6. Jesus Christ was not judge of the quick and the dead, because (according to preterists) He only judged the dead.
Jesus judged between the living and the dead in AD70. The true bride and the false bride were bodies of living people. Of course, part of the true bride was the Old Covenant saints (those “under the Altar”) who were dead.
Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads. The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which skirts the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and the onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one which goes around the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Hiddekel; it is the one which goes toward the east of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates. (Genesis 2:10-14)
After the Herod and Shylock post, I had one complaint that the Worship as Commerce tag didn’t really do what it said on the tin, so I hope to capture it (briefly?) here. Now, where to start? As James Jordan explains, the idea begins in Eden.
“Eden is the land of food, and the outlying lands are lands of other raw materials. The Bible conceives of commerce between these lands, so that those of Adam’s descendants who lived in Eden would have to engage in trade with those who had moved downstream to Havilah. In this way, precious stones would be brought from Havilah back to Eden to adorn the sanctuary. When Israel came out of Egypt, she sojourned in the land of Havilah while the Tabernacle and the High Priest’s garments were made (Genesis 25:18). Here in this land of rocks were made many items of gold and onyx. Indeed, the only reference in the Bible to the onyx stone, outside of Genesis 2, is in connection with the High Priest’s garments. The shoulder stones of the “ephod” were made of onyx, and had the names of the twelve tribes put upon them (Exodus 25:7; 28:9-12).” [1]
When the worship of God is both central and elevated, the priests of God carry the Spirit to the nations. In return, the nations bring to Eden the gold and precious stones of the surrounding lands. Because of Solomon’s request for wisdom instead of wealth, the Lord honoured his selflessness, his godly rule, with wealth from the surrounding nations. The kings of the world brought their glory into the Temple. As Israel’s kings continually disobeyed the Lord, the wealth was stolen away. The Lord was like a thief in the night. The gold shields stolen by Egyptian invaders were replaced with bronze ones. Nebuchadnezzar made Judah a vassal kingdom and taxed it the way Solomon and Rehoboam had taxed the tribes. Finally he took everything.
But this “wealth for wisdom” is not only typological. God is not against wealth per se. He wants a church that is glorious both inwardly and outwardly. It is when the church becomes a shell, as Judah did, a false witness with false whiteness, that God cuts it back to Adams in animal skins. [2] The letters to the Asian churches in Revelation 2-3 recapitulate Old Testament history, [3] which makes Herod’s Judah parallel with Laodicea. Well, not so much a parallel as the same sin but fully grown.
Matthew 1-10 follows the Dominion pattern. After Jesus’ testing in the wilderness, in 4:18-8:13 Jesus called His disciples and began mustering a new holy army - the “next generation”.[1] It was reported to Him that the last Old Covenant Nazirite (holy warrior) was dead. It was time for new warriors. Jesus healed the uncleanness of many, creating a new priesthood. His success in the wilderness as a new Head made possible this new body. Peter Leithart writes:
After reading about the Bible’s use of robes as symbols of office (see The Dominion Trap by James B. Jordan), Tim Mitchell commented:
In Bible study we’ve been looking at John, so a few weeks ago was John 13. My Bible translated v.4-5 as “So he got up from the table, took off his robe, wrapped a towel around his waist, and poured water into a basin. Then he began to wash the disciples’ feel, drying them with the towel he had around him.”
So that recalled for me the couple of pages on robe imagery, and it seems to foreshadow what Jesus will do later on very well: He is willing to take off his authority and righteousness, and take on the dirt of our sin.
But then I got a bit unsure, since Jesus then goes on to say “you ought to wash each others’ feet” in v.14 and “Do as I have done to you” in v.15. So if the symbolism applies, how are we also supposed to take other peoples’ sin on us as Jesus did?
Firstly, what a great question. Many New Testament passages become so familiar that we often lose the ability to really think about their ramifications.
The structure of the Last Supper puts this action of Jesus at Atonement, the Laver (Day 6). Jesus is liturgically pre-enacting His role as High Priest. The Adam removed his glorious robes and wore linen for the Day of Covering. Jesus left this in the tomb with our sin on it. But that is not all the High Priest did. He approached the Most Holy twice.
Paul seems to use the Matrix consciously in his letters, as Jesus did (the sermon on the mount, the Lord’s prayer, the seven woes to the Pharisees and even the seven words from the cross follow the pattern). There are two possibilities. Either I am seeing things that are not there, or a lot more work needs to be done in this particular area of “progressive chiasmus” based on Genesis 1.
How smart is this Book?
As discussed, if we begin with Saul’s anointing by Samuel, subsequent events follow the Feasts outline. Saul’s failure to kill Amalek is at Pentecost and his failure to defeat Goliath is at Atonement.
BUT… if we begin with David’s secret anointing by Samuel, subsequent events also follow the Feasts. This time, however, David’s slaying of Goliath is at Pentecost (the serpent/beast in the wilderness). Guess what’s at Atonement?
Eli’s corrupt priesthood came to an end when the Ark was taken by the Philistines. Saul’s corrupt kingdom came to a full end when the Ark returned (hence Michal’s barrenness). The last of Eli’s priesthood (Abiathar) was exiled when Solomon’s government began. Solomon’s kingdom was a new firmament (1 Kings 10:19). Isaiah, however, saw it being rolled up like a scroll (Is. 34:4).
“In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground…” (Genesis 3:19)
The book of Judges continually uses the imagery of the crushing of the heads of the Lord’s enemies, whether this is literal skulls or heads of state. The Bible makes a big deal of heads and bodies, whether this is the sacrifices picturing the totus Christus, or His rival, Gog and Magog.
or Limited Redemption
“For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins” - Hebrews 10:26
Did Christ die for all? If Jesus’ blood was not shed for all, how can it possibly be a sin to “trample it underfoot” as the unbelieving Jews did? (Hebrews 10:29)
Elijah set up a 12 stone altar as a substitute for Israel. The sacrifice ascended to the Lord (goat #1) and the prophets were slain (goat #2). Thus, the Baal worship was atoned for.
But Jezebel trampled this sacrifice underfoot, and continued in sin. In retaliation, she slew the prophets that Obadiah had hidden. Consequently she was trampled underfoot. (2 Kings 9:33).
The New Testament history, including the Revelation, follows this pattern. Jesus set up a new 12 apostle priesthood and Israel slew Him and them. Consequently, Israel was slain, as Jezebel. That is the context of the Hebrews passage, and the meaning of the harlot of Babylon.
A couple of brave readers of my book Totus Christus have pointed out an apparent discrepancy in my ordering of the above three roles. One kindly writes:
The only question of substance I have for you concerns the prophet, priest and king flow of OT history. It may be that you disagree with Jim, but he’s quite insistent that the proper order is priest, king, prophet. He discusses this in From Bread to Wine, p. 9-15. In any case, it might be helpful to explain why you deviate…
Read the Foreword here
