Basic Eschatological Frame

I see a basic "Pauline" eschatological "frame" lying upon the surface of 1 Cor 15; Eph 1; Col 1 which fits Rom 8 very nicely - in other words, these "eschatologically oriented" texts are remarkably consistent in their implicit (and apparent) assumptions and explicit claims.

Begin with 1 Cor 15.

Paul asserts (explicit claims on his part):

• Christ has risen from the dead as the "firstfruits" (organic beginning) of the resurrection of all who belong to him (15:20-23).

• His coming marks "the end" when all who are his will be raised with him (he has already been raised but our being raised is with him due to the organic connection = one harvest).

• When "the end" occurs, he delivers the kingdom over to his Father (15:24).

These two events, the resurrection of Jesus and his "return" set a frame of reference in which Paul must be understood.* Verses 24-28 fill in some details.

• He will deliver the kingdom over to the Father after destroying every rival rule, authority and power (24b).
• He must reign until all of this is accomplished - meaning the victory already won by King Jesus in the heavenly realms being implemented on earth (cf. Col 1-2).
• This refers to the present state of affairs in principle / invisibly (verse 27).
• This state of invisible affairs is coming into visibility - all things which have been subjected to him are being subjected to him (25 and 28 taken together).

Coming soon, comparison with Rom 8; Eph 1 and Col 1 to see if i can substantiate my claim above marked with an *

"Lighter" thoughts...that contraction!

While listening to all kinds of religious language for the past two years, I've noticed an abundant use of a particular contraction. Now, for southeners (in the USA) like myself, we're used to all kinds of crazy contractions. My personal favourite is "dog'll." As in "that dog'll hunt." [Which for the unintiated means - "the present suggestion seems viable."] Of course, southerners are notorious for our favourite contraction ("y'all") our second person plural (you all) lacking in standard English - which seriously hinders translating the New Testament into english!!!

The contraction i wish to discuss is "th'gospel." When people in my context use it, they almost never define or describe or unpack it. It is used, however, in constant connection with the benefits of salvation for individuals.

Usually (loosely - according to usage) it seems to mean, "the assurance of salvation" or the doctrine by which we give assurance - justification by faith.

I think most people who use the contraction mean "atonement PLUS justification" and sometimes mean - more fully - the whole ordo salutis (whole range of the application of salvation in its logical order).

In my context, however, what it almost never means is - the kingdom of God - in any sense. When that phrase is used, it generally refers to Churchy stuff in a vague sort of way - such as - "give to kingdom causes."

Why do we use words in this manner? Does it matter that our favourite word is gospel but that we rarely, if ever, use it the way Jesus did? Does it matter that when Jesus used the term Gospel he referred to the kingdom, and while we do NOT do that, when we talk about the kingdom - clearly Jesus' main topic - we are exceedingly vague?

40 Days on either side of covenant rebellion (2)

What happens after YHWH speaks to Moses for 40 days about the Tabernacle?

(See Exodus 32-34)

The highlights:

1. YHWH gives Moses the two tablets as he said he would (31:18).
2. YHWH sends Moses down to deal with his people - who are worshipping the golden calf - because Moses has been gone so long (32)!
3. Moses goes down and gets very angry.
4. Moses throws down the tablets of stone with the ten words.
5. Moses and those "on YHWH's side" destroy about 3,000 idolators.
6. YHWH tells Moses to take the people to the land he swore to the patriarchs accompanied by "an angel" to drive out their enemies but that He will not accompany them into the land due to their rebeliousness (33:1-6).
7. Moses begs YHWH not to send them without His presence (33:12-13).
8. YHWH says, "My presence will go with you" (33:14)
9. This leads Moses to ask for a fuller revelation of YHWH's character. He says to YHWH - "Show me your glory / weightiness." [Moses has seen YHWH's power and covenant (promise keeping) faithfulness. But is He weighty enough to handle a herd of rebels?]
10. YHWH responds by:

• agreeing to make himself known more fully (promising to come near),
• mentioning his name (YHWH),
• mentioning his grace and mercy,
• yet concealing himself (limiting what Moses can "see")
• hiding Moses in a cleft of the rock, covering him with his "hand"
• telling Moses to return with 2 tablets of stone,
• agreeing to re-write the words,
• concealing himself from others (limiting who can "see" him)
• descending on a cloud (coming near),
• proclaiming his name (YHWH),
• emphasizing his mercy, grace, patience, love and faithfulness.

