Skip to content

Tag: covenant continuity

Published on Leave a comment on Christianity is identical with the religion of the patriarchs

Dan Hames eats patristics for breakfast, that's why he glows with an ancient and other-worldly glory.

He passed this onto me today from his studies in Eusebius.  This is from Timothy D. Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, 1981, p. 126–127

'Christianity, for Eusebius, was not a new religion but the primeval religion from which the traditional religions of mankind were mere offshoots or declensions.  The Christ who was crucified in the reign of Tiberius was the Divine Word, the Son of God, the Wisdom of God, the Light of the World, the first and only-begotten Son of God.  He was, in philosophical terms, the second cause and hence partner with God the Father in the creation of the universe and its inhabitants.  Since the dawn of history, the human race has been divided into two classes.  The righteous and reverent (who included Abraham and the Jewish patriarchs, Moses and the prophets) have always worshipped the Son of God, who has acted as a mediator between God and man, instructing the pious in the knowledge of his Father by the theophanies which the Old Testament records.

'The majority of the ancients, however, neither worshipped the Son of God nor originally possessed the capacity to receive his teachings.  Adam disobeyed God, forfeited a life of blessedness and delight, and was condemned to a mortal and accursed existence.  Adam's immediate descendants filled the earth and, with few exceptions, lived no better than beasts: they had no care for political organization, for law and morality, for intellectual activity, but lived as nomads.  Their self-inflicted wickedness destroyed their natural reason, and they indulged in all types of unholiness, even preparing to go to way with their creator.  God therefore chastised them with floods, fires, famines, plagues, and wars.  Yet, when mankind was sunk in a drunken torpor of wickedness, the Word of God appeared to some of the ancient worshipers of God, who planted the seeds of godliness on the earth and soon made a whole nation devoted to godliness.  They were the ancient Hebrews, on whom God enjoined, through the prophet Moses, religious practices which were the images and symbols of a spiritual reality not yet clearly revealed.  The laws of Moses became widely known and had a gradually civilizing effect throughout the world.  Hence, when the Roman empire came into existence, the whole world, including the gentiles, was ready to receive knowledge of the Father.  The Word of God, therefore, appeared on earth as the savior of all mankind.  His birth, life, miracles, teaching, death, and resurrection had all been predicted exactly by Moses and the prophets of the Old Testament, who even revealed, to those who could read the Bible aright, that the incarnate Word would be called Jesus Christ...

'The Christian religion, therefore, Eusebius holds, is not novel or strange...  Christianity is identical with the religion of the patriarchs, and the worshippers of God from Adam to Abraham were Christian in all but name...

Thus Christianity is the most ancient and most venerable of all religions: accepted of old by Abraham and the patriarchs, now proclaimed to all mankind through the teaching of Christ, Christianity is the original, the only, the true way to worship God.'

11

Published on 11 Comments on The Anonymous Blackhamite [repost]

It's been ten years.  Ten years since that fateful afternoon in Oak Hill chapel.  And I was there.  Graeme Goldsworthy and Paul Blackham debated the object of faith in the Old Testament (yes that was the issue - I know these things get muddled up, but that really was the issue).

If you haven't heard of these names, sorry - this post won't make a lot of sense to you...

A little background.  I grew up and was converted in Sydney Anglican churches (my Canberra church, St Matthew's, was essentially a Sydney church plant and all its clergy have been Moore College educated).

On the other hand, I had been working at All Souls, Langham Place for the previous 9 months and, against all my background and initial protests, I had begun to lean towards Blackham's view on Christ in the OT.  (You can read more on my current position here).   Nonetheless, my mind was not completely made up and I was extremely interested to hear Goldsworthy.

I can pinpoint the moment when I swung decisively against the Goldsworthy position.  A young student I'd never heard of called Mike Reeves asked the first question from the floor:

"What exactly is faith? And what exactly is the proper object of faith? The importance of that is to do with whether it has changed or not."

