Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog, page 37

The Gospel of Peter

The Apostles grounded all of their teachings and direction in what God accomplished through Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and ascension. Some who came after the Apostles sought to faithfully maintain all they proclaimed. Others would introduce other gospels to justify alternative ideas and doctrines. One such example of a later, apocryphal gospel is the Gospel of Peter.

The Gospel of Peter claimed to have been written by Peter (Gospel of Peter 60), yet early Christians recognized it as pseudepigraphal and written at a later time. Modern scholars do not disagree (Serapion and Eusebius, reported in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History 3.3.12, 6.12). Some scholars claim the Gospel of Peter represents an early stream of Jesus tradition, perhaps from the first century; most, however, perceive the strong influence of the canonical Gospels on the Gospel of Peter, and consider it derivative in nature. Theodoret identified the use of a “Gospel of Peter” among the “Nazareans,” or Ebionites (a sect of Jewish Christians; Heretical Fables 3.2); Origen made a similar association (On Matthew, 10.17). Eusebius reported that Serapion was convinced the author of the Gospel of Peter was docetic (Ecclesiastical History 6.12); the Gospel of Peter spoke of Jesus being “taken up” (19), but also made much of burying His body (3-5, 23-24). While many noted scholars agree with Serapion’s claim of docetic influence, what has been preserved is not sufficient to identify the original author or audience with any degree of confidence.

The Gospel of Peter was sufficiently popular by 190 to lead Serapion of Antioch to write a treatise to the church in Rhossus condemning it as heretical (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.12); this condemnation would be repeated by others until the early medieval era. The Gospel of Peter was eventually lost save for a few quotations and references in patristic literature. The Gospel of Peter was the first noncanonical gospel to be re-discovered in the modern era: a manuscript was discovered, neatly buried with a monk of the 8th or 9th century, near Akhmim in Egypt, containing a portion of the Gospel of Peter relating to Jesus’ passion, burial, resurrection, and ascension.

A translation of the discovered portion of the Gospel of Peter can be found online here. What remains began in the middle of Jesus’ trial, this time primarily before Herod, who is the one who ordered Jesus’ crucifixion (Gospel of Peter 1-2). Joseph of Arimathea was then seen as asking for Jesus’ body from Pilate even before the crucifixion (Gospel of Peter 3-4). The people are then shown as mocking Jesus, acting as if they have power over the Son of God; Jesus was then crucified (Gospel of Peter 5-14). The darkness in the midst of the crucifixion was then described in detail (Gospel of Peter 15-18). In the Gospel of Peter, Jesus cried out that His power had forsaken Him, and was then “taken up” (19). The signs surrounding Jesus’ death were further explicated, with the Jewish people seen as rejoicing, and Jesus’ body is brought to Joseph’s tomb, called the “Garden of Joseph” (Gospel of Peter 20-24). Some Jewish people were then portrayed as lamenting their sin and expecting the end of Jerusalem (Gospel of Peter 25); the narrative quickly shifted to Peter and his companions, distressed and in hiding, sought for doing wrong and desiring to burn the Temple (Gospel of Peter 26-27).

The request for soldiers to be stationed at Jesus’ tomb was then described, and the centurion of the guard is identified as “Petronius” (Gospel of Peter 28-34). The soldiers stationed at the last night watch were said to have seen the heavens opened with two radiant men coming down to the tomb; the stone in front of the tomb rolled away by itself, and the young men entered, and came out with another male and a cross following them; a voice was heard from the heavens asking if proclamation was made to those who had fallen asleep, and the cross responded in the affirmative (Gospel of Peter 35-43). The soldiers went to Pilate, told them what happened, and confessed Jesus as God’s Son; Pilate responded that he was clean of the blood of the Son of God; they all agreed to say nothing about what they had seen, choosing to owe the greatest sin before God than to be stoned by the Jewish people (Gospel of Peter 46-48).

The Gospel of Peter then described Mary Magdalene’s visitation to the tomb at the “dawn of the Lord’s day,” explaining that she had not been able to complete the appropriate rites because of the anger of the Jewish people; the narrative consistently followed the canonical Gospels’ accounts except that the “young man” at the tomb claimed Jesus was not only risen but also had returned to the place from which He had been sent (Gospel of Peter 50-57). The surviving portion ended with Peter claiming that all the Apostles returned to their homes in sorrow, and spoke of himself, Andrew, and Levi as fishing (Gospel of Peter 58-60).

We can ascertain many post-apostolic developments attested in the Gospel of Peter. We can perceive the shift toward blaming Herod and the Jewish people more fully for the death of Jesus, and the beginning of the attempts to exonerate Pilate. The story of a cross following Jesus out of the tomb and even speaking is novel and otherwise unattested. The voice (ostensibly of God) asking if proclamation was made to those who had fallen asleep is very much influenced by 1 Peter 3:18-19 and is leading to the “harrowing of hell” speculation which would become popular soon after. The consolidation of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension is notable: it would be consistent with docetism, but on its own it is difficult to make much of it. Terminology like “the Lord’s day” betrays the later perspective of the author. If Origen has considered the same Gospel of Peter in its fullest form, it also promoted the perpetual virginity of Mary, claiming Jesus’ brothers were Joseph’s from a previous marriage (Origen, On Matthew, 10.7); another idea which was gaining currency in the second century (cf. the Protoevangelium of James).

The Gospel of Peter, therefore, is an apocryphal gospel. We can understand why it was not seriously considered to be part of the canon. While what has been preserved is not nearly as heretical and digressive as the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, or similar Gnostic gospels, we can still perceive how the doctrinal developments of the second century were being “read into” the story of Jesus. False teachings, after all, are much more easily accepted when told as if part of the gospel narrative. We do well to hold firm to the story of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and ascension as revealed in the canonical Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and trust in the Lord as manifest in them so as to be saved!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Works Consulted

“The Gospel of Peter“, accessed 03/26/2019

“The Gospel of Peter, translated by Raymond Brown”, accessed 03/26/2019

The post The Gospel of Peter appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Ever-Present Danger of “Soft” Preaching

I charge thee in the sight of God, and of Christ Jesus, who shall judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be urgent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside unto fables (2 Timothy 4:1-4)

One of the common jeremiads often heard proclaimed in pulpits warns against the dangers of “soft” preaching. “Soft” preaching is then associated with these teachers who tell those with “itching ears” what they want to hear and thus depart from the faith. Sometimes such “soft” preaching is defined as “all positive” preaching; many times it is negatively defined as preaching without discussing “hard” issues. Those “hard” issues tend to be defined in terms of matters of doctrinal distinctiveness: emphasis on the proper plan of salvation, proper functioning in the assemblies, and/or proper church organization and functioning. These days, “soft” preaching is extended to included unwillingness to preach against abortion, homosexuality, or other hot-button cultural and social issues.

These concerns are legitimate. One road to large churches and equally large church treasuries is paved with soothing self-help messages masquerading as preaching. Moralistic therapeutic deism, the belief in a god who is out there with some standards easily relaxed, who wants people to be happy and to have high self-esteem, and who will save all good people, is quite prevalent in our age, and is promoted vigorously with a “Christian” veneer. Meanwhile, the people of God remain tempted to dispense with that which makes them distinctive so as to be like everyone else. Israel wanted a king like the other nations (1 Samuel 8:1-22), and served other gods like the other nations (2 Kings 17:7-23). Some early Christians minimized the resurrection and promoted doctrines more consistent with Hellenistic philosophy than the apostolic Gospel (1 Timothy 6:20-21, 2 Timothy 2:17-19, 2 John 1:7-11). How many in “Christendom” today have fully or partially embraced modern cultural norms regarding science, gender, and sexuality? Proclamation regarding God’s plan of salvation, the proper way to edify and encourage in the assembly, and the authorized organization and work of the local congregation according to the New Testament is not appreciated in some places. We do well to show concern about these trends and to continue to preach the Gospel in its fullness.

Nevertheless, we also do well to consider whether it is advisable or wise to define “soft” and “hard” preaching so strictly and with such a limited application. Neither “soft preaching” nor “hard preaching” are Biblical terms. When Paul wrote to Timothy, the immediate dangers were for Jewish Christians to “turn aside” to listen to a gospel emphasizing Judaism and its cultural traditions (reflected in what would become the “Ebionite” sect) and for Gentile Christians to “turn aside” to listen to a gospel conforming to Hellenistic philosophies and an anti-Semitic bias (reflected in Marcionism, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the various Gnostic sects). These “gospels” would accommodate the listeners’ existing biases and grew into the heresies which were opposed so virulently during the first four hundred years of Christianity.

While early Christians were so fixed on opposing these heresies, changes were introduced in church organization (a bishop over the elders in a local congregation with Ignatius), and the very arguments used to defend the faith and to oppose heretics would become the basis of false doctrines: the appeal to Christians’ old covenant heritage in Israel in order to gain legitimacy led to Judaizing tendencies in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy; appealing to unbroken lines of authority figures in the church in Rome to show that “orthodox” Christianity predated the “heresies” and thus was more legitimate would eventually be used to justify Roman Catholic claims to legitimacy despite the fact that what the church in Rome taught in the first century is vastly different from what the Roman Catholic church taught in 600 CE, 1000 CE, 1500 CE, and today.

These early Christians were very concerned about the promotion of heresy and zealously defended their faith in Christ. Yet while they stood firm on many aspects of the faith and vigorously defended them, they let other aspects of the faith slide. Unforeseen consequences involving incremental changes in church organization and the inferences drawn from arguments defending the faith would eventually overwhelm the good which had been done in the defense of the faith.

Hopefully this example can show us the dangers of single-minded focus on particular issues to the detriment of others and putting too much faith in our arguments versus the explicit message of the New Testament. Strict definitions of what comprises “soft” and “hard” preaching can contribute to this focus and thus its inherent danger: if “hard” preaching involves proclaiming the distinctive aspects of our faith, and we constantly emphasize those distinctive aspects in our preaching and teaching, and everyone is affirmed in those distinctive matters, we can be lulled into complacency, convinced that we are “holding firm” to the faith. Meanwhile, other, less addressed, issues may creep into the church and lead to ungodliness. If the preacher dares to preach on these new challenges, he might find the audience has developed hardened hearts on the issue. Or perhaps Christians make bad or unintended inferences from arguments to defend the truth or use those arguments in unintended ways and begin promoting distorted doctrines. In such circumstances, “hard” preaching has become “soft” preaching, what was once derided as “soft” preaching proves necessary as “hard” preaching, and false doctrine has sprouted from previous attempts to advance the truth.

Paul wisely did not specifically mention which lusts people would want satisfied, which myths they would accept, and what precisely these teachers would teach: specific identification would lead to apathy and complacency in terms of other issues! There are all sorts of ways in which people develop itching ears and seek teachers to satisfy their desires. Yes, it is true that some people seek teachers to talk only about positive matters and focus only on how to be good people, and want little to do with doctrine and the distinctive truths of New Testament Christianity. Yet those very issues could themselves become “soft” preaching for a group who has itching ears to feel content that they adhere to the true doctrines of New Testament Christianity but want little to do with those parts of the Gospel that demand changes in their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.

“Soft” preaching as preaching designed to make everybody feel better about themselves as they are without any demand for repentance has no place among the people of God (cf. Matthew 4:17, Luke 6:26, 1 Timothy 6:3-10). The preaching of the Gospel of Christ is always designed to convict the hearer of their condition before God and should always exhort toward faith, repentance, and godliness; it should always be “hard” in the sense of challenging and faithful to the standard of God’s holiness (Matthew 4:17, Acts 2:37-38, 2 Timothy 4:1-4, Hebrews 4:12, 1 Peter 1:13-16). We should be wary of fixed definitions beyond these which focus upon certain aspects of the Gospel over others, for the danger always exists that the issues deemed “hard” preaching today prove to be “soft” matters tomorrow, and matters we take for granted today are considered as “hard” preaching tomorrow. Instead, we do better to proclaim the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). The whole counsel of God includes the distinctive doctrines of New Testament Christianity yet constantly reinforces the life, death, resurrection, and lordship of Jesus of Nazareth as the centerpiece of the faith and the basis of its standard of the righteous and holy life (1 Corinthians 15:1-58, John 2:1-6, Jude 1:3). Doctrine and practice are to complement each other, not stand in contrast. The whole counsel of God involves positive encouragement of commendable thoughts, feelings, and actions as well as exhortation away from ungodly and unholy thoughts, feelings, and actions (Galatians 5:17-24). The whole counsel of God demands believers to speak truth to society today without romanticizing an illusory past (cf. Ecclesiastes 7:10). The whole counsel of God demands the recognition of the distinction between what God actually said and the arguments we use to defend that truth, and to never allow the latter to be used or misused to contradict the former.

We humans like to quantify things, and the more objective the quantification, the better. On account of this Christians have always been tempted to quantify “soft” vs. “hard” preaching, or “sound” vs. “unsound” doctrines, on the basis of certain, easily quantifiable beliefs, doctrines, or practices. As Christians, we should certainly affirm sound doctrine and encourage preaching and teaching on the distinctive doctrines of New Testament Christianity. Yet we must always be wary about limited definitions of “soft”/”hard” preaching or “sound” doctrine. Focus on certain doctrines to the neglect of others is not healthy, or sound, at all; what constitutes “soft” preaching for “itching ears” in one context may prove to be “hard” preaching in others, and what constitutes “hard” preaching to some may actually be “soft” preaching for “itching ears.” After all, whoever actually, consciously believes they are departing from the truth and holding firm to myths because of their itching ears? Paul does not suggest that this problem only exists “out there”; his very concern is that it will become true of those “among us, right here”! Let us continually check our ears to see whether they itch to hear certain things over others or whether they are always ready to listen to the truth of God in Christ Jesus no matter how much that truth may ask of us, and seek to proclaim the whole counsel of God!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Ever-Present Danger of “Soft” Preaching appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Who Are We? Why Are We Here?

We humans tend to seek meaning in our lives and our behaviors. We want to know who we are, why we are here, and what we are supposed to do. We may not always think about it; in fact, many times we just absorb whatever our family or our culture has to say about who we are and why we are here. These questions prove important because they shape our lives: what we think we want out of life, what we need to do in life, and how we feel about the quality of our lives.

People have always asked such questions; the stories we tend to call “mythology” developed to answer them. In the past some people thought they were made to be the slaves of the gods, working the fields and providing food for the gods so they would not have to work. Others thought of the gods in very human terms, as extremely powerful and immortal people who were to be placated more than loved. Today people tend to seek answers from science, and according to science we are all accidents of evolution, born to use resources, create offspring, give ourselves and our offspring every advantage we can, and then we die. In such a world life becomes all about using resources, avoiding pain, and trying to enjoy life to the fullest until we die.

We find a very different story about who we are and why we are here from the pages of the Bible. According to the Scriptures man was not made as a slave of the gods, or developed as an accident: he is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27). This does not mean that God is just a really powerful human; God is spirit, and well above and beyond us (Isaiah 55:8-9, John 4:24). According to the Bible God is not just one Person, but the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, of the same substance and essence, one in will and purpose: in short, one in relational unity (John 1:1, 18, 17:20-23). Humans are made in the image of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; we have therefore been made in love by the God who is love and who is one in relational unity, and so we seek relational unity with God and with one another (1 John 4:8).

Once we have unlocked this core concept of who we are and why we are here, we can see how it is emphasized as primary in what God has accomplished in Jesus according to the New Testament. After explaining the great power of how God saved His people in Ephesians 2:1-10, Paul went on to explain how God worked to reconcile everyone to Himself through Jesus’ death, allowing all people to become one body in Jesus, as one household of God (Ephesians 2:11-22). Paul went as far as to say that such unity in the body is the eternal purpose which God realized in Jesus, displaying His manifold wisdom to the powers and principalities in the world which seek to divide and conquer mankind (Ephesians 3:10-11). In Ephesians 5:32-33 a “great mystery” involves the relationship between Christ and the church: it is to share in the same depth of intimacy as, or even greater than, enjoyed in the marriage relationship (cf. Genesis 2:28). In the final picture of what life will be like in the resurrection, John is given a vision of the people of God glorified, and God dwells in their midst (Revelation 21:1-22:6): the ultimate goal of life, therefore, is to share in God, and to dwell in His presence forever, in the midst of all of God’s people. The mature Christian will recognize that life cannot be about the gifts God gives more than the gift of God and His presence. Even though the fullness of the intimacy and power of this relationship awaits, God has called all of us to begin sharing in its blessings now. Jesus died and was raised again to prepare a place for us in the household of God; through His Spirit God will now dwell with those who love Him and keep the word of Jesus (John 14:1-3, 20-23; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 6:19-20, Ephesians 2:20-22, 1 Timothy 3:15). Christians are to become one with one another and with God as God is One within Himself (John 17:20-23): we are to participate in life together, and enjoy a taste of the beauty of relational unity which we will enjoy fully in the resurrection (1 Corinthians 12:12-28, Ephesians 4:1-16).

Thus God has made us in His image to share in relationship with Him and with one another; God is our heavenly Father, and has done all He can to love us, provide for us, instruct us, and redeem us (cf. Luke 15:11-32, Romans 8:31-39). This should become the predominant way in which we look at God and His purposes for mankind as revealed in Scripture. Yet to what end? God made Adam in the Garden of Eden to keep it and tend it (Genesis 2:15); man is to exercise dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:28). Everything we are and have are gifts from God, and He has given them to us so we may use them as stewards of His varied grace (1 Peter 4:10). We therefore live in relationship with God to use what He has given us for His purposes, to His glory, to serve Him and one another. Some have more gifts than others (e.g. Matthew 25:14-30); yet we all have our distinct purposes and abilities to work to build up one another and help grow the body of Christ and benefit all mankind (1 Corinthians 12:12-28, Ephesians 4:11-16). Our lives, therefore, are not our own: we cannot look at life as something over which we have mastery, using it to build ourselves up to the harm of others, but as a gift from God, to enjoy and share, and all His gifts as blessings with which we can bless others.

God offers true life in Jesus; in Him we live, move, and have our being, and in Him we can find rest, hope, comfort, strength, purpose, meaning, and full satisfaction. The Gospel of Christ remains compelling after all of these years, for in it we find answers to our deepest questions and a meaningful way forward in life. We are made in God’s image to share in life together, not in fear and insecurity to benefit some over others, but in love, joy, and confidence in God, sharing His gifts with one another to His praise and glory. May we put our trust in God in Christ and find true life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Who Are We? Why Are We Here? appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Understanding Covenant, IV: The New Testament Covenant

From days of old God has interacted with His people through the medium of covenants, agreements with mutual benefits and obligations. God made such covenants with Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, all Israel, and David. Yet all of these covenants were looking forward to the One who was to come and inaugurate a new covenant in His blood, Jesus of Nazareth.

As previously discussed, the Greek word for covenant is diatheke. It originally referred only to a testament or will; the translators of the Hebrew Bible essentially added a new definition to diatheke by using it to translate the Hebrew berit. The vast majority of the time diatheke is used it conveys the primary definition of berit, covenant, as in Hebrews 9:15:

And for this cause [Jesus] is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

God has thus established a new covenant in Jesus of Nazareth. This covenant proves revolutionary, for within it God shows no partiality: anyone can come to faith in Jesus and enjoy the benefits and shoulder the obligations of the covenant, not just the physical descendants of Abraham (Acts 10:34-35, Romans 4:1-25, 9:1-11:36). Thus the new covenant God has made in Jesus is with all mankind, and mediated by Jesus Himself, who is both fully man and fully God (1 Timothy 2:3-7). Within this covenant God has promised to reconcile to Himself those who would put their trust in Jesus: they receive forgiveness of sin, standing before God, fellowship with God and with His people, and all so that they can become more like God as made known in Jesus so as to share in eternal life with Him in the resurrection (John 17:20-23, Romans 5:1-11, 1 Corinthians 15:1-58, 1 John 1:1-4). In the new covenant humans are exhorted to become one with God and one with one another as God is One within Himself, to participate together in the work of God, turning aside from sin and becoming more like Jesus through repentance in love, humility, holiness, and righteousness (John 13:35, 17:20-23, Romans 8:29, Titus 2:11-14). The sign of the new covenant is baptism, immersion in water in Jesus’ name for the forgiveness of sins, the means by which one dies to sin, puts on Christ, and walks as a new, cleansed creature (Matthew 28:18-20, Romans 6:3-7, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 2:11-15, 1 Peter 3:21).

We can therefore see many parallels between the new covenant in Christ and the covenants which came before. Nevertheless, the new covenant in Jesus maintains its distinctiveness, and is superior, to what came before. All previous covenants looked forward to what God would accomplish in Jesus, and most find their fulfillment in Jesus and His Kingdom, as was predicted long before His birth (Jeremiah 31:31-34, Deuteronomy 18:15-19, Isaiah 2:1-4, Hosea 2:23; compare Hebrews 8:8-13, 1 Peter 2:10). The new covenant saw the inauguration of the reign of God in the Kingdom of Christ: a spiritual kingdom, one which transcends all nations, and not exclusively limited to one or a few (John 18:36, Ephesians 6:10-18). All are welcomed into the Kingdom of God in Christ, for in Christ all have equal standing before Him, no matter their gender, race, culture, or ethnicity (1 Timothy 2:4, Galatians 3:28). No covenant will replace what God has done in Jesus; it will endure forever (1 Corinthians 15:20-58). Until the He returns to judge the living and the dead, and death is finally defeated on the day of resurrection, Jesus continues to reign as Lord and Christ; God continues His eternal purpose He has purposed in Him in the church, the representation of God’s Kingdom on earth; all mankind is called to participate in God’s Kingdom in Christ if they would obtain eternal life in the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-28, Ephesians 3:10-21, Hebrews 13:8).

Thus the covenant between God and all mankind in Jesus Christ is the ultimate covenant, one for which we ought to praise God and give Him all glory and honor. As noted, Greek diatheke also has a meaning which goes beyond “covenant” to refer to testament or will. It seems to be used as such in Hebrews 9:16-18:

For where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him that made it. For a testament is of force where there hath been death: for it doth never avail while he that made it liveth. Wherefore even the first covenant hath not been dedicated without blood.

We understand the nature of a testament (or will): it represents the contractually authorized decree of the testator establishing the right of inheritance of his estate. As long as the person who made the will or testament lives, the promise might be alive, but the contractual obligations within it cannot be carried out. It is only when the testator dies that his or her heirs can inherit the testator’s estate. Such is why the attitude of the “prodigal” son is so shocking in Luke 15:11-13: he was essentially declaring that his father was dead to him!

All of us, like the “prodigal” son, have squandered our inheritance from God in the riotous living in the sin in which we participated, and found ourselves alienated from God (Ephesians 2:1-3). In Christ God has granted the ability to be adopted as sons, to become joint-heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with Him (Romans 8:12-18). In Christ God would provide us with every spiritual blessing (Ephesians 1:3); yet all of this required His death for it to be inaugurated in force. For this reason we celebrate the inauguration of the new covenant every Lord’s day in His Supper, a joint participation in Jesus’ body, grounding our life in Christ in His cross, celebrating the hope of life in His resurrection, and doing so together to reflect His body in the church (1 Corinthians 10:16-17, 11:17-34). Without Christ we are alienated from God and one another and have no hope in the world; in Christ we have a restored relationship with God and one another as His people and the hope of the resurrection of life. May we participate in the new covenant between God and all mankind in Jesus, and obtain its benefits and blessings!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Understanding Covenant, IV: The New Testament Covenant appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Day of YHWH’s Sacrifice

The people of Judah persisted in idolatry. Even though disaster had overtaken their Israelite brethren to the north, they imagined they would be spared on account of the Temple. Nevertheless, judgment was coming. Many prophets were sent to warn Judah about what would soon take place; one such prophet, often neglected, was Zephaniah the son of Cushi.

All we know about Zephaniah comes from the book that bears his name. He prophesied in the days of King Josiah (Zephaniah 1:1; 640-609 BCE); the portrayal of Assyria as relatively prosperous might suggest a message declared in the earlier days of Josiah (cf. Zephaniah 2:13-15). “Zephaniah” means “YHWH hides” in Hebrew. “Cushi” could simply be a first name, or it could denote a place of origin: a Cushite, from Cush, modern day Sudan in Egypt; the continuation of the lineage with Gedaliah, Amarah, and Hezekiah suggests the former is more likely than the latter. Some have suggested that the Hezekiah who is Zephaniah’s great-great-grandfather is King Hezekiah of Judah, but this is also unlikely. Zephaniah’s indictments portray a Judah still saturated in idolatry and immorality, in strong contrast with the general presentation of the faithfulness of Josiah (cf. 2 Kings 22:1-23:30): perhaps Zephaniah prophesied before Josiah’s reforms took hold in the land, or perhaps Josiah’s reforms went unheeded by many within the land.

Zephaniah focused on the imminent day of YHWH coming for Judah (Zephaniah 1:2-18). YHWH would consume everything: man and beast, birds and fish, the stumbling-block and the wicked, and man would be cut off from the face of the ground (Zephaniah 1:2-3). Such should not be taken to its extreme; it suggests a complete devastation of the land of the people of God on account of the idolatry they have committed, as Zephaniah would explain: YHWH would stretch out His hand against Judah and Jerusalem to remove Baal, the priests installed to serve the idolatrous images of YHWH (the real meaning of chemarim; cf. 2 Kings 23:5, Hosea 10:5), those who prostrated themselves before the host of heaven on their roofs, those who swore by Milcom (also known as Molech), those who had turned back from following YHWH, and those who did not seek YHWH or inquire of Him (Zephaniah 1:4-6). Many of the Judahites had become like all of the nations around them, serving all sorts of gods; even those who may not have served other gods, yet did not seek YHWH and His purposes, would share in the same condemnation.

Zephaniah then envisioned the upcoming Day of YHWH against Judah as the day of YHWH’s sacrifice (Zephaniah 1:7-11). All were summoned to hold their peace, for the Day of YHWH had come, and He was about to make His sacrifice, and His guests were consecrated (Zephaniah 1:7). YHWH’s sacrifice would be His people and land! Punishment would come to the authorities who had grown fat and rich and imbibed foreign customs (princes, king’s sons, those wearing foreign clothing; Zechariah 1:8). Punishment was also decreed for those who “leap over the threshold”; some suggest Zephaniah spoke of the service of Dagon among the Philistines (cf. 1 Samuel 5:5), but it seems out of place here; he most likely referred to those who would enter into the property of others to steal, filling the houses of their employers with violence and deceit (Zephaniah 1:9). The Day of YHWH would lead to great lamentation: the cry of lamentation would be heard throughout the city of Jerusalem, at the Fish Gate, in the Second Quarter, in the hills, at the Mortar (the meaning of maktesh), for many would have died, and the traders would have been cut off (understanding ‘am canaan here not as “Canaanites” but as traders, specifically Judahite traders; Zephaniah 1:10-11).

YHWH’s judgment would search out those who proved complacent, those convinced that YHWH would do neither good nor ill: their houses would be plundered and laid waste, and thus even if they would build a house, they would not live in it, and if they would plant vineyards, they would not drink wine from them (Zephaniah 1:12-13). Some Judahites therefore lived as if YHWH or His purposes had little do with their lives, and presumed that all would continue as it always had, and depended on it. They would soon learn the gravity of their error.

Zephaniah would then recapitulate and emphasize what had been decreed (Zephaniah 1:13-18). The Day of YHWH was near, and coming soon: a bitter day, a day of wrath, distress, anguish, devastation, gloom, clouds, thick darkness, the blast of trumpets, and war (Zephaniah 1:13-16). The people would suffer great distress and would go about as blind people, disoriented in darkness, for they had sinned against YHWH, and their blood would be poured out on the dust and their flesh made like refuse; all visceral imagery describing the folly of Judah and its horrific consequences (Zephaniah 1:17). They might believe their wealth could save them, but neither silver nor gold would deliver them from the day of YHWH’s wrath, for the earth would be consumed in the fire of His jealousy, and an end for its inhabitants is decreed (Zephaniah 1:18). We should not get distracted by a maximized interpretation of Zephaniah 1:18, for the Day of YHWH came against Judah and Jerusalem, and yet the earth remains. To the people of Judah and Jerusalem it would certainly have seemed like the entire earth was being destroyed; their judgment would be like that of Sodom and Gomorrah, and their end was nigh.

Zephaniah’s message was not pretty or likely appreciated, yet pointed and quite necessary. Zephaniah, as many other prophets before and after him, condemned the idolatry of the people and warned about the imminent judgment of God. Yet Zephaniah’s imagery is compelling: YHWH is about to make a sacrifice of His people, for they have transgressed and rebelled, and refuse to repent. Judgment is not just coming for the idolaters; those who have become wealthy and cosmopolitan at the expense of others and those who do not seek YHWH or His purposes, having become complacent in the status quo, would suffer just as terribly.

Within a generation the Day of YHWH had come for Judah, and all of Zephaniah’s frightful portrayals became reality. As Christians we do well to learn from the past experience of the people of God. Many today persist in idolatry in some form or another, giving the service due the Creator to some of the things He has made (cf. Romans 1:18-25); many others do not seek God or His purposes, and do not inquire of His will. Many prove complacent, living their lives as if there is no God, confident He will do neither good nor ill for them. All of these delusions can be sustained for a time until they no longer work. We do well to repent and seek God and His purposes in Christ, lest we experience wrath on the final Day of YHWH!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Day of YHWH’s Sacrifice appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Restoration Plea

Jesus of Nazareth is the way, the truth, and the life, the only way to the Father, and the anchor of the hope of the resurrection of life, according to those who saw Him in the flesh (John 14:6-9, 11:25). Ever since His resurrection and ascension God has called all men to put their trust in Jesus as Lord if they would obtain eternal life (Acts 16:33, 1 Timothy 2:4).

People today may seek to find the way of truth in Christ, but where? Hundreds of organizations and untold thousands of churches are spread around the world, and all teach and practice in different and contradictory ways. Most such groups will agree that the Bible is the Word of God, and the New Testament is authoritative for Christian faith and practice; nevertheless, many interpretations and conclusions have been drawn from the Scriptures, and some presume to maintain authority figures beyond what God has made known in the Bible. Is all of this what God really had in mind for the body of His Son Jesus Christ?

God would have those who follow Jesus become one with Him and one another as God is One in Himself (John 17:20-23). Most who profess Jesus recognize the importance of unity, yet most seem satisfied with the pretense of unity without any of its substance. Many would suggest that as long as we agree that Jesus is Lord, we are sufficiently united, and other doctrinal or practical matters are of lesser importance. Yet where has this been said by God anywhere?

The Apostle Paul spoke of the existence of one God, one faith, one Lord, one baptism, and one body, the church (Ephesians 4:4-6). At no point did Jesus, Paul, or anyone else in the New Testament suggest that the one body of Christ could be denominated; in fact, Paul condemned the denominational party factionalism in Corinth, dividing into groups based on Apollos, Cephas, Paul, and Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10-4:13). The body of Christ is substantively one; its members are one with God and one another as God is one in Himself (John 17:20-23).

How, then, can Christians find unity? We contend that Christians in the twenty-first century will find the ground of unity to be the same as the ground of unity which existed in the first century: in the faith which is in Jesus as Christ, made known by the Apostles and their associates in the Scriptures (Jude 1:3). Jesus of Nazareth, after all, lived, died, was raised from the dead, and ascended to the Father only once (Hebrews 9:24-26); the Apostles and fellow eyewitnesses saw these things, and no one else since has been able to (1 John 1:1-4). Thus, what could be meaningfully added to the witness of what God accomplished in Jesus beyond what the Apostles and their associates already have made known? In this way Jude can speak of “the faith” as having been “once for all delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3): Jesus has not changed, His authority has not been compromised, and what has been made known about Him and His Kingdom is sufficient for all Christians for all time (Ephesians 3:10-11, 2 Timothy 3:14-17, Hebrews 13:8).

For this reason, therefore, we make the plea to restore the ancient faith proclaimed by the Apostles and their associates. The need for restoration should not surprise us. The people of God throughout time have manifested a terrible tendency to conform to the nations around them and not according to the purposes of God. Israel in the flesh followed the idolatry and innovations of the nations, and despite the prophetic plea to return to the ways of the Torah, most persisted in their rebellion and were condemned (cf. Jeremiah 6:16). Paul warned about the pervasive influence of those who would teach falsely, and events would prove him sadly accurate (1 Timothy 4:1). The Gospel of Christ would be continually watered down by conformity to the ways of the nations until the churches of “Christendom” would become agents of the state. Traditions would accrue which were not grounded in the apostolic faith but in the innovations of men, however well intended or sincere they might have been. Throughout the past 1700 years many have seen the need to move away from the innovations of men and return to the apostolic faith, critiquing the depravity of compromised churches and summoning people back to the faith as manifest in the New Testament. Many reforms were made; unfortunately, many innovations and traditions persevered.

Shall we therefore find the faith which God has established in Jesus through the organizations and institutions formed and shaped in these cauldrons of compromise? Shall we seek communion with the Bishop of Rome? We have seen the corruption of his rule and organization, and the depredations of the church in the medieval era; such did not glorify Jesus. Shall we find it in the maze of denominations which have arisen since the sixteenth century? They have simply brought more division, not unity. Should we just try to act as if God has “baptized” the tempestuous history of the past 1700 years and act as if any church is as good as another as long as they confess Jesus as Lord? Israel’s history was never thus justified or commended, and so why would we expect God to be honored by persistent contentiousness, factionalism, sectarianism, and division? No! The ground of unity for Christians is in the Spirit of God, not in any earthly organization (Ephesians 2:17-22, 4:3). And how can we find unity in the Spirit of God if that unity has nothing at all to do with what He has made known about the faith in Christ Jesus (John 14:26)?

God is faithful; He has always preserved a remnant of His people. In the darkest days of Israelite idolatry, a remnant was found faithful (1 Kings 19:18). After devastation and exile, a remnant of Israel returned (Isaiah 37:32). Likewise, we maintain the conviction that a faithful remnant has always persevered in Christ, seeking to practice the primitive faith laid down by the Apostles and their associates. Their voices are faint, drowned out by their often victorious persecutors; their testimony can still be heard, and they lived and died to glorify God according to His purposes in Jesus. They sought to be one with God and with one another as God is One within Himself (John 17:20-23).

We can also be part of that faithful remnant, those who seek to serve God as revealed in Jesus according to what the Apostles and their associates have said about Him and His Kingdom in the Scriptures. We can seek to faithfully serve the Lord Jesus as part of His church, the temple of the Holy Spirit, according to what the Spirit has made known about the Lord (cf. Ephesians 2:11-22). We can continually strive to restore the truth of God in Christ in Scripture, clearing away the innovations and traditions of men which hinder the apostolic faith, individually and collectively seeking to conform ever more closely to Jesus the Lord (Romans 8:29). May we take up the restoration plea, seek the Lord Jesus as He has made Himself known in Scripture, and through Him obtain the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Restoration Plea appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

A Famine of the Word of YHWH

YHWH had persistently encouraged Israel to repent of their idolatry, their oppression of the poor, and their faithlessness toward Him through Amos of Tekoa (Amos 1:1-8:3). Israel believed they were entering a new golden age; they were actually enjoying a last moment of glory before their end would come. YHWH would now bring to an end His word to Israel through Amos: imminent judgment for the rebellious, a famine of His Word, and yet hope for restoration in the future (Amos 8:4-9:15).

Judgment and disaster were again foretold for those who committed oppression and injustice in the land: those who swallow the needy, bring failure to the poor of the land, yearning for the new moon and Sabbath observances to end so as to be able to yet again use corrupt weights, cheating the poor, giving them stalks as opposed to the real wheat (Amos 8:4-6). Amos has indicted the wealthy for their oppression of the poor man times before (Amos 2:6-7, 4:1, 5:7-17); this time he seemed to focus on the merchant class and their exploitation of the disadvantaged through false weights and inferior foodstuff, abominations in the sight of YHWH (Leviticus 19:36, Deuteronomy 25:13-16). We should not imagine that anyone would really be so bold as to think or say such things, but the rhetorical force of the message remains compelling, for whatever the merchants intended, such was the functional result. YHWH would remember these works, and the land would tremble on account of them: Amos compares the land to the Euphrates River or the Nile in its flood and the “River of Egypt,” either the Nile, in which case the comparison is precisely parallel with the Euphrates or redundant, or the wadi on the border between Egypt and Philistia called the “River of Egypt,” which would flood during the rains and then fully dry out; the latter is likely in view, and well describes the tumult the land would experience (Amos 8:8). In apocalyptic language Amos described the day which would come: the sun would go down at noon, the land would be enveloped in darkness, and all Israel’s feasts would be turned into mourning (Amos 8:9-10). The merchants might not think much of their extortion and deceit, but YHWH took it very seriously, and would rise up in judgment against them.

Amos then warned about a famine which would come into the land: not a famine of food or drink, but a famine of the Word of YHWH (Amos 8:11). The people would travel across the land to hear the word of YHWH, but would not find it (Amos 8:12-13). Those who called upon the idolatrous golden calves would fall and never rise again (Amos 8:14). Israel had come to depend on the prophetic message of God to know what to do; they would find themselves like Saul, unable to hear from YHWH, and their doom would be sealed (cf. 1 Samuel 28:1-25).

Amos was then granted another vision: he saw the Lord beside the altar (ostensibly in Bethel; Amos 7:10ff), who commanded for its capitals to be struck so that its thresholds would shake, and the temple would fall on those within it, and none would escape (Amos 9:1). God would pull them up from Sheol and down from heaven; if they climb Carmel, the highest mountain, or go down into the depths of the sea, YHWH would find them and seize them: if they were taken captive, the sword would come for them, for YHWH’s eyes would be upon them for evil and not for good (Amos 9:2-4). Amos again spoke of YHWH causing the land to rise and fall as the (Nile? Euphrates?) River, and the River of Egypt; He has made the heavens and its chambers; He caused the waters of the ocean to rise and rain on the land; YHWH is His name (Amos 9:5-6). Tempest and judgment were coming; none would be spared.

Israel had prided itself on its election as the people of YHWH, Creator of heaven and earth. And yet YHWH asked them: are they not as the Cushites to Him? YHWH brought Israel out of Egypt; did He not also bring the Philistines out of Caphtor (= Greece), or the Arameans from Kir (Amos 9:7)? YHWH saw Israel as a sinful kingdom, and it would be judged; yet God would not make a full end of the house of Jacob (Amos 9:8). Truly Israel would be sifted like grain in a sieve among the nations, and all the sinful people who believed themselves safe and secure from disaster would die (Amos 9:9-10). Israel’s election did not justify their transgressions; all the nations were in YHWH’s hands, and He would not preserve the sinful and unjust.

And yet Amos extended a glimmer of hope for Israel; YHWH would not make a full end of Jacob. In that day, in a later time, YHWH would raise up the tent of David which would have fallen and would rebuild it to possess the remnant of Edom and those called by YHWH’s name (Amos 9:11-12). In the days of John Hyrcanus the Edomites would be compelled to serve the God of Israel and become as Israelites, although as Idumeans they would be seen as half-breeds by the Jews (cf. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 13.9.1). In the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible, “Edom” is rendered “men” (edom vs. adam, with the same consonantal spelling); on this basis James the brother of the Lord understood how God had raised the House of David up again in Jesus, and called all the Gentiles to Him in Christ (Acts 15:13-19).

Amos’ prophecies ended on a hopeful note: YHWH would bring back Israel out of its captivity, and they would rebuild their cities, vineyards, orchards, and fields, enjoy prosperous harvests, and would remain planted in their land (Amos 9:13-15). This prosperity would prove elusive for Israel according to the flesh, but found abundantly in the spiritual riches with which God has blessed spiritual Israel in Christ (Ephesians 1:3).

And so Amos proved faithful; he proclaimed the message of YHWH to Israel. History would abundantly vindicate Amos: within a generation the Kingdom of Israel would be decimated, and then fully destroyed, by the Assyrians (2 Kings 15:27-31, 17:1-23). Its people would be dead or exiled; few would ever return. YHWH is a God faithful to His covenant, both in terms of its blessings, but also in upholding the consequences of persistent rebellion. Yes, God has now raised up the tent of David again in Jesus of Nazareth, who reigns for the rest of the age as the Risen Lord (Acts 2:36); God is faithful to His covenant in Christ, and will redeem those who trust in Jesus, but wrath is stored up for those who do not know Him or obey His Gospel (2 Thessalonians 1:6-9). May we soberly consider the example of Israel in the days of Amos, and not fall by the same pattern of disobedience, but in humility seek justice and righteousness in the ways of Jesus of Nazareth and obtain the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post A Famine of the Word of YHWH appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Salvation: Now and Not Yet

If there is one thing which everyone knows about the message of Jesus of Nazareth, it’s that “Jesus saves.” Yet, tragically, the nature of salvation in Jesus Christ is often a matter of bitter disputation.

There are many who emphasize salvation as a present reality: a person can be saved now in Christ. Such people place great emphasis on what is called “initial” salvation, the point of conversion from the world to being in Christ through faith: God accomplished the work necessary to secure this salvation long ago, and many who emphasize the “now” of salvation are easily induced into suggesting that it will endure no matter what a person may or may not do in the future. Those who emphasize the “now” of salvation point to John 3:16, Romans 5:6-11, 8:31-39, and Ephesians 2:1-10, among other passages.

There are others who emphasize salvation as a future promise: a person is not fully saved until after this life has ended and the resurrection of life has been obtained. Such people place great emphasis on what is called “final” salvation, the fullness of all what God promises to believers in Christ: to overcome sin and death in an incorruptible and immortal resurrection body, dwelling in the presence of God without hindrance or veil, no longer enduring pain or suffering. Many who emphasize the “not yet” of salvation are easily induced into questioning the ability for a present believer to have much confidence in their present salvation since it cannot be fully known what he or she will do in the future. Those who emphasize the “not yet” of salvation point to Matthew 10:22, Romans 8:18-25, 1 Corinthians 9:24-28, and Philippians 3:8-15, among other passages.

For generations those who emphasize the “now” of salvation have argued and disputed with those who emphasize the “not yet” of salvation; such arguments endure to this day. Many Christians end up feeling very confused by such argumentation, and for good reason. In the New Testament salvation is not a matter of “now” or “not yet,” but is both “now” and “not yet”! “Initial” and “final” aspects of salvation are not at odds with one another; the Apostles and associates hold them both as true in the tension of life in the world in the light of the resurrection of Jesus.

Christians can see the interplay between “initial” and “final” salvation in a passage like 1 Peter 1:3-9. Peter blessed God because He had already begotten Christians to a living hope in Christ; Christians have an imperishable, undefiled, and unfading inheritance guarded for them through faith (1 Peter 1:3-5). These promises speak to a current relationship and form of standing before God: initial salvation, salvation in the here and now. Yet Peter expected the inheritance to be obtained when salvation is “revealed in the last time”; the outcome of their tested faith is the salvation of their souls (1 Peter 1:5-9). And so the promises speak to something which awaits the Christian: final salvation, salvation not yet fully obtained. Peter did not seem to note any irony or internal contradiction in his encouragement to the Christians of Asia Minor.

Many Christians find this kind of tension uncomfortable. Why has God left us in this awkward transitory space, in the “now” but “not yet”? We understand the impetus of the question, yet it is vanity, a striving after wind: we cannot know the ways of the Almighty. Nevertheless, we can at least perceive that yes, we are in this transitory space according to what God has made known in Jesus. We can maintain confidence in God, for if He was willing to give of His Son to secure our salvation now, He will most assuredly bring to pass all that is necessary to bring salvation to a complete end.

We do well to understand salvation in relational terms. God is one in perichoretic relational unity: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are “in” each other, yet remain distinct persons (cf. John 17:20-23). Jesus prayed for believers to become one with God and one with each other as God is One within Himself (John 17:20-23). Yet humanity has become separated from God and alienated from one another on account of sin and its consequences (Isaiah 59:2, Ephesians 2:11-12). If left on our own, we humans could never atone for the sins we have committed: our good deeds cannot outweigh the guilt we bear for transgressing God’s commands, and we would be justly condemned (Romans 3:23, 6:22-23, James 2:9-11). In His great love, grace, and mercy, God sent His Son to become the propitiation of our sins, to show us the way of life and truth, and to obtain cleansing from sin and reconciliation in our relationship with God through faith in Him (John 14:6-11, Romans 3:24-38, 5:6-11, 8:1-7). Once we have died to our life of sin in baptism, we have new spiritual life, raised up spiritually to walk with Jesus (Romans 6:3-7, 8:10). We have become part of the household of God, and participate in the Body of Christ; we can call upon God as our Father; our relationship with God is restored (Romans 8:15-16, Ephesians 2:18-22, 4:1-16).

We confess that Jesus is Lord and serve Him in His Kingdom and recognize His death and resurrection as a transitional moment of new life (2 Corinthians 5:17, Colossians 1:13, 2:6-9). Yet this new life broke into the old world which is still subject to corruption, decay, and death. Jesus gained the victory over sin and death in His resurrection, yet His enemies, sin, death, and the powers and principalities still exist, and have not been fully conquered (1 Corinthians 15:25-26). Our salvation, therefore, is very much like ourselves once we have become Christians: a new creation of the Kingdom striving to grow and expand in an old, decayed world, until the contest is over and the victory is won. Today we live by faith and hope that what God began in Christ will be glorified in our lives and brought to its successful completion soon (2 Corinthians 4:7-18).

Indeed, what is gained by faith must be maintained in faith: if we turn away from our trust in Christ before the end comes, we have lost our ground of standing before Him and will suffer same condemnation as the world which we have chosen (Hebrews 10:26-31, 2 Peter 2:20-22). While we cannot know what will be, however, we can maintain confidence that God will do everything He can to save us and to continue to commit our lives to Him in faith (Romans 8:31-39). If we strive to be one with God and with the people of God as God is One in Himself now, we will enjoy the fullness of relational unity with God and His people for eternity. May we take hold of salvation in Christ now and maintain our faith in Him so as to obtain the fullness of salvation when He appears in glory on the day of resurrection!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Salvation: Now and Not Yet appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Understanding Covenant, III: Jesus, the Old, and the New

For our benefit and protection God has interacted with mankind through covenants. Covenants represent agreements between two parties with mutual benefits and obligations; for various reasons God inaugurated many covenants with mankind revealed to us in the Old Testament.

And yet, within those covenants, God extended hope and promises regarding One who was to come. This One would be the Seed of Abraham, through whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 22:18). He would be the prophet like Moses to whom Israel ought to listen (Deuteronomy 18:18-19). He would sit on the throne of His father David, and of His Kingdom there would be no end (2 Samuel 7:13-16). Furthermore, the prophet Jeremiah extended hope to Israel and Judah for a new covenant, superior to the one YHWH had made with Israel at Sinai (Jeremiah 31:31-35).

At His birth, Jesus of Nazareth was proclaimed to be this Christ, the descendant of David, the hope of Israel, and in whom the Gentiles would trust (Luke 1:5-2:38). Despite many attempts to de-Judaize Jesus over the past few centuries, the Scriptures unabashedly confess Him as a Palestinian Jewish male in the latter days of the Second Temple, a descendant of David, Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham according to the flesh (Matthew 1:1-18). Jesus’ ministry in life was centered upon His fellow Israelites (Matthew 15:21-28): interactions with God-fearers among the nations feature prominently in the Gospel narratives, but most likely because of their infrequency.

Jesus set forth His relationship and standing relative to the Law of Moses, the Torah, the covenant obligations of Israel, in Matthew 5:17-18. He affirmed their continuing force and relevance, and even indicted the Pharisees and scribes for how they relaxed certain commandments (Matthew 5:17-20). According to Jesus, the creation itself would be overthrown before a single jot or tittle (or, as we would say, a dot of the “i” or crossing of the “t”) of the Law would pass away, until all is fulfilled. Many have misunderstood this statement to be an affirmation of the continuing power of the Law, for they have missed the power of the limiting temporal statement at the end: until all things are accomplished (Matthew 5:18). Jesus affirms the continuing power of Torah until all things are accomplished; therefore, Jesus lived and died under the Torah, the Law of Moses, the covenant between God and Israel established at Sinai.

What are the things which needed to be accomplished? Righteousness needed to be fulfilled. Jesus would live without sin, and die for sin; then all things would be accomplished (John 19:30, Hebrews 4:15, 5:7-8). Jesus would embody the story of Israel: born as a child of Jacob in Canaan, exiled to Egypt, tempted in the Wilderness, ministered in the land of Israel, died in exile, allowing the story of Israel to reach its climax and culmination in Jesus’ return in His resurrection. As God in the flesh who lived fully according to the Law, Jesus could bring Torah and Temple together in Himself, to which He indirectly alludes in John 2:13-22, 14:6-12. Therefore, all of the promises YHWH made, and the hope of Israel, were manifest and fulfilled in the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, or reaffirmed as part of the confidence in hope of His eventual return (Luke 24:44).

Meanwhile, another purpose of Jesus’ life and ministry featured the proclamation of the “Gospel of the Kingdom”: the good news of the imminent reign of God (Matthew 4:17, 23). If there is a founding charter of this Kingdom, it would be Jesus’ proclamation in Matthew 5:3-7:29, the “Sermon on the Mount,” in which the basic demands of the Law and the higher way of the Kingdom are often strongly contrasted. This Kingdom would not feature cosmetic window dressing alterations to the existing status quo: it is a new garment, a new wineskin, leading to a new covenant (Matthew 9:14-17). Jesus would empower His disciples during His life to go out and proclaim the good news of the coming reign of God (Matthew 10:1-42). This reign of God would be manifest after Jesus ascended to the Father after His resurrection and He was given an eternal dominion which would never end, and reign with all authority over heaven and earth as their King and Lord (Daniel 7:13-14, Matthew 28:18-20). His disciples were made into Apostles by their commission to go and proclaim this reign of God in Jesus the Christ beginning on the day of Pentecost in the year 30 of our era (Acts 1:1-2:36).

It would be tempting to mark off the day of Pentecost as the firm date on which the old covenant between God and Israel was brought to its full conclusion in the reign of God in Jesus and the first day of the new covenant. Many do, and for a host of reasons draw out inferences about covenant doctrines, suggesting that whatever was proclaimed before Acts 2:1 belongs to the old covenant between God and Israel and has no more or less direct relevance to Christian faith and practice than anything in the Law or the Prophets, or suggesting that the old covenant ended immediately and fully on that day.

And yet what God has made known about Jesus and the proclamation of the Kingdom in the first forty years after Jesus’ ascension does not sit well with such simple, clear-cut distinctions. To the Pharisees looking for when the reign of God would be manifest, Jesus declared that it was in their midst (Luke 17:20-21). Throughout His life and ministry Jesus exercised authority over the spiritual forces of evil and was able to remit sin, and drew the appropriate conclusion for the Israelites: the reign of God had come upon them (Matthew 12:25-32, Mark 1:39, 2:1-12). At no point do we hear of major alterations in the proclamation of the good news of the reign of God between what Jesus proclaimed in His life and what the Apostles would proclaim after His death and resurrection: the Apostles would add to what had already been proclaimed what God had done through Jesus in the meantime (Luke 24:44-49, Acts 2:14-36). At many points in His teaching Jesus freely went beyond the Law or proved willing to specifically contradict it: the expectations of Matthew 5:21-58 go beyond what the Law required (including matters of divorce, in which the contrast is made explicit in Matthew 19:3-9), and in one stroke Jesus declared all foods clean in Mark 7:14-19, envisioning the elimination of the dietary restrictions mandated by the Law. In many such instances what Jesus proclaimed would be closely repeated by the Apostles and their associates later on (e.g. Romans 12:17-21, 14:14, 1 Timothy 4:1-4, James 5:12). In terms of marriage and divorce Paul would carefully distinguish between what was said explicitly by the Lord Jesus from what he as an Apostle was now setting forth in expansion, underscoring the relevance of Jesus’ instruction to His later followers (1 Corinthians 7:10-16). Thus the power of God was present in Jesus during His life and ministry, and His proclamation of the good news of the reign of God and all it would entail would become the founding charter of the new covenant between God and all mankind in Jesus, even if it happened to be originally proclaimed while the Law of Moses remained in force.

After the day of Pentecost the good news of the reign of God in Jesus the Christ went out into all the world, first to Israel, then to all people (Acts 2:1-28:20). Paul could say the message went out to the whole world by the time he wrote to the Colossians around 60 (Colossians 1:6). Yet many Jewish Christians remained zealous for the Law of Moses throughout the first forty years of the new covenant in Christ (Acts 21:17-26). Their zeal would inspire some of them to bind the Law on Gentile Christians, for which they were condemned (Galatians 1:6-5:15); yet they were not condemned for their own zeal for the Law. As long as the Temple stood, and Torah could be followed, the covenant between God and Israel was only becoming obsolete. Then, forty years after Jesus’ death and resurrection, He was vindicated as the Son of Man, and all He prophesied upon Judah and Jerusalem came to pass (Matthew 24:1-36, Luke 17:22-37). Israel according to the flesh was no longer in possession of the land; they did not have a place to offer sacrifice according to the Law; they did not have an operational priesthood to intercede before God for the people. As it had been foretold to Daniel, the land of Israel and its people had its seventy “weeks”, including the coming of the Messiah, but ending after a final “week” (Daniel 9:24-27).

Jesus of Nazareth represents the ultimate transitional figure in terms of God’s covenants with mankind: in Him the hope and promises of the old are fulfilled and satisfied, and in Him the new covenant is inaugurated. God’s reign is manifest in Jesus during His life; the covenant between God and Israel was only rendered finally obsolete when the message of the good news of Jesus’ reign had been proclaimed throughout the known world and Israel had a chance to repent. May we put our trust in Jesus as Lord and obtain the resurrection of life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Understanding Covenant, III: Jesus, the Old, and the New appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

New Testament Christianity

Many times we speak of “New Testament Christianity” or hear others speak of it. What is “New Testament Christianity?” Of what value is it? How could it be misunderstood?

Many who speak of “New Testament Christianity” refer to the desire to follow Jesus of Nazareth as Lord according to the testimony about Him and His Kingdom enshrined in the pages of the New Testament. In truth, “New Testament Christianity” ought to be redundant; the New Testament is to be the standard of faith and practice for Christians (2 Timothy 3:15-17, Jude 1:3). The term has only become necessary on account of the development of other forms of Christianity over the years: Catholic Christianity, Orthodox Christianity, Protestant Christianity, Evangelical Christianity, etc. New Testament Christianity involves the desire to practice simple Christianity, grounded in what God accomplished in Jesus, looking to the witness of the Apostles for guidance and direction in serving Christ as Lord (Romans 1:16, 1 John 1:1-4, 2:3-6).

Christians do well to remain firmly committed to grounding their faith and practice in the New Testament. What Paul warned has come to pass: many have been led astray by the doctrines of demons and have introduced all sorts of teachings and practices which did not originate in the witness of the Apostles (1 Timothy 4:1). Some introduced beliefs and practices from the covenant between God and Israel: while the Old Testament is profitable for our learning, and Christians are to maintain continuity with Israel of old as the people of God, the Apostles and their associates recognized the fulfillment of God’s purposes for Israel in Christ and insisted on a distinction between the covenants (Romans 15:3, 1 Corinthians 10:1-13, Galatians 1:1-5:15, Colossians 2:14-17, 2 Timothy 3:14-17, Hebrews 7:1-9:28). Others have introduced beliefs and practices from the pagan and/or secular world, seeking compromise between what God made known in Jesus and the prevailing cultural paradigm of the day. Paul warned about falling prey to deceptive claims of the philosophy of the world, no longer remaining rooted in Christ (Colossians 2:1-9); whereas all cultures have certain commendable commitments, Christians must always be on guard lest their faith conform to the ways of this world, and no longer transformed in Christ (Romans 12:1-2). Throughout all of these trends the New Testament has remained the constant witness of what God accomplished in Jesus and in His Kingdom, and the standard by which the Christian can test all the spirits, doctrines, and practices, to see whether they are of God or not (1 John 4:1).

Therefore, New Testament Christianity maintains great value, even in the twenty-first century: Jesus is still Lord; God still has His eternal purpose in Jesus which He is accomplishing in the church, the body of Christ; the means by which people can be redeemed from the world and transformed to conform to the ways of Jesus remain unaltered; God still cares for His creation and actively seeks for all to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (Ephesians 3:10-21, 1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). God’s work continues on in Christ, but the standard by which we come to know about Jesus also has not changed. All that was necessary to trust in Jesus and follow His purposes in His Kingdom was made known by the Apostles and their associates (Jude 1:3). We thus can practice New Testament Christianity to this day.

New Testament Christianity might easily be misunderstood as an uncritical or fundamentalist obsession with the New Testament, and disparaged as vaunting a mythic past. The goal of New Testament Christianity is not to recreate the first century world, acting as if everything were perfect while Apostles still lived, nor is it to enshrine a particular cultural expression of Christianity as superior to all others. The New Testament is full of examples which should not be followed: dividing into factions based on cults of personality, taking Christians to court over trivial matters, incest, and denial of the resurrection of the dead, and that is just discussing some of the issues among the Christians in Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:1-15:58)! In that Corinthian correspondence Paul explained how events described in the Old Testament relating to Israel were written for our instruction and warning (1 Corinthians 10:1-13), and so it is for us with these events, ideas, and practices in the New Testament. It is therefore not enough for a belief or practice to be found in the New Testament: Christians are to believe and do that which the Apostles and their associates commended, and be on guard against all which they warned about or condemned.

Likewise, New Testament Christianity does not demand a return to wearing togas and speaking Koine Greek. The New Testament is itself a model of how God worked to communicate to people regarding what He accomplished in Jesus in their language, in their culture, so they could understand (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:18-23). The Lord Jesus made it known to Simon Peter how God would accept anyone from any nation who would trust in Him (Acts 10:1-48): Christians do not cease being “from the nations” in order to serve Jesus, but are called to serve Jesus faithfully in their specific nation, place, and time (1 Peter 1:13-19, 2:3-9, Revelation 7:9-10). All Christians, therefore, must set themselves to the task of applying the faith and practice made known in the New Testament to their specific context: we have seen in Jesus the way of life and truth, and we must discern how to most effectively embody the life and message of Jesus in our time and place (Matthew 5:13-16, Romans 8:29). We must cling to what is good and abhor what is evil (Romans 12:9); whatever is commendable and good in any time and place is only so because it conforms to what is good according to Jesus, and we perceive that from what has been made known about Him in the New Testament (John 14:6-9).

Christians from all across the world and time may not look exactly the same; the challenges they face and the points of agreement with their cultures may vary; yet they all may still practice New Testament Christianity. In a world full of questions, doubt, and insecurity, we can maintain great confidence in the witness regarding what God has accomplished in Jesus in the New Testament, and ground our faith and trust in God in Christ on that witness. May we seek God in Christ as revealed in the New Testament so that we may obtain the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post New Testament Christianity appeared first on de Verbo vitae.