“The first element of evangelism is opening a person’s eyes, that is, his desires, his sense of need. This is not done with the gospel.”

Chapter 1 of Jim Wilson’s new book, Taking Men Alive: Evangelism On The Front Lines. Available December 1.

The first element of evangelism is opening a person’s eyes, that is, his desires, his sense of need. This is not done with the gospel. Because the gospel is the light, it must come only after the eyes are open. For hundreds of years Christians have been preaching the gospel to a pagan world whose eyes are shut. The world cannot see the light, because light does not cause sight.

Have you ever told the gospel to someone in complete detail, and after you finished, the person you talked with did not have the faintest understanding of what you had so carefully and clearly explained? Why did he not understand? His eyes were closed. Have you ever been in a church where they taught the gospel for two solid years in confirmation class, and at the end of all those classes the children were confirmed and never came back again? The church is under the impression that if it shines light on kids for two years, they will see. But they do not see, because light does not open eyes.

Several decades ago, I spent two years running a bookstore for a Missouri Synod Lutheran college. During that time, I asked many students if all the wonderful truth they had learned in confirmation class had sounded like good news to them. Most of them said, “Are you kidding? Two years of classes on Saturday mornings? Does that sound like good news to you?” Most of these students were preparing for the ministry, yet the gospel still did not sound like good news to them! I found only one student in that college who said, “Oh, yes, it was wonderful. I couldn’t get enough of confirmation class.” Someone had opened her eyes so that when she got the light, it looked like light.

Since giving light to someone with closed eyes does not make them understand, when you are opening people’s eyes, you do not have to explain the gospel to them. They will not understand it, no matter how clearly you present it. Opening eyes is not about making sense. It is pre-light, pre-gospel. Opening eyes speaks to the need, the desire, the fears, the hunger, the thirst. The unbeliever does not need to understand at this point; he just needs to be left wanting whatever it is that will meet his need.

The Bible also speaks of evangelism in terms of farming. The book of Jeremiah tells us to break up the fallow ground. Jeremiah was speaking of spiritual ground here. The first step is to plow the hard ground, harrow it, soften it. Consider the Lord’s parable of the sower from Mark chapter 4: A man went forth to sow, and some seed fell on the pathway, some fell on the rocks, some fell in the weeds, and some fell on good ground. Jesus said if the seed falls on the hard path, the birds eat it. It never gets inside; the devil takes it away. If it falls in the rocks, it does not have enough moisture and dies when the summer heat comes. If it falls in the weeds, the cares of the world choke it. But when it falls on good ground, it bears much fruit.

That is what would happen if you sowed that way. However, if Christ had been giving instruction on farming, He would not have said, “Go plant some seed on the turnpike.” He would not say, “Go plant seed in the rocks.” He would say, “Plow up the ground. Pick up the rocks, turn the soil over, get it ready for the seed.” Opening eyes is like that. It is preparing the ground of a person’s heart for the gospel. Plowed, soft hearts are hungry for seed just like open eyes are hungry for light. If we make someone hungry, when the seed of the gospel (which is the Word of God) is given, it is received. There may not be a conversion right away, but you will not run into an argument or an immediate rejection of the gospel. Then you can plant the seed and reap the harvest.

Suppose I have a thousand acres of unplowed ground that I want to be wheat. I say, “I need laborers in the field, so get out there!” and you run out, jump on a combine, and start driving it around the unplowed ground. I get you back and say, “No, no, wrong! Don’t reap. Plow.”

“What do you mean, ‘Don’t reap’? There were six stalks of wheat out there, and I got them all!”

You probably did. There are always people ready. However, when the ground is hard, we should plow. It is wonderful to watch the ground turn over. You know something? Hard ground does not object to being plowed. It only objects to being planted or reaped! Closed eyes do not object to being opened; they just object to being given light.

The best way to open a person’s eyes is to live a godly life in front of him. He may not know what the cause of that godly life is, because that comes with his understanding of  the gospel. Do not tell him why you live the life you do; you can tell him that after his eyes are open. He might think, “Oh, Joe is such a wonderful man. He must be a Buddhist. I think I’ll study Buddhism.” That is not bad, because he is still looking at you. Opening a person’s eyes does not mean that he comes to God; it means that sooner or later he will come to you or to someone like you. When you live a godly life in front of people, it reaches them emotionally, either positively or negatively. It makes a person very conscious of his state, or perhaps just very conscious of your state. He realizes that he is unhappy with his, and he admires yours.

Living a godly life means having a great love for him. This love is not necessarily expressed with a gospel tract attached. (Remember, you are still opening eyes.) Love the person for who he is. Love him unconditionally, regardless of where he is. Loving him is key.

Another way to open eyes is with the things you say, in a testimony. This testimony does not have to have the gospel in it, either. Years ago, I was working in a Christian bookstore in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and a student from the University of Michigan who had wandered in suddenly realized what kind of bookstore it was and felt obligated to tell me why she was not a Christian. She went through the entire history of Christianity—the Conquistadors, the Inquisition, the Crusades, the present inconsistency and hypocrisy of the Church, etc.

As she finished, I looked at her and said, “Well, that’s funny. I don’t agree with any of those things either, and I’m a Christian.”

She looked at me, slightly puzzled. “How could that be?” “I’ll tell you why I’m a Christian.” I said, “Twenty-three years ago I had an encounter with God that was like having a bath on the inside. It’s changed my life, and I’ve been happy ever since. I’m sorry you’re not a Christian.” I turned around and started to walk away.

This woman was in a belligerent mood when she started talking to me. If I had presented the gospel to her, she would have fought back. Instead, I told her something that made her want more: I told her I had been happy for twenty-three years! I told her I was clean on the inside, but I did not tell her how I had gotten that way.

