“The Spirit consistently puts earthly Succession to death, dividing families, communities and entire countries, as we see today. To claim otherwise is to work against the Spirit in the world. My heredity, my household, my culture, is the target of my ministry, not its source.”

It’s time to get back into Galatians. To recap, the epistle follows the Covenant structure, but gives the central point, the Ethics, its own Covenant structure. If this thesis is correct, what we should expect in the next “cycle” (Gal. 3:26-4:7) is a discussion of Covenant Succession. Lo and behold, this is exactly what we find.

This post has been refined by fire and included in a new book, The Shape of Galatians.

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

Join now for a year for $15!

“Jacob didn’t steal the future. He rescued it from a Man who put food first and whose eyes were not yet opened.”

James Jordan has done the Church a great service by rehabilitating the reputations of Noah the drunk, Abraham the liar, Jacob the swindler and Moses the murderer. He has shown us that the context of these so-called sins and crimes mean that they are nothing of the sort. [1] By this, I don’t mean “cultural context” but Covenant context. The reason these great men of God (and their wonderful women) get such a bad rap is because their stories are treated like a bunch of separate things that occurred, from which we must draw obvious and disconnected morals, rather than a single narrative begun in Genesis 1.

Matthew Mason recently wrote about Jacob’s being, not a quiet man, but a blameless man. [2] This puts him in the company of Noah, Abraham, Job, and other “sacrificial” men, men to whom God entrusted the future of His Covenant. The failure by translators to recognize the ongoing theme of blamelessness has meant that Jacob is seen as sneaky and perhaps a little effeminate. He is a mother’s boy who gets his way through deceit. In fact, Jacob was a man who outsmarted the serpent at every turn with the wisdom of God. He was “wise as a serpent” but “harmless as a dove.” Esau, who rolled the sins of Adam (gave up his birthright for food), Cain (desired to murder his priestly brother) and the sons of Seth (married idolatrous women) into one single life, got his animals around the wrong way. Worse, his blind father was willing to hand the future of the Covenant, and therefore the world, over to this entirely “natural” man.

In the account of Jacob and Esau, there’s also a very strong “architectural” undercurrent as well, and it has to do with the Tabernacle. Esau is the Red Man outside the tent (the bloody Bronze Altar, symbolizing the Land). Esau smells like the field. He is of the earth, earthy. He is a hunter, a man of blood (“Cain” means “spear”), and cares nothing for the future. Jacob listens to his mother, who isn’t a deceived Eve. She understands that Isaac’s blindness is more than simply natural. Jacob is the Bridal Man inside the tent, the Incense Altar. Like Adam, he is clothed in animal skin to “deceive the curse.” It is a miniature Day of Atonement, goats and all, and the blessing of Isaac is not squandered as it would have been. Like Adam, Jacob was a man with the Bride inside.

The Old Testament gives us quite a few “bridal” men, that is, Adams who have an Eve inside ready for God to construct in history. David is one (music is bridal). I believe Jacob is another. He is the one who ascends as a Covenant sacrifice. His serpentine wisdom is also “bridal,” an eye for eye judgment upon the various serpents he encounters as he is qualified by God. Both brothers ended up with two wives (like Lamech) but only one brother concerned himself with God. Jacob didn’t steal the future. He rescued it from a Man who put food first and whose eyes were not yet opened.

______________________________________
[1] Jordan’s Primeval Saints is a good place to start.
[2] Matthew Mason, Jacob was a ___________ Man.

“But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing…” Matthew 6:3

When it comes to doctrine, Mark Driscoll defines all issues as either closed-handed or open-handed. The non-negotiable fundamentals are held with a closed hand. In the open hand are issues that can be debated without shafting a church’s faithfulness to the apostles’ doctrine.

The Tabernacle was a metal man. In His left hand were bread and wine: servanthood, or more correctly, slavedom. In His right hand were the seven stars of the Lampstand: kingdom. The process of maturity, from obedience to wisdom, from slave to son, is the process of binding and loosing, from closed-handed issues to the open hand of the king. A priest is a silent servant in God’s house, and the details of his obedience are non-negotiable. His is an ear to be bored with an awl. A king is a vassal-son in God’s house, and he is counted as a friend, a courtly advisor. [1] His is a loosed tongue precisely because it has been bridled.

Of course, it takes a king to decide which issues should be held with a closed hand and which with an open one.

The true king is the son of the freewoman who was willing, like Isaac, to be bound as a sacrifice in order to free the generations of the people of God, the Bride. Likewise, Paul, the greatest apostle, was bound with a chain, held in the iron grip of Rome, for the hope of Israel. And the faithfulness of the apostolic church led to the binding of Satan–with a chain.

There is great wisdom in pastors requiring young Christians to focus on the fundamental doctrines, not simply in word but in practice, before allowing them, as qualified rhetors, to enter the debating arena. Doctrinal debates are a privilege of the New Covenant Church, but our motives must be pure. If we wish to speak in kingly courts, we must enter the arena from the place of the bondslave. Adam didn’t. Jesus did. The speech of a broken heart is not bitter but fragrant.

