Satan’s desire was always to turn the “pruning” of circumcision into an ax laid at the root of the tree of Israel.

A handful of treatments of the “massacre of the innocents” by Herod the Great see this bloodshed as the first of the New Covenant’s martyrs. But these miss the point of Matthew’s use of the word “fulfilled,” rendering it as good as meaningless. This massacre was the harbinger of the end of the old era and its promises. It said nothing about the promises of the new.

There is no way that this is the first of a series of new incidents, that is, Christian martyrdoms. Either this event simply continues the murders of offspring found throughout the Old Testament, or it brings them to an end. As my friend observes, suffering would now be different, but of course I would take this a little further than he would, concerning the significance of the sacraments.¹See my previous post, Feed My Lambs. Suffering would no longer be racial, tribal or genealogical, but voluntary. Killing Jews is genocide. Killing Christians is like killing Communists or capitalists. Its intention is not to wipe out a despised people but an intolerable “ideology.” The sons murdered in Matthew 2 were physical sons, sons of Abraham according to the flesh. Martyrs however are Sons of God.²See Provoking the Dragon.

New King on the Block

The era of Christ and His apostles was a period of transition, an overlap between the Old Covenant and the New. It was much like the time between the anointing of David and the death of Saul. Seen in this light, the parallels are remarkable. Just as the anointing of David was an irreversible divine decree, so was the life of Christ. And the Herods’ reaction was much the same as that of Saul. The sword of the Lord in the hand of a king maddened by jealousy was always a Covenant Sanction from the hand of God (1 Samuel 16:14). Saul would have seen both David, and later Jonathan, slain, had not the people restrained him. He employed an Edomite to slay the priests of God. The Herods were Edomites, and for the Herods, there was no restraint. Herod the Great murdered his own family as well as many rabbis. Like Pharaoh, the Herodian dynasty was the bloody hand of Cain. Sadly, the Jews failed to see that the “greatest builder in Jewish history”³Ken Spino, Crash Course In Jewish History. had built a Cainite city upon cursed ground.

 The Mutilation

The massacre if infants at the command of Herod the Great makes perfect sense as a sign of the imminent end of the Old Covenant, a Covenant which began with a barren womb and a barren Land. These infants sons — one from each woman, due to the directive concerning the age of the boys — were all Isaacs cut off because the end of the circumcision was nigh.

Circumcision was a genealogical “pruning,” bearing the curse upon Land and Womb in Genesis 3 for all nations that there might be a priestly nation, a people fruitful in righteousness. Satan’s desire was always to turn the “pruning” of circumcision into an ax laid at the root of the tree of Israel (Matthew 3:10, Luke 3:9), not a circumcision but a castration, a mutilation.⁴See New Covenant Virility 1 and 2.

The prophets condemned Israel’s shepherds when they became wolves, trading and tearing the sheep instead of leading them, shedding the blood of their own people while they perverted or ignored the substitutionary nature of the blood of the sacrifices. A cultic expression of this national self-mutilation was the worship of the priests of Baal, who cut themselves and threw themselves onto the altar on Mount Carmel. God would never accept human blood, at least not until truly blameless human blood was shed. This is why Paul refers to the Circumcision as the Mutilation, and wishes they would go the whole way and castrate themselves.

Ramah and Rachel

None of this is difficult to understand, but what is the reason for Matthew’s reference to Ramah and Rachel? Most commentators focus on Rachel, but the mention of Ramah is also significant, and its meaning is discovered in the “Covenant-literary” structure of of the text.⁵See also Matthew’s Literary Artistry.

In this passage, Ramah occurs at Ascension, which corresponds to the Bronze Altar (the Land) and the Table (the Firstfruits). For Israel, the foundational Ascension was the offering of Isaac on Mount Moriah. Her subsequent idolatry led her into the practice of false worship on the high places and child sacrifice in the pit, the Valley of Hinnom (Ge henna in Greek).

Failure to repent of false worship led to the slaughter and slavery of the children of Israel by Assyria and Babylon. The Lord protected Ramah and the other towns of the kingdom of Judah (Judah and Benjamin) from the Assyrians (Isaiah 10:24,27-29), but the continued corruption of Judah led to invasions by the Babylonians. It is believed that there was a prison camp at Ramah where the people of Judah were held before being carried into exile. This may be the background for Jeremiah’s mention of this town in 31:15. Jeremiah himself was imprisoned there for a time (Jeremiah 40:1).

What is the connection between Ramah and Rachel? Ramah was a town in the allotment of Benjamin, son of Rachel. He was the last son born to Jacob and his name means “son of my right hand.” Benjamin and Ramah thus symbolised an end to the immediate Succession of Israel, pointing to the cutting off of “the last son.”

Joseph’s brothers “slew” him, and Joseph tested them in return with the “slaying” of Benjamin, Rachel’s only other son, whom they presumed to be the only son of Rachel still alive. Joseph’s brothers sold him into slavery in Egypt and all Israel suffered in slavery. Just so, Israel’s child sacrifices in the Valley of Hinnom led to that valley being filled with the bodies of the idolaters. In the first century, this massacre not only of the sons of the flesh but also of Israel’s sons of the Spirit (Abraham’s true sons) would lead to a final filling of Ge henna, this time not at the hands of Babylon (the first empire) but Rome (the last). The circumcision intended as mercy for Israel on behalf of all nations (to avoid another flood) was twisted into a kingdom of bloodshed, a land filled with violence (Genesis 6:11).

You and Your Children

This “head-and-body” multiplication of judgment helps us to make sense of the words of Jesus, who not only knew of the massacre of the innocents and His own miraculous rescue, but also what was in store for all the Jews who rejected Him. It is Jesus Himself, as the suffering prophet on the way to His death, who tells the “Rachels” weeping for Him to weep for their own children.

This is the context of Peter’s words to the Jews on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, a text upon which rests almost all the supposed weight of arguments for paedosacraments. However, even a cursory reading by a one-eyed, uneducated, blithering ignoramus like me reveals its context to be entirely Jewish, with not-so-subtle references to the treatment of Joseph by his brothers.

Brothers,… Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

This clearly has nothing whatsoever to say about the children of Christians. This text is the Reformed equivalent of Haeckel’s fraudulent embryo diagrams. Although its abuse is so easily exposed, it remains in the textbooks because the cupboard is otherwise bare. Despite clear, concise and convincing arguments from myself and others, paedobaptists simply close their eyes and recite “You and your children” like some magic mantra. The irony is that Dispensationalists would likely understand this text perfectly!