As I started to walk away, she grabbed me by the arm and said, “Aren’t you going to tell me how this happened?”

I opened her eyes with a simple statement. If I had tried to give her light, it would not have worked. Just to be sure her eyes were open, I said, “Well, we do not believe in holding onto the customers.”

She said, “I have all the time in the world.” We went into the office, and I gave my testimony, this time loaded with the gospel. I gave her a whole stack of InterVarsity booklets. I do not know for certain that she ever became a Christian, but I am confident that she did. However, I do know this: her heart got plowed, and she got planted in good ground. That is all that had to happen! To push for the harvest right then would have been foolish. She was not ready. We do not have to always do the whole thing at once when we are evangelizing. Sometimes the seed needs time to grow before you can have a harvest.

Some biblical examples of this approach can be found in the Gospel of John. Look at John 3:2-3:

 He [Nicodemus] came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.” In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”

That was the first time in the history of the world that the expression “born again” had been uttered.

Here is my question: Did Nicodemus know what Jesus was talking about? No! Did Jesus know that Nicodemus didn’t know what He was talking about? Yes! Then why did He say it? Jesus was not communicating information. He was not communicating gospel. There was no light in His statement. Many people today think if you say “born again” often enough, you are preaching the gospel. There is no gospel in that statement. Jesus was not communicating light—He was communicating desire for the kingdom. He was opening Nicodemus’ eyes. He kept laying it on, over and over. Finally, He rubbed it in: “You mean you are a teacher in Israel and you do not understand these things?”

Nicodemus was climbing the walls for light before it was over. Then Jesus gave it to him:

 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:14-18)

Jesus set Nicodemus up. He opened his eyes, made him hungry, made him want more before He gave him the gospel.

An excerpt from a new book, Metropolitan Manifesto, by Rich Bledsoe.

Institutions say they want change, but this is at best a schizophrenic desire. Change requires pain and nobody wants pain.

Death and Resurrection Motif in the Bible

The entire backbone of this manifesto is the application of the biblical motif of death and resurrection to the leader’s situation. This begins with his/her survival in office, but must then have a broader application than that. Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy has understood the death and resurrection motif as the key to Western history as no one has. For the life of the Church and the Kingdom of God when things appeared to be at dead ends, over and over, it turns out to be the beginnings.

We see this pattern in the Old Testament. God brought a wicked world to an end in the flood and saved only eight people in the ark. But the end of that first world carried the promise of the rainbow with it as God promised He would never again flood the earth and made a covenant with all living things (Genesis 9:8-17).

A few generations later, He initiates a program of redemption when He calls Abraham to Himself, and promises to bless the whole earth and all peoples in Him (Genesis 12:1-3). This calling of Abraham is a calling that is over against universal judgment as He had exercised in the flood.

The family of Abraham develops for four generations, and then seventy people are called down into Egypt where eventually they are enslaved (Genesis 46:27). It is significant that seventy Hebrews go down into Egypt. Seventy is the
number of the nations, being derived from the table of nations in Genesis 10. Whenever the number seventy arises, it is symbolic of the nations.¹An example of this would be in the Gospel of Luke, which is the Gospel to the Gentiles. In Luke 9, Jesus sends out the twelve to the Jews, which number is symbolic of Israel being the nation of twelve tribes. Then in Luke 10, He sends out seventy to cities He is preparing to go to, some of which are in Gentile areas, and include Gentiles. Egypt is a fiery furnace and slavery in Egypt is a kind of death. These Hebrew people are going down into Egypt to die for the world. Their enslavement is in place of a universal judgment that would once again destroy the earth. The Exodus is a resurrection. Israel emerges from the furnace of Egypt in new life and is raised from the dead by Yahweh. Israel now proceeds to explicitly become the priestly people to the entire world.

If the death/resurrection motif is not clear in the Egyptian experience, it is made explicit in the Babylonian captivity. Return from Babylon is directly likened to a resurrection in Ezekiel 37. This passage presents a vision
of a valley of dry bones coming together, flesh coming onto the bones and breath entering the resurrected bodies. This is Israel and Israel is coming back from the dead.

Jesus literally fulfills the death and resurrection anticipated in Ezekiel 37, and the Church is baptized into His death and resurrection. The disciples are sent forth to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and they are to disciple the nations, not just individuals. Whole nations begin to take upon themselves this identity of “death and resurrection peoples” in analogous ways to Israel.

In previous chapters, we have spoken of the pattern of death and resurrection entering the life of the counselor to the king, as well as to the king himself. The hope for the leader is that his own experience of death and resurrection can become the experience of the institution he has headship over. Each institution is partaking of an era of a particular form of death and resurrection. It is in this that Rosenstock-Huessy has seen so deeply into. Hence, it is the explication of these patterns that become a way of giving orientation and hope to leaders.

Scapegoating and Cyclical Time: Hopeless and Hope

The first time I met privately with one of the leaders in our city, I said, “I am praying for you to make it in your office to seven years.” I hardly had to say another word. This person was almost as far down the road on this issue as was I. She said, “Before I came here (she named an important official in another state) X said to me, ‘When you get there, I want you to break the four year curse.’ “ Indeed, nobody had made it in this particular office for more than five years in nearly forty years. This was a very moving issue for the official. Momentarily, she appeared to be near tears. She was very touched. I then told her that her first year would be a honeymoon, the second a bit tougher and the sheen would be gone, and between the third and forth year, all hell would break loose. “If there isn’t a crisis, one will be invented. They will attempt to crucify you.” Several years later, a crisis indeed was invented. I got a call one evening, and it was the chief of staff wanting to know if I would see this person. A time was arranged, and I had a meal with her and her husband. We discussed the crisis. “How long have you been here?” She thought for a few moments. “Almost exactly three and a half years.” (This is significant, because Christ was crucified at 42 months, or 3 1/2 years into His ministry).

