Category Archives: Biblical Theology

01/01/2020

On Psalm 119:33-40 (He)

By Phillip Powers

Hebrew he33 Teach me, Lord, the meaning of your statutes,
and I will always keep them.
34 Help me understand your instruction,
and I will obey it
and follow it with all my heart.
35 Help me stay on the path of your commands,
for I take pleasure in it.
36 Turn my heart to your decrees
and not to dishonest profit.
37 Turn my eyes
from looking at what is worthless;
give me life in your ways.
38 Confirm what you said to your servant,
for it produces reverence for you.
39 Turn away the disgrace I dread;
indeed, your judgments are good.
40 How I long for your precepts!
Give me life through your righteousness.

In the the fifth stanza of Psalm 119 ( ה/he – pronounced “hey”), the psalmist expresses his complete dependency upon God for understanding His Word. And so, he prays to God for illumination. “Teach me, Lord, the meaning of your statues, and I will always keep them. Help me to understand your instruction, and I will obey it and follow it with all my heart.” (Verses 33-34) Illumination is simply that work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer by which He opens our minds to understand and apply the Scriptures. And it is this “spiritual” understanding that distinguishes the believer’s reading of Holy Scripture from the nonbeliever.

The reality is that there are secular scholars (historians, linguists, philosophers) who know the history, language, and theology of the Bible better than the average Christian. Their historical reconstructions are more compelling, their literary analyses are more sophisticated, their exposition perhaps even more accurate. However, they do not believe in the one who said, “and yet they testify about me.” (John 5.39) The difference being that they do not have the indwelling Holy Spirit whose specific job is to lead believers into all truth. Therefore, we must conclude that illumination gives us an understanding that is more than merely intellectual. It goes beyond the literary and the historical to the transformational. It is the Spirit who brings the dead words to life, who renews and revives the weary soul.

And so, we must affirm that illumination is not the imparting of new information, as opposed to that which is largely gained simply by being a good reader. Rather, illumination is the creation of a new capacity to receive the inspired Word of God and to be changed by it. As our psalmist goes on to pray, “Turn my heart to your decrees and not to dishonest profit. Turn my eyes from looking at what is worthless; give me life in your ways.” (Verses 36-37) Our psalmist clearly understands that what he needs is more than a mere intellectual reading of Holy Scripture; what he needs, and what we all need, is that Spirit given illumination leading to transformation. “How I long for your precepts! Give me life through your righteousness.” (Verse 40)

It is somewhat appropriate, I think, that I am writing on this on the day in which many Christians will make a “New Years Resolution” to read the Bible more in 2020, perhaps, by starting some kind of Bible reading plan, e.g. the Bible in one year, etc. And, of course, this is a worthy goal to aim for. But there must be a realization that we are not simply reading for information; we are reading for transformation. This does not mean that every reading will be some kind of mountain top spiritual experience. Some, in fact, will be dull drudgery (re: Leviticus). But faithfulness over time, daily dependence upon the Spirit, humbly praying for eyes to see and ears to hear will slowly result in the transformation of our being into the image of Christ. This is why we call it a spiritual discipline, faithful obedience while relying upon the Spirit.

For further study:
Introduction and Overview
Psalm 119.1-8
Psalm 119.9-16
Psalm 119.17-24
Psalm 119.25-32

See also:
Sermon: On the Spirit and the Word

6 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Hermeneutics, Psalm 119

12/23/2019

On the Fourth Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

advent 4

The fourth Sunday of the season of Advent is dedicated to the contemplation of love, namely that it was love that motivated the Father to send the Son into the world as the incarnate Christ-child. And though the lectionary readings do not mention the love of God specifically, they do focus us on that great act of love, whereby our Savior became like unto us so that we may become like Him. So, before we turn our attention to the readings for this fourth Sunday, let us remind ourselves of that most memorable of verses,

For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will no perish but have everlasting life. (John 3.16)

This is the gift that we celebrate at Christmas, and the lectionary readings prepare us for that celebration by reminding us that this was the eternal plan of God from the very beginning of time.

Old Testament: Isaiah 7.10-16
Of course, this is the passage where we find God’s prediction of the virgin birth, that “the virgin will conceive, have a son, and name him Immanuel,” (verse 14), and this is the verse that will be cited by Matthew in today’s Gospel reading. And so it is tempting to fast forward immediately to the those events surrounding the birth of the Christ-child. However, we would be completely remiss if we ignored the original context within which this prophecy is given. And while we do not have the space here to recount the whole story, it would behoove us to linger in these chapters, specifically chapters 7-9, before jumping to the details of the Christmas story. This passage recounts the promise given through the prophet Isaiah that God would deliver the Kingdom of Judah from the enemies, even in spite of the seemingly insurmountable odds that were arrayed against them. “For before the boy knows to reject what is bad and choose what is good, the land of the two kings you dread will be abandoned.” (Verse 16) And it is this pattern then that becomes the typological precedent for the coming of Messiah. In other words, because God loves His people, He will deliver them from their enemies, whether those enemies be temporal (as with the people of Judah) or eternal (as with us and our enemy – sin).

Psalm: Psalm 80.1-7, 17-19
In the Psalm reading, “the psalmist laments Israel’s demise and asks the Lord to show favor toward his people, as he did in earlier times.” (Study Note, NET Bible) In other words, the psalmist is praying for God’s salvation specifically as that pertains to the restoration of the people of Israel. “Listen, Shepherd of Israel, who leads Joseph like a flock; you who sit enthroned between the cherubim, shine on Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh. Rally your power and come to save us.” (Verses 1-2) But what is most sobering in this Psalm is that the psalmist admits that the people of Israel have reaped the just and due consequence of their sin in punishment from God, and that it is God and God alone who can must intervene on behalf of His people for their forgiveness and restoration. “Lord God of Armies, how long will you be angry with your people’s prayers? You fed them the bread of tears and gave them the full measure of tears to drink.  (Verse 4-5) And this is not unlike the spiritual condition of all humanity; we are too justly under the judgment of God for our sin, and He and He alone is the one who must act for our salvation. And so we pray, “Restore us, Lord, God of Armies; make your face shine on us, so that we may be saved.”

