Forgiving Others
“For if you should forgive people their offenses, your heavenly father will also forgive you. But if you should not forgive people, neither will your father forgive you your offenses.”
(Matthew 6:14-15)
While the language of this passage is fairly clear and explicit, conveying what Jesus wants us to understand, there are some things about this passage that we need to highlight so that we will understand the intensity of this statement. Jesus is not making this statement simply to add clarity to the petition for forgiveness found in verse 12, but he is saying this in such a way as to add teeth to the petition—to drive it home as a carpenter hammers in a nail. This statement is meant to make us feel uncomfortable and if we simply gloss over it lightly, we are not doing justice to the text.
The first thing that we should note is that most English translations do well when they translate the word for offense differently than they do verse 12. Most will translate verse 12 as “forgive us our debits” and verse 14 and 15 as “trespasses.” When we looked at the body of the Lord’s Prayer, we discussed how some groups have gone back to use the term “trespass” in the actual body of the Lord’s prayer when they recite it. Though this conveys a very similar idea, translating both verses in the same way causes these two verses to loose some of their punch.
In Greek, there are two separate words at work. The word found in verse 12 is the word ojfei÷lhma (opheilama), which literally refers to a financial debit that is owed to another. This, we discussed in terms of our sin debit that is owed to God—something that we could never hope to pay and that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross was a payment for the debit that his people owe to God.
Yet, in these verses, Jesus alternates to the term para¿ptwma (paraptoma), which is used to refer to wrongdoing or sin. As you would read through these verses that follow the Lord’s Prayer, you should be expecting that the word ojfei÷lhma (opheilama) would be used, and there is a shift to para¿ptwma (paraptoma). This would have caught his original hearers off guard, just as it should catch us off guard when we see the word change from “debit” to “trespass.” When you read that, a flag should go up, and you should immediately be asking yourself, “why is there a change in language here?” That forces you to stop and allow these two verse to sink into your heart.
Secondly, there is a parallel structure to these two verses. Essentially, both verses say the same thing, but they do so in two different ways and from two perspectives (one positive and one negative. The language of “offenses” acts as outer bookends or parenthesis to Jesus’ statement. This kind of thing is very common within the Hebrew psalms and other poetic literature, and is used specifically for emphasis. And indeed, that is exactly what Jesus is doing—emphasizing this incredibly important doctrine of forgiveness.
This may seem incredibly technical to be discussing when dealing with verses like this, but when you start to get the handle on what Jesus is doing by structuring his statement in this way, you can begin to appreciate how much it should stand out as being important to deal with as we struggle to grow in our faith. God gives many wonderful blessings to his people, people who have been forgiven more than we can begin to imagine—but at the same time, he expects us to forgive others their sins toward us. Loved ones, how is it that we who have been forgiven so much neglect to forgive others the petty things that they offend us with?
The Apostles’ Creed
I Believe: The Creed begins with an affirmation of belief. It is important to make note of this and be reminded of what it means to “believe” something. Belief in these truths does not necessarily imply saving faith, James reminds us that even the demons believe, yet the demons remain in their rebellion. Yet, belief does imply an understanding of a body of information and at least some level of intellectual assent to the truth claims of that information. It is impossible for you to “believe” something that you intellectually cannot assent to. For example, were I to tell you that you were really invisible, yet you could see yourself and others seemed to be acting as if they could see you, you would think that I was severely mistaken if not deluded.
In addition, belief requires that there be some body of information upon which that belief is based. Just as one cannot intellectually assent to things that you know not to be true, one also cannot intellectually assent to things that one knows nothing about. Assuming the premise that I know no Chinese (which is a true premise), were someone to hand me a philosophical statement written in Chinese and to ask me if I could assent to it as true, I could not do so. Does that make the statement untrue? Certainly not. Yet, unless I first can read and understand Chinese, or a good translation is provided in English for me to read, I have no information upon which to base a belief. Thus, to believe, requires both a content of knowledge upon which those beliefs are based and an intellectual assent to the truth-claims of those beliefs.
Thirdly, belief also requires a volitional act. Before one intellectually assents to a given truth claim, certain decisions and evaluations have been made. Does this information seem reasonable? Is it consistent with other truth claims that are held? Will my assent to this truth claim mean that I must abandon other truth claims that I have assented to previously? All these questions must be addressed as the intellect decides to accept or reject what has been presented. One of the great problems with the post-modern mindset is that it encourages the abandonment of this aspect of belief. Post-modern thought affirms that information must be had to have a belief and it affirms that belief requires an intellectual assent to truth claims of that information, yet it rejects the idea that one must evaluate the claims that one is assenting to and it rejects that such an evaluation must take place in the presence of all other truth claims that one has assented to previously. Thus, the post-modern mind regularly affirms multiple truth claims that are mutually exclusive and that contradict one another, creating schizophrenic behavior as one lives out life in various contexts, each with its own set of compartmentalized truth claims and beliefs. The Christian world-view is not this way, but seeks to holistically unite all aspects of the Christian’s life under a consistent and united set of truth claims—truth claims that have been given within God’s word.
I believe in God: Following the statement about belief, the creed lists a series of truth claims that are assumed and that are expected to be understood by the believer. These are ideas the creed assumes that the believer has intentionally thought through and has intellectually assented to. The first of these is the belief in God. To begin with, the Christian is a theist, he cannot be considered an atheist. One of the false accusations that was made of the early Christian church is that they rejected theism. While it is true that the Christians rejected the polytheism of the Romans, it was equally true that the Christians did not reject theism altogether. Instead, Christians are fiercely monotheistic, recognizing the fullness of the Three-in-One, Trinitarian, God of the Jews—the one and only true God, and this creed affirms just that idea. We believe in God. Though the persons and attributes of this God have not yet been explicated at this point in the creed, there are some implications that we can draw from the statement.
If we believe in God, we must have some information about this God in which we are placing our belief. So, where does this information come from? Some comes from the natural world, but the bulk of the information we base our belief in God upon comes from scripture. That very fact, though, implies something very important for the Christian that is sometimes lost in the debates over the veracity and inspiration of the Bible. If you are going to claim the Bible as the factual basis upon which you intellectually assent to a belief in God, by definition, you must then assent to understanding God in the way that the Bible understands him. The problem with many liberal theologians today is that they want to hold to a “knowledge” of God, but the character of the God that they are assenting to is contrary to the character of God that is presented in the source upon which they are claiming to base their assent! This kind of scholarship ends up in absurdity, for the basis upon which the scholar is assenting to information of God has nothing to do with the way the Bible presents that information and everything to do with the preferences of the particular scholar. When this is done, it is no longer the Christian God that is being assented to, but a humanistic substitute that can no longer be called Christian or God at all.
Also, if we are stating our belief in God, knowing that the basis of our belief is found in the presentation of that God in scripture, it would seem to imply that we are acknowledging at least some level of submission to his authority and to the authority of scripture. The scripture is clear that there is one God only and that God will share his role and reign with no one. The scriptures present God as being king and ruler over all of his creation, and if we are going to affirm that position as true, doesn’t that imply some degree of responsibility toward him on our part? Thus, in affirming that God is God, we are also affirming that we are not God and that we are set in submission to God who is greater than we are. This too, is part of what it means to be “Christian.”
The Father Almighty: Two affirmations are being made within this clause. First, it speaks of the “Fatherhood” of God. This can be understood both in terms of his relationship to the second member of the Trinity, God the Son, Jesus Christ, and it can be understood in terms of God’s adoption of believers into his household, making himself our divine Father. Thus, the Christian, in affirming this creed, is affirming the Father-child relationship and his or her submission to God as “child.”
The second affirmation that is made is that of God’s almighty power. There is not anything in the heavens or in the earth or below the earth that can rival God. There is nothing in the seas or that is in the air that can stand before God and claim power and might. God is infinitely more almighty than his creation and he will not permit a rival. Yet, when this is applied to the believer, it takes on a whole new level of meaning. If God is almighty and you are a child of God, in submission to his Godhead and rule, then you also understand that you are not mightier than God and are not in a position to tell him what he must or must not do. All too often Christians fall into the trap of trying to tell God what he got right and what he got wrong about the way he did this or that. Just as God is God and we are not, the Christian affirms that it is God who is almighty over the Christian’s life, not the Christian. Paul reminds the Roman church of this great truth when he quotes from the prophet Isaiah and asks, “who has been his counselor?” God is almighty and we are not. Yet do not miss the connection between these two affirmations. While God is almighty, he is an almighty Father who exercises fatherly care over those whom he has called his children. Just as a little child trusts in the strength of his or her earthly father to guide and protect them, so too, Christians can take great confidence in the power of our almighty Father to guide and protect us as we serve him in this life.
Creator of heaven and earth: This statement affirms for the Christian, the creating nature of God. Not only is God almighty, but God has demonstrated a portion of his might in creating the heavens and the earth. This is a reference back to Genesis 1:1, which is what some people refer to as a “mirism.” A mirism is when two extremes are used to imply not only the extremes but everything that falls in between. In other words, not only did God created the heavens and the earth, but he created everything in between. In addition, the reference to Genesis 1:1 implies also that the context of Genesis 1:1 must be kept in mind. God not only shaped and formed creation as some would suggest, but God created ex-nihilo—he made all things out of nothing. The term that is used in this passage is the Hebrew verb arb (bara), which, when God is the subject, speaks of God’s sovereign creation. Thus, in affirming that God is the “creator of heaven and earth,” you are affirming the intent of Genesis 1:1 that God created all things and he created all these things out of nothing. This is in direct contradiction to the naturalistic explanation of the cosmological origin of the universe, yet many who call themselves Christians fail to understand what they are affirming when they recite the Apostles’ creed or they have been too blinded by post-modernistic presuppositions allowing them to equally affirm two mutually exclusive views separated by artificial contextual barriers of their own creation. Theology that is Christian, by its very definition, affirms the creative work of God as it is reflected in scripture.
And in Jesus Christ: The next affirmation that is made moves from the first to the second member of the Trinity, God the Son. This affirmation begins with an identification of who the one and only-begotten son of God happens to be—and his name is Jesus. The name Jesus comes from the Hebrew root [vy (yasha), which means, “to save.” Hence, when Joseph was being given the pronouncement that the child born to Mary would be called Jesus, it was because, “he will save his people from their sins.” Thus, the second member of the Trinity is the one through whom salvation was worked for his people.
The next word in the creed is the word “Christ,” which functions as Jesus’ title during his earthly ministry. Christ, or Cristo/ß (christos) in the Greek, is taken from the Hebrew word x;yvim’ (mashiach), or “Messiah.” Both words literally mean, “the anointed one” and speak of the one through whom God’s promised redemption would come. Thus, the Christian affirms that Jesus, whom we call the Christ, is the one that was promised throughout the Old Testament for the redemption of his people.
His only Son: This is a reference back to John 3:16, that though God will adopt sons and daughters, he only has one son that is “begotten” of him. The term that John’s gospel employs is that of monogenh/ß (monogenes), which refers to one who is unique in his nature, unlike any other. God has many children (by adoption), but he only has one child who is of the same divine essence as God the Father. Thus, not only is Jesus the Christ, but he is God’s only Son, the only one able to bring sinners to the Father. As Peter proclaimed, “there is only one name under heaven whereby men must be saved!”