A number of years later, I had meeting with another person in that same office. I began by saying, “You know, you have about one more year before they come after you.” He got silent. He was a very seasoned politician in his previous life. He knew exactly what I meant. He then said three things. “You have been around here a long time, haven’t you.” It was a statement, not a question. I said, “Yes.” “You’ve seen this before, haven’t you.” Again, it was a statement. “Yes.” Then he did ask a question. “What sect are you from?” I told him my affiliation (Presbyterian). He was very silent and thoughtful, and our interview ended. I never saw him again, but he resigned a few months later. When he left, he left with a hero’s departure with the press trumpeting all that he had achieved. He had been there a little more than two years. What I knew was that he was getting out of Dodge ahead of the lynch mob that he knew was coming.

What follows in this section is not presented as a law, but as something that has typically functioned as one of the first acts of wisdom or interpretation that begins to win the king. The typical first act of wisdom in my experience has to do with a kind of prophesy regarding scapegoating and cyclical time.

This is the information that understandably has had the most immediate and often the deepest effect on almost all officials with whom I have counselled. This understanding is a combination of things that I have learned from Edwin
Friedman, Rene Girard and James Jordan.²Friedman, E. (1985), Generation to generation: family process in church and synagogue. New York, Guilford Press. Bailie, G. (1995), Violence unveiled : humanity at the crossroads. New York, Crossroad. Girard, R. (2001), I see Satan fall like lightning. Maryknoll, N.Y. Ottawa Leominster, Herefordshire, Orbis Books; Novalis; Gracewing. Jordan, J. B. (2007), The Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Powder Springs. GA, American Vision.

Time is of the utmost in importance to anyone who is appointed or elected to any given office. As often as not, the reason someone is newly appointed or elected is to bring change and resolve problems that the institution has been experiencing. This, however, is not really the case. Institutions say they want change, but this is at best a schizophrenic desire. Change requires pain and nobody wants pain. Ray Bakke has said that the first rule of all pastoral care is that all change is experienced as loss, even if it means a net gain in the long run. People want change until it means change, and then what we all want is for the same tune to be played, with the hope that this time it will be different.

The Bible is replete with numbers and many numbers have a typological content. One of the most basic numbers is the number seven. The world was created in seven days, and all through the Bible we find time being structured on sevens. Israel’s long term calendar was so structured with a weekly Sabbath every seven days, a Sabbath year every seventh year and a Jubilee year every seven times seven years. The Gospel of John is extensively structured on
sevens, as is the Book of Revelation, and Daniel prophesies about seventy weeks of years (7 X 10, Dan. 9:24).³There are seven miracles and seven discourses in the Gospel of John, and Revelation has seven seals, seven trumpets, and seven bowls.

The number three and a half is obviously seven cut in two. We first find it employed when Elijah prays for it not to rain, and it does not rain for forty-two months, or three and a half years. Three and a half is a curse. It is a time of completion, of creation or recreation cut short or in two. (James 5:17, I Kings 18:1, Daniel 9:27, Revelation 11:2, 12:6, 13:5). Jesus was crucified at about three and a half years into His ministry. The implication is that His life was cut off or cut in two. He bore the curse for us.

When someone enters office, it will take somewhere between seven and ten years to bring meaningful renewal.⁴Rosenstock-Huessy, E. (1947), The Christian future: or the modern mind outrun. London, S.C.M. Press. Cheyeny, T. Climbing Past 400 In New Church Attendence. In our current environment, this almost never happens. Most leaders are cut off in the middle. In my experience, most leaders are effectively cut off before they have been in office for four years, and most will quit somewhere around five years. This means that renewal never takes place and that the old dysfunctions just continue. Most of our institutions are not being renewed, and at some point the dysfunction could become complete.

In order to keep renewal from being brought by the leader, the leader must be removed or have his or her effectiveness destroyed. This happens through the process of blame and scapegoating. If a crisis can be found at hand, that will do. If one cannot be immediately found, one can always be manufactured. And this will happen with the greatest intensity somewhere between three and four years, at approximately three and a half years. In other words, the leader will be crucified. If he or she can survive this time, then they can make it to seven years, and be successful in bringing renewal. In this, they virtually pass through a resurrection.

If a resurrection is not experienced, then a new leader will be brought in, usually with great fanfare, to solve the problems that the previous leader could not resolve. What has really happened is that things are just going in vicious cycles, and the same thing in all likelihood will happen to the new leader. No real renewal will happen, and further decay and degeneration will continue to plague the institution, and will probably get worse.

Capturing the Conscience of the King

This forms the background of the capturing of the conscience of the king. Since the infamous 60s, when the fervor of the French Revolution was introduced into our universities and our cities, crucifixion of some sort is now almost inevitable in all positions of leadership in the United States.⁵This is true in most parts of the country, except the Deep South and those parts termed the Bible belt, which are still more stable. But in those parts of the country, the problem is often the opposite where officials stay and stay and form a good ol’ boys’ network that is just as impervious to renewal. In my experience, almost no leader in any significant position lasts more than five years in his or her tenure. As an example, I have discovered as a result of my ministry that university presidents in this country routinely play a game of musical chairs about every four years. A deep intuitive knowledge exists, that it is impossible to survive in any presidential, or chancellor position, beyond an early era before conflict has developed. Leaving at four years is often a way of avoiding what appears to be inevitable destruction in that position. It is leaving ahead of the final and inevitable destruction and end of intolerable and impossible conflict that has by that time already been inaugurated.