New Testament: Matthew 1.18-25
The Gospel reading for this fourth and final Sunday of Advent, then, takes us to the events leading up the birth of the Christ-child. “After his mother Mary have been engaged to Joseph, it was discovered before they came together that she was pregnant from the Holy Spirit. So her husband Joseph, being a righteous man, and not wanting to disgrace her publicly, decided to divorce her secretly.” (Verse 18-19) Obviously, Joseph was facing a perplexing dilemma, and who’s to say what we might have done under those same circumstances. But God intervened in a dream telling Joseph to take Mary as his wife. “She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” (Verse 21) Of course, Matthew goes on in verses 22-23 to make the point that this was in fulfillment of what God had said through the prophet Isaiah, as we saw in our Old Testament reading. And “When Joseph woke up, he did as the Lord’s angel had commanded him. He married her but did not have sexual relations with her until she gave birth to a son. And he named him Jesus.” (Verses 24-25) But the important point to note in this passage is that in the Christ-child, God himself has come into the world “to save His people from their sins.” 

New Testament: Romans 1.1-7
And this was God’s plan A all along, as Paul goes on to show in the New Testament reading. Of course, in the Letter to the Romans, Paul is writing to a church that he himself had never visited. He was practically a stranger to them, and so, in these introductory verses, he must establish his identity and the authority from which he writes, which he ultimately grounds in the Gospel of God. “Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God.” (Verse 1) And it is this concept, the Gospel of God that Paul goes on to define in verses 2 thru 6 of the passage, that it was promised beforehand through the prophets in the Scriptures (verse 2), that it concerns his son, Jesus Christ our Lord, that he was a descendant of David (verse 3), appointed the powerful Son of God by the Spirit through resurrection (verse 4), and that through Him, we have been given a mission to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of His name throughout the nations (verse 5). The point being that this was God’s plan all along from eternity past to eternity future, the Gospel of God is the script by which history unfolds. And the coming of Christ, both in His first Advent and in His second, is the cornerstone of that Gospel.

And so, we return to where we began, that the Gospel of God is nothing less than the expression of His love for His people, and that is what we celebrate at Christmas. God himself entered into the creation as the Christ-child incarnate to save His people from their sins. And thanks be to God for giving us this gift.

For further study:
On the Season of Advent
On the First Sunday of Advent
On the Second Sunday of Advent
On the Third Sunday of Advent

Comments Off on On the Fourth Sunday of Advent   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Worship & Liturgy

12/12/2019

On the Second Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

second-sunday-in-advent

In the second week of Advent, we focus on peace, that the Christ-child came into the world to offer us peace. Peace, meaning the absence of conflict, of animosity, of antagonism. In the words of the angels on the night of His birth, “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people he favors.” (Luke 2.14) And when the Prince of Peace returns one day, He will establish His kingdom of perpetual peace once and for all. However, the good news pf Advent is that this is a peace that we, as His people, already experience in the here and now. And so, the lectionary readings for the Second Sunday of Advent invite us into the peace that His coming offers us and that we desperately look forward to at His coming.

Old Testament: Isaiah 11.1-10
Of course, the prophecies of Isaiah are replete with messianic overtones, and this week’s Old Testament reading is no different. In verse 1, we read, “Then a shoot will grow from the stump of Jesse,” which is Isaiah’s way of describing the Messiah according to His biological lineage descended from David, Son of Jesse. But the important thing about Him is what He will do, specifically how He will rule. Verse 2 of the passage tells us that, “The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him.” In other words, Messiah will be anointed with the Spirit of God for the purpose of ruling in justice. And what we must understand is that a just rule, established in righteousness and faithfulness (verse 5), is a prerequisite for peace, because, “He will judge the poor righteously and execute justice for the oppressed of the land.” (verse 4)

And it is His just rule that establishes the idyllic serenity that Isaiah goes on to describe in verses 6-9. “The wolf (traditionally read as lion) will dwell with lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the goat,” etc. And notice in verse 9, “They will not harm or destroy each other on my entire holy mountain, for the land will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the sea is filled with water.” This is Isaiah’s vision for the reign of Messiah, that violence will be no more, that bloodshed and conflict will be no more. Oh, how we long for that day, because, “On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will look to him for guidance, and his resting place will be glorious.” In other words, the reign of Messiah will be characterized by perfect peace. 

Psalm: Psalm 72.1-7, 18-19
According to the traditional heading, this psalm appears to be a prayer that was written by King David (see verse 20) for his son and successor Solomon. David is praying for Solomon as he prepares to ascend to the throne. And so, in verse 1, we read, “God, give your justice to the king and your righteousness to the king’s son.” However, given the messianic implications of the term “son of David”, we must see this as a prayer for the perfect and peaceful rule of Messiah. “He will judge your people with righteousness and your afflicted ones with justice.” (verse 2) And again, “May he vindicate the afflicted among the people, help the poor, and crush the oppressor.” (verse 4)  In other words, this psalm is an expression of longing for peace that is written on every human soul, and it reminds us that our longings for peace on earth will never be fully satisified by any human ruler or government. No, “Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel, who alone does wonders. Blessed be his glorious name forever; the whole earth is filled with his glory. Amen and amen.” (verse 18-19). There is a deep and severe longing in every human soul for the peace, and in this prayer, we affirm that it will only be realized with the coming of Messiah.