AND FINALLY... Shiny, Blessed Prophet

Moses spends the next 40 Days (Exodus 34:28, cf. Deut. 9:9-18, 25) with YHWH on the mountain, neither eating nor drinking, and he wrote on the (new) tablets the words of the covenant, the ten words.

Thus, quite big-picture-like, we have a narrative structure.

• 40 Days on the Mountain w/ YHWH
• Covenant Rebellion - the true character of God's people revealed
• Covenant Restoration - the true character of the people's God revealed
• 40 Days on the Mountain w/ YHWH

Now compare this to Luke's two volume narration of Jesus' public ministry.

• 40 days tempted, eating nothing (Luke 4:1-2)
• Covenant Rebellion - Rejection of YHWH's Messiah
• Covenant Restoration - This King/Servant Fulfills the Covenant
• 40 Days teaching about the kingdom of God (Acts 1:3)

"40 Days" on either side of Covenant Rebellion

Exodus 24 narrates Moses approaching YHWH on Mount Sinai with Aaron, his two oldest sons and seventy of the elders of the children of Israel. Also Moses goes beyond this group to receive a copy of YHWH's ten words (with Joshua but leaving Aaron and Hur behind to be with the people). Moses waited six days, then on the seventh day God called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud which had been covering the Mountain. Toward the biginning of this episode, YHWH said to Moses, "Come up to me on the moutain and wait there, that I may give you the tablets of stone, with the law and the commandments, which I have written..." (Exo 24:12). This episode ends, several chapters later, "And he gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking to him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of stone, written with the finger of God" (Exo 31:18).

• Q1) What happens in between the invitation to receive the two tablets of stone and the actual giving of them?
• A1) The entire section pertains to YHWH's plan for the children of Israel to build him a sanctuary for him to dwell in thier midst (25-31; see 25:8).

• Q2) How long is Moses on the mountain?
• A2) 40 Days.*

What an amazing combination of significant material: the two talbets of stone with the ten words, the instructions for the Tabernacle, given on Mount Sinai in a 40 Day period.

Coming soon -
How does this relate to our purposes of thinking about Luke's two volumes?

*Interesting - many commentators point out that, while the plague narrative carries a de-creation theme, the Tabernacle includes a re-creation theme. See earlier post about the original "40 Days" of the flood, the presence of the Dove and creation language and how Luke narrates the baptism and temptation of Jesus as signaling him as God's Agent of new creation.

A helpful alternative to a gospel

reduced to (the assurance of) individual salvation?

Belief in God's good work in the world in Christ Jesus includes saving benefits for believers. But belief in my own personal salvation as the entirety of the gospel itself may not include God's world, my neighbors or God's will being done on earth as it is in heaven.

In Scripture the core of the good news is God's righteous, gracious and just reign (Isa 52:7) breaking into this world in the person of Jesus *Christ (Isa 9:2-7; 52:1-10; Matthew 4:12-17, 23-24; 6:9-10; 24:14; 28:18-20; Mark 1:14-15; Gal 1:6-10; Col 1:3-14; 1 Cor 15:1-28). This does not happen apart from the King's rejection, death (Isa 52:13-53:11) and resurrection (Isa 53:12). But the rejection, death and resurrection of the King does not remove his throne.

These events establish - what has always been the case for the God of Israel (Psalm 10:16; 45:6; 93:1-2; 97:1; 98:6; 99:1-2; 145:1-13) - the Son’s Reign as King in history / this world (Matt 28:18-20; Acts 2:14-36; Rom 1:1-5; 1 Cor 15:20-28 [the Son reigns as King NOW and in the future will turn his royal authority back over to his Father]; Col 1:13-14; cf. Psalm 2 with 2 Sam 7:8-14 and Psalm 110:1 with Psalm 8:6; Matt 22:41-45 (pars in Mark 12:35-37 & Luke 20:41-44); Acts 2:34-36; 1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:20-22; and Heb 1; 2; 8; 10:12-13; and cf. 2 Tim 2:8-10 with Acts 28:30-31).