My entry into many offices has been an understanding of this and speaking of this reality to the various leaders I have met. Understandably, there is hope of something better or more coming of what appears to be inevitable destructive conflict. Interest in talking with me is usually prompted by sheer self interest. People pursue these positions often for noble professional reasons, as well as sometimes, out of sheer personal ambition. Someone coming to them and speaking of an inevitable destruction of their position in office is certainly an attention getter. However, that discussion sometimes follows some kind of power encounter that has also been an attention getter. The prediction of the nightmare of coming conflict that will be utterly destructive is sometimes the first opening that the counselor has to begin to speak wisdom. Almost nobody else will broach such a subject, and, if they do, it is never broached with hope. Hope in the coming darkness is the advisor to the king’s great weapon and entrance. Who but a Christian, and particularly a Christian pastor, could better offer the hope of resurrection from the dead?

Metropolitan Manifesto: Half the world’s population now lives in cities, and that is where the Church must learn to serve. Rev. Richard Bledsoe has spent his life as a pastor to city leaders in Colorado. Over the years, he has become the unofficial bishop of his city, a recognized adviser to the king. In Metropolitan Manifesto: On Being a Counselor to the King in a Pluralistic Empire, Bledsoe lays out the theology behind his work, explains how to minister to leaders, and shares the lessons of his long experience. The Metropolitan Manifesto is an essential, inspiring testament to the transformative power of the gospel in today’s world.

“As always, the beauty of the arrangement is breathtaking. It is historical narrative, poetry, legal Covenant and high symbolism all at once… It consists of three Cycles which recapitulate the triune ‘Garden, Land, World’ architecture of the Creation and the Tabernacle.”

Matthew 28: SUCCESSION

The fifth major cycle takes us to the end of the Covenant pattern, from the Covenant Sanctions to Covenant Succession. In the Old Testament, this concerned handing Covenant authority to the faithful of the next generation. It was the blessings of Jacob upon his sons (Garden), and Moses passing the baton of headship of Israel to Joshua (Land). This time, the inheritance was not the Garden Sanctuary of Moses [1] nor the Land of Canaan, but the entire World. Thus, it is no accident that in both cases, in that of Joshua and that of the disciples, He said, “I am with you.” A battle lay ahead.
The Covenant “macrostructure” of Matthew is as follows (click the link for the previous blog posts):

This final Section also corresponds to the Feast of Booths, the festival at which Israel ministered to the nations. That feast would be fulfilled once for all over the next four decades until there was no longer a “Mosaic” Israel. As Christ gave Himself to the disciples, so the disciples would give themselves to the Jews and to the Gentiles.

Since this final Section is brief, I will do a detailed analysis. I have done my best to follow the “rhythms” of the Greek in my parsing. Although there were some tricky bits, every line seems to find its logical place in the progression. As always, the beauty of the arrangement is breathtaking. It is historical narrative, poetry, legal Covenant and high symbolism all at once.

The theme of this final Section is not only testimony to the nations but to the next generation. It consists of three Cycles which recapitulate the triune “Garden, Land, World” architecture of the Creation and the Tabernacle.

PRIESTHOOD
The first Cycle is the “singular” testimony of
the angel to the women
(Garden – Most Holy Place – Adam and Eve)

KINGDOM
The second Cycle is the testimony of
the soldiers to the Jewish leaders
(Land – Holy Place – Cain and Abel)

PROPHECY
The third Cycle is the testimony of
Jesus to the disciples
(World – Courts – Sons of God)

This means that this final Section of Matthew’s Gospel is effectively a new “three-decker” house. However, the “Land” between the World and the Garden, like the Veil, was about to be torn apart by the testimony of Jesus. Beginning with the witness of Abel, all the blood would be avenged upon that generation.
_______________________________________________________

Testimony in the Garden

(Physical)

CREATION – GENESIS – SABBATH

The first Stanza speaks of light in the darkness. Matthew mentions only two women as two “bridal” trumpets. Although the first listed feast is the weekly Sabbath, it is an imperfect, not final, rest. So the final step, Glorification/Booths, is missing, as it was in the Garden of Eden.

DIVISION – EXODUS – PASSOVER

The Sabbath silence is torn apart in Stanza 2. At this “Passover,” the firstborn is the Firstborn From The Dead. Covenant, Sonship, Law and Family are all redefined. It is not waters being divided here but the Land. Or is it? There is a symmetry between the rocks split at the crucifixion and those at the resurrection, like the rocks split by Moses that Israel might drink. Moses was not to strike the rock the second time because the new Israel was a resurrection body (Exodus 17:6; Numbers 20:11). Moses was denied an inheritance in the Land. The water at the crucifixion was from the body of Christ. The water at the resurrection was a river of the Spirit, the testimony of Jesus. So, in a sense, the waters above and below were once again divided, and a new Firmament created. [2]

ASCENSION – LEVITICUS – FIRSTFRUITS

Levite priests were the guardians of the Tabernacle. Here, the heavenly guardian knocks the earthly guardians flat. The literary structure shows us Matthew’s the reason for explaining these events slightly out of chronological order: the women needed to be in the “Sabbath” Stanza. Again, the final line is missing, mimicking the structure of the book of Leviticus.

TESTING – NUMBERS – PENTECOST

Testing often includes the theme of trembling at the opening of God’s Law. For Israel it was harlotry and death in the wilderness. It is interesting that at Ascension, the women are told not to fear. The terrible fires and thunders of Sinai are now silent. Matching this in the symmetry is Jesus, who is the new Law, the Law of the Spirit.

MATURITY – DEUTERONOMY – TRUMPETS

Maturity speaks of resurrection, the Bridal Body rescued from the serpent through obedience at Testing, and also legal witness, which is why the angel refers to the truth of Jesus’ “oath.” Notice that the bloody body of flesh is now missing, speaking of the end of the Circumcision. The only worship now is worship in Spirit (Testing – Pentecost) and truth (Maturity – Trumpets). This Stanza is fivefold, which means I suppose that this testimony of resurrection is a scroll yet to be “opened.”