Gospel: Matthew 3.1-12
In the Gospel reading, then, we read of a familiar character in the Gospel accounts, namely John the Baptizer. And though we may not think of him in conjunction with the Christmas story, he is, nevertheless, important because of His role as herald. “For he is the one spoke of through the prophet Isaiah, who said: A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: Prepare the way for the Lord; make his paths straight.” (verse 3) And so, as we think about our Lord’s Advent, we must recognize that John was the appointed herald to announce His initial arrival. And he did so my preaching, “Repent, because the kingdom of heaven has come near.” (verse 2) This, by the way, is the same message that Jesus preached at the beginning of His ministry in Galilee.

But what makes this passage appropriate for Advent is what John says to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came out to be baptized. In verse 7, we read, “Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?” Admittedly, it is somewhat awkward to read about wrath when we are supposed to be focusing on peace; however, John has hit on something that is important to understand about our Lord’s coming, namely that before there can be peace, there must be wrath. Evil must be dealt with, and the wicked must be removed so that peace can rise.  And so, John proclaims that one who comes after him has “His winnowing shovel is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn. But the chaff he will burn with the fire that never goes out.” When our Lord Christ returns to in glory, He will bring with Him two things, peace for those who repent of their sins and wrath for those that do not. And so John tells us, “Therefore produce fruit consistent with repentance.”

New Testament: Romans 15.4-13
And finally, in the New Testament reading, we can see exactly what kind of fruit that is, namely that we who have repented of our sins, trusted in Christ, and received His peace should show forth that peace toward others. As Paul puts it in verse 7, “Therefore accept one another, just as Christ also accepted you, to the glory of God.” In other words, we are called to be Christ’s agents of peace in the world; we give to others what we ourselves have already received. This is in keeping with Paul’s prayer in verse 13, where he prays, “Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you believe so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.” The point is that the foundation for peaceful human relationships is grounded in the finished work of the Christ-child.

And the proof of Paul’s point in this passage is the full and equal inclusion of the Gentiles in the people of God. In the first century, there was no more antagonistic vitriolic relationship as that between the Jews and the Gentiles, but Paul strings together a handful of Old Testament quotes in this passage to show that it was always God’s plan to bring the Gentiles into the kingdom of Messiah. So, all of a sudden, Jewish followers of Jesus were faced with a dilemma, namely how could they accept Gentile followers of Jesus  into their communities as brothers and sisters in Christ. And Paul’s answer is that they can because they have received the peace of Christ. So, he prays, “Now may the God who gives endurance and encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one another, according to Christ Jesus, so that you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ with one mind and one voice.” This is the crucial point: He gives peace, we embrace peace, and He gets the glory.

May this Advent season bring you and yours all the peace of Christ that passes all understanding, and may we all show forth His peace to a world that is in so desperate need of it!

For Further Study:
On the Season of Advent
On the First Sunday of Advent

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

12/04/2019

On the First Sunday of Advent

By Phillip Powers

Adventskranz 1. Advent

As previously noted, this last Sunday, December 1, 2019, marked the beginning of the Christian season of Advent, and this first Sunday of the Advent season emphasizes hope, namely our expectation that Jesus the Christ will one day return to this earth in glory and power to establish His kingdom forever. Understandably, the corresponding lectionary readings (taken from the Revised Common Lectionary) help us to envision and to prepare ourselves for that day, and they reinforce our hope in the midst of the pain and difficulties that are so common in our world today.

Old Testament: Isaiah 2.1-5
In the Old Testament reading, we are confronted with “The vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem” (verse 1), and in this vision, the prophet looks forward to the last days to see the house of the Lord established and all the nations streaming to it. In verse 3, they say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us about his ways so that we may walk in his paths.”  This reminds us that God’s plan was never solely for the people of Israel; rather, His plan was for the salvation of the nations, that all peoples might come to know Him and to enjoy His benevolence. Because on that day, “instruction will go out of Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” 

And on that day, He will establish peace, as Isaiah describes in verse 4, “They will beat their swords into plows and their spears into pruning knives.” He goes on, “Nation will not take up the sword against nation, and they will never again train for war.” What a glorious hope that we have, that our Lord Jesus will come back to establish peace on earth once and for all. Oh, how we desperately long for that peace, and so, Isaiah encourages us, “House of Jacob, come and let us walk in the Lord’s light.” In other words, we are called to people of peace because of our hope. We know that one day our Lord Jesus will return.  This is our blessed hope, and so we must walk in the His light.

Psalm: Psalm 122
The Psalm reading follows up on Isaiah’s vision, then, with a prayer for the well being of Jerusalem. It is one of the “Songs of Ascent” which would be sang by Jewish pilgrims as they made their way up to the holy city to worship at the temple. As it says, “I rejoiced with those who said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord.'” (verse 1) And David tells us why we should rejoice in verse 3-4, where he writes, “Jerusalem, built as a city should be, solidly united, where the tribes, the Lord’s tribes, go up to give thanks to the name of the Lord.” Of course David was thinking of that earthly city, that temple which was made by hands, but we know, in light of our Lord’s first coming, that we are waiting for that heavenly Jerusalem, the city of God, where we will live in the presence of God for eternity. This is our hope.

Gospel: Matthew 24.36-44
The Gospel reading for this first Sunday of Advent, as it does every year, comes from the Olivet Discourse, in this case Matthew’s version. And this is a profound reminder that the season of Advent is radically eschatological in its scope. Yes, it prepares us to celebrate the birth of the Christ-child at Christmas, but it also reminds that our hope is yet future. And as Jesus says, “Now concerning that day and hour no one knows – neither the angels of heaven nor the Son – except the Father alone” (verse 36). And He concludes, “This is why you are also to be ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect” (verse 44). The point here is clear, that we must be ready, that we must prepare ourselves for His arrival, and in the context of the Olivet Discourse, this means that we must be faithful to the responsibilities that He has left us. As it says in verse 46, “Blessed is that servant who the master finds doing his job when he comes.”