Wait a minute, I hear. What about “those who are afar off”? Firstly, Peter was addressing all the house of Israel, and as is common in Scripture, but commonly overlooked, his literary architecture is triune, an oratory reference to the Tabernacle:

You (Word, Most Holy – Fathers)
Your children (Sacrament, Holy Place – Sons)
Those afar off (Government, Court – Spirit)

I suppose this is easy to dispute, but as it was with Moses’ supposed “murder” of the Egyptian, the true crime is identified through God’s righteous judgment upon it and the corresponding atonement. Those who rejected Peter’s warning to this last generation of the children of Abraham according to the flesh were cut off; the fathers, the sons, and even those far off. Not only were the Jews trapped in their own city, clever Titus waited until Passover before he besieged the city, so that Jerusalem would be filled with Jews from all over the empire, “those afar off.” In the final act, six thousand Jewish women and children were slain in one stroke when part of Herod’s Temple complex collapsed at the end of the Jewish war. And the best of the young men, the Josephs, were sold into slavery in Egypt. This “cutting off” brought an end to the Circumcision, the era of “sons,” and the inauguration of the age of the Spirit.

Conclusion

Circumcision was about pruning that there might be more fruit. Baptism is a celebration of the firstfruits of the Spirit, a public testimony. Good fruit makes the cultivation or non-cultivation of the tree irrelevant. To turn baptism into merely another sign of cultivation misses the point entirely at best, and at worst puts our children under a curse. The sign of the end of Christendom  and its carnal sacraments comes with a massacre of infants of untold proportions. The answer is certainly not more paedosacraments.

Alpha and Omega

Since the sacred architecture of the Jew-Gentile social structure set up in Daniel was a spiritual expansion of the previous physical sanctuaries, we should not be surprised to find its shape serving as the foundation for the New Testament. Since the Holy Place symbolised the court of the King of Heaven, the Tabernacle sheds some helpful light on Jesus’ cryptic description of judgment from His throne in Matthew 25. It not only becomes clear why the Lord uses sheep and goats as symbols for Gentile nations, but their locations and destinies bring to an end a narrative thread which can be traced back to Genesis 4.

Matthew 25:31-46 is the “Judges” step of the Covenant Ethics component of Matthew’s five-fold Covenant progression. You can see where this passage fits in the overall structure here.

Following on from Matthew 24, its fulfilment is clearly first century, describing a judgment which would take place within a generation. Concerning the context and purpose of the passage, Chris Wooldridge wrote in a guest post:

In his covenant with Abraham, God had promised that nations would be blessed and cursed through him. In 70 AD, the Abrahamic covenant came to an end and the blessings and curses were distributed. Nations were resurrected, stood before Christ in heaven and were judged in accordance with their treatment of the people of Abraham. Israel herself would be judged in accordance with her treatment of the apostolic church. The blessing would take the form of reigning with Christ in heaven for the remainder of the new covenant era (Revelation 20:4-6). The cursing would take the form of returning to the grave in “shame and contempt” (Daniel 12:2) to await the end of the new covenant and eternal destruction in the lake of fire.

In context, this speech is a prediction of the judgment of the oikoumene [1], the final stage in what we refer to as the “Old Covenant.” All nations would be judged, yet, as we shall see, both the symbols Jesus uses and the pattern of Jesus’ words are very obviously Jewish.

A Ram and a Goat

The events leading up to AD70 avenged the blood of all the prophets beginning with Abel. In the primeval world, and in Temple architecture, this blood is tied to the demarcations of “Land” (both the Land outside Eden, and later the Land promised to Abraham), not the Garden or the World. Since the entire empire was considered part of the household of God during this era, instead of using the “World” beasts of Daniel 7 in Matthew 25 to describe the nations of the oikoumene, Jesus uses the sacrificial “Land” animals of Daniel 8. Concerning these symbols in Daniel, James Jordan writes:

Daniel sees two animals. They are not beasts this time, but sacrificial animals: a ram and a goat. They represent Persia and Greece. Each morning and each evening Israel would offer a lamb (Exodus 29:38-42). This fact is central to the present vision, and will explain why Persia and Greece are pictured as flockmembers. The flock of God is no longer only Israel, but also the nations of the God-established Oikumene, though not yet the whole world.

The ram of Persia has two horns, one behind the other. The one in back is later, but is also longer. The first horn is Media, the second Persia, but it is one ram. The ram conquers to the west, north, and south; since it comes from the east it does not need to conquer to the east. God gives everything to the ram, and lets it rule the world (vv. 3-4, 20).

Then a male goat comes from the west, as the ram came from the east. They collide, and the goat is utterly victorious. The goat’s swift advance represents the amazing progress of the conquests of Alexander the Great. The great horn between the goat’s eyes is Alexander himself, but the horn is broken very quickly, because Alexander died at the age of 30. Then four new horns arose and took over Alexander’s empire.

Then a little horn grew up out of their midst. This is usually considered to represent Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ruler of the Northern part of Alexander’s broken empire. I shall argue below that it is actually a symbol of the Herodian line. The little horn’s oppression of the saints is then described (vv. 9-14, 23-26).

The Lord tells Gabriel to explain the vision to Daniel. Gabriel explains that this vision pertains to the time of the end. The end of what? The end of the first creation, which came to a full close in AD70. Gabriel identifies the ram and the goat, and gives more information about the Herods (vv. 15-26)…

…we need to note that the ram and goat, or he-goat, are not “beasts” or wild animals, but “cattle” or domestic animals, and in particular they are animals used in the Levitical worship system. The ram, or male sheep, is required for the Trespass or Desanctifying offering, which is performed to cover high-handed sins, sins that in some sense put blood on the hands that needs to be washed off. The he-goat is required from a civil officer (hence, from a king) for a Sin or Purification offering, which is performed to cover sins of wandering (“inadvertency”), sins that in some sense put dirt on the feet that needs to be washed off. (Leviticus 4-5.)

The Passover ritual could use either a male sheep or a he-goat that was one year old (Exodus 12:5).

Perhaps more importantly, however, is what we find in Numbers 28-29, which is that on every important festival occasion, both a ram and a he-goat were brought to the altar.

As has been pointed out by Rodriguez, this is all related to the Continual of verses 11-12. The Continual, or tamid, is sometimes taken only for the evening and morning daily offerings, and this is indeed implied in verse 14 (“2300 evenings morning”). But the word is also used for all the continual daily activities in the Holy Place: the continual facebread, the continual incense, the lamp, and the fire in the altar.

What is the theology behind this imagery? It is this: The calling of Israel was to pray for and bring offerings near to God on behalf of the nations of the world. The ox was particularly for the High Priest and for Israel as a whole (Leviticus 4). But the daily offerings and the continual annual cycle involved the nations of the world, especially after the establishment of the Oikumene. The meaning is this: As long as the Jews are faithful and pray for the nations, offering rams and he-goats for the imperial leaders, then they will have good rams and he-goats as emperors. First the ram of Persia would come and deliver them from Babylon. Then, when the ram had ceased to do God’s bidding, a buck from Greece would arise and deliver them from Persian oppression (see Zechariah 9:1–8). But after the Greek deliverance, there would come a time when some evil Horn would wreck the Continual offerings. Such an evil Horn can only be a Jewish, and indeed priestly person, because no one else could wreck the system. Some pagan king putting a temporary halt to the offerings would count for nothing in God’s eyes. It was only His anointed priests who could defile the worship. In other words, the fact that the Horn is able to wreck the sanctuary and pervert the Continual makes clear that he symbolises, at least in part, a Jewish priestly power. [2]

Although Jesus uses similar sacrificial animals, His words concerning the judgment of the nations have a different purpose from Daniel 8. He is not speaking of separating Persians from Greeks. Greece conquered Persia, but those empires are not mentioned. Both animals were acceptable sacrifices, but Jesus accepts one and not the other.

As Jordan notes, the sheep concerned high-handed or deliberate sin (bloodied hands) and the goat concerned wandering astray (dirty feet).

Sheep: High-handed Sin
Goat: Wandering Astray

In Jesus’ day, the Jewish leaders were guilty of deliberate sin, since they possessed the words of God but instead taught their own distorted laws, misleading the people. It was the Jewish people who were guilty of “inadvertent sin,” since they were kept in ignorance, under the heavy burdens of the Oral Law, by their leaders. [3] Yet the leaders of Israel were to consider their people as brothers.

The Least Of My Brothers

An Israelite could take Gentile slaves, but not Hebrew ones. This was because Israelites were freedmen, and they would remain free as long as they faithfully served God, their heavenly master.

“If your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you. Take no interest from him or profit, but fear your God, that your brother may live beside you. You shall not lend him your money at interest, nor give him your food for profit. I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan, and to be your God.

“If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave: he shall be with you as a hired servant and as a sojourner. He shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him, and go back to his own clan and return to the possession of his fathers. For they are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves. You shall not rule over him ruthlessly but shall fear your God. As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their clans that are with you, who have been born in your land, and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons after you to inherit as a possession forever. You may make slaves of them, but over your brothers the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another ruthlessly. (Leviticus 25:35-46)

Taking a Hebrew brother as a slave began with Jacob’s debt slavery to Laban and continued with the sale of Joseph by his brothers. This was an issue close to the Lord’s heart. Under King Zedekiah, the Jewish aristocracy reneged on the oath they had taken to release their Hebrew slaves. At heart, Israel had become another Egypt. This was the last straw before the destruction of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar.

The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, after King Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people in Jerusalem to make a proclamation of liberty to them, that everyone should set free his Hebrew slaves, male and female, so that no one should enslave a Jew, his brother.

And they obeyed, all the officials and all the people who had entered into the covenant that everyone would set free his slave, male or female, so that they would not be enslaved again. They obeyed and set them free. But afterward they turned around and took back the male and female slaves they had set free, and brought them into subjection as slaves.

The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah from the Lord: “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: I myself made a covenant with your fathers when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, saying, ‘At the end of seven years each of you must set free the fellow Hebrew who has been sold to you and has served you six years; you must set him free from your service.’ But your fathers did not listen to me or incline their ears to me. You recently repented and did what was right in my eyes by proclaiming liberty, each to his neighbor, and you made a covenant before me in the house that is called by my name, but then you turned around and profaned my name when each of you took back his male and female slaves, whom you had set free according to their desire, and you brought them into subjection to be your slaves.

“Therefore, thus says the Lord: You have not obeyed me by proclaiming liberty, every one to his brother and to his neighbor; behold, I proclaim to you liberty to the sword, to pestilence, and to famine, declares the Lord. I will make you a horror to all the kingdoms of the earth.” (Jeremiah 34:8-17)

Sheep and goats are “brother” animals, different yet closely related, hence the need for a discerning shepherd to separate them. The Passover lamb could be either a sheep or a goat (Exodus 12:5), but the Firstfruits sacrifice could only be a sheep, and after the bull sacrificed for the priesthood, the Atonement offerings could only be goats. This seems to indicate that the spiritual character (or office) of a man is indiscernible at birth and only becomes apparent as he matures. Before God, is he a sheep or a goat, a priest or a king?

It seems that sheep picture the priestly head, which is why Jesus has hair as white as wool (Firstfruits). Goats picture the Covenant body (Atonement), which is why Jacob wore goatskin on his arms. Government is a robe which sits upon one’s shoulders. So the sheep pictures the Church and the goat pictures the State. The sheep dies in the stead of a blameless priest for the high-handed sin of Adam in the Sanctuary, a sin committed in full knowledge of the truth. The goat dies in the stead of a faithful king who serves his people rather than lording over them like Pharaoh.

Jacob the shepherd was the priestly brother. Sheep’s wool is soft and was used for clothing. Esau the hunter was the kingly brother. Goat hair is course and was used for tents. Goats are “hairy ones” like Esau. Peter Leithart writes:

Esau is a “hairy man” (sa’iyr), something we learn only when Jacob dresses himself in goat hair to approach his father (Genesis 27:11, 23). Jacob becomes a hairy one, subbing in for his brother. The only other use of the word in Genesis is in 37:31, where it describes the “kid” killed to fool Jacob into thinking that Joseph has died. Both passages involve substitution, and both involve deception of a father.

Leviticus 16 is the great chapter about hairy goats. The word is used 14x in the chapter to describe the two goats used in the day of atonement rite. On the day of “coverings,” Israel is covered with goat skin to receive the blessing of the firstborn; on the day of coverings, a hairy kid is killed in place of the beloved son. [4]

I believe this is the background for the distinction between sheep and goats in Matthew 25. It is a division between the nations within God’s extended household (the oikoumene), those with a priestly character towards the “least” of Jesus’ brothers, and those who were tyrants and abused them as slaves.

By the time of this judgment, heredity had become meaningless. It did not matter whether a nation was Jewish or Greek. Descended from Esau, the Edomite Herods and all those who served them had aligned themselves with Rome. This judgment concerned not the circumcision of the flesh, but the circumcision of the heart. The nations (including Israel) who abused the true Jews were repeating the sins of Edom, the false brothers who not only refused to feed Israel in the wilderness, but also looted Jerusalem after its sacking and enslavement by Babylon.

Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the king of Edom: “Thus says your brother Israel: You know all the hardship that we have met: how our fathers went down to Egypt, and we lived in Egypt a long time. And the Egyptians dealt harshly with us and our fathers. And when we cried to the Lord, he heard our voice and sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt. And here we are in Kadesh, a city on the edge of your territory. Please let us pass through your land. We will not pass through field or vineyard, or drink water from a well. We will go along the King’s Highway. We will not turn aside to the right hand or to the left until we have passed through your territory.” But Edom said to him, “You shall not pass through, lest I come out with the sword against you.” And the people of Israel said to him, “We will go up by the highway, and if we drink of your water, I and my livestock, then I will pay for it. Let me only pass through on foot, nothing more.” But he said, “You shall not pass through.” And Edom came out against them with a large army and with a strong force. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory, so Israel turned away from him. (Numbers 20:14-21)

Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob,
shame shall cover you,
and you shall be cut off forever.

On the day that you stood aloof,
on the day that strangers carried off his wealth
and foreigners entered his gates
and cast lots for Jerusalem,
you were like one of them.

But do not gloat over the day of your brother
in the day of his misfortune;
do not rejoice over the people of Judah
in the day of their ruin;
do not boast
in the day of distress.

Do not enter the gate of my people
in the day of their calamity;
do not gloat over his disaster
in the day of his calamity;
do not loot his wealth
in the day of his calamity.

Do not stand at the crossroads
to cut off his fugitives;
do not hand over his survivors
in the day of distress.

For the day of the Lord is near upon all the nations.
As you have done, it shall be done to you;
your deeds shall return on your own head.

(Obadiah 10-15)

The First Shall Be Last

All this background sits behind Matthew 25, which is not only near the end of the Bible, it speaks of the end of the Abrahamic Covenant, with its blessings and curses upon surrounding nations depending on their treatment of his children.

However, to make sense of where Jesus positions the separated oikoumene ”livestock” — the goats on His left and the sheep on His right — we must briefly trace it back even further, to the first brothers, Cain and Abel.

Due to Adam’s failure to submit to God as a priest, true kingdom was denied him. Blood was required to enjoy continued fellowship with God. Likewise, Cain usurped the ministry of his priestly brother. Cain, the firstborn, was disinherited by God. It is Christ who reveals to us that Abel, and all those like Him, would inherit the kingdom.

The Tabernacle is cruciform, and therefore humaniform. In this Man’s left hand is priesthood, the Table of bread and wine. In his right hand is kingdom, the Lampstand. Yet in Matthew 25, the priestly sheep are on the right, and the kingly goats are on the left. The first is last, and the last is first, an ironic take on the usurping of priesthood committed by Cain, who was supposed to make his offering after Abel. The “earth” is taken from the kings and given to the priestly, the meek. The inheritance is taken from the Esaus and given to the Jacobs. The “hairy ones” who refused to aid their suffering brothers are exiled forever.

There is a “chiastic” form to this brother-swap, which Jesus employs in the shape of Matthew 23:12:

This is precisely what we see in Genesis 48, when Jacob, whose eyes are failing, blesses Joseph’s sons:

And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are. And the children that you fathered after them shall be yours. They shall be called by the name of their brothers in their inheritance… And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. And Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh, crossing his hands (for Manasseh was the firstborn)… And Joseph said to his father, “Not this way, my father; since this one is the firstborn, put your right hand on his head.” (Genesis 48:5-6; 13-14; 18)

Matthew 25 is about tyrannical “kings” being butchered and given to sacrificial flames, and faithful servant-kings inheriting their houses and vineyards. As it was concerning the rich man and Lazarus within Israel, so would it be with the “ecumenical” nations over whom Christ, the First and the Last, was now enthroned.

In part 2, we will look at the Covenant structure of the passage and its allusions to the Ten Commandments.

_______________________________________
[1] Oikoumene means “inhabited world,” related to the extent of the realm or domain of a single code of law.
[2] James B. Jordan, The Handwriting On The Wall: A Commentary On The Book Of Daniel, 416-421.
[3] See When Judaism Jumped The Shark.
[4] Peter Leithart, Scapegoat.

One interesting facet of biblical symbols is their identification by “use” and “motion.” Objects that have no link in the natural order of things can be tied together through their use in a similar purpose in the work of the house of God. This is not entirely strange. Diverse things which have no relationship in the natural order are brought together by man for use in “housework.” For the Author of the Bible, nature is “plastic.” This factor is one reason why the Bible is strange to modern ears and minds.

[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!

In the pattern from Abraham to Joshua, Joseph is the firstfruits. He ascends to the court of the Most High and opens the mystery. In the later pattern, the one who opens the mystery is Daniel. Joseph converted Pharaoh, and Daniel converted Nebuchadnezzar.

What is really interesting is the significance of Daniel’s rule as senior advisor in Babylon for the leaders of Judah. James Jordan writes:

It is clear that the various letters sent by the prophets to the various nations were sent out when they were written. We also see that Jeremiah wrote up all his early prophecies and sent them to the king at one point (Jeremiah 36). There is no reason to doubt that the material in the book of Daniel was completed by the death of Daniel, which came shortly after the Persians took over the Babylonian empire.

We can know for certain that chapters 7–12 had been written by that time because Daniel himself was the author. Chapter 4 had been written and circulated by Nebuchadnezzar in the midst of his reign. In the light of this, to assert that chapters 1–3, 5–6 were written much later is specious. The information in each of these chapters was of supreme importance to Jeremiah and the others of the Remnant living in Jerusalem and Israel. We know that letters were sent back and forth (Jeremiah 29:1, 25). Common sense tells us that the events in these chapters were written up and sent out for the Jews to read, even if such initial writeups were not the same as the highly polished literary accounts that we find in the book of Daniel.

Chapters 1–3 describe events that took place right at the beginning of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. The events of chapters 1 and 2 were completed in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar. The events of chapter 3 likely happened shortly thereafter, probably in the third or fourth year of Nebuchadnezzar. This is fifteen years before the destruction of Jerusalem.

Consider the likelihood that these three stories were in circulation for ten or more years before Jerusalem was destroyed. For ten years Jeremiah and his associates were able to tell the citizens of Jerusalem and Israel that God was working to convert the Babylonian empire. For ten years it was clear that the Babylonian empire was ruled by faithful believers. Those Jews who refused to obey God by submitting to Nebuchadnezzar were totally without excuse. They could not argue that to submit to Babylon was to submit to a heathen power, because Babylon was clearly being ruled by believers.

Their rejection of Babylon and of Nebuchadnezzar was a rejection of Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Yahweh. [2]

What is really interesting is Jordan’s observation that Joseph and Daniel in the courts of emperors prefigured Christ in the court of the Father. The implications are huge for our interpretation of the Revelation and the Jewish War. The mystery Jesus opened was the mystery of the Gospel, and this is the subject of Revelation 5.

If all this makes sense to you, get a hold of Jordan’s Revelation lectures as well as his commentary on Daniel.

_______________________________
[1] See Bible Matrix p. 115 and p. 183. Notice that Jacob and Joseph also had dreams at Ascension within certain “matrix” cycles, Jacob a vision of angels ascending (with his own head as the head of the sacrifice on a stone altar) and Joseph of sheaves (Firstfruits) and then Sun, Moon and Stars (Pentecost) as two witnesses.
[2] James B. Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall, pp. 10-11.
See also Daniel the Destroyer and King Neb’s New Covenant.

“Idolatry is the Bible Matrix rendered impotent.”

You get out of life only what you put in, or so the saying goes. According to the Bible Matrix, you are supposed to get out more than you put in.

The single grain of wheat that dies is supposed to bring an abundant harvest. A life is given to God in the faith that He will take what is given and turn it into an increase. This is also found in the Covenant pattern: “Who’s the boss?; who’s His representative?; what do I have to do?; what do I get?; and, what’s next? Obedience brings plunder; disobedience brings plagues. [1]

Idolatry is the Bible Matrix rendered impotent. It is a poker machine that never pays out, a Covenant foolishly made with a god who cannot produce the goods. In our day, this is all the -isms mentioned the other day (and see Ray Sutton on ethics versus magic in his book, That You May Prosper, quoted in Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key.) It is men giving their all for tinpot men and tinsel ideologies that inevitably fail them. And shame them.

In the days of Jeremiah, it was lives and livestock given to tinpot gods. Instead of the sacrifices covering the people (as in The Day of Coverings, Atonement), that they might stand before God with heads lifted high, and minister to the world, the people would lie down, covered in shame. Peter Leithart writes:

Toward the end of a polemic against Judah’s idolatry, which occupies every hill and mountain and leafy tree, Jeremiah makes this comment: “the shameful thing has consumed the labor of our fathers since our youth, their flocks and their herds, their sons and their daughters” (Jeremiah 3:24). “Shameful thing” is bosheth, which could mean, abstractly, “shame.”  Jeremiah follows with an exhortation to “lie down in our shame, and let our humiliation cover us” (v. 25).  Shame is clearly an effect of idolatry. But in Jeremiah 11:3, the same word refers to an idol for which Judah sets up altars and to which they burn incense. In 3:24, the context supports the NASB translation as “shameful thing,” the shameful idol that causes shame.

Devotion to the shameful thing not only causes shame, but impoverishment.  Quite literally, idols eat (‘akal) our labor and its products. All the time invested in raising sheep, oxen, goats literally goes up in flames when offered to a nothing.  Sons and daughters pass through the fire, and all the invested hopes and energies are consumed. For Scripture, the same things offered to Yahweh are glorified and multiplied; not shame but glory is the product of sacrificing our labor to Him.

Our idols are as insatiable as ancient ones: Addictions, for instance, consume money, time, energy, life, children, marriages – and for what? The only product is humiliation.

Perhaps the prophet deliberately used the ambiguity of shame/shameful thing. [2] They would lie down in their idols, a slumber that was not God’s rest.

Lives offered to Christ bring a plunder for God that is eternal, even if the results are not seen in this generation or even in this life. We can offer him our “flocks and herds,” our sons and daughters, and our very lives, and see an increase of 30, 60 or 100 fold. Not only will we not be ashamed when we stand before Him, but He removes our shame now. The power of the accuser is the stigma of sin. In Christ, prostitutes and publicans, and even failed disciples, can lift up their heads, and minister to the nations. Jesus paid it all (mercy), and He keeps paying out (grace).

Creation – Transcendence – Sabbath
‘You shall call Me, “My Father,”
And not turn away from Me.’

Division – Hierarchy – Passover
Surely, as a wife treacherously departs from her husband,
So have you dealt treacherously with Me,
O house of Israel,” says the Lord.

Ascension – Ethics 1 – Firstfruits
A voice was heard on the desolate heights,
Weeping and supplications of the children of Israel.

Testing – Ethics 2 – Pentecost
For they have perverted their way;
They have forgotten the Lord their God.

Maturity – Ethics 3 – Trumpets
“Return, you backsliding children,
And I will heal your backslidings.”
…..“Indeed we do come to You,
…..For You are the Lord our God.
……….Truly, in vain is salvation hoped for from the hills,
……….And from the multitude of mountains;
……………Truly, in the Lord our God
……………Is the salvation of Israel.
……….For shame has devoured
……….The labor of our fathers from our youth—
…..Their flocks and their herds,
…..Their sons and their daughters.
(No Succession)

Conquest – Sanctions – Atonement
We lie down in our shame,
And our reproach covers us.
For we have sinned against the Lord our God,
We and our fathers,
From our youth even to this day,
And have not obeyed the voice of the Lord our God.”

There is no stanza 7 in this speech, no rest, no glory. Shameless Israel was devoured by shame.

_______________________________
[1] See Golden Emerods.
[2] For the prophets, language with a double meaning was a veiled blade. Ambiguous use of a word, done rightly, is the two-edged dagger of Ehud. In fact, Ehud announced that he had a dabar for Eglon, a Hebrew word which means “word,” or “thing.” Turns out it was a double-edged word, a physical “thing” that was not void. The blade went in and the machine paid out.

The systematic typology of the Bible Matrix allows us to follow the structures of the Torah thoughout the rest of the Bible. Here’s something that links the Restoration era with the book of Deuteronomy.

Concerning Esther’s entry into the Emperor’s beauty contest, James Jordan writes:

“[W]hat is Mordecai’s problem? It seems to be this: He is a schemer who seeks to acquire influence through political manoeuvering rather than through faith in God. When the king’s men round up pretty girls as potential queen candidates, Esther is among them. We can dismiss the notion that gangs of Persians went around seizing all the pretty girls. No, Esther shows up as a candidate because Mordecai wanted her to.

She only did what he told her (2:20). Mordecai tells her to conceal her Jewishness, and she obeys him even after she was married and owed her allegiance to her husband (compare Psalm 45). In this way, Mordecai causes Esther to sin.

We do not know why this man wanted to keep his Jewishness and that of his niece a secret. We know full well that this king had allowed the Jews in Jerusalem to rebuild their temple (Ezra 6). So, why conceal one’s Jewishness? There is absolutely no evidence of any anti-Jewish prejudice in the ancient world — we may not read European history back into Biblical history.

So, we don’t know. What we can see, however, is that whatever else good might have been part of Mordecai’s personal makeup, he was playing a political game. [1]

This theory might seem arbitrary, but Jordan’s “mere assertions” have an uncanny habit of playing out as one does further study. There is no more than circumstantial evidence in the text. Or is there?

Surely Mordecai’s “coerced” presentation of Esther near the beginning of the narrative chiastically mirrors Esther’s willing presentation of herself near the end. Despite Mordecai’s “threat” of the possible disaster, the final choice was left up to Esther herself. The external law had become internal. The first “robing” was Delegation (Hierarchy), the last was Vindication (Sanctions). From The Covenant Key:

We saw this exact pattern in Bible Matrix concerning Joseph. In his first cycle, he receives his robe of authority at Division (Hierarchy). At Conquest (Sanctions), the robe is stolen, torn and covered with blood. In this initial cycle, the Covenant pattern is corrupted. It was Joseph who was supposed to execute Sanctions against his brothers. Instead, he was made the scapegoat.

Of course, we see this pattern reversed at the end of the narrative. He tests his brothers with, among other things, a cup, to see whether or not the “wilderness” years have transformed them. He discovers internal Law. When he reveals his face, the Veil of Joseph’s Egyptian office is opened and he is vindicated. [2]

Joseph represented the Covenant Head, and Moses the Body. Daniel represented the Head of a New Covenant (the one predicted by Jeremiah [3]), but Esther represented the Body. The women in the Emperor’s harem represented the nations — both historically and typologically. Babylon had seized them all, disempowered them, and put them under tribute as his “chattels.” But this new king of kings viewed them differently.

The book of Esther retells the entire story. Israel was like Vashti who refused to submit to her Covenant husband and was exiled before her insubordination spread to every household. That Old Covenant is dead, and a New Covenant is to be made.

This emperor is a better Solomon than Solomon’s successors were. He rules in a higher court — a “Melchizedekian” one of all nations – and as Christ He chooses Israel above all the other nations. Initially, He chooses her because of her outward beauty. But later, He chooses her because of her courage and wisdom — inward beauty (2 Tim. 2:9).

Esther is Israel. She is transformed by holy fire. This new Israel is not simply a restoration of the old, and here is where we see a reflection of the process in the Torah. In Exodus, the Ten Commandments include a man’s wife as one of his chattels that must not be coveted. Israel then passes through the “holy fire” in Numbers, and the Law is repeated to a new generation. But in Deuteronomy, the “wife” is elevated from simply being part of the household to being a co-regent over the household. This is the difference between the priesthood of Aaron (Israel) and the priesthood of Christ (the Church), the Law of Moses and the Law of the Spirit. One is a household of servants and children. One is a household of sons and wise men, which brings us to New Covenant baptism.

The book of Esther follows the “Tabernacle” matrix, and there is baptism typology in the narrative. It corresponds to the Laver, and it is when Esther robes herself and bravely stands as a martyr (witness) on the Emperor’s “crystal sea.” [4] She is then no longer one among many, nor even merely an honoured wife. She, like the church, is accepted as an advisor/mediator, and is instrumental in taking vengeance upon those who sought her destruction.

____________________________________
[1] James B. Jordan, The Astounding Adventures of Myrtle Morningstar, Part 3: Introducing the Troublemaker, BIBLICAL HORIZONS No. 208, March 2010. Available from www.biblicalhorizons.com
[2] Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key, p. 223.
[3] See Jeremiah was a Bullfrog?
[4] Notice Peter doing exactly the same thing after spotting the resurrected Christ on the beach.

Biblical chronology isn’t always easy, but it provides the answers to many questions we have concerning Bible prophecy. James Jordan shows how crucial the book of Esther is for our understanding of Bible history:

The book of Esther is one of the most neglected of the books of the Bible. To be sure, sermons are preached on it, and commentaries have occasionally been written on it, but almost without exception Esther has been interpreted in isolation from the rest of Biblical history, chronology, and theology. Even many conservative commentators tend to view the events in Esther as minor occurrences that have been inflated in the narrative in order to make the point of the book. This is because they make the wrong assumptions about the dates of these events, and because they do not understand the importance of the events in Esther to the progress of revelation and redemption.

Because these considerations are intertwined, we want to look at Esther the same way we looked at Daniel, dealing with the context of the book, its teaching, and its timing. First of all, let me provide some introductory remarks to put Esther in Biblical context and perspective…

The Oracle Against Elam (Jeremiah 49:34-39)

The prophecies of Jeremiah against the nations flow from Jeremiah 25:9, where God says that He will give all the nations to His servant Nebuchadnezzar. With Daniel as his right hand counsellor, Nebuchadnezzar did indeed take over all these nations. Starting in Jeremiah 46, one nation after another is given to Nebuchadnezzar. But when we come to the oracle against Elam, nothing is said about Nebuchadnezzar. Thus, the commentators have suggested that the defeat of Elam is the defeat of Persia later on, after Persia conquered Babylon and then fell into ruin before Alexander the Great.

Without exception, the commentators fail to consider that this passage is most likely a prediction of the events in Esther. Susa was the capital of Elam, and Daniel was “in the citadel of Susa, which is in the province of Elam” when he was given his vision in Daniel 8. In that vision, Daniel was shown the ram of Persia conquering, and then the male goat of Alexander defeating him.

More to the point, however, is the fact that here we are expressly told of the link between Susa and Elam, which is important since the events in Esther take place in the royal city of Susa, capital of Elam-Persia from the time of Darius the Great onwards.

God begins in Jeremiah 49:35 by saying that He will break the bow of Elam, and it is worth bearing in mind that the Persians were great bow-wielding horsemen. God then says “I shall bring upon Elam the four winds from the four ends of heaven, and shall scatter them to all these winds.” Here is where the commentators go astray, because the four winds are not a symbol of a military invasion but of a Spiritual one.

Zechariah 2:6 states that God has dispersed His people as the four winds of the heavens. This is, of course, after the return from exile, when Persia ruled the world, but the symbol is here identified. Zechariah 6:5 shows the saints as the four winds of heaven riding forth on horses to bring God’s Spiritual conquest to the world of that day. The world, at rest in Zechariah 1, will now be shaken up because God’s Temple has been restored and the Holy Spirit is flowing out into the world (Zechariah 4).

Continue reading at Biblical Horizons.

Another gem from Tim Nichols:

Consider Daniel 9, the prayer of the just man Daniel. Go ahead and read it; I’ll wait.

Did you notice that Daniel identifies fully with his people? “We have not obeyed the voice of the Lord our God, to walk in His laws,” he says — although Daniel himself did, in fact, keep them.  “We have not made our prayer before the Lord our God” — although Daniel did so daily, even at risk of his life.  “Neither have we heeded your servants the prophets,” he says — although he himself was a close student of the prophets, especially Jeremiah.

How can Daniel say these things?  He can say them because “we” is a real category to God.  If the corporate body of which you are a part is mired in sin, you cannot simply say, “But I had nothing to do with that.”  No one knew this better than Daniel and the other righteous exiles.

Habakkuk’s Judah was wicked and required harsh judgment, and that was Daniel’s native land; the men of Judah in Habakkuk’s day were Daniel’s people. God promised judgment, and Habakkuk passes on that promise. However, there were also just men living in Judah, just men who would suffer with the unjust when the judgment came. Habakkuk also passes on God’s promise to them: “The just shall live by faith.”  Daniel suffered this judgment, as did his three friends. They were ripped from their homes as young men, dragged into captivity, and destined to die in exile.  Yet they lived through peril after peril by their faith, as God had promised.

We are Christians. We are required to think of corporate and individual, and the relationship between the two, the way God thinks of them. As in Daniel’s case, Scripture shows us time after time that being part of a sinning corporate entity has consequences that a righteous individual cannot dodge, and the righteous thing to do is own the sins of one’s own people.  Simply saying “But I didn’t participate” – even if it’s true – doesn’t mean that “we” didn’t do it.  You can’t extract yourself so easily, which is to say that your people are yourpeople.

What really brought this home to me was several years of pastoral leadership. It’s one thing to be part of a group; even that is tougher to get out of than we think. But it’s another thing altogether to be responsible for that group’s spiritual well-being as the one who gives account for their souls. You can’t just leave because it turns out the sheep really need a shepherd — what are you there for, anyway?

*   *   *   *   *

Some commands can only be kept corporately.  If there’s a particular way to observe the Lord’s Table, for example, you can only keep it with other people – because the Lord’s Table is something we do together. A group can either keep those commands, or it can disobey them.

If you find yourself part of a group that is disobeying a corporate command, obeying the command individually is often not an option, and even if you can, you remain part of a group that is breaking it.  Like Daniel. What ought you to do?

Like Daniel, you should walk with God.  Like Daniel, you should fulfill God’s will in those things that are up to you. And like Daniel, you should pray, “We have sinned” without any riders, or addenda, or excuses.  These people are your people; their sins are your sins, and you can’t separate yourself from those sins simply by disapproving. You may, like Daniel, find yourself suffering the corporate lack of blessing – or even punishment – as a result of corporate disobedience. But like Daniel, you can trust God to watch out for you through the trial.

Maybe, if God is kind to your people, you’ll be given a chance to call them to repentance.  Maybe not.  Sometimes it’s not your job; God will raise up someone else. There were many in Israel who walked with God in the days of Jeremiah, but only one was called to, well, be Jeremiah. Other times, the season for repentance is past, and God is moving in a different fashion, as He was when He called Isaiah. Many times, there is nothing you can do but hunker down and wait, trusting in the faithfulness of God.

Regarding such times, I once heard an experienced pastor advise praying in this way: “Lord this is sin. It is wrong. Please bless it; the only alternatives available right now are far worse.”

Amen.

During the fourth year that Jehoiakim son of Josiah was king of Judah, the LORD said to me, “Jeremiah, since the time Josiah was king, I have been speaking to you about Israel, Judah, and the other nations. Now, get a scroll and write down everything I have told you, then read it to the people of Judah. Maybe they will stop sinning when they hear what terrible things I plan for them. And if they turn to me, I will forgive them”… (CEV) Jeremiah 36:1-3

God’s Covenants are always temporary. Every Covenant is a to and fro. It reflects the Word sent to the Son by the Spirit and the “bridal abundance” received in return by the Father. The Word is often pictured as a scroll, for obvious reasons. Scrolls were written and sealed with wax. The seal was temporary, something to protect the confidentiality of the contents, but something to be broken once the document reached its intended destination. The Bible Matrix makes plain the symbols used by God to illustrate this step in the Covenantal order of all He has made.

In the Creation week, Light is the Transcendent Lawmaker, and a seal is set upon this Covenant document on Day 2. It is the firmament, a scroll that is stretched out, opened, but one that hides heaven from earth. [1]

In the Tabernacle, it is the Veil, hiding Man from the consuming fire of the Covenant in the Ark.

In the Covenant/Dominion pattern, it is the delegation of a human representative (or representatives) who are sent to speak this word. At this point, Joseph receives a robe. Just like the Veil — and the firmament — Joseph’s robe was intended by God to be torn and bloodied as a witness that the Word had been carried out. In darkness, the delegated Man is made prostrate. He falls on his face and God writes on him as a living epistle. The Word is engraved into him, and he receives it with meekness (Jas. 1:21). The Man then makes an Exodus with the scroll, or rather, as the scroll.

The third step is the unsealing of the document. This occurs at the Ascension of the delegated Man, the Covenant head. The Man is Moses on the mountain, opening the Law to God’s people. We see this throughout the Old Testament, and in the gospels. Interestingly, pretty much every time an Apostle stands up to preach in the Book of Acts, it is at Ascension. The Apostles themselves had become Tables spread with bread and wine, and were unsealing the invitation to God’s people. But the invitations of God are bittersweet. They always contain blessings and curses.

Revelation completes the book Daniel was commanded to close, to “seal up,” concerning “what is to happen to your people in the latter days” (Daniel 10:14). The latter days refers to the Restoration era, the Covenant restored in Zechariah, and they ended in AD70. The book was closed because the time was in the distant future, half a millennium away.

Now John was given visions because that time had arrived. The latter days were coming to an end. Jesus’ warning was in no way a generic, long-term “picture book”. It was an urgent seismic alert to those on the empire-Land. But it was also an invitation to a New Covenant, a new Creation:

(Revelation 1:1-3:)

TRANSCENDENCE
Creation – Genesis
The revelation
…..of Jesus Christ,
……….which God gave him
……………to show
……….to his servants
…..the things
that must soon take place.

HIERARCHY
Division – Exodus
He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,

ETHICS
Ascension – Leviticus
who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ,

Testing – Numbers
even to all that he saw. (Governing Law-Lights)

Maturity – Deuteronomy
Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy,

SANCTIONS
Conquest – Joshua
and blessed are those who hear,
and who keep what is written in it,

SUCCESSION
Glorification – Judges
for the time is near.

Notice that the first “week” or “seven” is a microcosm of the entire introduction. In the first week (Sabbath), it is Jesus who is the delegate. Then it is the angel, the messenger, sent to speak to John. (In Revelation 5, there are seven blessings that correspond to the seven ruling lights in their order of ascension. Mercury, the messenger, is number 2.)

At Ascension, John is the bread-and-wine, the sacrifice on the Bronze Altar. The reference to sight at the centre (Testing) is a common one, and here it corresponds to the “show” in the first sequence.

Then at Maturity, it is the angels of the resurrected body, the church, who are to speak the words aloud as Moses did to the new generation of Israel.

At Conquest, the division between the goats is the difference between those who merely hear the words, and those who both hear and keep them.

Finally, at Glorification, we have Covenant succession, and a reference to the final line in the first stanza. Here it is ironic, however, because the Revelation is the final word concerning the Old Covenant. The final point concerns the future of the Covenant, but the Old Covenant had no future. Its generations, including its genealogies, were about to be cut off and thrown into the fire. [2]

But every time Jehudi finished reading three or four columns, the king would tell him to cut them off with his penknife and throw them in the fire. Elnathan, Delaiah, and Gemariah begged the king not to burn the scroll, but he ignored them, and soon there was nothing left of it. The king and his servants listened to what was written on the scroll, but they were not afraid, and they did not tear their clothes in sorrow. (CEV) Jeremiah 36:23 25

The Jewish rulers tore up the New Covenant, so the Lord tore up the Old. Removing the Veil brought them face to face with God’s Law.

This pattern structures the entire book of Revelation. It expands and expands like ripples from a pebble dropped into a pond, or more correctly, like soundwaves from the very Source of the Created Order. At Ascension, Jesus is presented as The Firstfruits Lamb, the Man on the Altar, Bread and Wine. He is the first Man worthy to open the scroll. Was this the scroll sealed up by Daniel? In one sense, yes, because although the opening of the New Covenant ended the entire Old Testament construct of centralised worship, its last incarnation was the Restoration Covenant. That is what Jesus was about to judge.

Daniel ascended to the right hand of King Nebuchadnezzar and opened the mystery of the next 500 years. But its very end was to be sealed, TOP SECRET. The Covenant that had been stretched out in Zechariah as a new heavens was about to be rolled back up, snapping shut upon those who refused to enter the New Order. What was in the secret document? The mystery of Jews and Gentiles in one body. The rejection of this truth was the offense that sealed the doom of those who were the “unwise” of Daniel 12. They failed to realise that every Covenant installed a “Jewish” head and was supposed to return to God with a hybrid body, an arkful of animals, ie. Gentile worshippers. The Restoration Covenant, despite the fact that many scholars fail to even acknowledge its existence, actually succeeded. Even while certain Jews and all the Judaizers were hardening their hearts to God’s fresh work, Gentile God-fearers were crawling out of the woodwork and coming to Jesus, their Noah, their Rest.

Tragically, but perfectly, the firstfruits church was the torn, bloodied robe presented to the Father before Jerusalem’s doom. The mystery of the Gospel was opened as a testimony for all time, for all subsequent history. It was publicly shouted from the rooftops. Even these saints, these martyrs were sealed as Covenant documents, with the earnest of the Spirit, only to be torn open. The Apostolic epistles are Covenant documents, witnesses both for the first-century prosecution of the Covenant-breakers and the first-century defense of the Covenant-keepers. To read them in any other way is to miss the point.

Well, I’ve slammed modern evangelicals. Now it’s time for the hyperpreterists. The scroll that was unsealed by Christ in early Revelation is not the scroll that snapped shut later in the book. The New Covenant was opened, but it is still open. This new, friendly sky will remain open until this Covenant, too, has carried out its work.

Another thought: The seal placed by the Jewish authorities (with the Romans in cahoots, ie. harlot riding beast) on Jesus’ tomb symbolised their deliberate intention of maintaining the integrity of the Old Covenant. Case closed. But the Old Covenant was designed to die, to be completed, to be opened, in the New. When the stone was removed, the seal was broken. The day dawned. What was loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven at the Ascension.

Application: The seal of the Spirit is not something to “keep me safe until heaven.” If I fail to live publicly for Christ, I remain a Covenant document with an unbroken seal, a message whose contents were intended by God to be sounded as Trumpets and poured out as Bowls.

____________________________________________
[1] See Firmament of Flesh.
[2] See Pedigree Papers.

The Restoration era Scriptures are the most misunderstood texts in the Bible. Our failure to recognise their recapitulation of patterns from the Torah — and the fact that they are not presented in chronological order but by genre — makes it hard for us to put the pieces together. [1] Very often, we miss great ironies because we don’t get the joke.

One of the greatest “jokes” is the usurping of the throne of Judah’s kings by Nebuchadnezzar. The five point Covenant structure introduces the Great King in its preamble, then delegates power to a vassal. All of God’s Covenants follow this pattern, as well as the books of Moses, the structure of Deuteronomy, Psalms and the Revelation just to name a few.

Israel desired a king like the Gentiles, but this was impossible. An Israelite king would always be subject to a higher power. (This is exactly the debate going on in Western culture, isn’t it?) Saul failed to be a vassal under God, and was disqualified. The later kings of Israel and Judah also failed to be vassals, so the Covenant scroll, the mediating firmament, would be torn apart, a garment rolled in blood.

Nebuchadnezzar is referred to by God as His “servant.” This must have been terrifying for the kings of Judah, but they did not repent. Ironically, it was Nebuchadnezzar, a real Gentile king who brought rest to the Land—the 70 years of Sabbaths that were overdue. The number 70 is also ironic. It is the number of bulls sacrificed for the nations at the Feast of Tabernacles, the heart of Israel’s ministry to the nations. God and His prophets can be extremely sarcastic. But it is sarcasm with tears.

Jeremiah’s call for Judah’s king to become willingly subject to Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon was actually a call to a New Covenant, a Covenant of priesthood. [2] Yes, it was a call to national death, but it was also a call to national resurrection.

The death was to release the grasp on forbidden kingdom, that is, kingdom without subjection to God. It was exactly the sin of Adam, the sin with which Satan tempted Christ. The kings refused, and death came anyway, with a much greater devastation for the people of the Land.

But it was still a New Covenant. God set up new worship outside the “camp”, in Babylon, before He destroyed the old worship. Just as the prophets had substituted as mediators before God because the Covenant kings would not listen, Daniel and Ezekiel mediated for the people of God in a higher court. In fact, part of Daniel’s mediation was possibly the destruction of Jerusalem. [3]

Of course, all of this was replayed in the first century. The Jews were invited to submit to a new ruler, the Christ. He, too, called His servants to refrain from fighting, to die and to be resurrected as a new kingdom, the Church.

Some application: We are all kingly vassals in this New Covenant. Being a servant in the king’s house takes a lot of pressure off me as a Christian. Yes, I am to be faithful with everyone and everything over which God has made me a steward. This is the death of being a living sacrifice. But there is nothing to fear, for at the end of the day, if I am faithful, the buck doesn’t stop with me. It stops with the Son of God, my Conqueror, the One Who promised to protect me in a scroll rolled in His blood.

_______________________________________
[1] You must read James Jordan’s The Handwriting on the Wall.
[2] See Jeremiah was a Bullfrog?
[3] See Daniel the Destroyer.