Join the Online Student Area.storage.cloversites.com/resonatechurch1/documents... · Join the...

The Bible in Missional Perspective

Page 2

Join the Online Student Area.

Connect globally. Discuss topics. Share resources.

Engage with other students working out the Gospel in different contexts.

http://porterbrooknetwork.cobblestonecn.com/

The Online Student Area is accessible to all Porterbrook students, whether you

are connected with a Local Group, a Learning Site, or studying on your own.

Email info@porterbrooknetwork and request to join the discussion.


Page 3

Contents 1. The Bible — how we know and what we know

2. The encapsulating vision — the end justifies the means

3. The final revelation — the man

4. The story begins — creation

5. The plot thickens — fall and fall out

6. The characters revealed — one man and a people

7. The method established — a people

8. Failure and remedy — one man for a people

9. The story continues — a people

The rights to this work are owned by the Porterbrook Network.

Please do not copy this work; rent, lend or issue copies of this work to

the public; or adapt this work without consent of the owner.


Page 4

Assignment

The purpose of the assignments is to help you reflect on how the materials can be applied in your own church context, as well as to help other Porterbrook participants benefit from your thinking. They are designed to help you with the materials, not to be a hurdle.

With this in mind, all assignments can be presented in either spoken or written form — you can choose what you prefer. If you are involved in public speaking in your church context (whether it is preaching or teaching, in a small-group Bible study, for example) we encourage you to do at least some spoken assignments over the course. Spoken assignments will be delivered in small groups at the residential. Participants give a presentation lasting five to ten minutes, followed by group discussion. Written assignments are to be brief (no more than 800 words), and can be e-mailed prior to the residential. If you want to quote someone else‘s thoughts, indicate where they come from, but your paper does not need to be academically rigorous, with footnotes and bibliography.

In Luke 15:2, the Pharisees and the scribes grumble about Jesus, saying, ―This man receives sinners and eats with them.‖ Think about the way Jesus justifies his behaviour as he tells the three parables in that chapter. Identify specific ways in which this will shape your life and ministry.


Page 5

Unit 1.

The Bible — how we

know and what we

know

How we know We will begin this module by spending some time on the issue of knowledge, and more specifically how we know what we know about God.1 It is important to be clear about how we know what we know about God. There are at least five significant sources of our knowledge of God. One of the most significant differences between people who use the term ‗Christian‘ is the weight given to these sources. In this unit, it will be referred to as the BRITE model of knowledge:

B = Bible R = Reason I = Intuition T = Tradition E = Experience

1 This is not a general enquiry into epistemology (that is, theories of knowledge), and so we will avoid some of the more complex questions about whether there is a distinction between knowledge and belief.


Page 6

It can be represented diagrammatically:

As a white, Anglo-Saxon male from a working-class background, my reading of the Bible will be significantly influenced by that heritage (tradition) as well as how I am ‗wired‘ (reason, intuition, experience). However, my so-called ‗wiring‘ is also influenced by my upbringing and cultural placement. Furthermore, for some people, reason will dominate their knowledge acquisition, and for others experience will be the primary influence. This interchange and mutual engagement between the BRITE elements is not always a conscious process. For example, I may not be aware of the defining role that experience plays in my knowledge of God until someone highlights it. This really is a question of hierarchy of knowledge: what is the defining influence in how we know what we know about God? The classic evangelical position is that we are intentionally to filter our traditions, experiences, reason and intuitions through the Bible. We know God because he has taken the initiative and made himself known. The other sources of knowledge function at a subsidiary, though not insignificant, level. However, we cannot engage with the Bible with neutrality or pure objectivity. Consequently, we enter what is called the interpretative or hermeneutical spiral. That is, we come to the Bible to find out about God. We bring with us our experiences, traditions, reason and intuitions, which ‗skew‘ our understanding. However, the Bible then in turn shapes these factors. As a result, when we next read the Bible, our traditions, reason, intuitions and experience are different from before. This enables us to understand more about God. All of this assumes the authoritative priority of the Bible for our knowledge of God. A significant strength of this position is the way in which it recognises the reality and validity of other sources of knowledge, whilst assigning them an appropriately subservient place.


Page 7

What we know

Reflection What do you think are the defining moments of human

history? Does history have a purpose, an end goal?

John Piper claims that ―mission exists because worship doesn‘t‖.2 This assertion arises from his conviction that worship is the primary purpose of humankind. However, it is possible to assert worship as the ultimate creaturely end whilst at the same time asserting the priority of mission. This is because our God is a missional God. To this end, my proposal is that ―worship exists because mission does‖. Mission defines worship because the God we worship is a redeeming God, and the Bible is the unfolding story of redemption. Eternity will be spent glorifying God as the Redeemer. He redeems the world so that we may know him to be a redeeming God. The New Testament is emphatic that Jesus is the full and final revelation of the God of the universe (see, for example, John 1:1–18; Romans 1:16–17 with 3:21–26; Hebrews 1:1–3). And at the core of Jesus‘ life is mission: God‘s project to redeem for himself a people. Jesus came ―to seek and save the lost‖ (Luke 19:10); he came ―to give his life as a ransom for many‖ (Mark 10:45). This is the heart of Paul‘s gospel, what is of ―first importance‖: ―Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures‖ (1 Corinthians 15:1–4). Indeed, Paul can claim to preach nothing but ―Christ crucified‖ (1 Corinthians 1:23; 2:2). For God‘s plan from eternity past was to reconcile all things to himself and to bring all things under the headship of the crucified and resurrected Messiah (Ephesians 1:4, 8–10; Colossians 1:19–20). The redeeming cross is where God is ‗lifted up‘ and supremely reveals his glory (John 12:28–32; 17:1). And that is why worship and mission belong together. Chapters 4 and 5 occupy a strategic place in the book of Revelation, as they form the narrative beginning: everything that happens in the drama from this point flows out of this scene. In chapter 4, we find God being worshipped because of his holiness (verse 8) and sovereign creativity (verse 11). This worship occupies the four living creatures and the 24 elders. However, the worship in heaven reaches a climax when the Lion who is the Lamb (5:5-6) comes onto the scene. The four living creatures and the 24 elders combine their voices to sing a song that had not been sung before (verses 9-10). There is then added the

2 Piper, J., Let the Nations be Glad! (IVP, 1994), 11


Page 8

voices of the countless number of angels (verse 12), followed by the entire created order (verse 13). All of this is ratified by the emphatic ―So be it‖ of the creatures and the elders (verse 14). This is what Michael Wilcock writes at the end of a section entitled ‗Creation centred on Christ‘:

The whole scene … is a series of concentric circles. From every point on every circle is a radius of praise drawn inwards to the centre: and at the centre, by his Father‘s throne, is Christ. So he was among the lampstands in Scene 1. So he will be throughout the drama.3

Mission is more than simply the means by which the deficit of non-worship is rectified; mission defines worship because the God we worship is a redeeming God. Mission is the means by which we come to worship God as he is in all of his grace and mercy purchasing a people for himself. Understood in this way, mission is not merely the responsibility of the church; it is the way we respond to the God whose primary self-disclosure is Christ crucified. Mission is the most eloquent and appropriate expression of worship. The language Peter uses is gloriously replete:

You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvellous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God‘s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honourable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation. (1 Peter 2:9–12)

In verse 9, Peter almost certainly refers to Isaiah 43:21. Old Testament citations in the New Testament are like zip files in that they contain much more than they seem to at first sight. To truly understand the force of what the writer is saying, we have to go back to the passage from which they are quoted and read it in full. Isaiah 43 is particularly relevant to the development of Peter‘s argument. The people scattered among the nations are scattered among the nations precisely so that they can declare the praises of him who redeemed them to the nations! The scattering was a missional strategy. This doxological declaration is by both word and life. In verse 12, Peter seems to have in mind Jesus‘ words when he was talking to his newly formed messianic community (Matthew 5:14-16). Our lives give both credence and substance to our words, and are the means by which our commendation of God‘s glory and grace are vindicated. We are to live in the midst of an

3 Wilcock, M., The Message of Revelation, (Bible Speaks Today, IVP, 1975), 69


Page 9

antagonistic world so that eventually others will ask the reason for the hope within (1 Peter 3:15).

Conclusion The God we know, we know because he has taken the initiative and made himself known to us in the Bible. Jim Packer has memorably described the Bible as ―God preaching‖.4 What is the content of his sermon? The same content as any good sermon: his Son and our Saviour, Jesus Christ. The key issue of Christology is that God makes himself known to us in Christ, and most graphically in Christ crucified. The answer to the insistent question, ―What is God like?‖ should always be, ―Look to Christ and the cross,‖ for it is in that event that we see God exposed in all of his shocking glory. We know because God has made himself known. What we know as a result of that disclosure is that God is a redeeming God. Not ‗simply‘ in an attributive sense, but as that which somehow defines him. He has chosen and planned in eternity, resulting in his redemptive action in time and space. This is God as he wants himself to be known. All of the divine attributes pivot on that glorious event and self-disclosure. His grace, mercy and love are all redemptive. What is the nature of God‘s holiness? Look to the cross. What is the nature of God‘s justice? Look to the cross. What is the nature of God‘s grace? Look to the cross. In his book The Doctrine of God, John Frame makes the following points:5

God is timeless and unchanging.

His timeless plan is a plan for time, i.e. he has, before time, designed a ―story‖ or ―drama,‖ a historical sequence, in which change occurs.

He has become an actor in this drama, and in that drama he takes the role of a changing person.

The drama is a drama about creation, fall, redemption — in other words, the story is one of divine mission.

God‘s mission is a display of his love for the creatures he has made who have fallen into sin.

This love is an exercise of his divine attribute of love — the love of Father, Son, and Spirit.

Nevertheless, God remains a free being. He was not constrained by his nature to redeem sinners. That was his free and gracious decision.

4 Packer, J.I., God has Spoken (Hodder & Stoughton, 1993), 91 5 Frame, J., The Doctrine of God (P&R Publishers, 2002)


Page 10

Frame‘s assertion is that God is a missional God and that mission is an historical exercise of his love, freely chosen. God‘s mission reveals the depths of his love and what his love is capable of doing. On the basis that every divine attribute is a capacity for action, we learn from the redemptive story that God‘s love is (eternally and unchangeably) a capacity for redemptive action. What the Bible tells us, with its focus on Christ crucified, is that God acts redemptively. The God I know is the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible is redemptive for his own glory so that he will be worshipped forever as the God who saves. The aim of this module is to demonstrate this conclusion.


Page 11

Unit 2.

The encapsulating

vision — the end

justifies the means

Introduction Reverse engineering is the process of dismantling an object to see how it works in order to duplicate it. In the IT industry, software reverse engineering retrieves the source code to study how the program performs certain operations. It is then used to adapt a program written for use with one microprocessor for use with another. This is a useful model in our understanding of God‘s plans and purposes as revealed in the Bible. In an address to the Gospel Coalition in the USA, Don Carson made a series of eight statements about the nature of the gospel, the final one of which is that ―the gospel is eschatological‖.6 Carson is not the first to present this idea, but here he helpfully encapsulates an essential biblical truth. As Carson notes, the gospel is God‘s word to us concerning Christ, through whom he will bring in his uninterrupted and unambiguous rule (1 Corinthians

6 Carson, D. ‗What is the Gospel? (1 Cor 15)‘. Retrieved 5/12/08 from http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/resources/a/What-Is-the-Gospel-1-Cor-15


Page 12

15:50–57; cf. Romans 1:1–4). This means that it is only at the end of time that every eye will see what God is truly like and what his kingdom is all about. If this is the case, we work backwards from the fullness of God‘s kingdom: we interpret his deeds in the light of his end goal, and we shape our conduct and convictions by it. This is biblical and theological reverse engineering.

Revelation 21 and 22

Exercise Read Revelation 21–22. What major themes jump out at you?

What repeated imagery do you find?

