Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog

The Gospel in the Letters of Paul

Saul of Tarsus saw the Risen Lord Jesus on the road to Damascus and then devoted his life to the proclamation of His Gospel. He would have much to say and teach regarding the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus of Nazareth in all the correspondence he maintained with the Christians and churches with whom he was associated.

Saul of Tarsus, better known as Paul, descended from Benjamin in Israel, and was educated as a Pharisee under the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3, Philippians 3:5). He proved quite zealous for the customs of Moses and was motivated by that zeal to persecute the earliest Christians (cf. Acts 22:3-5). While traveling to Damascus to round up any Christians there, he saw Jesus in heaven in the resurrection (Acts 9:1-8). Paul would receive the Gospel by means of revelation from Jesus, who sent him to preach that Gospel primarily among the people of the nations, often called the Gentiles (Acts 9:15-16, Galatians 1:11-12). After spending a few years in Tarsus and Antioch of Syria, Paul began traveling to proclaim the Gospel in Asia Minor, Greece, and ultimately Rome for a period of around twenty years (ca. 46-65 CE; Acts 13:1-28:31, 2 Timothy 4:1-22). Paul would help those who heard his message and accepted it organize into local congregations, and he would often visit them and encourage them (e.g. Acts 18:22-23, 20:1-2). But Paul could not be everywhere at all times; therefore, he also maintained correspondence with both churches and individual Christians, and many of Paul’s letters have been preserved for us in the New Testament.

Jesus’ life did not feature prominently in Paul’s letters. It is not as if Paul denied Jesus’ life or considered it without meaning or value: Paul spoke of Jesus as an Israelite and descendant of David in the flesh in Romans 1:2, Galatians 4:4, and His willingness to take on flesh and the humiliation thereof in Philippians 2:5-8. Paul also made reference to Jesus’ instruction regarding divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:11-13 and the institution of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 (cf. Luke 16:18, 22:17-20); in 1 Timothy 5:8, Paul quoted and called Scripture what Jesus said in Luke 10:7, the only explicit quotation of a New Testament writing in another part of the New Testament and considered Scripture. Paul’s exhortations toward Christian living may not feature direct quotes of Jesus’ teaching, but they do demonstrate having been profoundly shaped by what Jesus had taught (e.g. Romans 12:1-21, Galatians 2:10, 6:10, etc.). While some have tried to make much of Paul’s lack of emphasis on Jesus’ life, we do well to remember how Paul was not a witness to Jesus’ life, bearing witness primarily to His resurrection and receiving the Gospel by revelation from Jesus Himself (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:8-11, Galatians 1:11-12), and how his correspondence did not represent the sum of all he taught within the churches. We should not assume a lack of emphasis on Jesus’ life in Paul’s letters means Paul did not put much emphasis on Jesus’ life or should cast aspersions on us doing so.

In his correspondence Paul reflected much on the death of Jesus, and he invested significant efforts into making sense of what God accomplished in it: he would go so far as to say he came to Corinth knowing only Christ and Him crucified in 1 Corinthians 2:2, and how he had been crucified with Christ in Galatians 2:20. Paul did speak of Jesus’ death as vicarious and sacrificial for our sins, considering Jesus the new Adam, able to atone for sin through His death on the cross (cf. Romans 5:12-21, 2 Corinthians 5:21). Paul would make much of the degradation and humiliation inherent in death on a cross, and very much wanted Christians to understand how they should humble themselves and expect suffering likewise (e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:18-31, Galatians 2:20, Philippians 2:5-9). To Paul, Jesus’ death on the cross represented His victory and triumph over the powers and principalities (cf. Colossians 2:15). Paul did not shy away from understanding Jesus’ death as redemptive, as seen in Galatians 3:13, 4:4-5, Colossians 1:14. Paul also made much of Jesus’ death as conciliative, reconciling God and mankind, Israelite and Gentile, and ultimately as redemptive for the entire cosmos, the great and powerful testimony of God’s love for us (Romans 5:6-11, Ephesians 2:1-22, Colossians 1:19-22).

Yet the resurrection of Jesus was as important as His death, if not more so, in Paul’s messages for the churches. In Romans 1:4, Paul understood Jesus as having been empowered as the Son of God in His resurrection (cf. Psalm 2:7-9): Jesus is the Christ not only because He suffered and died but also because He was raised from the dead. Resurrection from the dead would be a hard sell in a Greco-Roman milieu heavily influenced by Platonism and therefore hostile to the material creation, and Paul marshaled all his rhetorical skill to persuasively argue for the resurrection of Jesus, and the resurrection in general, to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 15:1-58. In that exhortation Paul insisted on Jesus’ resurrection as according to the Scriptures and certified by eyewitness testimony (1 Corinthians 15:1-11); presented the counterfactual if Christ were not raised, including the confession we all would remain in our sins if Jesus had not arose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:12-19); again portrayed Jesus as a second Adam, the basis for the hope of our own resurrection and to be made alive in the body forever (1 Corinthians 15:20-22, 45-49; cf. Romans 5:12-21); and introduced the illustration of the firstfruits to explain how Jesus arose first and now how we all await our resurrection at His return (1 Corinthians 15:23-29; cf. Exodus 23:16-19). A similar confidence regarding our resurrection in terms of Jesus’ resurrection animated Philippians 3:20-21; according to Philippians 3:4-10, Paul considered everything he had obtained as trash so he might strive to know Jesus in His suffering and death so as to also know His resurrection.

Nevertheless, if we attempt to pit Paul’s understanding of Jesus’ death and resurrection against each other, we have not well discerned his purposes in his messages to the churches. Paul was thoroughly transformed by the good news of how the Jesus the Christ lived, died, suffered, but then arose by the power of God in the Spirit: his consistent message featured sharing in Jesus’ humiliation, suffering, and death in order to share in His life. Thus Paul understood and described baptism as a spiritual death and resurrection in Romans 6:1-11; so Paul summarized his own life and hope, and the expectation for Christians to do likewise, in Romans 8:9-11, 17-18, Philippians 2:5-11, 3:4-16, etc.

Jesus’ ascension, like Jesus’ life, did not feature prominently in Paul’s letters. Paul was well aware Jesus had ascended; he had seen Jesus as the Risen Lord in heaven (cf. Acts 9:3-6). Paul did speak of Jesus’ ascension in Ephesians 4:8-10, likely alluding to Psalm 68:18 in the Greek Septuagint, and doing so in order to explain how Jesus was able to fill all things in the church. Paul thus did confess Jesus as having ascended to the Father and did take opportunities to explain its purpose and relevance for Christians when necessary.

Paul’s letters display Paul working out for Christians what Jesus’ lordship meant for their lives. Paul referred to Jesus as Lord around 250 times in all of his correspondence, and he manifestly primarily understood Jesus as his Lord (e.g. 2 Timothy 1:8, 1:18). Paul also well understood “Christ” as the Anointed One, the Messiah, and thus the King, receiving power and authority (e.g. Romans 1:4). He meditated on Jesus’ cosmic power and authority over all things in Colossians 1:15-18, and always understood how Jesus’ lordship was part and parcel of His life, death, and resurrection (cf. Colossians 1:13-14, 19-23). Few passages better illustrate how Paul expected Christians to consider and work out what Jesus’ lordship meant for their lives than Romans 14:1-15:7: Christians should receive one another as Jesus received them, always remembering how He is the Lord, He will judge, and how we should do all things for the Lord and not judge the servant of another. To this end all of Paul’s letters feature his instruction and exhortation in how Christians and churches can well serve Jesus as Lord by means of emulating His life, suffering, and death, so they might share in His resurrection.

As we have seen, Paul’s strong hope was in sharing in Jesus’ resurrection, and Paul expected Jesus to return soon in judgment and to inaugurate the resurrection. Paul made much of Jesus’ return to judge the living and the dead, manifest in Romans 2:1-11, 16, 2 Corinthians 5:10, and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9. He meditated at length regarding what the day of resurrection and the resurrection body would be like in 1 Corinthians 15:20-58, very much expecting Christians to look then like Jesus does now in His resurrection body in Philippians 3:21. But much of what Paul had to say about the expectation of Jesus’ return was to counter false narratives suggested about it, manifest in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, and perhaps even over-enthusiasm about it in 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15. We have every reason to believe Paul had confidence Jesus would return soon, but such should not mean we have any right to suggest Paul would perceive some kind of failure in what he taught since Jesus has not yet returned after almost two thousand years. “We” in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 are “we who are alive” when the Lord returns; in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11, Paul emphasized the importance of always being prepared and always encouraging one another, maintaining the confidence we would all receive the resurrection of life somehow or another. Even after almost two thousand years, Paul’s words in Romans 13:11 remain true: our salvation is closer now than when we first believed. Maranatha (Our Lord, come) indeed (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22!

Paul’s letters, therefore, remain saturated with the Gospel of Jesus Christ regarding which Paul proved unashamed (Romans 1:16). In Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, Paul perceived the demonstration of God’s grace, love, and righteousness, fulfilling all He promised to Israel, and making known His righteousness and essential characteristics (Romans 1:17). Paul sought to model his own life after Jesus’ life, sufferings, and death, and encouraged his fellow Christians to do likewise, so they might all share in the exaltation of His resurrection (Romans 8:17-18, 2 Corinthians 4:16-5:10). Paul made much of how God reconciled Himself to His people Israel, to all people, and in fact the whole cosmos in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, and lordship, and accordingly exhorted Christians to receive and welcome one another, living in shared faith as the body of Christ, whether Jewish or Gentile, rich or poor, male or female, free or slave (Romans 1:1-15:7, Galatians 3:1-5:16, 1 Corinthians 11:1-14:40, Ephesians 1:1-6:18, Colossians 1:1-4:1). Paul very much lived according to his hope in Jesus’ return, the judgment, and the resurrection of life, and encouraged Christians to imitate him to the same end (2 Corinthians 4:1-5:10, Philippians 3:1-21, etc.).

We do well to consider how Paul spoke of the Gospel, in each component and as a whole, in all of his letters. He had worked to understand how his life needed to change because of what God accomplished in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and would accomplish in His return, and worked out what it all meant for the various people to whom he preached and ministered in the Mediterranean world of the late Second Temple Period Jewish and Greco-Roman milieu. We should seek to imitate Paul as he imitated Jesus by deeply considering how the Gospel should profoundly affect and shape our lives, and proving willing to humble ourselves, suffer, and perhaps even die like Jesus so we might share in Jesus’ resurrection!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Gospel in the Letters of Paul appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Ideal Military Campaign

YHWH had not forgotten the matter of Baal of Peor. He had judged the Israelites who had compromised themselves there. Now would come vengeance against those who induced the Israelites into doing so.

The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” Numbers 1:1-25:11 bore witness to the experience of the generation which YHWH delivered from Egypt: preparation of the camp and Tabernacle for entry into Canaan, persistence in rebellion, its condemnation, and the fulfillment of that condemnation. After the new census of Numbers 26:1-65, much of the focus in Numbers shifted to the new generation and preparing them to finally entering the land of Canaan in Numbers 27:1-36:13, as well demonstrated in the legislation regarding offerings and payment of vows in Numbers 27:1-30:16.

In Numbers 31:1-2, YHWH commanded Moses to exact vengeance on the Midianites in order to begin fulfilling the vow YHWH had made to this end in Numbers 25:16-18 on account of the matter of Baal of Peor; Moses would not be gathered to his people in death until he did so. Moses thus commanded Israel to prepare, and they did so: from each tribe an ‘eleph of soldiers (generally translated “thousand”; it might have a more ancient meaning of just a military contingent), with twelve thousand soldiers in all, with Phinehas ben Eleazar in charge of the holy articles and trumpets (Numbers 31:3-6). Why Phinehas was chosen rather than his father was not explicitly stated: some suggest it was to make sure Eleazar would not come into contact with anything defiling, while most believe it probably has something to do with Phinehas having shown such zeal in the matter of Zimri and Cozbi, turning away YHWH’s anger in the matter of Baal of Peor (cf. Numbers 25:6-15).

Moses sent the army out, and they achieved phenomenal success: they slaughtered every man of Midian, including Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five Midianite “kings,” as well as Balaam ben Beor; they took all the women, children, herds, flocks, and goods as plunder; and they burned all the Midianite cities and encampments (Numbers 31:7-11). Since there would be Midianites alive to oppress Israel in Judges 6:1-8:21, we do best to understand “every man of Midian” as “every man of Midian with whom they came into contact”; likewise with the women, children, and destruction of cities and camps. The text calls the rulers of the Midianites “kings,” but they were more like chieftains than rulers over some kind of centralized nation-state. The death of Balaam ben Beor seems surprising since Balaam was last seen returning to his home, ostensibly away from the Midianites, in Numbers 24:25; the text provides no basis upon which to speculate what might have changed, but we have every reason to believe Balaam ben Beor was again among the Midianites and thus met his demise.

The victorious Israelites brought back all they had plundered to the Israelite camp in the plains of Moab; Moses, Eleazar, and the leaders met them outside the camp (Numbers 31:12-13). Moses burned with anger against the military leaders, wondering why they allowed the women who had seduced them into serving Baal of Peor at Balaam’s instigation to live, even though they suffered a plague on account of it (Numbers 31:14-16). Moses thus commanded them to kill every male child and every woman who had been intimate with a man; the virgin women would become the possession of the Israelites, whether to take as wives or maintain as slaves (Numbers 31:17-18).