Blackham answered:

"Faith is trusting, loving, knowledge of Jesus Christ. That is always the object of faith. From the beginning until the end. So Martin Luther, “All the promises of God lead back to the first promise concerning Christ of Genesis 3:15. The faith of the fathers in the Old Testament era, and our faith in the New Testament are one and the same faith in Christ Jesus… The faith of the fathers was directed at Christ… Time does not change the object of true faith, or the Holy Spirit. There has always been and always will be one mind, one impression, one faith concerning Christ among true believers whether they live in times past, now, or in times to come.” The object of faith is the person of Christ, explicitly so. A trusting knowledge of him."

Goldsworthy answered:

"How can I disagree? Faith is defined by its object. There are all kinds of faith that people have: the truckdriver has faith in his truck that it will get across the bridge; he has faith in the bridge that it will bear him up. A Christian has faith that God’s assurances in his word that what he has done in his Son Jesus is sufficient for his salvation. The point where we may disagree is that to me if God puts the person and work of Christ in the form of shadows and types and images in the OT and assures people that if they put their trust in that they are undoubtedly saved, then that is deemed to be faith in Christ. It is faith in Christ in the form in which he is given, and the work of the Spirit all through the Bible is with regard to Christ as he is presented."

It was hearing that question and those two answers that tipped me decisively towards Blackham on this question.

Goldsworthy rightly identifies the point of disagreement.  For him, God puts Christ in the form of shadows etc such that Israelites who trusted the shadows and had no knowledge of the Person were deemed to have trusted in the Person.

Now over the past decade that answer has seemed to me to be less and less satisfactory.  To me that's a bad reading of the OT, a bad reading of the NT and a bad reading of systematics (Doctrine of God and soteriology for starters).

But here's the point of this post.  Ten years on it's very encouraging to hear more and more people who say that OT faith was in the Person of Christ.  Wonderful.  But it's interesting that they still might identify themselves on the Goldsworthy side of the debate.

And, hey, whatever, I don't really mind.  "The LORD is my banner" not men, right?  Absolutely.  But there is a point of disagreement here.  And Goldsworthy himself has identified it.  He says God put Christ in the form of shadows, OT saints trusted the shadows only, God deemed it to be faith in Christ.  Blackham says God presented Christ explicitly in the OT (shadows being one consciously understood means) and the OT saints explicitly trusted Him.  That's the point of departure.  Forget the names - the positions are significantly different.

Now to me, a person who says 'OT saints hoped in the Messiah but were fuzzy on details' lies decisively on Blackham's side of this debate.  But often they are an anonymous Blackhamite.  And anonymous even to themselves.

Here's what tends to happen.  It is assumed that the debate is merely a disagreement over the degree of progress in revelation.  And so a person figures that they're with Goldsworthy because they acknowledge progress and Blackham doesn't so much.

But really, the debate is not about progress.  It's about the object of faith.  Therefore if you say OT believers hoped in the Messiah Himself, Goldsworthy has told you which side of this debate you're on.  And it's not his.

We can still all be friends, brothers, sisters, co-workers in the gospel.  This is not some 'foul, wide ditch' dividing evangelicalism and I'm not interested in creating one.  But let's at least acknowledge that there are distinctions and on which side we stand.

Maybe you believe they trusted Christ, but still you identify as Goldsworthian.  That's ok.  I say you're speaking better than you know.  I deem you to have trusted Blackham anyway.

;-)

.

7

Published on 7 Comments on God in the Old Testament

I've had many discussions under the title of "Christ in the Old Testament."  But perhaps the issues would be seen more clearly if we labelled the debate: "God in the Old Testament."

And actually, the fact that those two titles sound quite different tells you everything you need to know about the dire Christlessness of evangelical God-talk.