Our Lord: This is the first point in the creed where the first person plural pronoun is used. This in itself is a reminder that not only is this creed meant to be personally believed, but it is meant to be used as a corporate confession and symbol of the faith. Jesus is not simply “the Lord” nor is he listed as “my Lord,” but the creed refers to him as “our Lord.” And note the importance of the use of the term “Lord.” This is remarkably significant for two reasons. First of all, in ancient times, the Jewish people developed a superstition around the third commandment and fearing to use God’s name in vain, they opted to not ever use it at all. Thus, instead of speaking the covenantal name of God, which is hwhy (Yahweh), they would substitute yn”doa] (Adonai), which is Hebrew for “Lord.” This name, Lord, being ascribed to the Son of God is language that affirms his deity, connecting him with the divine name of hwhy (Yahweh).
Secondly, proclaiming Jesus to be our Lord implies that the church body (remember the plural nature of this clause) is standing in submission to the lordship of Jesus Christ. How often Christians think of themselves as being autonomous and neglect the Biblical model that has been set before us of our being servants in the house of Jesus Christ. How often Christians proclaim Jesus to be their Lord but live as if Jesus’ only role is to help out during times of difficulty. Once again, we see the effects of the post-modern mindset affecting Christian thinking.
Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the virgin Mary: In this clause of the creed, the dual nature of Jesus is articulated more specifically. Jesus is fully human as he was born of a human woman. Yet, Jesus does not have a human father, but a divine one. The Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and she became pregnant. More will be discussed on the reason for this when we reach our discussion of Christology, but this simple affirmation is an affirmation of the dual nature of Christ. The writers of the creed correctly understood the importance and the Biblical testimony on this issue, that you simply cannot call yourself a Christian if you deny either the full humanity or the full divinity of Jesus Christ, our Lord.
Note also that Mary was a virgin. God has left no room in the equation for the possibility that Jesus could have really been conceived from Joseph or from another. Also, it is a reminder that God is the one who opens and closes the womb and that he is able to do this work in his servant Mary without the aid of human intervention. Mary’s virginity reminds us also of her integrity as a woman, having remained chaste until her marriage and that at no time in between the conception and the birth did Joseph and Mary actually consummate their marriage vows.
Suffered under Pontius Pilate: This is not to suggest that the only suffering that Jesus had was while he was on the cross, but it is a reminder that the cross was the climax of Jesus’ suffering, it was real, and it was suffered under the hand of Pilate, who was trying to appease the crowd. In addition to our Lord’s suffering, there is another crucial element to this clause in the creed. Pontius Pilate’s name is set before us. The religion that we have is a religion that is set in history and can be attested to by outside sources. The life and suffering of Jesus is a real, historical fact, documented by numerous primary sources and cannot be refuted. The Christian affirms the historical nature of the Christian faith and the outworking of God’s plan in human events.
Was crucified: This is a reminder that the prophetic statements about the Messiah were fulfilled on the cross. It is a reminder that the death that Jesus endured was a horrific one and it is a reminder that it was a Roman one. The Jews did not execute by crucifixion; the Romans did. Much more could be said on this matter, but we will again leave that for the section on Christology.
Dead and Buried: Jesus did die on that cross and was buried in a tomb. He paid the penalty for our sin in its fullness and Jesus entered into the grave just as you or I will do when these physical bodies of ours die. There are some who have chosen to reject the idea of Jesus’ death on the cross, creating a story of him entering into a coma on the cross or otherwise some sort of pseudo-deathlike state to trick the Romans. First of all, the Romans knew death and they knew the difference between a dead body and an “almost dead” body. The piercing of his side was done to confirm that he really was dead. The creed does not allow for such nonsensical teachings like this and affirms that Jesus really did die and that he really was placed in a tomb. Christianity offers no hope if Jesus did not die, for with no death there was no completed sacrifice. The Christian understands this and thus affirms the real, physical death of Jesus Christ.
He descended into Hell: This is one point in the final formulation of the Apostles’ Creed that differs significantly from the older Roman form. Historically, there was developing a theology, based on an interpretation of 1 Peter 3:19, that suggested that during the time Jesus’ body was in the grave, his spirit descended into hell, proclaimed the gospel to the Old Testament saints (some suggested that it was to all) and those who would believe would follow him into heaven. The point of this study is not necessarily to go into a detailed exegesis of 1 Peter 3:19 and Ephesians 4:9-10, but let us suffice to say that it misunderstands what Peter and Paul are seeking to communicate. In addition, it makes Jesus’ statement to the thief on the cross that “today, you will be with me in paradise” nonsensical. This theology would eventually be referred to as the “Harrowing of Hell” and it would become part of the Roman Catholic understanding of intermediate states between heaven and hell. It was a theology that was becoming established in the church in the early parts of the seventh century, about the time that the final formulation of the Apostles’ Creed was being established by the church. Hence, it should not be a surprise that the language was included in the Creed’s finished form.
The protestant Reformers rejected this theology as un-Biblical, but were faced with the question of how to explain the theology to their people if the Apostles’ Creed were retained. Though there are a few different approaches to the question, most simply say that this refers to the entrance of Jesus’ body into the grave for three days and three nights. While this interpretation is not fully consistent with the language of the Creed, the reformers have pointed out that while the Apostles’ Creed is truly an ecumenical creed, the clause about the descent into hell is a later addition incorporated by the church. This is further confounded by the fact that the Athanasian Creed incorporates this language of Jesus’ descent as well, yet, as we have discussed before, there are some questions about the dating and authorship of that particular creed.
The third day he rose from the dead: Three simple affirmations are made within this clause. First, that Jesus did not remain dead. Therein lies the hope of the believer in Jesus Christ, for as Christ rose, so too will we rise with him in the resurrection. Were Christ not to have risen from the grave then we could have no hope that we too might one day be raised as well. Second that Jesus was dead. He was not simply placed in the tomb alive then revived later, but he was dead in every sense of the word. And thirdly, this line in the creed affirms the duration of Jesus’ time dead in the grave, which in itself is a fulfillment of prophesy. Just as with many other points of Jesus’ life, there are some scholars who have sought to deny in one way or another the actual bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the grave and at the same time call themselves, “Christian.” This simply cannot be done. When you deny the resurrection you have essentially denied the heart of the Christian faith and have reduced it to moralistic teachings; something that Christianity was never meant to be.
He ascended into heaven and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty: This affirmation naturally follows the previous statement, for if Jesus rose from the dead, one must ask, to where did he ascend? And here is the affirmation that Jesus did rise from the dead and that he triumphantly ascended into heaven and that he sits at the right hand of his Father: God Almighty. Note two things about this affirmation. First, Jesus sits. Sitting signifies a completion of the work that one came to do. Yes, Jesus still lives to make intercession for his people, but the work of redemption that Jesus came to earth to do was complete, and as victorious kings of the ancient times would do, after the completion of his victory, he took his seat at the right hand of his Father. The second thing that is worth noting is the location where that seat happens to be. In ancient times the right hand seat of the king was the seat of honor and dignity. Jesus, in ascending, is honored by his Father for his completed work. In other words, the sitting denotes honor and majesty, not complacency.
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead: The language of this clause looks forward to Jesus’ glorious return to bring all into judgment. The reality of judgment implies that there is a standard by which judgment will be carried out. It also implies that there are some who will be exonerated and some who will be convicted. It also implies that there will be a judge who discerns who is acceptable by the measure and who is not acceptable according to that measure.
This is where the post-modern line of thinking leads people into grave error. To say that a judge does not have a rule by which justice is measured, but who allows those who are being judged to construct their own rule by which justice may be measured is silly and removes the power from the seat of the judge and places it in the hands of the individual being judged. In doing so, justice loses all meaning, for who would condemn themselves to eternal damnation when it is within their own ability to free themselves? The concept of judgment becomes laughable.
Instead, the Christian faith affirms the reality of a standard by which men are judged, that it is singular in nature, and that mankind is unable, as a result of sin, to meet that standard. Thus, we stand guilty of the penalty of eternal damnation. In turn, what we need is not to recast the laws, but one who can substitute himself for us who will pay the penalty that we owe. Jesus did just that and intercedes for us to boot. Thus, those who are trusting in Jesus for their eternal salvation stand as righteous before the law as the penalty of the law has already been paid on our behalf. This clause of the creed affirms the nature of Christ and his authority to redeem his people. At the same time, it is a reminder that Jesus has the authority to condemn as well. Jesus has the authority as judge over all—the quick (meaning living) and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Ghost: While this is structured as a separate statement, it is connected theologically back to the language of belief in God, now affirming the third member of the Trinity. For theology to be Christian, it must affirm all three members of the Triune Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Many of the heresies of the early church were over the nature of the Trinity as well as the dual nature of Christ. It is important to recognize that the church has always understood these questions as questions that one may not compromise and there is no room for discussion. We may debate this view or that view of some ordinance of the church or the meaning of this text or that, but the nature of God is not open for debate, and Christian theology as well as creedal formulations all affirm this great Biblical truth about our Triune God.
The Holy catholic Church: The term “catholic” means “universal” and the statement is a reminder that there is only one body of Christ and thus only one true church. Yes, there are different denominations and different congregations in different geographic locations, but the body of Christ is still united in Jesus Christ. The term “Church” is derived from the term ejkklhsi/a (ekklasia), which simply refers to a gathering. Yet, the creed reminds us that this gathering is a holy gathering. Why is it a holy gathering? First, God’s people have been set apart from the world for his service and for his glory, and second, God’s people have a holy calling upon their lives to live in a holy way, just as God is holy and lives in a holy way. This statement affirms both the unity of the church in Christ and the call to holiness that is placed upon the church—notably that is placed on the life of every member.
The Communion of the Saints: This statement, while not found in older creedal formulations, does not introduce any new theology to what has already been stated, but simply reiterates the previous line. Originally, this language was meant to communicate the idea that the saints who have died and gone on to heaven are in communion with one another and with Jesus Christ. As the creed began to be more and more widely used, it began to be understood to reflect the communion that believers have with one another here on this earth as well. Either way, the statement simply affirms the unity and fellowship of God’s people as one body of Christ both here and in heaven.
The Forgiveness of Sins: This statement almost goes without saying due to the implications of past elements of the creed. The sacrifice of Christ on the cross guaranteed forgiveness for his people and ascension to the right hand of God the Father is our assurance that forgiveness has been granted. At the same time, for a sinful people who struggle with the temptations that befall them in this world, this statement is sweet and meaningful enough that it deserves repeating over and over. In Jesus Christ there is forgiveness for wretched, fallen, sinners such as I—and such as you, assuming we come to him in faith and repentance. Were there no forgiveness there would be no hope for anything but wrath and judgment. In Christ there is hope and this frames how the Christian lives in and interacts with the world.
The Resurrection from the Dead and Life Everlasting: Have you ever stopped and considered what you are stating when you state that you believe this? What the Christian is affirming is that after he or she dies, and after his or her body has been placed in the ground, and after it has decomposed over the years to nothing more than a skeleton or even to ashes, that when Christ comes, he or she will rise and live again. This concept is something that is ludicrous to the modern mind. Certainly some have sought to go to extreme measures to preserve their bodies from death and some have gone to even more extreme measures to preserve their body on the brink of death for some future time when their diseases might be curable, but the Christian need not do such things. In fact, the Christian need not fear dying because the Christian understands that at some future point, a point fixed by God’s design, Jesus will return in the clouds and those who are dead in Christ will be resurrected free from the ailments that have brought death to their bodies. In fact, this resurrection body will be so perfect that it will not succumb to disease and the believer will be able to live forever. In addition, during the intermediate years, the believer’s spirit will reside with Christ. This great truth is an essential tenet of Christianity. The afterlife is not some sort of eternal sitting on clouds practicing harp-music as some skeptics would portray, but it is life everlasting, being bodily resurrected from the dead.