Only at this point did Moses finally provide the crucial detail which connected the Balaam cycle of Numbers 22:1-24:25 with the matter of Baal of Peor in Numbers 25:1-18. From his blessings, Balaam knew YHWH would always take Israel’s side against external threats. If he were truly pious and oriented toward God, he would have left well enough alone. But for the sake of his reputation and fee, and recognizing YHWH’s anger could be stirred up against His people if they served other gods, Balaam had given counsel to the Moabite and Midianite leaders to encourage their women to seduce Israelite men to this very end. No wonder YHWH wanted Moses and Israel to avenge themselves on the Midianites for following Balaam’s advice, and why Balaam was singled out for death. While Balaam might well have been honored in many Levantine cultures as a pious and wise prophet, we now better understand why he would become a by-word for treachery and greed among the people of God (cf. 2 Peter 2:15, Jude 1:11, Revelation 2:14).

Moses also gave commands regarding seven days of purification outside the camp for anyone who had killed anyone or touched a dead body, consistent with the provisions previously made for purifying those who had come into contact with the dead (Numbers 31:19-20; cf. Numbers 19:1-22). Eleazar the priest added further instructions regarding purifying metallic objects with fire and water and non-metallic objects with water (Numbers 31:21-24).

YHWH then commanded Moses regarding all the spoils of war which the Israelites had obtained: they were to be divided into two parts, one for the soldiers who participated in the battle, and the other for the community of the people (Numbers 31:25-27). A tribute was to be taken from each share for YHWH: one life from every five hundred from the spoils given to the soldiers to be given to Eleazar as a raised offering to YHWH, and one life from every fifty given to the community for the benefit of the Levites (Numbers 31:28-30). A raised offering, or a heave offering, was lifted before YHWH but then given for the benefit of the priests; thus, the animals given to priests and Levites would be for their use and consumption, and the women for slaves, not human sacrifices.

The list of plunder and the dedicated tribute was then enumerated in Numbers 31:31-47: 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, 61,000 donkeys, 32,000 virgin women, appropriately divided as YHWH had commanded. “Thousand” in Numbers 31:31-47 is also ‘eleph in Hebrew, as in Numbers 31:4-6, and may be subject to the same kind of ambiguity. Questions are asked regarding numbers like 32,000 virgin women not because of any lack of confidence in YHWH’s ability to give overwhelming victory to the Israelites, but simply on account of the sheer population size it would require relative to what we currently understand about the population of the Levant in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages.

The military officers then approached Moses: they had taken a census of the men who had gone out to fight Midian, and not one was missing (Numbers 31:48-49). They had felt compelled to bring an offering of all the gold ornaments they had seized to make atonement for themselves before YHWH; it weighed 16,750 shekels and it was brought into the tent of meeting as a memorial before YHWH (Numbers 31:50-54).

For what sins did the military officers believe they needed atonement? Perhaps they felt they sinned when Moses was angry at them for having not killed the women and male children (cf. Numbers 31:14-18). Whereas the text did not come out and explicitly speak of Israel as thus putting Midian “under the ban,” or herem in Hebrew, it would nevertheless have been understood as a kind of holy war since YHWH commanded them to take vengeance on Midian (Numbers 31:2); in these instances, everything would be dedicated to YHWH, and YHWH would make provision for how all the spoils would be managed. We can therefore understand why the military officials would bring everything, including the women who had been intimate with men, back as part of the spoils. While the text does not explicitly say the military officers fulfilled Moses’ commands, it provides every reason to believe they did so.

But it is also possible the military officials wanted to atone for the sin of the census itself, since any such census was supposed to be done at the command of YHWH to prepare for a military campaign, and to take such a count in any other context was presumptuous and rebellious (cf. 2 Samuel 24:1-25). But the astonishing result of the census was to demonstrate the extraordinary faithfulness of YHWH and His manifest endorsement of the entire affair, since not one soldier was killed.

As modern readers, our attention in a passage like Numbers 31:1-54 gravitates toward the military action and its immediate effects, primarily set forth in Numbers 31:1-17. We might wonder why such a small force would be marshaled; we certainly have a lot of moral and ethical qualms regarding the wholesale slaughter of ostensibly thousands of men, women, and children, let alone regarding the forced marriages or slavery for the women who were not killed. We are tempted to pass over the rest of the text more lightly as just more legislation for Israel which can make our eyes glaze over when reading or studying. But we do well to step back from our modern biases and emphases and consider well the text in its context, for then we can perhaps better understand what this passage really set forth for Israel, and why it was placed here.

Numbers 31:1-54 was not presented in the immediate wake of the matter of Baal of Peor and YHWH’s command for vengeance in Numbers 25:1-18. Instead, another census is called, demonstrating how all the former generation had died in the wilderness as YHWH had promised; matters of inheritance and Moses’ ultimate demise were set forth; what offerings Israelites were to present when in their land, and when, were described, as well as how vows should be managed (Numbers 26:1-30:16). While Numbers 26:1-30:16 did address past matters in some way or another, the legislation given primarily looked forward to life in the land of Israel, and especially so in terms of Numbers 28:1-30:16.

The military campaign against the Midianites very much looked back to the past: it represented the settling of the final score regarding the former generation and one which no doubt impacted the younger generation as well (Numbers 25:16-18, 31:1-2). Yet consider well how the military campaign against Midian was narrated: each tribe provided an ‘eleph, a military contingent, no more, no less, and not one soldier was lost in the contest (Numbers 31:1-6, 48-49); the Israelite army met with complete success, killing all the men, burning down villages and encampments, and taking the spoils (Numbers 31:6-12); the soldiers purified themselves and their gear according to the commandments (Numbers 31:19-24); the spoils were divided according to YHWH’s command, with half going to the soldiers, half to the community, with relatively small portions of each going to YHWH and thus the priests and Levites as tribute (Numbers 31:25-47); and the military officers dedicated their golden plunder to YHWH (Numbers 31:48-54). The only “transgression” featured Moses’ anger at the military officers for having not already executed the women who had been intimate with men, and we have every reason to believe Moses’ purposes were accomplished and his anger turned away (cf. Numbers 31:14-18).

We can therefore consider Israel’s vengeance against Midian as essentially the ideal military campaign, set forth in great detail in Numbers 31:1-54 as a paradigm for Israel to remember and follow once they entered the land of Canaan and fought the battles YHWH commanded them to fight. An ‘eleph from each tribe symbolized the equality of the tribes in this kind of shared action. Slaughtering all the men and enslaving the women and children were a matter of course for ancient Near Eastern warfare; the additional slaughter of the women who had been intimate with men and male children was explained as unique punishment for Midian because of the matter of Baal of Peor. Soldiers would need to purify themselves and their gear because they had spilled blood and become ritually impure by coming into contact with dead bodies. Spoils were to be divided equally among soldiers and the community, with only a small percentage dedicated to YHWH: this proved quite anomalous in the ancient Near East, for we have many examples in which the vast majority of the spoils would go to the king, the gods, and/or the soldiers who fought. At the same time, those who wanted to offer their spoils to YHWH were recognized and honored for doing so.

Therefore, even though the military campaign against Midian by necessity looked backward to fulfill YHWH’s vow of vengeance, the narrative of the events was presented to provide Israel with a paradigm for how all future military campaigns should be managed. While we today might focus much more on the battle itself, the narrative in Numbers placed the focus much more on the legislation YHWH provided in the wake of the battle and how the Israelites obeyed that legislation. Many more men would be cut down by the Israelites, and women and children enslaved by them, as the narratives in Joshua and beyond would make known, and it would all follow the pattern set forth with Israel against Midian in Numbers 31:1-54.

It is therefore not for us to attempt to resolve today the discomfort we experience when we see the command to kill and enslave carried out by Israel so many centuries ago. Our hope today is in Jesus the Christ as Lord, who suffered, died, and was raised again in power; we hope and trust if we suffer for Him, we will share in a resurrection like His (cf. Romans 8:17, Philippians 3:20-21). In Christ we are called to love our enemies and pray for them, and not try to kill them or inflict violence upon them in any way, shape, or form (cf. Luke 6:27-36, Romans 12:16-21). We do well, however, to seek to understand what God made known to Israel in its appropriate context, and appreciate how God provided His legislation and purposes to His people. May we also seek to understand the ways in which God would have us serve Him in Christ, and follow after those patterns, and share in the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Ideal Military Campaign appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Psalm 3

Psalm 3:1-8, ASV translation, as prose:

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
YHWH, how are mine adversaries increased! Many are they that rise up against me.
Many there are that say of my soul, “There is no help for him in God.” Selah.
But thou, O YHWH, art a shield about me; my glory and the lifter up of my head. I cry unto YHWH with my voice, and he answereth me out of his holy hill. Selah.
I laid me down and slept; I awaked; for YHWH sustaineth me. I will not be afraid of ten thousands of the people that have set themselves against me round about. Arise, O YHWH; save me, O my God: for thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone; Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked. Salvation belongeth unto YHWH: Thy blessing be upon thy people. Selah.

Psalm 3:1-8 ASV according to Hebrew parallelism (as marked in BHS):

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
YHWH, how are mine adversaries increased! / Many are they that rise up against me.
Many there are that say of my soul / “There is no help for him in God.” Selah.
But thou, O YHWH, art a shield about me / my glory and the lifter up of my head.
I cry unto YHWH with my voice / and he answereth me out of his holy hill. Selah.
I laid me down and slept / I awaked for YHWH sustaineth me.
I will not be afraid of ten thousands of the people / that have set themselves against me round about.
Arise, O YHWH / save me, O my God /
For thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone / Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked.
Salvation belongeth unto YHWH / Thy blessing be upon thy people. Selah.
For the Chief Musician on stringed instruments.

Psalm 3 in the Scottish Metrical Psalter of 1650:

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.

1 O Lord, how are my foes increased?
against me many rise.
2 Many say of my soul, For him
in God no succor lies.

3 Yet thou my shield and glory art,
th’ uplifter of mine head.
4 I cried, and, from his holy hill,
the Lord me answer made.

5 I laid me down and slept; I waked;
for God sustained me.
6 I will not fear though thousands ten
set round against me be.

7 Arise, O Lord; save me, my God;
for thou my foes hast stroke
All on the cheek-bone, and the teeth
of wicked men hast broke.

8 Salvation doth appertain
unto the Lord alone:
Thy blessing, Lord, for evermore
thy people is upon.

Psalm 3 as Poetry

Psalm 3 is fairly straightforward. Only the first set of versets features intensification; most versets in Psalm 3 simply denote progression. Psalm 3:1-6 prepare for the exhortative petition of Psalm 3:7, expressing the number of foes and the dire situation so as to justify the demand for action and deliverance; as is consistent with lament Psalm 3:8 concludes with affirmations of confidence and faith in YHWH. YHWH as shield in Psalm 3:4 is the only metaphor of note; the shield is the Hebrew magen, a small shield for light infantry to ward off attack (cf. Genesis 15:1, Deuteronomy 33:29, 2 Samuel 22:2-3). In context Psalm 3:4 “holy hill” is to be taken quite literally, since David is confident that YHWH maintains His presence on Zion in Jerusalem. “Save me” in Psalm 3:7 shares the same root as “no help” in Psalm 3:3 along with “salvation” in Psalm 3:8; David calls for YHWH to do the very thing his foes are convinced will not take place, and since we can read this Psalm and know that David’s rule continued, we know that YHWH has answered and vindicated him.

In Psalm 3:2, 4, 8 we are introduced to selah. We do not know the precise meaning of selah; the Septuagint renders it as diapsalma, an interlude of strings; Jerome in the Vulgate rendered it as “always”. Some wish to emend the term to a Hebrew word meaning “raising the voice to a higher pitch.” Of all the possible variants the Septuagintal understanding would make the most sense but we cannot know for certain.

Psalm 3 in Context and Canon

Psalm 3 is a psalm of lament.

Psalm 3 is the first Psalm with a superscription and also a context: David wrote Psalm 3 and did so when fleeing from his son Absalom (ca. 1000-970 BCE; 2 Samuel 15:1-16:23). As David learns of all of his former associates who have turned to Absalom he speaks of how his enemies have multiplied; they taunt him with confidence that God will do nothing for him (Psalm 3:1-2; “soul” should not be understood in new covenant terms but as the whole person). Meanwhile David believes YHWH is a shield around him; he has the confidence that if he asks, God will answer, and will do so from His dwelling place in Jerusalem even if it is now in physical possession of Absalom (Psalm 3:3-4). David maintains trust in YHWH: he went to bed and arose again since YHWH sustained him, and he does not fear even ten thousand people who arrayed themselves against him (Psalm 3:5-6). David implores YHWH to arise and save Him, for He will overcome David’s wicked foes [Psalm 3:7; the use of the perfective denotes confidence that it will be done and does not imply it has already been done (grammatically “precative perfective”); “break the teeth” involves “rendering harmless,” if not literal in its expected execution (Job 29:17, Psalm 58:6-7)]. David closes with a benediction of faith in YHWH, for salvation belongs to Him, and he asks for YHWH’s blessings on His people (Psalm 3:8). In context we must remember how physical and concrete the words and expectations remain: David is looking for political rescue, the defeat of Absalom and his forces, and restitution to his throne in Jerusalem.

Immediately after the confidence of the wisdom of trusting in YHWH and YHWH’s affirmation of the Davidic king in Jerusalem in Psalms 1 and 2 the Psalter continues with five psalms of lament, as if juxtaposing the great power and confidence one can have in YHWH with moments of trial, distress, and pleading for His salvation. YHWH has made promises yet sometimes in life they seem remote and distant; the Psalter already expresses the vagaries and difficulties of life as truly experienced in reality. In Psalm 2 YHWH installs the king on the throne; in Psalm 3 the son of the king dethrones the anointed father. In Psalm 2 the Davidic king has power; in Psalm 3 he must be delivered from those over whom he used to rule. In Psalm 2 the king is installed in Jerusalem; in Psalm 3 the king has run away from Jerusalem, and yet trusts in YHWH to arise from His holy hill there in Jerusalem to rescue him. Yet throughout it all confidence in YHWH is maintained, for such faith in YHWH and His blessings for His people is the high concern for the Psalter.

