Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever."
15 Καὶ ὁ ἕβδομος ἄγγελος ἐσάλπισεν· καὶ ἐγένοντο φωναὶ μεγάλαι ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ λέγοντες· ἐγένετο ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ κόσμου τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ τοῦ χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ βασιλεύσει εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων.
There are some questions around this verse that I'm not sure if I can handle in a blog post. But I do know that these Christological passages fascinate me. We know from Ephesians 1 that Christ is indeed on His throne and that He is indeed in control of everything. So what does this passage mean?
Getting back to what I wrote way back in chapter 1, it would seem that John had a very close fulfillment of these passages in mind. Yet I know many who take this to mean that Christ is not currently ruling earth, but that Satan is now (i.e. the god of this earth). So what do we make of this? Ephesians 1:22 tells us that all things are under His feet. I would consider the world to be part of "all things." This means that there is a contradiction (which is impossible) or we're reading something wrong somewhere.
As a rule, I like to use a clear passage to help interpret a more difficult passage. Ephesians 1 is crystal-clear. Meanwhile, here we are dealing with apocalyptic literature that is rich with symbolism and is ambiguous as to the time of its fulfillment. This forces me to say that this has already happened. I may later regret writing this, but it's where I am now. I also realize that there may be other passages I am not considering.
Theology geeks may find this conversation interesting, but I do want to keep this blog fairly devotional. I focus on these Christological passages because I like thinking about Jesus and His reign over all of creation. It amazes me that this God who created everything (and Colossians tells us all things were created through Him and for Him) also knows me personally and I can know Him as well. He condescends to humanity by giving us special revelation through His Word. It's an incredible blessing to know the Living God.
Does this fill your heart with awe and wonder? It should certainly empower your life. Not in a health and wealth kind of way, but in a way that encourages you to walk by the Spirit and not by the flesh. Does it?
Showing posts with label dispensationalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dispensationalism. Show all posts
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Who He Helps
Hebrews 2:16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham.
16 οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται.
Given a discussion I have had recently on Facebook, this verse really leaps out at me. Here we see that Jesus helps the σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ. The word σπέρματος is a genitive singular and it means "seed." This would be very confusing except that this word can also be used in the singular to refer to a collective plural. It's sort of like how a farmer would buy a bag of seed today. You could say "seeds," but you don't have to in English and you don't in Greek either.
Why is this significant? We know from the Old Testament that the "seed" of Abraham has two meanings. One refers to Christ Himself as Paul explains in Galatians 3:16. However, one does not have to read much in the Old Testament to see how Israel is described as the seed of Abraham as well. As my Old Testament professor pointed out over and over again, the three megathemes of the Old Testament are land, seed, and blessing.
Here we see that Christ helps the seed of Abraham. Just taking this text at face-value, I don't see what else it could mean other than the author of Hebrews is identifying the church with the seed of Abraham. It is possible that since this is written to a Jewish audience he is telling them that Christ helps the seed of Abraham, but that is just a subset of all the people who He helps. I find that logically possible, but highly improbable.
To be fair I consulted my MacArthur Bible Commentary on this verse and, sure enough, that is the argument that he uses. He writes that since the readers were Hebrews they would identify themselves with this description. True, but it seems like that ignores the flow of the chapter. We just had references to the "children God has given me," for example. Read it for yourself and I think you'll see that the scope of the chapter refers to all of God's children in Christ. I don't think it makes contextual sense to take this verse and limit it to those who are actually genetically linked to Abraham.
What do we do with this? As a friend of mine says, Israel is the key to the Bible. How we read the Bible depends on what we do with Israel. If we take Israel to refer to the literal people who are genetically linked to Abraham then we read the Bible and particularly the Old Testament one way. But if we understand the church to be the fulfillment of Israel then we read it another way. A verse like this has me leaning in the latter category. But frankly that gives me a lot of hope because that lets me read the Old Testament in a way that it actually has meaning to me rather than to a group of people that I will never truly be a part of, despite being grafted in.
Of course, I still have not studied any of this in a structured way so I am open to criticism and correction. Please comment if you have thoughts on this matter. Did I completely miss the point of this verse?
Note: This is the 1000th post for this blog. I love round numbers like that. I want to thank those of you who read this regularly. I really write it for my own benefit as it serves as a way for me to get deeper into something I've read each day. But if you've enjoyed it or been edified I'd love to know in the comments.
16 οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται.
Given a discussion I have had recently on Facebook, this verse really leaps out at me. Here we see that Jesus helps the σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ. The word σπέρματος is a genitive singular and it means "seed." This would be very confusing except that this word can also be used in the singular to refer to a collective plural. It's sort of like how a farmer would buy a bag of seed today. You could say "seeds," but you don't have to in English and you don't in Greek either.
Why is this significant? We know from the Old Testament that the "seed" of Abraham has two meanings. One refers to Christ Himself as Paul explains in Galatians 3:16. However, one does not have to read much in the Old Testament to see how Israel is described as the seed of Abraham as well. As my Old Testament professor pointed out over and over again, the three megathemes of the Old Testament are land, seed, and blessing.
Here we see that Christ helps the seed of Abraham. Just taking this text at face-value, I don't see what else it could mean other than the author of Hebrews is identifying the church with the seed of Abraham. It is possible that since this is written to a Jewish audience he is telling them that Christ helps the seed of Abraham, but that is just a subset of all the people who He helps. I find that logically possible, but highly improbable.
To be fair I consulted my MacArthur Bible Commentary on this verse and, sure enough, that is the argument that he uses. He writes that since the readers were Hebrews they would identify themselves with this description. True, but it seems like that ignores the flow of the chapter. We just had references to the "children God has given me," for example. Read it for yourself and I think you'll see that the scope of the chapter refers to all of God's children in Christ. I don't think it makes contextual sense to take this verse and limit it to those who are actually genetically linked to Abraham.
What do we do with this? As a friend of mine says, Israel is the key to the Bible. How we read the Bible depends on what we do with Israel. If we take Israel to refer to the literal people who are genetically linked to Abraham then we read the Bible and particularly the Old Testament one way. But if we understand the church to be the fulfillment of Israel then we read it another way. A verse like this has me leaning in the latter category. But frankly that gives me a lot of hope because that lets me read the Old Testament in a way that it actually has meaning to me rather than to a group of people that I will never truly be a part of, despite being grafted in.
Of course, I still have not studied any of this in a structured way so I am open to criticism and correction. Please comment if you have thoughts on this matter. Did I completely miss the point of this verse?
Note: This is the 1000th post for this blog. I love round numbers like that. I want to thank those of you who read this regularly. I really write it for my own benefit as it serves as a way for me to get deeper into something I've read each day. But if you've enjoyed it or been edified I'd love to know in the comments.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Breaking Down Walls
Ephesians 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
14 Αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν, ὁ ποιήσας τὰ ἀμφότερα ἓν καὶ τὸ μεσότοιχον τοῦ φραγμοῦ λύσας, τὴν ἔχθραν ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ,
This verse falls in the middle of the second half of Ephesians 2. Here Paul is explaining how the Jews and Gentiles have been brought together by Christ. I go through this verse every week as I review Ephesians and every time I go through this passage I fail to understand how this can be satisfactorily explained in a Dispensational context. To me, this seems to be part of the Ephesians road away from Dispensationalism.
It's easy to lose the grandeur of this passage when I read this through 21st century Gentile eyes. But if I transport myself back to being a first-century Gentile I begin to see why this is so great. The temple had a section for Gentiles, but you had to be a Jew to get to the holy place. And of course the Most Holy Place was only accessible by one Levite per year on Yom Kippur.
Here Paul emphasizes that Christ has made both Jew and Gentile into one. The curtain in the temple was torn when Christ died on the cross. Galatians 3:28 tells us that in Christ there is no longer a distinction between Jew and Gentile. If you were a first-century Gentile in Palestine and you really wanted to pursue God you would really be kept at arm's length. You couldn't approach Him because you were not a Jew. But as Paul writes to those folks he explains that the distinction doesn't matter anymore. It is all about Jesus and His finished work in His life, death, burial, and resurrection.
Keep in mind that Gentiles were considered unclean. Apart from Christ we are all unclean. The good news is that we can all be washed completely clean in the blood of Christ. Are you ready to leave the filth behind?
14 Αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ εἰρήνη ἡμῶν, ὁ ποιήσας τὰ ἀμφότερα ἓν καὶ τὸ μεσότοιχον τοῦ φραγμοῦ λύσας, τὴν ἔχθραν ἐν τῇ σαρκὶ αὐτοῦ,
This verse falls in the middle of the second half of Ephesians 2. Here Paul is explaining how the Jews and Gentiles have been brought together by Christ. I go through this verse every week as I review Ephesians and every time I go through this passage I fail to understand how this can be satisfactorily explained in a Dispensational context. To me, this seems to be part of the Ephesians road away from Dispensationalism.
It's easy to lose the grandeur of this passage when I read this through 21st century Gentile eyes. But if I transport myself back to being a first-century Gentile I begin to see why this is so great. The temple had a section for Gentiles, but you had to be a Jew to get to the holy place. And of course the Most Holy Place was only accessible by one Levite per year on Yom Kippur.
Here Paul emphasizes that Christ has made both Jew and Gentile into one. The curtain in the temple was torn when Christ died on the cross. Galatians 3:28 tells us that in Christ there is no longer a distinction between Jew and Gentile. If you were a first-century Gentile in Palestine and you really wanted to pursue God you would really be kept at arm's length. You couldn't approach Him because you were not a Jew. But as Paul writes to those folks he explains that the distinction doesn't matter anymore. It is all about Jesus and His finished work in His life, death, burial, and resurrection.
Keep in mind that Gentiles were considered unclean. Apart from Christ we are all unclean. The good news is that we can all be washed completely clean in the blood of Christ. Are you ready to leave the filth behind?
Friday, July 23, 2010
The Israel of God
Galatians 6:15 For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. 16 And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.
15 οὔτε γὰρ περιτομή τί ἐστιν οὔτε ἀκροβυστία ἀλλὰ καινὴ κτίσις. 16 καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν, εἰρήνη ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς καὶ ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ.
This is another one of those passages that seems to blur the distinction between Israel and the church. In fact, here Paul uses the terms synonymously. Those who are new creations are part of τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ. Of course, one could also make the argument that the καὶ before this phrase means that there are two distinct groups -- those who walk by this rule and the Israel of God.
But why does Paul have to add the τοῦ θεοῦ if that is the case? Simply mentioning Israel would be sufficient to make the reader think of the descendants of Abraham. Back in chapter 3 Paul made the point that the promise was not to the offsprings referring to many, but to the offspring who is Christ. In other words, it seems to be all about Christ.
What is the point of writing this? First, this is my blog and I use it to work out things over which I'm wrestling. I attend a strongly dispensational school, but I have my doubts and here is one place I'm working them out. Not every day is going to be a wonderful devotional, so I'm sorry about that.
Another is that I do think that this opens up the Old Testament. It seems to me that if you do not blur the lines between Israel and the church then the Old Testament has practically no relevance for the Christian other than to show God's providence in sending Christ for us. We can glory in the fulfilled prophecies, but what do we do with Psalms, for example? Do we read the whole Psalter and say, "That's for Israel, not for us?" I don't think so. I don't know any dispensationalist that does so, but it seems like you should if you want to be consistent.
Again, I don't claim to have a deep knowledge of dispensationalism. By this time next year I will after taking Systematic IV. Until then, I'm just going to keep musing as I read Scripture.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