We (and I include myself here in my knee-jerk western deism) imagine that there's a bed-rock deity called "God" who is obviously the God spoken of in Genesis.  And then we discuss whether the Patriarchs also knew this shadowy figure called Messiah.  And we debate how Messianic certain discrete verses are, and to what degree the author was aware, and to what degree the first audience was cognisant of specific promises and appearances, etc, etc.  But we almost never challenge that view of "God" which we all signed off on in the beginning!

Thus from the outset God is defined as - essentially - 'the God of monotheism' (broadly conceived) and Christ is defined as a nuance to a more foundational divine reality.  Then we spend all our time debating how clear the nuance was!

But what if, from the beginning, Elohim was not the god of Aristotle!  It's a shocking thought I know, but let's run with it.  What if He makes all things by His Spirit and Word and says "Let us"?  And what if this is not something that needs to be kept in check by a hermeneutic that expects only the omnibeing?  And what if the LORD God stoops down and breathes into Adam's nostrils and what if, under the name "Voice of the LORD", He walks in the garden in the cool of the day and encounters the couple as a divine Person.

How much clearer Adam saw God than us!  Without the "benefit" of our western theistic presuppositions, he sees the "very God from very God."  He doesn't think in that exact language, but he certainly doesn't think in unitarian categories either.  To think of "the Son" as something extra to his simple belief in "God" betrays disturbing assumptions about who we think "God" is.

Who is this "God" for whom the Son is an addendum?  Why on earth are we beginning the Scriptures with that "God"?  And if the primary truths about God are unitarian, is our own faith primarily unitarian, just with a Jesus nuance?

The question is deeper than "Christ in the Old Testament."  It's deeper even than "God in the Old Testament."  It's the question of God.  Which explains why the issue can get quite heated at times.  But also why it's so crucial.

8

Published on 8 Comments on The Teacher is not an atheist – he's just a crummy christ

I'm preaching on Ecclesiastes on Sunday so I've been listening to some other preachers.  They pretty much all preach Ecclesiastes as the futility of atheism.  And of course when you preach it like that, what's the solution?  Good old theism.  Yay theism.

And one or two preachers have even suggested that Christian theism gives the most amount of meaning.  So yay Jesus too.  (Although the last preacher I listened to -- BIG NAME --  was way too excited about theism to get around to that Jesus nuance.)

Anyway, just thought I'd state something that's pretty darned obvious but it seems like it needs saying.  The Teacher aint no atheist.  He's a hard-core theist.  Check it:

Ecclesiastes 1:13; 2:24-26; 3:10-22; 5:1-7, 18-20; 6:1-2; 7:13-14; 18,20; 8:2, 11-17; 9:1,9; 11:5,9; 12:1-14;

Here's just a sample of what he says:

God has set eternity in the hearts of men.... He's done it so that men will revere him... Stand in awe of God... God made mankind upright but men have gone in search of many schemes... I know that it will go better with God-fearing men who are reverent before God... God will bring you to judgement... Remember your Creator... Fear God and keep his commandments.

He's a theist right?  A pretty ardent one.

But what do you expect from a son of David, a king of Jerusalem? (Ecclesiastes 1:1)  Here is a christ - an anointed king.  But, here's the thing, he's not the King of Heaven.  He's a king under heaven (notice how 'under heaven' and 'under the sun' are parallel 1:3; 3:1).  He's not the One full of the Spirit without measure, instead he seeks to shepherd the Spirit (or chase the wind, e.g. 1:14) while he must receive his teachings from the true Shepherd (12:11).

The teacher is self-consciously not the Messiah (he's a very naughty boy!).  He's not the Christ with a capital C certainly. But he is a christ with a small c.  And so he embarks on a sustained meditation of life in which the king is subject to all the forces that we are.  This christ is also under the sun and therefore under the powers that enslave mankind and even nature itself.  This king, for all his wealth and power and wisdom cannot pierce through the shroud of sin, law, judgement and death.   And so what hope is there?  None!  Not with this king.  Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.  And then we are judged - by the God is who is ever-present in Ecclesiastes.  But ever-present as Judge.  And who knows how we will fare under His judgement.