The vows of Church membership are, in this sense, a submission to chains for the sake of the gospel. So often, when tongues are afire, the Word of God is hindered, and when we are chained, the Word is loosed. The principle of intercession, of substitutionary sacrifice, permeates every area of ministry.

And soon enough, the chains might be real ones.

“…and most of the brethren in the Lord, having become confident by my chains, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.” Philippians 1:14

___________________________________
[1] See God Chooses His Friends.

26. Christ returned in A.D. 70 (?), but according to preterists the literal cloud was missing (see Acts 1: 9; Matt. 24: 30; Rev. 1: 7).

The “Bible matrix” pattern always begins with a Word from God’s glory cloud on the Lord’s Day (Sabbath), the accepted Mediator received into this single-cloud “Tabernacle” (Firstfruits) and ends with multiple clouds, a corporate Mediator (the body). The Feast of Tabernacles (“succoth”) is literally the Feast of Clouds. This was fulfilled in AD70. Christ ascended to prepare the place, and the firstfruits church was received into it at the destruction of the Temple.

See also Not Just Any Old Cloud.

27. Israel never repented in A.D. 70 (Acts 3:19-21).

Paul wrote, “They are not all Israel which are of Israel.” The Word of God is always a sword that divides in two. That is the sword that Jesus brought. Many Jews converted, but many hardened their hearts. Many converts died to fulfill the first goat, many more hard-hearted hardliners died to fulfill the second. After the end of the Temple, over the next two centuries, many Jews converted to Christianity. The will of God concerning Judaism, and His wisdom throughout this “harvest”, had been made plain to all.

28. Christ said the nation won’t see Him until they repent. Matt. 23: 39. According to preterists “every eye saw Him” in A.D. 70.

The context of this verse is undeniably first century—unless of course we resort to some wild “postponement” theory that divorces these predictions from the historical destruction of Jerusalem.

Jesus’ mention of eyes is the product of the literary structure:

1. Eyes at the centre of the chiasm refer to the “seven eyes” of the Law. Christ died under the Law, but He was filled with the Law. He became the Lamb with seven eyes—and seven horns to gore the Law’s offenders with! The seven Lampstand eyes are opened as seven seals (Pentecost) which in turn blow seven Trumpets, which result in seven bowls of wrath (Atonement).
2. When they appear at the end of the structure (Tabernacles) it is the eyes of God inside a Man. (For more on this, see Eye Spy – 1.)

The idea is that Adam is given two eyes to judge with—two witnesses. If he  judges rightly between good and evil in the light of God’s Law (which he heard with two ears), he becomes a “Solomon” at the end of the process. His judgment is the Law incarnate. He is given (symbolically) seven eyes. If, however, he fails to judge with his two eyes, at the end of the process, the Lord visits the Garden and Adam is judged under God’s seven eyes. And Adam, like Isaac, Eli, Samson, etc., loses his two eyes. The process starts again with a fresh Word from God. What’s interesting is that after Isaac’s lack of judgment concerning the blessing, his judgment later returns concerning a bride for Jacob. He follows the example of Abraham and sends to Laban. The literary structure puts his “coming to” at the centre. His spiritual eyes had been reopened. I bet judges does the same with Samson also.

So, to get back to the question, “every eye” is a sudden return to sound judgment. The faithful martyrs literally did see Christ. They did “see him face to face” as did Jacob and Job, both of whom wrestled with God and prevailed. The Judaisers would realise God was actually against them. They would lose their eyes—and their sons—like Zedekiah. This last step often concerns Sabbath-wisdom and Covenant succession. The Jews who mourned the death of the Son repented. Those who wouldn’t mourn (ie. “I sit a queen and am no widow” Herodian worship) did not repent.

29. The land was smitten with the curse. According to preterists, John the Baptist failed. See Mal. 4: 5-6.

The gospel is a “liberating curse.” It kills the “Canaanites” and frees the faithful “Rahabs.”

Revelation describes the gospel as four horsemen. Word-Division-Fullness/Starvation-Judgment. It was a winnowing process. The Old Covenant “bread” became expensive, but the New Covenant oil and wine were not harmed. The book of Ruth follows the same pattern. Bethlehem (“house of bread”) begins in famine, the old generation is killed off by God “in the fields of Moab” [as spiritual harlotry], but the Lord builds a new body out of Jew and Gentile, and Bethlehem is again a house of bread. Herod was eaten alive by maggots and his big white house of bread Temple was eaten alive by Romans who tore up the masonry looking for gold. Maggots, and I guess Romans, only eat death. They cleaned the open wound wrought by the gospel sword while the chaste virgin bride feasted with the Bridegroom in heaven. Two goats, two parties. One on the mountain/Altar of God and one on the Altar of the Abyss. [1]

See Totus Christus for more on this theme: the “liberating curse”, especially the notes on Zechariah 5.

30. The living saints weren’t rewarded in A.D. 70. Matt. 16: 27-28. (According, they had to wait until death!).

The context of this passage is first century martyrdom. Those who were rewarded were actually dead by that time. This ties in with Hebrew’s exhortation to boldly draw near. See The Context of Drawing Near.

“But if anyone draws back, my soul has no pleasure in him.” Hebrews 10:38

50FPDZ

.

The content of this post has been revised and included in Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key.

See also Joseph as Torn Veil.

“Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” And he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.  
—Genesis 15:5-6

Abraham didn’t sleep in on the day he was to take his beloved son, his only son, to Moriah, kill him and offer him as an ascension. He got up early. By this stage in the narrative, Abraham had been tried and tested many times, but this seems just a little too keen.

Abraham told his servants that both he and the boy would return. He believed, without a shadow of turning, God’s promise concerning an inheritance. Sarai laughed concerning her miraculous conception (Isaac means laughter). It was the scornful chuckle of unbelief, and she was caught out. Perhaps, here, after this crazy command from God, Abraham also laughed. But it was the chuckle of faith. [1]

The chuckle of faith comes from an experience of God’s complete faithfulness in the past that leads to a knowing, twinkle-eyed, obedience. Outwardly, it says, “OK, Lord.” Inwardly, it says, “I can’t wait to see how He gets Himself and us out of this one, and remains faithful.”

It is possibly the response of Moses caught between a rock and a hard place at the seashore. “Moses, you brought us out here to die!” is the cry of the people. By this point, Moses had seen enough to know something pretty cool was about to happen.

It was the response of Daniel’s three friends as they defied Nebuchadnezzar and the local ministers’ association. There is a God in heaven who can save us from the flames if He wills, but even if he doesn’t, we won’t bow down.

The chuckle of faith is prophetic. It knows the future because it has seen the ways of God in the past. Modern Christians are unable to chuckle because gutless men preach HOPE and CHANGE without an understanding of God’s clockwork-Covenant ways. [2] 

Hebrews 11, the chuckle-of-faith chapter, gives us a list of those who stopped the mouths of lions with a chuckle, and those who patiently kept preaching the truth knowing that they were going to be brutally sawn in half. I doubt they were chuckling when this happened, but they delighted in the ways of God and trusted Him for the future. It is grossly, deliciously, irresponsible to the eyes of the world. [3]

When you lose your job, or discover you have cancer, or can’t have children, or find you have been betrayed, or your family despises your Christianity, or have to struggle for years with a compulsive sin… don’t laugh like Sarai. Think of Abraham and his promised son Laughter, and get up early to obey the impossible command.

The Lord honours the chuckle of faith because it comes from a far-sighted trust in His character. This delights Him as it does any good dad.

______________________________________
[1] A cool phrase stolen from Doug Wilson.
[2] If they do preach the Ethics of the Covenant, it is without the preceding Transcendence (an anchor in God’s character and power) and Hierarchy, (an anchor in the history of the saints) and without the inevitable arrival of blessings for the faithful and curses for the rebellious. See A Jaw-Dropping Book and also Peter Leithart’s Exhortation, May 9, 2004 on a prophet’s understanding of God and His plot devices.
[3] When the Lord’s justice finally arrives to vindicate the martyrs, they chuckle the way James Jordan does in his lectures when the enemies of God are massacred. Then they write a song about it.

Abraham had gone to extreme measures to make sure Isaac didn’t intermarry with Canaan and pollute the promise. He sent his most faithful servant as a forerunner to find a bride for his son. Like John the Forerunner, the most faithful servant found the beautiful bride, Rebekah, by the water in a garden of God. And like Paul the apostle, the servant adorned her with gold in preparation for her presentation to the Bridegroom. Like Herod and the Jews, Laban and his mother didn’t want to let her go, and were given no choice but to bless her with their riches.

“And now, indeed, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you shall be blind, not seeing the sun for a time.” And immediately a dark mist fell on him, and he went around seeking someone to lead him by the hand.” Acts 13:11

The blindness of Elymas caused Sergius Paulus to believe. The temporary blindness of a Jew brought about the conversion of a Gentile.

A repeated symbolic concept in Scripture is that of sight and blindness. Samson and King Zedekiah both lost their eyes. Isaac and Eli were blind. From Genesis 1:4, 3:6 and 6:2 we learn that eyes are organs of discernment and judgment. The process of maturity makes wise judges who are “the eyes of the Lord”, walking “to and fro on the earth”, collecting evidence to present before His court. Bible symbols are consistent, and their meanings become plain to the saints with their “new eyes.” Those who refused to obey the gospel twisted the Scriptures to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:16).

“For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness [hardness] in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.” Romans 11:25

…Herod and the Jews had symbolically become Egypt, hardened like Pharaoh (Romans 9:17-18; Hebrews 3:16; 8:9; 11:26-29; Jude 1:5; Revelation 11:8). The old Jerusalem was Hagar, and the New Jerusalem was Sarah. Christians, not Jews, were “the promised child.” Judaism had become childless like Naomi, and it was only the “fullness” of outsiders, Peter’s “unclean animals”—Ruth—that rescued the people of God from spiritual famine, the extinction of unbelief. The barrenness of Egypt was replaced with the harvest of Pentecost.

…Agabus the prophet foretold a famine in Judea (the curse for the shedding of Stephen’s innocent blood), but the Antioch saints sent relief (the richness of ‘Ruth’) to those in Judea.