This is why Jesus announced, embodied and clarified the kingdom of God (often by deconsructing old wine skins) and Paul announced the gospel of *Christ. Because for a Jew like Paul in the first century, "Christ" is the Greek way to say/write "Messiah" and "Messiah" meant - denotatively speaking - "the annointed" = the long anticipated King like David. What happens if we read through Paul's letters reading "Mesiah" or "King" when we see the English term "Christ" on loan from Greek? Why do we translate agape but not Christos?

Summary of preaching/reasoning content in Acts:

Acts 2:36 Jesus, the crucified, is Lord and Messiah (King)

Acts 5:42 (the crucified, resurrected, exalted) Jesus as the Messiah
(who grants repentance and forgiveness of sins)

8:4, 5, 12 the word, the Messiah, the kingdom of God

9:22 that Jesus was the Messiah

10:34-43 good news of peace through Jesus the Messiah
God commanded us to preach / testify that Jesus is the one chosen by God to judge,
everyone who believes in him will receive forgiveness of sins.

13:31-43 What God promised to the fathers He has fulfilled by raising Jesus,

through this man forgiveness of sins is announced and freedom from the law.

13:44-52 The word of the Lord (3 times)

14:15-17 good news – that you should turn from vain things to a living God

17:1-7 This Jesus is the Messiah, the true King (not Caesar)

17:30 God commands people everywhere to repent

18:5 The (identity of) Messiah (has been revealed) is Jesus

19:8 The kingdom of God

20:18-35 repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus the Messiah,

the gospel of the grace of God,
Proclaiming the kingdom,

the word of God’s grace

24:24-25 faith in Messiah Jesus,

righteousness, self-control,
the coming judgment

26:16-23 witness to Jesus as resurrected Messiah/Lord,
repentance and forgiveness of sins,

repentance and deeds keeping with repentance,

the necessity of the Messiah’s suffering,

his resurrection,

his preaching light to Jew & Gentile

28:23 the kingdom of God,

trying to convince Jews about Jesus from the Scriptures

28:31 the kingdom of God and the Lord Jesus the Messiah

40 Days

The reference to "40 days" in Luke 4 and Acts 1 is most interesting. Why do periods of 40 days bracket Jesus' public ministry? What is the significance of 40 days in the biblical narrative / canon?

The first reference to 40 days, of course, is the flood story. Great wickedness (Gen 6:5) leads to a horrible destruction. This destruction comes through 40 days and 40 nights of flooding (7:4, 12, 17). This flooding destroys all living things (7:21-23); only Noah and those with him were left alive.

Two other details of the flood story fit significantly with

how Luke narrates Jesus' preparation for

his ministry of

kingdom

announcement / embodiment / inauguration.

First, after the flood, how does Noah know it is safe to re-enter God's good creation? Gen 8:6-8 "at the end of forty days Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made and sent forth a raven... then he sent a dove..." While the raven is not mentioned a second time, Gen 8:8-12 mentions the activity of the dove 5 times. The activity of the dove lets Noah know when it is safe to re-enter God's world.

Second, what does God say to Noah once he re-enters God's post-flood world? Gen 8:16-17 and 9:1,7 report the Creator treating Noah like a new Adam. He tells him how to bring about the blessing of all living creatures that they "may be fruitful and multiply" (8:16-17) and blesses Noah repeating the words he first spoke to Adam and Eve (9:1 repeats 1:28).

How significant, then, is it when we find a Dove representing the Spirit (Luke 3:21-22, who was also active at the first Creation, Gen 1:2) and a reference to the first Adam (Luke 3:38) in the two elements leading into Jesus' temptation for 40 days in the wilderness?

With

• the Dove,
• the genealogical connection with the first Adam and
• the reference to 40 days

is Luke portraying Jesus as the Agent of God's new creation?

*In a post soon to come I will ponder the significance of 40 days on either side of Jesus' prophetic / Messianic career in Luke's two volume narrative.

I will soon post a few thoughts about the preaching recorded in Luke's (second volume) Acts. For a primer, I've included what many see as Luke's narrative frame.