Revelation is written to the seven churches of Asia Minor. They represent the Church in its fullness, spatially and temporally, between the Ascension and Return of Christ. The book ends with a captivating vision of God‘s eternal plan and purpose: the subject of these chapters form not only the climax of the book, but the climax of the story of redemption. The dominant image throughout the two chapters is the New Jerusalem (21:10–22:5). This is the holy city (21:10) and the bride of the Lamb (21:9). Interestingly, John‘s initial vision of the city (21:2) coincides with his sighting of the new heaven and new earth (21:1). Beale, in The Temple and the Church’s Mission, poses what he regards as a critical question: ―Why does John see ‗a new heaven and earth‘ in Revelation 21:1, while in 21:2, 10-21 he sees a city that is garden-like, in the shape of a temple?‖7 His proposed answer is that ―the new creation and Jerusalem are none other than God‘s tabernacle, the true temple of God‘s special presence … the new heavens and earth are described as a temple because God‘s goal of universally expanding the temple of his glorious presence will have come to pass‖.8 Listen to what the loud voice in 21:3 says: ―Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men and he will dwell among them‖. Here John is bringing together a number of rich and significant biblical images. In the Old Testament, the tabernacle, like the temple, was where God met with his people (see Exodus 25:22; 1 Kings 6:7-11). It is as the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven that God is said to dwell among his people. But John becomes even more specific. In 21:9 the angel promises to show him ―the bride, the wife of the Lamb‖. But in 21:10-27, it is the New Jerusalem that is described in some detail. Paul Barnett makes this observation: ―Here is an astonishing teaching. The New Heaven and New Earth is the New Jerusalem, which is the Bride of Christ, both of which depict the gathered community of the redeemed ones. The new creation is the church, the church of the end time.‖9

7 Beale, G. K., The Temple and the Church’s Mission (Apollos, 2004), 365 8 ibid., 368 9 Barnett, P., Apocalypse Now and Then (Aquila Press, 1989), 152


Page 13

What is the significance of this view of the future? Eternity is filled with the church, what Barnett describes as ―the community of the redeemed ones‖. This ties in with John‘s description of the people who are the New Jerusalem as those ―whose names are written in the Lamb‘s book of life‖ (21:27). In chapter 22, John sees a ―river of the water of life‖, which flows from the ―throne of God and of the Lamb‖ (verse 1). As throughout Revelation, this chapter is full of Old Testament allusions (see, for example, Ezekiel 47:1-9; Zechariah 14:8; Joel 3:18). All life proceeds not only from the Lord God, but also from the Lamb, the one who came to redeem the people of God by his death. His name will feature on the foreheads of those who make up the New Jerusalem (verse 4). We cannot miss the prominence of the Lamb in these two chapters (21:9, 14, 22, 23, 27; 22:1, 3). It is from the ―throne of God and the Lamb‖ that the river flows, so it is ―the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb‖ who are the temple of the New Jerusalem. In 21:23, there is no need for the sun and the moon in this city because it is illuminated by the glory of God. We then learn that it is the Lamb who is the lamp. This can only be because it is the Lamb who is the glory of God. What we have discovered so far from the final scene of the redemptive narrative is the dominance of two figures, namely the redeemed and the Redeemer. This view of the culmination of God‘s purposes confirms Paul‘s statement in Ephesians 1. In verse 10, we have what Martyn Lloyd Jones describes as ―God‘s grand, comprehensive, final ultimate purpose‖.10 It is God‘s plan ―to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, that is, Christ.‖ But in Ephesians 1:22, Paul adds to that statement and writes something even more remarkable. So certain is Christ‘s coronation at the end of time that Paul can claim God has ―already‖ put all things under Christ. And what has God done with the Christ who is ―head over all things‖? He has given him ―to the church‖, which is the body of Christ, ―the fullness of him who fills all in all‖. God‘s ultimate purpose is not to see a solitary King ruling, but a King ruling over his people and with his people. It is the Lion-Lamb King with his redeemed people who is God‘s ultimate purpose! There are two final points to note on Revelation 21 and 22. On either side of the river that flows from the ―throne of God and the Lamb‖ is the tree of life (22:2). The usual word for ‗tree‘ in the New Testament is dendros. However, John here (also verses 14, 19) uses the word xylon, which can refer to dried timber. What is of particular interest is that this is the word used several times in the New Testament to refer to the cross (Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24). It is this tree that gives life and brings healing to the nations. The only ones who may enter the New Jerusalem are those who ―wash their robes‖ in the ―blood of the Lamb‖ (Revelation 7:14; 22:14).

10 Lloyd Jones, D. M., God’s Ultimate Purpose (Banner of Truth Trust, 1978), 196


Page 14

Finally, in Revelation 22:16–17, it is both the Spirit and the Bride who say, ―Come,‖ as they wait eagerly for the return of the one who is ―the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star‖. Immediately, John gives an invitation and warning to the individual, culminating in these solemn words: ―If anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city.‖ In their conversation with the serpent, the first man and woman had taken away from God‘s words. Their sin resulted in exclusion from the garden, and the way to the tree of life was barred. The tree is there, but the garden of Genesis 3 has been replaced by the city. Rejection of the prophecy is punishable by exclusion from the blessings that rightly belong to the people of God. There is no salvation, no life and no blessing ‗outside‘ the Church, the company of the redeemed.

Conclusion These chapters form the climax of the biblical narrative. This is the point toward which salvation history is moving. Because of these chapters, we know that the future has a twin focus — the Redeemer and the redeemed. This climax helps us to interpret all that has gone before. It helpfully clarifies what was previously ambiguous or simply unclear. The Bible story is the story of redemption, and the hero of the story is the God who redeems. This provides the hermeneutical key for exegeting every act and character within the whole Bible story.

Exercise Can you tell the whole story of the Bible succinctly? Does your summary change, depending on whether you are talking to a Christian or to someone who does not yet know Jesus?


Page 15

Unit 3.

The final revelation

— the man

Introduction The Bible tells a coherent story which shows that God is redemptive in both his character and his purposes. The God we know, we know because he has made himself known. He has made himself known to us as the God who redeems. The significance of this is that redemption is not ‗simply‘ something God does; in some sense it is who God is. Because the Bible is the story of redemption, it is impossible for us to speculate about the attributes or character of God outside of that self-disclosure. In the previous unit, we saw how the climax of the Bible story is the new creation, which is in fact the church: the new heaven and earth is the church, the fruit of God‘s redemptive action in Christ. If the model of reverse engineering suggested in the previous unit has any validity, then the end point of God‘s historical activity is the key interpretive tool for understanding all that goes before. In this unit, we will see how God has made himself known in Christ, and how redemption is integral and essential to that disclosure.


Page 16

The end of Exile

Jesus claimed that the whole Old Testament was about him (John 5:39; Luke 24:25–27), and the New Testament writers repeatedly show how Jesus is the reality which the Old Testament writers foreshadowed. In this unit, rather than giving the broad brushstrokes of various types of Christ from the Old Testament,11 I want to dwell just with the opening of Matthew‘s Gospel. We will learn from Matthew one way in which Jesus reveals God as a redeeming God. We will see how Matthew (and the other New Testament writers) understand the Old Testament as a book of promise. That is, the Old Testament Scriptures present to us a sovereign, gracious God of covenant faithfulness, with saving purpose and liberating action.

Behind Matthew‘s usage of the Old Testament lies the conviction that it was preparing the way for Christ, anticipating him and pointing to him. Throughout the Old Testament there is a sense of expectation and hope. All kinds of Old Testament writings reveal a hope in the fulfilment of God‘s promises. And so we can draw on all those Old Testament sources to better understand Jesus as the fulfilment of that hope. The powerful reality of Jesus was plugged into the powerful potential of the Old Testament‘s future hope.

Most pointedly, Jesus‘ contemporaries are looking forward to a proper return from the Exile in Babylon — this is the redemption for which they are longing. God had promised great blessings for Israel — freedom from foreign nations, peace, and pure hearts, in a new Eden where God would once more dwell with his people. (See, for example, Isaiah 65:17–25; 66:10–24; Ezekiel 36:24–38.) Suffering under the rule of the Romans, the Jewish people of Jesus‘ day were still waiting for God to fulfil his promises. Matthew highlights this at the start of his Gospel, drawing a link between Abraham, David, the Exile, and Jesus (Matthew 1:17). The birth narrative, which follows immediately afterwards, also draws heavily on the theme of Exile.

The birth narrative

As we come to read the extended birth narrative in Matthew, we might ask: What is the purpose of this in the Gospel? Why does Matthew use the material he does? What lies behind his editorial decisions? At one level, Matthew uses this narrative to validate the messianic claims of Jesus: he was in fact born in Bethlehem, David‘s city, although he ‗came‘ from Nazareth — that was his parents‘ home, and where he grew up. Commentators often find a lot of significance in the geography of the early chapters: Bethlehem, Egypt, Nazareth, Judea, Jordan, Galilee, Capernaum. Matthew sometimes draws our attention to the way that these places fulfil aspects of God‘s Old Testament promise (for example, Matthew 4:15-16 citing Isaiah 9:1).

11 For an example of this, see Units 5–9 of the Foundation Year Porterbrook module Introducing Exposition and Biblical Theology.


Page 17

If we had the opportunity to travel with Matthew through the region in these early chapters, and if we knew our Old Testament well, we would see that the ministry and reputation of Jesus covered an area that was co-extensive with the area of Israel at the peak of her powers under David. In other words, this son of David ‗reigned‘ over the land of his father. The land which had been promised to Abraham was now ‗inhabited‘ by the son of Abraham. (See Matthew 4:23-25.)

The use of the Old Testament in the birth narrative

Matthew Content OT reference

1:1 Introduction

1:2-17 Genealogy

1:18-25 Birth Isaiah 7:14 (verse 23)

2:1-12 Magi Micah 5:2 (verse 6)

2:13-15 Egypt Hosea 11:1 (verse 15)

2:16-18 Herod Jeremiah 31:15 (verse 18)

2:19-23 Return ―the prophets‖ (verse 23)

To demonstrate how Matthew views and uses the Old Testament, we will consider in some detail the citations from Isaiah, Micah and Hosea.

(1) Isaiah 7:14

Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

This verse is set within the wider context of Isaiah 7–9. The historical background can be found in 2 Chronicles 28 and 2 Kings 16. Israel (Ephraim) and Syria (Aram) form an alliance in response to Assyrian expansion. Judah is reluctant to join; the Northern Alliance invades, but they fail to destroy Jerusalem (2 Kings 16:5). A second invasion follows (2 Chronicles 28:17). Let us make a few remarks on the early verses of Isaiah 7 so that we can see the immediate context of verse 14. Verse 2 — Ahaz is ―the house of David‖: what he does in response to the threat will be decisive for the future of the dynasty. Quite simply, the king and the people panic. That is why an appeal to the emerging superpower of Assyria seemed so attractive. Verse 3 — Shear-Jashum (a remnant shall return) is a name of promise. It indicates that the Lord would never desert his people so that they actually perished. It is also a name of disaster, for only a remnant would survive. (The aqueduct of the upper pool is part of Ahaz‘s preparations for the coming siege.) Verse 4 — ―Be careful and do nothing.‖ Syria and Israel were a spent force: ―smouldering fire-brands‖. By doing nothing, Ahaz would keep clear of


Page 18

compromising alliances. Will Ahaz seek salvation by works or by simple trust in divine promises? Verses 5–6 — There is reference to ‗the son of Remaliah‘ and ‗the son of Tabeel‘. These names seem insignificant when we remember that Ahaz is the son of David. These other sons threatened not just Ahaz but the Davidic dynasty, and therefore all the divine promises that rested in it. Verse 7 — The Lord GOD (Adonai Yahweh) is the Sovereign Lord. Ahaz has a straight choice: to trust in alliances, or to trust in the King. Verses 8–9 A1 The head of Syria is Damascus

B1 The head of Damascus is Rezin C1 Within 65 years Ephraim will be shattered

A2 The head of Israel is Samaria B2 The head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah

C2 If you do not believe, the same will happen to you Israel chose the path of human collective security by its alliance with Syria and so sealed its doom. In a relatively short time, it would cease to be a nation. To reject the way of faith for the collective security of an alliance with Assyria would mean the end for Judah. Isaiah could have continued the pattern, here: the head of Judah is Jerusalem and the head of Jerusalem is David‘s son — a situation of divine strength and a kingship sustained by divine promises. Verses 10-17 comprise Isaiah‘s second message to Ahaz. He tries to encourage Ahaz to faith (verses 10-12), but then denounces Ahaz as a traitor to his people‘s most treasured hopes (verses 13-15). The prophet predicts a calamity greater than the schism of Israel (verses 16-17). Verse 11 — The LORD will stop at nothing to protect the Davidic king and his dynasty: ―I will move heaven and earth for you.‖ Verse 12 — Ahaz shrouds his unwillingness to face the spiritual reality in a veil of piety. To refuse a sign when it is offered is proof of a refusal to believe. Ahaz was a wilfully unbelieving man. Because he refused to trust, he could not continue as king: this was the defining moment. Verse 14 — The sign is not offered, but predicted. Now it is not a means of encouraging faith, but of confirming God‘s disapproval and anger. Verse 15 — Curds and honey are the food of poverty; they represent the only food left on the day of wrath (verses 18-22). Within three years, Damascus (Syria) will have fallen to Assyria; thirteen years later, Samaria will be taken, and the ten northern tribes will have ceased to exist.