That's life under the sun.  Here's what we can expect if the Teacher is our christ.

But if that's the problem, what's the solution?  The glories of theism?  The truth that God knows us and has a wonderful plan for our lives?  The thought that my actions have eternal significance?  The Teacher knows all these things and declares them utterly meaningless.  Our only hope is Christ.  The true Christ.  The Christ from Heaven.  The Christ who conquers sin and law and judgement and death and bursts through into resurrection hope.  That's the answer to Ecclesiastes' meaninglessness.

Any other solution is vanity of vanities.

 

7

Published on 7 Comments on The Teacher is not an atheist – he’s just a crummy christ

I'm preaching on Ecclesiastes on Sunday so I've been listening to some other preachers.  They pretty much all preach Ecclesiastes as the futility of atheism.  And of course when you preach it like that, what's the solution?  Good old theism.  Yay theism.

And one or two preachers have even suggested that Christian theism gives the most amount of meaning.  So yay Jesus too.  (Although the last preacher I listened to -- BIG NAME --  was way too excited about theism to get around to that Jesus nuance.)

Anyway, just thought I'd state something that's pretty darned obvious but it seems like it needs saying.  The Teacher aint no atheist.  He's a hard-core theist.  Check it:

Ecclesiastes 1:13; 2:24-26; 3:10-22; 5:1-7, 18-20; 6:1-2; 7:13-14; 18,20; 8:2, 11-17; 9:1,9; 11:5,9; 12:1-14;

Here's just a sample of what he says:

God has set eternity in the hearts of men.... He's done it so that men will revere him... Stand in awe of God... God made mankind upright but men have gone in search of many schemes... I know that it will go better with God-fearing men who are reverent before God... God will bring you to judgement... Remember your Creator... Fear God and keep his commandments.

He's a theist right?  A pretty ardent one.

But what do you expect from a son of David, a king of Jerusalem? (Ecclesiastes 1:1)  Here is a christ - an anointed king.  But, here's the thing, he's not the King of Heaven.  He's a king under heaven (notice how 'under heaven' and 'under the sun' are parallel 1:3; 3:1).  He's not the One full of the Spirit without measure, instead he seeks to shepherd the Spirit (or chase the wind, e.g. 1:14) while he must receive his teachings from the true Shepherd (12:11).

The teacher is self-consciously not the Messiah (he's a very naughty boy!).  He's not the Christ with a capital C certainly. But he is a christ with a small c.  And so he embarks on a sustained meditation of life in which the king is subject to all the forces that we are.  This christ is also under the sun and therefore under the powers that enslave mankind and even nature itself.  This king, for all his wealth and power and wisdom cannot pierce through the shroud of sin, law, judgement and death.   And so what hope is there?  None!  Not with this king.  Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.  And then we are judged - by the God is who is ever-present in Ecclesiastes.  But ever-present as Judge.  And who knows how we will fare under His judgement.

That's life under the sun.  Here's what we can expect if the Teacher is our christ.

But if that's the problem, what's the solution?  The glories of theism?  The truth that God knows us and has a wonderful plan for our lives?  The thought that my actions have eternal significance?  The Teacher knows all these things and declares them utterly meaningless.  Our only hope is Christ.  The true Christ.  The Christ from Heaven.  The Christ who conquers sin and law and judgement and death and bursts through into resurrection hope.  That's the answer to Ecclesiastes' meaninglessness.

Any other solution is vanity of vanities.

 

14

Published on 14 Comments on Jesus saved a people out of Egypt – The Story of Exodus [Repost]

Jesus... saved a people out of the land of Egypt. (Jude 5)

That's Exodus in 10 words.