New Testament: Romans 13.11-14
And finally, the New Testament reading gives us a glimpse of what this readied faithfulness looks like. It is sufficient here, I believe, to simply quote the passage at length: “Besides this, since you know the time, it is already the hour for you to wake up from sleep, because now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed. The night is nearly over, and the day is near; so let us discard the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us walk with decency, as in the daytime: not in carousing and drunkenness; not in sexual impurity and promiscuity; not in quarreling and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and don’t make plans to gratify the desires of the flesh.” That last line says it all, that we should put on Christ-likeness, because we know that our hope is certain and that our faithfulness will be rewarded on that day when Jesus comes again.

And so, let us renew our hope this Advent season. We live in a world that is completely inundated with conflict, confusion, and chaos; we are constantly bombarded with painful and tearful reminders that this world is not completely as it should be. But one day, it will all be put to rights, and until that time, we are called to endure in hope and to persevere in faithfulness, no matter how grim the outlook may be.

For further study:
On the Use and Benefit of the Lectionary
On the Season of Advent

3 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Spiritual Formation, Worship & Liturgy

10/21/2019

On Psalm 119.1-8 (Aleph)

By Phillip Powers

Aleph
1 How happy are those whose way is blameless,
who walk according to the Lord’s instruction!
2 Happy are those who keep his decrees
and seek him with all their heart.
3 They do nothing wrong;
they walk in his ways.
4 You have commanded that your precepts
be diligently kept.
5 If only my ways were committed
to keeping your statutes!
6 Then I would not be ashamed
when I think about all your commands.
7 I will praise you with an upright heart
when I learn your righteous judgments.
8 I will keep your statutes;
never abandon me. (CSB)

ℵ (aleph) is the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and therefore, it is the first stanza of Psalm 119. And when we read the first two verses, we are immediately confronted by the simple truth that obedience to the Word of God is the only way to experience God’s blessing. The CSB (see above) renders the verb as “happy”, whereas the majority of modern translations (NET, ESV, NASB, NIV) render it as “blessed”. Interestingly, the NLT renders this word as “joyful”, and this perhaps most accurately reflects the psalmists intent. “Joyful are people of integrity, who follow the instructions of the Lord. Joyful are those who obey his laws and search for him with all their hearts.” Nevertheless, no matter which English rendering we prefer, it is clear that something more than pleasing circumstances is being described here.

In the Bible, blessing or joy is something that is experienced more deeply in the human soul than mere surface level happiness. It is that inner sense of complete satisfaction and total contentment, of unwavering peace and ultimate fulfillment. It is nothing less then the ultimate thriving of the human soul as God intended it. And lets be clear, the source of this blessed joy is completely divine. It is not something that we can manufacture or achieve on our own. Our psalmist is clear that the only way into this experience of divine blessing is by obedience to the Word of God. In fact, he goes on to say in these verses that obedience is the only way that we can be set free from the bondage of guilt and shame and bring praise into his abiding presence.

Sadly, obedience is under emphasized in most Protestant versions of spirituality. Because of our Reformation heritage, we are quick to react against anything that smacks of works based salvation. We champion the cause of sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christus, that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. As Paul said in Ephesians, chapter 2, verse 9, “not from works, so that no one can boast.” However, in our haste to affirm the unconditional nature of grace, we have neglected and omitted the role that obedience plays in the Christian life. As Paul went on to say in that very next verse, “ For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time for us to do.” (Eph. 2.10) The simple truth that the psalmist is affirming in this first stanza of Psalm 119 is that obedience to God’s Word is the only available way into the fullness of divine blessing.

Of course, the reality is that none of us are able to perfectly keep the commands of God. As the Apostle James reminds us in chapter 2, verse 10 of his letter, “For whoever keeps the entire law, and yet stumbles at one point, is guilty of breaking it all.” The Gospel teaches us that we are all sinners, that we are all utterly incapable of obeying God’s Word. And left to ourselves, we can never experience the fullness of God’s blessing. This is why our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ became incarnate. He lived a life of perfect obedience to God’s Word in every way. And because we are united to Him by faith, His perfect obedience has become our obedience, His righteousness has become our righteousness. This is why Paul writes in Ephesians, chapter 1, verse 3, “Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavens in Christ.”

And it is precisely because His perfect obedience has been graciously reckoned unto us as righteousness that we should value and cultivate the habits of obedience to God’s Word. We should love obedience the way that the psalmist does here, because when we walk in His ways, then we are able to experience the fullness of blessings that are already ours in Christ by the Spirit.

For further study:
Introduction/Overview

10 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Psalm 119, Spiritual Formation

10/13/2019

On Psalm 119: An Introduction and Overview

By Phillip Powers

megillat-esther-persia-long-view

The Psalms are perhaps the best kept secret of the Old Testament; they are a deep well of food for the weary Christian soul. They are a rich resource for our spirituality, but sadly, more often than not, we neglect this spring of spiritual life in favor of the well worn tracts of the New Testament. However, this is merely a symptom of the larger problem, that being our fundamental neglect of the Old Testament in general, but more on that another time. For the purpose of this post, it is enough to say that most Christians are suffering from a feeble weakened spiritual life due to a basic disregard for the Book of Psalms.

Of course, there isn’t enough time or space here to completely explore the spiritual richness of each and every chapter in this central Old Testament Book, but there is one chapter in particular that demands our attention – Psalm 119. This chapter is a vast ocean of refreshing spiritual water for the dry and weary soul, and yet, so often, we fearfully ignore it simply due to its size. And at first glance it can be overwhelming; there are 176 total verses in this single chapter. However, in spite of its imposing length, there is an artistry about this chapter that is beautiful and majestic. It lifts us out of the despair of our circumstances into the glory and hope that is the Word of God.

From a composition perspective, this chapter is an absolute masterpiece of literary artistry. It is structured in a Hebrew acrostic pattern, which means that each successive stanza begins with the next letter of the Hebrew alphabet. There are twenty-two stanzas, one each for every letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and each stanza contains eight lines, each beginning with the designated Hebrew letter for that stanza. (22 x 8 = 176) However, what is truly masterful is that almost every line contains some synonym for the Word of God. Law, testimonies, ways, precepts, statutes, commandments, judgments/ordinances, Word, promises, etc. The psalmist enumerates the perfections of God’s Word in every line literally from A to Z.

And this is perhaps the most important aspect of this glorious chapter, namely that it is written as poetry, and as such, it is intended not only to speak to our intellect but to stir our affections, to lift our souls, to restore our hope and joy. It is impossible to read this psalm and not be completely awestruck by the authors absolute joy in God’s Word. In other words, for the psalmist, the Word of God is more than a mere resource for right thinking and right doing. No, it is so much more than that. It is the foundation upon which he stands; it is the source of all his hope and joy and comfort and assurance. It is the sustenance and provision for all of his being, all of his spirituality and devotion. The Word of the one true and living God is all that he needs.

However, in spite of all of this magnificent and majestic artistry, this Psalm is still largely neglected and/or completely ignored in the devotions of most Christians and their churches. Whether it is because we find it imposing and off putting due to its length, or simply because we believe it to be redundant and repetitive, we refuse to refresh our souls at this inexhaustible spring of spiritual life. And this is absolutely to our spiritual detriment. We severely need the testimony of this Psalm in both our personal and corporate devotions, especially at a time when the sufficiency of God’s Word is being questioned more and more. Let us turn back once again to the well worn paths of biblical spirituality, and linger long over Psalm 119.

For further study:
Spurgeon, Charles H. The Golden Alphabet: An Exposition of Psalm 119. Revised and Updated. Abbotsford, WI: Aneko Press, 2018.

11 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , | posted in Bible Exposition, Biblical Theology, Psalm 119, Spiritual Formation

04/24/2018

On the Interpretation of the Prophetic Genre

By Phillip Powers

solar-eclipse-apocalypse-853728

There is an inherent fascination in the human psyche with knowing the future. We all would like to have the ability to know and/or predict the future, because, let’s be honest, the unknown can be downright frightening. In the Christian context, this fascination works itself out in an obsession with the prophetic portions of Holy Scripture. Passages like Daniel’s 70 weeks, Jesus’ Olivet Discourse, or John’s Revelation along with numerous others become the seed bed for a diversity of end-times scenarios and perspectives. Modern day geo-political entities and events are identified with biblical images to suggest that we are living in the end times, or even to predict specific dates for the end of the world and Jesus’ second coming. So-called prophecy teachers write books espousing their views on end-times events, and they host prophecy conferences to advance their particular eschatological agendas.

The problem with all of this is that it is based on a fundamental hermeneutical error as it relates to the interpretation of the prophetic genres of Holy Scripture, namely that these prophecies speak with specificity to the events and political personalities of our own day. Certainly, the teaching of Holy Scripture, especially its prophetic portions, applies to the day in which we live, but these passages do not identify the specific movements of geo-political entities or personalities as we know them. The actions of nations like Russia, Iran, Syria, or Israel in our world have no relationship whatsoever to the prophecies of Holy Scripture. So, instead of trying to use current newspaper headlines like a cipher to “decode” the prophecies of the Bible, we should attempt to understand these texts within the boundaries of a reasonable and sound hermeneutical method. In the space that remains, I will attempt to lay out some of interpretive principles that may guide us in our understanding of the prophetic genres of Holy Scripture.

First, we must give interpretive priority to the original author’s intended message for his specific audience. In other words, a text cannot mean something today that it did not mean when it was originally written/spoken. But, someone might say, “well, isn’t the Holy Spirit the original author of all of scripture,” and then, they might go on to argue for a sensus plenior, a fuller sense than the human author was able to realize.  However, we must affirm that in inspiration God did not violate or override the identity of the human authors. Rather, in His graceful condescension, he used the personality and circumstances of the human authors to convey timeless truths, even while speaking to a specific people at a specific time in a specific way. So, any “fuller sense” we may supposedly identify must be consistent with the human author’s intended message, and if an interpretation or any applications we come up with would not make sense to the original audience, then we have violated this fundamental principle.

Second, and somewhat related to the first, we must give interpretive respect to the original context in which a particular a text occurs. In other words, a text without a context is a pretext for a proof text. The original authors of Holy Scripture were writing to specific people living at a particular time in a particular place, so, in order to understand their intended message, we must give consideration to the particulars of their historical and literary contexts. This is especially true when it comes to texts like the prophets, because, more often than not, they are using evocative cultural imagery, symbolism, and metaphors that would resonate with their intended audience. So, any supposed correspondence or identification of their imagery with persons, places, or things our modern context must be considered suspect if it could not have made sense in the original context within which it was spoken/written.

Third, we must reconsider our understanding of the prophetic task. The prophets of the Old Testament, and those prophetic texts in the New Testament, are not interested in laying out a step by step playbook for the events culminating in the end of the world. That kind question is more a reflection of our own interests than it is of theirs. The prophets were more interested in forth-telling God’s truth for their audiences than they were in foretelling future events, and all of their foretelling serves their overall purpose of forth-telling. Their primary interests and motives were moral, to bring about change in behavior and conduct; they were not interested in prediction simply for the sake of prediction. In other words, the prophets purpose is to indict Israel for her failure to keep God’s covenant and call her to repentance, to warn of impending judgment and punishment for disobedience, and to instill a hope for the future restoration in spite of that punishment.  We must remember that almost all of their predictions find their fulfillment in Israel’s immediate future, and the ones that do refer beyond that immediate time frame find their fulfillment in the eschaton at Jesus’ coming. So, any supposed fulfillment in our own day should be rejected outright as outside the boundaries of the prophetic task.

Finally, we must not let our theological/eschatological presuppositions (read hobby horses) control our understanding of Holy Scripture. Rather, Holy Scripture should govern our theological/eschatological conclusions.  Most of the obsession with the prophetic scriptures presupposes the framework of classic dispensational premillenialism; however, this kind of presupposition puts the proverbial cart before the horse. Now, I am not interested here in evaluating the particular tenets of that eschatological perspective, but it is important that we do not impose our preferred theological or eschatological viewpoint on the text. We certainly can and should draw theological conclusions from Holy Scripture as a part of the interpretive process, but we must remember that those theological conclusions should be held in submission to not in presumption of the teaching of Holy Scripture.

Ultimately, we must remember that the purpose of eschatology in the Bible is always sanctification. In nearly every instance, the foretelling of future events is meant to elicit life changing transformation. So, when we teach or preach from the prophetic portions of Holy Scripture, we would do well to follow their lead and invite our audiences to respond likewise. Even when our world seems dark and dim, our eschatological hope in Jesus’ second coming should lead to renewed and strengthened faith for living. If our interpretation of the prophets does not accomplish this task in us and in our hearers, then we have completely misunderstood the prophetic genres of the Bible.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Christian Education, Hermeneutics, Ministry

04/09/2018

On Penal Substitution Theory in the Early Church

By Phillip Powers

church fathers

Recently, I have been reflecting on the penal substitution theory of the atonement as it relates to the significance of Jesus death, both in the thinking of Jesus himself and in the understanding of his first followers. And the conclusion that I came to in both of those posts is that a penal substitution understanding is essential and necessary for a proper understanding of the atonement. The witness of Holy Scripture requires us to conclude that Jesus died for our sin. He took the place we deserved when he was nailed to the cross, and, in his death, he satisfied the just and due penalty for our sin required by a Holy and Righteous God.

This my seem like an injustice to us, that the innocent Son of God was unjustly punished by His Father for the sins of human beings, but simply because our modern sensibilities may view this as distasteful and hard to swallow, we cannot simply dismiss this understanding of the cross as so-called “cosmic child abuse”. Any attempt to bypass the offense of the cross to make it more palatable must ultimately be rejected. It is the very injustice of the cross that makes the Gospel beautiful and powerful, because that injustice was suffered by God himself that we might be reconciled to Him. He himself paid the penalty that He himself required so that we might be saved.

However, if we truly believe that this understanding of the cross is true and necessary, then it would make sense that we would see it throughout the history of the church. In their attempts to disprove this view, some critics of penal substitution suggest that the theory did not exist in the early church. They argue that it first appeared in the late eleventh century in the writings of Anselm of Canterbury, specifically in his work Cur Deus Homo. It was then further developed in the 13th century by Thomas Aquinas in his work Summa Theologiae, and then crystalized into the doctrine we know today in the 16th century by John Calvin in The Institutes of Christian Religion.

While the contributions of these works to our understanding of the atonement certainly hold great value, these critics question that if a penal substitution theory of the atonement is so central and essential, then why is not represented in the theological tradition before the 11th century. It is further argued that the early church fathers unanimously held to a Christus Victor or ransom theory of the atonement, and that if that’s how the earliest theologians viewed the atonement, then so should we. The problem with this argument, though, is that this it is often more assumed than it is demonstrated.

So, in what follows, rather then examining the views of any specific church father, I would simply like to list some resources that challenge this prevailing understanding of the development of the theology of the atonement.

Books
Jeffery, Steve, et al. Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2007.
McDonald, H.D. The Atonement of the Death of Christ: In Faith, Revelation, and History. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1985.

Articles
Chatfield, Graeme. “Penal Substitutionary Atonement in the Early Church Fathers, the Creeds, and Trinitarian Theology.” The Pacific Journal of Baptist Research 10/1 (May 2015). 3-10.
Vlach, Michael J. “Penal Substitution in Church History.” The Masters Seminary Journal 20/2 (Fall 2009). 199-214.
Williams, Garry J. ” Penal Substitutionary Atonement in the Church Fathers.” Evangelical Quarterly 83/3 (Fall 2011). 195-216.

Weblinks
“Historical Reflections on Substitutionary Atonement” posted at FullerStudio.Fuller.edu
“Penal Substitution a Sixteenth-Century Innovation?” posted at ReformationTheology.com, 05.11.12
“No Christus Victor Here – Atonement According to the Apostolic Fathers” posted at HolySpiritActivism.com, 04.07.14
“A Common (But Bad) Reason for Rejecting Penal Substitution” posted at Christianity.com, 07.15.14
“Did Early Christians Believe in Substitutionary Atonement?” posted at TheGospelCoalition.org, 04.03.15
“Penal Substitution as a Theory of Atonement in the Early Church Fathers” posted at OrthodoxChristianTheology.com, 06.03.15
“Penal Substitution in the Church Fathers: Part II” posted at OrthodoxChristianTheology.com, 11.26.15
“10 Things You should Know about Penal Substitution” posted at SamStorms.com, 05.02.16
“Penal Substitution In The Writings Of The Church Fathers” posted at PirateChristian.com,  05.04.16

Now, we certainly do not want read later theological concepts back in to the early church fathers anachronistically, but we may conclude that “an author can be held to teach the penal doctrine if he plainly states that the punishment deserved by sin from God was borne and dealt with by Jesus Christ in his death on the cross.” This means that the early church fathers can be shown to affirm the essential features of a penal substitution view, even if their understanding of that essential truth was not as developed as it would be by later authors. The church fathers were not univocal or unanimous in their support of the Christus Victor view as critics of the penal substitution view claim. They seemingly held a multifaceted understanding of the atonement with no one view overshadowing any others.

And this final observation is quite instructive for Christians today. No one view, no matter how essential, central, and necessary it is, can exhaust the mystery of Jesus’ death on the cross. So, even while affirming the centrality of the penal substitution view, we must not overlook or ignore other possible significances. The crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus is to the Christian faith like a beautiful diamond whose many facets all shine forth the glory of God in our salvation.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Church History, Systematic Theology

03/28/2018

On Jesus’ Understanding of His Death

By Phillip Powers

JesusFinalHours-56a149da5f9b58b7d0bdda13

In a previous post, I began considering how we should understand the death of Jesus, and I argued that the overwhelming testimony of both the Old and New Testament point to a penal substitution view as essential for understanding the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Specifically, I gave a handful of quotations from the various New Testament authors that show that the very first followers of Jesus understood His death in this way. Now, it is only reasonable to suppose that they must have received this understanding from somewhere; they didn’t just come up with it on their own. And it is my thesis that they received this understanding of Jesus’ atonement from Jesus himself.

However, this proposition is not without its critics. One such voice is that which belongs to Brian Zahnd, founder and lead pastor of Word of Life Church in St. Joseph, Missouri and author of a book entitled, Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God: The Scandalous Truth of the Very Good News, where he argues:

“Among the many problems with [a penal substitution] theory of the cross is that it turns God into a petty tyrant and a moral monster. Punishing the innocent in order to forgive the guilty is monstrous logic, atrocious theology, and a gross distortion of the idea of justice. … A theory of the cross that says it was God who desired the torture and murder of Jesus on Good Friday turns the Father of Jesus into a cruel and sadistic monster. It’s salvation by divine sadism.” (101-102)

He has also stated that

“Even if penal substitutionary atonement theory is one of the correct models for interpreting the cross (personally I’m convinced its a pagan idea and an outrageous libel against God) its still not the gospel. The gospel is the story of Jesus – not abstract atonement theories.” (via @BrianZahnd, tweeted 3.20.18, 7:27PM)

And in his blog “How Did Jesus Understand His Death?”, he argues that Jesus understood his death in the vein of the Christus Victor theory of the atonement on the basis of John 12:31-32.

So, in order to understand the meaning of Jesus’ death, we must consider carefully how Jesus understood it and conveyed its significance to His first disciples. It is relatively obvious that Jesus anticipated his death by crucifixion at the hands of the Jewish and Roman authorities. In the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), He predicts his death at least three specific occasions. Those predictions, along with many other allusions, coupled with the obvious animosity between the Jewish religious establishment and Jesus clearly indicate that Jesus was well aware of the fate that awaited Him on that third and final trip to Jerusalem. However, not only did he expect his upcoming execution, he also very clearly saw it as the necessary culmination of His ministry and mission.

In this light then, it is reasonable to expect that He must have reflected on the meaning of His death. And there are three sayings of Jesus that give us some insight into how he understood that meaning. The first saying of Jesus that gives us some insight into how he understood His death is found in Mark 10:45 (also Matthew 20.28), which is known as the ransom saying, because Jesus says, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” The second saying of Jesus that shows how he understood his death is found in the words of institution at the Last Supper (Mark 14:22-25, Matt. 26:26-29, Luke 22:14-20). There Jesus reinterprets the elements of the Passover meal in the light of His upcoming death. And the third saying that is also somewhat conceptually related is found in the prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he prayed “Take this cup away from me.” (Mark 14:36. Matt. 26:39,42, Luke 22:42)

These statements indicate that Jesus understood his death as a vicarious substitution for many, and it seems reasonably clear that the theological background of these sayings is to be found in that paradigmatic passage from the Old Testament which describes the vicarious substitution of the “suffering servant”. In Isaiah 52:13-53:12, the prophet vividly predicts the vicarious and expiatory suffering of the servant of the Lord for the many. The linguistic and conceptual parallels between the suffering servant song and these sayings of Jesus are quite telling. For example, the idea of a ransom in Mark 10:45, used as a metaphor, parallels the idea of a guilt offering in Isaiah 53:10, and the idea for many echoes the repetitive many in Isaiah 53:11-12. This indicates that Jesus clearly understood himself to be fulfilling the role of the suffering servant in His death on the cross.

Further, in the garden, when Jesus asks His Father to remove “the cup”, He is likely referring to “the cup of God’s wrath” or “judgment” so often described in the Old Testament prophets. And that is why He is able to say in John 12:31, “Now is the judgment of this world.” So, here again it seems fairly evident that Jesus understood His death as the satisfaction of God’s judgment on sin. In light of all this, it is safe to conclude that Jesus viewed His death as a substitutionary and expiatory act that satisfies the just judgment and due penalty for sin before a Holy God. It would seem, then, that the first followers of Jesus drew their penal substitution view of the atonement directly from the words of Jesus himself.

3 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Systematic Theology

03/15/2018

On so called ‘Cosmic Child Abuse’ and the Atonement

By Phillip Powers

o-CRUCIFIXION-facebook

In recent years, it has become rather faddish for critics of traditional atonement theory to dismiss the idea of penal substitution as a form of cosmic child abuse. In other words, these critics assert that it is a morally evil injustice for God to punish His innocent Son for the sins of all other human beings. They further assert that this kind of “redemptive violence” is simply incompatible with a God who is love. Stephen Chalk and Alan Mann, in their book The Lost Message of Jesus, state it this way:

The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse—a vengeful Father, punishing his Son for an offence he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside of the church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith. Deeper than that, however, is that such a concept stands in total contradiction to the statement “God is love”. If the cross is a personal act of violence perpetrated by God towards humankind but borne by his Son, then it makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies and to refuse to repay evil with evil.

Later, they give their understanding of the atonement when they state:

The truth is, the cross is a symbol of love. It is a demonstration of just how far God as Father and Jesus as his Son are prepared to go to prove that love. The cross is a vivid statement of the powerlessness of love.

This moral influence theory of the atonement is not new or original with Chalk and Mann. It was first advanced by a medieval scholastic theologian named Peter Abelard (1079-1142), who

“emphasized the primacy of God’s love and insisted that Christ did not make some sort of sacrificial payment to the Father to satisfy his offended dignity. Rather, Jesus demonstrated to humanity the full extent of God’s love for them” (Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 803)

In other words, on the cross, God showed to what extent He was willing to go to demonstrate the depth of His love for humanity, and His great love so demonstrated should cause human beings to respond in love to God. Certainly, God is love (1 John 4:7-21) and the cross is a demonstration of God’s love (Romans 5:8), but the above definition simply does not go far enough to explain why the cross is effective as a means of salvation for human beings. In what follows, I will give some reasons why this critique, that penal substitutionary atonement is “cosmic child abuse”, is completely unfounded and why a penal substitution view of the atonement is essential to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

First, it goes against the overwhelming testimony of Holy Scripture. It is no overstatement to conclude that the nearly unanimous witness of the Biblical authors from beginning to end is that Christ died as a substitute for the sins of humanity. There is not enough space here to quote all the verses that would serve to prove this point, so a few will simply have to suffice. As it relates to the Old Testament, one could argue that the entire sacrificial system was pointing to the death of Jesus, because that system is based upon the foundational assumption that the death of animals can substitute and atone for the sins of human beings. But, the premier text on this topic is the “Suffering Servant Song” of Isaiah 53, which says in part:

But he was pierced because of our rebellion, crushed because of our iniquities; punishment for our peace was on him, and we are healed by his wounds. We all went astray like sheep; we all have turned to our own way; and the Lord has punished him for the iniquity of us all. (verses 5-6)

And, in the New Testament, there are numerous verses that could be quoted to show that the first followers of Jesus understood his death as a substitutionary atonement for sin. Due to space limitations, a few will have to suffice. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul says, “For I passed on to you as most important what I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” Also, in 2 Corinthians 5:21, “He made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” In Romans 4:25, he says “He was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.” And not only Paul, but we see that the other writers of the New Testament understood the atonement in this way as well. In 1 Peter 2:24, Peter wrote, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree; so that, having died to sins, we might live for righteousness.” And in 1 Peter 3:18, he wrote, “For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring you to God.” In 1 John 4:10, John writes, “Love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice (propitiation) for our sins.” And the author of Hebrews, says in Hebrews 2:9, “But we do see Jesus—made lower than the angels for a short time so that by God’s grace he might taste death for everyone.”

In light of all this, we are safe to conclude that the Old and New Testament authors unanimously understand the death of Jesus as a substitute making atonement to God for the sins of humanity.

Second, this view also misunderstands the essential character and nature of God in two ways. First, as it relates to His character, proponents of this kind of moral influence theory exalt God’s love over and against His other attributes, namely His holiness and justice. God’s character attributes cannot be so divided as to pit them against one another. He is a God of love, but he is also and equally a God of holiness and justice. Moreover, His attributes are interrelated, such that his love is just and holy, and his holiness and justice are loving. To pit God’s justice against His love is to recapitulate that ancient heresy attributed to Marcion of Sinope (c. 85-c. 160), who believed the wrathful Hebrew God of the Old Testament was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. That heresy was rightly condemned by the fathers of early church.

Also, as it relates to the nature of God, this view fundamentally misunderstands the doctrine of the trinity. These critics of the traditional penal substitutionary view seem to assume that the Son was an innocent third party separate and distinct from God the Father. Therefore, they argue that it is unjust for God to punish the Son for the sins of all humanity. However, the Son is not some innocent disconnected third party in this discussion; no, the Son is God himself. The second person of the trinity was incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth, so it was the second person of the Trinity that died on the cross. We must not disconnect God’s threeness (in persons) from his oneness (in essence). After all, Christians are fundamentally monotheists; Holy Scripture clearly teaches that there is one God. So, we must conclude that all three Persons are the same God. In other words, there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct Persons. So, if the second person of the trinity died on the cross for the sins of humanity, then we must say that God himself died on the cross for the sins of humanity. Thus, the Son was a willing participant in the crucifixion, as God took the sins of humanity onto himself.

The atonement, a penal substitutionary atonement, is at the very center of the Christian Gospel, that Jesus Christ bore the sins of humanity on the cross and died in their place to satisfy their deserved punishment before a just and holy God. Let us not shrink from this fact in fear or shame, but embrace it as the glorious demonstration of God’s love that it is.

2 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , | posted in Biblical Theology, Church History, Gospels Studies, Historical Jesus, Systematic Theology, Worship & Liturgy

Tim Challies

Slow To Write

"let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger."

lovegavehope

Just another WordPress.com site

Jared Cornutt

Pastor | Speaker | Writer

Denny Burk

A commentary on theology, politics, and culture

G3 Ministries

Events + Resources for the Local Church

Biblical Reasoning

Biblical and Systematic Theology According to the Scriptures

RetroChristianity

Reclaiming the Forgotten Faith

SBC Voices

Southern Baptist News & Opinion

Lucid Theology

Thoughts on words, books, theology, and life.

Baptist21

A pastor-led voice for Baptists in the 21st century

Center For Baptist Renewal

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Pastor's Well - Pastor Well

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

Welcome

Articles - AlbertMohler.com

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers

The Gospel Coalition

The Personal and Professional Blog of Phillip Powers