Page 19

But when would this sign be seen? The next child we hear about is in Isaiah 8:1-4. But Isaiah‘s wife was not a virgin, and the name of the child was not Immanuel. We must look, then, for Immanuel‘s birth to follow the coming judgment. He will be born when the Davidic dynasty has lost its throne. Because of the unbelief of Ahaz, the promised Messiah will be born in poverty, heir to a meaningless throne in a conquered land. However, the promised Immanuel will:

Possess the land (8:8);

Thwart all opponents (8:9–10);

Appear in Galilee of the Gentiles (9:1);

Be a great light to those in the land (9:2). In other words, according to the rest of the section, Immanuel is a Messianic figure. Unlike Ahaz, he will eat the bread of affliction in order to learn the lesson of obedience. From Ahaz onwards, there never was a true ‗house of David‘. They were mere puppet kings until the Exile, and at that point they disappeared completely. Exile is an important motif in Isaiah 6–12 (see especially 6:11–12). But where was Immanuel? Again, the presence of God was an important and cherished promise (Isaiah 60:18-20; cf. Revelation 21:3). To the Jewish mind, exclusion from the land meant exclusion from God‘s presence. But where was this Immanuel? That would have become an insistent and difficult question as the People of Promise languished outside the Land of Promise. When could it truly be said once more that ―God is with us‖? According to Matthew, so familiar with the OT in general (60 references; around twelve are unique to this Gospel) and Isaiah in particular, it was with Jesus that ―the sign‖ of Isaiah 7:14 was fulfilled. God would once more be with his people, and he too, through his humiliation, would learn obedience (Hebrews 5:8).

(2) Micah 5:2

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.

Micah was a contemporary of Isaiah and Hosea. He spoke out against the idolatry and corruption of both Israel and Judah, though his primary target seems to have been injustice and corruption (3:10–11). Judgment is inevitable for both the northern and the southern kingdoms. But chapters 4 and 5 speak effusively about the continuing purposes of God and the certainty of his promises (cf. Isaiah 2). Judgment is still certain, but the threat to Judah in no way threatens God‘s purposes. In fact, despite her weakness and frailty, Judah will be the means in the hand of God for


Page 20

executing judgment on those whom he had previously used to execute judgment on his people. From among the smallest and most insignificant will come a ruler: he will rescue his people, fulfil God‘s promises, and judge the nations who have set themselves up against the people of God. Again, the theme of Exile can be seen behind the text: once in Babylon, the people had no ruler of their own, and they were like sheep without a shepherd (Micah 4:9–10). As we have seen, the genealogy draws a link between Abraham, David, the Exile, and Jesus. The LORD had promised that David would be the shepherd of his people (2 Samuel 5:2). Matthew has spliced this promise into his citation from Micah 5:2, presumably to make it plain that Micah‘s promised ruler is the very same person who will fulfil the promises to David.

(3) Hosea 11:1

When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.

The events described in Hosea are contemporaneous with those of Isaiah 7. Hosea prophesied during the reigns of Jeroboam II of Israel, and Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah of Judah. Interestingly, although Hosea‘s ministry related primarily to the northern kingdom, his ministry is referenced by the reigns of the kings of Judah. He ministered for the last 30 years of the northern kingdom, whose identity ended in 722 when Samaria fell to Assyria after a three-year siege. Hosea 11 is all about God‘s love for Israel (see especially verses 9-11). Despite her sin, and despite the immanency and certainty of judgment, God would not entirely forsake her. The chapter looks forward to a time when God will both save and visit his people (verse 9). When Hosea speaks about God calling his son out of Egypt, our minds fly to the Exodus (Exodus 4:22–23). God‘s intention was that his promises to Abraham (Genesis 12:1–3) be fulfilled in Israel. Israel was to obey God and be blessed; they were to be a light and blessing to the Gentiles (see, for example, Exodus 19:5–6). However, Israel never fulfilled that calling. As a nation, Israel never walked in righteousness, nor did they respond faithfully to God‘s gracious call on them. This is why judgment was imminent and certain, though not total. So what does Matthew mean when he speaks about the return of Jesus to Israel from Egypt ‗fulfilling‘ this passage? In many places in the New Testament, Jesus is presented as the true Israel. He was everything that Israel was meant to be but failed to be. Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness and passed through the time of testing, whereas Israel failed during their testing in the wilderness for 40 years. Jesus is the true vine (John 15), whereas Israel were a vine that failed to bear fruit (Isaiah 5:1-7). Jesus is God‘s Son (Matthew 3:17), just as in Hosea and Exodus Israel was described as God‘s


Page 21

son. Israel never faithfully served Yahweh, but Jesus did. So in the Matthew narrative, as God‘s true Son, Jesus returned to Israel to fulfil all that Israel had been unable to fulfil.

Fulfilment ‗Fulfilment‘ is a critical word for Matthew when he cites the Old Testament. He uses the term on ten occasions in his Gospel (1:22-23; 2:15; 2:17-18; 2:23; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:35; 21:4-5; 27:9-10; see also 3:3 and 13:14-15). Donald Hagner comments:

… these quotations are not to be understood as prooftexts that would in themselves persuade … The quotations have as their foundation christological convictions — they are, in deed, christocentric. They take as their starting point that Jesus is the One promised by the Old Testament Scriptures.12

Another way of understanding Matthew‘s fulfilment motif could be as ‗this is that‘. In other words, Matthew understands the events of Jesus‘ life as being the very things of which the Old Testament prophets spoke. So Jesus is the Immanuel of which Isaiah spoke; the return from Egypt of Jesus and his family is the call spoken of by Hosea. Whatever was in the minds of the authors of those texts, this was in God‘s mind. This is sometimes called the sensus plenior, or fuller sense. In either case, Jesus is indeed the One promised by the Old Testament scriptures. Everything that goes before Matthew 1 is pointing to and preparing for the coming of Christ. Jesus comes as the fulfilment of all of God‘s promises to Abraham, Israel and David. He comes to rescue his people, to set free the captives, to end the Exile and to lead the people of God into the promised land of the new heavens and earth. This is God in all of his redeeming glory.

Reflection Can you think of other places where New Testament writers draw on Old Testament motifs of redemption? Think, for example, of freedom from slavery, sacrifice for sins, new life,

new creation, gathering of a scattered people. There are many more. How do these fill out our view of Jesus, and of God‘s character and purposes?

12 Hagner, Donald A., Matthew 1-13 (Word Biblical Commentary; Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1993), lvi; italics original


Page 22

Unit 4.

The story begins —

creation

Introduction God, as the Bible reveals him, is remarkable. He is shown to possess all the qualities and attributes one might ‗expect‘ of a divine being, in that he is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-together wise. This would not make him distinguishable from the kinds of gods humans dream up for themselves. But the God of Israel is also the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in that identity he shows himself to be unique. At its simplest, the Bible asserts and demonstrates that the God we adore is a redeeming God. Yahweh is a God who loves people who have no love for him. His nature, revealed as it is most clearly at Calvary, is redemptive and missionary. At the cross, when God-in-Christ was crucified, we see the heart of God exposed. It is a heart that beats for the salvation of lost sinners. The issue, then, for those who claim to love God and seek to imitate him, is to understand how God expresses that missionary nature and achieves his missionary intent.

Genesis 1-2

Reflection How do you imagine the Garden of Eden? What do you think God‘s purpose was for Adam and Eve?


Page 23

Even on a cursory reading, Genesis 1 is a fascinating piece of literature. While bearing a striking resemblance to some creation myths of the same era — each offering a competing vision of reality — it overtly rejects them and provides a compelling alternative. The universe came into being not through chaos and confusion (as the Babylonian myths claimed) but through the intentional will of a sovereign God by the means of his powerful word. He made the world, and he made it for something. The narrative is explicit that God‘s creative act was deliberate and purposeful. The word ‗good‘ is repeated throughout the opening scene (verses 4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). Perhaps the best sense of this word is ‗fit for purpose‘. This creation, in each of successive stages, is fit for purpose in that it achieves the purposes for which it was made. The story begins with God creating, ex nihilo (out of nothing), something formless and empty (verse 2). This seems to be the raw material out of which God ‗fashions‘ the universe. This creative process involves the Spirit of God who hovers over the chaos like a bird over her young (cf. Deuteronomy 32:11). To anticipate language used later in the chapter (verse 28), we can perhaps view this as God ‗filling and subduing‘. Even in this we are permitted a glimpse into God‘s nature. That is not to say that God has to ‗redeem‘ the world out of the chaos as though the formless void were somehow intrinsically evil. But it does show God making something beautiful and truly good out of something that is less than it would be. What is clear from Genesis 1 is that the God it reveals is the God of the whole world. This is no tribal deity; this is the God of the universe, the Sovereign over all that is. But it is not simply the scope of God‘s sovereignty that is in view; it is also the intent. We also learn that he made the world for his own purposes. This is no frenzied deity going about his business of war or conquest. Unlike the gods of the Babylonian myths, the God of the Bible does not create things accidentally or as a ‗plan B‘. Rather, things are created ―according to their kind‖, and are also assigned a purpose, ―for signs and seasons‖, ―for food‖, and so on. We learn more of God‘s intent in 1:26-30 and the creation of man and woman. All other aspects of the creation are made through God‘s ―Let there be‖. Tellingly, when it comes to humankind, God does not simply speak a word of command; he engages in conversation: ―Let us‖. The purpose of the first couple is to be God‘s image-bearers, and 1:26 reveals a fascinating interplay of pronouns: ―God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.‖ In the conversation God has concerning this act of creation, he is revealed as a social rather than a solitary being. This being the case, his image cannot be borne by an individual, but by man and woman together. Chapter 2 underlines this point when the writer tells us that the only thing in all of creation that is not good (that is, fit for purpose) is a solitary Adam (2:18). A single individual is incapable of imaging a social God. The purpose


Page 24

of an image is to represent something; in this case, God on earth. From the beginning, God intended to reveal his glory and character, and he made the human race to be the primary vehicle through which that revelation would take place. How the man and woman image God is seen, not only in their relationship with each other, but also in the task assigned them by their creator. Their purpose is ―to rule‖ and ―to fill and subdue‖. In this way, they imitate God‘s creative activity in the preceding five days, as he fashioned a world fit for purpose out of the primordial material of 1:2. God placed them in a cultivated garden, but not so they would stay in idleness. The intention was for the man and woman to go out from there into the whole world and ‗create‘ culture as they imaged God. It was their task to make the world a garden —to extend Eden (the place of God‘s dwelling and blessing) until it covered the entire planet. A number of commentators link the command to ―fill and subdue‖ with the command given by the risen Christ in Matthew 28. There on the mountain, God‘s people are sent into the world to subdue it, to bring it under the rule of the Sovereign Lord. As they disciple the nations, they are filling the earth with those who own Jesus as Saviour and Lord. As they go in obedience, the Second Adam goes with them, for it is he who ultimately fills and subdues. It is important to be explicit about the hermeneutical process involved in this reading. Genesis 1-2 does not present the fulfilment of all that God intended. Nor does Genesis 3 show how a cunning serpent with ideas above his station thwarted God‘s plans. These chapters are fulfilled in the gospel. It is the second Adam who is the true Adam. Adam was a flawed prototype. The primary task of the first Adam was to give a glimpse of what Christ‘s role and function would be. Suffice it to say at this stage that these opening chapters of the story of redemption reveal that God has plans for his world. He wants to do something with it that will be to his praise and glory.

Genesis 3 It is not the aim of this unit to unpack the complexities of this chapter, nor to try to deal with all the issues raised within it. The focus will remain the way in which it reveals God as redemptive. It is not unusual for this chapter to be reconstructed as God being frustrated in his daily promenade with Adam and Eve. As is his custom, God comes to walk with the first couple in the cool of the day. On this fateful occasion, however, he learns of their spiteful disregard of his will and the rest, as they say, is history. But there is nothing in the text that permits this reading. What is significant is that it is at the very point of disobedience that God comes down to meet with his image-bearers. The phrase ―the cool of the day‖ is a translation of the Hebrew phrase ruach hayom. We have already encountered the word ruach in 1:2 (ruach ’elohim — usually translated ‗the Spirit of God‘). It is interesting


Page 25

that although the word is used on a number of occasions in Genesis, there is no occasion when it unambiguously refers to wind (cf. Genesis 8:1 where the ‗wind‘ passes over the earth and the waters subside). Perhaps the author is telling us that just as the Spirit was present in the moment of creation, hovering over the barren wasteland, so too we find the Spirit present at the point of sin and hateful rebellion. Just as it was God‘s will to fashion something good out of the chaos, so too is it God‘s will to now create something good out of this moral and relational chaos. Whether or not this reading is correct, in Genesis 3:8 we find the LORD God coming to seek and save the lost. He is not content to leave them to their rebellion. Despite their cold and callous rejection of him, he will pursue them. Clearly he speaks to them words of judgment: he continues to rules his world by his word. But he also speaks words of grace and promise. For there is hope in what he says, even when he speaks judgment upon the serpent (Gen 3:15). There is hope for the stay of execution, and the implicit promise of continuing life and work. Eve and Adam will continue to fill and subdue, though now it will be through pain and toil. Now their rule as vice-regents will be frustrated. In the end, they are sent into the world, but we have learnt enough to know that Eden will never be extended: angels and a flaming sword bar the way (Genesis 3:24). As the narrative unfolds, it seems that the human race moves further and further away from God‘s place; they also move away from being his people. But God will bring them back, and from there he will redeem his world. Obviously, this does not say all that there is to be said of how God expresses his missionary nature, but it does provide us with a vital foundation. We cannot be entirely surprised when God‘s redemptive nature becomes explicit later in the story. These opening chapters are, at the very least, a fitting introduction to the Bible‘s message.