Psalm 3 Throughout History

Psalm 3 originates with David in response to a dire threat to his crown and his life; he trusted in YHWH and YHWH delivered him. Psalm 3 would have been relevant at other times during the period of the monarchy and for the Davidic king: when the Assyrians invaded Judah the Rabshakeh taunted Hezekiah and Judah with a similar message to Psalm 3:1 (701 BCE; 2 Kings 18:35). Hezekiah and Judah responded by maintaining their trust in YHWH and were vindicated (2 Kings 19:35-37).

In terms of the Temple cult Psalm 3 would have given voice to any Israelite petitioner who felt ostracized and/or betrayed by his fellow man. Psalm 3 would serve to remind the petitioner that his sustenance and confidence comes from YHWH and YHWH would make sure righteousness was upheld and wickedness punished.

During the exile and in the Second Temple period Psalm 3 would serve as the necessary reality check after Psalms 1 and 2: YHWH has promised much, the Messiah will break those who rage against YHWH, but until then, Israel is surrounded by enemies who are confident of victory. Psalm 3 would give voice to those in such distress, especially those directly encountering persecution by the pagan powers of the time, and sustain the hope and faith of the Israelites in YHWH.

As David felt surrounded by enemies and trusted in God for his salvation and rescue, so Jesus likewise was surrounded by enemies when He was betrayed, tried, and crucified (Matthew 26:1-27:56). As David called for YHWH to “arise” and “save” him, YHWH vindicated Jesus by raising Him from the dead in triumph over death and His foes and thus He is able to save all who trust in Him (Romans 1:4, 5:6-11, 8:1-3). In turn the followers of Jesus would suffer at the hands of their enemies all around them and took comfort in Psalm 3, seeing in it the solidarity of Jesus with His followers and using it as a prayer for the people of God. They meditated on Psalm 3:5 and understood it Christologically, and by extension, of their own hope: they would “lay down” in death and would “arise” in the resurrection (cf. Romans 8:17-25)!

In the monastic era Psalm 3 would become part of the morning office of prayer. “Pseudo-Bede” marked the appropriateness that this is the third psalm, understood as speaking of resurrection as Jesus was raised on the third day (1 Corinthians 15:4). Many commentators spoke of the parallelisms between David and Absalom and Jesus and Judas in light of Psalm 3.

Throughout the generations believers have taken strength and confidence from Psalm 3 when they felt as if beset and under siege by enemies all around them, be they political or spiritual or both.

Psalm 3 Today

We may live in different times in different environments and under a different covenant, yet Psalm 3 can maintain great power for the Christian. We have heard, as Israel did, that YHWH prospers the righteous and makes it go well with him while the wicked suffer and will experience torment. We trust that YHWH has established His Anointed on the throne and has given him power over the rebellious, just as Israel did. And yet, as with Israel, our earthly reality oftentimes can overcome our hope. The righteous should prosper and the wicked should suffer, and yet there are times when the people of God suffer persecution from the hand of those of the world. Those of the world may mock and deride the people of God, confident that they have no justifiable hope in their God. In such a time and place it may seem that God’s rule is a joke, or cruel, or not really present; where did He go? Why is He not acting according to His promises?

If one observed the life of Jesus of Nazareth as He entered Jerusalem and then found Himself betrayed, tried, scourged, and crucified, one would easily wonder the same thing. This is how God allows the righteous to be treated? This is YHWH’s “deliverance”?

Yet, as we know, at that particular juncture the story was incomplete. Yes, Jesus was betrayed, tried, scourged, and crucified, but God raised Him from the dead on the third day in triumph (Romans 6:1-11, 8:1-3). Through suffering Jesus gained the victory; through suffering and tribulation His followers will enter His Kingdom (Acts 14:22, Romans 8:17-18, 2 Timothy 3:12). John saw this in graphic detail in Revelation 12:1-19:21.

Whenever the people of God have suffered on account of their faith they have been reminded to trust in God on account of what He has done, past and present, and what He has promised in the future (e.g. 1 Peter 1:3-12). For Israel it was the Exodus; for Christians, Jesus’ death and resurrection. God is faithful; God knows what He is doing.

Psalm 3 stands at the intersection of promise and trial and points the believer to faith. There are times when we feel that the world is full of foes standing against us, mocking and deriding our confidence in God. They exist. But YHWH God of Israel, the Creator God, is stronger than they; He will vindicate His righteous ones in His good time. We can go to sleep and awake again through God in Christ in confidence of His sustenance; if we are called upon to sleep in death, then we have confidence that we will rise again in the resurrection. Salvation continues to belong to YHWH, and He will bless His people. Let us stand firm in faith and confidence in God, always aware of His care and provision, especially when foes beset us, and obtain the resurrection in Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Psalm 3 appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Humiliation and Exaltation

You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had, who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death – even death on a cross! As a result God highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow – in heaven and on earth and under the earth – and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:5-11).

Philippians 2:5-11 is most likely the most commented upon passage within Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, and would also rank highly in Paul’s entire corpus and even the whole New Testament. We should never allow all the questions it might raise to distract us from its core powerful message: we must humble ourselves if we would have God exalt us in the end.

Philippi was a Roman colony in Macedonia (part of modern Greece); Paul first visited the area and preached Jesus around 51 (cf. Acts 16:11-40). Paul wrote to the Christians in Philippi most likely around 60-61 from Rome while living under house arrest there (cf. Philippians 1:1). Paul thanked the Philippian Christians for their joint participation in his ministry and prayed for them to abound in love and make good decisions to share in Jesus’ praise at His return (Philippians 1:1-11). He explained how his circumstances had worked to advance the Gospel; if he were to die, he would go and be with Christ, but he was confident he would continue to faithfully serve God, and the Philippian Christians, while in the body (Philippians 1:12-26). Paul set forth his main exhortation: the Philippian Christians should live as citizens of the Gospel, standing firm together in it, and to suffer well for God in Christ (Philippians 1:27-30). Paul had begun establishing and defending this exhortation by encouraging the Philippian Christians to be of the same mind and to seek the interests of one another and not just themselves (Philippians 2:1-4).

Paul continued the probatio, the main body of the letter detailing how the Philippian Christians might live as citizens of and to stand firm within the Gospel, by exhorting the Philippian Christians to share the mind of Christ, and what it would demand, in Philippians 2:5-11.

No contextual division exists between Philippians 2:1-4 and Philippians 2:5-11: for the Philippian Christians to complete Paul’s joy and to be of the same mind, each and every one of them would need to manifest the “mind of Christ.” To “have the mind” translates Greek phroneistho, which suggests having the same thought process; such a process would be reflected in attitude and disposition toward oneself and others. The mind, attitude, or disposition they should have “among [them]selves was “that which” was “in Christ Jesus”: it can be well understood either as “the attitude among yourselves which was in Christ Jesus” or as “the attitude among yourselves which you have in Christ Jesus.”

In 1 Corinthians 2:16, Paul spoke of Christians as having the “mind of Christ”; this instruction was therefore neither new nor novel. Paul would certainly encourage and expect Christians to seek and embody the mind of Christ in all things; nevertheless, he has a specific aspect to the mind, attitude, or disposition of Jesus Christ in mind for the Philippian Christians.

The mind, attitude, and disposition of Jesus Christ which Paul wanted the Philippian Christians to manifest was set forth in poetic form in Philippians 2:6-11. Almost everything about this passage has engendered some kind of argument or dispute.

Disputes attend to what kind of poem Philippians 2:6-11 represents. Many have suggested it is an ancient “Christ hymn,” something written and sung well before Paul wrote to the Philippian Christians, which Paul quoted here to connect his exhortation to a powerful message they already well knew and understood. Others shift away from this perspective and consider the poem to be a composition of Paul himself for this particular context and moment. The arguments will continue because either position remains tenable and can marshal evidence from Paul’s writings to make their case. 1 Timothy 3:16 could certainly represent an early Christian statement of belief or perhaps a kind of hymn. Paul exhorted Christians to sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16); by 112 even pagans attested to Christians coming together and singing hymns to Christ as a god (cf. Pliny the Younger, Epistulae X). Therefore, the suggestion Paul might be quoting an already existing hymn in Philippians 2:6-11 should not be deemed outlandish; it would go a long way to explain the presence of a few words Paul used nowhere else, and the lack of emphasis on Jesus’ resurrection, contrary to what one might expect from Paul. Whether Paul composed the poem for the benefit of the Philippian Christians, or he quoted a hymn well known to both Paul and the Philippian Christians, Paul powerfully affirmed the sentiment and substance of the message for the Philippian Christians, and by extension, for us as well.

The poem or hymn first meditated on Jesus’ humiliation: Jesus existed in the morphe of God, but did not consider being treated as God a thing He should seize or grasp firmly (Greek harpagma); instead, Jesus “emptied Himself” (Greek ekenosen), taking on the morphe of a slave, fully partaking of humanity; in so doing He profoundly humbled Himself and proved obedient to the point of death on a cross (Philippians 2:6-8).

Philippians 2:6-8 remains most assuredly one of those passages regarding which Peter warned about the unstable and ignorant twisting in 2 Peter 3:16. When Paul insisted Jesus did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped, but He instead emptied Himself, Paul did not speak ontologically, as if Jesus divested Himself of some or all of His divinity when He took on flesh and dwelt among us. Paul had already confessed Jesus existing before His incarnation in the form of God: not merely image, but form. Instead, and for very good contextual reasons, Paul spoke of honor and privilege: as God the Son, Jesus had every right to expect and insist upon enjoying all the privileges, honor, and glory which would attend to such a lofty standing. But Jesus did not insist on seizing this privilege and honor for Himself: instead, He emptied Himself of all such privilege and honor, humbling Himself profoundly not only by becoming human, but living as a peasant in the backwoods of Galilee during the Second Temple Period. Therefore, Paul did not suggest Jesus only “seemed” to be human, or was ontologically a slave.

Paul, either in his own composition or by means of a hymn appreciated by all, wanted to deeply focus on the humiliation Jesus willingly experienced: fully God, yet setting aside all glory, honor, and privilege to live among humans as a human being, experiencing the deprivations of human life as the least among humans, proving obedient to the point of death on a cross.

The power of the cross has been severely diminished by its idolization by well-meaning Christians. Death by crucifixion was agonizing, an inhumane and degraded form of execution. Crucifixion was designed to humiliate the victim and terrify all spectators into compliance. In the first century Roman world, one would not speak of crosses or crucifixion in polite society; no Roman citizen would ever be subjected to such a humiliating fate, and anyone who would speak about such a thing among the elite would commit a serious faux pas.

Thus, the One who should have enjoyed all the benefits of privilege and standing instead chose to endure the most despicable and shameful form of life and sentence of execution. Whether in existing song or a fresh poem from Paul, we can only imagine how deeply the Philippian Christians would have been impacted by how Paul spoke of the mind, attitude, or disposition of Christ which they should have among themselves in Philippians 2:6-8.

But the poem or hymn did not end there, just as Jesus’ story did not end there. Because Jesus so profoundly and deeply humbled Himself, God comparatively exalted and glorified Him: Jesus was given the name above every name, and every knee would bow and tongue confess Jesus as Lord to the glory of God the Father, whether in heaven, on earth, or under the earth (Philippians 2:9-11).

Arguments regarding whether God was exalting the name of Jesus over the name of God Himself would seem to miss the point: the poem or hymn bore witness to God’s complete endorsement and elevation of Jesus. Jesus’ humiliation and suffering were not accidents or some kind of “Plan B”: they reflected the will of God and the fulfillment of all which had been promised. Jesus gained His rule, authority, power, and all the glory, honor, and privilege due Him, because God granted it to Him because of all He endured and suffered.

We emphasize these things so that we may not get so lost in all the arguments, contentiousness, and disputes regarding Philippians 2:5-11 that we miss Paul’s point and purpose.

Paul wrote to the Christians who were dwelling in, and at least many of whom were citizens of, Colonia Augusta Iulia Philippensis, the Philippian Colony of the Augustus Julius. The name made reference to Augustus Caesar, since he settled Philippi with many veterans and other Roman citizens in the final years of the first century BCE. The Philippian Christians, therefore, had been raised and enculturated in the Roman world and the Roman way of things. The Romans prided themselves on their military prowess and organization. Advancement in society was reserved for the elites and followed the cursus honorum, the series of political offices which would eventually lead to the consulship and governor of a province. The Roman world was quite hierarchical: everyone had their place and knew their place; if anyone presumed beyond their station, they would be quickly reminded of where they belonged. We have every reason to believe the Roman colonists who remained in Philippi in the middle of the first century still highly regarded Augustus Caesar, and most likely considered him as divine.

In Philippians 2:5-11, Paul therefore exhorted the Philippian Christians to cultivate a mindset, attitude, and disposition entirely contrary to almost everything they had been taught as good Romans. The Roman system “worked” by making sure those who deserved glory and honor enjoyed it; Jesus could have insisted on those kinds of privileges, but instead divested Himself of all of them. The Roman gods were fickle, capricious, and terrifying, demanding sacrifice and living like super-powerful humans; Jesus maintained full divinity and yet took on human form and humbled Himself. Slaves were barely human and had no social identity or standing; Jesus was God and took on the form of a slave. It would be humiliating and degrading enough for a Roman to be compelled to commit suicide in order to avoid execution and to save face; Jesus endured the comparatively unimaginably degrading and shameful death on a cross. Jesus’ life and death was everything the Romans abhorred and despised.