Amen: Many times when the Apostles’ Creed has been recited, the word “amen” is appended to the end. The word itself comes from the Greek ajmh/n (amen) which in turn comes from the Hebrew !ma (aman or amen). The Greek use is normally translated as “truly” in our Bibles and the Hebrew word is simply the verb that means, “to believe.” In other words, the closing word is a final, repeated affirmation that these are things that are held to be true in the most absolute sense. It is true that many people in the modern world would suggest that there is no such thing as absolute truth or absolute error, only truth and error that is relative to the situation that one finds oneself in. This is not the Bible’s presentation of what it means to be Christian. The Bible presents God as absolute and his word as objective truth with the expectation that the Christian will say “Amen” to the fullness of what God has revealed. So too, this creed ends with a resounding, Amen!
Through this formulation, the early church took the teachings of scripture and sought to concisely answer the question, “what must I believe if I am to claim to be a Christian.” In fact, many pastors echo this understanding even today as their churches recite the Apostles’ Creed. Just prior to beginning the recitations, many will introduce the creed by saying, “Christian, what do you believe?” The church then replies by reciting this creed in unison.
There have been two criticisms made of the assertion that the use of arb (bara) is used of God’s sovereign creation ex-nihilo. The first cites passages like Isaiah 43:15, where God is spoken as the “Creator of Israel.” The suggestion is that God did not create the people who made this nation from nothing, but that he gathered them together and formed them into a nation. Yet, people who make this argument miss the point of what the Biblical writer is asserting. Yes, God did gather the people together to form Israel, but Israel as an institution—as God’s people—was formed by God’s sovereign call, and in a very real, theological sense, the nation was formed ex-nihilo even though it incorporated many individual people. The second assertion builds upon the first. They argue that since arb (bara) can mean “to form from existing matter” then Genesis 1:1 can be understood in terms of God forming eternally existent matter to shape the cosmos as we know it (this is the predominant Mormon view). This can be easily refuted when one notes both the mirism that is employed (see above) and that if this mirism includes all things that are—from what did God create unless he created ex-nihilo? Secondly, in the creation account, the term hf[ (asah) is used in every instance where God is taking existing matter and making or forming aspects of the created order. The term arb (bara) is only ever used in the creation account to refer to that which God is making completely new—ex-nihilo.
Again a reminder of Jesus’ humanity, for were Jesus not fully human he could not have suffered and died.
Please note that though the theology of the Harrowing of Hell was not popularized until the 7th century, the theology had some minority support for many years. Likewise, there are older versions of the Apostles’ Creed that do contain the language of Jesus’ descent into Hell, but this language is not in the oldest versions, nor is it in the majority of the texts until we find ourselves in the sixth and seventh centuries.
The Year of the Lord’s Favor: Isaiah 61:2a
“To proclaim the year of Yahweh’s Favor…”
(Isaiah 61:2a)
There are two promises in view with the words of this phrase. The first is the concept of the Year of Jubilee that we discussed above. This was the season when debts were forgiven and family lands were restored-the oppression of division from the community by debit was brought to an end. Indeed, this is what we find in Christ Jesus, where all believers are brought into the covenant and are given an inheritance in the land-a land that is being reserved for us free from corruption, by Christ in Heaven (1 Peter 1:4-5. Indeed, the celebration that Christ ushers in is an ongoing Year of Jubilee before the Lord.
Yet there is more at work than this, for the Year of the Lord’s Favor, ushered in by Christ, is a promise to be enjoyed by Gentiles as well as by Jews. It is to be enjoyed by all who will trust in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The language of this verse also picks up on the language of Isaiah 49:8, where God promises that in the “time of the favor” of the Lord, God will work salvation for his people, bringing the nations into the covenant. Indeed, the verses that follow echo much of the language of chapter 61. Thus, in Christ, we see the principle of the Year of Jubilee applied to the gentiles as well as to the Jewish people. In Christ we find that the fortunes of all the tribes of the earth-all of the descendants of the sons of Noah, find blessing as the gospel is brought to them.
We need to raise one more issue regarding this passage. Given that we know the context of the Year of the Lord’s favor with respect to the Year of Jubilee and its extension to the gentiles, we still ought to ask the question of what favor means. I raise this question, because oftentimes when we think of favor, we think of earning someone’s favor, and this is obviously not the case with God. The word “favor” is the Hebrew word, !Acr” (ratson), and while we find the term used in a variety of contexts, normally it is used to refer to favor that is graciously given and not favor that has been earned. In many of the cases, this term could also be translated as “grace.” Do understand, loved ones, that the language of the Year of God’s Favor is the language of a gracious gift that has been given, not something that has been earned in any which way. Seek Christ, and enjoy the year of his grace-enjoy his mercies and rest in the assurance of his promise. That which you could not do for yourself (being brought into the favor of the Lord) has been done by Christ for us! Hallelujah! Amen!
The Names of God
It is worthwhile to spend some time reflecting upon the various names of God, particularly those names given in the Old Testament. In thinking on these names, it is important to reject at the outset of this discussion the theological error of attributing the many names of God to a variety of cultic traditions which were later combined together to form what we know as Old Testament Judaism. These names do not reflect multiple cultic groups, but rather reflect ancient Israel’s attempt to understand the fullness of God’s character from multiple angles. These names are designed to reflect specific character traits of our infinite God, and as God is infinite, so too are the angles in which one may seek to express his character. Just as one needs more than one lens on a camera to take a three-dimensional picture, the multitude of names given to God give us multiple lenses by which we can perceive God’s character and thus have a fuller picture of his character.
Primary Names of God: While there are many names given to our God in scripture, there are five names that are most commonly used in the Old Testament to speak about God:
hwhy (Yahweh): By far the most commonly used name of God is Yahweh (6,828 times in the Old Testament). This is the name that God gave to Moses on Mount Horeb at the burning bush so that Moses could identify God to the Israelites back in Egypt. It is the name that God gave to his people by which we can know him throughout the generations. This name literally means, “I am who I am,” or “I am who I will be.” In other words, it reflects the eternality and self-existence of God’s character. There never was a time when God was not, nor will there ever be a time when God will be, God simply “is.” In the New Testament, the language that refers to God as “the one who was, who is, and is to come” is built on the idea of the covenantal name of Yahweh. In addition to speaking of the eternality of God, the giving of this name also reflects God’s covenantal nature and is often found used in a redemptive context.
~yhiloae (Elohim): This name of God, used 2,602 times in the Old Testament, reflects his strength and power, especially in the context of Creation. Oftentimes, the fact that this name is found in the plural is cited to speak of the plurality of God’s person, yet the plural usage of this name, as discussed above, may also simply be seen as reflecting the idea that God’s might and power are so abundant that it is not suitable to speak of it in the singular. In addition, this name is also understood to represent God as lawgiver in the lives of his people.
yn”doa; (Adonay): The root word for this name of God, found 444 times in the Old Testament, is !Ada” (adon), which simply means “lord” in a very generic sense. Yet, when the y ‘ (ay) ending is added, the term takes on new meaning. This ending elevates the word to a title of exaltation. God is not simply being referred to as Lord, but as the Lord of all Lords, or as the greatest and mightiest Lord that has or ever will exist.
tAab’c. hw”hy> (Yahweh Tsebaoth): God is called “Yahweh of Armies” or “Lord of Hosts” on 242 occasions in the Old Testament. This name is a constant reminder not only of the might that is found in God’s own hand, but that he is the God of hosts of armies. God is the mightiest Emperor in all of the universe, no Czar, no Caesar, no Pharaoh, no King or General can stand against him—God reigns and no other has the might to rival him.
lae (El): This is a more generic name for God that refers to his might and to his power. It is found 200 times on its own in the Old Testament, but is usually found in connection with one of God’s attributes, reflecting that God is the greatest in righteousness, holiness, etc…
Secondary Names of God: There are a number of other names that are given to God that are reflections of some of God’s many perfections. They help us see the fullness of God’s glory, his grace, and his goodness and the abundance of these names is meant to enhance our worship as we see God in the context of these various attributes. As mentioned above, many of these names are composites of the name lae (El) and one of God’s attributes.
yD:v; lae (El Shaddai): This name literally means, “God of the Mountain,” but is often translated as “God on High,” reflecting God’s exalted state resting high above the mountains. It might also be seen as an allusion of our relationship to God, sitting under the mighty shadow of his presence, not unlike the Israelites when they dwelled under the shadow of Sinai.
!Ayl.[, lae (El Elyon): This name means “God Most High,” and is a name that reflects the exalted nature of God himself. Jesus is also referred to as the “Son of the Most High,” which is a direct reference to this divine name.
Yair| lae (El Raiyy): “God of Seeing.” God sees all things that men do; nothing escapes his sight.
~l'(A[ lae (El Olam): “God of Eternity” or “Everlasting God.” God is forever, there is no end to him or for him, thus we who belong to him may rest in him forever as well.
hn”Wma/ lae (El Emunah): “God of Faithfulness” or “Faithful God.” God is faithful to the ends of the earth, we need to fear him to be whimsical or capricious, but in him lie everlasting stability and faithfulness.
tA[DE lae (El Deoth): “God of Knowledge.” God is all-knowing and omniscient; God knows all things to an infinitely thorough degree. There are no surprises to God and there is nothing is not eternally and intimately known to God on high.
rABGI lae (El Gibor): “God of Strength” or “Mighty Warrior God.” This name of God reminds us that the battle is the Lord’s, it is his might that brings victory at every stage, and not our own.
tAlmuG> lae (El Gemuloth) and tAmq’n> lae (El Neqamoth): “God of Recompense” and “God of Vengeance.” God will bring vengeance upon his enemies and upon those who cause harm to his people. “Vengeance is mine,” says the Lord.
yliyGI tx;m.fi lae (El Simchath Gili): “God of my Jubilation and Exultant Joy”. This is probably one of my favorite, and could even be simply translated as “God of my joy joy” to echo the old children’s song about having God’s joy down in our heart. This title used only once of God expresses the almost uncontainable joy that one feels when he or she comes into the presence of the Lord of their life.
yY”x; lae (El Hayay): “God of my Life.” This name is the simple reflection of the Lordship of God in all of life—God is a jealous God and he will share his people with no one.
New Testament Names: Though the New Testament does not contain the abundance of names for God as does the Old Testament, several new Testament Names are worth mentioning.
qeo/ß (Theos): This Greek term is the most common name that is used to reference God. It can be applied to refer to any supernatural entity, but within the Greek New Testament, it is most commonly used to refer to the God of the Bible. It is the term from which we get “Theology” and “Theophany.”
Pa/ter (Pater): Normally when we think of God in terms of his Fatherhood, we think in New Testament terms. We think of how, as believers in Jesus Christ, we are adopted into God’s household and given the privilege of calling him Father. Yet, we must also recognize that this language is not alien to the Old Testament as well. God is referred to as Father of believers in ancient Israel as well. In addition, as a sign of God’s great mercy, God is also referred to as a “Father to the fatherless.”
uJio/ß (huios): As we move into the New Testament, we find the Trinitarian names of God coming into prominence. And while we will spend time speaking of the many names and titles given to Christ when we deal with the section on Christology, it is important to remember at the onset, that God is Triune and thus the names applied to the Son apply to the Trinitarian Godhead as a whole. God is not Father alone, but he is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit in perfect Trinitarian union as discussed above.
a¢gion pneuvma (hagion pneuma): The third member of the Triune God is God the Holy Spirit, again, as we have seen above, who has been spoken of in the Old Testament, but presented with far more clarity in the New Testament. Again, we will discuss the Holy Spirit more fully when we deal with the section on Soteriology, but it is important to mention Him here as we present the names of God.