Let me give a more expanded but less inspired version.  I will focus on the who of Exodus rather than the what.  My attention will not be on Moses or Pharoah or the plagues or the Red Sea or the law or the tabernacle - that can be for another time.  I happen to think there's a more fundamental issue to tackle: Who is the LORD who redeems Israel?  Given that this is precisely how the God of the Old Testament defines Himself  - 'the LORD who brought you up out of Egypt' - getting this question right will be absolutely crucial.

We begin at the non-burning bush - Exodus 3.

burning bush

Here the Angel of the LORD (v2) confronts Moses. This Sent One from the LORD is "the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" (v6).  (Note that Jacob agrees - the God of His fathers is the Angel: Gen 48:15f).  The Sent One calls Himself “I AM WHO I AM.” (v14)

Note: When Jesus, in His incarnate ministry, calls Himself “I AM” (for e.g. John 8:24,28,58; 13:19; 18:5-8) He is not saying that He's closely related to the God of the Exodus.  He is the God of the Exodus.

This is important to note because verse 12 may just be the book's theme sentence:

He said, "But I will be with you, and this shall be the sign for you, that I have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain." (Ex 3:12)

The Angel does not say “God will go with you and you will worship God.” Nor does He say “I will go with you and you will worship Me.”  No, the Angel is the saving LORD (see Judges 2:1-5) and He relates the people to Another.  Jesus saves a people and brings them to worship God on the mountain.  The Son redeems a people for the Father.  That is what Exodus is all about.  And the rest of the book is the playing out of this truth.

pillar cloudAs the people come out of Egypt - there He is in the pillar of cloud/fire.  At one point He's called the LORD (13:21,22) at another, 'the Angel of God' (14:19,20).  The Sent One who is God is the redeeming LORD.

When He carries them on eagles wings to the mountain (as promised) He makes sure they are prepared to meet the LORD:

"The LORD [who carried Israel on eagle's wings - v4] said to Moses, "Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their garments and be ready for the third day. For on the third day the LORD will come down on Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people. And you shall set limits for the people all around, saying, 'Take care not to go up into the mountain or touch the edge of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall be put to death."  (Ex 19:10-12)

Here the LORD is on the mountain warning the people about how dangerous it will be when the LORD meets them on the mountain.  If this were some unitarian god it would be strange talk indeed but we know that the divine Angel is the LORD who is bringing them to meet God (the Father) on the mountain (Ex 3:12).

As Deuteronomy 4 and 5 underline, the encounter on Sinai was utterly unique (e.g. Deut 4:15; 5:26).

giving law

No-one had ever heard 'the living God' speaking out of fire on the mountain as they did on that third day.  Of course Moses had heard the I AM speaking out of fire on that very mountain (Exodus 3).  But this is different.  This is the unseen LORD.  This is the Most High God and it has taken 70 chapters of the bible - and the mighty redemption of the Angel - to make this kind of encouter possible.

And just when you thought Exodus might finish in chapter 19, the people don't actually go up the mountain at the trumpet blast (Ex 19:13).  Instead Moses goes up on their behalf (cf Deut 5:27).  Everything will now be presented by intermediaries, shadows, types.  For the second half of the book it's mainly Moses on the mountain, in the cloud, receiving the law and the tabernacle blueprint from the unseen LORD.

Attention turns to the future as the unseen LORD promises Moses that the Angel will continue to deliver them (Ex 23:20-23).  They can trust Him because the name of the unseen LORD is in Him (Ex 23:21).  The Angel commands, leads and forgives the Israelites.

Perhaps Moses wasn't listening at this point because in 33:12 he says:

"See, you say to me, 'Bring up this people,' but you have not let me know whom you will send with me."

The unseen LORD replies: "My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest." (v14)  The word 'Presence' is the word for face and it recalls a very memorable phrase from the same chapter.

In Exodus 33:7-11 we hear about what used to happen.  We leave the mountain-top briefly to be told how Moses used to meet with the LORD down on ground level.  At that time he'd go to the tent of meeting and speak with the LORD "face to face as a man speaks with his friend."