CONQUEST – JOSHUA – ATONEMENT

The “Day of Coverings” Stanza is actually an uncovering. The women are permitted to see what only the High Priest was previously permitted to see: the Most Holy Place. Wonderfully, the words of the angel follow the process of Ascension, and the body has indeed risen. It is like touring the launch pad after the rocket has take off. Line by line, the first elements of the tent of Moses are replaced with the real thing. This leaves us at the Lampstand, the imminent Day of Pentecost. Of course, this would also lead to the incineration of the stoicheia one generation later, as Peter predicted (2 Peter 3:10).

GLORIFICATION – JUDGES – BOOTHS

Just as the ministry of Israel to the nations at Booths was the outflow of their cleansing at Atonement, so here the testimony of the women is the outflow of the empty tomb.

_______________________________________________________

Testimony in the Land

(Social)

CREATION – SABBATH

The women come out of the tomb into the Light as Eve came out of the side of Adam. The structure makes their testimony the witness of the New Covenant. The Ethics of this Covenant is an internal motivation to speak, the Law-Word written on flesh.

DIVISION – PASSOVER

Prostration is common at Division. Jesus’ greeting at Firstfruits is beautiful. Jesus’ feet are clean feet. He is not only the new Tabernacle but the head of the new Priesthood. He needs not to shake off the dust and wash His feet. Having crushed the serpent and risen from the dead, even the dust is no longer cursed.

Notice that Jesus is the Head of this Stanza (forming) and the Women are the Body (filling). It is word and response.

ASCENSION – FIRSTFRUITS

At Ascension, Jesus makes a promise. It seems that the brothers are in the center, which would make them Pentecostal lamps. Once again, Galilee is a cipher for the combination of the Land and the Sea, the union of Jew and Gentile.

TESTING – PENTECOST – RULERS

At the center of the cycle we have the testimony of the soldiers to the serpentine rulers. In the Land, this is the witness of a better Abel’s resurrection, whose blood speaks not of curses but of blessings. They would fail to rule over sin, just as Cain had done, but vengeance upon them would not be postponed for long. They were marked with the mark of the beast. Indeed, it was the “ministry” of the Jewish rulers against the Church which would lead to their reliance upon Rome to wipe out the Christians. Like Cain, they would lose their inheritance. Jerusalem appears at the center as the city of peace, corresponding to the Peace Offering in Leviticus. Also, as the “Pentecost” Stanza, the light brought to them by the soldiers would be turned to darkness. They would withhold the truth in unrighteousness.

MATURITY – TRUMPETS – SWARMS/HOSTS

Maturity is often military but it also concerns legal witness. Notice that these guards went into the city after the resurrection just as those who came out of the graves. This means there was a contingent of Jews and a contingent of Gentiles: two witnesses. Jerusalem had no excuse in her denial of the resurrection.

This gathering corresponds structurally to the brothers of Joseph plotting his demise and then his sale. The earthly “elders” at Ascension correspond to the heavenly elders in the Revelation. But those elders acknowledged Christ.

The silver pieces turn up where the silver usually turns up. It is a bridal metaphor, found in the purchase of Sarah’s tomb, the plunder of Achan, and of course the shiny “Gentile fish” of Day 5. These leaders had bribed a Jew with silver to murder Jesus and now they were bribing Gentiles to keep Him dead. This “plunder” would bring the Covenant plagues upon them. Notice that their “counsel” and the silver pieces correspond to the theft and false witness in the Ten Words. These believing Gentiles are silenced by murderous Jews.

CONQUEST – ATONEMENT – MEDIATORS

The structure of this little speech is mind blowing. It is the Day of Atonement perverted but not beyond recognition. Notice the clever combination of the hearing of the Word (Pentecost) and the governing lights in the center. The Jewish leaders were a Law unto themselves, and thus betrayed and misled their people once again. No wonder Jesus referred to them as serpents.

GLORIFICATION – BOOTHS – REST AND RULE/REPRESENTATION

So, the true testimony of Jesus was turned into a false one, and God was slandered as He was in Eden. Notice that the Jews appear at Sanctions. All the Covenant curses would fall upon them for this act and the ones which followed. That is what the book of Revelation is about.

_______________________________________________________

Testimony in the World

(Ethical)

The pattern begins in a hole in the ground and ends upon a mountain. Moreover, it was a mountain in Galilee. Jesus and the disciples were sons of Abraham as lights in the sky and grains of sand on the shore, mediating between Land and Sea.

CREATION – INITIATION (Light)

The mountain seems to appear in the center as a reference to the commission to Adam in Eden, the first mountain of God.

DIVISION – DELEGATION (Firmament)

The Division now is not between Jew and Gentile, or Hebrew and Egyptian, but between believer and unbeliever. The Firmament was filled with lights.

ASCENSION – PRESENTATION (Land and Firstfruits)

At Ascension, Jesus opens the New Covenant scroll, just as He does in the Revelation, which follows the same pattern. What was being bound on earth would be bound in heaven (the unbelieving Jews as a whole burnt offering) and what was now loosed on earth (the true Isaac) would be loosed in heaven as the first Son of the Promise.

TESTING – PURIFICATION (Governing Lights)

At the Ethics/Heavenly Rulers Stanza, we have the Covenant structure of the Revelation in microcosm: The vision of Jesus, His authority over the Churches, the preaching of the Gospel, the slaying and ascension of the saints, and the pouring out of the curses upon the Land.

MATURITY – TRANSFORMATION (Swarms in Sky & Sea)

This Stanza is another witness to the error of paedobaptism. Firstly, the mention of “nations” does not mean a “civic” baptism. John’s baptism for Jews was now Jesus’ baptism for Jews and Gentiles (all nations), hence the location: not the Jordan River but overlooking the Sea of Galilee. Moreover, the baptism appears where it does in the first Cycle of Matthew: at Ascension. It is a priestly robe for a mediator, not merely a recipient. Baptism is not for those who are Physical Sons (Noah) or Social Sons (Abraham) but Ethical Sons, those in whom the Father is pleased because they are Triune, they have overcome the serpent. It is interesting that the Father corresponds to the fatherhood of God in Deuteronomy and the role of Samuel the prophet (and Joseph) as an Ethical “father” to kings. The Son is of course Adam-Jeshua, and the Spirit is the Shekinah which fills each Temple once the instructions have been followed. The baptized are wise judges because their eyes have been opened and they see as God sees from heaven and do His will on earth.

And, just to annoy paedobaptists even more, the baptism does not appear at step 6 (the Laver) but at step 3, Day 3 (which is actually the step 6 of the “Head” pattern). One being baptized rises up out of the water like the Land out of the Sea, or a murdered Jew who knocks out the Gentile guards. So, unwashed brother or sister, get with the programme. Get immersed or you have not identified with Jesus as one in whom God is pleased. [3]

CONQUEST – VINDICATION (Mediators)

The Gospel is the two-edged sword in the mouth of Jesus, here, as it is in the Revelation. It brings great blessings to those who hear and obey, and great curses to those who do not. The promises to Abraham concerning those who blessed him or cursed him were transferred to his seed, Jesus. Also, based upon the Edenic pattern, the disciples were now the ev-angels with the flaming sword of the Spirit. The four Gospels would go out into the Land as four horsemen: Creation, Division, Ascension, Testing, just as the witness of the angel concerning the empty tomb. The shockwave of the original “earthquake” would divide the entire Land.

GLORIFICATION – REPRESENTATION (Succession)

The final stanza is fivefold, a scroll awaiting to be opened in history. Just as Joshua stood on the border of the Land, now Jesus stood on the border of the World.

This Garden, Land, World pattern of testimony is replicated in the Revelation at a greater level. John sees the ascended Christ who sends the four Gospels into the Land. Once the Land is conquered, all the saints ride with Jesus into the World.

I hope you have enjoyed this analysis of Matthew.

_____________________________________________
[1] The blessings of Jacob upon his sons, when aligned with the tribes arranged around the Tabernacle, construct a cruciform ladder to heaven, a ziggurat.
[2] See my notes on Hagar and Sarah as the waters below and waters above in the forthcoming The Shape of Galatians. You can find my inspiration in James B Jordan’s Trees and Thorns.
[3] I plant to write a post about sprinkling some time soon. Briefly, sprinkling is about substitutionary blood and death, disintegration, ashes and dust mediated in water, not about the integration of resurrection. It is the cross, not the tomb.

ART: The Resurrection of Christ (right wing of the Isenheim Altarpiece) – Matthias Grünewald, c.1512-c.1516

HT Daniel Foucachon

I have recently been reading Cornelius Van Til’s “Christian Apologetics” and it has really got me thinking about how the Church ought to be interacting with the world on some of today’s hot topics. I think all too often we are prone to affirming certain parts of the secular worldview without properly considering the consequences. So here are five things which the good Christian apologist should never agree with the secularist about. There are probably many others, but here are just a few.

1) “Both of us believe in the laws of science”

We should never affirm that any such impersonal, unchangeable ‘laws’ exist (cf 2 Peter 3:3-4). By agreeing with the secularist on this matter the apologist is basically affirming a materialistic worldview from the outset. Contrary to this, we must insist that God directly and personally governs the universe through his Spirit (eg. Psalm 104); the ‘laws’ of science are merely conventions which God is free to break whenever he so desires.

2) “Both of us are honestly pursuing the truth, we have just come to different conclusions”

The Apostle Paul does not reason this way. He insists that those who deny the gospel are fools (Romans 1:22-23) and that they “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:18-19). Deep down in his heart of hearts, the secularist knows that Jesus is Lord of the universe and he is doing everything he can to actively suppress that truth. He has become so accustomed to doing this that he has become blind (2 Corinthians 4:3-4) and hard-hearted (Ephesians 4:17-18).

3) “The existence of God is a complex issue”

Psalm 19 teaches that the existence of the triune God is crystal clear from the world he made; that creation is constantly screaming the good news about its Creator and about his graciousness towards us. It is our sinfulness which blinds us and keeps us from recognising this self-evident fact.

4) “We should begin outside of faith and the Bible and investigate these issues independently”

The secularist is not capable of investigating anything independently because he is blind. He needs to recognise the reality of his sinfulness through hearing the good news about God’s grace revealed in Jesus (Romans 1:16-17). The apologist is not seeking to win an argument, but to lead a non-Christian to repentance.

5) “Faith should be a private matter”

Christianity is about proclamation. You cannot be a Christian and be quiet about it. The Apostles did not keep silent even after violent persecution (Acts 4) and neither should we. We would be hypocrites if we failed to speak out against the sinful practices of the world, if we did not denounce evil and rejoice in good. This applies in the ‘political’ sphere just as much as in the ‘personal’ one. Jesus is lord over all the kings of the earth (Psalm 2).

Presbyterians and Baptists have a long history of working together. As is God’s way, any new endeavour must take the past into account but not be bound by it. This is a guest post by my friend Matt Carpenter.

The questions surrounding the origins and necessity of denominations have been discussed at great length and I don’t intend on bringing them up here. But it doesn’t mean we have a license to continue without giving it another thought. This isn’t another call for lip-quivering ecumenism. Fellow soldiers in God’s army can learn a lot from one another and the two groups I currently have in mind are Baptists and Presbyterians. Traditionally they have shared a lot in common.

In 1642, Oliver Cromwell led a group of mostly Puritans, Presbyterians, and Baptists against the army of King Charles I. Regardless of one’s opinion of this war, it’s not an exaggeration to say they banded together to gain religious freedom for many in England.

Two years later, Presbyterians drew up the Westminster Confession of Faith, a document they believed declared the doctrines of the Reformers, Church fathers, and apostles. In 1689, the Baptists of London drew up a document that declared their faith. With a few exceptions it was taken directly from the Westminster Confession. This was no accident, for they, “have no itch to clog religion with new words, but do readily acquiesce in that form of sound words which hath been, in consent with the Holy Scriptures, used by others before us; hereby declaring, before God, angels, and men, our hearty agreement with them in that wholesome Protestant doctrine which, with so clear evidence of Scriptures, they have asserted.” [1] In other words, they explicitly wanted to express their commonality with the Presbyterians (among others) in primary doctrinal truth.

A little over one-hundred years later, Presbyterians and Baptists in the North American colonies again united against the threat of King George III sending an Anglican Bishop to preside over the colonies. None other than John Adams called this the first spark in the American Revolution. [2] Most of the soldiers in the continental army were Presbyterians and Baptists. What is it that links these two groups together, and has done so for hundreds of years? [3]

The first common conviction is the sovereignty of God. As has already been noted, the London Confession reads almost exactly similar to the Westminster Confession when it speaks of God’s sovereignty in all of life, including salvation. In the 1830’s a segment of Baptists and Presbyterians stood against the forces of liberalism that wanted assert man’s free-will over the sovereignty of God.

Another link is the stance against revivalism during the Second Great Awakening. For the Presbyterians the split was among those who supported the “new measures” of Charles Finney (altar calls, anxious benches, etc.) and those who opposed the emotionalism fanned by some ministers. It resulted in the expulsion of 500 ministers and 550 churches. [4] There was also a split among the Baptists in 1832 who also registered their opposition to the “new measures” of revivalist preachers.

A third area of similarity is the belief in the regulative principle (only God’s word can declare what should go on in worship). Baptists like Charles Spurgeon and Benjamin Keach, along with Presbyterians R.L. Dabney and John Murray taught this. Although the principle is interpreted differently among many, it is still held in some form by conservatives of both denominations.

Although there are many other similarities that could be mentioned, a final common link is the emphasis of the local church. In both the Westminster and London Baptist Confessions, chapter 26, section 1 (referring to the church), says: “Saints by profession, are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and communion in the worship of God, and in performing such other spiritual services as tend to their mutual edification; …” (emphasis mine). The authors of these statements realized that this can be done only in the context of the local church.

In addition to these areas there are many more we could observe. But suffice to say, sovereign-grace Baptists and Presbyterians have more in common doctrinally than any other groups.

After understanding the historical similarities between Baptists and Presbyterians, we should also understand that there are things we can learn from one another. This requires us to forgo our denominational arrogance. Once we admit that others might see things that we miss, here are some things we can learn from one another.

The first area we can learn is in evangelism. Calvinistic Baptists were known at one time for their evangelistic zeal. They took the message to the frontier and evangelized Indians, white settlers, and anyone else who crossed their path. The Baptist preacher Isaac McCoy was called the apostle to the Indians. Presbyterians Marcus Whitman and Samuel Kirkland were also known for taking the gospel to the Great Plains.

For the church to grow we can’t just rely on other Christians leaving their churches and joining ours; we must be willing to proclaim the word of God to dry bones and tell them to live. We must believe, just like they did, that God will call His elect and they will believe when the gospel is preached.

We can also learn the importance of applying the Word of God to everything. One of the fallacies of modern thought is that the Bible is only useful in the religious sphere, that is to say, at church and in between your ears. But Jesus is Lord over everything, not just our souls. Because His lordship extends to all things our calling is to cast down every thought and stronghold that exalts itself against the knowledge of God. This is one place we as Baptists can learn from our Presbyterian brethren.

R.L. Dabney spoke of the necessity of understanding science from the perspective of Scripture. In his Systematic Theology he articulates why a literal reading of Genesis 1 is important, and he did it in the face of the growing popularity Darwinism. One quote from him should suffice. “The position to which they [Darwinists] consign God’s word is that of a handmaid, dependent for the validity of the construction to be put upon its words, on their (the scientists’) permission. Now this we boldly assert, is intrinsic rationalism… exalting the conclusions of the human understanding over the sure word of prophecy.” [5]

And who could overlook the ministries of men like Cornelius Van Til and Gordon Clark who used the sword of God’s Word to dispel humanistic philosophy. And when it comes to law, many are familiar with R.J. Rushdoony and the work he’s done with biblical law, but another man who believed in applying God’s law when possible might surprise you: the Baptist theologian John Gill. In his Body of Doctoral Divinity, Gill said:

“And they are, certainly, the best constituted and regulated governments that come nearest to the commonwealth of Israel, and the civil laws of it, which are of the kind last described… And whereas the commonwealth of Israel was governed by these laws for many hundreds of years, and needed no other in their civil polity, when, in such a course of time, every case that ordinarily happens, must arise, and be brought into a court of judicature; I cannot but be of opinion, that a digest of civil laws might be made out of the Bible, the law of the Lord that is perfect, either as lying in express words in it, or to be deduced by the analogy of things and cases, and by just consequence, as would be sufficient for the government of any nation.”

Suffice to say, these men believed in applying God’s word to everything. If we don’t give the church and those outside the church a vision for life under the Lordship of Christ, they will construct their own vision with whatever materials the world makes available to them.

Another lesson we can learn from our brothers in the past is the need for the church to not forsake its calling to the world. Early Baptists did a great job critiquing the world’s attempts to usurp the roles of the church. [6] But you can’t beat something with nothing. We should know what role the church should play in society, but that’s not enough.

The best way to protect the roles of the church is to step up and begin ministry. Do you visit the orphans and widows, or leave it to the government? Does the local church create tracts and literature or do we leave it to the para-church ministries? These are small steps but we must begin somewhere. Charles Spurgeon operated orphanages, shelters, and food kitchens. When Thomas Chalmers was pastoring in Scotland, the number of poor dramatically decreased because of the local ministries developed. The modern church has surrendered her calling to the state and secular groups. We can’t despair of the position we’re in; we must start wherever we are and be faithful right here.

Last but not least I hope we can learn of the importance of the unity of believers. In England, sovereign grace Baptists were known for being much more open in fellowship than the General Baptists. [7] Charles Hodge and other Presbyterians wrote articles that called for greater fellowship with the saints.

In America, this was one area in which all have struggled. We have long memories and if “your people” did something to “my people” we won’t easily forget it. No one is immune to the disease of disharmony among saints. As I said earlier, those who hold to the Westminster and London Confessions have more in common with one another than they do with some in their own denomination.

Do we really believe iron sharpens iron? Then why do we only listen to those who are shaped in a similar way to ourselves? Baptists have weaknesses; Presbyterians have weaknesses and neither will gain strength without changing our spiritual exercise. This means talking, praying, listening to, and fellowshipping with those outside our local church or denomination. You can say, “I love them.” But how do you practice it? Do we foster relationships with churches which are different from us?

There are two different beliefs Christians hold about the world. One says we should remove ourselves from others and remain as pure as possible while we wait for Jesus to come. This view naturally lends itself to divisions among brethren. The other view says that we are called to manifest the reign of Christ in the world and live as spiritual warriors. This view requires us to fight alongside those who serve the same Lord but differ with us on some matters.

God has called us to grow up into a new man. We can’t return to the “good old days”, whatever those were; we must go on to maturity and this requires us to fight next to those who proclaim the same gospel. It’s time to go to war together again, but this time not with carnal weapons. Our enemy is spiritual and we must fight him with God’s weapons in the power of the Holy Spirit. Victory will not be granted to Baptists or Presbyterians, Methodists or Pentecostals. It will only be granted to the body of Christ, the same body which He will present as a glorious kingdom to His Father on the last day.

___________________________________
[1] Introduction to the London Confession of Faith, 1689
[2] Religion and the American presidency: George Washington to George W. Bush, pg. 7, by Gastón Espinosa
[3] In referring to Presbyterians and Baptists, I’m speaking of Presbyterians who held to the Westminster standards and the Baptists who held to the London Confession of 1689, not just anyone who calls himself by one of those two names.
[4] Crossed Fingers, p. 119.
[5] Dangerous Pseudoscience, The Christian Observer.
[6] The Black Rock Address, 1832.
[7] A History of the Baptists, Robert Torbert.

“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5-11)

This passage (or pericope?) retraces the Covenant pattern, which is also played out in the flow of the history of Israel. We’ll have a look at the structure of the passage and then I want to discuss the significance of the literary placement of “every tongue.”

WARNING: Weird ahead.

[This post has been refined and included in Sweet Counsel: Essays to Brighten the Eyes.]

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Don Carson on the Church in Britain

This kind of thoughtful analysis is just one of the many reasons why Don Carson is such a blessing to the church, and one of the many reasons why he will be remembered when the impact of other – perhaps noisier – men has faded.

Here’s one particularly striking extract:

“We must not equate courage with success, or even youth with success … I have spent too much time in places like Japan, or in parts of the Muslim world, where courage is not measured on the world stage, where a single convert is reckoned a mighty trophy of grace.

I am grateful beyond words for the multiplication of churches in Acts 29, but I am no less grateful for Baptist ministers like my Dad, men who labored very hard and saw very little fruit for decades in French Canada, many of whom went to prison …

Just as the widow who gave her mite may be reckoned to have given more than many multi-millionaires, so, I suspect, some ministers in Japan, or Yorkshire, will receive greater praise on that last day than those who served faithfully in a corner of the world where there was more fruit.”

Dennis Prager recently had a lot of good things to say about the Ten Commandments, highlighting the stupidity of the West in its hurry to tear them down and remove any trace of them.

There is only one solution to the world’s problems, only one prescription for producing a near-heaven on earth.

It is 3,000 years old.

And it is known as the Ten Commandments.

Properly understood and applied, the Ten Commandments are really all humanity needs to make a beautiful world. While modern men and women, in their hubris, believe that they can and must come up with new ideas in order to make a good world, the truth is there is almost nothing new to say.

If people and countries lived by the Ten Commandments, all the great moral problems would disappear.
Or, to put it another way, all the great evils involve the violation of one or more of the Ten Commandments.

You can read his rundown on the Ten here. He concludes:

There is only one way to achieve a great society, and it is not by creating a massive state that doles out other citizens’ money. It is by cultivating citizens who try to live by these Ten Commandments. They are as relevant today as they were 3,000 years ago.

At the centre of Western society in its greatest moments was a church that not only promoted the Ten Commandments, but a church that preached the gospel of grace. A moral, just society, however imperfect, is an outflow of the preaching of the gospel. And however imperfectly it is preached, Jesus is there.

Prager can lament the scrapping of the Law of Moses all he likes, but the real issue is a deeper one. Non-Christian conservatism is at best nostalgia and at worst flogging a dead horse. The only thing that will turn our society around, and back to Moses, is the Spirit of God through the gospel of Jesus Christ.

So keep telling people about Jesus.