The Narrator’s Frame:

Acts 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 To them he presented himself alive after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

Acts 28:17 After three days he called together the local leaders of the Jews, and when they had gathered, he said to them, "Brothers, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans…22 But we desire to hear from you what your views are, for with regard to this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against." 23 When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.

24 And some were convinced by what he said, but others disbelieved. 25 And disagreeing among themselves, they departed after Paul had made one statement: "The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet:
26 "'Go to this people, and say,

You will indeed hear but never understand,

and you will indeed see but never perceive.

27 For this people's heart has grown dull,

and with their ears they can barely hear,

and their eyes they have closed;

lest they should see with their eyes

and hear with their earsand understand with their heart

and turn, and I would heal them.'

28 Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen."
30 He lived there two whole years at his own expense, and welcomed all who came to him, 31 proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance.

What is the significance of this frame? According to Luke, is Paul's gospel other than the one Jesus proclaimed (as recorded in the Synoptics)?

Long Blogging holiday!

After a long blogging holiday - i will begin to post thoughts about Jesus' use of the noun euangelion and its verbal forms... and related things - such as reflections on the preaching in Luke's 2nd volume, Acts.

Filling out the picture - The New Testament as the Presentation of the Gospel and its Implications for His people / the Nations / His Creation:

Massive Simplification run amuck...on over drive... (supply your favorite cliche) ___________

*Is the gospel a soteriological message?

Or is it a declaration which carries soteriological implications?

Where to read / read about:

Implications

Paul's letters to communities of previous gospel reception

(new-creation, soteriology, new humanity, reconciliation)

not that the narrative Gospels are void of this,

but for the sake of simplification)

__ __ __

Christology

Paul's sermon summaries & effects recorded in Acts

The Crucified & Resurrected Jesus is Messiah /

Lord of every nation / Exalted above every power

(Acts 9:19-22; 13:16-41; 17:1-7, 22-31; 18:5;19:8-10;

20:17-35; 24:24-25; 26:12-23; 28:23, 29-31;

This is a case-in-point, NOT intended to represent

anything remotely exhaustive.)

__ __ __ __ __ __

Narrative

The Canonical Gospels

The story about how Jesus

brings the story of Israel

to its long anticipated climax

(The critical moment of the Drama)

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

Meta-Narrative

Jewish Scriptures

The drama of redemption

(Luke 24:18-47; Acts 26:22-23)

Presented and Interpreted in the Whole Canon

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

*Inspired by Michael Bird's follow up questions to previous questions...

Those responsible for previous lame versions of this post have recently been sacked.

Thinking about the gospel:

In some North American evangelical contexts - soteriology - theology of salvation, or the implications that follow for individuals who believe in Jesus (concerning their personal salvation) - makes up 99.9% of what is recognized as "gospel preaching"... such as:

explaining the gospel = explaining the doctrine of justification.

But if justification is a primary implicate of the gospel - who Jesus is and what he has done - does this kind of "gospel preaching" give the false impression that one may have the personal, individual results of the gospel apart from Jesus?

Do I need to believe certain things about Jesus? Certainly. Is it necessary to entrust myself to him? Just as certainly!

So who is he? This raises again the question of Christology which is a question the Bible answers primarily with a narrative (sequesnce of narratives / redemptive drama).

My persoanl tradition stresses that by faith one has actual union with Jesus Christ and that in this union with him in his death and resurrection all the benefits of redemption are ours in him

I die to sin, guilt and death itself in him and am raised to life, justification and a living hope in him. His death accomplishes my forgiveness, pardon, reconciliation with God, etc. His vindication - for he was the obedient Son - results in my vindication, qualifies me to share in his inheritance. His death was the death I deserve. His vindication is the vindication that otherwise would escape me.

I agree with this stress on the necessity of our union with Christ. Especially if we remember that "Christ" means Messiah and that the Messiah of Israel has been exalted as the Lord of the nations and above every power. That is, the Christ with whom we have union - in whom we have salvation - is also our Lord, our Head, our King.

He is engaged as God's focal point of the reconciliation of all things. [In him - the agent through whom God made all things - all things are being reconciled to God their Creator.] Do I have union with him only in regards to benefits for me? Or am I to be engaged in the reconciliation of all things?

We can not choose which Christ to follow, trust, hear or obey.