Page 26

Unit 5.

The plot thickens —

fall and fall out

Introduction In the previous unit, we saw how God acted redemptively in meeting the first man and woman at the point of their rebellion. The aim of this unit is to highlight the areas within the so-called ‗Fall‘ narrative that underline God‘s redemptive character and activity, and to see how the theme continues to unfold in the immediate aftermath.

Genesis 3 We see God‘s redemptive purposes in three principal aspects of the narrative in Genesis 3.

The serpent and the seed Genesis 3:15 has received a lot of attention since at least the 2nd century AD.13 It has been the source of a great deal of speculation, being subject to at least as much eisegesis as exegesis. Without adding to this dubious interpretative history, it seems both responsible and reasonable to see in the text at least a hint of redemptive promise. We might even say that we find an indication of

13 ―He, the sole of whose foot should be bitten, having power to tread upon the enemy‘s head; but the other biting, killing, and impeding the steps of man, until the seed did come appointed to tread down his head, — which was born of Mary.‖ Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3:23:7 in Roberts, A., The Ante-Nicene Fathers: the writing of the Fathers down to AD325, Vol. 1 — the Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (Cosimo, 2007), 457


Page 27

the trajectory of redemption. Enmity will exist between the woman and her seed and the serpent and his seed. But verse 15b seems to point to an event when the enmity will reach a definitive climax. There is coming a time when the seed of Eve will strike a decisive blow against the serpent (―bruise your head‖). This has been described often as the proto euangelion, because it is read as the first statement of the gospel. However, in our desire to see the good news, it would be an error to miss the reciprocal nature of the event (―bruise his heel‖). The crushing of the serpent comes at real personal cost to the one inflicting the blow. Yet is it too hopeful to think that a blow to the head is more decisive than one to the heel? So even in wrath we find mercy, and in judgment there is grace. The rebellion of the man and woman will not thwart God‘s intentions. His promise of redemption is spoken with all the authority of his creative word.

In the short span of Genesis 3:14–19, the God of the Bible is shown to be both just and merciful. The scene puts God on display as one who upholds righteousness and yet offers hope to guilty human rebels. He is a God of justice and so renders just condemnation for the transgressors. Yet he is also a God of mercy, and so he makes plain that his image bearers will triumph over the wicked snake.14

A woman named Eve At the end of God‘s speech, the narrator tells us that ―the man called his wife‘s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.‖ (Genesis 3:20) Clearly, this event differs from the other two cited in this unit, because it describes something the man does, rather than God. However, let us examine it here and respect the flow of the Biblical narrator. What encouraged the man to name the woman as he did? After all, the naming of Eve follows on immediately from the LORD God‘s three judgments against the serpent, the woman and the man (verses 14-19). Not for a moment are we left wondering whether humanity will continue to exist. Indeed, despite the warning that eating the fruit would lead to death (2:17), God in the midst of his curse promises children to Eve. Eve, who with her husband was the bringer of death and judgment, is named ‗Life‘. This is what Henri Blocher has called the ―confession of hope‖.15

Garments of skin Immediately after their act of wilful and devastating disobedience, the man and woman try to hide their newly discovered nakedness with leaves (3:7). However, in 3:21, the LORD God assumes the role of tailor.

14 Hamilton Jr, James M., ‗The Skull Crushing Seed of the Woman: Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Genesis 3:15‘, in Southern Baptist Journal of Theology Vol. 10:2 (Summer 2006) 15 Blocher, H., In the Beginning: the opening chapters of Genesis (IVP, 1984), 192


Page 28

This is an extraordinary act of grace. God does not seek to reverse the process, nor act as though nothing had happened. He takes the man and woman where they are, in their sin, and deals with one aspect of the consequences. Blocher puts it perfectly:

God covers sin and its degradation. Here we may recall the biblical picture of justification: the gift of a new robe, rich and pure. History is irreversible, but God is able to do a new thing: we remain sinners, with no merit of our own to show, but where sin has abounded, grace has abounded all the more. And the amazing thing is that God brings to fulfilment in the garments of salvation depicted in the beginning by those of Genesis, the paradoxical, revelatory function of clothing. Clothed in the grace of God, the children of God are freer and more open to the eye of God and man than were Adam and Eve. We are perfectly protected and perfectly disclosed.16

Genesis 4–11 It might be thought that the primary function of these chapters is to show the inexorable spread of sin. Indeed, the ‗fall out‘ from the ‗Fall‘ is both shocking and expansive. In these chapters we encounter the violence of Cain (4:8) and Lamech (4:23-24), the spread and intensification of sin (6:5), and human self-assertion of Babel (11:4). But God is no more a passive observer in the drama than he was in chapter 3. He is active and intimately involved at each of those points of insurrection, and not just in judgment.

Cain The story pivots on Cain‘s rage when the Lord accepts the offering of his younger brother but rejects his (Genesis 4:5). Why did God do that? One answer must be, ―Because he could.‖ The LORD, by virtue of who he is, was free to accept or reject. Pagan sacrifices might have held some magical spell over their deities by imposing some sort of obligation upon them, but not so Yahweh. But what does this sovereign God do with the anger and sullen resentment of the older brother? Like the father in the story told by Jesus in Luke 15, he goes out to meet him! He engages him in conversation. He encourages him towards a right response. Even after the grotesque act of fratricide (4:8), God withholds execution, and when Cain laments his punishment (4:13-14), the Lord provides protection for the fugitive (4:15). This is an extraordinary narrative: blatant sin is met with surprising grace. Of course, this is not the first time God has responded in such a way. As in chapter 3, the purposes of God continue. Cain the murderer has a son and

16 Blocher, In the Beginning, 191-192


Page 29

builds a city and so fulfils the mandate given to his parents, to fill and subdue (1:28). From Cain‘s line comes music and industry (4:21–22). In the face of arrogant aggression (4:23-24), Eve gives birth to another son and the line continues. Clearly Cain would not be the one to bruise the serpent‘s head, but perhaps Seth, ―another offspring‖ (cf. 3:15) would?

Despite all the ravages of sin, it spreading through the generations, its violence, vengeance and murderous rage, the isolation, alienation and anxiety to which it leads, and the disorders and ambiguities of life in this broken world, God can still be known. Eve said so in her cry of faith (4:25). The story-teller says so too: at that time men began to call on the name of the Lord (4:26).17

Noah This particular pericope deserves far fuller attention than can be afforded in this unit. However, the redemptive character of God is displayed in a striking way in the early part of chapter 6. The author has drawn attention to the spread of sin and God‘s intense and emotive response to the evil (6:5-7), with verse 7 reading as the ultimate ―final solution‖. Most translations of verse 8 begin with the word ‗but‘. In verses 5, 6 and 7 the word ‗man‘ (adam) is repeated on three occasions. The emphasis in the preceding verses has been on the universality of sin, and the context gives us no ground for an exception. Yet, we are told, Noah ―found favour‖. Alex Motyer draws attention to the fact that the ‗x found favour in the eyes of y‘ formula (which occurs on around 40 occasions in the Old Testament), ―deals with a situation where ‗x‘ can register no claim on ‗y‘ but where ‗y‘, contrary to merit or deserving, against all odds, acts with ‗grace‘.‖ (See Genesis 18:3, 19:19, 30:27). To highlight this point, Motyer suggests we reverse the reading of 6:8, so it reads ―grace found Noah‖. 18 So although in verse 9 Noah stands out from the rest of humankind on account of being a ―righteous man, blameless in his time‖, it is a consequence of verse 8 rather than an explanation: ―When grace comes (verse 8), it produces the changed and distinctive life of the new man (verse 9).‖19 If Motyer is right in his exegesis, then this is consistent with God‘s actions throughout human history: where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more!

Babel The most disturbing feature of the incident at Babel is its resonance with Genesis 3. In the archetypal sin, the first man and woman wanted to be like God and decide for themselves the nature of good and evil (3:5). In chapter 11, the inhabitants of the plain of Shinar wanted to reach heaven and make a

17 Atkinson, D., The Message of Genesis 1-11 (Bible Speaks Today, IVP, 1990), 117 18 Motyer, A., Look to the Rock (Kregel, 1996), 43 19 ibid., 44


Page 30

name for themselves (11:4). This is a clear affront to the prerogative of the creator. The sin is further compounded by their wilful refusal to do what God had commanded the human race to, that is ―fill the earth‖ (1:28): they want to build the city lest they be ―scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth‖ (11:4). But how does God react to this further rebellion? Unsurprisingly (by now!), he takes the initiative and comes down (11:5). Again, he acts in judgment, but in so doing he ensures that his original intent is fulfilled (11:8-9). Von Rad claims that unlike the previous stories within Genesis 1-11, the Babel narrative ―ends without grace‖.20 This appears to raise the question, ―Is God‘s grace finally exhausted?‖ Von Rad finds the answer in the ensuing genealogy: ―The answer to this most universal of all theological questions is given with the beginning of the saving history, the call of Abraham and Yahweh‘s plan for history indicated therein, to bless ‗all the families of the earth‘ through Abraham.‖21 Abraham is the tenth in line from Noah, and Noah was the tenth in line from Adam. Our next unit will look at how with Abraham, God begins ―the decisive implementation of the plan of God.‖22

Reflection What is the link between God‘s promises in Genesis 12:1–3 and all that has happened in chapters 1–11? Does this affect your view of how Jesus fulfils the promises to Abraham?

20 Von Rad, G., Old Testament Theology: Vol.1 (SCM Press Ltd, 1975), 163 21 ibid., 164 22 Blocher, In the Beginning, 211


Page 31

Unit 6.

The characters

revealed — one

man and a people

Introduction It is impossible to overstate the importance of Genesis 12:1–3 in understanding the succeeding biblical narrative. The words of Yahweh to Abram are defining for what follows. In many respects, the rest of the Bible story can be read as an exposition of these verses, a demonstration of their accomplishment and fulfilment.

It is this Abrahamic covenant … that underlies the whole subsequent development of God‘s redemptive promise, word, and action … The redemptive grace of God in the highest and furthest reaches of its realisation is the unfolding of the promise given to Abraham and therefore the unfolding of the Abrahamic covenant.‖23

What this unit will endeavour to demonstrate is that, given the crucial role of these verses to the Bible, what they reveal about God and his purposes is

23 Murray, J., The Covenant of Grace (Tyndale, 1954), 4


Page 32

essential to our understanding of God and his purposes. What they reveal is a redemptive God who has his heart set on the nations. Prior to looking at the verses in some detail, it will be helpful to set them against the backcloth of the previous chapters. We saw in the previous unit that, although the dominant motif in Genesis 4-11 is the correspondence between human sin and divine judgment, God nevertheless acts consistently in redemptive grace. In fact, the account of Babel seems particularly bleak. As we saw, commentators like Von Rad only see hope in the genealogy which follows, which itself provides an introduction to the Abraham narrative. Significantly, the narrator in Genesis explicitly connects God‘s speech in 12:1–3 to the earlier chapters through the use of specific words. The root word ‗to bless‘ (barakh) occurs on five occasions in 12:1–3. It is a word that recalls God‘s word to the first man and woman (1:28–30). It also brings to mind a similar word spoken to Noah and his sons (9:1–7). Its usage here gives the sense of a new beginning, but one characterised by the same intent. The LORD also promises to make a name for Abram, in contrast to the previous incident in which the inhabitants of the plain of Shinar had been intent on making a name for themselves (11:4). Also, in 6:4, the mighty men who were the result of the union between the ―sons of God‖ and the ―daughters of men‖, are described as ―men of renown‖, or literally, ―men of a name‖. These were examples of those who either sought or won fame for themselves apart from the LORD, whereas true honour belongs to those that the LORD chooses and blesses. David Atkinson helpfully shows how the blessings promised to Abraham, in some measure, address the curses of chapters 3-11:

The ground was cursed in 3:17; Abraham was promised land to possess (15:7). Cain was cursed and became a wanderer in 4:11, 14; Abraham the wanderer is given a home. Cain, and the Nephalim, and the builders of Babel all sought for themselves a name; God says to Abraham, ―I will … make your name great‖ (12:2). Cain, who built a city in the land of restlessness, and the migrants from the east who tried to build one at Shinar, all discovered that ―here we have no continuing city‖, cf. Hebrews 13:14; Abraham, we are told, ―looked forward to the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God‖ (Hebrews 11:10). The families of the nations were scattered at Babel; in Abraham all the families of the earth will be blessed (12:3).24

It ought not to escape attention that the Lord‘s choice of Abram is given no explanation. It is shown as a unilateral decision with no indication of anything in Abram, his family or his circumstances that might predispose the Lord to choose him. Also, to all appearances, the migration of Terah and his sons was merely part of the ―scattering‖ described in 11:9 — Ur of the Babylonians was the epicentre of the rebellion and consequent dispersion.

24 Atkinson, The Message of Genesis 1-11, 187-188


Page 33

In other words, God‘s resolve to act in grace and redemption is unremitting, and is the only explanation of the promises made.

Genesis 12:1-3

Go forth from your country From your relatives, from your father‘s house, To the land which I will show you; I will make you a great nation, I will bless you, and make your name great; So you shall be a blessing; I will bless those who bless you, the one who curses you I will curse In you all the families of the earth will be blessed.

The LORD begins his epoch-making speech by telling Abraham to leave his land (’eretz) in order to go to the land (’eretz) the Lord directs him towards. This was a significant act, particularly against the backdrop of Genesis 10 in which the nations formed from the descendants of Noah separated themselves into ‗lands‘ (10:5, 20, 31). By leaving his land, Abraham would be leaving his nation and his identity. God was calling him out of the nations in rebellion against God, and Abraham had a command to obey. Having issued a clear and uncompromising directive, and dependent upon Abraham‘s obedience, the LORD proceeds to make three promises of staggering proportions to encourage and facilitate that obedience. Calvin observes:

Hitherto Moses has related what Abraham had been commanded to do; now he annexes the promises of God to the command; and that for no light cause. For as we are slothful to obey, the Lord would command in vain, unless we are animated by a super-added confidence in his grace and benediction.25

I will make you a great nation

Having left his nation, Abraham will himself become the father of a new and distinct nation. Furthermore, this nation will be a ―great nation‖ (cf. Deuteronomy 4:7-8).

I will bless you From this point on, Abraham will be the subject of Yahweh‘s attention and care. The word ‗bless‘ is in the imperfect tense, indicating incomplete action: the LORD‘s interest in and care for Abraham will be ongoing.

25 Calvin, J., Commentaries on the book of Genesis, Vol. I (Baker Book House, 1979), 316


Page 34

I will make your name great Abraham would, by the LORD‘s will and commitment, become a man of renown. But this would only be his through obedience: he would have to renounce his identity, citizenship and security. The next phrase indicates the outcome of the LORD‘s blessing of Abraham. Walter Kaiser points out that the shift to the perfect tense of the verb barakh in the final phrase makes it a consequential clause: ―So that in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.‖26 Although the term ‗nations‘ (goyim) is used in other places in the Abraham narrative (see Genesis 18:18), here the term ―families‖ is employed. This word previously appeared in 10:32: ―These are the families of the sons of Noah.‖ Those families recorded in the Genesis 10 genealogy are the families to be blessed because of Abraham. In other words, this is the extent of the blessing promised through Abraham — every major group in the world! These are the defining words of Yahweh to this ageing and previously insignificant individual. The human race has proved itself to be stubbornly rebellious, and God has acted in repeated judgment against them. But the blessing that is to come through Abraham comes at the very point of judgment. When speaking to Noah, the Lord said he would blot out mankind from the face of the earth (6:2): the site of judgment has become the arena of blessing.

Conclusion It would be a useful exercise to trace how this promise fares throughout the rest of the Bible story. But that is beyond the scope of this module. Let us notice just two main points: 1. These verses set the agenda for the remainder of the biblical narrative; 2. These verses show God to be determined in his redemptive action on

behalf of the human race, not being content to leave them alone in judgment.

If these assertions are valid, it once again demonstrates the legitimacy and necessity of reading the Bible ‗in missional perspective‘. If these promises are what we might call essentially redemptive, and if the story that flows from here shows how these promises are fulfilled, then the story itself is essentially redemptive.

26 Kaiser, Jr., Walter C., Toward an Old Testament Theology (Zondervan, 1978), 87


Page 35

By way of a further reminder of the direction of this module, it is perhaps appropriate to allow Calvin the final word: ―…the covenant of salvation which God made with Abram is neither stable nor firm except in Christ.‖27

Exercise You may wish to spend a few minutes tracing the fulfilment of these promises throughout Genesis. Note how frequently the human actors stray from God‘s commands, and yet God

remains faithful to his promise and purposes. At the very least, read Genesis 50:22–26 and Exodus 1:1–16. Which aspects of the promise have been fulfilled, and which are under threat?

27 Calvin, Genesis, 349


Page 36

Unit 7.

The method

established — a

people

These are the generations… The Abraham story is a fascinating case study in how to interpret Old Testament narrative. It is all too easy to slip into an approach that is little more than moralism — that is, where Abraham is viewed as a model of how to behave (or not) in a range of scenarios. However, if we are to understand Abraham‘s life, then we must set it within the overall purpose of Genesis. The story of Abraham is an integral part of that large unit and makes a significant contribution to it. Something of the focus of Genesis can be demonstrated by looking at the recurring pattern of generations. All together there are ten genealogies in Genesis, and are all introduced by the phrase, ―These are the generations of…‘. (See 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10; 11:27; 25:12; 25:19; 36:1, 9; 37:2.) The Hebrew word for ‗generations‘ is toledot, so this is sometimes referred to as ‗the toledot formula‘. On each occasion, there follows either a genealogy (5:1; 10:1; 11:10; 25:12; 36:1) or a narrative (2:4; 6:9; 11:27; 25:19; 37:2). To help distinguish between


Page 37

the two types, the former can be translated, ―These are the descendants of…‖; the latter, ―This is the story of…‖. Furthermore, the genealogies can be divided into two types: 1. Vertical, which pursues one line of descendants (for example, Adam to

Noah in 5:1, and Shem to Terah in 11:10); 2. Horizontal, which indicates the relationships between the various

subgroups in a family. The function of the vertical genealogies is to trace an unbroken line from Adam to Jacob and to provide a framework for the patriarch narratives. So the descendants of Adam are traced to Noah (5:1) and the formula in 6:9 introduces the account of the flood. In 11:10 the line is continued from Shem to Terah and the formula in 11:27 introduces the Abraham narrative.

1. The heavens and the earth (2:4)

2. Adam (5:1)

9. Esau (36:9)

3. Noah (6:9)

4. The Sons of Noah (10:1)

5. Shem (11:10)

6. Terah (and Abraham) (11:27)

7. Ishmael (25:12)

8. Isaac (25:19)

10. Jacob (Israel) (37:2)


Page 38

What this diagram illustrates, then, is that the most significant issue is the one line from Adam to Jacob. All the other characters spread out from it, but, as it were, disappear over the horizon.28 All of this highlights the point about the role of the Abraham narrative within the wider context of Genesis. The promises in Genesis 12:1-3 did not merely concern Abraham. The call of God was for Abraham to become a great nation. In other words, it was all about offspring. The rest of the narrative shows that Abraham himself proves to be of questionable blessing to the nations (see especially 12:17, 14:15 and 20:9). But as Hamilton points out,

Genesis supplies several illustrations of the fulfilment of this promise … Jacob (30:27) … Joseph (39:5). Not only was the household of Jacob saved from starvation by the presence of Joseph in Egypt, but so was the country of Egypt itself. In that sense they were blessed. Instead of famine there was plenty for all to eat, even in the lean years.29

Reflection I said that the Abraham narrative is not merely an exercise in ‗moralism‘, where we are supposed to copy (or not) Abraham‘s behaviour.

What, then, is the application for us of the Abraham narrative?

A kingdom of priests In fact, Genesis ends with the descendants of Abraham in Egypt. They are hardly a great nation, comprising a mere 70 people (not including Jacob‘s daughters-in-law; see 46:26-27). However, the pace picks up considerably by the beginning of Exodus. The descendants of Abraham become very numerous (Exodus 1:7, 12, 20) and the promise to Abraham is well on the way to fulfilment. However, their numerical strength is a problem to their hosts, and the blessing that came to Egypt through Joseph is forgotten (1:8). Israel became a curse. The biblical narrative gives us no reason to think that their increase, nor the fear and subsequent actions of the Egyptians posed any threat to the promises made by the LORD to Abraham. In fact, we are told that the LORD heard their groaning, remembered his covenant with the patriarchs (2:24-25), and so took action on their behalf.

28 Chester, T., From Creation To New Creation (Paternoster Press, 2003), 23 29 Hamilton, Victor P., The Book of Genesis: chapters 1-17 (Eerdmans, 1990), 375-6


Page 39

As the story unfolds, Israel move out of Egypt and their relationship with the LORD is ratified at Sinai. A key section of this covenant is the preamble in Ex.19:4-6:

You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles‘ wings, and how I brought you to myself. Now then, if you will indeed obey my voice, and keep my covenant, then you shall be my own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

Chris Wright describes this as a ―definitive text that links Israel‘s obedience to the covenant law to their identity and role as God‘s priesthood in the midst of the nations.‖30 Brevard Childs puts it this way: ―The covenant responsibility encompasses [Israel‘s] whole life, defining her relation to God and to her neighbours, and the quality of her existence.‖31 Israel has been brought out of captivity, culminating in God‘s act of simultaneous salvation and judgment: Israel is rescued through the Red Sea; the Egyptians are swallowed by it. God has now brought Abraham‘s descendants to the foot of the mountain, and through his servant Moses, God constitutes them as his people under his rule. Something very interesting is going on in Exodus 19. God reiterates his choice of Israel as a nation, and he underlines their distinctive position and the unique nature of the relationship between them. They alone are his ―treasured possession‖, and they alone are a ―kingdom of priests and a holy nation‖. Yet it is at this very point of privilege that God‘s promise to bless the nations through Abraham is to be fulfilled. The call of God on the people of Israel was to be a ―holy nation‖. The word ‗holy‘ has at its root the idea of being separate or apart. It is precisely because the nation was set apart by God that they could be described as being holy. Their distinctiveness was primarily in the uniqueness of their relationship with Yahweh, which itself was the consequence of his choice rather than their behaviour. Yet by being set apart by God, they were being set apart for him. In being called God‘s chosen people, they were being called to reflect the character of the one who called them. It is no accident that this description of Israel occurs in the preamble to the giving of the law that constituted the covenant between Yahweh and the descendants of Abraham. By describing the nation as ‗holy‘ in the context of his covenant with them, God was looking for his people to provoke a response from the nations. On the one hand, as they lived under the rule of Yahweh and reflected his character, the nations around them would recognise the distinctiveness of their corporate life and know a sense of amazement and awe. On the other

30 Wright, Christopher J. H., Deuteronomy (New International Biblical Commentary; Hendrickson, 1996), 12 31 Childs, Brevard, S., Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary (Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 367


Page 40

hand, the nations would be drawn by the quality of the life they witnessed. (Deuteronomy 4:5–8) God also decreed that the nation should be a kingdom of priests. This is the only time this phrase occurs in the Old Testament, and it precedes specific instruction in the law about the role and identity of priests. The people would have been familiar with the function of priests in Egypt, for example, but Egyptian priesthood should be seen as definitive for their understanding of their priestly identity as a nation. Priests had an important role in Israel. They were a distinct grouping, set apart from the rest of society and distinguished by lineage as the sons of Aaron and Levi. What becomes clear in the law is that the Levitical priests‘ functions included representation and teaching. They represented the people to God by the means of sacrifices and intercessions, and they taught the people about God by expounding the law. In other words, they served as mediators between God and people. Through the law, the LORD will constitute Israel as his people under his rule. Exodus 19 forms a preamble to the law, and here God says that his people will be priestly as a nation. Consequently, at a corporate level they will have a dual role in relation to the other nations. They are being called to bring the nations into a relationship with God as they bear witness to him by their corporate life as his people under his rule. By that same life and witness they will teach the nations about Yahweh, and show him to be not only the God of Israel but also the God of the whole earth (verse 5).

[In Isaiah 40–55, t]he international scope of the servant‘s mission to all peoples is quite clear. That goal is evident from the very beginning of the nation, in God‘s promise (and commission) to Abraham that through his seed all the families of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:3). God‘s choice of Israel was his way of dealing with mankind as a whole, meaning that as Israel fares, so fares the rest of mankind (cf. Romans 3:19). In a manner of speaking, Israel serves as God‘s ―test-tube‖ for sampling the whole human race.32

The law After an extended period of wandering in the wilderness due to their disobedience, Israel are brought to the border of the land promised to Abraham. Moses is instructed to remind them of the covenant God made with them at Sinai a generation earlier. A whole generation had fallen in the wilderness, but God had once again brought them to the brink of Canaan. The vision of Exodus 19 could now be realised, and the promise to Abraham would reach another level of fulfilment. At the heart of this realisation and fulfilment is the law of the covenant by which God exercises his rule over his people:

32 R. L. Thomas, ‗The Mission of Israel and of the Messiah in the Plan of God‘, in Masters Seminary Journal 8:2 (Fall 1997), 192-210


Page 41

See, I have taught you statutes and judgments just as the LORD my God commanded me, that you should do thus in the land where you are entering to possess it. ―So keep and do them, for that is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes and say, ‗Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.‘ ―For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as is the LORD our God whenever we call on Him? ―Or what great nation is there that has statutes and judgments as righteous as this whole law which I am setting before you today?‖ (Deuteronomy 4:5-8)

Although this was the law given to Israel alone by which the nation was marked out as God‘s treasured possession, it was never intended to be for Israel‘s benefit alone. The nation was called to obey the law and live a life of visible holiness. To the extent that they did this and showed their love for Yahweh by their obedience and service, the nations would notice Israel‘s distinctiveness. Israel must be very clear about the reasons behind their greatness as a nation. There was nothing intrinsic to them as a people. Their greatness was consequential, and derived from two interrelated elements:

The nearness of God to his people (verse 7)

The righteousness of the Law (verse 8) They would be a cause of wonderment to the nations around them, but it would be Yahweh who received the glory.

The Psalms So far, we have seen how the intention of the biblical narrators is to show that the God of Israel is in fact the God of the whole world: he made it, is sovereign over it and intends to bless it. His choice of Israel was his means to that end, and that becomes even more explicit as God‘s revelation of himself unfolds in the Old Testament. Psalm 67 is a helpful case in point. The Psalms are Israel‘s prayers. They are poetry and songs, but they also served the crucial function of making the connection between the worshipper and God. What is particularly interesting about Psalm 67 how it employs the prayer Aaron was instructed to pray in order to bless the people of Israel, recorded for us in Numbers 6:22-27. In this original setting, the prayer is in the context of instructions to Moses concerning ―the internal or moral and spiritual organisation of the nation as a congregation of the Lord.‖33 Many of the instructions contained in the preceding chapters deal with issues that are, at fist reading, somewhat esoteric. In Numbers 3-4, the appointment of the Levites to the priesthood is explained, along with their duties. Each of the sons of Gershon, Kohath and Merari are given particular tasks within the cult. Although chapter 5 deals

33 Keil, C. F. and Delitzsch, F., Commentary on the Old Testament; Vol. 3. The Pentateuch (Eerdmans, 1983), 2


Page 42

with the question of defilement because of leprosy and sin, the focus is upon how the priests are to respond to such factors to ensure the whole congregation is not defiled. Chapter 6 gives details of the Nazirite order, which seems to function as a microcosm of the congregation as a whole. In fact, both the Levite and the Nazirite seem to serve a similar function, in that both orders stand as representatives of the nation (see 3:40-51). Just as both groups are set apart in the congregation, so is Israel set apart among the nations. Aaron, as the chief priest, is given the task of speaking the words of blessing upon the entire congregation, or the ―sons of Israel‖ as they are described in 6:23, 27. The prayer assumes Israel‘s distinctive identity in the world, as they are the people the Lord will bless and keep, the people on whom his face will shine and to whom he will be gracious. The Lord will respond to this blessing by blessing the people (verse 27). Intriguingly, the psalmist then takes part of this prayer and gives it a universal focus. He calls for God to be gracious to the nation and bless them, causing his face to shine on them, ―that your way may be known on the earth, your saving power among all nations.‖ (Psalm 67:2) The remainder of the psalm ‗calls‘ the nations to praise Yahweh, and to be glad and rejoice because of Yahweh. The intent of God‘s blessing is summarised at the end of the psalm: ―God blesses us, that all the ends of the earth may fear him‖ (verse 7). The psalmist knew the purpose of Israel‘s election, and understood the determination of Yahweh to fulfil the promise he made to Abraham. He would bless the descendants of Abraham so that through them he might bless the nations and so be recognised as the God of the whole earth.

The prophets This focus is equally as clear in the prophetic writings.34 We shall return to these in greater depth in the next unit, but it is worth providing an overview here. The role of the prophets in the life and faith of Israel cannot be over-emphasised. They played a crucial role in reminding the people of their identity as God‘s covenant people. In many respects, their role can be seen as that of covenant enforcers. They did not speak in a vacuum. They were the mouthpieces of a God who spoke. He had spoken to Abraham and had made expansive promises to him. He had also spoken to the nation in his law, summarised in the Ten Commandments. These two great revelatory acts were definitive for Israel‘s history and identity.

34 For more on this, see the Foundation Year Porterbrook module Introducing Exposition and Biblical Theology, especially Unit 9.


Page 43

The task of the prophet was essentially to remind the people of what God had said to them in both the Abrahamic promise and the Mosaic law concerning himself and concerning their privileges and responsibilities as his treasured possession. That is not to say that there was no future focus in the prophets‘ words, but even that element concerned the fulfilment of the promise and the eschatological intent of the law. This dual focus of promise and law comes to the fore in Isaiah 2:2-4.

2 It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and shall be lifted up above the hills; and all the nations shall flow to it, 3 and many peoples shall come, and say: ―Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths.‖ For out of Zion shall go the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 He shall judge between the nations, and shall decide disputes for many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.

Isaiah looks forward and sees the fulfilment of the promise as the nations stream to ―the mountain of the house of the LORD‖. The God of Jacob is also the God of the nations (verse 3). The agrarian imagery of verse 4 has echoes of Eden where the curse is removed and its terrible consequences reversed. They come to the mountain because the sight of God‘s people living under his rule draws them. The nations now want to live under the rule of Yahweh (verse 3). As they do so, they discover for themselves the blessings that are to be found there. Johannes Blauw makes this suggestive observation when commenting upon the promise of God to Abraham in Genesis 12: ―The whole history of Israel is nothing but the continuation of God‘s dealings with the nations, and therefore the history of Israel is only to be understood from the unsolved problem of the relation of God to the nations.‖35 Isaiah‘s vision of the nations encouraging each other to go the mountain of the house of the LORD promises a stunning resolution to that apparently unsolved problem. Karl Barth summarises the issue for us:

The Old Testament makes it unmistakeably clear, again and again, that … the covenant of Yahweh with a unique Israel … far from being an end in itself … has

35 Blauw, J., The Missionary Nature of the Church (Lutterworth, 1962), 19


Page 44

meaning, revelation, real and dynamic import for the relationship between God and all peoples.36

Robert Martin-Achard states it in a refreshing and unequivocal manner: The fortune of the world ultimately hangs upon the existence of Israel in the midst of the nations; living by Yahweh, the chosen people live for mankind. That is the missionary perspective that becomes visible in the declarations of … Isaiah.37

Isaiah sees the relationship of Israel to Yahweh as defining of her relationship with the nations. Israel‘s unique relationship as the people of God was good news for the Gentiles, as evidenced by the prophetic vision of a global surge towards ―the mountain of the house of the Lord‖. In other words, in both the promise and the law, Israel was given an evangelistic identity and function. In order to capture this dynamic, Israel‘s mission has been described as ‗centripetal‘, that is, it draws the nations in towards them. Israel is to be as a light to the other nations. This is clear in the second of the so-called Servant Songs in Isaiah 49. It was the 19th-century form-critical scholar Bernard Duhm who first identified four Servant Songs in Isaiah. Although there is some ongoing discussion about the extent and number of these units, Duhm‘s theory is still largely accepted. Isaiah introduces the Servant in chapter 42, where we learn that he is the ideal Israel, the embodiment of all that Israel was meant to be. The same character who resurfaces in chapter 49. The Servant addresses the nations and requires their attention (verse 1). He identifies himself in terms of his unique relationship to Yahweh. He has been called and equipped (verses 1b-2a), and secreted away until the time comes for his deployment (verse 2b). The Servant is identified as Israel in verse 3, and the purpose of his election is to be the medium through which the LORD will show his glory. That demonstration of glory will occur as the Servant becomes the ―light of the nations‖, and God‘s salvation reaches the ends of the earth (verse 7).

God’s redemptive method And so we have seen that throughout the whole Old Testament — the histories, the law, the prophets, and the Psalms — God‘s plan was to bless all the families of the earth. He is intent on undoing the effects of Adam‘s disobedience. His chosen instrument was Israel: a redeemed nation who would reveal God‘s redemptive character to the whole world. And yet we know that Israel failed to live out the implications of her election. God‘s glory was smothered under a cloak of disobedience. The nations had looked on in vain and had seen only judgment. But Yahweh would not be frustrated. He promised to raise up one who would be all that Israel had been called to be,

36 Barth, K. cited in Blauw, ibid., 28 37 Martin-Achard, R. cited in Blauw, ibid., 33


Page 45

and through him to bless the all the nations, even as he had promised Abraham he would.

Reflection In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul reflects on the history of Israel. In verse 11 he says, ―Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on

whom the end of the ages has come.‖ What can we learn from God‘s dealings with Israel? What comfort and what warnings can we draw?


Page 46

Unit 8.

Failure and remedy

— one man for a

people

Introduction The LORD‘s calling on Israel was a noble one: to be the means through which he blessed the nations. After the judgment at Babel, it seemed on one level like the story focused on one man and his descendants, but the global scope of God‘s redemptive purpose never diminished. However, as we mentioned in Unit 7, the nation failed to live out the implications of her election. God‘s glory was smothered under a cloak of disobedience. The nations had looked on in vain and had seen only judgment. What is clear from the unfolding Old Testament narrative is God‘s patience with Israel, expressed chiefly in the ministry of he prophets he sent to call them back to covenant faithfulness. (2 Chronicles 36:15)

The prophets One of the consistent pictures drawn by the biblical authors of God is that he is a speaking God. He is a God who communicates. This is often the backcloth for the scathing criticism of idolatry. The idols are dumb; they do not speak. But Yahweh does, and in that speaking he makes himself and his purposes known.


Page 47

It is a worthwhile exercise to look at the emphasis the Bible places on the word of God. Peter Adam explains it like this:

Moses‘ ministry of the Word is of great importance to our study, and he is the paradigm prophet in the Bible. Indeed, it is possible to see Moses‘ ministry as the fountain of all Old Testament ministry of the Word. For that ministry was carried out by six groups of people: the prophets, who spoke the word of God, recalled people to covenant obedience, and were prophets like Moses…38

Speaking out God‘s word is at the heart of the prophetic ministry. People often think ‗prophecy‘ means ‗predictive speech‘, but this is not the case in the Bible. Fee and Stuart claim that less than two per cent of Old Testament prophecy is ‗messianic‘; less than five per cent specifically describes the new covenant age; less than one per cent concerns events yet to come.39 Although there is an interpretative element in the statistics, the point they make is a good one. We should always keep in mind the two elements of proclamation and prediction in understanding and interpreting the ministry of the prophets, but proclamation is the most crucial. The primary role of the prophets is calling the people back to what God‘s promises. In fact, the predictive element itself generally highlighted of what God had already said. The sixteen writing prophets who contributed to the canon all ministered in a fairly short time frame. Which prompts the question as to why so much prophetic activity, and why is it condensed into a relatively short period? If we accept the definition of prophets as ‗enforcers of the covenant‘, their rise must be connected with spiritual decline in Israel. Put at its simplest, judgment was coming, in the form of Assyria in 722 BC and the Babylonians in 597 BC. Goldsworthy says:

The writing prophets all do three things. First, they identify the specific ways in which Israel has broken the covenant. These include social injustice and oppression, insincere worship of God, mixing pagan religion with the true faith revealed by God, and even worship of false gods. Second, they pronounce the judgment of God on this unfaithfulness to the covenant. Sometimes the judgment is predicted in specific terms of destruction of Samaria or Jerusalem. At other times the judgment is more general, and even universal as a degeneration of the whole earth. Whether it is the end of the nation or the end of the world (Jeremiah 4:23-28; Isaiah 24:1-3; Amos 7:4; Zephaniah 1:2-3), the judgment is coming because Israel rejects God‘s grace. Third, they speak a message of comfort to the faithful. God will yet save them completely, finally and gloriously.40

Despite human sin, God will not abandon his redemptive purposes, but will instead use the rebellion of his people to bring it about. In this way we see that even such cataclysmic events as the Exile are not mere accidents, nor simply a response from God to prior human sin. Somehow and mysteriously

38 Adam, P., Speaking God’s Words: A practical theology of preaching (Regent College Publishing, 2004), 40 39 Fee, G. and Stuart, D., How to Read the Bible for all its Worth, (Scripture Union, 1983), 166 40 Goldsworthy, G., According to Plan (IVP, 1991), 245


Page 48

they are all tied up in those redemptive purposes and are means of advancing them. Judgment does come, even as the prophets promised, but God has not finished with his people. Even in the midst of the dire warnings and threats of judgment, the prophets never lose sight of a hope for the future, and neither will they allow the people of God to lose sight of it. The covenant still stands, and all the nations of the earth will indeed be blessed through Abraham and his descendants.

Reasons for Exile There are three significant ‗causes‘ of the Exile as identified by the prophets.

Injustice Injustice was both a cause and symptom of the nation‘s demise. Within the framework of the Mosaic covenant, it is a serious offence because justice was not incidental to God‘s purposes. His desire at Sinai was that Israel should be a nation of justice and equity, where the principles of sufficiency and equality (as expressed in the giving of manna) would prevail because ―there will be no poor‖ (Deuteronomy 15:4). But as God looked at his people, ―He looked for justice, but saw bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, a cry!‖ (Isaiah 5:7). The poor were being exploited, and Israel‘s courts were places where oppressive laws were passed and iniquitous decrees issued (Isaiah 10:1). The poor were getting poorer and the rich richer, and although God had stipulated a nation of small tenant farmers, ―the rich were joining house to house and adding field to field until there was no more room.‖ (Isaiah 5:8)

Militarism Part of Israel‘s distinctiveness was to be her reliance on Yahweh, rather than on armies: as the psalmist commands, ―Be still, and know that I am God.‖ (Psalm 46:10) The psalmist calls Israel to stop fighting, and to allow God to demonstrate his supremacy through Israel‘s weakness. But Israel felt vulnerable. They wanted a king of flesh and blood to lead them into battle, because they wanted to be like the surrounding nations (Isaiah 30:1-2; 31:1; Micah 5:10-11).

Impure worship Despite their religious observance and their spiritual activities, Israel‘s lives individually and corporately knew nothing of the radical, visible holiness to which they had been called (Isaiah 58:2). Fasting was far more significant


Page 49

than a day or two without food (Isaiah 58:6-7). In short, they had forgotten what it was to trust God and to live their lives before him. The rampant idolatry prior to the Exile was an expression of this. These other gods were lawless, but the God of Israel demanded worship expressed in changed lives and transformed communities.

To Babylon and back It was important for us to take time considering these things because of the bearing they have on the question of return. Judgment fell not simply as punishment, but in order to bring his people to their senses — to call them back to obedience to the covenant. 2 Chronicles 36:11-21 tells us something very significant. The Babylonians ―left in the land of Judah some of the poor people who owned nothing, and gave them vineyards and fields.‖ (Cf. Jeremiah 39:10) Israel failed to comply with the covenant and live distinctively as God‘s covenant people. Expulsion from the land was God‘s response to the failure of his son (Exodus 4:23; Hosea 11:1), just as expulsion from Eden had been his response to the rebellion of his first son, Adam (Luke 3:38). However, even in Exile they were called to fulfil the LORD‘s promises to Abraham. We see an example of this in the narrative of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego in Daniel 1-7. Jeremiah‘s letter to the exiles is explicit:

Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon, ―Build houses and live in them; and plant gardens and eat their produce. Take wives and become the fathers of sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; and multiply there and do not decrease. Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the LORD on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare.‖ (Jeremiah 29:4-7)

But Jeremiah was equally clear: even as they were seeking the welfare of Babylon, they were to remember the Lord‘s promise of return:

―When seventy years have been completed for Babylon, I will visit you and fulfil my good word to you, to bring you back to this place. For I know the plans that I have for you,‖ declares the LORD, ―plans for welfare and not for calamity, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you search for me with all your heart. I will be found by you,‖ declares the LORD, ―and I will restore your fortunes and will gather you from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you,‖ declares the LORD, ―and I will bring you back to the place from where I sent you into exile.‖ (Jeremiah 29:10-14)

Certainly the exiles would have been full of hope and optimism. With the decree of Cyrus ringing in their ears, and the promises of the prophets to propel them on their journey, many made their way back to the land of promise, but some remained in the land of exile.


Page 50

Why? New ideas began to emerge from the lips of the prophets themselves as they brought new light to bear on the covenant. While they were in Exile, God reaffirmed his direct rule, his kingship (Ezekiel 20:33). This rule was not only over Israel, as if he were some sort of king-in-exile himself. He was King over all the nations (Jeremiah 10:7), and the Saviour-king at that (Isaiah 45:22-23). There were those who went back to Israel; they were in fact encouraged to do so. By bringing them home, God was vindicating his holiness before the eyes of the watching world (Ezekiel 36:22-25). They went with great hopes and ambitions of a rebuilt temple, a restructured city, a reconstituted people. Yet it never happened. The city was rebuilt and the walls repaired, but Jerusalem remained a pale shadow of her former self. This was not least because they lacked political independence (Nehemiah 9:36-37). Apart from the briefest of periods, they were to know only vassal status under the Egyptians, Syrians and Romans, right up until the final destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

The problem is that although the structure of the kingdom portrayed by the prophets is there in outline, the substance is not. There is no glorious return, no magnificent temple set in the midst of the regenerated earth. It is clear also that the people have still not undergone that spiritual transformation that makes them perfectly the people of God. There is no magnificent reign of the Davidic prince.41

The narrative material of Ezra and Nehemiah underscores this theme of failure. Whatever the returning remnant thought they were coming back to, what they experienced quite clearly did not meet their expectations. Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi bring the covenant to bear on the predicament of the returnees, and expose the continued covenant breaking. They continue to call the people to repentance and to trust in the future purposes of God when his rule will be established. Tom Wright expresses it well:

When Israel finally ‗returned from exile‘ … it would be the re-betrothal of Yahweh and Israel, after their apparent divorce. It would be the real forgiveness of sins; Israel‘s God would pour out his Holy Spirit, so that she would be able to keep the Torah [that is, the law] properly, from the heart. It would be the ‗circumcision of the heart‘ of which Deuteronomy and Jeremiah had spoken … it would above all be the ‗kingdom of God‘. Israel‘s God would become in reality what he was already believed to be. He would be King of the whole world.42

Reflection Do you ever feel dissatisfied with God, that your walk with Jesus does not match up with your expectations? How might God‘s dealings with his people in the Exile and return speak a

word of comfort to people who are disappointed with God?

41 Goldsworthy, According to Plan, 254 42 Wright, N. T., The New Testament and the People of God (SPCK, 1992), 301


Page 51

The Servant It would be a serious error if we were to overlook the ‗emergence‘ in the prophetic writings of the kingly servant. He is one who would embody all the virtues of the nation. As we mentioned in passing in Unit 3, he comes as the fulfilment of all of God‘s promises to Abraham, Israel and David. He comes to rescue his people, to set free the captives, to end the exile and to lead the people of God into the promised land of the new heaven and earth. Zechariah memorably predicts the Servant‘s coming:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Look, your king comes to you; He is triumphant and victorious, humble and riding on an ass, on a colt the foal of an ass. I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war -horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off, and he shall command shalom to the nations. (Zechariah 9:9-10)

Matthew explicitly cites the prophecy by Zechariah as Jesus rides into Jerusalem just a few days before his arrest (Matthew 21:5). Matthew introduces it with a familiar introduction: ―This took place to fulfil what was spoken through the prophet‖.43 The citation is yet another example of the ‗this is that‘ formula: the act of Jesus was the very thing of which the prophet spoke. Donald Hagner makes this comment on Matthew‘s usage: ―Zechariah 9:9 is the deliberate frame of reference Jesus chooses to create by riding into the city on the foal of an ass. He comes as ‗the king‘, i.e. the messianic Son of David.‖44 The messianic theme is strengthened and developed by the songs of the crowd (cf. Psalm 118:25-26). The timing of this public, messianic entry into Jerusalem is highly significant. The Gospel writers record this as the culmination of the ministry of Jesus. Martin Kahler has gone so far as to describe the gospel of Mark as ―a passion narrative with an extended introduction‖.45 Jesus is in Jerusalem for one reason, and one reason alone: an appointment with death. Both his death and its manner are central to the identity and mission of Jesus. Hagner concludes his comment on Matthew 21:5 with this insight: ―He comes as ―the king‖ … as a king indeed who will hang on a cross for his people.‖46 Jesus completes Israel‘s story, but not by satisfying popular demands for military conquest. His victory is a very strange victory indeed, and the enemies he defeats are not the ones walking the streets of Jerusalem with swords strapped to their sides.

43 See Unit 3 44 Hagner, D. A., Matthew 14-28 (Word Biblical Commentary; Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), 495 45 Kahler, M., The So-Called Historical Jesus And The Historic, Biblical Christ (trans. and ed. Karl E. Braaten; Fortress, 1964), 80 46 ibid., 495


Page 52

In other words, God‘s victory was redemption. He liberated the people of promise with the most outrageous rescue act imaginable. It was at the cross that Jesus finally lived up to his name, for it was there that he saved his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21). N. T. Wright states the issue succinctly when commenting on Mark 8:34-9:1:

Jesus saw the coming of the kingdom as closely bound up with his own messiahship, his own forthcoming death, and the journey to Jerusalem which would encapsulate both. He would embody in himself the return from exile, the defeat of evil and the return of Yahweh to Zion. Once we have understood that entire sequence of thought, as a whole and in its parts … we can see that from Jesus‘ point of view, this was indeed how ―the Son of Man‖, who is also ―the Son of God‖ would be vindicated. This was how Yahweh would return to Zion; this is what he would accomplish when he arrived there. This would be the way to the victory of God.47

Conclusion According to Genesis 12:3, Abraham and his offspring are the means of reversing the curse. In Adam, humanity is cursed. In Abraham, there is the promise of universal blessing. As Wright puts it, ―If Abraham and his family are understood as the creator‘s means of dealing with the sin of Adam, and hence with the evil in the world, Israel herself becomes the true Adamic community.‖48 By choosing Abraham, God was creating a representative people; as Israel fared, so too did the world. Without covenant faithfulness, there was no covenant blessing, so the nations saw little to attract or commend Israel‘s God, leaving them to wallow in their unbelief. Israel was another Adam, who consistently repeated the sin of the first Adam. In Romans 5:12-21, Paul expounds at length the identity of Jesus Christ as the representative of a new people: ―If by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to many‖ (verse 15). When he died on the cross, Jesus was the Last Adam, and ‗in him‘ was the new humanity. God would not leave the verdict of ‗guilty‘ on Adam‘s race; he would not abandon his world to hopeless decay. It is in Christ, in his representative death and resurrection, that we discover just exactly what the Lord meant when he promised to bless the nations through Abraham.

47 Wright N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God (SPCK, 1996), 651 48 Wright, N.T., The New Testament and the People of God, 263


Page 53

Unit 9.

The story continues

— a people

A quick recap In Unit 1, I said that the God I know is the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible is redemptive for his own glory; he will be worshipped forever as the God who saves. As John Frame points out, in eternity God conceived and designed a ‗drama‘ to be implemented in time: it is a drama involving creation, fall, and redemption; it is the drama of divine mission. If this is correct, then to read the Bible in missional perspective means to read the Bible for what it is: the story of God rescuing a people for himself. Unit 2 showed that Revelation 21 and 22 form the climax of the biblical narrative — the point towards which salvation history is moving. That point is the twin focus on the Redeemer and the redeemed. This should not surprise us: without the Redeemer there are no redeemed; without the redeemed, there is no Redeemer. The following bullet points highlight the key elements in reading the Bible in missional perspective:

God created the world to have a people of his own;

These people are identified as the children of Abraham;

Under the old covenant, this is Israel;

Not all Israel are Israel, but God kept a remnant for himself;


Page 54

Under the new covenant, the people of God are the Church, comprising some from all the nations of the earth (including Israel), in glorious fulfilment of God‘s promise to Abraham;

Eternity will see the triune God enjoying intimate fellowship with his people.

Reflection Think about the relationship between the old covenant and the new covenant, particularly with regard to the people of God. What are the points of continuity? What are the points

of discontinuity?

The people of God The overarching identity of the people of God is assumed in 1 Peter 2:9-10:

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

Ed Clowney in his commentary on 1 Peter states: ―Peter saw the church as the people of God in exile and dispersion.‖49 J. Ramsey Michaels describes the church simply as believers who are ―Israel as God intended her from the time of the Exodus, a holy people called to worship and praise God in the world.‖50 Peter Davids puts it with his customary clarity: ―These Christians … were ―not a people‖, for ―the people of God‖ was a term reserved for Israel … But now these Christians know they are elect — not just a people of God, but the people of God.‖51 Each of these three commentators recognises that Peter understands the identity and circumstances of the Christians he is writing to within the framework of the unfolding drama of the biblical story. However, this is not altogether uncontroversial. What we are asserting is that the church is the people of God. The word ‗church‘ as used in the introduction to many of the epistles (for example, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians) is the primary way the New Testament writers refer to the people of God in the new covenant. But it is not the only way. For example, the terms ‗saints‘ is used frequently to describe the people of God in both covenants (Psalm 16:3; 31:23; 85:8; 132:16; Acts 26:10, Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 6:1, Philemon 1:5, 7). The fact

49 Clowney, E., The Message of 1 Peter (Bible Speaks Today; IVP, 1988), 23 50 Michaels, J. R., 1 Peter (Word Biblical Commentary, Thomas Nelson, 1988), 113 51 Davids, Peter H., The First Epistle of Peter (NICNT, Eerdmans, 1990), 93


Page 55

that the New Testament writers use an Old Testament term so freely must surely indicate the identification of the two in their minds. The title of Unit 7 is ‗The method established — a people‘, and the aim of the unit is to show that God‘s agent of mission in the world is his covenant people. Unit 9 is developing that by claiming that God is a faithful husband and has only ever had one wife. It is not that there was Israel in the Old Testament, but because of her failure, God rewrote the plan, gave the Gentiles a chance, and in so doing created the church. Rather, there is one people of God, composed of faithful members of Israel (from the old covenant) and those who believe in Jesus in the new covenant — Jew and Gentile alike.52

Church is that phenomenon of which Paul speaks so eloquently in Ephesians: the irreconcilable reconciled by the cross (2:11–16). Thus the church is the prism of God‘s glory, the manifestation of his wisdom to the principalities and powers in the heavenlies (3:10). This is how he always intended it to be: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all (Ephesians 4:4-6).

Romans 11 is a crucial chapter in this whole theme. The Gentiles have been grafted onto the one tree. Branches have been broken off and we have been grafted in. But there is only one people. This point is underlined in Revelation 4: we are introduced to the 24 elders surrounding the throne: twelve patriarchs plus twelve apostles gives one 24-man eldership, representing the people of God from both covenants.

The messianic community

As we have already seen, Matthew‘s concern in his Gospel is to locate the person and work of Jesus in the continuing history of God‘s dealings with Israel. From the carefully crafted genealogy to the recurring refrain of ―This was to fulfil…‖, Jesus is shown to be the One to whom all of the Old Testament pointed and for whom it was preparing.

The Exile theme is a consistent focus in Matthew. He shows how the coming of Jesus marks the end of the Exile. The baptism of Jesus by John in the Jordan is where the Son called out of Egypt enters into the Promised Land. For when Isaiah had foreseen the end of the Exile, he called for straight paths to be made in the desert for the LORD God so that he could return to Israel (Isaiah 40:3). Now John the Baptist calls for straight paths to be made in the desert for the Lord Jesus, as he crosses the Jordan and enters Israel (Matthew 3:1–3, 13–17). The end of the Exile is at hand. This is a time of a new beginning, but one that is securely rooted in millennia of history. Now is

52 It is worth noting that one cannot be saved by 'being Jewish‘ today, without believing in Jesus. The old covenant is defunct (e.g. Hebrews 8:6–13). The apostles called on Jew and Gentile alike to repent and believe in Jesus, ―for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.‖ (Acts 4:12; cf. Romans 3:21–30)


Page 56

the time to bring the exiles ‗home‘, into the place of blessing where God walks among his people (Matthew 4:23). With the coming of Jesus, a blessing is being poured out — a blessing of such a proportion that it cannot be contained within the land, and the nations come even as God had promised they would. The purpose of Jesus‘ coming was to gather the people of God like a shepherd his sheep. He began by calling the remnant and teaching them about life in his kingdom. That is the context for the Sermon on the Mount. The disciples were that remnant within Israel who would be the core of the new, messianic community. In Matthew 4:19, Jesus calls on his disciples: ―Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.‖ He is picking up the theme of Jeremiah 16. At first reading, this seems to be a chapter of unremitting misery and judgment in a larger section of the same (cf. 15:7). 16:13 states it in unequivocal terms: ―I will throw you out of this land into a land neither you nor your fathers have known, and there you will serve other gods day and night, for I will show you no favour.‖ However, the word ‗therefore‘ that begins verse 14 could be translated ‗nevertheless‘, because at the heart of the dark and heavy scene of judgment with the ominous smell of sulphur hanging in the air, God speaks a word of comfort and consolation:

―Nevertheless, the days are coming,‖ declares the LORD, ―when men will no longer say, ‗As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of Egypt,‘ but they will say, ‗As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of the land of the north and out of all the countries where he had banished them.‘ For I will restore them to the land I gave their forefathers. I will send for many fishermen,‖ declares the LORD, ―and they will catch them.‖ (Jeremiah 16:14-15)

It is as though, for just the briefest of moments, a crack appears in the thunderclouds, and a shaft of sunlight shines through — brilliant but brief. It is gone as quickly as it appears. God promises in the midst of judgment that he will send out fishermen to find the remnant and bring them home. When Jesus comes, he appoints those he calls to be those fishermen. Their task will be to gather in the remnant, and bring them, as a people, into the place of God‘s blessing, living under the reign of God‘s King. Jesus‘ response to his popularity at the end of Matthew 4 is significant. He goes up a mountain, calls his disciples to him and teaches them in the presence of the crowd (5:1). From that mountain, just as Moses had done at Sinai, Jesus makes known the word that will govern the people. Of particular interest to us is 5:13-16, where Jesus describes his disciples as both ‗salt‘ and ‗light‘. Jesus did not pluck these metaphors out of the air. On a number of occasions in the Old Testament, salt is used as a symbol of the unbreakable nature of God‘s covenantal relationship with his people:


Page 57

Season all your grain offerings with salt. Do not leave the salt of the covenant of your God out of your grain offerings; add salt to all your offerings. (Leviticus 2:13) Whatever is set aside from the holy offerings the Israelites present to the LORD I give to you and your sons and daughters as your regular share. It is an everlasting covenant of salt before the Lord for both you and your offspring. (Numbers 18:19) Don‘t you know that the Lord, the God of Israel, has given the kingship of Israel to David and his descendants forever by a covenant of salt? (2 Chronicles 13:5)

The phrase ‗covenant of salt‘ is a significant description of the relationship between Yahweh and his people. It was to be added to all the sacrifices offered, both grain and meat. Sacrifices were the means by which sin was dealt with, and so also the means by which the relationship between God and his people was maintained and restored. The addition of salt probably signified permanence in that relationship. In both the Numbers and Chronicles references, this aspect of durability is highlighted. When God entered into a covenant relationship with Israel, it was a durable relationship. It was common during the period of history covered by the Old Testament for men to carry a pouch of salt with them on their belt. When they wanted to enter into some kind of meaningful relationship with someone else, they would drop grains of salt into the pouch of the other. The relationship could only be broken if the grains of salt could be retrieved! Keil and Delitzsch in their comment on Leviticus 2:13 make the observation that it was still common practice among the Arabs to eat bread and salt together as a sign of the treaty between them.53 Edward Pollard writes this:

As salt was regarded as a necessary ingredient of the daily food, and so of all sacrifices offered to Yahweh (Leviticus 2:13), it became an easy step to the very close connection between salt and covenant-making. When men ate together they became friends. Compare the Arabic expression, ―There is salt between us‖; ―He has eaten of my salt,‖ which means partaking of hospitality which cemented friendship; compare ―eat the salt of the palace‖ (Ezra 4:14). Covenants were generally confirmed by sacrificial meals and salt was always present. Since, too, salt is a preservative, it would easily become symbolic of an enduring covenant. So offerings to Yahweh were to be by a statute forever, ―a covenant of salt forever before Yahweh‖ (Numbers 18:19). David received his kingdom forever from Yahweh by a ―covenant of salt‖ (2 Chronicles 13:5). In the light of these conceptions the remark of our Lord becomes the more significant: ―Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace one with another. (Mark 9:50)54

Jesus speaks to his newly called disciples, a small number among the crowd of Jews listening in, and he identifies them as a salt community. Jesus‘ description of the community he has called into existence is both a positive affirmation and a stinging denunciation. They are the new salt community

53 Keil and Delitzsch, Pentateuch, 295 54 Pollard, E. B., ‗Covenant of Salt‘, in J. Orr (ed.), International Standard Bible Encylopedia (The Howard-Severance Company, 1937). Retrieved 14/9/09 from http://tinyurl.com/o6esql


Page 58

because the old salt community has lost its ‗saltiness‘, which once gone is impossible to restore. In an overt reference to the judgment of the Exile, Jesus refers to the old community being thrown out and trampled under foot. This theme of continuity and discontinuity is maintained in the next analogy: you are the light of the world. Isaiah spoke of Israel as a light to the nations, a role the Lord‘s Servant will discharge (Isaiah 42:6; 49:6). Jesus states elsewhere that he is indeed the ―light of the world‖ (John 8:12). Yet as he speaks to the fledgling messianic community, he describes them as the light of the world. The new community takes on the responsibilities of the old community. As they live under the reign of the Messiah, in obedience to his word they will radiate God‘s glory and cause others to worship Yahweh. This is what the old community was called to be: ―If you do away with the yoke of oppression, with the pointing finger and malicious talk, and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness, and your night will become like the noonday.‖ (Isaiah 58:9-10) Right at the outset of his ministry, Jesus calls a community into existence and gives it a missional focus with a centripetal force. In a very real sense, this community has not been called into existence ex nihilo, but from out of the ashes and embers of the old community. The existence of a remnant in Israel was crucial to God‘s faithfulness to his promise to Abraham. The messianic community is not ‗new‘ in the sense of ‗novel‘; it is simply the old community extended in line with the promises of God to Abraham to include the Gentiles. The function of the covenant community in the world is as it has always been: to be both salt and light, to display God‘s commitment to the world and reflect his glory in the world.

The church Paul picks up this theme of light in his letter to the believers in Ephesus. From Ephesians 4:17 onwards, Paul describes two types of communities. The one is the dis-community of darkness, ―darkened in their understanding and excluded from the life of God‖ (verse 18). The believers in Ephesus were themselves once in darkness (5:8), and so they are exhorted to distance themselves from the ―unfruitful deeds of darkness‖ (5:11). Such practices are altogether inappropriate for the community of light. Dark and light imagery features prominently in this section (cf. 5:8-13), and they serve to make the contrast between the two communities stark and uncompromising. In 5:11, Paul calls the community not merely to refrain from participation, but actively to expose the dark deeds for what they are. This exposure happens as they live as communities of light, showing forth the virtues of


Page 59

goodness, righteousness and truth (verses 9, 13). Darkness is exposed and expelled when light shines. The church in Ephesus was evidence of this dynamic at work, for they were formally darkness but they are now light (verse 8). The same process will occur as they radiate the light of faithfulness to the covenant and behave as God‘s distinctive people. Paul moves on to assert the inseparable relationship between Christ and his people in verse 14. Christ will shine on sinners as his people live out their identity as light communities. Once again, the centripetal dimension is to the fore. The Church continues to do what Israel was called to do. God‘s people now have the function they have always had, which is faithfulness to the covenant. To the extent that is true is the extent to which they will be communities of light in the midst of a dark world.

Exercise 1. Spend some time dwelling on the awesome privilege of being part of God‘s redemptive purposes. Praise him for the transformation which he is working in your life individually

and corporately. 2. Talk with some others in your Christian community. Where can you see evidence of God making you a community of salt and light? Where would you like to see more change? Are there concrete steps you can take in that direction?

Conclusion God‘s intention has always been to have a people of his own. His mission strategy is to litter the world with communities of light. The darkness is exposed and expelled as these communities are ‗sent out‘ into the world and as they ‗live out‘ the covenant. Just as God‘s glory was to emanate from Israel, so Christ‘s glory is to emanate from the new covenant people of God. In that way, he fulfils his Servant role as ―the light of the world‖. In a sense, God has no other mission strategy. This is the one he has revealed throughout the Bible story. These light communities are created through the gospel as men and women are brought into a right relationship with God. This transformation occurs as the gospel word is spoken, and as the gospel life is lived. The gospel word functions as the only explanation of the phenomenon of our life in Christ. Strategic missionary thinking requires us to not merely send out ‗preachers‘, but to plant churches, anywhere and everywhere. The people of God are the agents of God‘s mission in the world. As we live by the Sprit in faithfulness to the covenant, that life requires an explanation. The word of a crucified


Page 60

Messiah is the only plausible explanation. That word reveals a uniquely wise and redeeming God. Last updated 8th October 2010

Date post:	20-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Join the Online Student Area.storage.cloversites.com/resonatechurch1/documents... · Join the...

Documents