That was the 'face to face' LORD at ground level.  But when Moses is on the mountain, the unseen LORD reassures Moses that the Face (Presence) would continue to go with them.  Moses considers this to be absolutely essential - if the Presence doesn't go with them he'd rather just perish in the wilderness (v15).  Give me Jesus or give me death!

Having been encouraged greatly, Moses is now bold enough to ask something with echoes of Philip's request in John 14.  Now he wants to see the glory of the unseen LORD (v18)!  The LORD’s reply is very telling: He would pass in front of Moses, He would proclaim His name, but, v20, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live." Again in v22 He emphasizes “my face must not be seen.”

Now Moses is not an idiot.  He's just recounted the incident in the tent of meeting (33:7-11) for a reason.  He's deliberately distinguishing the ground-level appearing LORD with the mountain-top unseen LORD.  But distinguishing them so as to intimately relate them.

Because as soon as Moses hears the name of the Unseen LORD (Ex 34:5-7) he exclaims:

"If now I have found favor in your sight, O Lord, please let the Lord go in the midst of us." (Ex 34:9)

When he hears the name of the Most High God he asks Him to send the Lord in their midst.  The name of the LORD is in the Angel who is in their midst (Ex 23:21).  So when Moses hears this gospel character he knows he's experienced this very name in the Angel.  The seen LORD is everything that the unseen LORD proclaims when He reveals His name.  And so Moses asks the Father to send the Son in their midst - the redeeming Lord-from-Lord.

Moses’ plea of 34:9 is granted and, at the end of Exodus, the Glory / Presence / LORD fills the tabernacle and directs all their travels (40:34-38).

pillar cloud tabernacle

We see throughout the Old Testament that this promise of the Presence of the LORD being in the midst of His people was kept. Numbers 9:15-23 is one example of many showing the seen LORD going in the midst of His people.  Number 14 tells us that even the surrounding nations knew that the Face-to-Face LORD travelled with the Israelites and fought for them (v13ff).  When Solomon finally builds a Temple for the Name of the LORD, the LORD fills it in exactly the same way as He filled the tabernacle in Exodus 40. This LORD appears to Solomon in 1 Kings 9 and to Isaiah in chapter 6. If we were in any doubt as to who this Divine Person is, the Apostle John settles all dispute: “Isaiah said this [Isaiah 6] because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about Him.” (John 12:41)

In the fulness of time this LORD - this Angel of the covenant, this sought after and desired Redeemer - would come in a definitive judgement and salvation (Mal 3:1ff).

Jesus has always been the saving, ground-level, appearing LORD.  He has always perfectly mediated the saving plan and character of His Father.  Jude was speaking absolutely plainly and straightforwardly - Jesus is the LORD who brought the Israelites out of Egypt.  In other words He is the God of the Old Testament.  Exodus is a wonderful demonstration of this foundational truth.

.

2

Published on 2 Comments on Youth Talks on Christ from the Old Testament

Here are my Powerpoints and links to the video clips I used.

1. Jesus and Adam (Powerpoint file)

Genesis 3

Jesus - there in the beginning.
Jesus - promised from the outset.

Defeating Doubts:  Is Jesus really that important?

Video clip: Gethsemane scene from The Passion

.

2. Jesus and Abraham (Powerpoint file)

Genesis 22

Defeating Doubts: Isn't the bible weird?

When you read it without Jesus it's awful!
When you read it with Jesus it's incredible!

Video clip: That's Real Love

.

3. Jesus and Moses (Powerpoint file)

Exodus 3

Defeating Doubts: Where is God when it hurts?

Jesus comes down into suffering
To bring us out.

Video clip: Richard Wurmbrandt - Tortured for Christ (first 3:20)

.

4. Jesus and David (Powerpoint file)

1 Samuel 17

Christianity is not Do it for Christ
Christianity is Christ did it for you as your Champion

Defeating Doubts:  I'm too weak to be a Christian!

Video clip: Tim Keller - What is the Bible about?

If I had time for a fifth I'd do...

.

5. Jesus and Isaiah (Powerpoint file)

Isaiah 6 and 53

Christ is high and lifted up on the cross
He is my substitute.

Defeating Doubts:  I'm too sinful to be a Christian.

Video clip: Nothing but the blood

Published on Leave a comment on Five youth talks on Christ from the Old Testament

I've been asked to give some talks to teenagers on Christ's "mission impossible" - that's the name of the camp they're on.  They suggested I do it from the OT.

I thought at some point in each talk I'll address a sneaking suspicion that Christians have deep down that eats away at our faith.  So, something like:

Jesus and Adam (Genesis 3) – "Jesus can’t be that important."

Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and End, the world's only hope.

.

Jesus and Abraham (Genesis 22) – "The bible’s weird and sometimes shocking."

The bible is not a rule-book, but with Christ at the centre it makes sense.

.

Jesus and Moses (Exodus 3) – "I can’t believe in God in a suffering world."

The LORD meets us in suffering to lead us out.

.

Jesus and David (1 Samuel 17) – "I’m too weak for Jesus."

The gospel is not, do it for Jesus, it's: Jesus did it for you.

.

Jesus and Isaiah (Isaiah 53) – "I’m too sinful for Jesus."

Jesus' mission is for sinners - He's for you!

.

Anyone have any ideas for good youth-friendly video clips or jazzy stuff.  I'm not the youthiest, jazziest speaker ever!

 

2

Published on 2 Comments on Passover is…

... the ultimate plague (i.e. judgement)  (Ex 11:1)

... judgement upon the gods (Ex 12:12)

... the defeat of the Enemy (Ex 6:1)

... liberation from slavery to overlords (Ex 13:14)

... liberation to the service of the LORD (Ex 8:1)

... the cause of unparalleled sorrow for the enemies (Ex 11:6)

... the cause of great joy for the redeemed (2 Chron 30:21)

... the distinction between the LORD's people and the world (Ex 11:7)

... in darkness (Deut 16:6)

... a sacrifice (Ex 12:27)

... substitutionary (Ex 12:13)

... bloody (Ex 12:13)

... a sign for the LORD's people (Ex 12:13)

... for the LORD Himself to see (Ex 12:13)

... to be memorialized in perpetuity (Ex 12:14)

... community-defining (Ex 12:47)

... open to non-covenant people (Ex 12:49)  but...

... for those who enter the covenant and own its sign (Ex 12:48)

... time renewing (Ex 12:1)

... the ultimate revelation of the LORD (Ex 6:7)

 .

What is the cross?

Exactly the same.

[this is a repost]

.

5

Published on 5 Comments on It’s not about which Testament, it’s about which Gospel

I've been chatting to three different mates about their sermons this week.  In each case the commentaries they have read and the sermons they have listened to have, in the end, put us in the driver's seat.  Ironically, those commentators and preachers who make the most noise about being "God-centred" have seemed to be the most keen to put us at the centre.

And it doesn't seem to matter which testament they're preaching from.  Two friends are preaching from Psalms.  And even though the Psalmist is described in impossibly lofty terms - an Ideal King and Sufferer and Worshipper - yet the applications from the great and good leave us aspiring to approximate the Psalmist's experience.  (And Jesus is brought in at the end as someone who really approximated the Psalmist's experience rather well!).

My other friend is preaching on the parable of the man who finds the treasure and buys the field.  He is surrounded by evangelical interpretations which make us the protagonists in the whole kingdom drama.  (Suffice to say, that is not the way I take it!)

It's reminded me yet again that "Christ in the Old Testament" is just the tip of the iceberg.  We need to fight a much more basic battle - Christ in all Scripture.  Is it really all about Him?

It's also reminded me: You gotta watch those "God-centred" preachers!

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer