In Part 1 of this four-part series, I outlined two problems that come from delaying coming of Christ. First, if Christ promised a near return and he did not return soon, then it gives skeptics the ability to question the veracity of the Bible. Second, if Christ’s promise of a near return are extended to an event in the distant future, then they are joined to a number of events that must happen before he can return. And when that happens, the ostensible imminence is actually delayed by world events, such that the imminent return is not as imminent as some would conceive.

In response, I will begin to outline the doctrine of the Lord’s imminent return, based upon a reading of the New Testament that understands Christ’s “coming” in the near future as an event that took place in the first century. To be clear, I am not arguing that Christ’s Second Coming came in the first century. Instead, I am arguing that Christ came in judgment upon Jerusalem, as he always promised.

In this way, Christ’s words were always true. Yet, many are the interpreters who misunderstood his words and thus missed how his first century prophesies were fulfilled, and how this fulfillment served as a witness to the world that judgment will eventually come upon all nations, so therefore, repent and believe the gospel.

In this reading of the New Testament eschatology, I am affirming Christ’s Second Coming, often referred to as his Parousia, at the end of time. But I am also affirming the many ways the risen and exalted Christ has come in judgment (cf. Rev. 2:5, 16, 25; 3:20)—both in the first century and every century since. Still, to prove that point, we need to evaluate what Jesus and his Apostles said about his parousia or “coming.” And so in what follows, I want to look at the word parousia to show why its common use as a technical term for Christ’s final coming (Parousia) at the end of the age does not match its biblical use (parousia).

To put it simply, I will show in what follows why Parousia the theological term and parousia the biblical word are not exactly the same.

Parousia in Matthew 24
 
The word parousia is first used in Matthew 24:3, when the disciples ask Jesus a series of three questions: “Tell us, ^[1] when will these things happen? And ^[2] what is the sign of your coming and ^[3] of the end of the age?” As it is used by these disciples they ask two questions related to Christ’s “coming”—one relates to the sign of his coming and the other relates to the coming of the end of the age.

Notably, Matthew 24 is the only place in the Gospels we find this word—once in the question (v. 3) and three times in Jesus’s answer (vv. 27, 37, 39). First, he describes his coming like “lightning” that “comes from the east and flashes as far as the west.” Next, he compares his coming to the “days of Noah” (Matt. 24:37). And finally, he describes the manner of his coming as the flood. Speaking of those in Noah’s day, “They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. This is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be” (Matt. 24:39).

Remarkably, the other Gospels do not employ parousia, and in the other two places where the Olivet Discourse is found (Mark 13 and Luke 21), Peter, James, John, and Andrew (listed in Mark’s Gospel) do not ask about Jesus’s coming. Instead, they simply ask “when will these things be.” In context, the “these things” relates to the destruction of the temple.

From this use in the Gospels, it seems that parousia is neither a common word (as it is only used four times), nor a technical one. A “technical” term is one that has a fixed meaning wherever it is used. For instance, when Paul uses the word mysterion (“mystery”), it has a fixed meaning: something hidden, now revealed. With respect to marriage, the gospel, or the Gentiles, the mystery was previously hidden under the old covenant, but now in Christ it has been revealed.

In common parlance, Parousia is used as a technical term for Christ’s Second Coming. This is how the term is used in many works of theology, and accordingly many read that theological meaning back on to the text of Scripture. Yet, this technical usage does not match the New Testament. And so, as we think about the word parousia and the way it is used in the New Testament, we should not demand more of the word than Scripture gives. Rather, we can and should make distinctions between a theological use and a biblical use of the word.

By analogy, this is similar to the word “covenant.” Theologically, many Christians speak about the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, even the covenant of redemption. Yet, these three theological terms are not found in Scripture. Instead, the Bible speaks of a covenant with Abraham or a new covenant. Thus, in speaking about covenant theology, one must distinguish between two domains of discourse (i.e., two ways of speaking)—one doctrinal, the other biblical. Both are needed and both are good, but we can and should make distinctions. That is what is needed here, too.

Parousia and parousia: Distinguishing Two Uses of the Word
 
To distinguish Parousia (the theological idea) from parousia (the biblical word) we would need to consider all the verses where the term is found in Matthew, Paul, Peter, James, and John. But for now, let me offer a brief reflection on the word itself from Brian Orr. In his book on The Olivet Discourse, here is what he writes on pages 31–33.


Orr’s comments are technical, but they are critical for understanding the difference between Parousia and parousia. He reminds us that the way Christians speak of Christ’s Parousia is often more theological-heavy than anything we find in Scripture. In fact, when we do a word study of the term, we find that the word is often used to speak of Paul, Titus, and other Christian workers (1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil. 1:26; 2:12). And in one instance it is even used of the man of lawlessness (2 Thess. 2:9). In other words, parousia does not refer to Christ’s Second Coming, except when context dictates (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:23).

Therefore, as we seek to rightly understand the Bible and the doctrine of last things, we should be careful to read Scripture on its own terms. And for many of us, that means re-orienting the way we read the word parousia, so that we can see what the Apostles are saying, without superimposing our eschatology on the New Testament. Certainly, the Apostles affirm the final return of Christ and his judgment of every living thing.
     
   ^{[1] France, Matthew, 785.
   [2] TDNT, 5:859.
   [3] TDNT, 5:865. In the technical eschatological sense TDNT notes, Parousia only occurs in the Post Apostolic Fathers (“at Dg., 7, 6 and Herm. S. 5, 5,3, cf. also Act. Thom. 28. In Ign. Phld., 9, 2 there is a ref. to the early coming of Jesus”), 5:870.
   [4] N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341. For other types of coming as in “arrival” see 1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12.
   [5] Carson, Matthew, 1324.
   [6] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 85.
   [7] Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341n95.
   [8] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 87.
   [9] BDAG, 780–81.
   [10] Both terms erchomai (cf. 1 Cor 4:5; 11:26; 2 Thess 1:10) and parousia (cf. 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess 4:15) can apply to the Second Coming.
   [11] France, Matthew, 790.
   [12] Ibid.}

In August, the elders will preach from the Epistle of James during our Sunday worship services. James is a short epistle, and yet it has a higher percentage of imperatives (biblical commands) than any other book of the Bible. So, if you crave a practical sermon series, James might be a book for you. At the same time, if you struggle with not doing what you know you should as a follower of Christ, James is a book for you, too. How can it be both a call to action and a comfort when we fail? Context helps us see this reality.

As a brief background, James was written to believing Jews who were scattered when persecution of the early church intensified. (Read Acts 11:19–30 for historical context.) James, although a half-brother of Christ and a leader in the church in Jerusalem, in humility refers to himself as a servant of Christ. The other James mentioned throughout the gospels was James, the son of Zebedee and brother of John. This James was put to death by Herod Agrippa around 44 A.D. (Acts 12:2) as part of the persecution that caused Jewish believers to be scattered throughout Palestine and Syria.

For the book of James, then, it is more than a topical book with a series of disconnected commands; James is deeply theological. The overarching theme that binds James together is a consistent, undivided commitment to God in Christ. This concept of spiritual wholeness functions as the lens through which each chapter’s practical instructions gain coherence. As we will see, all the practical instruction is aimed towards an undivided heart in the life of the believer.

James is writing to believers facing persecution to encourage them to persevere in their faith because of the finished work of Christ. The book is not a series of commands calling Christians to “do more better.” Rather, it is a call to repentance and to look to Jesus’s perfect life and atoning death for his justification and to resolve, by the power of the Spirit, to walk in obedience.

An undivided heart results in spiritual integrity. This unity, the lack of being double-minded, emerges as the ultimate outcome of perseverance in trials, believers who are “mature and complete, not lacking anything.” The Greek word teleios (often translated “perfect”) encompasses entirety, completeness, and maturity, with these latter concepts understood fundamentally as completeness. Rather than sinless perfection, the complete person makes progress in all areas without exception.

From this foundation, James develops his practical exhortations. Living an undivided life means living with integrity, which means ensuring your desires, words, and actions align with an uncompromising dedication to God. Any departure from this consistency reveals a lack of the faith necessary to live with wholehearted devotion to God.

This unifying thread helps us see how each instruction addresses a different arena where believers either fragment their allegiance or integrate it. James wants you to become a well-rounded, complete Christian who lacks nothing, not perfect in the sense of sinlessness, but unified in the sense of moving toward maturity across all dimensions of life. In the first chapter, James introduces the areas of life that must be undivided. In the subsequent chapters, he develops further these themes that together point to the theological import of the book. Christians must be complete or mature in living an undivided life of total surrender to our Lord Jesus Christ.

As you read James and sit under the preaching of this epistle, lets pray that God will give our church a renewed sense of both the depth of our own sinfulness and the sufficiency of Jesus to cover our sin. May the Spirit of God take the biblical text and impress it upon our hearts, conforming us in greater measure to the image of Christ while also causing us to groan for the Lord’s return and the final restoration of all things.

For His glory and your joy,

Pastor Rod

Warfare: It is a gruesome thing. Movies like Saving Private Ryan and Hacksaw Ridge try to depict the horrors of war, but they can only do it so much justice. Many are the memoirs of military generals and commanders who have also written their own tales—long military expeditions, with no food, little sleep, and many thoughts of home. And of course, there are many in our church, for whom war is far more than a cinematic experience.

When we think of the Christian life in Scripture, it is also likened to warfare. From the moment of conversion until the day our Lord takes us home, we are constantly in a grueling fight with the world, the flesh, and the devil. And while spiritual warfare is usually highlighted in individual terms and in places outside the gathered church, when we gather with the saints to worship God we are going to war. For as we will see,  Sunday worship is a battleground.

Worship as Warfare in Church History
The Church Fathers were certainly aware of this, and we can see this in their hymns. In fact, early Christian hymns were often used for warfare—of the doctrinal variety! In the fourth and fifth centuries, orthodox churches only used biblical psalms for in their corporate worship.. But, as the church came into conflict with those who followed Arius and his denial of the Son’s eternal nature, the church redeemed hymns for their own use as they went to war (both spiritually and physically).

Notably, Arius’s disciples were also singers and would often sing in the public square at night, promoting the doctrine that Christ was a created being. In response, John Chrysostom of Constantinople (c. 347–407) helped to lead nightly processions of Christians who sang hymns as a counterforce to correct this. Hilary of Poitiers (c. 310–367) was known as “The Hammer of the Arians” for his nightly polemical hymn-singing, and Ambrose of Milan (340–397) composed short marching hymns for his disciples to stay awake during their watches against Arian forces.^[1]
 
 Yet, this is not the only era where we see this type of warfare. In the Reformation, Martin Luther’s “A Mighty Fortress is Our God” became a favorite. And during the years of Protestant and Catholic conflict, what is known as the Thirty Years War, German hymnody exploded, producing over 25,000 hymns.^[2] Certainly, in dark times throughout church history, spiritual warfare has brought about some of the most God-glorifying hymns for corporate worship.

Worship as Warfare in the Old Testament
Moving from church history to the biblical text, we find worship as warfare in Scripture, too.

From the beginning, there has been a spiritual warfare. As soon as Satan deceived Eve and invited Adam to rebel, Satan has been at work to destroy the image of God. Failing to serve the Lord and protect the garden, God’s first royal priest defiled himself and all humanity with him, so that he could not remain in God’s presence—not without a blood sacrifice. Accordingly, the spiritual warfare between the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman would center on the service of the priest.

In ways that develop the original man, priests took on the duty to keep and to guard God’s temple with swords and spears. We see this most clearly in Exodus 32 and Numbers 25. Exodus 32 recounts the Golden Calf incident, where Aaron concedes to the demands of the rebellious Israelites in making a golden calf to worship, and in doing so the rest of the camp breaks loose into false worship and immorality. As Moses sees this, he calls those who are on the Lord’s side to join him. And it is the Levites who gather around him to strike down the false worshippers. Moses then commands them, “Thus says the Lord God of Israel, ‘Put your sword on your side, each of you, and go to and fro from the gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbor’” (v. 27).

In Numbers 25, as Balaam uses the daughters of Moab to seduce the Israelites to come and sacrifice and bow down to idols, and to commune with pagan feasts, one Israelite brings a daughter of Moab with him towards the camp in the sight of Moses and the congregation (Num. 25:6), implying this is towards the Tabernacle. In the midst of this, one zealous priest  [DS3] rises up and strikes through the Moabite woman and the Israelite with a spear. God’s wrath is abated, and worship could continue as prescribed, as Phinehas, through this act of both worship and warfare, brings about a covenant of peace (the Levitical Covenant) and atones for Israel’s iniquity.

Changing Keys in the Old Testament: From Sword to Song
During the wilderness days of the tabernacle, the priests bore the sword, but they also carried the trumpets—a precursor of things to come. We get a hint of this as early as Numbers 10, where the sons of Aaron (v. 8) blow the trumpets to assemble the people, and even prepare them for war. As verses 9–10 read,


Here we see that as the Israelites brought their sacrifices, the Levites were to rejoice with praise, using trumpets to assist them in this sacrifice of praise. This points forward to what David and Solomon will bring forth in the Temple.

In one man, David embodied warfare and worship. For instance, he is famous for killing the giant Goliath in 1 Samuel 17, but he is also called “the sweet psalmist of Israel” (2 Sam. 23:1). In this way, we see how David was a great warrior king and one who gave us 73 psalms that can be used for every season, including times of war.

Always attendant to God’s dwelling place (Psalm 132), David would establish Levites within the temple of God to sing these war songs as they gathered on Mt. Zion. It is here where they trade in their swords for psalms. Specifically, 1 Chronicles 22–26 shows how David prepares the materials and workers to help Solomon build the temple of the Lord, andhe leaves this charge with the leaders of Israel,


Through God’s anointed king, peace has come to the land of Israel. And that means the people of Israel can worship in peace and sing! Yet, they can only do that because the Levites are established in the temple service. First Chronicles 23:30–32 says,


In this time of peace, instruments will even multiply as sons of Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun prophesy with lyres, harps, and cymbals. Warfare leads to peace, which leads to a more fruitful praise.

Additionally, the story of Jehosophat in 2 Chronicles 20 gives another picture of how Israel’s weapons of warfare have moved from sword to song. In the midst of being surrounded by enemies from the Moabites, Ammonites, and the Meunites, King Jehosophat humbles himself before the Lord and prays for deliverance. Amazingly, the Spirit of the Lord comes upon Jahaziel, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, and he prophesies for the people to stand firm, for the Lord will deliver them.

In response, the King, Levites, and whole city of Jerusalem worship and praise the Lord. As they rise early the next day, they praise the Lord singing a familiar refrain, “Give thanks to the Lord, for his steadfast love endures forever.” At the same time, as all of Jerusalem is singing to the Lord in glorious harmony, the Lord sets dissonance and discord among all the men of Ammon, Moab, and Mount Seir, as they turn against one another and destroy themselves. Incredibly, the Lord has delivered his people through song!

The Israelites are then able to plunder the many dead armies, and gain they return to worship, As 2 Chronicles 20:28 says,  “They came to Jerusalem with harps and lyres and trumpets, to the house of the Lord.” In all, warfare through song leads to peace and rejoicing.

Worship as Warfare in the New Testament
Finally, as we turn to the New Testament, Jesus Christ is a worshiping warrior like his father David. Only he fights foes of even greater strength. For instance, our greatest warrior-priest went to war with Satan and his armies as he came in his earthly life declaring the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. Similarly, during his ministry demons surrendered and bowed before him as he took dominion and inaugurated the new creation.

In these ways, Jesus shows us he is the greater David who leads his people into spiritual battle. And of course, this battle centers on his death and resurrection. Yet, one facet of his trek to Golgotha that can easily be missed is his singing. For as Jesus prepared to be arrested en route to the cross, he was singing a hymn^[3] (Matt. 26:30). Likewise, as he hung on the cross, he quotes Psalm 22.
 
Instead of using brute force to win the victory, Jesus lives out, in perfect obedience to his Father, the song of the suffering servant of Isaiah. As Isaiah 53 “sings,” Jesus was pierced instead for our transgressions, making the perfect covenant of peace that even Phinehas and the Covenant of Levi could never accomplish. And it is through this great sacrifice and resurrection that the seed warfare has been won. Though Satan thought he had triumphed over God’s Messiah, Jesus’s death ironically conquers over sin, death, and Satan himself. Gloriously, Jesus lived out the war song of Psalm 68 in his ascension, and he continues to live out that song, as he gives the gifts of his people throughout history (Eph. 4:7–11).

In Christ, we too have war songs to sing. Now as we gather, we come to proclaim the Gospel, “so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and the authorities in heavenly places” (Eph. 3:10). Peter calls us royal priests in his letter (1 Pet. 2:9–10), and if that is true, we too have the duty to use the weapons of our warfare to combat the enemies of God. By means of offering spiritual sacrifice of praise (Heb. 13:15), we bring the incense of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:18–20) before the altar of our God (Mal. 1:11). In this way, we both guard the flock and build up God’s holy temple, the Church, through the singing of the saints.

Three Applications
So, what does this mean for us as we gather? Well, for one thing: First, realize there are spiritual powers at play as we gather. We have our rock and fortress in God, as Psalm 144 says, because he meets us in a special way through the gathering. But, this does not mean we put our guard down. We are not to take on a passive consumer mentality as we come to worship on the Lord’s Day. Rather, because we know there are spiritual powers at play, we are to be on the offensive. Like the priests and Levites, David and Jehoshaphat, and Jesus too, we are to take ownership in defending God’s honor and proclaiming his holy name through song.

Second, don’t discount the weapons of our warfare. Music has the power to inform, instruct, exhort, remind, and provide a means of comfort or confession. We are not only teaching ourselves as we sing to one another, but we are also instructing the nations and authorities about what we believe about Christ. And further, as we declare the gospel, we are actively guarding, defending, and building up the temple of God through song.

Most importantly, because the gospel is being declared through song, it is one means by which God saves! When the gospel is declared, even in song, God uses that to draw people to himself and plunder the dominion of darkness, bringing people from death to life. We need to remember there is great power in the church’s song. As a hymn we often sing says, “Shout on, pray on, we’re gaining ground– glory hallelujah! The dead’s alive and the lost is found– glory hallelujah!”^[4]

Third, this active participation should begin the night before we gather for worship. As we pray and plan for Sunay, we should come prepared, ready for battle. Prepare your heart the night before and train for war, so that as we use the weapons of our warfare God will subdue our enemies under our feet.[5] Read the scriptures and the confessions that we will hear on Sunday. Remember: a link to Sunday’s bulletin is always attached to the Friday email.

Likewise, listen to the battle songs beforehand, so that as you gather you can proclaim a shout of victory over spiritual and earthly forces. Truly, when we gather we do so as those who can and should have a spirit of confidence, victory, and hope, knowing that Christ has won the victory. And though battles remain in this Christian life, we can remember, we do not have to fight these battles alone. We have our priesthood of the believers and Great High Priest with us in the fight. And so, let us sing with loud shouts, because our worship is warfare.

For His glory and your joy in Christ,

Matt Wood
 
   <sup>[1] Harry Eskew and Hugh T. McElrath, Sing With Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Hymnody. (Nashville: TN, Church Street Press) 85-86.

   [2] Ibid. 101.

   [3] Some theologians say in Matt. 26:30 that psalm is a better translation, and that this was most likely a Hallel Psalm, probably Psalm 118. See Sing a New Song: Recovering Psalm Singing for the Twenty-First Century, eds. Joel R. Beeke and Anthony T. Salvaggio (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books). 2010. 84.

   [4] Samuel Medley, “I Know That My Redeemer Lives–Glory Hallelujah” Trinity Hymnal. (Suwanee, GA: Great Commission Publications) 1990. 281.

   [5] See The Baptist Catechism, “Q.30: How does Christ execute the office of a king? A: Christ executes the office of a king, subduing us to Himself, in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and conquering all His and our enemies.” We don’t conquer our enemies, it is through the means of our singing and spiritual sacrifices that Christ conquers our enemies for us.</sup>
   

Can Christ return tomorrow? What about next week? Can he return at any time, or must certain things happen first? And what are those things? And how do we know they are still future and not in the past?

These questions are just a few of the ones I want to address here and in the next few weeks. For if the imminent return of Christ is a precious doctrine to you (as it should be), then ironically, some of the most popular views on eschatology, especially those related to Dispensationalism, actually undermine the doctrine of Christ’s imminence, even as they heighten speculation about what must happen before his return.

Pursuing this doctrine—the imminent return of Christ—I will consider the places in the New Testament that speak of Christ’s nearness, and I will attempt to show you that the best way to read those texts is not as prophecies pointing to events thousands of years into the future. Instead, the best way to consider the language of imminence in the Gospels, the Epistles, and Revelation is to see the promises of Christ “coming” (parousia) as being fulfilled in 70 AD.

Such an early fulfillment does not deny the future coming of Christ. Rather, it clears the way for Christ to come at any time. To say it differently, if I am reading the New Testament correctly, then it supports his imminent return. But it supports this doctrine in ways that might be different than you have heard, especially, if you have heard them explained with a Dispensational timeline.

So, in what follows let offer one argument in four parts.

1. I will outline two problems that come from delaying coming of Christ.
2. I will explain why the word parousia (coming / presence) should not be understood as a technical term for the Second Coming, but should be defined as simply the presence or coming arrival of the Lord.
3. I will review New Testament the passages that speak of Christ’s nearness.
4. I will tie these strands together to offer a view of Christ’s imminent return that is based upon a partial preterist reading of the New Testament.

Two Problems with Delaying Christ’s Parousia

In The Last Days According to Jesus (1998), R. C. Sproul begins his book by discussing Betrand Russell’s rejection of the Christian faith. Russell (1872-1970) was an atheistic philosopher, who rejected the God of the Bible. Yet, as Sproul points out, Russell took very seriously the claims of Christ and his coming kingdom. Sprouls observes,


On this basis, Russell dismissed Christ. And he is not alone. Albert Schweitzer, Rudolph Bultmann and “a multitude of highly learned specialists in the field of biblical studies” (14) have also looked at the way Jesus spoke about his return and decided since he did not make good on his promises that he is not worth believing. Sproul himself, who was one of the greatest defenders of the Bible’s inerrancy, was trained in a seminary where “much of the criticism leveled against the trustworthiness of Scripture was linked to questions regarding biblical eschatology” (15).

Historically, Dispensationalism flourished in the early twentieth century because it believed the Bible, defended its divine inspiration and authority, and maintained a strong belief in the supernatural—including the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and his future return. And significantly, Dispensationalists argued for the imminent return of Christ and defined his imminent return in terms related to the Rapture.

Still, the imminent return of Christ in the rapture is not the same thing as his final return, when "Christ judges the living and the dead", as the Apostles' Creed frames it. Instead, the Dispensational doctrine of the imminent return of Christ is keyed to the first of many events (e.g., the rapture, the tribulation, the millennium, etc.) that lead up the eternal state. There, Christ separates the sheep and the goats and makes all things new in the new heaven and new earth. Thus, in response to the critics who denied the Bible and other Christians who understood the church age to be the millennium, Dispensationalists rightly defended the veracity of the Bible and they continued to hold to a doctrine of the Lord’s imminent return. Yet, in making the case of Christ’s imminence to be anything beyond the first century, they are forced to break one of their cardinal virtues—namely, the literal interpretation of Scripture.

Reading With the Grain of Scripture

As John Walvoord explains in his book, Millennial Kingdom, the "literal method" of interpretation is the standard for all Dispensationalists.^[1] Yet, as the critical scholars point out, a literal reading of Christ’s prophecies about a near return is difficult to believe. For how can Christ say that he is coming soon (Rev. 22:20) or in this generation (Matt. 24:31), when in fact the first century came to an end, and Jesus had not returned visibly, bodily, or physically? Even more, now that it has been two millennia since he ascended to heaven, how can we read Jesus’s words as being factual?

Of course, the skeptic’s solution to the eschatological statements of Jesus is to deny the claims entirely and to charge the Bible (and Jesus!) with errors. Christ said he would come soon; he didn’t; and so he must have been wrong. For the Christian, this rejection of God’s Word is deadly to the faith. And it is not necessary, either. For as we will see, dismissal of Jesus’s claims is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of what he said, combined with an attempt to make Jesus’s plain speech mean something else.

For in fact, one of the more common ways to resolve the eschatological speech of Jesus is to cast Jesus’s words into the far future. For example, John Walvoord (1910–2002), a well-known scholar at Dallas Theological Seminary, offered three age-old and/or futuristic explanations for explaining Matthew 24:34 (“This generation shall not pass, until all these things be fulfilled”).

First, he suggests that  “this generation” might mean the race of the Jews; or, second, it might mean “this age,” where the word “generation” stands in for a long period of time. In both instances, the generation of the Jews or the long period of this age will continue until the second coming. Then third, he offers his own view, wherein he concludes that the generation in view “is not the generation to whom Christ is speaking, but the generation to whom the signs will become evident.”

Thus, by means of forwarding Jesus’s words from the days of his first advent to the days of his second, Walvoord solves (so he thinks) the riddle of Jesus' imminent promise. By Walvoord’s light, Jesus did not claim to come in his own generation—meaning something in the first century. Accordingly, the skeptics have no place to reject this claim or anything else.

This is but one example of the ways that Jesus’s imminent language has been protected from skeptics who demand a more natural reading. But is this the best way to interpret what Jesus is saying? Is Jesus really describing events thousands of years in the future, when his own death was days away? To answer that question, we need to look more carefully at the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21). And then we also need to consider how Jesus’s own interpretation of the Prophets is fulfilled in his own day, before taking Jesus words as pointing far into the future.

Why (Partial) Preterism Is Better Than Futurism

Now, to return to R. C. Sproul: He does not follow the futurist reading of the Olivet Discourse or any other part of the New Testament. Instead, he argues for a preterist reading. To be more specific, he calls for a “moderate preterist” reading, which does not deny the fact the “some crucial prophecies have not yet been fulfilled” (24).^[2] Still, as I will show in Parts 2 and 3, the most natural (and even literal) way to read Jesus’s words about his imminent “coming” are found by means of seeing the ways Jesus fulfilled Old Testament promises to bring judgment upon Jerusalem—a reality that came in 70 AD.

This is why the approach that Sproul makes, and that I will make too, is called (partial or moderate) preterism. Instead of reading Jesus’s words as direct prophecies to some later period of time, whereby his prophecies could not be tested by those who stood to hear him (cf. Deut. 13:1–18), a preterist view of Jesus’s words looks to the first century to see an impending judgment on Jerusalem in his own generation. In the days ahead, I will show from Scripture why this is a faithful reading.

But for now, it should be evident that if a preterist reading holds up, it resolves the problem of the skeptics and as I will show, it also provides a better foundation for the imminent return of Christ. For ironically, in all the ways that Dispensationalists call for the imminent return of Christ, it is only the imminent rapture that they can look. On their reading of the New Testament, there remains many events between today and the last day. And thus, while they can speak extensively about the imminence of Christ, it is actually a deeply-restricted imminence.

By contrast, I will show why a preterist reading is more faithful to the text of Scripture and why it actually serves to protect and promote a real sense that Christ can return at any time. For in fact, all the language of nearness in the Gospels, Epistles, and Revelation came to fulfillment by 70 AD. And from that point on, the world and all of its nations have been served a notice, that unless you repent and believe, they too will experience the judgment of God.

Salvation and Judgment Until the End

Today is the day of salvation (2 Cor. 6:2), but as with Jerusalem, the salvation that goes to the world is given to prepare sinners for the day of judgment. And because Christ is even now reigning on high, there is a real sense in which he has already begun to judge the world, even as he will come again to judge the living and the dead.

Therefore, to deny a futurist reading of the New Testament to Jesus' words in the Olivet Discourse does not deny his later return or the final judgment. If anything, it actually secures it and calls the sinner to repent and believe the gospel before the judgment falls on them and their land, even as it did on Jerusalem. And even more, by dealing faithfully with Jesus words about events in his own generation, it takes away the arguments used by skeptics to reject Christ.

In all, these opening reflections on the doctrine of Christ’s imminence help us to see at least three ways to consider Christ’s words. Next time we will pick the word parousia itself, to see what it means in its biblical usage. And from there we can decide if it has technical meaning for Christ’s second coming, or if something else is going on. Stay tuned.

For His Glory and your joy in Jesus,
Pastor David
 
   ^{[1] John Walvoord, Millennial Kingdom, 128–33."The prophecies in the Old Testament concerning he first coming of Christ—His birth, His rearing, His ministry, His death, His resurrection—were all fulfilled literally" (Charles Ryries, Dispensationalism Today, 86–89).
    [2] He defines moderate preterism like this: “Many future prophecies in the NT have already been fulfilled. Some crucial prophecies have not yet been fulfilled.” This is not the same as “hyper-preterism,” which sees everything fulfilled in the first century.}
 

In college I spent a good bit of time with a campus minister named Phil. Phil led Athletes in Action at Michigan State University, and he also helped me start that ministry at my college. Along the way, Phil taught me to how share my faith with others, lead Bible studies, and draw really cool graphics.

Well, to be fair, as a trained architect, he drew really cool graphics. I could only translate his artistry into my own stick figure drawings. And if you have ever been in one of my Sunday School classes or a Tuesday night Bible study, you might have seen me attempt to illustrate a point with the white board.

Among all the illustrations that Phil shared, none has been more helpful than his Position/Condition graph. It is currently drawn on the whiteboard in my office and when I plugged it into Grok, here’s what it spit out.



Now, this rendition is lacking in some ways, but it gets the point across. Chiefly, that when a sinner is brought to faith in Christ, that man or woman is seated with Christ in heavenly places (Eph 2:5) and given every spiritual blessing in Christ Jesus (Eph. 1:3). In short, our position in Christ is no longer dead in our sins; it is alive in Christ.

Indeed, few doctrinal truths are most important for the Christian than understanding what it means to be transferred from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of the beloved Son (Col. 1:13). That is to say, when we are born in Adam we are by nature objects of wrath (Eph. 2:1–3) and enemies of God (Rom. 5:8–10). But when we are made new in Christ, our God in heaven sees us (hence the eyes) as being completely righteous—positionally, at least.

In the image, the cross represents that moment when we repent and believe in the gospel. And the throne represents our new position in Christ. In fact, if you want to consider what it means to be “in Christ,” take time to read Ephesians 1:3–14, where Paul lists many realities that are true of the believer now that he is in Christ.

Importantly, this new position is a fixed reality and not one that is subject to change. And actually, as Ephesians 1:3–6 tells us, this position even goes back before the world began as God the Father chose us in Christ to be holy and blameless before him. Thus, knowing what is unchangeably true about us in Christ is the foundation we need to stand in the face of our ever changing condition—which is the other part of the graphic.

Understanding Our Position and Condition

If you look at the graphic, the bottom line relates to our condition and the top line to our position. And on the right you see numbers—0 percent at the bottom, 100 percent at the top. Those numbers relate to our righteousness.

In the eyes of God, everyone who remains in Adam is one-hundred percent unrighteous and zero percent righteous. Yes, the unbeliever might love his wife or do good to his children; he might pay his taxes on time and even make time to serve in his community. But before the burning eyes of our holy God, all of our righteous deeds, if they are done without faith, are like filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6; Romans 14:23). And this is why the unbeliever is unrighteous before God.

Yet, when a sinner places faith in Christ, then all of Jesus’s righteousness is credited to his or her account (Phil. 3:9). And positionally, this means that God sees us in Christ as one-hundred percent righteous. Clothed with Christ’s righteousness, we are forgiven, cleansed, redeemed, and declared justified. This is what the gospel promises.

Yet, in our condition, we are still less than fully righteous. Plagued with sinful patterns of thought and habits of the body, our condition fluctuates. Yes, all those who are justified in Christ will be progressively sanctified. In Christ, our condition will improve. But such improvement, does not mean perfection or immediate change. Even more, as we see improvement in our condition, we also see how far we are from the perfect standards of righteous—a reality that we were blind to before Christ.

Thus, Christians live between two realities—the unchangeable reality is our position in Christ; the fluctuating reality is our day-to-day condition. And that is what this graphic is meant to convey.

As the upward, squiggling line suggests, our condition is making progress toward holiness and conformity to Christ. But as we know all too well, that is a slow climb. And sometimes, it comes with setbacks and what Jeremiah calls backsliding (see Jer. 2:19; 3:14; 3:22; 14:7). Still, as our loving Father disciplines us, and our great high priest intercedes for us, and the Holy Spirit works to convict us and conform to the image of the Son, we can have assurance that God is working in us, until our condition matches our position.

Truly, our certain hope is that in heaven and in the new heaven and new earth, we will be one hundred percent righteous and entirely sanctified. Until then we can continue to embrace the truth of who we are in Christ, by learning about all the things that are true of us as children of God, united by faith in the Son, and led by the Holy Spirit. And as we wrestle against all the things in creation (the world, the flesh, and the devil) that would undermine our condition, we can give thanks to God that Christ has secured our position. For truly, that is what this chart helps us to see, as it makes sense of the ups and downs we face as Christians.

The Story of Jacob in Genesis 25–35

Similarly, this charter helps us make sense of the story of Jacob too. Chosen by God to be the blessed son of Isaac, his position of grace is not dependent on the works of his condition, but on the unmerited favor of God. Yet, as the story of his life demonstrates, once God set his favor on Jacob, he began to prepare him to receive the blessing.

In ways that illustrate for all Christians what it means to grow in grace, Jacob’s story is one where the heel-grabbing second born has to learn how to trust in God and not to work for himself. And this is no small feat. From grabbing his brother's birthright with a bowl of stew, to taking his blessing by means of a well-prepared meal, to Jacob’s flight from Laban while his father-in-law was sheering his sheep, Jacob made a way for himself in the world. Yet, as Laban deceived him and made his life difficult, God used those conditions to prepare Jacob for his elevated position.

In short then, God did not bless Jacob because of the conditions he achieved for himself. Instead, his conditions followed the plans and purposes of God to make this chosen son ready to be a vessel of blessing to his sons and to the world. And more, when it was all said and done, the conditions of his life were still lacking in many ways. Yet, his position before God, and his place in God’s hall of faith (Heb. 11:20–22), was not merited by his condition. Rather, God orchestrated all the events of his life to secure his sanctification—a reality that God does with all of his children.

Thus, as we read the story of Jacob, we should not forget how God works in all of our lives. And if this little graph can be helpful, print a copy for yourself. Or, just get in the habit of drawing it. By remembering your fixed position in Christ and your fluctuating condition it will remind you of how God is working in your life. And then, like Phil did with me, you can share it with others too.

For His glory and your joy in Christ,
Pastor David

In 1854, the “father of modern church history” and the most important church historian in America, returned to his native land. For ten years, Philip Schaff had taught in the wilderness of Pennsylvania. Recruited to teach at Mercersburg College, Schaff came to America at the age of twenty-four. And after a decade of learning the customs of America, he returned to Germany, where he gave three lectures on America.

Those lectures were quickly copied, translated, and distributed in Germany (1854), America (1855), and the Netherlands (1855). Today, they can be found in a volume titled, America: A Sketch of Its Political, Social, and Religious Character.^[1] In 1961, Harvard Press published this book with an introduction by famed Puritan scholar, Perry Miller. And in this slim volume, Schaff outlines with impressive detail the character of the American people, their Christian faith, and their social customs.

Written by a church historian with Reformed theological convictions, America is a book that rivals, if it does not surpass, its more famous precursor, Democracy in America. Two decades before Schaff, Alexis DeTocqueville, a French aristocrat, came to America to examine the penal system. Only his time in America (1831–32) did more than produce ideas for prison reform. Far more important, he wrote a masterpiece of American history, a time capsule of what America was when it was young. Released in two volumes (1835, 1840), Democracy in America is book that examines the democratic impulses of the young American country.

In his reflections, Tocqueville observed the peculiar way a free society (America) emerged without a national church (like all of Europe). He reasoned, as one historian put it that, “Modern democratic freedom . . . developed as a result of Christianity’s influence on European civilization, and more particularly as a result of Puritanism’s influence on American civilization.” Going further, Tocqueville said that without official government support, the church was strong, because it was America’s “first political institution.” In other words, the church(es!) in America are what shaped the culture and the political structures. So, if freedom was going to continue, the Christians that forged the character of America would need to continue, too. As he put it, Americans must “maintain Christianity . . . at all costs.”^[2] For without Christianity, America as it was originally founded could not continue.

Philip Schaff’s Unique Perspective

Returning to Philip Schaff: He witnessed the same features of American life. Only he did not travel the land as a foreigner set to depart; he was sent as a missionary to serve the churches in Pennsylvania and beyond. In this way, he came to America to stay. And when he returned to his native homeland, he came as an apologist for America, seeking to allay fears and overturn accusations. For the Germans who never visited America in his day, these men and women had a predisposition to dislike the new world, because of the reports they heard of its rude citizens and untamed frontiers. Yet, in reading the elegant prose of his lectures, Shaff makes plain all the ways Christianity had forged the nation and its inhabitants.

Indeed, as he explains America to his countrymen, he says that the new nation is undeniably “Christian” (76).  Yet, such a statement raises a host of questions today. For instance, what does a Christian nation mean to him and to those who heard him? And what does it mean to us, who stand 250 years removed from America’s founding? If America was truly a Christian nation in its youth, is it still? And is recovering our Christian heritage a fool’s errand, or the very thing that God would have us do?  

These are debated questions and ones that invite reflection that exceed the length of this blogpost. But limiting ourselves to Schaff’s place in space and time, I think we can learn a number of facets of what made America a Christian nation and what the church can and should do today to proclaim Christ among the ruins of our once-Christian civilization. To that end, let me offer five observations about the church and state in America. Drawn from Schaff’s America, these reflections help us to see what kind of Christian nation America was and what kind of Christian nation we might be again, if the Lord would restore the foundations of our nation.

What Kind of Christian Nation Was America?

First, America was founded because of Christian motivations.

As he begins his section on “Religion and the Church” in his first lecture, Schaff shows how “religious motives” drove the founding of America. He states, “the first emigrants left the homes of their fathers for faith and conscience’ sake, and thus at the outset stamped upon their new home the impress of positive Christianity” (72). Without denying other motivations, Schaff describes the cradle of America wrapped in the swaddling clothes of Christianity. And from its birth, America has never been without a formative, one might even say a constitutive, Christian influence.

Stressing this point, Schaff continues by saying that the original imprint of Christianity “now exerts wholesome influence even on those later emigrants, who have no religion at all” (72). This will need further explaining, with respect to the laws and customs of the state, but it is notable that the first founders of America came to this land with a commitment to settle this place for Christ. Therefore, unlike the nations of Europe that had to be converted from paganism, America was founded by men and women wholly devoted to Christ and his commission to disciple the nations.  

Second, America was Protestant in character.

In America, “everything had a Protestant beginning” (72). Whereas Christianity in Europe had “historical connections with Catholicism,” in America “the Catholic Church has come in afterwards as one sect among others, and has always remained subordinate” (72).^[3] Even more, he explains that the source of America’s “spirit and character” came from “the Puritans in New England, the Episcopalians in Virginia, the Quakers in Pennsylvania, the Dutch in New York, . . . the Presbyterians from Scotland and North Ireland, and the German Lutherans and Reformed from the Palatinate” (73).

All told, the Christian character of America was rooted in the historic doctrines of the Reformation. And specifically, that means that American Christianity would be uniquely centered on the Bible, a feature that caused Mark Noll to label America a “Bible civilization.”^[4] Capturing the same spirit, Schaff says of American Christianity that it gave “zealous support of Bible and Tract societies, or domestic and foreign missions, the numerous revivals, the general attendance on divine worship, and the custom of family devotion” (76).

Going further, he adds, “In every new city district, in every new settlement, one of the first things thought of is the building of a temple to the Lord, where the neighboring population may be regularly fed with the bread of life and encouraged to labor, order, obedience, and every good work” (79). By comparison then, “the Americans are already in advance of most of the old Christian nations of Europe.” And how did this happen? Not by governments establishing churches, but by the free and voluntary worship of the people. Indeed, this is a feature that is rooted in the Protestant Reformation and one that distinguishes American Christianity from that of Europe.

Third, American Protestantism separated the church from the state.
 
 As a son of Switzerland and a student trained in Germany, Schaff knew by experience and by education that many European nations were Protestant. By this measure, it was not Protestantism alone that formed American religion. Rather, it was the unique way that Protestant Christianity, as it developed in the new world, separated church and state in America.

Tracing the history from the “rigid Calvinistic church-state system” of the Puritans in Massachusetts (74) to the introduction of religious liberty by Roger Williams and William Penn, in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, respectively, Schaff arrived at the period of the American Revolution and the disestablishment of the church in the constitution (74–75). Speaking to his German audience, he acknowledged the imperfection of the American system, because of the way Christ’s kingdom “is to penetrate and transform like leaven, all the relations of individual and national life” (75). Yet, instead of critiquing this novel system, he extolled the unparalleled freedoms that it created (75–76).

For, in fact, the American system of separation did not, as it would come to be defined in the twentieth century (after 1947), erect a “high and impregnable wall” between church and state.^[5] Instead, it made possible a “voluntary system,” which “calls forth a mass of individual activity and interest among the laity in ecclesiastical affairs, in the founding of new churches and congregations, colleges and seminaries, in home and foreign missions, and in the promotion of all forms of Christian philanthropy” (79)^.[6]

Observing these features, Schaff puts his finger on the genius of the American system. On the one hand, the church is protected from being dominated, and in some cases persecuted, by the state. And on the other hand, the state is strengthened by the vitality and moral accountability of its citizens, who are either Christians worshiping God according to their free consciences, or if they are not Christians, they are so far surrounded by the institutions of Christianity, that society is reformed for the better.^[7]

This is kind of religious liberty can only be found in Christian nations, and Schaff makes this point explicit in his second lecture, when he says, “the principle of religious freedom rests there on a religious basis, as the result of many sufferings and persecutions for the sake of faith and conscience; and thus differs very materially from some modern theories of toleration, which run out into sheer religious indifference and unbelief” (91).

Tragically, the religious liberty that is peddled today by modern Americans, and not a few Christians, is one based wholly on “religious indifference and toleration.”  Such religious liberty, however, is worlds apart from the separation of church and state that Schaff saw in 1854. Indeed, if the church in America will have a place to worship freely, as 1 Timothy 2:1–4 invites us to pray, it must reject the type of separation on offer today and recover the type of separation where free churches strengthen the state and the free state is suffused with true churches.

In short, the church and state in America were separated in Schaff’s day, but they also enjoyed a symbiotic relationship that should be the aim of every Christian today. Still, if such a Christian vision of the state is going to be recovered today, it will require a church that finds its bearings in American Protestantism, not classical liberalism.

Fourth, American Protestantism developed a symbiotic relationship between church and state.
 
Immediately after Schaff identified the separation of church and state, he clarified himself, saying, “For it is by no means to be thought, that the separation of church and state there is a renunciation of Christianity by the nation” (76). This might be the most needful corrective to errant views of church and state today.

Whereas many well-meaning Christians want to argue that nations cannot be Christian, because not all citizens are born again and the “holy nation” must be limited to the church, such a simplistic way of thinking ignores the important role that nations, and their governors, play in the purposes of God. Paul was called to preach the gospel to kings (Acts 9:15) and throughout the book of Acts (as well as church history), the civil magistrates, who are God’s servants (Rom. 13:1–7), play a role in affirming or denying the proclamation of the gospel. That is say, that while the church is called to preach the gospel, the state will either permit and maintain such efforts or stand in their way.^[8]

Indeed, while governors are not called to use the sword to coerce faith or criminalize the conscience, Schaff is right when he says that in America, “the church, indeed, everywhere enjoys the protection of the laws for its property, and the exercise of its functions,” even as “it manages its own affairs independently, and has also to depend for its resources entirely on voluntary contributions” (73–74).

In this way, Schaff distinguishes the establishment of one sect of Christianity that comes at the expense of others from the lawful encouragement of Christianity by the magistrate who supports and strengthens the church.^[9] In fact, he goes so far as to approve of the ways “the state, as such, to some extent officially recognizes Christianity” (76). And he illustrates his point with examples taken from America.


These are the ways that the American government supported the church in the nineteenth century. And they are ways that a nation can maintain spiritual separation between church and state, all the while protecting and promoting Christianity. Indeed, this is what Schaff saw in America and reported to Christians in Germany. And it is why he rightly labeled America a Christian Nation.

And more, with all the unique ways that church and state functioned in the past, it should teach us about how nations can be Christian and how, in particular, America was a Christian nation. For indeed, to let Schaff have the last word on America’s unique church-state relationship.


In America, disestablishment was the law of the land.^[10] But in no way did the First Amendment outlaw the magistrates from encouraging Christianity as the true religion. In fact, the inclination of the young nation was just the opposite. The relationship in America between church and state was one of symbiosis, not stand off.

Fifth, America was a nation with the soul of a church.
 
Writing a generation later, one year before Philip Schaff died in 1893, Supreme Court justice David Brewer wrote his opinion in the case Trinity v. United States (1892). And in his statement, he argued that America was a Christian nation.^[11] This argument follows on the work of the National Reformation Association (NRA), who sought to amend the constitution in 1863 to acknowledge the Lordship of Jesus Christ.^[12] And this argument comes three decades before G. K. Chesterton declared in his 1922 book, What I Saw In America, that America is “a nation with the soul of a church.”

Put all of these testimonies together, and it is impossible to deny the way in which America was more than a nation with a Christian founding or simply nation-state with lots of Christians or Christian ideas—though these claims are undeniably correct. Rather, when time is taken to define the terms, America really was a Christian nation.

The Protestant Church in America Must Maintain Christianity At All Costs

Whether America continues to be a Christian nation is another question altogether. And it is one that will need to be considered another day. For today, it is worth knowing that when the father of church history took up the task of defining America, he declared this young country a Christian nation. And this year, as America celebrates her 250th anniversary, we would do well to learn again what it means to be a Christian nation and how American Protestantism impressed its Christianity on this country.

As Alexis DeTocqueville said, with respect to America’s democracy, Americans must “maintain Christianity . . . at all costs.” And specifically, American Christians must maintain a genuine American Protestantism for the sake of Christ and his Church.

For not only are the doctrines of the Protestant Reformation the ones that founded our country, but they are also the doctrines that are most true to the Word of God. And because the mission of Christ is more than the preservation of one nation, because the mission of the church is the exaltation of Christ among all nations, we must play our part in God’s grand scheme. For truly, if Christians are to be faithful in our generation, we must learn from those who have gone before us. And so, as Philip Schaff has helped us to see a few things about America as a Christian nation, let us be reminded also of God’s plan with all nations, America included.

At all events, whatever may become of the American denominations and sects of the present day, the kingdom of Jesus Christ must at last triumph in the New World, as elsewhere, over all foes, old and new. Of this we have the pledge in the mass of individual Christianity in America; but above all, in the promise of the Lord, who is with his people always to the end of the world, and who has founded his church upon a rock, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail. And his words are yea and amen. (81)

From one generation to the next, this is our hope—that Jesus Christ is the Lord of the nations. And whether America returns in fresh ways to honor the Lord or is rightly cut down for her refusing to humble herself before God, the Lord will establish his kingdom.

As citizens of heaven we have a colonizing work to do on earth. And today, as he has planted us in America, let us seek the Lord for the good of our families, our church, and our nation. So that we might, with gratitude, sobriety, thanksgiving, and energy, might be faithful in this generation, until he calls us home or makes all things new.

For His glory and your joy in Christ,
Pastor David


 
<sup>[1] Philip Schaff, America: A Sketch of Its Political, Social, and Religious Character (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press, 1961). All page numbers are parenthetical references.

[2] Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, trans. Harvey C. Mansfield and Delba Winthrop (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), pp. 279–280, 519.

[3] Schaff notes the way that Maryland, established by Catholics, “was by no means specifically Roman.” Instead, “it was found expressly on the thoroughly anti-Roman, and essentially Protestant, principles of religious toleration” (72–73).

[4] Mark A. Noll, America’s Book: The Rise and Decline of a Bible Civilization (1794–1911) (New York: Oxford, 2022).

[5] Everson v. Board of Education (1947) was the genesis of our modern understanding of a strict separation between church and state. Reinterpreting the language of Thomas Jefferson, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black made the infamous case that “the First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.”

[6] Remember, Schaff wrote at a time when America had no income tax. A national income tax was introduced in 1861, as an emergency measure to fund the Civil War. After that tax was repealed in 1872, the federal income tax was made permanent in 1913, with the adoption of the Sixteenth Amendment.

[7] One remarkable example of this cultural influence is the number of churches that stood in New York City. In a footnote, Schaff counts 300 churches: “In 1854 there were in New York city, forty-eight Episcopal churches, forty-eight Presbyterian, thirty-five Methodist, nineteen Reformed Dutch, twenty-nine Baptist, eight Congregational, five Lutheran, and twenty-four Roman Catholic; besides the church edifices of several smaller denominations and sects, which must swell the number now to nearly 300” (78). By his estimation, it is the prominence of these churches, which filled the city with their Sabbath-keeping, that prevented New York City from becoming a “second Paris” (52).

[8] This is the point I made, when I preached Zechariah 1:18–21 on the four horns.

[9] As the state commits itself to no particular form of Christianity, there is of course also no civil requisition of baptism, confirmation, and communion. Religion is left to the free will of each individual, and the church has none but moral means of influencing the world. (73–74)[

10] At the federal level, at least.

[11] Copies of his argument can be found on the bookshelf or here.

[12] Later this year, my introduction to William Symington’s book, Messiah the Prince, will be released with Canon Press. As a part of their amendment campaign, the NRA republished and distributed Messiah the Prince.</sup>

“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions,
and your old men shall dream dreams . . .” - Acts 2:17

As I showed last week, the “latter days” is a biblical term that begins in Genesis 49:1 and proceeds through the entire Old Testament. Moses uses the term, and so do the Prophets. Likewise, the Apostles, who depend upon the Old Testament for their own letters, speak of the  “last days” five times in New Testament (Acts 2:17; Hebrews 1:2; 2 Tim. 3:1; James 5:3; and 2 Pet. 3:3). From these uses, biblical scholars, pastors, and theologians have come to hold one of three positions.
Generally speaking, these three positions coincide with three different approaches to eschatology.


To put it into a picture, you have three approaches:


 
 ? Pentecost
 ?          Temple Destroyed / End of Old Covenant (70 AD)
 ?️          The Great Tribulation
 ?‍♂️          Today
 ?          The Eternal State

As you can see from these three timelines, the Futurist reads the New Testament as describing events thousands of years from the Apostles. As a result, the New Testament becomes a key by which we understand current and future events. This approach puts heavy stress on the prophetic element of God’s Word, but lighter emphasis on  the ways that the Apostles attempted to show Old Testament prophecies as fulfilled in the first century. Certainly, Futurists apply the Old Testament to the person and work of Christ. But often, these fulfillments are seen as Christological more than eschatological. And the resulting approach to Scripture is one that looks to the future for all eschatological fulfillments.

By contrast, the Idealist sees the Last Days as beginning in the first century and continuing until the return of Christ. They appeal to passages like Acts 2:17 and the outpouring of the Spirit as a fulfillment of Joel 2. Equally, in the case of G. K. Beale, he shows how the content of the Latter Days passages in the Old Testament (e.g., Gen. 49:1; Num. 24:14; Deut. 4:30; 31:29; Daniel 2:27–29, 45; etc.) is clearly applied to Christ and his kingdom all throughout the New Testament. Indeed, in the chart offered below, I glean from his work to show the many ways Old Testament texts are fulfilled in the New Testament. Accordingly, when it comes to the last days, Idealists see their arrival in all the events related to Christ’s resurrection, ascension, and outpouring of the Holy Spirit. As Hebrews 1:2 speaks of “these last days” as the ones in which God “has spoken to us by his Son.” Accordingly, they place the last days in the first century and they see them continuing until the return of Christ.

This was the approach that I held for many years, as I read passages like Acts 2:17 and Hebrews 1:2 identifying the latter days as beginning with the Apostles. Even more, when you consider the ways in which the end-time expectations of the Prophets are fulfilled in Christ preaching the kingdom, establishing a new temple, and pouring out the Spirit for the purpose of a new creation, it only makes sense to say that the latter days have begun. And in fact, if you want to consider that argument further, take time to read the Scriptures in this chart.

Old Testament Prophecy	New Testament Fulfillment
End Times Tribulation   Daniel 2:27–29, 45 Daniel 8:17, 19; 11:35, 40; 12:1	Gospels Matthew 24:21, 29 John 16:33	Epistles Acts 14:22 1 John 2:18 Revelation 1:9
Return From Exile / New Exodus   Deuteronomy 4:30 Deuteronomy 31:29 Jeremiah 16:14–18	Gospels Matthew 4:18–22 Luke 9:31	Epistles Colossians 1:13
Salvation   Jeremiah 48:47; 49:39 Isaiah 53 Zechariah 9–14	Gospels Matthew 1:21 Matthew 20:28	Epistles Roman 3:23–26 Ephesians 2:1–10
Resurrection Ezekiel 37:1–14 Daniel 12:1–3	Gospels Matthew 16:21 Matthew 27:51–53 John 11:25	Epistles Romans 1:4; 4:25 1 Corinthians 15:21–28
Kingdom of God Isaiah 9:6–7; 11:1–5 Daniel 2:27–29, 45	Gospels Matthew 3:2; 4:17 Matthew 13 Luke 17:20	Epistles Acts 8:12 Acts 28:30–31 Romans 14:17
Davidic King (Judah’s Scepter) Genesis 49:1 Numbers 24:14 Hosea 3:5	Gospels Matthew 1–2 Matthew 3:17 Matthew 21:41–46	Epistles Romans 1:4
New Creation   Isaiah 65:17–25	Gospels Matthew 19:28 John 20:11–18	Epistles 2 Corinthians 5:17 Titus 3:5
Restoration of Israel Ezekiel 37:15–23	Gospels John 4 Acts 9:31	Epistles Romans 11:32 Galatians 3:28 Ephesians 2:14
Nations Coming to Zion   Isaiah 2:1–5; cf. 19:16–25 Micah 4:1–4	Gospels Matthew 2:1–12 Acts 1:8	Epistles Romans Ephesians 2:11–22
New Covenant   Jeremiah 31:31–34 Ezekiel 36:33	Gospels Matthew 26:28 Luke 22:14–23	Epistles 2 Corinthians 3 Hebrews 8
Holy Spirit   Joel 2:28–32	Gospels John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13	Epistles Romans 8:1–17 Galatians 3:1–6, 14
Temple   Ezekiel 40–47 (43:18; 44:27; 45:22; 46:6) Haggai 2:6–9	Gospels   Matthew 21:42 John 2:19	Epistles 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16 Ephesians 2:19–22
Priesthood   Malachi 3–4	Gospels Matthew 3:11–12	Epistles Acts 1–2

Yet, as I worked my way through the New Testament last year, I began to see a few other features about the last days and how the Apostles applied the eschatology they received from Jesus and his Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24 // Mark 13 // Luke 21). In a couple weeks, I will address Jesus’s stated eschatology on the Mount of Olives, but for now consider these seven observations.


Putting all of this together, I began to consider the claims that the last days were the forty years (one generation) that spanned the distance between Christ’s resurrection / ascension / Pentecost and the time of the judgment on Jerusalem, which Jesus describes throughout the Gospels. At first, this reading seems odd because of how “latter days” are used by Futurists and Idealists, but on a second (or twenty-second) reading of the New Testament, I believe the period of time that the apostles founded the church, which corresponds to the inspiration of the New Testament, we see the birth pains of God’s bride being born (cf. Ezekiel 16). That is to say, in the trials and tribulations of the first generation, we see many of the promises and prophesies of Christ being fulfilled. The church, composed of Jews and Gentiles, is formed as one new man, emerging from the nation of Israel who is not only under God’s judgment in the first century, but is actively seeking to destroy the new covenant people—as the whole New Testament describes.

Saying all of this, there are countless biblical passages that need to be examined to confirm or deny this claim. But for now, let me explain the way I now see the Latter Days and then invite you to examine the passages in the chart and the ones listed in the seven observations to see how the New Testament shows us the ways that Latter Day expectations are fulfilled in the first century. By reading the New Testament passages with the Old, you won’t have all of your questions answered. But you should be able to grasp how many Old Testament prophecies about the Last Days are shown to be fulfilled in the first century.

So, in contrast to the Futurist reading of the Latter Days and paralleling the Idealist in many ways, the (Partial) Preterist reads the last days as taking place in the last days of the old covenant people of Israel. They read the promise of the kingdom, the Spirit, the temple, and the new creation as arriving in the last days of the old covenant. And then, as the New Testament helps us to see, they see these days coming to a close with the end of the old covenant, as signified by the destruction of the temple. This is the time of the Reformation (Heb. 9:10), and it may even be the time of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24; Rom. 11:25) as they bring down the structures of Israel, which have become defiled by the sins of the priests and rulers of Jerusalem.

To anticipate one objection, or two, a preterist reading does not mean everything is fulfilled in the first century (that is the heresy of hyper-preterism). And a preterist reading does not deny the way that God continues to sift the nations today. Rather, the judgment that Malachi promised (Malachi 3–4), John the Baptist applied to Christ (Matthew 3), and Jesus prophesied when he stood on the Mount of Olives (Matthew 24), this fiery judgment is what came to Jerusalem, after all the elect of Israel were gathered to Christ and the church. And by means of Christ making good on his judgment, he warns all nations to repent and believe, lest the same judgment come upon them.

All that to say, a preterist reading of the New Testament does not mean the latter days have nothing to say today. It may even add more gravity to the warnings to kings and nations to kiss the son, while time remains. For truly, if God brought a judgment on his chosen people, the nation of Israel, he will show no qualms in bringing judgments on other peoples, lands, and nations who refuse to honor Christ. Thus, while a preterist reading may at first suggest that the New Testament has nothing to say about our day today, it is actually the opposite. If the nations who owe their existence to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob do not acknowledge the Lordship of Abraham’s true seed, the Lord Jesus Christ, then their days are numbered. And if you don’t believe it, look at what happened in the first century in Jerusalem.

Long story short, it seems best historically, textually, and even evangelistically to be able to read the last days as describing events in the generation between the Ascension and the judgment on the temple. Still, don’t just take my word for it. Take time to read the verses in the chart and the ones listed in the seven observations. Let Scripture persuade you and shape your understanding of eschatology. And then, ask the Lord how to be faithful for you in your generation—our generation.

For in fact, what we read in Scripture about the latter days has massive implications for our lives, to live faithfully in the time that God has given to us. And truly, our time is shorter today than ever before. So take time to read these verses in the their original context and then consider how they might spur you on to prepare for the day when the Lord comes again.

For His Glory and your joy in Christ,

Pastor David


^{[1] We will consider differing views on Revelation in a coming week.
[2] I will examine these passages in a future post.
[3] For a preterist reading of Matthew 24, see this blog. For Mark 13, see this blog.} 

Eschatology precedes soteriology.

This is an axiom that I explained when we looked at Genesis 1–2 and how God made the world. When God brought the world into existence, he had a plan for all things. And this telos, or goal, was the basis for saying that proper eschatology depends upon proper protology. And thus, from the beginning of creation, we can see how eschatology began to emerge.

In fact, when the first promise of redemption was given in Genesis 3:15, it did not change God’s eschatological plans; it only advanced them. For as 1 Peter 1:20 reveals, the Lamb of God was slain before the foundation of the world—meaning, that God had a plan for salvation before sin entered the world through Adam’s disobedience (Rom. 5:12–21).

Yet, in time, the first gospel (protoevangelium) soon flourished into a messianic hope that turned on the arrival of a Second Adam, a true Enoch, a better Noah, a superior baptism, a seed of Abraham, a royal priest like Melchizedek, a beloved Son like Isaac, a substitutionary ram found on God’s hill, and royal son like Joseph who would come from Judah’s line. In short, the history of the Bible has an eschatological cast to it. In other words, you cannot read the story of Genesis without being confronted with people, places, and events that foreshadow Christ. And lest you think I’m making that up, just go look up the Scriptures in this paragraph.

The Latter Days
 
If Genesis is filled with eschatology, then it stands to reason that we don’t have to wait for the latter days to learn something about the latter days. In fact, if we are reading carefully, we discover that the first instance of the latter days is found in the second to last chapter of Genesis. And beginning with Genesis 49:1, we have a series of texts from Moses, Isaiah, and the rest of the Prophets that give us content to the latter days.

In other words, we don’t need to wonder if we have entered “the last days,” because Scripture tells us when the latter days will come. Or to turn it around, the Word of God tells us the kind of things that will happen when the Latter Days arrive. And thus, from Moses to the Prophets, let me outline twelve key passages that speak of the Latter Days. And then after enumerating these verses, I will list ten realities that signify the arrival of the Latter Days.

Latter Days in Moses
 
Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, often called the Pentateuch, in which he not only reported the history of the patriarchs and the laws of Sinai, he also spoke of Jesus Christ. This is what Jesus says in John 5:46, when he was debating with the Pharisees about his identity. Jesus says, “For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.” By this measure, and many others, Moses was a not merely a law-giver, he was a prophet. And by the leading of the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:9–21), many of his words include eschatological promises, which is to repeat the point: eschatology begins in Genesis.

Yet, more than just finding general ways that Moses spoke about Christ and other future events, we also find in him a specific term that will repeat throughout the Old Testament, until it comes to life in the New. And that term is “last days,” and it is found four places in Genesis 49:1, Numbers 24:14, and Deuteronomy 4:30 and 31:29.


In the ESV, “in the latter days” (be’aharit hayyamim) is translated “latter days” in passages that are understood to be eschatological, while passages that are not immediately defined as eschatological are rendered “in the days to come.” Yet, “in the days to come” hides the eschatological nature of the phrase in Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 4, which is unfortunate because the phrase is clearly eschatological.^[2]
 
I would encourage to read all of these verses their original contexts, but if you do, you will find a list of prophecies for Israel’s twelve sons (Genesis 49); the prophecies of Balaam about Israel (Numbers 22–24); and Moses’s anticipation of a new covenant that will arise after Israel has been blessed and cursed (both in Deuteronomy 4 and 30–31). In other words, the use of the words phrase “in the latter days” is an eschatological term, as it will be used throughout the rest of the Old Testament, until it is fulfilled at the coming of Christ and the establishment of his new covenant.

When we get to the New Testament, we will consider how this term is fulfilled and whether we have been in the “latter days” for 2,000 years or if the latter days refers to the end of one age (the old covenant), before the arrival of a new age (the new covenant and the new creation). For now, it is important to recognize how this language of “latter days” originated in Moses, in contexts where he was speaking about Christ. And, we can confirm this by the way this language is used in the Prophets, too.

Latter Days in the Prophets
 
In the Prophets, we find the language of Latter Days in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Hosea, Micah. Without providing a commentary, let me offer the texts where these phrases are used. As expected in the Prophets, these oracles do point to future realities. But most importantly, there is specific content that comes in these prophecies, including an in-gathering of the nations at Zion (Isaiah 2:1–5; Micah 4:1–4), judgment on the nations who do not repent (Jeremiah 23:17–20; 30:24; 48:47; 49:39), the arrival of a Davidic King (Hosea 3:5), and the victorious rule of a kingdom made without hands (Daniel 2:27–29, 45).

In short, by following the language of “latter days” (and related phrases), we come to see that many of the eschatological promises are not found in our future, but in our past. The Son of David has come, he has gathered the nations to Zion, and he is judging the nations, as he establishes his heavenly kingdom. Yet, the only way to see that is to look at what the Bible says. So here are eight passages that identify the latter days.
 

From all of these passages, we can begin to see a picture of what the Prophets, following Moses anticipated. And if you want to extend the search to phraseology that is like, but not exactly the same as “in the latter days,” you will also find two key chapters: Jeremiah 31 and Zechariah 9–14. Jeremiah 31:31–34 introduces the “new covenant” and Zechariah 9–14 recounts all the events leading up to and surrounding the death of Christ. Notably, in Jeremiah, the language of “at that time” (Jer. 31:1), “the days are coming” (Jer. 31:27, 31, 38), “in those days” (Jer. 31:29), or “after those days” (Jer. 31:33) repeats. And in Zechariah 12–14, the phrase “on that day” occurs sixteen times.

Long story short, the Prophets give us a clear testimony to the coming of a day or days, when God will establish his kingdom through a new covenant. At the beginning of the New Testament, we find the faithful in Israel anticipating this day. And soon, we find Jesus and his Apostles explaining all the ways that Christ brought these new realities into being.
 
The Last Days Summarized
 
Next week, I will show the ways the New Testament applies these prophecies to Jesus, but for now, consider a summary provided by G. K. Beale. In his book, New Testament Biblical Theology, Beale concludes his study of the atter days by saying of the term “Latter days,” that it “occurs at points throughout the OT to refer not to the mere indefinite future but rather to the culmination of history from the various writers’ perspectives” (p. 115).
 
As outlined above, there is specific content that is assigned to the arrival of the latter days. By examining the content of those promises with the New Testament in hand, we can see that most of the expectations have already come and are now continuing as Christ rules the earth from heaven. Again, in days to come, we will look at what the New Testament says, but for now consider this tenfold expectation that G. K. Beale offers.


This list may not include every detail of Christ’s arrival or the dawning of a new age, but it is a good summary of all that the Old Testament promised in the “latter days,” and by comparison, it does correspond to all that Christ brought when he was born, died, rose again, and ascended to heaven. Of course, we still need to see how the New Testament develops these promises, but for now, by paying careful attention to the language of “the latter days,” we can see what the Old Testament expectation is.

So, should we be looking for the latter days in our own generation? Absolutely! But like every generation since the first generation of the church, the place to find and understand the latter days (cf. Jer. 23:20; 30:24) is in Scripture and not in the news reports coming from the Middle East. Wonderfully, Christ has come. And the more we can put him at the center of our eschatology, the more we can grow in faith, hope, and love, while avoiding vain speculations and fruitless prognosticators.

For His Glory and your joy,
Pastor David
 
   ^{[1] Beale, NTBT, 92.
   [2] As Brown, Drivers, and Briggs, 31a, defines it, “a prophetic phrase denoting the final period of the history so far as the speaker’s perspective reaches; the sense thus varies with the context, but it often = the ideal of Messianic future.” Driver, Deuteronomy, 74, says almost the same thing: “the final period of the future so far as it falls within the range of the speaker’s perspective.” Quotes from Beale, NTBT, 95.}

The Bible is art. And for new creations in Christ, who are the workmanship of God (Eph. 2:10), it is good for us to see all the ways that God’s Spirit inspired the Scripture. For just as the beauty of our creator is made visible in the heavens and the earth, so his majestic wisdom is found throughout the Bible. And this Sunday, we have a passage whose art is worth observing.

When I say art, I have in mind the literary beauty of the Bible. Yes, there is artistic elegance in the way that God works in, among, and behind the events of the people who star in God’s Book. In all of these historical dramas, God brings beauty from ashes, blessings through curses (Gal. 3:13–14), or even an eternal promise of life (think God’s promise to Abraham) through the sinful brother who threatens death (think Esau). Truly, there is art in the stories of the Bible.

But the art I am describing has everything to do with the selection, arrangement, and purpose of the words that tell the stories. And in Genesis 28:10–22, when the Spirit inspired Moses to tell the story of Jacob at the House of God, we find at least two literary structures that organize the scene—one chiastic and one pattern that doubles. Add to this the overarching chiasm of Genesis 25:19–35:29, and you can see how the Spirit enabled Moses to write Scripture with beauty and glory, just like he skilled Bezalel to build the tabernacle with the same (Exod. 31:1–11).

So, as we prepare to meet God meeting Jacob in Genesis 28:10–22, let’s turn our attention to these three literary structures.

The Chiastic Structure of Jacob’s Generation (Genesis 25:19–35:29)

In Genesis 25:19, Moses begins a new section of Genesis, stating, “These are the generations of Isaac, Abraham’s son.” In Genesis, the book is organized by these toledot clauses (“These are the generations . . .”). And the next one we find is in Genesis 36:1. This means that Genesis 25:19–35:29 form one unit. And incredibly, when we look closely at these eleven chapters, we find a discernible chiasm that moves from the birth of Jacob and Esau to the death of their father Isaac. Yet, most importantly these chapters center on the birth of Abraham’s seed, the twelve sons of Jacob (Gen. 29:31–30:24).

As Gordon Wenham frames it, here is the chiastic structure of Genesis 25:19–35:29. ^[1]

 A 25:19–34        Jacob and Esau Born
          B 26:1–33           Isaac and the Philistines
              C 26:34–28:9  Jacob Receives the Blessing
                   D 28:10–22       Jacob Meets God at Bethel
                       E 29:1–14            Jacob Arrives at Laban’s
                            F 29:15–30        Laban Outwits Jacob
                                 X 29:31–30:24                  Israel’s Son
                            F’ 30:25–31:1  Jacob Outwits Laban
                       E’ 31:2–32:1     Jacob Leaves from Laban’s
                   D’ 32:2–3            Jacob Meets Angels of God at Manaheim
             C’ 32:4–33:20 Jacob Returns Esau’s Blessing
         B’ 34:1–31          Levi and the Hivites
 A’ 35:1–29          Jacob and Esau Die

From this arrangement, we find evidence for the Spirit’s inspiration of the text, and we find help in discerning the main point of this section. What does God want us to see? He wants us to keep our eyes open for the promised seed. As with the birth of Isaac, this section of Genesis moves from the promised seed of Jacob to the birth of his twelve sons. And while, there is more to the story than the number or order of their births, in a book full of genealogies, these birth stories do play a central part. And how do we know that? Because the literary structure shows us.

 The Twin Structures of Genesis 28:10–22

If the Old Testament scholar, Gordon Wenham, reminds us that the Spirit organizes large parts of Scripture (e.g., Genesis’s organization by generations), he also shows us how the Spirit inspired Moses to organize smaller sections too. And in Genesis 28:10–22, we actually find two overlapping structures. That is to say, we find a chiasm in verses 10–19 and a storyline that clearly divides into two panels in verses 10–16 and verses 17–22.^[2]

From his commentary on Genesis, Wenham first observes that the narrative employs a chiastic structure on the basis of repeated words. Here’s how it looks:

 (A) “place” (v 11),
       (B) “take stones, make a headrest” (v 11),
            (C) “sky” (v 12),
                  (D) “God” (v 12),
                        (E) “the Lord” (v 13),
                        (E) “the Lord” (v 16),
                  (D) “God” (v 17),
            (C) “heaven” (v 17),
       (B) “take stone, make a headrest” (v 17),
 (A) “place” (v 19).

From this arrangement, we can see what Moses is stressing: The LORD, the God of heaven, is in this place! Incredibly, just as the God of heaven revealed himself to Jacob at Bethel, so this inspired word reveals the God of Jacob to you and me. And if we have eyes opened by the Spirit, we will see that this same God is present with us as we read this story.

Still, this chiastic structure does not stand alone, as Wenham observes. He writes, “There is also repetition [in the text], so that the two halves of the tale fall into parallel panels.”^[3] Critically, the evidence for this literary structure does not originate in the mind of the interpreter, but in the text itself—a fact made evident in the chart below.^[4]

“place”(v 11 3x)	“place” (vv 16, 17)
“stones,” “headrest” (v 11)	“stone,” “headrest” (v 18)
“I am really with you” (v 15)	“If God will be with me” (v 20)
“guard you wherever you go” (v 15)	“guard me on the journey I am undertaking” (v 20)
“bring you back to this land” (v 15)	“return in peace to my father’s house” (v 21)
“I shall not leave you” (v 15)	“and the Lord is my God” (v 21)

As before, this literary structure is pregnant with meaning. But what is it? As I read the parallelism, it appears that Jacob’s vow does not originate with him, nor is it an attempt to manipulate God with his conditions. Instead, as his words echo the Lord’s, it demonstrates a budding faith. Later, Joel 2 teaches us that those who call on the Lord (v. 32a) are the ones called by the Lord (v. 32b), which is another way of saying that those who confess the faith (Rom. 10:8) are simply professing the words that God puts in their hearts (Rom. 10:8; cf. Deut. 30:6. 14). In Genesis 28, that appears to be happening to Jacob: he is pledging himself to the God of heaven in the words that Yahweh has given to him. And our confidence in this reading is based upon the repeated words we find in the text.

A Final Word about Bible Reading

The Bible is art. And, over time, followers of Christ should become connoisseurs of Scripture’s literary features. Importantly, salvation does not depend upon seeing all the glories of Scripture, but sanctification does and so does faithful interpretation. And that is why I am sharing what I learned from Gordon Wenham, a faithful Bible teacher.

While many Bible readers might not see these structures (immediately), they are there. And one of the roles of Bible scholars and pastors is to help show God’s people what is in God’s Word. And as Genesis 28 shows us, he has not simply given us a binary code of information. He has inspired a tapestry of text that reveals his wisdom and beauty through divinely-inspired literature. And thus, to know God and his Word means learning to read the text as he inspired it.

Therefore, as we continue to meditate on Genesis, let us remember the main point as revealed by the large literary structures. And then, as we look at the smaller narratives, let us expect to see further literary elements that help us understand the text. For truly, in seeking to understand Scripture, as the Spirit inspired it, God protects us from error and conforms us into the image of Christ.

^{[1] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50, 169.
[2] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50, 219.
[3] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50, 219.
[4] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50, 219.}

Reading the Bible is not for the faint of heart. It requires time, effort, prayer, patience, persistence, and a willingness to let Scripture speak. Often, through years of study, sermons, and trips through the text, we can develop ruts in our reading. In fact, such ruts are safeguards from misguided novelty. That said, some ruts can make it difficult to see what is actually in the text. And recently, in our sermon on Genesis 27, we encountered such a rut.

If you missed that sermon, take time to watch or listen. But if you heard it, you might have puzzled over the argument that I made regarding Rebekah’s righteousness and her actions to secure Jacob’s blessing. As most commentators have it, Rebekah led Jacob to deceive his father in order to steal Esau’s blessing. In fact, I had multiple comments (and a few texts) after the sermon that said one of two things: (1) I’ve never heard that Rebekah was in the right and that helps me understand the story, or (2) I’m not sure about Rebekah’s righteousness, for the animal skins certainly seem like a scheme to deceive.

Clearly, last Sunday’s sermon escaped from the rut. And it either did so rightly or wrongly. And so, I wanted to clear up a couple things and help us all to see what Genesis 27 does and does not say. And that begins with the fact that I did not sufficiently address the question of animal skins in the sermon.

And so, here’s my attempt to explain my reading of the text. Additionally, The Hope Desk will cover this subject on Monday. And if further questions remain, feel free to reach out.

For now, let me answer three questions on the way to better understanding God’s Word. And let me do so with three levels of interpretation. In other words, there is large scale, medium scale, and minute scale details in this story. And I believe that at the largest and medium levels, it is evident that Rebekah is acting righteously. And then at the most detailed level, Level 3, there are the most questions and uncertainties. So, proceeding from greater to lesser degrees of certainty in the text, let me offer three levels of answering the big question: Is Rebekah righteous? And then I will finish with a few reflections on why that matters.

Level 1: Is Rebekah on the right side in this story?
 
At the highest or widest level, we need to decide if Rebekah is in the wrong and trying to steal the blessing? Or if she is in the right blocking Isaac’s blessing of Esau? For if she is in the wrong in the big picture (siding with Jacob over against Isaac), then every other action is also wrong. Even if she is wrong, we know from the rest of Genesis that one of Moses’ thesis statements for the book is Gen. 50:20, “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive as they are today." So we should not lose trust in God's plan or God's Word if this is the case. Yet, if she is in the right to help Jacob receive the blessing when Isaac seeks to bless Esau, then it points us in the opposite direction that her other actions are also right.

So, what evidence do we have that suggests she is on the right side in this story? There are at least three pieces of evidence.

First, her track record is unblemished.

From her willingness to follow the servant of Abraham and marry the son of Abraham (Gen. 24:58), to her prayerful pursuit of God when she was barren (Gen. 25:22), we have a record of Rebekah’s faithfulness. To put it differently, we have no evidence in Genesis 24–26 that she is a deceiver or given to trickery. To date, she has only conducted herself well. By contrast, there are evidences that Esau, Jacob, and Isaac are not so upstanding up to this point—either entirely (Esau), or partially (Isaac), or to date (Jacob). As Genesis records, Jacob’s faith comes later in life (Genesis 28–32), and has not yet been manifested. Still, for all of the men around Rebekah, she only has been blameless so far.

In fact, we can ground her unblemished character in the text even further. While Moses includes the words of Isaac in Genesis 27:35 that identify Jacob as being a deceiver (“But he said, ‘Your brother came deceitfully, and he has taken away your blessing.’”), we don’t have anything that targets Rebekah in the same way. Of course, an argument by silence does not wholly absolve her of guilt, but it is noteworthy that Moses records how Jacob “came deceitfully,” but nothing is said about Rebekah sending him deceitfully.

Second, her action in Genesis 27 opposes ignorance and wickedness.
 
Remember, Isaac was blind (Gen. 27:1), which was not only a physical condition but also a spiritual condition. How do we know physical blindness indicates spiritual condition? By comparison to other figures in the Bible. For instance, Eli was blind to his sons’ wickedness in 1 Samuel 3:2 and 4:5; and the Pharisees were blind to the Lord who stood before them in John 9. In both of these instances, the physical blindness is suggestive of moral decline.

Still, we don’t need run to other texts to see Isaac’s moral blindness. In the text itself, we see that Isaac’s willingness to bless his wicked son was evidence of his spiritual blindness. Just before we learn of Isaac’s blindness (Gen. 27:1), Genesis 26:34–25 tells us Esau had married two Hittite women, thus proving his wickedness. Accordingly, when Isaac attempted to bless this wicked man, it is plain to see that his blindness is more than physical. It is moral, too.

It is in this context, where Rebekah hears her husband’s foolish plan. She comes to his aid—seeking to prevent him from making the error of blessing the wrong son and thereby thwarting the plans of God. On the whole, Rebekah is not seeking evil; she is resisting it.

Third, her actions were based on God’s Word.
 
Most evident of all, Rebekah acted in keeping with God’s Word. In Genesis 25:23, God himself told Rebekah that the older (Esau) would serve the younger (Jacob). And so, she is not acting for Jacob because she was playing favorites. Rather, she loved Jacob, as Genesis 25:28, because he was the son chosen by God. By any estimate, therefore, Rebekah is acting in faith and righteousness when she leads her son Jacob to seek the blessing from his father. And at this first and broadest level, we can say that she is not an “ambitious and designing mother” whose actions with Jacob were “utterly discreditable and indefensible.”^[1]

That is how Rebekah is often portrayed, but is it correct to present her as a deceptive schemer? Before this episode, her track record shows no evidence of wrongdoing, and even now her actions are defensible, for God told her that Jacob was the chosen son. Thus, it was right for her to protect Jacob’s blessing from the folly of Isaac and the wickedness of Esau—a point that will lead her to send Jacob away in Genesis 27:41–45. Still, there is more to say, and this gets us to Level 2.

Level 2: Does Rebekah do the right thing?
 
Pressing into details, we come to Level 2. If we might affirm that Rebekah was ultimately on the right side (Level 1), we need to see if she might have acted in the wrong way (Level 2). As we see with Tamar in Genesis 38, it is possible to do the right thing (seek the promised seed) in the wrong way (by means of prostitution). And perhaps that is what Rebekah did here. Yet, upon further examination, I believe her decision to intervene in the situation is a further testimony to her righteousness and not an evidence of unrighteousness. Here are three more evidences to prove that point.
 
First, Rebekah stands in contrast to the deception of Eve, Sarah, and Daughters of Lot.
 
When we read Genesis, we are faced with a host of famous women, and we learn a great deal about them when we make comparisons. For instance, when Eve, Sarah, and the Daughters of Lot took initiative to lead Adam (Genesis 3), Abraham (Genesis 16), and Lot (Genesis 19), respectively, they all brought a curse into the world, as the men in their lives followed their lead. As God designed it, the husband and father is to be the spiritual head of the home, and in Eve’s offer of the fruit, Sarah’s offer of Hagar, and the Daughters’ offer of drink, these women exacerbated sin. And thus, the careful reader of Scripture learns early when women take initiative to lead their husband or their father, sin results. Yet, as Rebekah takes initiative in Genesis 27, that is not what happens.

In fact, Rebekah, whose name is associated with blessing (beraka), is the source of salvation in this story and a protector against the curse. As James Jordan frames it, “Rebekah is the great heroine in the book of Genesis. Her very name is a play on the word ‘blessed,’ for in Hebrew the word for bless is written BRK, while Rebekah's name is written RBK. When we meet Rebekah in Genesis 24 she is like a new female Abram” (Primeval Saints, 95).

So, Rebekah stands apart from the earlier women of Genesis and sets a new trajectory in the Bible. And that is the next observation to make.

Second, Rebekah begins a new pattern for women who stand to defend the seed of the woman. 
 
Think of it, the midwives of Israel stand against Pharaoh’s edict to kill baby boys in Exodus 1, and Rahab offers protection to the spies in Joshua 2, when she is asked about Israelites in her home. In both cases, these women “deceive” the tyrannical authorities that are trying to kill the sons of Israel. Likewise, God blesses all of these women for their willingness to protect the seed of promise, even if they used deception against the seed of the serpent.^[2]

Similarly, when Judah fails to secure a husband for Tamar and to ensure his seed will continue to David and Jesus, Tamar uses cunning to propagate the royal line of Israel. And what does Judah say of this woman, when he discovers that he is the father of her child? “Then Judah identified them and said, “She is more righteous than I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he did not know her again” (Genesis 38:26).

On the basis of the declaration, we learn why Tamar is more righteous—she was committed to the seed of promise in ways that Judah was not. And thus, we discover how women prove their righteousness in Israel. They protect the babies given to them, or to put it theologically, they seek and shelter the seed of the woman, which is the third evidence of righteousness.

Third, Rebekah’s actions are motivated by the gospel promise of Genesis 3:15.

It impossible to understand the storyline of Genesis without the original promise. Speaking to the Serpent (Satan), God says, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” This promise secures the defeat of Satan and the salvation of all those who look to God for help from Satan. In the fulness of time, Christ will fulfill this promise. But short of that fulfillment, we see this promise play out in the history of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Israel. And here in Genesis 27, Rebekah shows herself a true woman by protecting the seed of the woman and standing against the seed of the serpent.

By doing so, she shows herself to be more righteous than Isaac. But is she perfectly righteous, or only relatively righteous? That is what we must consider next.
 
Level 3: Is Rebekah (Perfectly) Righteous?
 
So far, we have seen that Rebekah stands on the right side of the story and that her actions do not lead her husband to do wrong, but to do right. But still, we have one more level to go and one more question to ask: Is Rebekah perfect in all her actions?

Now, on one hand, she doesn’t need to be perfect in her actions. And, if you follow James Jordan, you might simply conclude that her intentions were good, while her actions lack perfect righteousness. And if that’s how you see the text pointing, then you are seeing it far more clearly than the host who chide Rebekah as a scheming woman. Still, a central feature of this story turns on her own willingness to take the curse in the place of her son (v. 13), this suggests that she is a Christ-like figure and one, who in this case, must be righteous to actually secure her son’s blessing while offering to take the curse.

Again, there are other readings that frame Rebekah as doing the right thing, while employing deceit righteously, because Isaac is acting like a tyrant (James Jordan). But this only complicates things because she is his wife and he is not seed of the serpent, but a chosen vessel whose righteousness will be restored in Genesis 28. Thus, while Jordan’s reading permits the easier assessment that Rebekah lied, it runs into trouble with her ability to take Jacob’s curse in any real way. And it also runs into trouble with any Christological comparison.
 
So, I do think that her role in this story is that of the righteous heroine, whose wisdom proves her righteousness. Of course, this does not mean she is sinless or providing salvation like Christ. She is not a covenant head, and there are of course distinctions between Rebekah the wife and mother with Christ the Son of God, but all that being equal, Rebekah effectively secures the blessing for the promised seed by all that she does in vv. 5–17.

Restricting myself to these verses, let’s make four observations.

First, she does not lead with deception.

Rather, when she hears of Isaac’s intention to bless Esau, she takes initiative to cook food such as her husband likes so that Jacob would receive the blessing. Until Jacob responds with fear (vv. 11–12), there is no indication of subterfuge or dressing up like Esau. Yes, Rebekah is looking to take the blessing of Isaac away from Esau, but that is because Esau is wicked and not the chosen of God. In this way, her actions to deprive Esau of the blessing is good, not bad. And her actions of cooking a meal that her husband loves is also good.

Now, maybe, in this cooking, it was always the plan to deceive her husband. This is how faithful commentators like John Calvin and Iain Duguid read it.^[3] But the difficulty of this reading is that Rebekah does not command deceit in verses 5–10. Instead, you see her taking initiative to provide her husband a better meal, given to Isaac by Jacob, not Esau. In this way, she does not, in my estimation, lead with deception.

Rather, the specter of deception comes in vv. 11-12, when Jacob expresses fear that his father will feel him. Again, this may have been Rebekah’s plan, but the text doesn’t say that. Instead, v. 13, which stands at the center of this section, presents the solution to Jacob’s fear: Rebekah volunteers to take the curse.

 A vv. 5–10           Rebekah learns of the blessing and she calls Jacob to find food

                 B vv. 11–12        Jacob responds in fear, worried he will be found out and be cursed

                                C v. 13                   Rebekah assumes the curse

                 B’ vv. 14                Jacob brings the animals and his mother prepares the food

C’ vv. 15–17      Rebekah gives Jacob Esau’s clothes, covers his flesh with skins, and puts the food (meat, bread, wine) in his hand

At a time when Rebekah could have reinforced the ruse, she doesn’t. She simply says that if your father curses you (because he finds you out), let that curse fall on me.

Maybe I am mistaken, but that promise seems to indicate that Jacob could have, if he trusted his mother, gone to his father, announced himself and his food and sought a blessing. And if his father protested, his mother would have helped again.
 
Again, this is a very subtle reading of the text. But remember, we are at Level 3. And that is the point. We are pressing into the details of the text. And at the most basic level, we have yet to find clear evidence that she led her son to deceive Isaac. At the least, she gives into Jacob’s fears and tells him to clothe himself like Esau to achieve the original purpose. This is a plausible reading. But if that is the case, she doesn’t lead with lying. And as I am about to argue, there are reasons to not assume the worst.
 
Second, Rebekah is not deceiving her husband with anything visible.
 
Whatever Rebekah does with the garments and the skins, in verses 14–16, it is not to deceive Isaac’s eyes. If he could see, this story would be entirely different. And because he couldn’t see, whatever else Rebekah was doing, it absolves her from trying to deceive his eyes. Rather, as I suggested above, her actions of bringing Jacob before her husband with the food he loved was intended to confront the blind man with the true son, Jacob.
 
Yes, Jacob feared being caught (vv. 11–12). But when Rebekah responds to that fear, she volunteers to take the curse for him (v. 13). And as the organization of the text puts that great exchange at the center, it seems to suggest that we should pay more attention to Rebekah’s Christ-like substitution, instead of maligning her for clothing her son with Esau’s garments and animal skins. I will return to this point in a moment, but for now, don’t miss the fact that Rebekah couldn’t have attempted to deceive Isaac with anything visible.
 
Third, the clothing and skinning has theological significance.
 
If we enter this story without awareness of the whole book of Genesis, then we won’t know where animal skins or garments given to firstborn sons show up. But if we read Genesis 27 with Genesis 3 and Genesis 37, we come to see a couple things.
 
First, animal skins were the gracious provision of God, when he sent Adam and Eve out of the garden. In that cursed setting, God killed an animal (for how else do you get skins?) provided a covering for the man and his wife. In a way, God exchanged their curse for a blessing, or at least by means of sacrifice he clothed them with garments. And not just any garments, but garments that match those of the priests.
 
In Genesis 3:21, we find the same word that is used for priestly garments in Exodus 28:4, 39, 40; 29:5, 8, 27. And actually, this same word is used of Joseph’s coat of many colors in Genesis 37:3, 23, 31, 32, 33. By way of this common word, we see a connection between priesthood and firstborn sons, which is a common feature of Genesis. The firstborn son would receive the blessing to be a blessing to his household as the next priest. And effectively, that is part of the background to Genesis 27, and why blessing Esau would have spelled disaster.
 
Keeping our eyes on the text of the story though, we can see how the clothing of Jacob in Esau’s best garments and with the skin of animals also conjoins firstborn and priest. Now it might be possible that the garments are made of the skins, but I would take them as separate but related and all of a piece where Rebekah is presenting Jacob as the true priestly firstborn.
 
For notably, the best garments of Esau are not in Esau’s possession. Instead, they are in Rebekah’s tent, which suggests that he had abandoned them, forgot them, or lost them when he left his mother’s side to marry two Hittite women (Gen. 26:46). To put it differently, the firstborn son had forsaken his best garments, just like he had forsaken his birthright—so little did he think of his portion in Isaac. Thus, with possession of these garments, she clothes Jacob as the true firstborn. And completing the image, she also puts skins on him—skins that likely came from the animal she just killed for eating.
 
Now, admittedly, we are weaving thin strings at this point. But if Rebekah (1) promised a blessing in place of curse, and (2) killed an animal for the meal, and (3) used the skins from the animal (or another) to clothe Jacob, and also (4) clothed him with firstborn garments, we really do get an incredible picture of how she was helping to secure a blessing for Jacob from his father. She was doing everything necessary to win the blessing from Isaac. The only question is: Did she intend for Jacob to say that he was Esau (v. 18)?
 
Fourth, Jacob lied to his father.
 
I guess we cannot know for absolute certain whether Rebekah told Jacob to call himself Esau, but at this point in the study, I hope you are at least willing to see the problem with that perspective. Undeniably, Jacob lied about who he was (v. 19) and his father called him deceitful as a consequence (v. 33), but we don’t have anything in the text that confirms that Rebekah told him to do that. Certainly, he used his garments and the skins to further his ruse, but making the connection between Jacob’s lie and Rebekah’s mastermind remains uncertain and maybe even dubious.
 
What is evident is that Jacob did not trust in his mother’s offer to bear the curse. Instead, when asked who he was, he lied. And in many ways, he receives the curse in himself, instead of letting her make the great exchange. And how did Jacob bear the curse? Well, after he lied, his brother hated him and he had to flee the land.
 
Now do the twenty years of servitude in Laban’s house (Gen. 31:38–41) equal the curse that his mother could have taken? It’s hard to say. But certainly Jacob’s faith came to life as he bore the burden of being exiled from his family. Under God’s hand of providence, the Lord used the deceit of Laban to undo the deceit of Jacob. And thus, it was a needed exile. Still, this process of sanctification—if we can call it that—only confirms Jacob’s lack of faith in Genesis 27.
 
It seems to me that Jacob was chosen by God and blessed, but not brought to faith until the episode at Bethel and maybe not even until Jacob wrestled the angel. In either occurrence, Jacob was not a man of faith in Genesis 27. And that means that while he did what his mother told him, he was also an unbeliever. He even identifies Yahweh as Isaac’s God, not his own (Gen. 27:20). Thus, I am content to believe that Rebekah’s faith floundered in her son’s execution of the plan, and that while Jacob lied, it was his own unbelief and his unwillingness to trust his mother’s offer of taking the curse that led to his lie.
 
Which would then mean that Rebekah did not urge him to lie. And she did not concoct a scheme to deceive his father to steal the blessing from his brother. Clearly, Jacob lied. But it is not clear that Rebekah did. And if anything is true, it appears that she was the most righteous character in this chapter and perhaps even righteous in her actions. For how else could she genuinely offer to take the curse?
 
Could I be wrong about Rebekah’s intentions?
 
 In the end, I have made a case for the righteousness of Rebekah, based upon three things.

1. She was on the right side of the story, as the text lays no charge against her.
2. She was on the right side of the seed, as she protected the seed of the woman and stood against the seed of the serpent.
3. She was on the right side of her husband and her son, as she developed a plan that centered on her own righteous offering to take the curse in order for her son to be blessed.

 
By these features of the text, read with the rest of Genesis, I am persuaded that Rebekah is righteous in her intentions and actions. Yet, it is far easier to see her righteousness at Level 1 (and Level 2) as compared to Level 3. Still, with each level reinforcing the other, I think it presents Rebekah to us as the hero of this story and a genuine Christ-like figure.

Ironically, commentators who call Rebekah sinful also believe her rash words point to Christ. Here is the assessment of Iain Duguid:

_{"In the most remarkable reversal of all Jesus graciously says to us what Rebekah rashly said to her son: “Let your curse be on me” (Gen. 27:13). The words Rebekah said so carelessly Jesus said to us knowing the full depths of what he was saying. The curse that you and I earn for ourselves every day by our many sins was laid upon him, so that the Father’s blessing that was rightfully his might be given to us, his undeserving people. Jesus wore the shroud of the cursed death that we deserved so that we might be clothed lawfully in our elder brother’s garments, the spotless robes of Christ’s righteousness, and be welcomed to receive the Father’s blessing as his beloved children."^[4]}

Incredibly, Duguid makes the same Christ-connections that I am making, but he does so against the grain of the text. Far better, as I have tried to show is the way that Rebekah’s commitment to the seed, her willingness to take the curse, her provision of the animals skins, and her clothing of the true son with priestly garments of the firstborn is righteous and something that rightly points to Christ.

All that being equal, you may remain unconvinced. Or maybe you believe that someone like Iain Duguid is right to assign blame to Rebekah, while also pointing to Christ. Or maybe in reading the complexities of this story, I am just wrong. In whatever position you find yourself, let me encourage you: if you are not convinced by my arguments here, don’t give up on the Bible. Rather, keep reading Genesis, examining the text, and asking, Why does Moses write it the way that he does? And, how does this passage relate to the storyline of Scripture that leads to Christ (John 5:39)?

As I said at the outset, reading the Bible is not for the faint of heart. But hopefully, in looking carefully at this passage together, it strengthens your heart to see how God works for the good of his people in the midst of harrowing circumstances. Lord willing, it also helps you see how the glories of Christ are hidden and revealed in the text of Scripture.
 
For truly, Genesis 27 is not simply a lesson on how parents can avoid family disasters; it is a story of how God is protecting and preserving his seed (the seed of the woman) by a woman who lays her life down for her son, who happens to be another type on the way to Christ. In this way, God’s Word is doing more than reporting history, so that we can find analogies. God’s Spirit is revealing the very character of God, along with patterns that repeat in Scripture.
 
For these reasons, therefore, the labor that it takes to read and understand Genesis 27 is worth the effort. Why? Because in working to understand the big picture and the smaller details, it conforms us into the image of Christ, as the Spirit who inspired the Word teaches us how to read it. And so keep reading, keep looking, and keeping searching for Christ in Scripture. And don’t settle for anything else.

For His glory and your joy in Christ,
Pastor David
 
<sup>[1] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50 (Dallas: Word, 1994), 214–215.

[2] For a thoughtful consideration of different kinds of lies in the Bible, see James Jordan, Primeval Saints, 87–90. Following Augustine and Luther, he distinguishes different ways that lies might be used righteously (e.g., Rahab defending the spies or Jesus, in Luke 24, hiding himself from his disciples). He defends Rebekah for deceiving Isaac, because Isaac was acting like a tyrant with Esau. I take a different view of the matter, but his reflections are worth considering, as he defends her use of deceit.

 [3] Iain Duguid, Genesis, The ESV Expository Commentary, 248: “She [Rebekah] is the instigator and driver of this deception.” