“…who were the Pharisees in their real setting? Where did they come from? There are no such people in the Old Testament, but when we get to Matthew they seem to be hiding behind every rock and shrub.”

Essay by Daniel Hoffman

If people today know anything about the Pharisees, they know them as the villains of the New Testament. Those who know a little more probably have a conception of the Pharisees as overly strict, eating their gruel with a scowl and casting condemnation in every direction, while Jesus was open and chill. Some might go beyond this and imagine the Pharisees as the perfect (or perfectly bad) model of self-salvation: The Pharisees wanted to save themselves by their good works, but the New Testament (it’s thought) is all about salvation through faith, and works are no big deal.

But who were the Pharisees in their real setting? Where did they come from? There are no such people in the Old Testament, but when we get to Matthew they seem to be hiding behind every rock and shrub. What was their reason for being? What was their agenda? If they were so awful, why does Jesus seem perfectly friendly toward Nicodemus? Why were there Pharisees in the Christian assembly (Acts 15:5)? Why did Paul still consider himself a Pharisee even after his conversion (Acts 23:6)? The goal of this post is to provide some context on who the Pharisees actually where, to help us better understand their role in the biblical story.

When the Jews began returning to their homeland after the Babylonian exile (2 Chron 36:23), they were not really getting their independence, and they were certainly not experiencing the kingdom of God. Cyrus was the messiah of Yahweh, a shepherd for Israel (Isa 44:28; Isa 45:1), but he was a Gentile; surely not the true messianic king. Israel had been rescued and redeemed from Babylon (Mic 4:10), and that was well and good, but Israel was far from subduing the surrounding nations who had been gathered against her (Mic 4:13). In fact, it wasn’t long after the return that the Persians themselves were superseded by the Greeks under Alexander, and Israel fell victim to the power struggles resulting from Alexander’s early death. You can read about this in 1 Maccabees chapter 1. The point most relevant here is that the Greeks and their culture came to so dominate the whole Mediterranean world that the Jews were faced with the question of conformity: Adopt Greek customs or not? Adopt only some? Which ones? Conform outwardly while maintaining inner separation? Prove your zeal for the Law by violent resistance and revolution? Retreat from society to live in a pure, isolated community?

In 164 B.C., the family of Judas Maccabee (Judas “the Hammer”) successfully revolted against the Greek ruler Antiochus, and for a while Israel had its independence. The family of Judas became the new ruling dynasty (called the Hasmonean dynasty after one of the family members), and it was not without its problems. There was often collusion with pagan powers, there was the blurring of distinction between priestly and kingly functions, there were assassinations and cruelties galore. If the return from exile hadn’t given way to the promised kingdom of God, the successful Maccabean revolt hadn’t done it either, despite being celebrated still today at Hanukkah and despite serving as a beacon of hope for many Jews in subsequent decades who still harbored dreams of throwing off the pagan yoke.

It was in that situation that the Pharisees arose. As noted above, the great and immediate questions of the day had to do with issues of conformity. How exactly was Israel to maintain its distinction as Yahweh’s covenant people? What stance could a faithful Jew take with regard to the ever-encroaching Gentile ways of life? It’s easy to imagine that in this climate, a party would take shape that saw itself as defending the old ways—the traditions of Israel—against both Gentile encroachment from outside and compromising corruption from inside. Such a group did arise, and that group was the Pharisees.

The Pharisees as a whole were not idiots. Greek (and very soon Roman) power was the reality, and it had to be responded to in some sort of realistic manner. As N.T. Wright suggests,

“[F]aced with social, political, and cultural ‘pollution’ at the level of national life as a whole, one natural reaction . . . was to concentrate on personal cleanness, to cleanse and purify an area over which one did have control as compensation for the impossibility of cleansing or purifying and area—the outward and visible political one—over which one had none. The intensifying of the biblical purity regulations within Pharisaism may well therefore invite the explanation that they are the individual analogue of the national fear of, and/or resistance to, contamination from, or oppression by, Gentiles.“

The Pharisaical focus on things like purity and Sabbath-keeping were thus driven, at least at the level of ideology, by a strong desire to maintain Israel’s distinction from the surrounding nations. It’s also important to realize that Pharisees had no official power. They weren’t even official teachers of the Law. They had no legal authority as Pharisees, although people in positions of power could have been Pharisees. They existed as a pressure group. An analogy which may be helpful is today’s Tea Party. The Tea Party is a “pressure group” which tries to do what it can in society to push for conservative politics—especially with regard to economics and foreign policy. The “Tea Party” as such has no legal authority, but they have succeeded in getting some of “their people” elected to office and they do exert considerable pressure on the Republican Party. Wright again:

“The Pharisees sought to bring moral pressure to bear upon those who had actual power; to influence the masses; and to maintain their own purity as best they could. Their aim, so far as we can tell, was never simply that of private piety for its own sake . . . Their goals were the honor of Israel’s god, the following of his covenant charter, and the pursuit of the full promised redemption of Israel.“

Thus Saul, for example, when he wanted to arrest Christians in Damascus, needed letters of authority from the high priest (Acts 9:1-2). In the early years of the Pharisees’ activity, the Hasmonean rulers were still interested in maintaining some appearance of ruling in accord with Israel’s Law. The Romans and Herods didn’t care so much about this, and so by the time of Jesus the Pharisees perhaps had less influence with the ruling elite, but could still hold themselves up as models for the common people. Their goals could take on different practical forms: Supporting armed resistance on the one hand, or withdrawing into Torah study and on the other (this second option is illustrated by Gamaliel in Acts 5:34, who recommended that the new Christian sect be left alone. Saul, already mentioned, would have been more in line with the first option of using physical violence).

It is certainly the case that the Pharisees’ insistence on maintaining the purity and separateness of the covenant people was driven by the belief that such a condition would find favor with God. What could be wrong with seeking to enforce—and with compelling others to enforce, either with violence or moral influence—Yahweh’s own Torah? But an official or theoretical ideology is a far cry from understanding and applying the Torah rightly, and it’s a far cry from the condition of the heart. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for both of these things, for allowing the Tradition to usurp the injunctions of Scripture (Matt 15:5-6), and for the hypocrisy of their hearts (Matt 23:25).

Was Pharisaism wrong in principle? It doesn’t seem so. Yahweh had given his people the Law, and had called them to be separate from the nations. In the Gospels, the Pharisaical problem was that they were not following the Torah in truth, and were not following it in its true intent, which was to serve the Love of God and neighbor. They had allowed their practices to take over and usurp these overriding concerns. Many of them also were in fact lovers of money and privilege (Luke 16:14-15). Jesus rebukes them for this hypocrisy and for misunderstanding the Scriptures they claimed to believe and defend, and their wickedness was real and profound—it lead them to plot the murder of Christ (John 18:3).

Republished with permission.

If you are interested in being young, thinking young, and having progressive, up-to-date opinions on all subjects, and if you are particularly interested in establishing “social justice,” beware.

From the blog of Richard Bledsoe:

How odd the world is. Pharisees gave the pretence of caring about the justice and righteousness given witness to in the Torah. But instead, God’s righteousness was subverted by giving priority to the “traditions of the elders,” and the Word of God was buried under a mass of habits, traditions, and precepts inherited from past fathers. In doing so, they actually “became like the nations around them,” because such traditions were the whole fabric of all of the ancient world outside of Israel. The Word of God is startling, surprising, and its reception, application, and result, could never be foreseen or predicted.

Revelation created something unheard of and impossible outside of Revelation. It created a future. There could be no future for ancient pagans, because all of life was a repetition of the traditions of the elders. Such repetition simply meant nothing new could ever happen. But, the Prophets, in particular, gave new promises of new life, of redemption, of renewal of all things in ways never dreamt of, never thought of before. God promised over and over, to “do a new thing.”

Jesus was the future. He was the startling New Man who would renew all things. He therefore opposed the Pharisees adherence to “the traditions of the elders” which buried the Torah under a mass of dead human precepts. He did so over and over, and in every instance of opposing “the traditions of the elders,” he does so by quoting the Hebrew revelation, what we now term The Old Testament.

As the Gospel has taken hold through history, we see a gradual overcoming of the habits of the ancient world. The Reformation was a re-affirmation of the text of Scripture (Old and New Testament) over against a whole lot of new “traditions of the elders” that had come to cling to the church over the centuries. The very heart of Martin Chemnitz’s Examination Of The Council Of Trent (published a generation after Luther) was the greatest of all defenses of Reformation Doctrine by showing that the very structure of Roman Catholic and Trentine theology, was that its structure was a virtual repetition of Rabbinical Theology. The Rabbis had a secret oral tradition that supposedly came down from Sinai, and Trent claimed an oral tradition that came down from the time of the Apostles. In both cases, the secret oral tradition (known only to the highest clergy in both cases) took practical precedent over the written text. But, Jesus who was the future, always forced the priority of the written text over all secret oral traditions. The Reformation forced the same issue. And, it must be said that Rome has been extensively forced back to the written text as it has tried to do war with the children of the French Revolution. The traditions of the elders were substantially what gave fuel to the Revolution in the first place.

Phariseeism has been disappearing. So is the world now, in an untrammelled way, becoming righteous?

I am skeptical. There may be forward movement, but in hardly an untrammelled way. There is a great new set-back. The devil is clever. If you can’t beat them, join them…

If the traditions of the elders have been the way of blocking the new future that will be created by the New Man in concert with His Word, then let us (says the Evil One) do the opposite.

What we care about now, what we will make the new public opinion (say the Principalities and the Powers) is youth and the future. All things (including the Word of God) can now be subordinated to Youth and a Utopian Future. But this utopian future created by the Planners of the Omnipotent State, is a world of perfect stagnation. It is remarkably like the static cyclical world of the traditions of the elders.

It is the novelists who have seen this. The “dystopias,” the brilliant satirizations of the coming leftist utopias, those great novels of Orwell (1984), Huxley (Brave New World) and most insightfully, CS Lewis (That Hideous Strength).

The new Phariseeism is established by lifting up youth and the future. And, the engine that propels it is the very concept of Righteousness and Justice that is derived from the Bible, from Christianity. In this way, a new hypocrisy is ensconsed. The text of the Word of God is effectively subordinated to The Up To Date Opinion, The New York Times editorial page.

If you are interested in being young, thinking young, and having progressive, up-to-date opinions on all subjects, and if you are particularly interested in establishing “social justice,” beware. You might be in the neighborhood of the new Pharisees. You might be party to creating a stagnant, unchanging world of perfect oppression. And it is all in the name of superior righteousness.

From Tim Gallant’s blog:

The Sabbath and the Day of Yahweh

It strikes me that people tend to read the conflicts between Jesus and the Pharisees in the Gospels as a matter of incompatible casuistries. “The Pharisees are applying the fourth commandment wrongly because they don’t make the proper exceptions for works of necessity, works of mercy and works of piety.”
But when we consider the Gospels themselves, it is hard to take that approach all that seriously. The Gospels globally are not about Jesus needing to correct the moral vision of His opponents in connection with their reading of Torah (even if that may come up occasionally on the fringes).

The Gospels are about JESUS. The reason He comes into conflict repeatedly with the Pharisees on this is not merely that they have too many minutiae attached to the rulebook, nor that they forgot some categories of exceptions.

Rather, the reason is that Jesus presents HIMSELF as the embodiment of true Sabbath, doing what Torah could not do. We look at Jesus’ Sabbath healings and conclude: “Aha, works of mercy are exceptions to the general rule.” But although Jesus observes that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath, that is hardly His fundamental point. We should not miss that Jesus is performing HEALINGS by a power that His opponents did not have, no matter how good they may have been at lawkeeping.

So long as we view the Gospel Sabbath episodes primarily as moral directives, we will misread them. They are primarily signs of an inbreaking kingdom that transcends the old creation and its Torah.

This of course is why the supposed problem of “only nine commandments” is beside the point. As Jordan says, the Ten Words were Israel’s charter. While the other Nine Words are transformed but retransmitted to the Church, it is not at all problematic to say that the Fourth Commandment does not simply switch days of the week and carry on. In the Gospels, the Fourth Commandment plays a key role, but not because it needs to stick around in any independent way. It plays a key role because Jesus is emerging from its heart with something new: His arrival is the arrival of the Day of Yahweh, promised throughout the prophets.

It is no accident that in Matthew 11-12, the narrative flows from John the Baptizer to Jesus the rest-giver, and on into Sabbath conflicts. In Malachi 3-4, the Day of the Yahweh would be marked by the messenger of the covenant purifying the sons of Levi as well as bringing justice and hope to the poor and oppressed. A time of new creation would arrive. This would be preceded by “Elijah the prophet.”

Jesus’ Sabbath healings are not merely intended as a generalized picture that doing generic good (“works of mercy”) is a suitable activity for the Sabbath. Rather, they demonstrate that in Him, not only is a “greater than the temple” present, but that the Day of Yahweh has arrived, transcending the Sabbath. The seventh day Sabbath is part of the first creation, but now, in Jesus, the new creation has come in the eschatological Day of Yahweh.

He is Yahweh; and His ministry is the Day of Yahweh.

And thus He says, “Come to Me, all you who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”—a rest that the law’s Sabbath could not give.

The “Day of Yahweh” is translated “the Day of the LORD” (Kuriou) in the LXX (Greek OT) and thus into the New Testament. It is therefore no surprise when we get to the Revelation of St John, and he uses another form for that genitive: “the LORD’s Day” (Rev 1:10). On the first day of the week, when the disciples around the Roman world were gathering into the presence of the God of Israel, John was alone, exiled on Patmos, but “in the Spirit” he enters into God’s throne room where that host of believers has also gathered for worship.

And there, John sees what? He sees the unfolding apocalypse (revelation) of “the Day of the LORD,” beginning with preliminary judgments and culminating in the final one.

It is fair to say that in the New Testament vision, Lord’s Day worship is a miniature, a preliminary anticipation of the final Day of Yahweh. The reason that Hebrews says not to forsake the assembling together “as you see the Day approaching” is that the assembly itself partakes of the character of that Day.

The Sabbatarian vision is too small. This is why Paul chides the Galatians for observing “days and months and seasons and years.” The Sabbath, along with the Torah administration as a whole, belonged to the stoicheia, the “elements of the world,” the things that constituted the first creation.

But for us, there is something more than that. We gather into the Day of Yahweh, and find not merely physical rest, but an eschatological event that is busy setting the kosmos to rights, even as Yahweh incarnate did throughout His earthly ministry.

1 John 5: 1-12   |   Sermon Notes   |   17 June 2012

Introduction

Jewish Christians were first opposed by unbelieving Jews, then by Jews who said they believed. Members of this latter group are called “Judaizers,” and they were the false teachers whom the apostles condemn in their letters.

Not only did these men pervert the gospel by including adherence to the Law of Moses, they also failed to keep the commandments of Jesus. This was Pharisaism dressed up in Christianity, the old leaven carried into the new age. The Pharisees loved to control people, while they failed to control themselves. This is the context of John’s letters to Jewish Christians: despite their profession, these men would be exposed by their lack of of certain things in their character.

1    Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.

• The first “child” we love is Jesus. The Jews claimed, and still claim, that they love God, but hate Jesus. John says this is impossible. One cannot love Japan and show disrespect to a Japanese ambassador. Jesus was sent by the Father, and did only what the Father asked Him to do. He spoke the Father’s words. To reject Jesus is to reject the Father — and to replace Him with an idol of our own making.
• First century Judaism became a “doctrine of devils,” and it remains demonic today. In Galatians, Paul refers to it as witchcraft. Judaism is rebellion against Christ and is thus rebellion against the very God of the Jews. (However, when they convert, Jews usually become remarkable Christians.)

2    This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands.

• And if we love the firstborn, we will love God’s other children, whether we actually like them or not. And if we don’t, the Spirit will be calling us to do so. True Christians know how much they have been forgiven and will be forgiving. Those who refuse, and continually harden their hearts, are most likely not born again.

3    In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome,

• Christians keep God’s commands not because they are terrified of God, but because they both love and fear Him as a father. We fear discipline from God, but we also come to understand how much we hurt Him when we sin, and what it cost Him to cover that sin in Christ.

4    for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.

• What does this mean? It means that any pain can be born if there is a great reward to be had on the other side of it. A mother endures childbirth for the sake of a child. Jesus bore the cross for the sake of plundering the devil’s house of its captives.

• So, the faith spoken of is faith in the promise God makes of what is on the other side of suffering. We take His word for it and endure until what we heard becomes visible to our eyes. Overcoming the world means not believing what the world says, and not believing our eyes. Faith looks at ruins and sees a new house based on the blueprint in the promises of God.

5    Who is it that overcomes the world? Only the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

• Our faith is based on the fact that Jesus overcame the world. Christians persevere, even when threatened with death, because Jesus, as the Son of God, overcame death.
• The period between AD30 and 70 was characterized by the rivalry between the testimony of Jesus and the testimony of the Jewish rulers. Would it be the Temple or the Church which survived the tribulation? Only one of them “overcame.” Likewise, only the true believers persevered to the end.

6    This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

• This point is where I twigged that in this passage John is working his way very subtly through the Ten Commandments. John is up to “false witness.” Two or three witnesses were required for God to make a judgment. Remember the witnesses against Cain? And Sodom? And the false witnesses brought to testify against Jesus? Here we have the water and the blood as witnesses, and the third witness is the Spirit, who unites the water and the blood. But why is it water and blood?
• Water and blood are both liquids required for life. One comes out of the body and one goes into the body. The Jews were the blood, the circumcision, the genealogy of Christ, the Land rising out of the water. The Gentiles were the water, the baptism, the office of Christ, brought into the household of faith in the first century to bring new life to the Old Covenant body. The body of Christ is one new man, made up of Jew and Gentile, blood and water.
• Jew and Gentile had been separated in Abraham as “Land and Sea.” [1] Water and blood poured out of Jesus’ body when He was speared. Being separate, they were two witnesses that He was dead. But they were reunited in His resurrection body. The old division was torn down. The last sacrificial blood was shed, and now there is only “office.” Genealogy no longer matters. Baptism wipes out all heredity and confers basic Christian office upon all believers.
• Why it is not “blood and water”? The water ended Jesus’ perfect life and began His earthly ministry. The blood completed that ministry. So it’s:
  Circumcision (blood) > Baptism (water); Atonement (blood) > Ascension (water)

7    For there are three that testify:
8    the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

• Unlike the witnesses against Jesus, the witness of Jesus’ baptism and Jesus’ death both corroborate the story of His identity. Not only did the Spirit testify at His baptism, it testified at His resurrection. He came up out of the water, then came up out of the Land.
• The process is actually blood to water: Circumcision to baptism, death to resurrection. But it is the baptism and death in the centre here that John has in mind. If Jesus was only baptized but not resurrected, He would have been a false teacher.

9    We accept human testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son.

• The Spirit not only witnessed to Jesus’ sonship in history, His testimony continues in us now.

10    Whoever believes in the Son of God accepts this testimony. Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son.

• Christians believe the Spirit’s legal witness, and that is why Christians gather as further witnesses, even though we are not eyewitnesses.

11    And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

• Our very life is a testimony to the truth of the Gospel, because the Spirit is making us like Jesus. And now God says of us, as He did of Jesus, that we are “beloved sons.”

12    Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life.

• Here we have the inside/outside of the new household of God. Only those inside Christ, inside the ark, inside the passover household, are safe.

The Ten Commandments in 1 John 5:1-12

1. Worshipping the True God
2. Responding faithfully to the New Covenant Oath — Jesus’ name
3. Overcoming the world brings Sabbath rest
4. Honouring father and mother (God and church) because Jesus is the Son of God
5. Water and blood testify to the murder of Jesus
6. The Spirit of Jesus is not “strange fire,” or spiritual adultery
7. The Spirit unites water and blood into Kingdom (Adam believed a lie and stole kingdom)
8. We accept God’s testimony, in the cursing and blessing of His Son
9. Eternal life is a new house
10. Whoever believes is in that new house [2]

_________________________________

[1] See Cosmic Language.
[2] I follow the ancient Jewish “scroll” division of the Ten Words, followed by St. Augustine, because it fits the Bible Matrix. See Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key, chapter 4, “God-In-A-Box.”

Art: Land, Sea Alchemy by Lisette, Textile Seahorse

“The abundant life is a life that is constantly being beheaded by the truth.”

Legalism and Leadership

“For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:20)

You may have had some experience with a “legalistic” church or Christian. We all know that a domineering leadership is a curse to the work of God, but so many people who make the decision to leave such ministries, or individuals, behind become “lawless” in their liberty. What’s really going on there, and what is the Bible’s solution for legalism?

[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!

“…and their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked.”
(Genesis 3:7, cf. Matthew 9:30; Luke 24:31; Acts 9:8)

Jesus’ sermons are all literary masterpieces. Perhaps it was not only the explicit content of His speeches that riled the rulers. He not only claimed to be Yahweh, His sermons all follow the structure of the speeches of Yahweh. They are Covenantal not only in content but in form. No other man spoke like this man, except perhaps Moses and the Prophets, who repeated the Words dictated to them by God.

TRANSCENDENCE – Initiation
Do not think
…..that I came to destroy
……….the Law

……….or the Prophets.
…..I did not come to destroy
but to fulfill.

This stanza is deliberately missing its “Pentecost.” It follows the Creation pattern but the Law has not yet been “opened.” As Robert Alter claims, much of the Bible’s communication relies on repetition of establishes forms but with modification, additions, and omissions. Sometimes what is not said is the elephant in the room. Jesus would fulfil the Law at the centre of history and send the Spirit. He would kindle the fire on the Altar of Israel at Pentecost, and it would be totally consumed in AD70. He does it again in stanza 2.

HIERARCHY – Delegation
For assuredly, (Initiation)
…..I say to you, (Delegation)
……….till heaven and [Land] pass away, (Presentation)
……………[No Holy Fire, no Pentecostal Purification]
……….one jot or one tittle (Transformation – Law repeated)
…..will by no means pass from the law (Vindication)
till all is fulfilled. (Restoration)

Notice that heaven and Land are at Day 3,  the Ascension offering. Genesis (Initiation), Exodus (Delegation), Leviticus (Presentation)… All the tribes possessed Land except Levi because the Levites were the holy Firstfruits upon the Altar-Land.

ETHICS – Purification (Israel threshed)
Whoever therefore (Creation)
…..breaks (Division)
……….[of these commandments the least] (ironic Ascension)
…………….(No Testing)
……….and teaches men so, (Maturity)
…..shall be called least (ironic Conquest)
in the kingdom of heaven; (Glorification)

Notice that this stanza follows the Creation week’s 1-2-3 (least), 1-2-3 (least) forming and filling. In this case it is a failure to form and a subsequent failure to fill. It is Adam at Day 6 who is least.

SANCTIONS – Vindication
but whoever (Creation)
…..[shall practise (Division)
……….and teach, (Ascension)
……………this one] (Testing)
……….great (Maturity)
…..shall be called (Conquest – Vindication)
in the kingdom of heaven. (Glorification – Succession)

Finally, we have a Man in the middle.

SUCCESSION – Restoration
For I say (Genesis)
…..to you, (Exodus)
……….that unless your righteousness (Leviticus)
……………exceeds (Numbers – Testing)
……….the scribes and Pharisees, (Deuteronomy)
…..you will by no means enter (Joshua)
the kingdom of heaven. (Wise Judges)

What did Jesus mean in this final stanza? The purpose of the Covenant process is to put Man under God’s eyes at Ethics/Testing, so that Man might become God’s eyes by the end, and initiate the next cycle as God’s tried and tested representative. Adam failed so God moved to the next generation, which also failed. The failures continued (except for Enoch as righteous Firstfruits) until Noah become the first righteous judge, and was handed the sword of judgment instead of being scattered by it.

The scribes and Pharisees came to an end with the Old Covenant in AD70. They were denied Succession. The key is that this entire structure above recapitulates God’s Covenant plan for Adam. Jesus is saying that unless you have eyes that judge righteously between good and evil, by obedience to the Spirit of God, you will be as blind as the Pharisees, who judged according to outward appearances only. The Spirit’s choice of the Son of David was the same as it was for David. The Pharisees were not looking upon Jesus’ heart. But God was, and it pleased Him.

All those who have the Spirit of God are not missing the “Pentecostal” line of the Covenant poem. Obedience to the gospel allows God to pour out the holy fire and transform the sacrifice. Baptism is the vindication of such a person by the Church. At “Sanctions” and “Glorification”, we find robes and wine.

Robes and wine are for those who are spiritually, and judicially mature. But the watershed is one’s own personal Pentecost. The first birth is (fundamentally) about growing in stature, rising like a loaf of bread whose purpose is to be broken. The second birth breaks the bread, and its purpose it that we are to be poured out like wine.

For sure, we are to grow into even greater maturity after conversion, but if we have the Spirit of Christ, we are justified and have the wisdom of Christ guiding us into all truth. Certainly, there are stages of maturity within the regenerate, but the indwelling Spirit of God is quite clearly the baseline, and repentance and baptism are the first “baby” steps of obedience in our new life.

The beginning of this “judicial maturity,” this righteousness that exceeds that of the Pharisees, is someone being cut to the heart, recognizing that they are unrighteous and Jesus is righteous, that light is day and darkness is night. Conversion begins a new creation — in that individual. It is a Covenant process that is both objective and subjective. Jesus calls His sheep and His sheep responds.

Paedobaptists object to credobaptism because it’s hard to tell if a child is ready. And if they are ready at aged 7, how can this be the Maturity that the Covenant process demands. We like to pin maturity down to how old someone needs to be. The Old Covenant pinned everything down so they didn’t have to think. Ages were specified. That’s priestly. It’s childhood. The New Covenant doesn’t do that. We are led by the Spirit, and babies aren’t.

To clarify, the “age in years” is more about the first birth than the second — a maturity that is practical and valuable but nonetheless a carnal wisdom. The wisdom the New Covenant requires is a gift of the Spirit of God. There are certainly overlaps (elders should be elders) but that concerns a maturity that comes with years of rule by the Spirit. A newborn Christian, born by the Spirit, that is, receives a Spirit of judgment far beyond anything the Pharisees could hope to possess. Their eyes were full of darkness, so Jesus fulfilled the Law and became a light to their path. When Pentecost finally came, they continued to blaspheme the Holy Spirit and His conviction of their unrighteousness. The only place for them was outer darkness. But the Spirit-filled man — or child — has wisdom beyond his years: the riches of the wisdom of Christ.

___________________________
See also Matthew’s Literary Artistry.
Art: Sermon on the Mount by Laura James.

“And the times of this ignorance God winked at;
but now commandeth all men every where to repent…” Acts 17:30

Reading the Bible without an understanding of Creational and Covenant structures is like watching test cricket without knowing the rules. It’s not unusual for even the best commentators to be distracted by something as inconsequential as a lost seagull. But every moment is part of a bigger picture. Isaiah can seem tedious at times, but it’s a long game. Let’s look at Isaiah 4:2-6, which relates the purging of exiled Israel to the jealous inspection in Numbers 5. In this case, she comes up trumps.

Sabbath – Genesis
In that day the Branch of the LORD
shall be beautiful and glorious;

…..Passover – Exodus – Exodus
…..And the fruit of the [Land] shall be excellent and appealing
…..For those of Israel who have escaped.

……….Firstfruits – Leviticus
……….And it shall come to pass that he who is left in Zion
……….and remains in Jerusalem will be called holy –
……….everyone who is recorded among the living in Jerusalem.

……………Pentecost – Numbers
……………When the Lord
………………..has washed away the filth
…………………….of the daughters of Zion,
…………………………and purged the blood of Jerusalem
…………………….from her midst,
………………..by the spirit of judgment
……………and by the spirit of burning,

……….Trumpets – Deuteronomy
……….then the LORD will create above every dwelling
……….place of Mount Zion, and above her assemblies,

…..Atonement (Day of Coverings) – Joshua
…..a cloud and smoke by day and the shining of a flaming fire by night.
…..For over all the glory there will be a covering.

Booths (Tabernacles) – Judges
And there will be a tabernacle for shade in the daytime from the heat,
for a place of refuge, and for a shelter from storm and rain.

Firstly, notice a few things about this passage that identification of the Feasts pattern brings out:

1. It begins with the Branch, grown from the stump of the old tree that was axed, and it ends with Israel as an entirely new tree, moving from Bridgegroom to Bride.
2. The Restoration era prefigured the New Covenant’s priesthood of all believers.
3. Notice that the names are recorded at firstfruits. In Revelation, that is when the firstfruits saints are sealed, or Numbered.
4. The jealous inspection occurs at the centre (remember what was observed regarding the Ten Words? [1])
5. Zion is mentioned three times, at Ascension (flesh), Testing (fire) and Maturity (smoke), all the action on the Altar. (These three points are combined as Ethics to make the process a five-point treaty). But here it is not Sinai but Zion; not death but resurrection.
6. The smoke by day and fire by night occur at the same point in the passage as the smoking firepot and blazing torch in Genesis 15: head and body. The Ark-Light holds up the water walls, opens the Veil, and allows the Incense-army through the Veil into the Heavenly Land. [2]

My focus is on the central point, Pentecost. The “Levitical” Covenant Head receives the Law as Firstfruits, and opens the Law to purify the Covenant body. Yes, this entire process of “Restoration” was repeated in the first century. When the bride is handed the cup, she becomes a blessing or a curse. She herself is “poured out” as rivers of offspring from the mountain of God at Tabernacles, beginning a new cycle. Being poured out enables Covenant succession.

The cross was Passover, which led to resurrection and Ascension. Christ was enthroned (Revelation 5) and Satan was expelled from his role in God’s courtroom as accuser, thrown down to the Land to make Judaism ripe for judgment. The blood went up and the Spirit came down. Testing. So the Holy Spirit was not the only spirit that fell like lightning. Saul received an evil spirit when David received the Holy Spirit. It was a jealous inspection. The succession was taken from the family of Saul and given to the family of David. In the first century, the kingdom, the future, was taken from the Herods and the Pharisees, the “kings of the earth” (rulers of the Land) and given to a new nation, a new bride.

After Pentecost, like Saul, Judaism became demonic, filled with a strong delusion, spiritual swine cast out and heading for a cliff. Pentecost flames were also prefigured in the battle of Midian. Gideon’s men exposed the flames and God sent the spirit of confusion amongst His enemies. They destroyed each other. In the first century, the Herods sleazed with Rome. Eventually, the Romans besieged Jerusalem and set it alight. Inside the city, even the Jewish zealots were slaying each other. Christians are not taught this history for some reason.

In some comments on Daniel 7, James Jordan speaks about the Word awakening the Monsters from the Id. The Jews were scattered as seed, and beastly empires arose. Plato read Moses and it changed the world. [3] The light comes and men are made conscious of their beastly nature. The gospel wakes the dead, but they are beasts, not men. Initially, it brings out the worst in us. We suddenly see ourselves as we are, and as Paul states, knowledge of the Law can actually cause us to sin more. The Spirit of God gives men the ability to judge, but there is still a choice. Men perceive the fragrance as life or death, and respond accordingly.

The Spirit enlightens (as the Lampstand, the governing lights on Day 4) and makes rulers, but enlightenment forces a decision, a “judgment” call. The choice itself brings either enlightenment or a greater love of darkness. King Saul turned into a monster, despite continual challenges. But when David was challenged by Nathan, the Law was a light to his path. The Lampstand showed Belshazzar the writing on the wall. [4]

Revelation shows the Day of Pentecost as coals from the Altar tipped out upon the Land. A coal was taken from the Altar to set ablaze enemy cities under the ban (devoted, or accursed). The coals purged the lips of the Apostles, as it did with Isaiah, and the fiery words they spoke put the entire city on the Altar. Pentecost put the Old Jerusalem under the ban. The Spirit was the fire that Jesus wished was kindled already (Luke 12:49).

“…thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head,
and the LORD shall reward thee.” Proverbs 25:22

Our culture has seen itself in the light of the Gospel, but current generations have decided to defiantly remain “content” with beastliness, to “fill up” our sin in the face of God’s revelation. The greatest despots in history are always men who take Covenant wisdom and use it for evil, apostate sons of the Church. [5]

“And for this reason God will send them strong delusion,
that they should believe the lie…” 2 Thess 2:11

When the Gospel comes, God’s Lampstand can no longer “overlook,” watch over, our sin. The stars can no longer wink or twinkle. They come crashing down as burning coals on our heads. Once exposed, our sin is not a wandering astray, but high handed. This is what blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is: the Word comes to you and you BACK-CHAT. Instead of being filled with the Seven Spirits of God, the watching “eyes” of the heavenly Lampstand, you are filled with seven devils, darkened eyes devoid of judgment. The sin of the rulers corrupted the entire first century generation, the Old Covenant “body.”

“The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is good,
your whole body will be full of light.” Matthew 6:22

This blasphemy is unforgivable because it is a rejection of mercy. It is inherently Cainite. It is high-handed, sin with full knowledge of the Law. In Leviticus, the only atonement for high-handed sin was the blood of the person who committed it, hence the so-called problem verses in Hebrews, written to first century Jews who saw the Day approaching:

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; but if it bears thorns and briars, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned. Hebrews 6:4-8

“For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins…” Hebrews 10:26

The sin of the Israelite who brazenly fornicated with a Moabite woman was a high-handed sin. Jesus returned in AD70, and like Phinehas, put a spear through the harlot and the beast, Herodian worship and the Roman state. As in Numbers, they were speared through the point of contact, the reproductive organs (“bellies” is a euphemism).

The Gospel is daylight. To Israel, it brought the end of the Old Testament shadows, and the false additions the Pharisees had burdened men with. [6] The age of angels and animals was over. Only by following this wake up call with obedience can we become true men. The gospel brings a sword to a sleeping but stagnant world and wakes the monsters. The Lord disturbs us from our moral slumber to purge us and then bring us true rest. It makes us better or worse. We choose enlightenment or delusion. We open like flowers or scuttle like cockroaches who call on the rocks and hills. Neutrality is impossible.

Interestingly, the early chapters of John follow a similar pattern to the early chapters of Daniel. Jesus’ healing on the Sabbath incited the unbelieving Jews. Like the captive Jews, Jesus ‘stirred the water’ and raised up a man — and monstrous Pharisees. [7]

We drink the strong drink, the goblet of fire, every week. It judges us to make us judges. It doesn’t make us perfect. God’s intent is to bring us wisdom. The Spirit opens our eyes and makes our sin apparent. Sometimes we feel we are going backwards. The continued application of the Law makes us exceedingly sinful in our own eyes. That can be discouraging. But is your sin becoming more detestable to you, more worthy of death (mortification) or more justifiable? That is the question. The mercy of God is a withholding of judgment, sins laid upon the Temple of Christ. It is an anointing for greater service or an opportunity to fill up our sin, a reason to draw nearer to God in humility or to pull away in pride. The cup is a sacramental dose of death, [8] shalom for the wise and strong delusion for the unwise, who drink it to the dregs.

This is why people continually exposed to the gospel without obedience to it become “immunised.” They have hardened their hearts, like Pharaoh, like the first century Jews. God eventually gives them up to the outer darkness they loved.

“…enlightenment wasn’t the diamond. Enlightenment was the choice.”

___________________________________
[1] See Warp and Weft.
[2] See Pass-over and Pass-through.
[3] See Did Plato Read Moses?
[4] See The Finger of God.
[5] See How to be Really Evil.
[6] See The End of Shadows.
[7] See Stirring the Waters.
[8] See Sacramental Doses of Death.

“The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look, a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’” (NKJV) Luke 7:34

Some good logical thoughts concerning alcohol from Andre Rook’s blog, and comments from me at the end:

Alcohol is synonymous with sin for many. Still for others it is considered an act of Christian love to perpetually abstain from alcohol, to provide a good Christian witness to others. My beef with the latter view (the former being easily dismissed on account of Scripture, and also condemned in the heresy of Manicheism) is that it creates a counterfeit virtue for the Christian.

The erroneous logic is as follows: 1. Alcohol itself is not inherently bad. 2. Perpetual abstinence from “stumbling” consumables is commanded from Scripture for reason of providing a good Christian witness. 3. Therefore, perpetual abstinence from alcohol is not bad; it is in fact a virtue.

My claim is that perpetual abstinence from alcohol is not good, and Scripture by no means condones this false conviction; it is in fact a counterfeit virtue.

Starting from the first premise: alcohol is not inherently bad. The positive of this negative statement is that alcohol is inherently good. Alcohol, being a creation of our Lord, is intrinsically good. Unlike the Manichees who understood evil to be tangible, Jesus states that “it is not what enters into the mouth that defiles the man, but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man” (Matt. 15:11). Evil is not tangible; evil is spiritual. This the Bible makes this absolutely clear (Gen. 1:11-12, Matt. 15:11, Romans 14:14, 1 Tim. 4:3).

The second premise is where things have gotten hairy in many modern churches; this is where my disagreement lies. In Kenneth L. Gentry Jr.’s book, “God Gave Wine,” he devotes an entire chapter to the exegesis of Romans 14. In that chapter, Paul is speaking to the Romans about the doctrine of Christian liberty. There were a few things that stuck out to me in this chapter. One such point is the term “stumbling block” that many Christians like to throw around. What does this cryptic saying mean? What constitutes as a “stumbling block?” Gentry defines the Greek word used here: proskomma. As it turns out, this Greek word does not simply mean something that causes someone to feel uncomfortable or irritated. The meaning is much stronger than that. Proskomma in the Greek refers to something that causes someone to fall into sin against God. Notice the word “cause.” If the effect of my cause is rebellion against the Lord, then I should not do what is in question. On how many occasions is moderate alcohol consumption a cause for sin? Let us answer the question with care, for our Savior Himself consumed alcohol in public, around the society’s lowest, most likely some of which may have been tempted with the sin of drunkenness.

The fact is that Christ did not cause anyone to sin. “Cause” implies intent. If it is my intent to cause someone to fall into sin, then I have sinned; I am responsible. We cannot cause someone to sin if it is not our intent to do so. If our intent is not to make others sin and simply enjoy God’s goodness and providence, then the responsibility literally does not lie with us for the sin they may commit as the result of our lawful activity. We cannot unknowingly cause someone to sin, according to the very nature and definition of the word proskomma.

So how, then, should we approach alcohol? In the same way we approach everything else. With sobriety of mind and spirit, and with praise for our Lord on our lips. He is good, and all that he has created is good. Alcohol abstention is, in fact, nothing more than a counterfeit virtue, a “virtue” that Christ Himself did not practice.

It is dangerous business indeed to try and be holier than Christ; that was the Pharisee’s fatal game. Let us give thanks to our Maker for the good things he has given to us to enjoy; let us praise Him by enjoying alcohol as He meant for it to be enjoyed. Cheers!

As C. S. Lewis has pointed out to us, Satan only has the materials that God created to tempt us with. Sin is an inappropriate use of good things—including other people. Everything has its place, and many things can be quite deadly if they are out of place. Internal bleeding or a punctured bowel are perfect examples. Greasy fried chicken is a blessing in moderation. Fried chicken grease from kids’ fingers on a new leather lounge is not. Farming, mining, fishing and foresting are good. All of these in the extreme are bad. In all cases, we are called to use the created order justly, in love, and with wisdom.

Just as bread is a symbol of priestly obedience (just follows the baking rules), wine is a symbol of wisdom. It is for someone who knows the rules and doesn’t need them enforced. It is self-government.

In the toolbox of Creation, alcohol is a powersaw. [1] To be used wisely, not to be toyed with. As a picture of the Covenant cup, it brings both blessings and curses depending upon obedience. We experience the “shalom” of the kingdom, ruling over our enemies as Solomon, or we stagger and fall prey to those same enemies, as the kings eventually did. Jesus drank wine as a king, and He also drank the cup of Covenant curses at the Father’s hand.

The view on alcohol at the church we attend is that it is inherently bad. I can’t argue with the tragedies it has caused in many lives and families, experienced firsthand by many friends and acquaintances. For sure, those who cannot handle it should abstain—this was the sin of Adam. [2] But is prohibition a wise decree—or is it a refusal to accept the role of government of the kingdom Christ has purchased and delegated to us? Even after his failure, the Lord called Adam to judge rightly.

Reaching a maturity in judgment is always messy. [3] So a prohibition of alcohol is the same as a ban on farming, mining, fishing and foresting. It is a refusal to grow up and enter into glory, and to deal with the risks this always involves. This was the sin of the Pharisees, who preferred the security of legal minutiae to the living, flexible, mature wisdom of one who was greater than Solomon. [4]

________________________________________
[1] See Boisterous with Wine, Deconstituted Ingredients, and Power Tools.
[2] See Touch Not, Taste Not, Handle Not.
[3] See A Priesthood of All Believers Can be Messy – 1.
[3] See the lengthy quote from James B. Jordan’s From Bread to Wine in May His Days Be Few.

.

Sabbath – Jesus defiantly heals a man on the Sabbath under the accusing eyes of the Pharisees. It is a conflict between the brittle light of the law and the perfect light of lawful love.

Passover – The Pharisees “go out” and plot with the Herodians to destroy Him. But Jesus withdraws with His disciples to the sea. 

Firstfruits – Jesus ascends a mountain and calls those He wants. He appoints the twelve to preach.

Pentecost – (Wilderness/Rulers) Jesus is accused of being the “Lord of the Flies.”

Trumpets – He calls them to Himself and speaks of the fall of a divided house or family, entering the strong man’s house and plundering his vessels.

Atonement – All sins will be forgiven, except blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, Whom the Pharisees had called “unclean” [1]

Tabernacles – Those who do the will of God are Jesus’ true family.

_____________________________________________
[1]  ie. they got their goats mixed up right up until AD70. For more on this see under subhead “The Word is ‘Yes’” in A White Stone – 3.

Pic: The Scapegoat by M.C. Escher.

or Tearing the Old Adam in Two

Jesus comes to the Pharisees. Who are the Pharisees? They are us. Pharisees are the evangelicals. They are the faithful in Israel.

The Sadducees were the liberals, the zealots were the political activists and the Essenes were the dropouts, and Jesus doesn’t fool with them at all.

The evangelicals, the Bible believers, the people who have faith in God, who are waiting for the Covenant to be fulfilled, were the Pharisees. But just as in evangelicalism, some of the Pharisees were not regenerate. They were proud and legalistic and mean. But some of the Pharisees were good, humble believers. So Jesus comes and preaches and His converts come out of the Pharisees. The people who oppose Him also come out of the Pharisees…

What happens with Jesus’ ministry is that He divides them. Those who refuse to come into the New Covenant harden up. This hardening and separating process continues until AD70 when God finally brings a full judgment upon the wicked among the Pharisees.

You will run into the same thing in evangelicalism today. You will come across Lutherans for whom the whole touchstone of their religion is the Formula of Concord. They don’t know anything about the Bible. All they want to do is argue Lutheran doctrine. You will run into Calvinists who don’t want to talk about the Bible. They just want to argue the Westminster Confession. Everything comes out of that. It was all settled then. You’ll run into Fundamentalists who don’t want to talk about the Bible. Everything is settled in Scofield’s notes…

This same tendency to have the traditions of man become far more important than the Word of God is what is being dealt with in the New Testament. Not that human traditions are wrong. Many of these things reflect wisdom from the past. But they need to be kept in the right place in our hierarchy of priorities.

James Jordan in Lecture 48 of his indispensable Revelation series, available here.