But God exalted Jesus and gave Him the name that is above every other name, and every knee would be compelled to bow, and tongue to confess, Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. No Philippian Christian of any sense or sound mind would have missed the implication: if Jesus Christ is thus Lord, then Augustus Caesar and his descendants were not as powerful as they claimed to be. All the elites and “great men” of the Greco-Roman world would likewise be compelled to bow the knee before Jesus and confess Him as Lord and Christ. Augustus Caesar himself, victor in the Roman civil wars, the great propagandist and administrator who made the Roman Empire what it would be, would therefore be compelled to bow the knee before Jesus and confess Him as Lord and Christ. Alexander “the Great”, against whom Augustus judged himself, and upheld as the great paragon of what people thought a great conqueror and ruler looked like, would likewise be compelled to bow the knee before Jesus and confess Him as Lord and Christ.

What Paul was expecting from the Philippian Christians, therefore, was no little thing. Whether in a new composition, or by using well known words in a familiar hymn, Paul exhorted the Philippian Christians to a completely different way of thinking, feeling, and acting than they had been raised to believe. If they wanted to share in Jesus’ exaltation, they would have to first live according to Jesus’ humiliation. In Christ it would no longer matter who was poor or rich, a slave or among the elite; all were called upon to humble themselves and to be of one mind with one another in Christ. In Christ none would become great because of birth or impressive striving; in Christ only God can and will exalt those who have deeply humbled themselves and served one another like Jesus served us all (cf. Matthew 20:25-28). The Philippian Christians would likely earn the suspicion and hostility of their neighbors who would rightly perceive how everything the Christians believed, lived, and stood for would undercut and overthrow the Roman world and way of life.

What Paul might expect from Christians to this very day in Philippians 2:5-11 remains no little thing. He calls all of us to a completely different way of thinking, feeling, and acting than we have been enculturated by our culture and society to believe. Every President of the United States, every highly regarded general and soldier, the greatest titans of industry, and the most popular celebrities and influencers will be compelled to bow the knee before Jesus and confess Him as Lord and Christ. In Christ it still no longer matters who is poor or rich or where they fall in the social hierarchy; we are all called upon to humble ourselves and be of one mind with one another in Christ. None of us will find greatness through our accident of birth or our impressive striving in worldly, or even spiritual, affairs; we will only find greatness if and when God exalts us with Christ because we have profoundly humbled ourselves and have served and suffered as Christ did.

Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6). What is His Way? He was, is, and ever will be God; He humbled Himself, becoming fully human, fully experiencing humanity, serving, and suffering a most despicable and humiliating death. The Father exalted Him and gave Him the name above every name, and everyone, however willingly or unwillingly, will be compelled to humble themselves before Him and confess His name to God’s glory. If we want to share in Jesus’ exaltation, we must have the mindset He has given us, and share in His humiliation and suffering. May we humble ourselves like Jesus so we might share in His exaltation on the day of the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Humiliation and Exaltation appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Gospel in the Book of Acts

Jesus had lived, suffered, died, and had been raised from the dead. The Book of the Acts of the Apostles would set forth how Jesus ascended to the Father, was made both Lord and Christ over His Kingdom, and the proclamation of all these things to Israel and the Greco-Roman Mediterranean world.

In Acts, testimony regarding the life of Jesus was not the primary focus and was essentially taken for granted, especially at the beginning. When Peter spoke before the Israelites on Pentecost, he expected his audience to already be well aware of how Jesus was manifestly commended by God through the signs and wonders He had done over the previous few years (Acts 2:22). Before Cornelius and his associates, Peter characterized Jesus as anointed with the Holy Spirit, going about doing good, and healing those oppressed by the devil (Acts 10:38-39). While Paul was not recorded as testifying much regarding Jesus’ life in Acts, he did refer to a saying of Jesus unattested in the Gospel narratives in Acts 20:35 (“it is more blessed to give than to receive”).

Testimony about Jesus’ death also did not feature very prominently in Acts. No one attempted to suppress the information; Peter and Paul both forthrightly spoke of how Jesus had been “hung upon a tree” and crucified (cf. Acts 2:23, 36, 4:10, 5:30, 10:39, 13:29). Peter indicted the Israelites (especially the members of the Sanhedrin) for handing Jesus over, condemning Jesus to death, and having Him crucified (Acts 2:23, 36, 3:13-16, 4:10, 5:29-30). Peter would also stress how Jesus’ death was no accident, but was part of the predetermined plan according to the foreknowledge of God (Acts 2:23); Paul emphasized the injustice of the trial and its result in Acts 13:28 in order to stress Jesus’ righteousness despite being condemned as a criminal. Paul did speak of God having purchased the church with the blood of His Son in Acts 20:28, yet as part of his charge and exhortation to the elders of the church in Ephesus. While we might fairly assume Philip the Evangelist would have spoken of Jesus’ death as featuring His vicarious suffering and for the forgiveness of sins based on Isaiah 53:7-8 to the Kushite eunuch, Luke did not explicitly record any such witness in Acts 8:31-35.

Jesus’ ascension was both narrated and somewhat explained in Acts. Luke bore witness to Jesus’ visitation of the disciples many times in the forty days between His resurrection and ascension, and described how Jesus was taken up before His disciples in Acts 1:1-11. Before the Israelites in the Temple, Peter spoke of Jesus’ ascension to heaven as the fulfillment of the Scriptures (Acts 3:19-24; cf. Deuteronomy 18:15, Psalm 110:1, 4, Daniel 7:13-14).

The moment of Jesus’ ascension featured the first promise of His return in Acts: as Jesus ascended to heaven, so one day He would return in the same way (Acts 1:11). Peter would bear witness to a similar association in Acts 3:19-21: Jesus ascended to heaven and would remain there until the promised restoration would take place when He returned. Before the Athenians Paul warned about the judgment to come, a moment assured by Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, and Paul exhorted Felix the governor in a similar way (Acts 17:30-31, 24:25). The Apostles certainly did not shrink away from proclaiming the imminent judgment and return of Jesus in Acts, but it was certainly not their predominant theme.

Instead, it is the establishment and proclamation of Jesus’ resurrection and lordship which defined the Book of Acts and the witness and work of the Apostles described therein. Pentecost in either 30 or 33 was described as the day on which Jesus baptized His disciples in the Holy Spirit before the assembly of Israel (Acts 2:1-9). Peter explained to the Israelites what they were seeing: they handed Jesus over to be crucified by the Gentiles, but God raised Him from the dead; they presented their eyewitness testimony which was confirmed by the prophetic testimony of David in the Psalms; God had made Jesus both Lord and Christ; the Spirit was poured out as Jesus promised and Joel had prophesied in Joel 2:28-32 (Acts 2:1-36). After the crowd bore witness to their belief by asking what they needed to do, Peter charged them to repent and for each to be baptized in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins so they might receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:37-39). Over three thousand would do so and be added to the church on that day (Acts 2:40-41).

And so it would continue throughout Acts. After healing a man born lame, Peter preached Jesus as the Source of his healing, crucified but whom God raised from the dead, the fulfillment of all which God had promised Israel, and therefore they should change their hearts and minds (Acts 3:1-26). Peter twice castigated the Sanhedrin for unjustly executing Jesus, solemnly testifying to how God raised Him from the dead, made Him Lord and Christ, and who gave the Holy Spirit to those who obeyed Him (Acts 4:8-12, 5:29-32). Philip preached the good news about the Kingdom of God and the Name of Jesus the Christ in Samaria and to the Kushite eunuch, and they were baptized (Acts 8:12, 26-39).

Eventually Paul would establish a similar pattern in his ministry: he would enter a place and try to find a synagogue or gathering of Jewish people to testify about Jesus as the Risen Lord and Christ, the fulfillment of the hope of Israel; he would continue to bear witness among the Jewish people until they excluded him; he would then proclaim similarly before the people of the nations, called Gentiles, in those places; he would continue to proclaim Jesus in the community and encourage the Christians in the church there until compelled to leave by some catalyst; and he would go somewhere else and do likewise. So it began at Antioch of Pisidia in Acts 13:52; so it would continue in Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, and eventually Rome (Acts 14:1-28, 16:6-19:41, 28:17-31). Paul would find himself imprisoned, but used the opportunity to proclaim Jesus’ resurrection, his own experience with Jesus the Risen Lord, and Jesus as the Lord of all, fulfillment of the hope of Israel, and his confidence in resurrection before Jewish people in Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin, Roman governors, and King Herod Agrippa II (cf. Acts 21:37-26:32).

All aspects, therefore, of the good news of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return can be found in the Acts of the Apostles. And yet the strong emphasis and priority was placed on Jesus’ resurrection and lordship in the narratives presented by Luke.

We must remember how the Acts of the Apostles is best understood as (some of the) Acts of (a couple of the) Apostles: Luke had no intention of comprehensively setting forth everything done and proclaimed by any of the Apostles, let alone all of them. We mentioned how Philip almost certainly spoke of the reasons behind Jesus’ death, and certainly about responding in faith by means of baptism, when preaching Jesus to the eunuch (Acts 8:34-38). Paul’s speech to the elders in Ephesus presupposed a lot of understanding about things Jesus taught in life and the redemptive nature of His death (Acts 20:17-35). We therefore have every reason to believe the Apostles spoke at far greater length regarding all aspects of Jesus’ life, death, ascension, resurrection, lordship, and imminent return among Christians, and perhaps even in their preaching before Jewish and Gentile communities, than what has been explicitly preserved in Acts.

Therefore, Luke’s decision to emphasize how the Apostles bore witness to Jesus’ resurrection and lordship was a deliberate decision. But why?

We often look to Acts, as we have done here, to see how the Apostles bore witness to Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, and for good reason. But we must also remember how what Jesus’ resurrection and lordship meant for the Apostles, Israel, and the world at large was being revealed and played out in real time in the middle of the first century.

We already saw how this took place on Pentecost, 30 or 33: the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles, and they were empowered to bear witness to Israel what they had seen and heard and to make known what Israel was supposed to do about it (Acts 2:1-40). Saul of Tarsus had been a vicious persecutor of the faith, but he saw the Risen Lord while on the road to Damascus at some point between 30/33 and at least a couple of years before 42 as described in Acts 9:1-18.

But perhaps no event would prove as transformative, or, at the time, as controversial, as Peter’s proclamation of the Gospel before Cornelius the Roman centurion in Acts 10:1-48. An angel visited Cornelius and told him to send for Peter in Joppa (Acts 10:1-8); Peter meanwhile was praying and received a vision from the Lord Jesus of unclean animals on a sheet and was told to not call unclean what God had cleansed (Acts 10:9-16); when Cornelius’ men soon arrived, the Holy Spirit assured Peter he should go with them (Acts 10:17-22). When Peter and some fellow Jewish Christians arrived at the house of Cornelius and heard his testimony regarding the angelic visitation, Peter recognized from the witness of Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the angels how God desired for the Gospel to be preached to Cornelius and his associates; he thus preached the Gospel; the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius and his associates as He had on the Apostles on Pentecost; Peter then had Cornelius and his associates baptized (Acts 10:23-48).

Today most Christians come from among the nations and are not Jewish by birth, and we often take our inclusion into the work of God in Christ for granted. Yet before a Canaanite woman, Jesus declared He was sent only to seek and save the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 15:24); as the fulfillment of all God promised to Israel, it was natural to expect the good news of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return to be spread among the Israelites and for the Israelites alone (e.g. Acts 3:1-26).

And so we should not be surprised when Peter was strongly criticized for associating with Gentiles when he returned to Jerusalem, but was able to demonstrate by means of all which had taken place how God had granted the Gentiles to receive the repentance leading to life (Acts 11:1-18).

But what about circumcision and observing the customs of the Law of Moses? Some Jewish Christians would insist upon Gentile Christians observing all these customs (cf. Acts 15:1-2). The Apostles and elders of the church in Jerusalem met about this question, and on the basis of the testimony of Peter in terms of what happened with Cornelius, Barnabas’ and Paul’s testimony of how God had worked in their ministry to the Gentiles in modern-day Turkey, and James the Lord’s brother’s application of the witness of Amos 9:11-12 LXX to the situation, they determined God was not compelling Gentile Christians to observe the customs of the Law of Moses in order to be saved. Paul would later be compelled to work out the theology and implications of God’s welcoming of Gentiles in Christ as Gentiles in much of his correspondence which has been preserved in the New Testament (e.g. Romans, Galatians).

In this way, all of the aspects and implications of the good news of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, and imminent return were not fully worked out as Acts began; God was still revealing His purposes in Christ throughout the narrative presented in Acts. But we should not be terribly surprised at this if we recognize the implications of the way Luke framed the beginning of Acts:

I wrote the former account, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after he had given orders by the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen (Acts 1:1-2).

Luke thus characterized what we call the Gospel of Luke as “all that Jesus began to do and teach” (Acts 1:1, emphasis mine). By inference, the Acts of the Apostles would therefore represent the continuation of what Jesus did and taught.

We often consider the Acts of the Apostles primarily in terms of the preaching and witness of the Apostles, primarily of Peter and Paul. But the Apostles were not acting merely on their own impulse and initiative; the Lord Jesus was actively and directly encouraging, exhorting, and guiding them throughout. Jesus directly spoke with Peter in Acts 10:9-16, Ananias in Acts 9:10-16, and Saul or Paul in Acts 9:4-6, 23:11. Paul discerned how the Spirit of Jesus hindered him from continuing to spread the Gospel in modern-day Turkey, and, along with a vision of a Macedonian asking for help, understood God as calling him to preach in Greece in Acts 16:6-10.

Therefore, the emphasis on Jesus’ resurrection and lordship in Acts can be appropriately understood. Luke recorded how Jesus was still teaching and working as Lord and Christ in heaven through the Apostles and the work surrounding the Apostles. The proclamation of the Gospel would certainly still include Jesus’ life, death, ascension, and imminent return, but Luke was inspired to set forth how God worked in Christ through the Spirit and by means of the Apostles to proclaim Jesus’ resurrection and lordship and what it meant first for Israel and then for all people.

In Acts of the Apostles, Luke set forth how the promise of Jesus found its fulfillment: the Apostles bore witness to Jesus in Jerusalem, throughout all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth, to the heart of the empire in Rome (Acts 1:8). Luke ended his witness without ending the story in Acts 28:31, which proves appropriate. The good news of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return never ends. Yes, Jesus of Nazareth came to live, suffer, die, and be raised from the dead only once; only a select few were witness to His life, death, and resurrection (cf. Acts 10:41). Only those few were granted the authority to thus establish the ground of the faith delivered once for all (cf. Matthew 18:18, Jude 1:3). Yet Jesus remains Lord to this day; to this day we must work out what it means to faithfully serve Jesus and to proclaim what God accomplished in His life, death, resurrection, ascension, and lordship, and exhort people to godliness and faithfulness in light of His imminent return. May we continue to live according to the Gospel and make the Gospel known by means of our words and deeds, and share in the life of God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Gospel in the Book of Acts appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Book of Baruch (1 Baruch)

The Book of Baruch, sometimes called 1 Baruch, can be found in the Greek Septuagint and the Old Testament Apocrypha, but is not found in the Hebrew Bible or in most versions of the Old Testament. Who is Baruch? What is the Book of Baruch all about? How should Christians view the Book of Baruch?

The Book of Baruch claimed to be written by Baruch ben Neriah (Baruch 1:1). Baruch ben Neriah was a scribe associated with the prophet Jeremiah ben Hilkiah of Anathoth: Baruch would often write down the prophecies of Jeremiah which Jeremiah would dictate to him, and when Jeremiah was not allowed to enter the Temple precinct, he commissioned Baruch to go on his behalf and read out the word of YHWH which was given to Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 32:12-13, 16, 36:1-32, 43:3, 6). Jeremiah 45:1-5 represented a word of YHWH through Jeremiah specifically to Baruch: Baruch had despaired in his suffering and groaning; YHWH did not present the situation in glowing terms, since He was bringing disaster on the world, but promised Baruch he would escape with his life wherever he might go. Baruch ben Neriah, therefore, was a real person, living at the beginning of the sixth century BCE, a witness to the destruction of Jerusalem, and ultimately an exile in Egypt with Jeremiah (cf. Jeremiah 43:6). Baruch was indeed a Biblical character of some importance: not only was he an associate of Jeremiah, but Baruch was most likely the one responsible for the actual composition and writing of the Book of Jeremiah, and received a specific blessing from YHWH Himself.

The Book of Baruch was collected as part of the Greek Septuagint and has been fully preserved in Codices Alexandrinus and Vaticanus (among others), although not in Codex Sinaiticus. Arabic, Armenian, Bohairic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Latin, and Syriac versions all present indications they are direct translations from the Greek text. Origen betrayed no understanding of any Hebrew original in the Hexapla of the Book of Baruch, and Jerome said there were no existing copies in Hebrew in his own day; nevertheless, some aspects of the text, especially in Baruch 1:1-3:4, present Semitisms and perhaps even mistranslations of an original Aramaic or Hebrew, so a Hebrew original cannot be entirely ruled out.

The Book of Baruch can be found in almost all versions of the Apocrypha and also online here. The Book of Baruch began with an editorial comment, identifying the author as Baruch (with a much more expanded genealogy) and suggesting material was read out before Jeconiah and the exiled people of Judah in Babylon “in the fifth year, on the seventh day of the month,” when the Chaldeans destroyed Jerusalem (Baruch 1:1-4; cf. Jeremiah 36:1-32, Ezekiel 1:2?). After they wept, fasted, and prayed, the exiles of Judah then sent a collection with a priest, Jehoiakim ben Hilkiah, to be sent to Jerusalem, so offerings could be made before God there, and for the welfare of Nebuchadnezzar and his son Belshazzar, and for themselves, and for Baruch to read the scroll as a form of confession and contrition in the Temple; at the same time Baruch was collecting the silver vessels taken from the Temple to return them to Jerusalem (Baruch 1:5-14).

The confession which was supposed to be spoken in the Temple was set forth in Baruch 1:15-3:8. Baruch 1:15-2:10 featured a confession of sin, lamenting the disobedience of Israel since the days in the Wilderness, the rejection of the messages of the prophets, recognition of the suffering of the consequences for disobedience laid out in the Law of Moses, and recognition of continued distress, exile, and suffering because of the sins of the people presently. Baruch 2:11-3:8 turned toward an appeal to God for His anger to turn away from them for the sake of His Name, begging for God’s mercy, aware of how they did not listen to what the prophets told them and thus have suffered devastation and exile, and imploring God to remember promises of restoration given through Moses.

After this extended prayer, and without any real transition of any sort, the Book of Baruch presented an exhortation toward obtaining wisdom in Baruch 3:9-4:4. Israel was exhorted to reflect well on her past and obtain wisdom in the process, to turn to God and to know His ways (Baruch 3:9-15). Such wisdom was not found among the Canaanites, Edomites, or Arabs; a person could not go and search for it and find it in the heavens or elsewhere; only God knows the ways of knowledge and wisdom, and would give them to Israel, found in the commandments of Torah; therefore Israel should not give God’s glory to foreigners but be happy they can know what pleases God (Baruch 3:16-4:4).

The Book of Baruch continued, again without any noted transition, into what has been deemed the “Consolation of Baruch” in Baruch 4:5-5:9. In what seems to be a pastiche of all kinds of prophecies regarding Jerusalem and Zion, the author exhorted the people of Israel to take courage, understanding how the destruction of Jerusalem and their exile was the result of angering God on account of disobedience in idolatry; Zion grieved because of it; their neighbors were invited to see and learn from the disobedience of the Israelites; and yet Zion maintained the confidence God would restore His people, and God would comfort her and make sure she was rebuilt; Jerusalem would again exult and rejoice and would forever enjoy the glory of God when He would lead Israel back again.

In many modern translations of the Apocrypha, including the Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version, the Letter of Jeremiah is presented as the final chapter of the Book of Baruch (as Baruch 6:1-73). This follows the convention set forth in the Latin Vulgate. In the Greek Septuagint, however, the Letter of Jeremiah was presented as an independent work. Since the Letter of Jeremiah would claim to have been written by Jeremiah, not Baruch, and by common confession the Letter of Jeremiah reflects an independent composition, we will not consider it as part of the Book of Baruch.

What should we make of the Book of Baruch? We find no attestation of it in the Dead Sea Scrolls or in rabbinic literature. Early Christians have a high regard for the Book of Baruch in evidence from the late second century onward. The Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah were often found right after Jeremiah and before Lamentations in the Greek Septuagint. We should remember the Greek Septuagint edition of Jeremiah is one-seventh shorter than the edition in the Masoretic Text, and the text is ordered differently, with Jeremiah’s message of blessing Baruch coming at the end of the Greek version of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 51:31-35 LXX). The editorial comment of Baruch 1:1-4, in fact, is more naturally understood to refer to reading aloud that which came before rather than that which would follow afterward: therefore, early Christians understood the Book of Baruch as simply carrying on the narrative begun in Jeremiah with Baruch reading the Book of Jeremiah before exiled Israelites in Babylon. To this end, Augustine thus argued for Jeremiah, the Book of Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, and Lamentations as all the words of Jeremiah written down by Baruch. Such is why the Book of Baruch was believed to be canonical according to many early Christians, and why it was more explicitly attested in the East while more likely wrapped in with Jeremiah in the West.

Nevertheless, the Book of Baruch proves very difficult to accept as a sixth century BCE composition. The editorial framework of Baruch 1:1-14 stands at variance with narratives presented within Jeremiah and with recorded history. First of all, the framing itself seems rather confused: in Baruch 1:1, it seems to borrow “the fifth year” from the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s exile from Ezekiel 1:2, which would be 593 BCE, but the Chaldeans would only take Jerusalem and burn it with fire in 586 BCE. A pre-destruction date might make better sense of the exiles sending silver with a priest in order to make offerings at the Temple; offerings might still have been offered after the destruction according to Jeremiah 41:5, but the whole scene remains difficult to imagine in its context, since we have no evidence the Judahite exiles were in any mood to pray for the welfare of Nebuchadnezzar immediately before or in the immediate wake of the destruction of Jerusalem, and plenty of evidence in Jeremiah and Ezekiel to the contrary (cf. Jeremiah 29:1-32, Ezekiel 37:11). Speaking of Belshazzar as Nebuchadnezzar’s “son” and expecting prayers for him in the 580s would prove quite historically anachronistic and very much influenced by Daniel 5:2. Yet, above all, the Book of Jeremiah consistently bears witness of Baruch staying with Jeremiah in Jerusalem and ultimately ending up exiled with Jeremiah in Egypt (cf. Jeremiah 32:12-13, 16, 36:1-32, 43:3, 6); Baruch is never in Babylon or among the exiles in Babylon, contrary to Baruch 1:1-14. The editorial composition of Baruch 1:1-14 is far better understood as a far later composition of the Second Temple Period providing either some kind of independent introduction to the material which would follow, or perhaps intentionally written as a bridge connecting the following material with the Book of Jeremiah as presented in the Greek Septuagint.

But what of the material in the rest of the Book of Baruch? The confession of sin in Baruch 1:15-3:8 and the “Consolation of Baruch” in Baruch 4:5-5:9 do sound very similar to prayers of confession and contrition in Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah and the prophetic messages regarding Jerusalem and Zion in Isaiah and Jeremiah, respectively. The exhortation regarding wisdom in Baruch 3:9-4:4, however, has no parallel in any of the books of the prophets in the Hebrew Bible. While one might want to make connections with the Book of Proverbs and the wisdom literature tradition, the stronger point of connection would be the Book of Sirach.

Based upon all these considerations and factors, it proves far more challenging to suggest the Book of Baruch as part of the Book of Jeremiah or an additional composition of Baruch in the sixth century BCE, and makes far more sense to understand the Book of Baruch as a pseudepigraphal, apocryphal work of exhortation, quite likely written around the second century BCE, perhaps in the wake of Antiochus IV Epiphanes’ defilement of the Second Temple and its eventual cleansing by the Maccabees.

Therefore, the Book of Baruch was most likely not written by Baruch ben Neriah. It should not be recognized as inspired literature or therefore part of the canon of the Old Testament. We should not seek to establish any principle of dogma, faith, or practice based on anything written in the Book of Baruch.

But just because the Book of Baruch was not written by Baruch and is not Scripture does not mean Christians cannot benefit from it. Instead, Christians can take encouragement and gain some insight from the confession of sin, exhortation toward wisdom, and hope in consolation presented in the Book of Baruch: not as the inspired words of Jeremiah’s scribe, but as examples of the devotion, faith, and piety of some Jewish people of the Second Temple Period a few generations before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christians can always benefit from deeper consideration of prayers of confession and contrition; there are many aspects of Baruch 1:15-3:8 which we could well appropriate in our own lives in prayer. The wisdom presented in Baruch 3:9-4:4 can instruct us as well to seek wisdom and knowledge in God and how people have failed in any attempt to create their own substitute. We can also take comfort and assurance in how God is working to restore Jerusalem in His work through the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ, and perceive the true fulfillment of the hope of restoration which infused the consolation of Baruch 4:5-5:9.

The Book of Baruch might seek to project itself into the context of Israel in exile in the sixth century BCE, but most likely reflects the situation of Israel in its own kind of exile and challenging predicament in the second century BCE. While Christians should not believe Baruch ben Neriah wrote the Book of Baruch, and they should not reckon it as an inspired, canonical part of the Scriptures, Christians do well to read the Book of Baruch and appreciate it as a piece of devotional literature from the Second Temple Period. May we find appropriate profit in the Book of Baruch, but in all things find knowledge and wisdom and the fulfillment of the hope of restoration in Israel in God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Works Consulted

The Book of Baruch (accessed 2025/25/08).

The post The Book of Baruch (1 Baruch) appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Offerings and Vows

YHWH determined it was time again for Israel to consider how they would serve Him in the land He was about to give them.

The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” Numbers 1:1-25:11 bore witness to the experience of the generation which YHWH delivered from Egypt: preparation of the camp and Tabernacle for entry into Canaan, persistence in rebellion, its condemnation, and the fulfillment of that condemnation.

A new census had been taken in Numbers 26:1-65: overall, the number of Israelites remained mostly constant despite all the consequences of Israel’s various rebellions, and, save for Moses, Caleb, and Joshua, all those from the generation YHWH delivered from Egypt had died. The next generation had arisen, and much of Numbers 27:1-36:13 would feature their preparation to enter the land of Canaan, and all the more so for the legislation YHWH gave in Numbers 28:1-30:16.

YHWH commanded the Israelites regarding the schedule of His offerings they would present before Him in Numbers 28:1-29:40. The instruction began with the expected daily offerings every morning and evening (Numbers 28:1-8), then the weekly Sabbath offerings (Numbers 28:9-10), followed by the monthly offerings to be presented on the first day of every month (Numbers 28:11-15), and finally the offerings which should be presented at each of the major annual festivals: Passover (Numbers 28:16-25), the Feast of Weeks, or the “Day of the First Fruits” (Numbers 28:26-31), the Feast of Trumpets (Numbers 29:1-6), the Day of Atonement (Numbers 29:7-11), and the Feast of Booths (Numbers 29:12-39). Moses faithfully instructed Israel in all these matters as YHWH commanded Him (Numbers 29:40).

Some of the instruction will find parallels with material in Leviticus, but nowhere else was the focus primarily on the offerings which should be presented before YHWH as in Numbers 28:1-29:40. While the offerings would no doubt actually be handled by the Levites and offered by the priests, this legislation seems to want to emphasize how the offerings themselves would be coming from the people. With the offering of two lambs daily, an additional two lambs weekly, two bulls, a ram, and seven more lambs monthly, and all the offerings at the festivals, especially the seventy bulls, fourteen rams, and ninety-eight lambs offered over the seven days of the Feast of Booths, along with the grain, oil, and drink offerings which were expected along with all these offerings, what YHWH was expecting went well beyond what any given household or tribe could easily manage. The whole nation of Israel could manage these offerings, however, and in the process would maintain their share in YHWH and jointly participate in life in Him.

Moses then provided YHWH’s legislation regarding vows to the leaders of the tribes of the Israelites in Numbers 30:1-16. The tribal leaders of Israel were supposed to have been executed on account of the matter of Baal of Peor according to Numbers 25:4, and the lack of their participation in the census of Numbers 26:1-65 was quite noticeable. Perhaps the command had been carried out and a new set of leaders had been appointed; regardless, these would be the next generation of leaders after those who had originally led and counted Israel in Numbers 1:1-54. YHWH had already provided legislation regarding appropriate valuations and offerings related to things vowed, or dedicated, to YHWH in Leviticus 27:1-33; this legislation would focus on binding oaths and pledges.

The basic, foundational legislation regarding vows was set forth in Numbers 30:2: a man who made a vow to YHWH or took an oath binding them in an obligation must not break his word but do whatever he promised. While there should be little doubt many Israelites would make vows and would not make good on them (cf. Hosea 10:4), if there is any commandment YHWH gave to Israel which the Israelites held fast to even beyond what we would consider appropriate, it was the command to uphold their vows. The Gibeonites induced Israelites to make a vow to them under false pretenses; Israel nevertheless honored the terms of their oath (cf. Joshua 9:1-27). Jephthah the Gileadite would offer his daughter as a burnt offering before YHWH because he had vowed to thus offer whoever met him after successfully defeating the Ammonites (cf. Judges 11:29-40). We today find these examples, particularly the latter, very troubling, and for understandable reasons. However we might feel about them, their witness underscores how seriously Israelites were willing to take the vows and oaths they uttered before God.

In Numbers 30:3-15, Moses provided instruction to the tribal leaders of Israel regarding vows which women might take. He spoke of the situation of a daughter living in her father’s house (Numbers 30:3-5), a woman who marries while under a vow or a pledge (Numbers 30:6-8), the vow of a widow or a divorced woman (Numbers 30:9), and the vow of a married woman (Numbers 30:10-15). If a woman who was divorced or widowed made a vow, she would need to keep it intact, consistent with the legislation for men (Numbers 30:9; cf. Numbers 30:2). But a young unmarried woman’s vow would only hold and stand if her father heard it and did not object; likewise for the woman already married or about to be married in terms of her husband (Numbers 30:3-14). If the father or husband heard the vow or pledge, or heard about the vow or pledge, and overruled the woman, then the vow would be nullified and YHWH would release her from it (Numbers 30:3-14). If the husband attempted to nullify the vow after he heard it without critique, he would bear the iniquity for the transgression (Numbers 30:15). The narrator confirmed these as the statutes YHWH commanded Moses regarding vows in the household (Numbers 30:16).

Ancient Israel was a patriarchal society, and this legislation regarding vows reflects this patriarchal framework. This legislation regarding vows could, and historically has, been used to consider women as inferior, requiring the endorsement and validation of men in order for their word to have standing and value. Yet this kind of interpretation does not well reflect the evidence and situation provided. Note how a divorced or widowed woman’s vows or oaths stand just like a man’s according to Numbers 30:9. Furthermore, even in the cases of daughters in their father’s household or wives in their husband’s household, the vow or pledge of the woman stands unless the father or husband explicitly speaks up and nullifies it. This legislation has more to do with responsibility than integrity or standing before God: since the father or husband would prove the ultimately responsible party for whatever his daughter or wife would vow or pledge, he is given the authority to nullify. It is patriarchal, but nevertheless consistently patriarchal. We should not justify any degradation of women on the basis of this legislation regarding vows in Numbers 30:1-16.

Why would YHWH bring up the matter of vows in this particular context and situation? We cannot know for certain, but it might well have something to do with the nature of the observances and festivals described in Numbers 28:1-29:40. Hannah, after all, vowed to dedicate her firstborn son to YHWH during their annual visit before YHWH at His Tabernacle (cf. 1 Samuel 1:1-20). Certainly, vows uttered in a private or household context would still be bound by this legislation, but we can also understand how many such vows might well be made while in the presence of God at His chosen location during these special events.

Yet, for that matter, why did YHWH even bring up the offerings and their schedule in Numbers 28:1-29:40? Again, we cannot know for certain, but it seems consistent with YHWH’s purpose to prepare this new generation to arise and enter the land of Canaan to possess it. YHWH would thus set forth in advance all the offerings which the people should be prepared to make when they arrive in the land and enjoy its blessings. The priests and Levites might be the ones actually handling all these offerings, but the offerings would come from the people themselves. Many of those offerings would be given in their absence; but they were expected to come before YHWH during many of the festivals, and in so doing share in the communal life of the people of Israel and YHWH their God.

Thus YHWH gave Israel commands regarding offerings and vows and how they should be handled once they entered Canaan in Numbers 28:1-30:16. As Christians, it is not for us to offer up animal and grain offerings, but should offer up ourselves and our continual devotion to God as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1); our yes should be yes and our no, no, for we should be people of our word and do what we say we will do (cf. Matthew 5:33-37, James 5:12). But we have been redeemed as the people of God to share in the communal life of the people of God in Christ and in Christ through the Spirit (e.g. Ephesians 2:1-4:3). May we faithfully serve God in Christ through the Spirit and obtain eternal life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Offerings and Vows appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Complete My Joy

Therefore, if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort provided by love, any fellowship in the Spirit, any affection or mercy, complete my joy and be of the same mind, by having the same love, being united in spirit, and having one purpose. Instead of being motivated by selfish ambition or vanity, each of you should, in humility, be moved to treat one another as more important than yourself. Each of you should be concerned not only about your own interests, but about the interests of others as well (Philippians 2:1-4).

What would make Paul happy? For Christians to jointly participate in the Spirit in love and humility.

Philippi was a Roman colony in Macedonia (part of modern Greece); Paul first visited the area and preached Jesus around 51 (cf. Acts 16:11-40). Paul wrote to the Christians in Philippi most likely around 60-61 from Rome while living under house arrest there (cf. Philippians 1:1). The church had appointed elders and had deacons serving them, and had sent Epaphroditus to provide support and service to Paul (cf. Philippians 1:1, 2:25-30, 4:18). Paul thanked the Philippian Christians for their joint participation in his ministry and prayed for them to abound in love and make good decisions to share in Jesus’ praise at His return (Philippians 1:2-11). He explained how his circumstances had worked to advance the Gospel; if he were to die, he would go and be with Christ, but he was confident he would continue to faithfully serve God, and the Philippian Christians, while in the body (Philippians 1:12-26). Paul set forth his main exhortation: the Philippian Christians should live as citizens of the Gospel, standing firm together in it, and to suffer well for God in Christ (Philippians 1:27-30).

In Greco-Roman letters, once an author established his propositio, or thesis, he would present evidence and arguments to ground and support his message; this would be called the probatio. We can discern Paul’s probatio in the Philippian letter in Philippians 2:1-4:3, representing the bulk of the letter. We would not be wrong in understanding Philippians 2:1-4:3 as Paul’s extended commentary on and demonstration of his exhortation of Philippians 1:27-30, detailing how the Philippian Christians might live as citizens of and to stand firm within the Gospel.

Philippians 2:1-4, the beginning of Paul’s probatio, certainly fits this understanding: Paul began with “therefore,” indicating that which would follow would expand upon or at least flow from his exhortation in Philippians 1:27-30 (Philippians 2:1). In Greek, Philippians 2:1-4 is one conditional sentence: a comparatively short protasis, or “if” clause (Philippians 2:1), followed by a much longer and more elaborate apodosis, or “then” clause (Philippians 2:2-4).

Paul’s “if” clause, the protasis, packed quite a rhetorical punch: if there were any paraklesis in Christ, any comfort in love, any koinonia in the Spirit, or if any splagchna and mercy (Philippians 2:1). Paraklesis is generally translated encouragement or exhortation; koinonia refers to things held in common, thus joint participation, fellowship, or association; and splagchna refers to the bowels, a visceral representation of the gut experience of empathy or sympathy, thus, compassion. In this way Paul communicated how all the essentials of the Gospel and faith were on the line regarding the exhortation he was about to provide, for his whole life was about encouragement and exhortation in Christ; all seek comfort in love; God in Christ has worked diligently to bind believers together in joint participation in the Spirit (cf. Ephesians 4:1-4); and who among us would want to live without any compassion or mercy?

Philippians 2:2-4 represents Paul’s “then” clause, the apodosis, and is all controlled by one verb and its attendant subordinate clause: complete (my joy) so as to feel the same / think the same, that is, to be of the same mind (Philippians 2:2ab). Everything which follows in Philippians 2:2c-4 represents expansions or commentary on how the Philippian Christians might complete Paul’s joy and reflect the same mind.

We do well to note how Paul spoke of the Philippian Christians as “completing” his joy in Philippians 2:2. In Philippians 4:1, Paul would declare the Philippian Christians to already be his “joy” and “crown.” Yes, he will have reason to exhort Euodia and Syntyche to agree in the Lord in Philippians 4:2, which indicated there was at least some interpersonal conflict among the Christians in Philippi. To that end, the extent to which Philippians 2:1-4:1 was directed toward Euodia and Syntyche and their situation is often debated: some take a maximalist position and imagine it all has them in mind. Others, while not denying how the exhortations in Philippians 2:1-4:1 would have application to Euodia and Syntyche, would nevertheless not insist on the probatio as having them entirely or even necessarily primarily in mind. Whatever we might conclude regarding the relationship of Paul’s probatio to his specific application to Euodia and Syntyche, we must not blow the situation out of proportion. Paul has a high regard for the Philippian Christians and maintains confidence in their faith and maturity. He therefore exhorts them to complete, or finish, his joy in them, by carrying on and persevering in sharing the same mind and all it entailed.

Having already thrown down the gauntlet regarding encouragement in Christ, comfort in love, and joint participation in the Spirit in Philippians 2:1, Paul felt it best, as a rhetorical strategy, to encourage the Philippian Christians to complete his joy, as if a personal favor or request (Philippians 2:2). He would consider the Philippian Christians his joy before the Lord in Philippians 4:1; the Thessalonian Christians were likewise his glory and joy in 1 Thessalonians 2:19-20. Paul had dedicated himself to the work of ministry in Christ; his great pleasure involved seeing the Christians he encouraged well walking according to the ways of God in Christ through the Spirit.

Paul’s joy in the Philippian Christians would be completed if they had the same mind (Philippians 2:2). He already had spoken of wanting to hear the Philippian Christians were standing firm in one spirit, with one mind, contending side by side for the faith of the Gospel in Philippians 1:27; in this way they would live as citizens, or live in ways worthy, of the Gospel. Paul would go on to describe what being of the same mind looked like: to have the same love; to be sumpsuchoi, “fellow-souled,” or united in one spirit; having one purpose; as opposed to being motivated by selfish ambition or vanity, to instead, in humility, treat one another as more important than themselves; and to be concerned not only with their own individual interests, but also the interests of one another (Philippians 2:2c-4).

Paul expected the Philippian Christians to have the same love, to be so unified in spirit as to be “fellow-souled,” and to have the same purpose if they would be of the same mind (Philippians 2:2). Such unity would require a common, shared understanding of what God had accomplished in Christ, or an overall unity on matters of the faith and in doctrine. Yet what Paul had in mind went well beyond matters of agreement on Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return; it required a far deeper and more profound joint participation in lives in faith. The Philippian Christians would have to spend a lot of time together to develop the kind of relational unity which could rightly be described as sharing in the same love, becoming “fellow-souled,” and to maintain the same purpose. They would have to diligently work to preserve those kinds of relationships by displaying love, grace, patience, and mercy toward one another. Paul did not imagine the Philippian Christians would merely give lip service to this exhortation, as if just agreeing on what was true would, on its own, be enough to enliven and empower profound relational unity among them. They would have to actively and actually invest in one another to love one another, to share in life together, and to agree on how they would best work together to glorify Jesus in Philippi.

The Philippian Christians would never be able to cultivate anything resembling this kind of relational unity if they harbored and nurtured eritheian or kenodoxian in their hearts or their actions (Philippians 2:3). Eritheia can refer to strife or factionalism (as in Galatians 5:19-21), but in this kind of context is generally and well translated “selfish ambition,” for it involves the competitive urge to advance oneself in ways which cause division and strife within a group (so also James 3:14-16). Kenodoxia is used only here in the New Testament; “empty glory” gives a flavor of what the two individual words involve, and so it refers to vain or empty pride. Paul well identified the major reasons why the Philippian Christians might not be motivated toward being of the same mind: relational unity would be dashed if any of them thought they were actually better or greater than the rest and thus to manifest empty glory, or if any actively worked to advance their own reputation or standing even if it led to factions and divisions because of how others were dishonored or regarded less. James would speak of similar matters as consistent with the demonic wisdom of the world in contrast to the heavenly wisdom from above, and Christians do well to maintain a similar contrast (cf. James 3:13-18).

Instead of pursuing selfish ambition or vain pride, Paul exhorted the Philippian Christians to remain humble, treating one another as more important than oneself, and to be concerned not only for each individual’s interests, but also the interests of others (Philippians 2:3-4). The only way the Philippian Christians could be of the same mind and share in relational unity in God in Christ through the Spirit would be in humility; each must appropriately esteem themselves and others in Christ to truly glorify and honor Him. As Jesus did not come to be served but to serve and to give His life a ransom for many (cf. Matthew 20:25-28), so Christians should not just think about themselves, but also think about what is best for one another in Christ, and to treat others in Christ as more important than ourselves.

Some manuscripts omit the kai in Philippians 2:4, which would turn the statement into one suggesting full self-denial: each of you should not be concerned about your own interests, but (instead) the interests of others. Nevertheless, the vast majority, and many of the most ancient, witnesses maintain the kai, and such is why most translations render the text in ways similar to the New English Translation (NET) as above. We can imagine why some would want to omit the kai and have the text read in a more ascetic manner; of course, one could make the argument someone would want to add the kai to blunt the force of what Paul was suggesting. Since Paul presumed a level of self-care and self-interest on the part of people in Ephesians 5:28-29, we should not be surprised to find a similar expectation of a base level of self-interest in Philippians 2:4 as well.

Paul thus expanded and intensified his propositio of Philippians 1:27-30 in the beginning of his probatio in Philippians 2:1-4. Paul leveraged everything – encouragement in Christ, comfort in love, joint participation in the Spirit, compassion, and mercy – in his request for the Philippian Christians to complete his joy by being of the same mind. They would share the same mind if they had the same love, were united in spirit, maintained one purpose, resisted selfish ambition and empty pride, manifested humility, and demonstrated concern for others and not just themselves, and to act accordingly. If they did so, they would truly live as citizens of the Gospel, glorifying God in Christ.

Paul has since gone on to be with Christ and await the resurrection of life along with the Philippian Christians. But if there remains any encouragement in Christ, any comfort in love, if we truly jointly participate in the Spirit, and if there remains any compassion or mercy, we should also be of the same mind by having the same love, cultivate unity in spirit and purpose, resist selfish ambition and empty pride, manifest humility, and demonstrate concern for others and not just ourselves, and to act accordingly. Paul’s exhortation in Philippians 2:1-4 remains justly famous as exhortation to what it looks like to serve and glorify Jesus, and we should certainly continue to encourage and emphasize all Paul proclaimed in it.

Lamentably, Christians today struggle as much, if not more so, to display this kind of shared mind and unity in love, spirit, and purpose as did those who came before us; we continually remain tempted toward selfish ambition and empty pride in our fear and shame, when we instead should remain humble and seek what is best for one another. Our society and culture has become very individualistic and looks suspiciously on anything which would elevate and glorify the needs of the many over the independence of the self. At the same time, people are beset by anxiety, fear, and loneliness, for the life devoted to the self ultimately proves empty.

We therefore do better to strive toward the relational unity regarding which Paul preached in Philippians 2:1-4. If each of us seeks what is best for one another, and not merely our own individual interests, each will find his or her needs more than satisfied by others, and there will be no lack. It requires great trust and effort to share in the same mind by having the same love, being “fellow-souled,” and cultivating the same purpose; we will often be betrayed and hurt in the process. Nevertheless, God in Christ is faithful, and nothing is better than the relational unity we can share in God in Christ through the Spirit and with one another in Him. May we all have the same mind in Christ, work diligently toward relational unity in God in Christ through the Spirit, and share in life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Complete My Joy appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Gospel in the Hebrew Bible

The disciples wondered in amazement upon seeing Jesus risen from the dead. In the midst of the confusion and joy, Jesus solemnly pronounced to them the following:

Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled.”
Then he opened their minds so they could understand the scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it stands written that the Christ would suffer and would rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:44-47).

Jesus thus affirmed to the disciples how He fulfilled and was fulfilling all which was spoken of Him in the Law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms. To this end, He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, that is, the Hebrew Bible, and how it bore witness to His life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return.

We can therefore ascertain much regarding the Gospel in the pages and witness of the Hebrew Bible, and we do best to allow the Apostles and their associates to point the way forward for us.

From the very beginning, the Apostle Peter proclaimed what God had accomplished in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return in terms of the witness of the Hebrew Bible. He began his address to the Israelites on Pentecost by declaring the event the fulfillment of what Joel prophesied would take place “in the latter days” (Acts 2:16-21; cf. Joel 2:28-32). Peter enrolled David as an anticipatory witness of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and lordship by quoting Psalms 16:8-11, 110:1 in terms of what the Apostles witnessed God accomplishing in Jesus (Acts 2:24-31).

Peter would frequently evoke concepts and passages from the Hebrew Bible in the way he would speak of what God accomplished in Christ. In Acts 3:13, Peter proclaimed God as having glorified Jesus His “Servant”; by common confession, Peter was making deliberate reference to the “Servant Songs” prevalent in Isaiah’s witness, particularly in Isaiah 42:1-9, 49:1-7, and especially Isaiah 52:13-53:12. Peter would often speak of Jesus’ crucifixion as “hanging upon a tree,” perhaps a common idiom for crucifixion, but one drawn from the wording of the legislation offered in Deuteronomy 21:22-23, which itself highlights the shame associated with the death of a criminal.

According to Peter, the elements of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return were announced beforehand by God through the prophets and holy men of old, and came to pass in the midst and to the benefit of their descendants (Acts 3:18-26). Peter and the other Apostles, by means of the Holy Spirit, went about proclaiming the fulfillment of all the prophets had spoken in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, and imminent return, things which they discerned through the Spirit of Christ working within them and for the benefit of those future generations (1 Peter 1:10-12).

The Apostle Paul, like Peter, would enlist Moses, David, and the prophets as witnesses regarding what God would accomplish in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return; like Stephen, he would proclaim the Gospel to many Israelites in terms of the rehearsal of Israelite history (Acts 13:16-41; cf. Acts 7:1-53). Paul also understood what God had and was accomplishing in Jesus as the fulfillment of the hope of Israel, as God making good on everything He had promised their fathers (cf. Acts 26:2-8, 22-23).

But Paul determined to make one thing clear: the Gospel was not imagined or invented by people (Galatians 1:11-12). According to Paul, the mystery of what God accomplished in Christ had not been disclosed to previous generations as it had been made known by means of His Apostles and prophets in the Spirit (Ephesians 3:4-5).

In so doing, Paul was not suggesting the prophets had no understanding whatsoever of what God would accomplish in Jesus; instead, he affirmed the prophets did not imagine or invent the story of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, for it was only appropriately and properly understood as Jesus accomplished it all. We should not imagine Peter would disagree with Paul: Peter himself well embodied Paul’s principle here, since Peter continually did not fully and really understand what God was doing in Jesus until after His ascension and when he received the Spirit. Furthermore, in terms of the welcoming of the Gentiles as Gentiles (the mystery of which Paul spoke in Ephesians 3:4-6), it was Peter himself who became a major participant in God’s revelation, for Peter was called by Cornelius on account of the angel, and Jesus Himself visited Peter and gave him the vision and sign of the unclean animals, and the Spirit prompted Peter to go on with Cornelius’ associates, and Peter saw how God gave the Spirit to Cornelius and his associates just as God had given Peter and the Apostles the Spirit on the day of Pentecost (cf. Acts 10:1-11:18).

Paul had been well read and well-studied in the Hebrew Bible before Jesus met him on the road to Damascus; afterward, his perspective on the Hebrew Bible would be informed by what God had accomplished and was accomplishing in the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of His Son Jesus Christ. Paul set forth Adam as a type of Jesus in both Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:20-45, in terms of the catalyst for death and redemption from it, and in terms of the body as it is now and the body as transformed in the resurrection (cf. Genesis 2:1-3:22). Paul affirmed God proclaimed the Gospel to Abraham in advance in Galatians 3:8. We should not imagine Paul thought God set forth a creedal level understanding of Jesus, His nature, and His purposes, but the proclamation was in the promise of the blessing of the nations through Abraham’s seed (cf. Genesis 12:3, 18:18). Paul would go on to establish how Christians do not obtain an inheritance of God independent of the promise made to Abraham, but are reckoned as children of Abraham by faith, and therefore able to be welcomed into the promise which was fulfilled in Christ (Galatians 3:6-29). In these, and many other ways, Paul returned to the Hebrew Bible which he knew quite well and now in it saw the witness regarding what God would accomplish in Jesus.

Paul would even bring concepts from the Hebrew Bible to bear on how he explained the Gospel. The resurrection of the dead was anticipated and expected in the Hebrew Bible, but primarily in terms of the general resurrection of the dead on the final day (cf. Daniel 12:1-2). God raised the Lord Jesus Christ from the dead; while Matthew recorded witnesses of other resurrections taking place around that time in Matthew 27:52-53, no one believed or suggested the general resurrection from the dead envisioned in Daniel 12:1-2 had taken place. When attempting to explain the resurrection of the dead to the Corinthian Christians, Paul spoke of Jesus as the “firstfruits” of the dead, attesting to the future promise of the resurrection for all believers on account of Jesus’ resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-24). “Firstfruits” came from Exodus 34:22-23 and other passages in the Law of Moses, in which Israel was to offer before God the first fruit of any of their harvests. In this framework, offering God the first fruit would engender confidence in God providing Israel with the “second fruit” and “third fruit” and perhaps beyond. There is no automatic or intrinsic association between the “firstfruit” and the resurrection in the Hebrew Bible; instead, Paul mined some of the concepts and imagery in the Hebrew Bible in order to better explain what God was doing in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return.

The author of the Letter to the Hebrews deeply explored the Hebrew Bible in light of what God accomplished in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return in compelling ways. He vividly perceived Jesus’ humiliation and exaltation in the Septuagint reading of Psalm 8:4-6 in Hebrews 2:5-11, and confessed how Jesus is the Pioneer of salvation for all who follow and suffer in Him as a result. The majority of the Letter to the Hebrews featured its author’s careful exegesis of Psalms 95:7-11, 110:1, 4, and Jeremiah 31:31-34, all to the end of exalting Jesus as the high priest according to the order of Melchizedek, able to secure a new and better covenant in His life, death, resurrection, ascension, and lordship, and as a guarantee of His return (Hebrews 3:1-10:31). Like Peter and Paul before him, the Hebrews author gave assurance of the Gospel as the fulfillment of all God had promised to Israel; he extolled the examples of the people of faith in the Hebrew Bible, yet then encouraged his current audience to follow after Jesus since they would not be made perfect apart from those who have come to hope and trust in Jesus (cf. Hebrews 11:1-12:2).

God brought His revelation regarding Jesus to a conclusion with all that which He gave to Jesus to show His servant John on Patmos in Revelation 1:1-22:21. From the beginning of Revelation until its very end, the visions John saw were rooted and informed by events and images in the Hebrew Bible. Such proves literally true (one of the few truly “literal” things about Revelation!): the first thing John saw was Jesus described in ways which align with and evoke the “one like a Son of Man,” the “Ancient of Days,” and the “man clothed in linen” in Daniel 7:9-14, 10:5-6 (Revelation 1:10-20), and in the end John saw the holy city, the river flowing from the throne, and the tree of life with leaves for the healing of the nations, all of which evoke what Ezekiel saw in Ezekiel 40:1-48:35 (Revelation 21:1-22:5). In between, almost every aspect of the vision drew from or alluded to some event or imagery described in the Hebrew Bible.

Thus God in Christ could show John a vision of what was and would be for Christians while drawing heavily from the imagery of the Hebrew Bible. In this way God made known how all regarding which He had spoken and promised in the Hebrew Bible would find its fulfillment in Jesus. We can see the shift in emphasis on account of what God accomplished in Christ even in these examples. In Daniel, the “Ancient of Days,” the “one like a Son of Man,” and the “man clothed in linen” are different characters; in John’s vision, their characteristics are combined in Jesus, glorifying Jesus as fully human and fully God (Revelation 1:10-20). The bulk of Ezekiel 40:1-48:35 described the imagined new temple for Israel, with the city and the river flowing from the temple receiving far less consideration; in Revelation 21:22, John was explicitly told there was no temple or a need for a temple, since God and Jesus the Lamb were in its midst, and thus the focus remained entirely on the holy city, the glorified people of God (Revelation 21:1-22:5).

We can learn much from Peter, Paul, the Hebrews author, John, and the other inspired writers of the New Testament regarding how we can perceive the Gospel in the Hebrew Bible. We will find prophetic encouragement which has unique reference to the work God accomplished in Jesus, as in Joel 2:28-32. We will find anticipatory witness regarding Jesus from Moses, David, and the prophets, as in Psalm 110:1, 4, or Isaiah 52:13-53:12. We can discern types of Jesus in many of the characters found in the pages of the Hebrew Bible, from Elijah to Eliakim ben Hilkiah (cf. Isaiah 22:20-25). Concepts, frameworks, and images presented in the Hebrew Bible might provide compelling ways to communicate regarding what God has accomplished in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, as seen with the firstfruits and the resurrection and the whole of Revelation.

The Hebrew Bible remains the witness of all God spoke to the fathers through the prophets (cf. Hebrews 1:1). We always do well to first seek to make sense of the Hebrew Bible in terms of its original context. It is likewise often helpful to also consider how it would have been understood in Second Temple Judaism. It was never intended, on its own, to establish authority for faith and practice in the covenant between God and all people in Christ. But much of what God spoke to the fathers through the prophets involved the promises and expectations which would find their fulfillment in ways no one really expected: in the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, the Son of God, and we do well to read and understand the Hebrew Bible accordingly. May we well perceive the Gospel in the Hebrew Bible, and seek to follow the way of Jesus our Pioneer and obtain salvation in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Gospel in the Hebrew Bible appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Psalm 2

Psalm 2:1-12, ASV translation, as prose:

Why do the nations rage, and the peoples meditate a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against YHWH, and against his anointed, saying, “Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast away their cords from us.”
He that sitteth in the heavens will laugh: the Lord will have them in derision. Then will he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure: yet I have set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
I will tell of the decree: YHWH said unto me, “Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”
Now therefore be wise, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve YHWH with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish in the way, for his wrath will soon be kindled. Blessed are all they that take refuge in him.

Psalm 2:1-12 ASV according to Hebrew parallelism (as marked in BHS):

Why do the nations rage / and the peoples meditate a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves / and the rulers take counsel together
Against YHWH / and against his anointed,
“Let us break their bonds asunder / and cast away their cords from us.”
He that sitteth in the heavens will laugh / the Lord will have them in derision.
Then will he speak unto them in his wrath / and vex them in his sore displeasure
Yet I have set my king / upon my holy hill of Zion.
I will tell of the decree: YHWH
Said unto me, “Thou art my son / this day have I begotten thee.
Ask of me / and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance / and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron / thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”
Now therefore be wise, O ye kings / be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
Serve YHWH with fear / and rejoice with trembling / Kiss the son,
Lest he be angry and ye perish in the way / for his wrath will soon be kindled.
Blessed are all they that take refuge in him.

Psalm 2 in the Scottish Metrical Psalter of 1650:

1 Why rage the heathen? and vain things
why do the people mind?
2 Kings of the earth do set themselves,
and princes are combined,

To plot against the Lord, and his
Anointed, saying thus,
3 Let us asunder break their bands,
and cast their cords from us.

4 He that in heaven sits shall laugh;
the Lord shall scorn them all.
5 Then shall he speak to them in wrath,
in rage he vex them shall.

6 Yet, notwithstanding, I have him
to be my King appointed;
And over Zion, my holy hill,
I have him King anointed.

7 The sure decree I will declare:
The Lord hath said to me,
Thou art mine only Son; this day
I have begotten thee.

8 Ask of me, and for heritage
the heathen I’ll make thine;
And, for possession, I to thee
will give earth’s utmost line.

9 Thou shalt, as with a weighty rod
of iron, break them all;
And, as a potter’s sherd, thou shalt
them dash in pieces small.

10 Now therefore, kings, be wise; be taught,
ye judges of the earth:
11 Serve God in fear, and see that ye
join trembling with your mirth.

12 Kiss ye the Son, lest in his ire
ye perish from the way,
If once his wrath begin to burn:
blessed all that on him stay.

Psalm 2 as Poetry

Psalm 2 features a chiastic structure of A B B’ A’ perhaps as a “four act play” or ritual of sorts (Psalm 2:1-3 A, Psalm 2:4-6 B, Psalm 2:7-9 B’, Psalm 2:10-12 A’). The versets display classic Hebrew parallel features, often emphasizing and intensifying the message.

Other aspects of the poetry reinforce associations and connections between Psalm 1 and Psalm 2. Psalm 1:1 begins with a beatitude; Psalm 2:12 ends with one, an inclusio for Psalms 1-2 as an introductory unit. The Hebrew root hagah is found in both Psalm 1:2 (“meditate”) and Psalm 2:1 (sometimes translated “meditate,” also translated “plot”). Many similar lexical associations can be found between the two psalms.

Psalm 2 in Context and Canon

Psalm 2 has no superscription just like Psalm 1; many in antiquity reckoned Psalms 1 and 2 to be a composite unity (cf. certain manuscripts of Acts 13:33 which read “first” for “second”), and even those who recognized them as distinct psalms understood that they served as a dual introduction to the whole Psalter.

The “wicked” of Psalm 1 morph into the nations and peoples who rage and plot against YHWH in Psalm 2; the “righteous” of Psalm 1 is embodied in YHWH’s Anointed One in Psalm 2, the King who will receive power and authority.

If one looks at Books 1 through 3 of the Psalter as “the king in prayer,” Psalm 2 proves a most fitting introduction to this collection. Psalm 2 is certainly a royal psalm, a coronation, part of either an enthronement ceremony or perhaps a covenant renewal ceremony (cf. 2 Kings 11:12).

The history of Israel is full of examples of the danger of instability that marked regnal transitions. When Ahab king of Israel died and Ahaziah took his throne Moab revolted (2 Kings 1:1); in the days of Joram king of Judah Edom and Libnah rebelled (2 Kings 8:22). Kings would frequently need to make military excursions soon after they ascended to the throne so as to continue to project strength and keep vassal kingdoms under submission.

Psalm 2 is composed to this end. The Psalter is aware of the plots and machinations of the nations to rebel against the authority of the Davidic king; in so doing they plot against YHWH as well (Psalm 2:1-3). YHWH sees this from above; He laughs at them and holds them in derision, and in His (burning) anger He will speak and vex them (Psalm 2:4-5). What frustrates the nations? YHWH has set His king on the hill of Zion in Jerusalem (Psalm 2:6). The Davidic king is an authority legitimated by YHWH and is to accomplish YHWH’s purposes (associated with the “righteous” of Psalm 1).

“The decree” is then given; in the ancient Near Eastern world almost every culture had some sort of recognition of adoption of the king as the son of the relevant deity. The Psalter speaks in similar terms: “Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee” (Psalm 2:7). As a result the Davidic king is invited to ask of YHWH to receive power and dominion over the nations and He will provide (Psalm 2:8-9). Perhaps the Davidic king would use a royal scepter or mace to break a pot as a symbolic gesture to declare his power over the vassal nations in the midst of the declaration of Psalm 2:9.

A taunt or exhortation to the nations follow: they ought to be wise, serve YHWH, and indicate their submission to the rightful Davidic king lest he get angry with them (Psalm 2:10-11). There may be some textual confusion surrounding “kiss” in Psalm 2:10 yet the idea is clear enough: the delegate of the nation(s) ought to provide the proper gesture of subjugation and humiliation before the Davidic king. We should not be surprised to see an expectation for other nations to serve YHWH; we must remember that the standard practice of the ancient Near Eastern world was to respect the gods of other nations and especially give them their due when their people were ascendant. That standard practice proved to be exactly the problem for Israel: the Israelites respected the gods of the other nations and did not serve YHWH exclusively (cf. 2 Kings 17, etc.)!

The point of Psalm 2 is found at the very end: blessings come to those who serve YHWH and His anointed, the Davidic king, and take refuge in him (Psalm 2:12). Problems come to those who would dare to revolt and rebel, thinking the death of one king and the accession of the next to be an indicator of weakness.

The strong association between YHWH and the anointed Davidic king in the face of the nations who would seek to break away from Judahite vassalage provides strong evidence that Psalm 2 belongs originally to the First Temple period. It certainly sounds like a psalm that would be used in an enthronement ceremony declaring the strength of the Davidic monarchy; whether it was used only at the accession of a new king or annually or at certain “jubilee” points, or whether the ceremony would take place at the Temple precinct or in front of the palace cannot be definitively ascertained.

Psalm 1 expressed the two ways, that of the righteous and that of the wicked; Psalm 2 places that in the context of the monarchy. The nations often plot wickedly; YHWH has established the Davidic king and his kingdom based in Jerusalem as the bastion for the righteous and will prosper His people. Psalm 1 provides a framework for the individual to find liturgical value in the Psalms while seeking to practice Torah as an ethic in life; Psalm 2 provides the framework for the nation of Israel to understand how YHWH will triumph over the nations hostile to Israel through His anointed Davidic king. Psalms give voice to the individual to make his complaint before YHWH, but Psalms also give voice to the nation of God’s people to give voice to their frustrations about their plight in light of current events. Psalms 1 and 2 set the tone for the rest of the Psalter: follow YHWH’s torah, remain righteous; the enemies and the wicked will plot, but YHWH will gain triumph through His Anointed.

Psalm 2 Throughout History

During and after the exile in the Second Temple period Psalm 2 was understood as a Messianic Psalm. The Israelites continually lived under the yoke of foreign oppression and increased hostility by those nations. Israel looked forward to the Messiah who would come as the descendant of David and who would crush their foes and vindicate them in the sight of their enemies.

It is worth noting that the Seputagint reads poimaneis (“rule”) for Hebrew tero’em (“break”) in Psalm 2:9; while the Hebrew MT reading is preferable since it maintains continuity in parallelism (break / dash in pieces), the Septuagint LXX reading highlights the rule of the Messiah over the nations and is seen in Revelation 2:27.

Psalm 2 features prominently in the New Testament. The decree of Psalm 2:7, understood as the adoption of the Davidic king as the son of God, is understood in its fullness and actuality in terms of Jesus of Nazareth when God the Father declares Him to be His Son at His baptism and Transfiguration in Matthew 3:17, 17:5. All references to Jesus as the “Son of God” are rooted in the decree of Psalm 2:7. The Hebrew author uses Psalm 2:7 to prove that Jesus is higher than the angels since God never called an angel His Son (Hebrews 1:5, 3:6) and emphasizes that Jesus does not assume the honor for Himself but is granted it by the Father’s spoken decree (Hebrews 5:5, 8). Paul understands the decree of Psalm 2:7 in light of the promises of Psalm 2:8-11 and interprets them in view of Daniel 7:13-14 and the resurrection: this leads to his citation of Psalm 2:7 in Acts 13:33 and Romans 1:4 to assert that Jesus was declared the Son of God, that is, the Messiah of David who would rule over all the nations, in power in His resurrection. John evokes Psalm 2:7 when speaking of Jesus as the monogenes, the “only begotten” or “unique” Son of the Father in John 1:14, 18, 3:16. The Apostles appropriated the entire message of Psalm 2 around Jesus, for after they experienced persecution from the same Sanhedrin authority that had condemned Jesus to death, they pray before God, explicitly quoting Psalm 2:1-2 and interpret it in light of the plotting of Herod, Pilate, the Jews, and the Gentiles first against Jesus and by extension now against them as well (Acts 4:23-31). In Revelation 12:5 the Child of the woman is identifiable as Jesus precisely because John describes Him as the One who would rule the nations with a rod of iron. In Revelation 2:26-27, however, Jesus invites all those who conquer/overcome to share in that rule over the nations, indicating some level of participation of the people of God in the Kingdom of Jesus.

Christians continued to understand the powerful Christology inherent in Psalm 2. Many considered Psalm 2 to highlight Jesus’ humanity yet also how Psalm 2 provides a coherent view of how Jesus could be both fully God and fully man.

Christians also continued to use the “life situation” of Psalm 2 as a way of understanding the struggles of their own day, especially in the early modern period (1500 – 1800). They understood their situation in terms of the “nations raging” and “peoples plotting” and put their trust in God in Christ that He would overcome and gain the victory.

Psalm 2 Today

Many Christians look at Psalm 2 entirely according to its apologetic/Christological purpose and see the foreshadowing of Jesus the Anointed One gaining God’s victory over the forces which conspire against Him. This approach does have its value and we ought to gain encouragement from the clear reference to Jesus and what He would do.

Yet we do well to also consider the whole message of Psalm 2. In context Psalm 2 is really a bold declaration: be afraid of this geographically small kingdom based on this hill in the Judean highlands! One can imagine the snark or contemptuousness which would be sounded from the thrones of Pharaoh in Egypt or the kings of Assyria, Babylon, etc., to such a claim. Yet Israel held firm to the belief that YHWH their God, the Creator, intended to be vindicated through His people in the face of enemies generally stronger than they.

Psalm 2 is not just about Jesus being begotten of God and the Son of God even though that is there. Psalm 2 is about God’s rule over the nations and the wisdom of submitting to YHWH and His Anointed. Jesus has now been ruling for almost 2,000 years; in the meantime the Jewish people who rejected Him saw the loss of their Temple and their city, the Romans terribly persecuted His people but ultimately were won over to a form of Christianity, falling as a power; in turn all sorts of kingdoms, rulers, and authorities have come and go. Christianity itself has experienced its ups and downs in terms of faithfulness and standing. Yet through it all the nations have raged and the peoples have plotted against YHWH and His Anointed, and they have all failed.

We live in a time when we can see the nations raging and the peoples plotting against YHWH and His Anointed. Psalm 2 thus can speak to us and for us today, just as it did for the early Christians to whom John wrote his Revelation. The nations rage; we should not be afraid, for YHWH has obtained the victory through His Anointed, and He laughs and holds them in derision. The peoples plot; yet YHWH invites us to participate with His Anointed in His Kingdom and we will see Him crush all who are opposed to Him. If the authorities, nations, and peoples were really wise they would serve YHWH and revere His Son!

Psalms 1 and 2 open our eyes and ears so we can truly see and hear and thus speak the Psalter. We are invited to choose righteousness through the Torah of YHWH and to know that despite the ravings and plots of the wicked YHWH will gain victory over them through His Anointed Jesus; therefore, we should submit to the Father, obey the Son, and give praise and thanks through the voice of the Spirit as He has provided in the Psalter. Let us be wise, serve YHWH in Christ, and live to glorify and praise Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Psalm 2 appeared first on de Verbo vitae.