Archive for the Old Testament Category

A Smoking Fire Pot

Posted in Genesis on January 28, 2011 by Harry

“When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces” (Gen. 15:17).

When covenants were made in the ancient Near East, certain rites would accompany the agreement in order to signify what would happen if one or both parties failed to live up to their end of the pact. One common ritual involved dismembering animals and then laying the pieces in two rows side-by-side with a path in between. The individuals making the covenant would then pass between the animals and invoke a curse upon themselves if they broke the agreement. In performing this rite both parties were in effect saying, “If I do not fulfill the terms of this covenant, may the destruction that befell these animals also be upon my head.”

As if His word of promise were not enough, the Lord finishes His encounter with Abram in Genesis 15 with this very same rite. In a theophany — a visible revelation of the divine — God appears as a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch (v. 17), a form similar to the pillar of fire He will use to guide the Israelites toward Canaan centuries later (Ex. 13:21–22). Fire symbolizes the Lord’s glory (Pss. 29:1–7; 50:1–3), further displaying the Almighty’s character.

Notice that it is God alone who passes between the animals; Abram is not invited to participate. He has already shown his trust and faithfulness. Here we have the Lord alone swearing by Himself that He will see to it that His promises will come to pass. This sworn oath is promissory and self-maledictory (invoking death to Himself if it is not fulfilled), giving His people confidence that He will accomplish all that He pledges (Heb. 6:13–18). It is an unparalleled manifestation of the Lord’s grace, for He promises to care for His loyal servant and his descendents forever.

This grace does not abolish Abram’s responsibility to continue his loyalty, as the patriarch is later given conditions to uphold (Gen. 17:1–14). What this display shows, however, is that though His people may at times be disloyal, God will still keep His end of the bargain; He will give His people the promised land. He finally fulfills this by sending the Messiah, who fully obeyed His Father, thus securing for them His blessings (Isa. 53; Matt. 3:13–17; 1 Peter 2:21–22).

Coram Deo:
Consider how amazing it is that God, who will not suffer any loss of His glory (Isa. 48:11), places His honor at stake in His plan to bring redemption to the world. What love is this? He condescends to us and assures us He will certainly do all that He promises! He pledges to do all that He swears to do, because if He does not, He would not be the one, true God of creation, nor would He be the faithful Lord of Israel. Rejoice in His covenant love for all of His people today.

Don Carson on Zechariah 3-5

Posted in OT Messianic Prophecies, Zechariah on December 21, 2010 by Harry

Before reflecting briefly on the two visions of Zechariah 5, I must go back and add a note on Zechariah 3–4.Chapters 3 and 4 clearly carry messianic overtones. For Zechariah 3, see the meditation for December 16: though the primary reference is to the reconstruction of 519 B.C., the stone (3:9), the Branch (3:8), and the temple all point beyond themselves. That significance is tied in Zechariah 4 to the two “sons of oil” (i.e., “the two who are anointed,” 4:14) who “serve the Lord of all the earth” (4:14). In the historical context, the two are Zerubbabel the governor, who is also the Davidic prince, and Joshua the priest. The one rebuilds the temple; the other offers the sacrifices prescribed by the covenantal sacrificial system. These two “messiahs,” these two anointed ones, exercise complementary roles. Together the two point forward to the ultimate Davidic king and the ultimate priest. The people of Qumran (a monastic community by the Dead Sea, still operating in Jesus’ day) actually expected two different messiahs, one Davidic and one priestly. They did not know how both the kingly and the priestly functions would come together in one man, the God-man, Jesus of Nazareth.

The two visions of chapter 5 leave aside the messianic overtones of the previous two chapters and focus on the continuing lawlessness and violence in the land. Yet the change of theme is not arbitrary. One of the functions of the Davidic king was to enforce justice (3:7; see 2 Sam. 15:2–3). Priests, too, were charged with administering justice (e.g., Deut. 17:9). The prophets foretold a time of perfect justice (Isa. 11:3–5; Jer. 23:5).The first of the two visions (the flying scroll, 5:1–4) promises judgment on the lawless. The scroll represents the whole law, not least its sanctions on those who defy God. These are God’s words, and God’s words have the power to accomplish all of God’s purposes. The second vision, of the woman in a basket (5:5–11), deals with the persistence of evil in the community. Because the Hebrew word for “wickedness” is feminine, it is personified in this vision as a woman—the Old Testament equivalent of the woman Babylon, the mother of prostitutes, in Revelation 17. Just as evil is often hidden, so is she—until she is exposed. The only answer is God’s: she is taken away to “Babylonia” (5:11) where she belongs. Thus God removes sin from his people as far as the east is from the west (Ps. 103:11–12). He washes away the uncleanness of his people (Ezek. 36:25), and the filthy garments are replaced by clean ones (Zech. 3), or else we have no hope at all.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

The Angel Brings Judgement

Posted in 1 Chronicles, Atonement, Providence - God's with tags on December 12, 2010 by Harry

1 CHRONICLES 21 “God sent the angel to Jerusalem to destroy it,but as he was about to destroy it, the LORD saw,and he relented from the calamity” (v. 15a).

Continuing our look at how the angel of the Lord appears in Scripture, we come today to an interesting passage in which the angel of the Lord plays a key role. David’s census of Israel in 1 Chronicles 21 provides an opportunity for us to see the angel work in both judgment and redemption.

Before we look specifically at what the angel does in this passage, note that in 1 Chronicles 21:1 Satan incited David to take the census, while in the parallel account of this event in 2 Samuel 24 the Lord moved the king to count the people. This is no contradiction; rather, it reflects the way in which God uses secondary means to accomplish His purposes. Being perfect in holiness, it is impossible for the Lord to sin (James 1:12-18), but that does not mean He is unable to use evil and evildoers to accomplish His will. The Lord is the primary cause of all that happens in that He governs all things, but this sovereign providence establishes secondary causes through which His goals come to pass. God moved David to take a census (2 Sam. 24:1), which was not wrong in itself, but apparently the motivation that David had in taking the census was. The Lord was not the actual individual who tempted David to sin (even if He was testing him here); this “honor” belonged to the accuser (1 Chron. 21:1), the end result of which was the good of selecting the temple site (1 Chron. 21:2-30). In the same event, God’s intent was good but David’s was not.

Even though God is sovereign over all, He remains free of evil, as people who sin are fully culpable for their actions. For this reason, Yahweh sent a plague on His people to discipline David for his sin; He even sent the angel of the Lord to destroy Jerusalem (vv. 14-17). Even though the angel of the Lord is not here identified explicitly as a pre-incarnate manifestation of the Son of God, these activities of judgment are in keeping with Christ’s work, for He will bring the sword of judgment to bear upon creation on that final day (Matt. 10:34-39).

At the same time, Jesus will stay His hand against all those who serve the Father through faith alone in His name, evidenced by obedience to His will (John 3:17; James 2:14-26). This too is foreseen in today’s passage, for the angel of the Lord’s wrath is withheld when David confesses his sin and seeks mercy (1 Chron. 21:15-30).

+Our culture is accustomed to seeing Jesus as meek and mild; indeed, this is an accurate picture of Him. Yet it is not a full-orbed depiction, for He is also the great Judge to come who will execute God’s wrath upon the impenitent. When sharing the gospel, it is appropriate to warn people that if they will not take upon themselves the gentle yoke of Jesus, they will be subject to His holy wrath.

The Commander of the Lord’s Army

Posted in Joshua with tags on December 12, 2010 by Harry

JOSHUA 5:13-15 “The commander of the LORD’S army said to Joshua,’Take off your sandals from your feet, for the place where youare standing is holy.’ And Joshua did so” (v.15).

Examining Scripture reveals that God employs angels often in the unfolding of His plan of redemption. From the angel who guarded the way to the Tree of Life in Genesis 3:24 to the angel Jesus sent to give the final vision of God’s Word in Revelation 22:16, angels are used to give physical help to the people of God, deliver messages, and even execute judgment upon the impenitent. This week, our study of how old covenant themes are fulfilled in the New Testament will focus on angels and the various roles they have played in the history of redemption.

Importantly, the term we translate as “angel” in English can also mean “messenger,” so it is not necessarily the case that every person called an angel in Scripture is the same as what we consider to be a heavenly being from God’s holy court. This may be the case with the angel of the Lord, who appears in many places throughout the Old Testament. Some theologians have identified this angel with the pre-incarnate Christ; thus, the angel of the Lord may be a “christophany” — an appearance of God’s Son before He assumed a human nature and “was made man” (Nicene Creed).

Not every being called the “angel of the Lord” is, in fact, the pre-incarnate Christ, for the term can simply refer an angel who serves the God of Israel. Also, the pre-incarnate Christ, in the guise of the angel of the Lord, can go by names other than the angel of the Lord. This is the case, for example, in today’s passage. We are clued in to the fact that the one identified as the “commander of the Lord’s army” is not simply an angel because Joshua worships Him and is not rebuked for it (Josh. 5:13-15). Since the Bible is not afraid to condemn people for worshiping creaturely angels (Rev. 22:8-9), this being in Joshua 5 mustbe none other than God Himself.

Notably, this commander does not give an affirmative answer when Joshua asks if He is for the Israelites, even though the Israelites were fulfilling the will of God in the invasion of Canaan. Neither does the commander claim to be on the side of the Canaanites. This teaches us a vital truth: even though we may profess to serve the Lord, we cannot take it for granted that we are always on the right side. Only as we possess the faith we profess and seek to do the will of God can we count on Him to fight for us (Dent. 1:19-46).

+Even believers can presume that God is on their side on a particular issue without due consideration. Though he was not an evangelical, Abraham Lincoln’s famous words can serve us well here: “My concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side, for God is always right.” Unless our goals and positions are grounded in Scripture, we cannot reasonably expect the Lord to fight for us.

An Inheritance That Never Perishes – “but the word of the Lord stands forever”

Posted in 1 Peter, Bible, Isaiah on November 26, 2010 by Harry

One of the greatest pretensions of  human existence is that this mortal life lasts forever. Though young people theoretically know there is an end to each human life, they act as if death will never catch them. Decades later, they know better, but even then most act as if their families will inevitably continue, or at least their culture or their nation will survive.

The most farsighted know it is not so. Individuals die; so do family connections. For all but those most committed to genealogical archaeology, we do not know much about our past families beyond three or four generations back—and we ourselves will not be remembered a few generations hence.

Mighty empires fall. They are partitioned, sink into vassal status as third-rate or fourth-rate powers, or dissolve into oblivion. We may have an immortal destiny, but nothing restrictively bound up with this life is secure, nothing is changeless, nothing endures. “All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall” (1 Peter 1:24).

Yet there is one more line in this quotation from Isaiah 40:6–8: “but the word of the Lord stands forever” (1 Peter 1:25). It follows, then, that human beings who hunger for the transcendent cannot do better than align themselves with God’s unchanging and enduring word. And there are several hints in this chapter as to what that means in practical terms.

(1) “And this is the word that was preached to you” (1:25): the very Gospel that was declared to Peter’s readers is the word of the Lord that stands forever. Adherence to the Gospel is adherence to that which endures forever. The same cannot be said of adherence to a political system or an economic theory or professional advancement.

(2) More precisely, Christians have been “born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God” (1:23). That which has transformed us and granted us new life from God himself has not been physical impregnation, but spiritual new birth, brought about by the enduring word of God.

(3) The word mediated through prophets before Jesus looked forward to the revelation that came exclusively with him (1:10–12). That means it was all one: this was always the plan, however much those Old Testament prophets had or had not grasped of it.(4) The “new birth” (1:3) that we have experienced by the action of the enduring word of God introduces us to “an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power” (1:4–5).

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 1. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Don Carson on God Relenting

Posted in Amos, Sovereignty - God's with tags on November 18, 2010 by Harry

In Amos 7:1–9 the prophet intercedes with God to avert two catastrophic judgments. In both cases, the Lord relents (7:3, 6). But then God deploys a plumb line to show just how crooked Israel is, and promises that he will spare the people no longer (7:6–9). Two reflections:

(1) If God were endlessly forbearing, there would be no judgment. A lot of people think of God in these terms. God is good, so he is bound to forgive us: that’s his job. So argued Catherine the Great. The Bible insists that such a picture of God is hopelessly flawed. On the other hand, if God executed instantaneous justice, there would be no place for either compassion or forbearing delay. This sort of tension is bound up with many virtues. Genuine courage presupposes fear that is overcome. If there is no fear at all, there can be no courage. Similarly, if there is no wrath, forbearance is no longer a virtue; it dissolves into some strange alchemy of niceness and moral indifference. Thus a large part of what these scenes are saying to the ancient Israelites is that God’s patience is running out. The reason God has not destroyed them already is that he is forbearing. But genuine forbearance presupposes that justice must sooner or later prevail: it is a call for repentance before it is too late.

(2) God here answers the intercessory prayer of Amos and relents—as in a number of other moving passages where God responds to fervent intercession (Gen. 18:23–33; 20:7; Ex. 32:9–14; Job 42:8–9). How does this square with a passage like 1 Samuel 15:29? “He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind.” Indeed, if I were certain I could change God’s mind in some absolute sense, I would be terrified of trying, for I know far, far less than he. Yet the “prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective,” we are told (James 5:16–18). The point, surely, is that this God is not some cold, deterministic, mechanical, force. He is a personal God who has ordained means as much as ends—means that include our intercession. If we are to pray according to God’s will (1 John 5:14), then Luther was right: “Prayer is not overcoming God’s reluctance. Prayer is laying hold of God’s willingness.” It is not so much a means of talking God into a position repugnant to him, as a God-ordained means of obtaining the blessings that God in the perfection of his virtues is willing to bestow. But that perfection of virtues also means that there may come a point when the collision of holiness and sin issues in implacable wrath that will not be diverted.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Francis Schaeffer and B.B. Warfield on the age of the Earth

Posted in Genesis with tags , on November 14, 2010 by Harry

When we realize that these genealogies give no guidance as to dating, we can understand why Professor B. B. Warfield said, “It is to theology, as such, a matter of entire indifference how long man has existed on earth.” In the flow of history in Genesis 1-11, therefore, I feel there really is no final discussion possible concerning dating. On the Bible’s side there are the questions we have just considered, and on modern science’s side there are certainly questions as to whether science’s dating systems are accurate. As I said in regard to the use of the Hebrew word day in Genesis 1, it is not that we have to accept the concept of the long periods of time modern science postulates, but rather that there are really no clearly defined terms upon which at this time to base a final conclusion.

  • From No Final Conflict

Don Carson: Jehu vs. David – Kings 9

Posted in 2 Kings, Providence - God's, Sovereignty - God's on October 28, 2010 by Harry

It is worth comparing the anointing of David (1 Sam. 16) with the anointing of Jehu (2 Kings 9)—or, more precisely, it is worth comparing not only the two anointings, but what follows from the two anointings.

The story of David is the better known (1 Sam.). When Samuel anointed him to be king, David was still a young man, a youthful shepherd. The anointing changed nothing of his immediate situation. In due course he gained heroic dimensions by defeating Goliath and then maturing into an efficient and loyal officer of King Saul. When Saul became embittered and paranoid, forcing David to hide in the hill country of Judea, David seemed a long way from the throne. Providence gave him two startling opportunities to kill Saul, but David restrained himself; indeed, he even restrained some of his own men who were quite prepared to do the deed that David would not touch. His reasoning was simple. Though he knew he would be king, he also knew that at the moment Saul was king. The same God who had anointed David had first installed Saul. To kill Saul was therefore to kill the Lord’s anointed. He was unwilling to grasp the inheritance that the Lord himself had promised him, if the price to be paid was an immoral act. God had promised him the throne; God would first have to vacate it of its current incumbent, for David would not stoop to intrigue and murder. This was one of David’s finest hours.

How different is Jehu! When he is anointed, he is assigned the task of punishing and destroying the wicked household of Ahab. But he waits for no providential sign: as far as he is concerned, his anointing is incentive enough to embark immediately on a bloody insurrection. Moreover, for all his pious talk about wiping out the idolatry of the wretched household of Ahab (e.g., 9:22), his own heart is betrayed by two evil realities. First, he not only assassinates the current incumbent of the throne of Israel, but when he has the opportunity he kills Ahaziah, the king of Judah as well (9:27–29), not sanctioned by the prophet, however.

Did Jehu perhaps entertain visions of a restored, united kingdom, brought together by assassination and military power? Second, although Jehu reduced the power of Baal worship, he promoted other forms of idolatry no less repugnant to God (10:28–31). Unlike David, he was not “a man after God’s own heart” (cf. 1 Sam. 13:14). Far from it: “He did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam, which he had caused Israel to commit” (10:31).The lesson is important. Not even divine prophecy frees a person from the obligations of morality, integrity, and loyal and obedient faith in God. The end does not justify the means.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 1. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

R.C. Sproul on the Tower of Babel

Posted in Genesis, Holy Spirit on October 27, 2010 by Harry

GENESIS 11:1-9 “Come, let us go down and there confuse theirlanguage, so that they may not understandone another’s speech” (v. 7).

Studying how God has related to His people from the time of the Old Testament through to the New could not be complete without contemplating what Scripture says regarding the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Today’s passage is the first one we will consider in examining the biblical teaching on the Spirit; however, we need to do some brief theological reflection on the role of the Holy Spirit before we dive into Genesis 11:1-9.

We could say much about the work of the Holy Spirit in bringing about the new birth, honoring Christ, and other aspects of His ministry, but it is His role as the bringer of unity that is pertinent to Genesis 11. Ephesians 4:1-16 is one of the clearest passages on the Spirit’s role of uniting the people of God, and the focus of that text is on Christ’s distribution, through the Spirit, of gifts “for building up the body of Christ,” which moves us to “attain to the unity of the faith” (vv. 9-16). Indeed, the entire text encourages us to see the Spirit of God as the one who brings about true unity between Christians, for there is but “one body and one Spirit.” One of the chief goals of the Holy Spirit, Sinclair B. Ferguson reminds us, is to create a community that is “united by the Spirit” (The Holy Spirit, p. 60).

Yet contrary to the understanding of many leaders in mainline Protestantism today, the unity that the Spirit seeks to create is not a superficial structural unity that papers over many contradictory views of the’ will of God. Instead, the Spirit builds unity in the truth first, and visible unity is an eventual fruit of shared submission to the Word of God (1 Peter 1:22-24).

If the Spirit works to bring those who believe the Lord’s truth into union, then He also works to create disunity among those who will not receive His truth. That is one of the points of Genesis 11:1-9. At that time, the only thing that people could be united in was sin, namely, the idolatrous desire to make a name for themselves and challenge God through the construction of monuments. But the Lord put up a roadblock, leaving them in their sins but confusing the languages of mankind so that the whole earth might not again put up a completely united front against His Word and His children (vv. 7-9). We who serve Him should be grateful for this act of grace.

+The Spirit of God seeks to bring unity to His people, and one of the ways He does this is to cause confusion among His foes. Though these enemies might remain united in their common refusal to bow the knee to the Lord, different languages and beliefs make it hard for them to agree with each other and work together against the church. We should be grateful that the Lord is able to stir up disunity among outsiders for the good of His people.

Christ Our Curse by Kim Riddlebarger

Posted in Atonement, Deuteronomy, Faith on October 26, 2010 by Harry

There are a number of Old Testament passages that figure prominently in the New Testament. In Galatians 3:10-14, several of them are quoted by the apostle, and he uses these Old Testament passages as proof texts for the doctrine that sinners are justified through faith alone. Those who trust in Jesus Christ to save them from their sins understand that it was Jesus’ suffering upon the cross that turned aside God’s wrath and anger. But this was not yet clear in the Old Testament when these passages first appeared.

The first passage cited by Paul in this section is from Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy 27:26, Moses writes, “Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.” This passage makes it plain that God is not going to grade the final exam for eternal life on a curve. In order to avoid God’s curse, God demands that we obey His law perfectly. Those who fail to do so come under the wrath of God. That this is what Moses meant becomes clear in Matthew’s gospel, where a rich young man claimed to have obeyed all the commandments. When Jesus exposed him as a law-breaker and therefore subject to the curse the young man went away with great sorrow. Witnessing this exchange, Jesus’ disciples asked Him, “Who then can be saved?” (19:25). Jesus reminded them that people do not obey God’s law; they cannot save themselves — it is impossible. But all things are possible for God (19:26).

Another passage cited by Paul is Leviticus 18:5. In Deuteronomy 27, Moses warned of the curse coming upon all those who don’t obey the commandments. Here, he speaks of a reward promised to those who do: “You shall therefore keep my statutes and my rules; if a person does them, he shall live by them: I am the LORD.” In these two passages, we see one of the basic themes of God’s covenant relationship with His people, the so-called blessing-curse principle. God promises to bless those who perfectly obey Him by giving them life. Yet God also threatens any act of disobedience with the covenant curse.  Anyone who has ever truly considered his own sinfulness can certainly relate to the disciples’ question: “Who can be saved?”

A resolution is found in an obscure passage in Deuteronomy 21. Anyone who has committed a crime and who is put to death on a tree comes under God’s curse. According to verse 23, “his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by God.” While this passage is dealing with the burial of criminals, from the perspective of New Testament hindsight it becomes the key to understanding how God could put to death His sinless Messiah, who perfectly obeyed the commandments of God and who earned eternal life through that obedience.

In his epistle to the Galatians, Paul is refuting the errors of the Judaizers, who were arguing that while the death of Jesus was necessary for God to save sinners, Jesus’ death was not sufficient to save sinners. According to the Judaizers, those who came to believe that Jesus is the Messiah must also undergo circumcision, keep the dietary laws, and observe the Jewish feasts in order to be justified. The Judaizers contended that Gentiles must not only embrace Israel’s Messiah through faith, they must also live as Jews.

Paul answers this error by reminding the Galatians of the blessing-curse principle and how, in the death of Jesus, God’s curse is taken away. Eternal life comes to the people of God through faith, not works. In Galatians 3:10, Paul cites Deuteronomy 27:26 to warn those who think that Christ’s death is not sufficient to save sinners: “For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.”‘ God’s justice requires perfect obedience. Sin but one time, and we come under God’s curse.

Paul concludes, “Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for ‘The righteous shall live by faith… (v. 11), citing from yet another Old Testament writer — the prophet Habakkuk (2:4). To further bolster his contention, Paul cites from Leviticus 18:5: “But the law is not of faith, rather ‘The one who does them shall live by them”‘ (v. 12). Here Paul echoes the question of the disciples. Sinners cannot save themselves. They do not obey God’s law, they fail to live, and they come under God’s curse.

The good news of the gospel is that someone else bore God’s curse for us in our place. As Paul points out in Galatians 3:13-14, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us — for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree’— so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.” Little did the Romans know that when they put Jesus to death upon a cross, He came under God’s curse, so that those of us who deserve God’s judgment instead receive eternal life through Jesus’ own obedience. And all of this becomes ours through faith.

  • +Dr. Kim Riddlebarger is senior pastor of Christ Reformed Church (URCNA) in Anaheim, California. He is authorof A Cose for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times
  • From October 2010 Tabletalk Magazine

Daniel’s Prayer

Posted in Bible, Daniel on October 24, 2010 by Harry

Daniel’s great intercessory prayer (Dan. 9:1–19) cries out for prolonged meditation. The date is 539 B.C. Daniel “understood from the Scriptures, according to the word of the Lord given to Jeremiah the prophet” (9:2; cf. Jer. 25:11; 29:10), that the seventy years were up—which on the face of it shows that Jeremiah’s writing quickly circulated as Scripture. Some reflections:

(1) The “seventy years” have occasioned some dispute. There were different ways of calculating the period of exile (see, for example, the figures in Ezek. 4). Some argue that seventy years is merely an idealized fixed term for God’s wrath (cf. Zech. 1:12; 2 Chron. 36:21). If (as is more likely) this refers to seventy literal years, the best judgment is that the beginning of the seventy is 609, when the Babylonians beat the Egyptians at the battle of Carchemish, with the result that Judah for the first time became a vassal state in service to Babylon.

(2) When Daniel becomes aware from Scripture just when the close of the exile would take place, far from resting and waiting for the promises to come true, he prays for such fulfillment. The peculiar dynamic between God’s sovereignty and human responsibility in the Bible never retreats to fatalism. The promises of God are incentives to intercession.

(3) Daniel’s confession is general, not personal: “we have sinned and done wrong.… We have been wicked and have rebelled; we have turned away …”—and so forth. Here Daniel reminds us of Isaiah, who joins together personal and general confession (Isa. 6:6). It is doubtful that we can fruitfully pray for our church and our culture without confessing our own sin.

(4) The heart of the confession is that Daniel and his people have turned away from God’s commands and laws (9:5), have not listened to God’s servants the prophets (9:6), have not obeyed the laws God gave through his servants the prophets (9:10), have transgressed the Law (9:11), and have not sought the favor of the Lord their God by turning from their sins and giving attention to his truth (9:13). Note carefully: the heart of the matter, as Daniel sees it, is neglect of what God said or disobedience to what he said. That is always the heart of the issue. Conversely, genuine sanctification comes through adherence to God’s words (Ps. 1:2; John 17:17). That is why the rising biblical illiteracy within confessional churches, let alone the culture at large, is the most distressing and threatening symptom among us.

(5) Daniel recognizes that the judgments that have befallen God’s people are both just and perfectly in line with Scripture (9:7, 11b–14). What bearing does this have on us today?

(6) What are the grounds of Daniel’s appeal for relief?

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Don Carson on our secret idols

Posted in * Favorites, Ezekiel on September 15, 2010 by Harry

Three observations from  Ezekiel 14:

First, the peculiar expression “set up idols in their hearts,” repeated several times with minor variations in 14:1–8, reeks of duplicity. Publicly there may be a fair bit of covenantal allegiance, but heart loyalty simply isn’t there. To set up idols in the heart is to separate oneself from the living God (14:7).
That danger is no less treacherous today than in Ezekiel’s time. Somehow we manage to adhere to our creedal profession, but if anything goes wrong our undisciplined rage shows that we maintain little real trust in the living God: our secret idol is comfort and physical well-being. We attend church, but rarely do we pray in private or thoughtfully read the Word of God. We sing lustily at missionary conventions, but have not shared the Gospel with anyone for years. And deep down we are more interested in our reputation, or in sex, or in holidays, than we are in basking in the awesome radiance and majesty of God. Meditate on 14:8, and ask for forgiveness and grace to become more consistent.
Second, those who set up idols in their hearts are the very people most likely to seek out a prophet or a preacher to keep up appearances and secure a little help along the way. But God says, “I the LORD will answer [them] myself in keeping with [their] great idolatry” (14:4). He will “entice” the prophets (14:9–11)—the word might better here be rendered “deceive.” God’s “deception” of the prophets is part of his judicial sentence. Yet it is a peculiar “deception,” for God’s revelation is already there in public Scriptures to be read and studied; moreover, he now openly tells the prophets of his judicial hand upon them. If they had an iota of spiritual sensibility, the warning would drive them to self-examination and repentance. But no: the sentence is pronounced, and they are deceived. Such prophets lie to the people, and the people like the lies and listen to them (cf. 13:19).
Third, sometimes judgment becomes so inevitable that not even the presence of the most righteous would delay it any longer (14:12–23). The reasoning presupposes the theology of Genesis 18: God may spare a wicked city or nation for the sake of the just who reside there. But where wickedness overflows, not even the presence of Noah (spared from the Flood), Job (declared “blameless” and “upright,” Job 1:1), and Daniel (Ezekiel’s contemporary, serving in the Babylonian courts, renowned for his piety) will stay the disaster that God ordains. Indeed, when the exiles see the revolting conduct of the new refugees, they will realize how right God was (14:22–23).

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Don Carson on Psalm 57

Posted in Psalms, Trials and Suffering, Trust on September 13, 2010 by Harry

The superscription Psalm 57 specifies that this psalm was written when David “had fled from Saul into the cave” (cf. 1 Sam. 22:1; 24:3). What we find, then, is something of the emotional and spiritual tone of the man when he could say, in effect, that “there is only a step between me and death” (1 Sam. 20:3). Some reflections:

(1) Even as he cries for mercy, David expresses his confidence in God’s sovereign power. The language is stunning: “I cry out to God Most High, to God, who fulfills his purpose for me” (57:2). The title “God Most High” is not very common in the Psalms. Perhaps David is thinking of another man without a home, Abraham, who was more familiar with this way of addressing God. Certainly David does not think that somehow circumstances have slipped away from such a God. He begs for mercy, but he recognizes that God, the powerful God, fulfills his purposes in him. This mixture of humble pleading and quiet trust in God’s sovereign power recurs in Scripture again and again. Nowhere does it reach a higher plane than in the prayer of the Lord Jesus in the garden: “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will” (Matt. 26:39). In some measure or another, every follower of Jesus Christ will want to learn the anguish and the joy of that sort of praying.

(2) The refrain in 57:5 and 11—“Be exalted, O God, above the heavens; let your glory be over all the earth”—finds David not only in reverent worship, but affirming something believers easily forget, not least when they are under duress. Perhaps the clearest New Testament equivalent lies in the prayer the Lord Jesus taught us: “Hallowed be your name” (Matt. 6:9). Here David meditates not on God’s sovereign power, but on God’s sovereign importance. More important, for David, than whether or not he gets out of the cave, is that God be exalted above the heavens. The passionate prayer that willingly submerges urgent personal interests to God’s glory breeds both joy and stability: “My heart is steadfast, O God, my heart is steadfast; I will sing and make music” (57:7).

(3) Rather striking is David’s glance at the orbit where he intends to bear witness: “I will praise you, O LORD, among the nations; I will sing of you among the peoples. For great is your love, reaching to the heavens; your faithfulness reaches to the skies” (57:9–10). No truncated vision, this. And today as countless millions sing these words, David’s vow has been fulfilled far more extensively than even he could have imagined.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

D.A. Carson on Faithfulness

Posted in Jeremiah with tags on August 16, 2010 by Harry

One cannot say that Jeremiah’s ministry ended on a high note. We are all called to be faithful; some are called to be faithful in troubled and declining times. One dare not measure Jeremiah’s ministry by how many people he convinced, how many disasters he averted, or how many revivals he experienced. One must measure his ministry by whether or not he was faithful to God, by whether or not God was pleased with him. And so, finally, it is with each of us. I doubt that many of us living in the West have fully come to grips with how much the success syndrome shapes our views of ourselves and others—sometimes to make us hunger at all costs for success, and sometimes, in a kind of inverted pseudospirituality, to make us suspicious at all costs of success. But success is not the issue; faithfulness is.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

The Centrality of the Passover

Posted in Israel, Numbers with tags on June 8, 2010 by Harry

NUMBERS 9:1-14 “If anyone who is clean and is not on a journey fails to keep the Passover, that person shall be cut off from his people because he did not bring the LORD’S offering at its appointed time” (v- 13).

When we talk about the old covenant Passover, we make a distinction between the Passover as first celebrated and the codified, permanent way it was later commemorated. That is to say, while some traditions established in the first Passover meal continued on, not every element given in Exodus 12:1-32 was performed year after year. For example, the Israelites did not spread blood on their doorposts once they dwelt in the Promised Land. Instead, they looked to the instructions given in passages such as Leviticus 23:4-8, Numbers 9:1-14, and Deuteronomy 16:1-8 to show them how to keep the feast once they settled in Canaan.
Numbers 9:1-14 establishes the importance of Passover in the life of the people of God. There was to be no Israelite who failed to keep the feast each year, for even the unclean or those travelling on a long journey were required to observe Passover, although their particular circumstances meant that they were allowed to do so the following month. The important part of all this is, of course, the requirement that no covenant member could get away with neglecting the feast that commemorated Israel’s redemption from Egypt. Anyone who did not keep the Passover would be cut off from the people (v. 13) — they would be excluded from the nation. They were risking their lives, as those who were cut off faced the possibility that the Lord might strike them dead (Gen. 9:11). There is probably a hint of eternal judgment in this phrase as well. Paul is probably alluding to this warning of being cut off when he cautions today’s believers against unworthily partaking of the Lord’s Supper, which is a new covenant expression of Passover (1 Con 11:27-32). Professing new covenant believers who fail to partake of the body and blood of Christ Jesus in faith risk God’s discipline. Moreover, the command not to miss the Passover in Numbers 9:13 likely should be taken as a caution for us today not to miss the sacrament when it is offered.
Once Israel was established in the Holy Land, Passover was celebrated each year in Jerusalem, the whole nation making pilgrimage there to keep the feast and recall God’s salvation (Dent. 16:1-2). Later generations of Israel would sing the hallel (Pss. 113-18) on their way to Jerusalem for the seder, or Passover meal. The final Passover Lamb Himself sang these psalms just before His own sacrifice (Matt. 26:30). +

The importance of the Passover to the life of the old covenant people of God should clue us in on the centrality of the new covenant sacraments to the Christian life. These ordinances are not to be neglected but are to be attended when they are celebrated, for in them we have special remembrances of our salvation, and through them the Father strengthens our faith, union with Christ, and our unity with one another.

D.A. Carson on “Instant Judgement”

Posted in Job on May 23, 2010 by Harry

IN THE SECOND PART OF HIS REPLY TO Eliphaz’s last speech, Job begins (Job 24) with a pair of rhetorical questions: “Why does the Almighty not set times for judgment? Why must those who know him look in vain for such days?” (24:1). The argument is not that God never rights the books, but that meanwhile a great deal of evil takes place without any prompt accounting, and righteous people suffer without any prompt vindication.
So Job begins another long list of representative evils, frequently unrequited in the short haul, yet commonly observed; and of public injustices (24:2–17). The wicked move boundary markers, steal cattle, abuse the poor and needy, put the poor into indentured slavery, rebel against the light, and feed their sexual lust. Meanwhile the poor barely get by, eking out a living from the wasteland. They glean in the vineyards of the wicked, they are often cold and wet, they carry the sheaves of others and go naked themselves. “The groans of the dying rise from the city, and the souls of the wounded cry out for help,” Job contends. “But God charges no one with wrongdoing” (24:12).
The next big section of this chapter (24:18–24) is something of a puzzle. At first glance Job seems to be advancing the kind of argument his miserable comforters prefer: God answers the wicked in kind. Some scholars have suggested the passage has been misplaced; others think Job is deploying massive irony and means exactly the reverse. Yet perhaps the explanation is simpler. Job is not denying that justice will be done someday. To do that he really would have to change his view of God in very substantial ways. But Job acknowledges that the wicked will finally face judgment. They die; they are not remembered. God is not blind; he “may let them rest in a feeling of security, but his eyes are on their ways” (24:23). So in a while they are gone (24:24). All this Job acknowledges: “If this is not so, who can prove me false and reduce my words to nothing?” (24:25). But in the context of the first part of the chapter, the question remains: “Why does the Almighty not set times for judgment?” In other words, why does he wait until the end? Granted that he is the God of justice and that justice will finally be done, why wait so long for it, the wicked becoming more wicked and the victims still suffering?
It is a searing question. Part of the answer emerges later in the book. But at the very least we should acknowledge that instant judgment on every sin would have most of us in pretty constant pain, yelping like Pavlovian dogs to avoid the hurt, but without inner transformation. Do you really want what Job seems to be asking for?
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

D.A. Carson on Eliphaz

Posted in Job on May 23, 2010 by Harry

THE FIRST SPEECH OF ELIPHAZ takes up two chapters. In the first part (Job 4), Eliphaz gives shape to his argument:
(1) The opening lines are seductive (4:2–4). One might almost think that Eliphaz is respectfully pursuing permission to offer helpful counsel to Job, in the same way that Job in times past has offered helpful counsel to others. But that is not it at all. Eliphaz is not asking permission; rather, he is fixing blame on Job because he is discouraged. It turns out, Eliphaz says, that the great Job who has helped others cannot cope when he faces a bit of trouble himself (4:5).
(2) The next verse transitions to the heart of Eliphaz’s argument: “Should not your piety be your confidence and your blameless ways your hope?” (4:6). In other words, if Job were as pious and as blameless as many had believed, either he would not be in this fix, or else he would at least be able to live above discouragement. The disasters that have befallen Job, and Job’s reactions to them, prove that Job is hiding shame or guilt that must be confronted.
(3) In brief, Eliphaz holds that in God’s universe you get what you deserve (4:7). God is in charge, and God is good, so you reap what you sow (4:8).
(4) Eliphaz claims nothing less than revelation to ground his argument (4:12–21). In some sort of night vision, he says, a spirit glided by his face (4:15) and uttered words of supreme importance: “Can a mortal be more righteous than God? Can a man be more pure than his Maker?” (4:17). God is so transcendently powerful and just that even the angels that surround him are tawdry and untrustworthy in his eyes. So human beings, “those who live in houses of clay, whose foundations are in the dust” (4:19), are less significant, less reliable. The implication, then, is that a man like Job should simply admit his frailty, his error, his sin, and stop pretending that what has befallen him is anything other than what he deserves. The way Job is carrying on, Eliphaz implies, he is in danger of impugning the God whose justice is far beyond human assessment or comprehension.
We should pause to evaluate Eliphaz’s argument. At one level, Eliphaz is right: God is utterly just, transcendently holy. The Bible elsewhere avers that a man reaps what he sows (e.g., Prov. 22:8; Gal. 6:7). But these truths, by themselves, may overlook two factors. First, the time frame in which the wheels of God’s justice grind is sometimes very long. Eliphaz seems to hold to a rather rapid and obvious tit-for-tat system of recompense. Second, Eliphaz has no category for innocent suffering, so he is embarking on a course that condemns an innocent man.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

D.A. Carson on Job

Posted in Job on May 23, 2010 by Harry

FROM JOB 3 UNTIL THE FIRST PART of the last chapter of the book, with a small exception at the beginning of chapter 32, the text is written in Hebrew poetry. The book is a giant drama, like a Shakespearean play. Speech follows speech, the movement of the drama carried forward on the sustained argument between Job and his three “friends.” Eventually another character is introduced, and finally God himself responds.
The opening speech belongs to Job. The burden of his utterance is unmistakable: he wishes he had never been born. He is not ready to curse God, but he is certainly prepared to curse the day that brought him to birth (3:1, 3, 8). Everything about that day he wishes he could blot out. If he could not have been stillborn (3:11, 16), then why couldn’t he have just starved to death (3:12)?
Implicitly, of course, this is criticism of God, however indirect. “Why is life given to a man whose way is hidden, whom God has hedged in?” (3:23). What Job is experiencing is what he feared throughout his years of plenty (3:25). He has no peace, no quietness, no rest, but only turmoil (3:26).
Four reflections will put this first address in perspective:
(1) This is the rhetoric of a man in deep anguish. So many of the things about which we complain are trivial. Even our most serious grounds for complaint are usually only some fraction of what Job faced.
(2) Before we condemn Job, therefore, we must listen attentively, even fearfully. When we come across those who for good reason are in terrible despair, we must cut them some slack. It would have been wonderful if one of the “friends” had put an arm around Job’s shoulder and wept with him, saying, “We love you, Job. We do not pretend to understand. But we love you, and we’ll do whatever we can for you.”
(3) Job is transparently honest. He does not don a front of feigned piety so that no one will think he is letting down the side. The man hurts so much he wishes he were dead, and says so.
(4) Both here and throughout the book, for all that Job is prepared to argue with God, he is not prepared to write God off. Job is not the modern agnostic or atheist who treats the problem of evil as if it provided intellectual evidence that God does not exist. Job knows that God exists and believes that he is powerful and good. That is one reason why (as we shall see) he is in such confusion. Job’s agonizings are the agonizings of a believer, not a skeptic.
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 2 (25). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.

R.C. Sproul on the book of Joshua and the Scarlet Cord

Posted in Atonement, Joshua on May 23, 2010 by Harry

The scarlet cord seen in the light of the Passover and the Cross.

Don Carson reflects on Moses and the Law

Posted in * Favorites, Law, Old Testament on May 12, 2010 by Harry

There are few passages in the Pentateuch which on first reading are more discouraging than the outcome of Numbers 20:1–13.
Yet the account carries some subtle complexities. It begins with more of the usual griping. The need of the people is real: they are thirsty (20:2). But instead of humbly seeking the Lord in joyous confidence that he would provide for his own people, they quarrel with Moses and charge him with the usual: they were better off in slavery, their current life in the desert is unbearable, and so forth.
Moses and Aaron seek the Lord’s face. The glory of God appears to them (20:6). God specifically says, “Speak to that rock before their eyes and it will pour out its water” (20:8). But Moses has had it. He assembles the crowd and cries, “Listen, you rebels, must we bring you water out of this rock?” (20:10)—which rhetorical question, at its face value, is more than a little pretentious. Then he strikes the rock twice, and water gushes out. But the Lord tells Moses and Aaron, “Because you did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring this community into the land I give them” (20:12).
Three observations:
(1) God does not say, “Because you did not obey me enough …” but “Because you did not trust in me enough to honor me as holy.…” There was, of course, formal disobedience: God said to speak, and Moses struck the rock. But God perceives that the problem is deeper yet. The people have worn Moses down, and Moses responds in kind. His response is not only the striking of the rock, it is the answer of a man who under pressure has become bitter and pretentious (which is certainly not to say that any of us would have done any better!). What has evaporated is transparent trust in God: God is not being honored as holy.
(2) Read the Pentateuch as a whole: the final point is that Moses does not enter the land. Read the first seven books of the Old Testament: one cannot fail to see that the old covenant had not transformed the people. Canonically, that is an important lesson: the Law was never adequate to save and transform.
(3) In light of 1 Corinthians 10:4, which shows Christ to be the antitype of the rock, it is hard to resist the conclusion that the reason God had insisted the rock be struck in Exodus 17:1–7, and forbids it here, is that he perceives a wonderful opportunity to make a symbol-laden point: the ultimate Rock, from whom life-giving streams flow, is struck once, and no more.

  • Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God : A daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. Volume 1. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.