Kurio/ß (Kurios): This is just as much a name as it is a title. It is the Greek term which is used to translate both hwhy (Yahweh) and yn”doa; (Adonay) from the Old Testament. In the New Testament, its primary usage as a name of God is applied to God the Son, who is Lord of our lives as believers.
∆Emmanouh/l (Emmanouel): Once again, the name “Immanuel” is as much a title as it is a name, and means “God with us.” While this name is most commonly thought of in terms of the naming of Jesus, we must be reminded that this name, like that of Pa/ter (Pater), has Old Testament roots.
While there are many other names of God that we could explore and reflect on, rich names like “Lord of Lords,” “Lord of Kings,” “Lord of the Whole Earth,” and “The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” the aforementioned names demonstrate for us how these names reflect upon the character of God as a whole. In some ways, looking at these names, like looking at God’s many perfections, is like gazing at a diamond from many different angles. As you turn the diamond, the light catches the different facets from different directions and the gem never ceases to sparkle and gleam in slightly different, but increasingly captivating ways. The deeper we look at God and his perfections, the more deeply we must be drawn into him, the more deeply we must love him, and the more deeply we shall adore him.
Note that the very fact that we have names of God given to us in scripture is just one more affirmation that our God has made himself knowable to his people. Note also that these names do not originate in the ideas that men have about God, but as scripture, they originate with God and come through inspired men who are seeking to describe what God has revealed to them about himself.
Because of the uncertainty of the vowels for the covenantal name of God, many older texts transliterate this name as Jehovah, yet most modern scholarship leans toward Yahweh as the proper pronunciation of God’s covenantal name. Most of our English Bibles will render this name as LORD or LORD (depending on the typeset) to reflect the Jewish tradition of substituting yn”doa; (Adonay, which means “Exalted Lord”) out of reverence for the divine name.
Revelation 1:4,8; 4:8. Revelation 11:17 and 16:5 also pick up on this idea, though they only contain part of the formulaic language.
Liberation!: Isaiah 61:1f
“and to the ones imprisoned—liberation!”
(Isaiah 61:1f)
This final clause in Isaiah 61:1 naturally follows the previous statement. With the coming of the Messiah, the chains of bondage to sin are released, they are broken, and the prison cells of death have been opened wide. Indeed, our Lord proclaimed just that message:
“Truly, Truly, I say to you that an hour is coming and is now, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and the ones who hear will live.”
(John 5:25)
The final clause in this verse, which I have translated as “liberation,” is a Hebrew idiom comprised of two similar ideas for release, or delivery from prison: x;Aq-xq;P. (peqach-qoach). The key to remember here is that the language reflects the idea of being released by someone else from something that you could not free yourself of. In other words, it reflects the idea of being liberated and not the idea of escape. Indeed, there are many human bonds and constraints that we may be able to throw off on our own strength, but sin and death are the two things that have bound us as a race in a way that we are helpless against apart from a divine act of liberation. And indeed, dear friends, this is the liberation that is worked by Christ Jesus!
It is worth pointing out that the language of “liberation” has been used by some in our culture to promote an un-Biblical political theology. “Liberation Theology” as it has been called, takes passages like this and argues that the purpose of Christ’s life and death was to open up avenues for relief from political oppression. This theological model has then been adapted to meet the specific needs of particular groups. Thus, there has been Feminist Liberation Theology, Black Liberation Theology, Hispanic Liberation Theology, etc… And while genuine Christianity lived out does seek to lift people from their oppressed conditions (the abolishment of the slave-trade, for example), this particular theology seeks to reverse the roles, placing the oppressed in a position where they can now oppress their former oppressors.
Not only does this theology blend political Marxism with a mis-interpretation of scripture, but it also departs from the witness of historical Christianity, where believers have regularly sought to evangelize their oppressors. More importantly, it misses the whole point of Christ’s atoning and liberating work. Jesus did not come to serve a political agenda, he came to redeem us from our sins. He did not come to make it possible for us to throw off our earthly oppressors; he came to redeem us from the eternal judgment of God. It misses the point when Jesus says, “blessed are those who have been persecuted in the name of righteousness…” (Matthew 5:10). In addition, does not Peter also teach us that it is of no merit if we suffer for our sin (1 Peter 2:20)? Instead of repaying evil for evil, are we not to repay evil with good (1 Peter 3:8-9)?
Beloved, rejoice in the liberation that you have been given, but understand what Jesus is liberating you from. You are being liberated from sin and death; you are being liberated from the fate of eternal judgment! How much greater and more wonderful is this liberation than anything that men can work in this world! How much more permanent this liberation is! Don’t be fooled, loved ones, by the false teachers that surround you—search the scriptures and guard your heart, for there are many who would lead you astray. Be like the noble Bereans (Acts 17:10-11) and do not follow the lies of those who would manipulate God’s word to serve their own ends.
“For this is no empty word for you, but it is your life. And in this word your days will be made long upon the ground which you are passing over the Jordan to inherit there.” (Deuteronomy 32:47)
Father Fred
FATHER FRED
Father Fred went on a religious crusade
To sunny California; to save the freaks he prayed.
He took the bus, then train, then air,
And then he hitch-hiked half the way there.
He looked for a hotel to stay the night,
But “no-vacancy” signs were all he could sight.
Finally he found a small barn out in the boondockies
That was used to house horses of great race jockeys.
The following day he hit the streets
In search of some rotten, dirty old thieves.
Wearing a hard rock T-shirt and faded blue jeans
No one believed him to be a priest it seemed.
He patrolled the beaches, both normal and nude,
Until he was stopped by a mean looking dude.
The man stood six-foot eight with a tatoo on his chest;
Large bags under his eyes showed his lack of rest.
Fred blessed the man and forgave his sins,
And pulled out his Bible, but before he could begin,
The large man laughed loudly, his mouth open so wide
That every cavity and filling could be seen inside.
With a his laugh the man halted Fred’s lofty recitation
And proclaimed that he was Arch-Bishop of L.A–on vacation.
Fred then started on his way back home with a sigh–
No wonder California has freaks, especially with that guy.
Have a blessed April Fools Day!
Release to the Captives: Isaiah 61:1e
“To preach release to the captives…”
Isaiah 61:1e
In the context of Isaiah’s ministry, this statement would have had a very specific promise, recognizing that at this point in history, the northern Kingdom of Israel has fallen and the people had been taken and scattered throughout the Assyrian Empire. In addition, the southern Kingdom would, within 100 years, fall as well. To those who would hear this prophesy, that would speak of the hope of the return of the people from exile with the advent of the Messiah’s coming. When Jesus spoke these words of his own ministry, the people would have responded in a similar way, not only thinking of the return of the various Jewish people who had been scatted all over the Roman Empire, but also of the lifting of Roman oppression in the Holy Land. Yet, Jesus had an entirely different bondage in view—one that was far more dangerous than the taxation and oversight of the Romans. Jesus was dealing with our bondage to sin.
The language used by Isaiah echoes this great promise that Jesus has come to fulfill. The word that we translate as “release” or “liberty” is the Hebrew word, rArD> (deror), which specifically has in view the release that God commanded in conjunction with the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee (which is where verse 2 picks up—also see Leviticus 25:10). Essentially, God commanded that every 7th year was to be a Sabbath year set aside for himself. During this year the fields would be left fallow, Jewish slaves would be set free, and debts would be considered satisfied. In the Year of Jubilee (every 50th year), even the family lands that had been sold to pay off debts would be returned to their rightful owners for the purpose of preserving the family in the land. It was to be a time of celebration and deliverance from economic and social bondage. Yet, do not miss the purpose of the Year of Jubilee and Sabbatical years, or you will miss what Isaiah is doing by referencing it and you will miss what Jesus is doing by applying it to his own Messianic ministry.
Leviticus 25, a chapter devoted to the release that was to be associated with the Sabbatical Year and with the Year of Jubilee, ends with God’s explanation for instituting these events:
“Because, to me, the sons of Israel are servants;
they are my servants which I brought out of the land of Egypt.
I am Yahweh, your God.”
(Leviticus 25:55)
In other words, God is saying that the reason for these Jubilees is because the people of Israel belong to no one other than to himself. He did not share them with Egypt, but delivered them, and he will not share them with those who would exploit them in their own land. God’s people are God’s servants and a perpetual bondage means that he is forced to share with one who is an illegitimate owner. God brought his people from Egypt to be his own; he is not going to let them go.
Do these words not also ring true with the language of our Lord?
“All that the Father gives me will come to me; I will definitely not cast out.”
(John 6:37)
“Also I give them eternal life, and they shall never be destroyed; no one will snatch them from my hand.”
(John 10:28)
Yet, this language echoes even more strongly with the language of the writer of Hebrews:
“Remember those who are bound as ones bound with them; and the ones who are tormented, as they are in the body. Let marriage be precious to all, and the marriage bed be morally pure; for the sexually immoral and adulterous God will judge. Let your lifestyle not be covetous, being content with what is at your disposal. For he has said: “I will never send you back, nor will I ever leave you behind.” Thus we can say with certainty, “The Lord is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?” (Hebrews 13:3-6)
Okay, let’s put the puzzle pieces together in light of what the writer of Hebrews teaches. We know from Leviticus that God has delivered his people from their bondage in Egypt for the purpose of making them his own servants. In light of that, God instituted the Sabbatical Year and Year of Jubilee in Israel’s governmental law for the purpose of ensuring that the people would not sink back into bondage. The writer of Hebrews builds on this idea and asks us as Christians to look at several things that will lead us into different kinds of bondage. We are to remember believers who are in actual chains—why? Because God hears the cries of his persecuted people (Exodus 2:23-25). We are to preserve the sanctity of our marriages—why? Because in marriage, one man and one woman are bound covenantally together to the point that they are seen by God as one flesh (Genesis 2:24). Thus, this binding must always be a holy one—one that does not detract from the couple’s ability to serve God, but instead aids it (1 Corinthians 7:2-7, 26-28). We are not to defile our marriage bed with sexual immorality or adultery, why? Because not only does this sinful activity ruin the holy nature of the marriage, but it also enslaves the person who entered into such sin to the sin and to the one with whom he or she has committed said immorality and adultery (1 Corinthians 6:16). Our lifestyles must not be covetous (more than just the love of money, but the 10th commandment includes coveting your neighbor’s house, wife, servants, and/or property—Exodus 20:17). Why? Because this places you in bondage to the lust of material things—things that belong to this world, and not to the things of God (1 John 2:15-17). All of these things that the writer of Hebrews mentions are things that binds us in servitude and slavery to things or persons other than being bound in service to God.
Thus, it is in this context that the writer of Hebrews quotes Jesus as saying, “I will never send you back, nor will I ever leave you behind.” While this is likely a reference to Jesus’ promise to his Apostles in John 14:18, it picks up the language of the passages quoted above from John above as well as other promises of Jesus that he will be with us always, even to the end of eternity (Matthew 28:20). All of these statements must be understood in the context of God’s calling of us to be his own. Why will Jesus not allow us to be left behind? Because in being left behind, we are left in bondage to the things of this world, to sin, and ultimately to death. As the Apostle Paul writes:
“You were bought with a price; do not become slaves to men.”
(1 Corinthians 7:23)
So, we return back to Isaiah 61:1 and to Jesus’ proclamation that he is the fulfillment of this prophesy (Luke 4:21). Our Lord came to proclaim, and thus the Gospel of Jesus Christ proclaims, that we are released from our bondage to the world—Egypt has no more claims on us; sin has no more claims on us; the kingdoms of the world can do nothing to us for we are eternally bound to the risen Christ. Oh, beloved, how is it that we so often bind ourselves to the world even in light of this great truth! Loved ones, let us live in service of Christ, for he is our only master—the chains of this world have been loosed, and we have found our freedom in him!
Redeemed how I love to proclaim it!
Redeemed by the blood of the lamb;
Redeemed through his infinite mercy,
His child and forever I am.
-Fanny Crosby
The Shattered Heart: Isaiah 61:1d
“He has sent me to bind the heart which has been shattered…”
Isaiah 61:1d
When I read this part of the verse, my mind cannot help but to think back to the promise that was made by God earlier in Isaiah 35:4:
“Say to those whose hearts are hasty; be strong and you must not fear.
Behold, your God of vengeance will come in the recompense of God—
He will come and save you.”
And indeed, now, those whose hearts have caused them to run ahead, chasing after their own plans and dreams instead of chasing after holiness, will find that God, in his might and in his power, will come to save them—save them by sending his Son, Jesus Christ. And Christ will be the one who takes their hearts, as broken, war-torn, and shattered as they are, and bind them back together. Note the power of this great and wonderful promise, Jesus is not simply one to put back together a heart that has been fractured, like a bone that is broken might be set in a splint or a cast, but the Hebrew word used here is derived from the Hebrew verb, rb;v’ (shavar), which means “to shatter.” Any human doctor can mend a fractured bone, but it takes God to mend that which has been shattered beyond recognition. And note that when the Hebrews were speaking about the “heart,” they were not speaking simply in terms of one’s emotional well-being or of one’s passions as we often do; when the Hebrews spoke of the heart, they had in mind the intellect and the personality—that which makes you, you. And this is the work of Christ. Jesus is more than a family counselor or a psychologist helping you to get your emotions in check. And he does more than to nurture bruised egos—Jesus mends lives! And Jesus does far more than mend lives that have been beaten around and bruised by the world, but he mends lives that have been blasted away, shattered, demolished, and utterly crushed, and he restores us whole!
I am reminded of the story of Humpty Dumpty. Indeed, all of the kings horses and men could do nothing to patch that shattered egg and to restore him to strength. Yet, Christ is far more than a servant of a human king; he is the King of Kings, Son of the Living God and creator of the universe. Indeed, there is no life, no person who is too broken and shattered that he is beyond the ability of our Lord, Jesus Christ to put back together. Yet, there is another difference. When Jesus puts a life back together, he does not simply restore one to health, but he restores one slowly into the image of himself—we are remade not for a fallen world, but Christ’s remaking is designed to prepare us for glory! What a wonderful promise that we find in our great and glorious Lord!
“He is the one who heals a shattered heart;
and the one who binds their sorrows.”
Psalm 147:3
Into Thy gracious hands I fall,
And with the arms of faith embrace;
O King of glory, hear my call!
O raise me, heal me by Thy grace!
-Wolfgang Dessler
Good Tidings: Isaiah 61:1c
“to herald good tidings to the meek”
Isaiah 61:1c
These words should immediately bring to mind the language of the angels in proclaiming the good news before the shepherds (Luke 2:10). Indeed it was the role of the angels to proclaim the birth of the one who would bring such good news and glad tidings to the world—who would emboss onto the history of mankind the great hope and promise of redemption that would be brought by this Jesus. In Christ, men and women no longer need to live in darkness and fear, but could dwell forever in Christ’s marvelous light. Indeed, there are no better tidings than the reality that God has come into the world to dwell with men, to bear the sins of those whose faith is in him, and to face the mighty wrath of God on behalf of his own. The one who needed no redeeming came to earth, took on flesh to identify with us as his people, and did the mighty work of redemption on behalf of we who needed redeeming, yet could not even begin to do that work on our own.
And it is important to see the way in which this message of good tidings is proclaimed to those who are meek. It’s root is the word rv;B’ (bashar), which means, “to bear good news.” Yet this verb is found in what is called the Piel stem in the Hebrew language. The Piel stem is used in Hebrew to point to a repeated action. In other words, the idea of the good news borne or heralded by Christ is not just a one-time deal, but it is good news that is repeatedly proclaimed in the hearts and in the lives of God’s people. How true this is indeed! The good news of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is news that bears repeating in the lives of those who know him and before the waiting ears of those who do not. How often God’s people need to be reminded of the wonderful good news of the hope that is found in a relationship with Jesus Christ.
But look at to whom this proclamation is directed. It is directed to the meek or to the poor, depending on your translation. The term that Isaiah uses here is wn”[‘ (anaw), which is related to the word ynI[‘ (ani). Literally, wn”[‘ (anaw) refers to one who is bowed down or dejected, one who has been humiliated and broken under the oppression of outside forces. Its cousin, ynI[‘ (ani), picks up the idea of one who has become poor and afflicted as a result of oppression. It is not to the proud or to the powerful that this message is proclaimed, but to the poor, to those who have suffered under the oppression of the world and under the oppression of sin and who understand that there is no place to look for a redeemer other than to God. This language is reminiscent of the Israelites in Egypt, crying out for God to deliver them from Pharaoh’s hand (Exodus 2:23). And indeed, it is this idea that Jesus picks up on in his Sermon on the Mount when he says, “blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 5:3).
The proud, the arrogant, the haughty, those trusting in their own strength or righteousness, these are not the marks of those being drawn to God faith (James 4:6; 1 Peter 5:5). Indeed, the first step in coming to faith is genuine, heart-felt repentance, and in repentance there is no room for the pride of men. Loved ones, do not picture yourself approaching God with trumpets blaring and shouts of acclamation; do not picture yourself because you have earned an audience with the Almighty King. Understand that we come before him on our knees, pleading forgiveness and mercy, and in His undying grace, to all who come into His presence through faith in his Son, Jesus Christ, to them—to us—he has given us eternal life, no longer seeing us as rebels, but adopting us as sons and daughters. Loved ones, oh, what a day of rejoicing that will be!
“See the kind of love that the father has given to us, in order that we might be called children of God; and we are. Because of this, the world does not know us: because it did not know him.” (1 John 3:1)
“And as it says in Hosea:
I will call those who are not my people, ‘my people.’
And she who is not beloved, ‘beloved.’
And it will be in the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called, “Sons of the Living God.”
(Romans 9:25-26)
Because Yahweh has Anointed Me: Isaiah 61:1b
“Because Yahweh has anointed me…”
Isaiah 61:1b
Oh, what an amazing statement this is in itself, that this Messiah is not one anointed by man, but by the covenantal God, Yahweh, himself! How much more significant this becomes when you realize that this construction is only ever used three times in the Old Testament. It is used first in 1 Samuel 10:1 of God’s anointing of Saul, it is used secondly here, of the Messiah, in Isaiah, and thirdly, it is used of Jehu, who destroyed the house of Ahaz (2 Chronicles 22:7). There are many instances where God asks a prophet or a priest to anoint someone as he did with Samuel’s anointing of David—but these are the only instances where Yahweh is said to have anointed.
There are several things that we can learn from this. In each case, this was a kingly anointing. Saul was the very first human king over Israel—Jesus was the last. Saul was rejected by God because he did not execute God’s judgment upon Agag, the king of the Amalekites—one of the great persecutor of Israel. In contrast to Saul, Jehu was anointed king for the express purpose of executing God’s judgment upon the house of Ahaz (Ahaziah) in Judah and upon the house of Ahab in Israel—both kings which promoted pagan idolatry. Of course, Jehu’s downfall is that he did not go far enough in the purging of Israel of its idolatry and wickedness. Christ is the greater fulfillment of that which both Saul and Jehu failed to complete. Jesus is the greater king that not only redeems his people, but also promises complete and final judgment upon God’s enemies—upon all those who would devote themselves to idolatry.
The second thing that we can learn from this is the very nature of the Kingship of the Messiah. The verb, “to anoint” in Hebrew is the word xv;m’ (mashach) and is the very word from which we get the word “Messiah,” literally meaning, “the anointed one.” Not only then, is Isaiah pointing toward the very reality that this promised Messiah will be God himself, but also that he will fulfill the promise that God gave to David, in that a king will be raised up from his household who would have an eternal kingdom (2 Samuel 7:12-13).
Thirdly, it is an ever-present reminder of the nature of Jesus’ Kingship. Jesus himself said that he did not come to peace but division (Luke 12:51). John the Baptist describes Jesus as one who comes as with a winnowing fork to separate the wheat from the tares (Matthew 3:12). And what is the purpose of all this division? It is salvation (John 12:47). How is it that both can be true? The wrath of God being poured out upon his enemies is the means by which God saves the world for he brings her to purity only after he has separated the distillates out of her in the refining process. Refinement is done with fire, thus fire is brought by Christ to both redeem and destroy—both go hand in hand. In the case of Saul and Jehu—the destruction of God’s enemies ended their idolatrous influence (at least for a time). In the case of Jesus, the destruction of God’s enemies means a promise of the eternal end to the idolatrous influence of the world upon our lives—oh praise be to God that our Lord would come in this way!
The Spirit of the Lord Most High: Isaiah 61:1a
This passage is one that is very familiar to us because of Jesus’ use of it during his first sermon back in his hometown of Nazareth. Notice the unambiguous nature of this statement—“the Spirit of the Lord Most High, Yahweh, is upon me. To begin with, when x;Wr (ruach), which can mean “spirit” or “wind”, is used in construct with the personal name of God (Yahweh) and is used in the terms of being placed upon someone, it is consistently used in terms of God’s power, and that power being placed upon an individual to complete God’s design. It is used of Othniel (Judges 3:10), Samson (Judges 14:6), of David (1 Samuel 16:13), and of Elijah (1 Kings 18:12). Most importantly, it is used of Jesus at his baptism (Luke 3:22). How this shines light on passages like Colossians 2:9, which speaks of the fullness of God being pleased to dwell in Christ. How so it is that the Spirit rushed on these Old Testament saints in part and for a time, yet came upon Christ in full and remained upon him for eternity. What is more is that same Spirit rushed upon Peter and the other apostles at the time of Pentecost and likewise remained upon him for the length of their ministry. And that same Spirit—the third member of the divine Trinity has shown himself to be pleased to dwell in you and within me both for the purpose of accomplishing God’s work in this world and for the purpose of drawing you and I more closely to himself in intimate fellowship. This is not a change of state for Jesus, but it is a promise. It is a promise that in Christ all of the promises of deliverance that are contained within the words of the Old Testament find their fullness in Christ and in his work. And it is a promise that it is the very Spirit of God that will bring about God’s designs in your life and mine. What a wonderful way for Jesus to announce his ministry to the community that thought they knew him best. Oh, how much greater a sin it was for these townsfolk—those who knew Jesus from childhood—to reject him in the way that they did.
Yet, we must not stop there. It is not only the x;Wr (ruach) of Yahweh, but we are told that this is the x;Wr (ruach) of the yn”doa] (adonay) of Yahweh. The Hebrew word !Ada’ (adon) means lord in the generic sense (much like we would use the word “sir” in English as a term of respect), but when you add the Qamets-yod ending (the “ay” sound), that intensifies the word, which communicates the idea that this Lord is the most high of all Lords—a term never employed of anyone in the Old Testament but God. Finally, we should not neglect to note the covenantal name of God, Yahweh, that is employed in this Statement. We can be left with no doubt of what Isaiah is seeking to communicate within this passage. The messiah of whom he speaks will have the fullness of the covenant God of Israel upon himself—that he is the fullness of God—and that is a statement that can only be made of God. This messiah of whom he speaks will be, and can only be, the covenant God of Israel, having taken on flesh and come to redeem his people. It points to and can only point to Jesus Christ, the very Son of the living God. By declaring that this prophesy was fulfilled in himself as he did before the people in the synagogue of Nazareth, he declared himself to be none less than God in the flesh.
Pillars: Marks of Good Theology
It would be unwise for us to end our preliminary discussion of theology by simply defining theology on the basis of what it is not (see Pitfalls); thus it is prudent for us to add marks that define what a good theology looks like. A biologist might begin a discussion about a bumble-bee by explaining the differences that it has with a wasp or a hornet, but until the characteristics of what does make a bumble-bee a bumble-bee are known, the student will still be at a loss to identify a genuine one out in the wild with any mark of surety. Thus, we lay before us key elements that are marks of a good theology, and though they may not be exhaustive, such elements are so fundamentally necessary to good theology that no good theology can exist without the things we will mention below.
It Must be Biblically-Accurate:
Though this may seem to be a rather obvious first mark, the presence of many bad theological strains in our culture demands that this principle be laid before us. How may a God who is infinite be known apart from the way he reveals himself to his creatures? Ultimately, while God has revealed many of his characteristics in nature, it is only when we come to his divine word that we find the complete and perspicuous revelation of his being. Ultimately, God has revealed himself in his Son, Jesus Christ, and the Bible is a book that is eminently about Jesus Christ. Though our place in this introductory chapter is not to defend the plenary inerrancy of scripture, that position will be stated and defended vigorously in the chapter on Prolegomena, let it suffice to be said here, that the things which come directly from God—that are “God breathed”—are incapable of being at fault. Thus, for a theology to not be scripturally accurate is defeating the purpose of doing theology at all. Good “God talk” must be consistent with the “talk” that God has uttered about himself from on high.
One final note about a theology that is Biblically Accurate: there is always some degree of proof-texting that is done when doing any kind of theology. We will always cite this verse or that group of verses in support of this position or another. If done well, this adds a level of credibility to theological arguments as it always reminds the reader that the theologian is not the authority upon which a particular argument stands or falls—but scripture is. Yet, when proof-texts are taken out of their context, they can be made to mean things that they are not stating at all. Careful exegesis must be done before any proof-text should be used or considered valid; one must always endeavor to understand any given text in the broader context of the larger argument or passage that it is a part of, in the context of the particular book that it is located within, and in the context of the other writings by said author. In addition, Even a book’s location within the revealed canon of scripture must be taken into account as well as scriptural teaching as a whole. D.A. Carson is fond of reminding his students, “A text taken out of its context is a pretext for a proof-text.”
It Must Accurately Describe the World Around Us:
As we will discuss further in the section on Prolegomena, God has revealed himself not only in the scriptures but also in the created world. Certainly God’s word, being the revelation of an inerrant God, is the lens through which we must view the world around us; to do otherwise would be foolish. God’s revelation of himself in creation is mediated through our senses and through our understanding—both of which can be demonstrated again and again to be fallible; God’s word is not. At the same time, God has given us reasonable minds with which we can study the world around us. We can observe through our senses, recognizing that though there is a significant degree of error within our sensory observation, we do live in a world with a benevolent God who does not play tricks upon our senses. Thus, the theology that we have must be consistent with the things in God’s created order that we can observe, though recognizing that there are limits upon our senses and that there are no limits upon God’s senses.
For example, when many of us were younger, particularly if we attended a government-run school, we were taught by our teachers that Christopher Columbus discovered that the world was round and that prior to Columbus’ discovery, most people still believed that the earth was flat and that we were capable of falling off the edge of the earth if we sailed too far. Though many of my Elementary School teachers passionately affirmed this falsehood, it simply was not true. The Pythagoreans, more than 2000 years before Columbus, had demonstrated mathematically that the earth was round and had even estimated its diameter with a fair degree of accuracy. Now, when my young mind was first confronted with this truth by a mathematician and scientist, I had a choice to make: do I believe my elementary school teacher or do I believe one who is a trained authority on these particular matters. The answer was obvious: I submitted my previous knowledge to the teaching of one who was an authority in his field. In the same way, is not God the ultimate authority on the creation that he has brought into being? When there is potential for our own errors in observation, ought we not submit ourselves to the teaching of one who is the authority on every subject? Thus God, in his word, provides us with a lens through which we can see and properly understand the world—yet there is still a world out there that we are looking at. As mentioned above, we must not do theology “in a vacuum;” rather, when doing theology, we must always understand it in reference to how it relates to life and the world that God has created around us.
It Must be God-Centered:
This principle is the counter-point to the mark of a bad theology, that of man-centeredness, that was mentioned above. Theology must always be God-talk and not man-talk. Scripture begins with the words, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” There can be no doubt that the scriptures begin with the assumption that God exists and that he is primary over his creation. Of course, were there no God, there would be no revelation in scripture, and then the Bible itself would be the greatest farce ever perpetrated by men, for the Bible itself claims to be God’s word, not men’s. Thus, our theology must always reflect the glory and majesty of the one who created us and must genuinely be speaking of the one true God.
It Must be Christ Centered:
As mentioned above, the scriptures also are given for the purpose of pointing toward, speaking of, and proclaiming the glory of Jesus Christ: God the Son. All of the Old Testament points toward Jesus and all of the New Testament is a result of Jesus’ work, or, as the Apostle Paul records it, “All of God’s promises (speaking of the Old and New Testaments) find their yes in Him.” The answer that scripture presents to all of the problems of man is Christ and him crucified. It is through Christ that our sins are atoned for; it is through Christ that God becomes propitious towards believers; it is by Christ that we are brought into the presence of God the Father and adopted as sons and daughters, as the church, being made the very bride of Christ. It is through Christ that we know the true meaning of sacrificial love and it is only when we observe the majesty of Christ that we can understand what is genuinely beautiful and pleasant in this world. It is in Christ Jesus that we can find peace and hope not only for this life, but for all eternity. It is in Jesus that we can finally find meaning for our lives and freedom from the bondage that sin places us in. It is in Christ that we become “blessed,” and any theology that does not prominently present Jesus Christ is a theology that has no value to the lives of men and women, who ultimately need him more than they need life itself. Good theology is centered on Christ.
It Must be Doxological:
The Westminster Shorter Catechism begins by asking the question: “What is the chief end of man?” In other words, “What is mankind’s reason for being on earth?”, or more succinctly, “What is the meaning of life?” The answer that the catechism brings forth is, “The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever.” What a wonderful statement! While philosophy sends many a man on lifelong and frustrated quests to try and discern the meaning of life, the catechism presents an answer that is so simple that a child can understand it and yet so profound that it will take a lifetime to live it out and enjoy its implications. And this is the purpose for which man was created—to glorify God with the aim of enjoying him eternally.
Jonathan Edwards loved to deliberately misquote this catechism question. “What is God’s chief end?” Edwards would ask. The answer? “To glorify himself with the aim of bringing us to enjoy him forever.” Some have suggested that such a stance would be rather an arrogant one on the part of God, yet, in all of God’s manifold perfections, is he not worthy of all praise? Indeed, do we not find the greatest pleasure in life by enjoying God fully? If God is infinitely satisfied in himself, and he is, can we not also be infinitely satisfied in him? When we center our theology on God’s Triune person, our theology cannot help but be doxological.
The bottom line is that if your theology does not drive you to worship God in all of his fullness and majesty, it is not a good theology at all. Heaven is described as being a place where believers, surrounded by creation and myriads upon myriads of the heavenly host, will be wonderfully and gloriously singing praises to God on high and to the Lamb. If we are not finding our ultimate joy in worship here in this world, what does that say about our hope for an afterlife? Has the fall made us so schizophrenic that we will want then what we detest in this life? May it never be said! As a believer, the fullness of our joy in this life and the next must come through worship, and if our theology does not aid us in that end, our theology falls woefully short of its goal.
It Must be Both Eschatological and Protological:
Good theology must be both eschatological in that it anticipates the return of Jesus Christ and protological in that it looks backwards to see God’s hand ordaining the events of history. God is the God of yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and we must never lose sight of the fact that he is a God who has demonstrated his might in the events of history. He has raised empires and he has crushed them into the dust and God has given us his word through history so that we might understand all that he has done. To forget this is to live in denial of the greater portion of God’s revealed word. At the same time, we are not to be a people who always are looking backwards, but we are to be a people of anticipation, looking forward to the great culmination of history in the second coming of Jesus Christ. The scriptures themselves close with the promise of Christ, “Behold, I am coming soon!” Our theology must reflect the truth of that great promise. In a sense, we are to be people always actively engaged with the tasks of the day, yet with one hand looking to the sky, wondering and waiting, when our Lord will return as he left us.
It Must be Ecclesiastical:
Christians are not to find themselves as believers in isolation from one another. As appealing as that may sound at times, given that sometimes other believers are the ones who can drive us mad, God has ordained that we are part of one church—one body in Christ Jesus. Though we may constitute many parts based on our giftings and backgrounds, we are meant to understand ourselves as interconnected with other believers—rejoicing together and weeping together during the highs and lows of life. All of this has one great and wonderful end, when the Church, described as the bride of Christ, is presented to her groom as one, unified, clean, and perfect whole, and all to the glory of God. John sums up this principle in his first letter, when he writes that our fellowship with one another is what “makes our joy complete.” Our theology must reflect that sense of a believer’s connectedness with other believers.
It Must Encourage Sanctification:
John Calvin wrote that one of the purposes of our theology is to teach us piety. Calvin would continue in the same passage:
By piety I mean that union of reverence and love to God which the knowledge of his benefits inspires. For, until men feel that they owe everything to God, that they are cherished by his paternal care, and that he is the author of all their blessings, so that nought is to be looked for away from him, they will never submit to him in voluntary obedience; nay, unless they place their entire happiness in him, they will never yield up their whole selves to him in truth and sincerity.
In the fall, we not only found ourselves separated from our intimate communication with God, but the image of God, the Imago Dei, within us was warped. In God’s wonderful graciousness, he loves his people so ddeply that he not only justifies us through the saving blood of Jesus, but he works his Holy Spirit in us to restore the Imago Dei little by little. In other words, God is at work in the lives of believers to change them and to remold them, making their lives more and more reflect that of Jesus Christ. If our theology is not encouraging us to want to be sanctified, if it is not encouraging us to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in the work of sanctification, it falls short of its intended goal.
It Must Encompass All of Life:
The final mark of good theology is that it must encompass all of life. Abraham Kuyper once commented that as Sovereign Lord of creation, there was not an inch of the life of man that Christ did not put his finger on and declare, “Mine!” Modern man has a tendency to “compartmentalize” his life, living one way in church and another way before a watching world. Good theology does not allow one to do so. Theology is meant to be applied to all things that we do, and thus unify our life in a meaningful way before the throne of the Lord Jesus Christ. Everything that we do in one area or venue of life has an impact on what we do in every other area of life and our theology must be the thing that governs it all. Our theology must also engage both our hearts and our minds as well, challenging us to shape our very lives according to God’s revealed word. God is perfect by the very definition of who he is; should we not expect that he can perfectly order our steps? Indeed, that is the kind of God we have and that is the kind of God that our theology should always reflect.
It is worth noting that in the Old Testament alone, “thus says the Lord” is uttered more than 600 times. God is without question a God who talks to man—it is in the fall, though, that we lost the intimacy of that talk being face-to-face—something that Jesus came to undo.
Exegesis is the study of understanding what is being conveyed by any particular statement within its particular context.
Though little is known about the actual man, Pythagoras, the Pythagorean school was established in Samos, of southern Italy, about the year 525 B.C. Pythagoras was reportedly Ionian by heritage, having moved to Italy, and there is documentation that his disciples traveled as far as India, perhaps influencing their idea of reincarnation.
In 1643, a group of more than one hundred preachers and theologians representing the Scottish church, the Anglican church, and the Separatists, met in Westminster Abbey to begin what would be a five year discussion, endeavoring to articulate a concise statement of Biblical Doctrine. In 1649 the first edition of what are known as the Westminster Standards were published, complete with longer and shorter catechisms for the training of youth and directories for the application of this doctrine to life. Though different denominations have made many revisions of this doctrine over the years, the original language has rarely been improved upon, but has simply been nuanced to fit a particular denominational preference.
Edwards was one of the most influential American theologians of the 18th century, and along with George Whitefield, the English, Methodist preacher, paved the way for the first “Great Awakening” in America.
This is the heart of the message in Psalm 78—tell your children what God has done in the past so that they might live in hope of what God will do tomorrow (see especially Psalm 78:7).
Much theological confusion comes as a result of people ignoring one or both of these aspects. We must look to the future, but at the same time remember that an understanding of the imagery that is employed to speak of the future is found rooted in the Old Testament. The book of Revelation, in other words, cannot be understood apart from the prophets in the Old Testament Canon. At the same time, the Old Testament cannot be properly understood unless it is understood in light of the revealing of Christ in the New Testament. How many Jewish scholars lay frustrated because they are unwilling to see this great truth!
Pitfalls: The Marks of Bad Theology
Dead Orthodoxy:
The first pitfall that must be deliberately avoided is that of a “dead” orthodoxy. In the year 164 BC, the Jewish people celebrated the rededication of the temple after they had thrown off their Seleucid Syrian oppressors. Antiochus Epiphanies had not only looted the temple of its gold and silver, but had gone as far as to sacrifice a pig on the temple altar and set up a phallic symbol of Zeus in the Holy Place. This sparked the Maccabean revolt, let by Judah, Jonathan, and Simon Maccabees. After this victory, the Maccabeans assumed the role of kings, establishing what is referred to as the Hasmonean Dynasty. Remembering that the Maccabees were Levitical priests by decent, this joined the role of King and High Priest into one office, causing a great deal of resentment within the more orthodox Jewish community. The power of this combined position also led to corruption within the rulership. As a result, two groups emerged during this time: the Essines and the Pharisees.
The Essines were a separatist group that withdrew from their Jewish communities and established their own fortified communities, training in theology and warfare, and preparing themselves to be the army of the Messiah when said Messiah came. The Pharisees were a more moderate reform group, seeking to bring religious reform working within the Jewish society. They established rules for behavior and piety and they lived lives that were deliberately structured to promote obedience to the Law of God. When Jesus taught that the people’s righteousness had to exceed that of the Pharisees to enter the kingdom of heaven, this was not said tongue-in-cheek, but was a comment that would have shocked the people, as the Pharisees were perceived to be the holiest people that most Jews had ever encountered. The problem, though, within this sect, was that in their zeal for personal holiness, they had turned the law of God into a legalistic system of rules to check off. If you just did this and that and did these things in the prescribed way, the Pharisees taught, you are guaranteed heaven. They forgot the intent of the law, which is to demonstrate our total inability to be holy before God, and were expecting eternal life as a reward earned by the works of men. For this, Jesus would rebuke them in the strongest language.
Yet, this provides for us a good illustration of what can happen when one’s orthodoxy becomes dead and lifeless. The word orthodoxy itself means “right or sound doctrine,” coming from the Latin, “orthodoxos,” and begs the question—can “right thinking” about the things of God ever truly be without life? God is the source of all life, and thus, proper and right teaching about God must too be filled with the life of God. How sad it is when individuals and churches loose sight of the heart behind God’s word and fail to point to the life that comes from the God of light, whose very word is given as a light to our paths. As C.S. Lewis also warned, beware when the God of the “God talk” is lost or forgotten. Such happens when your orthodoxy becomes legalism.
Wildfire Passion:
The second mark of bad theology, and the exact opposite of “dead orthodoxy,” is an uncontrolled passion that burns like a wildfire, consuming all that it touches. This is not to deny the importance of passion in terms of faith—it is essential, but just as genuine orthodoxy builds up the believer, strengthening him with the truth of God’s word, so too does genuine passion. And just as there is a counterfeit orthodoxy that brings with it nothing but cold and stale death, so too there is a wildfire passion that might burn hot for a time, but which burns out the individual (and often those around them) and leaves nothing but a smoldering zone of death.
We must always remember that our passions are part of our divinely created makeup, and thus, as we grow in grace, our passions and our actions ought to better and better reflect the nature of God himself. Are God’s passions uncontrolled? Does God act out of a sense of emotionalism? Does God’s Spirit destroy those within whom he dwells? Certainly not! God’s Spirit brings life to the one in whom he dwells! So too, theology and religion, while it must address and move the passions, must not set them out of control, burning like a wildfire amongst dry timber.
Vain Theology:
The Hebrew term for vain is lb,h, (hevel) and is used to describe things that are empty and insubstantial like one’s breath or an idol. Sometimes our theology becomes so speculative that it looses its substance all together. Sometimes our theology becomes so influenced by ideas of men (rather than scripture) that it loses any solid foundation that it might have once had. We can ground theology in scripture because scripture itself is qeo/pneustoß (theopneustos), or “God-breathed,” but that which is the breath of men, that which is anqrwpneu/stoß (anthropneustos), is lb,h, (hevel). While good theology does at times enter into a degree of reasonable speculation, good theology is never founded upon speculation or wild ideas, but is consistently and perpetually grounded in the inerrant truth of God’s revealed word. One further note: in a post-modern era, we live in a culture that is ready and willing to affirm multiple, mutually-exclusive ideas as truth. As a result, many professing Christians have a theology that is a mixture of orthodox Christianity as well as non-Christian religions and ideas. Many professing Christians also have a proclivity to adapt their theology to fit new ideas that appeal to their minds rather than judging the new ideas through the lens shaped from a solidly scriptural theology. When theology becomes fickle, it becomes vain.
Man-Centered Theology:
Our final category of bad theology is a man-centered theology. As theology and religion did not originate in the mind of man, as liberal and natural theologians would suggest, it is not the right of mankind to determine how God is to be understood or worshiped. Indeed, that right belongs solely to God himself. And, as God is the source of the “God-Talk,” it is to be rightly assumed that God should be the center of such talk. The only man that should ever be exalted by our theology is Jesus Christ himself, who, while fully man, is also fully God. A theology based upon the works and glory of men—even one designed to give man comfort where no comfort is warranted – is a bad form of theology, and is truly no “God Talk” at all, but “man-talk.” Man exists to glorify God, not the other way around.
Their father, Matthias, was an elder priest in the temple who fled Jerusalem with his family, rallied the people to himself, and began the revolt against the Seleucid governors. Matthias and his sons Eleazar and John would die early on in the fighting, leaving his remaining three sons to continue the battle and overthrow the oppressors. The Maccabees proved themselves to be tactical geniuses in guerilla warfare and are still studied today as a model for how a smaller force of soldiers can overcome a larger, more organized foe.
The Garden of God’s Word
Before I enter scripture itself, I wanted to begin with it as a whole. God’s word is very much like a wonderful garden, filled with all kinds of produce. And, it is a garden that reflects back at us all of the thorns and thistles of our lives. When I was growing up, my parents kept a large vegetable garden. This garden usually caused me to lament the coming of Saturday, for I often was made to spend them pulling up weeds or tilling the soil when I would have rather been playing baseball or watching cartoons like my friends. Yet, though we all sweated and toiled over it, the produce was always a blessing on the dinner table.
God’s word is the same way. As a Christian, we need to labor in it. It takes work to root out the deep truths and riches that it contains. Does that mean that the Bible is full of thorns and thistles, subject to the fall? Certainly not! The thorns and thistles are the things that we bring to the table. These are our secret sins and lusts. The word of God is powerful and potent when it comes to convicting men of their sinful ways. And if we are going to approach the word of God seeking its fruit, then those thorns and thistles in our own life must be pulled out by the root.
But what a rich variety of fruit that lies within God’s Word! There are the sweet berries of God’s promises, the abundant and hearty beans of God the Father’s nature revealed within, the spicy peppers of the power of God the Holy Spirit moving through history, and the earthy tubers of God the Son’s work on earth. There are the majestic and flowering fruit trees of God’s grace and there are the bitter radishes of God’s judgment on unbelievers. And the abundance therein proclaims without hesitation God’s glory and his constancy toward and provision for his people.
And just as is with any healthy garden, it is full of life. Worms to till the soil, bugs to pollinate, and birds to fill the trees with song, God’s word is alive and healthy and how the Christian ought to long to rest therein for all of his days. And the garden most importantly is a garden that is fed with a spring of pure and living water, even though it is surrounded by a dry and arid land. What an oasis we have in God’s Word! Oh, how the Christian inflicts such pain on himself by seeking the worldly pleasures of baseball and cartoons over the riches of God’s word.
God’s Garden
(Genesis 2-3)
It would seem that God is the original gardener. And what a garden he planted. It was paradise! Yet, what made it paradise is not the variety of beautiful and tasty plants, but God’s own presence therein. God strolled freely with Adam and Eve in the garden. Even the pits of hell would be paradise with Him as a companion. Yet this garden also was not fallen. There were no thorns or thistles, there were no pesky rocks to till out, and there were no diseases within the place. There were no storms in Eden. There were no natural disasters or floods to worry about; just the cool summer rain that fell gently on their backs.
There was no viciousness in the animals and no predators to worry about. They could sleep under the stars gazing at a picture of God’s glory undefiled by the clouds of sin or the fear of darkness. They lay naked and unashamed. What a contrast this is to our world today. And Adam and Eve gave all of this up for a bite of fruit and a lust to be like their creator.
It has been said that you never appreciate your blessings until they are gone. How this truth is illustrated by Adam and Eve. They threw away paradise! And we would do the same if we got the chance. How often we find ourselves longing for the “greener” grass on the other side of the hill. We know that it is not greener, but our heart still yearns for it. How often we reflect longingly at past paths of sin. We only remember the fleeting moments of pleasure and never the lasting pain of guilt and grief. Oh how often we see the seeds of temptation as harmless, yet, time and time again, they sprout in our fertile hearts.
Let our hearts long once again for paradise. For the believer in Jesus Christ, paradise has been reserved for you in heaven, no more will the ravages of sin destroy. Yet, as we look around at those we care about, we must ask, how many of them will not be joining us there. Let us seek to plant the seeds of paradise in the hearts of those around us, that they might walk the cool meadows of heaven by our side.
Adam’s Garden
(Genesis 4)
What a contrast Adam’s garden is to God’s. Adams is filled with rocks, thorns, and thistles. It requires the sweat of the brow to be worked, and where was the eternal spring of water to nourish the produce? And where was the presence of God, walking freely within?
There is such a difference between the things that God has made and the things that we attempt to make. We marvel at our towers and sky-scrapers, yet God built the mountains to tower miles high. We have seen towers topple as a result of earthquakes and hurricanes. On September 11th a few years back, we found out how quickly towers fall in an explosion. Yet, even with the explosive force of a volcano, which is millions of times more powerful than a detonating airliner and thousands of times more powerful than an atom bomb, there is still quite a formidable mountain that remains. James says that the edifices of man will burn away like grass under the hot winds of the summer. Pound for pound, the tensile strength of the silken strand of a spider-web is many times greater than that of man-made steel alloys. Oh the vanity that lies with in the garden of the children of Adam.
And what fruit did Adam’s garden bear? It bore the fruit of discontent and shame, for it was Cain the gardener who slew his brother in the fields. And we are still slaying each other today in our fields. Yes, we may be more subtle than to bash in our brother’s head with a rock, but when we destroy his marriage because of a fling with his wife, we do the same thing. Calvin said that the heart of man is a factory of idols. If that is the case, it is the mind of man that is the heart’s marketing firm. And production is in high gear. Not only do we fill our lives with the thorns and thistles of sin, but we export our sins to our neighbors and our children. What a mess Adam’s garden was. What a mess ours continues to be.
Noah’s Vineyard
(Genesis 9: 20-29)
What a picture of human nature we have painted for us here by Moses. Noah, “the preacher of righteousness” to quote Peter, had just exited the ark and planted a vineyard. Though that is not a bad thing in itself, what he does next is. Noah becomes drunk and in some way exposes himself to his son Ham. Ham, perhaps with a tinge of sarcasm or humor, tells his brothers, “guess what dad did!” And all over again, we have the separation of the children of God and the children of the world. Ham and his line are cursed and Shem’s line is blessed.
How often in our own lives have we fallen into this trap. During times of great trial and difficulty our faith shines and is strong. But during times of peace and prosperity, we let our guard down, falling prey to the sins of the world. This is what happened with Noah. Once he had a chance to relax, he fell back into his old ways. Is this not the tendency of the church itself? The times of greatest church growth are always during the times of great persecution and trial.
I would argue that this is the greatest trial of the church in America today. We have great freedoms when it comes to expressing our faith and in religion. We don’t have to worry about government oppression or persecution. While this is a great blessing, it has become a stumbling block for many. Church has become culturally acceptable and in turn it requires no sincere commitment.
I suggest that we learn from Noah’s folly. Even in times of prosperity and rest, we need to keep our guard up. Yes, we are reminded of the humanness of many of these “Bible heroes,” but more importantly, let the lessons of their failure fall on attentive ears. Satan is always seeking to destroy, he is always lurking behind the next corner. Though he may not attack with claw or bite, he will attack in some way and it may be with wealth and flattery. Let us seek to live to God’s glory every day and in every moment and not fall into sin during times of relative comfort.
The Jordan Valley
(Genesis 13)
When Abram offered Lot a choice of land to settle in, Lot chose the Jordan Valley for it was well watered as Eden had been. Abram trusted in the Lord for his provision, but it is clear here, that Lot evaluated things by the way of men. But what he found in that valley would eat at his heart. Peter tells us that Lot’s heart was tormented because he lived and worked around the wicked men of Sodom. The grass looked greener in the valley, as the Garden of the Lord, scripture tells us, but there was one thing missing from that garden altogether: the presence of the Lord. God had left those men to their wickedness.
So often this is a testimony to the result of our own decision making. We often make our choices based on human ideas and terms. “What do I think that I would like,” we ask. “Where would I like to serve in ministry?” “How should I spend MY money.” Yet, the money does not belong to us, the ministry does not belong to us, and our life does not belong to us. Thus, the only opinion of what we should or should not be doing that matters is the opinion of our Lord and Savior. I think that it was Spurgeon who said that there is no ideal place to serve God—except where he puts you. How often do we truly seek God’s will first and our will second. Let us learn from righteous Lot the torment of making decisions based on human reasoning.
The Promised Land
(Joshua 1)
The Israelites had been slaves in Egypt, having had to work to irrigate the gardens which they grew, they had traveled through the desert, with God as an oasis from the elements, and they were about to enter into the Promised Land. This land was to be a place much like Eden, where the vegetation was lush and the thorns and thistles were few. It was described as paradise, but Canaan was only meant as a partial fulfillment of God’s promise to his people. Canaan had been polluted with the sin and wickedness of its inhabitants and the Israelites did anything but purge the land of sin. Rather, they quickly joined in with the pagan revelries.
How little we do to preserve the purity of what God has given us. We pollute our marriages with want and a wandering heart; we pollute our families with the things we teach our children to ignore. We pollute our jobs with laziness and we pollute our relationship with our Creator with neglect and sin. We may not have carved Baals and Asherahs, but we have set humanism and materialism in our hearts. We need to turn our hearts back toward the Lord, seeking his glory and the joy of the promised land kept and preserved from ruin for those who would call on the name of Jesus for salvation.
Naboth’s Vineyard
(1 Kings 21)
Once more, we have a picture of Adam’s garden. Ahab wanted that which was not his and Naboth was too stubborn to give the king what he wanted. While Naboth is certainly “in the right” by all legal and moral estimations, he still coveted the land of his fathers. Now we can certainly talk about Leverite law and how a family is to keep the land within the family, but we also must remember Samuel’s warning about the ways of kings (1 Samuel 8:14).
Perhaps Naboth was not aware that Ahab would seek his death. Perhaps Naboth was not aware of the wiles of Jezebel. No, that hardly seems possible. Ahab had deliberately sought the death of the prophets of God. Perhaps Ahab was just misunderstood by those pesky prophets. “Ahab did more to provoke the LORD, the God of Israel, to anger than all of the kings of Israel who were before him” (1 Kings 16: 33). I hardly think that there was any misunderstanding about the nature of Ahab.
Naboth coveted his land and would not give it up to the king. Naboth had to know to what end this path would bring. And once again, blood flowed. Sticking to your guns is a good thing, even in the face of death, but I am not convinced that Naboth is doing just that. So often we too hold stubbornly to the wrong things. And usually those things are sins that God is calling us to mortify. We must always remember that it is not our fathers who have given us their land, but it comes from God, and it is given for His glory, not our satisfaction. He who giveth can also take.
Solomon’s Garden
(The Song of Solomon)
While it is important not to allegorize this book, there is a clear sense of looking both forward and back. This is Solomon’s pursuit of a young lady, but the purity with which this pursuit is done is a model for all Christians today. In addition, it points back to the purity of the marriage pursuit of Adam and Eve in the garden before the fall and it points forward to give us a picture of our Savior pursuing his bride, the church.
Yet, there is something else worth noting about the setting of this book. This book describes a hidden garden where the maiden works. The garden is a safe place, a place where these pursuits can take place without fear or threat. Our homes need to exhibit that same sense of safety. They need to be a place where husbands and wives can come together with joy and pleasure, knowing that they will not face the kind of the scrutiny that the world gives out. And it needs to be a place of safety where children can retreat to and find comfort and hope therein when the world seems to hate them. It must be a place of building up, not tearing down.
Is that how our spouse would describe our home? How about our children? If not, then there is cultivating to be done.
Jeremiah’s Garden of Hope
(Jeremiah 32)
The setting and timing of this event is as bleak as it gets. The Chaldeans are bearing down on the city of Jerusalem. They have been on a warpath conquering all of Judah, and the walled city of Jerusalem is one of the last holdouts. Jeremiah has been preaching to the people that the reason that the Chaldeans have come is because God is using them to bring punishment on the people for their faithlessness. Many wish to fight, Jeremiah is telling them to surrender, for this is God’s will.
Yet, as bleak as this time seems, there is a point of hope. Though the promised land is about to be totally overrun by the Chaldeans, God instructs Jeremiah to buy the field of his cousin. While this might seem contrary to common sense, God was using this purchase to make a statement.
Though Judah had sinned, though God was bringing catastrophic judgment on the people, God would also restore his people. Jeremiah’s purchase was a sign that the land would be restored to the people of Israel. They could not know this, but God would bring Cyrus to power in Persia to overthrow the Chaldeans, and would eventually send the exiles home. The field that Jeremiah bought would eventually be redeemed, as would all the land.
Yet, we must remember, that even that hope was a temporary one. Though there was repentance on the part of the people, a solution had to be had to atone for sin. God had that planned as well, for he would later send his son Jesus to do just that and to prepare a land that is permanent and unfading for his people. We have a great hope in Christ, dear friends; take courage. Even though things may look bleak, God, is, as he has always been and always will be, in control.
Habakkuk’s Garden
(Habakkuk 3: 17-19)
In many ways, Habakkuk’s story is like that of Job’s. Though Habakkuk had not been afflicted personally with trial, God’s people were being afflicted by their neighboring nations. Assyria had conquered the northern Kingdom of Israel and Babylon had just conquered the kingdom of Assyria and would soon come to destroy the southern kingdom of Judah. And behind it all is God’s hand of judgment on his people for their idolatry. In the face of this, Habakkuk boldly places the question before God as to how he could do this. How could God use the ungodly to punish his people? And ultimately, by God’s grace, Habakkuk comes to the same conclusion as did Job: God is sovereign and he will use those means that he chooses to rebuke his people. Yet, no matter how harsh the rebuke may seem, God will redeem his people as well. What a message of hope this is today, in a world that seems to have embraced chaos instead of holiness.
At the end of this little book, Habakkuk gives us a picture of his garden. It is a picture of barrenness and destruction. There is no blossom on the fig tree, no fruit on the fine, and the olive crops have failed. There is nothing in the fields, either plant or animal, and there is nothing in the stalls. This is a picture of a desolate land. Yet, it is not desolate at all! Why? For he understands that his strength, his help, and his salvation do not come from the crops that he produces or the animals that he owns, but it comes from the hand of God himself. God will deliver his people even when all of the means that this world has to offer are spent.
In the time of impending doom that Judah was facing at this point, what a message of hope and encouragement this is. What a stark reminder it is to us? So often we look only with discouragement at our own gardens. The things of our life may not be working out the way we have planned, never-the-less, if our trust is in God, he will provide for us our needs. God is a great and merciful God, and is abundant in blessing toward his people. Let us learn from Habakkuk’s own testimony; the sure provision of God is better than all that the world can provide.
A Treasure Hidden in a Field
(Matthew 13:44)
This parable, I find to have some particularly interesting elements. First of all, the man stumbles on the treasure by accident, or, more accurately, by God’s providence. He was not looking for it and he found it in a field that had been tilled and planted by another who had not found the treasure. Secondly, the field was not his own. This says both that the man was trespassing and that the field’s owner had no interest in things of true value.
Yet, the setting is still a field or a garden. It is a place that is not wild or unkempt but in a place that has been ordered and cultivated. And even though the treasure finds the man if you will, it is worth noting that the place in which the treasure is found is not in the chaotic wilds. So many people feel that the last place they can “find God” is in the church. “I feel closer to God when I am outside in the middle of nature.” Yet, usually, that is not where God is to be “found.”
I will admit that the church is often anything but a place of love and joy and compassion. Yet it is a place that has ordered itself in such a way as to strive to emulate God’s will. This is where God delights to make himself known. Sometimes it catches us by surprise and sometimes we are diligently searching for it. Regardless, unless we are in a place that strives to reflect God’s glory, the treasure will usually remain unseen.
Gethsemane
(Matthew 26:36)
What a sad garden, indeed. It is the place where Jesus went to spend his final hours with his disciples. It is the place where the disciples could not even stay awake with him in his final hour. It is the place where one of his disciples would betray him. And, it is the place where the rest of the disciples would flee.
How heavy our Lord’s heart must have been as he ascended this hill. The Songs of the Pilgrims Praising God and announcing his triumphal entry less than a week earlier must have felt a lifetime away. That night, darkness reigned. Yet, though darkness made its false claim of triumph from this garden, in not too many days, the angels of the Lord would announce to the women Jesus’ triumph over death in another garden. “He is not here for he has been raised!” These words of hope have split the darkness in the heart of many a man. It is a word which God has planted in the heart of all who he calls his own, that we might not only share the joy of a risen savior but so that we might be encouraged when we enter times where the devil appears to have triumphed.
The Preacher's Study 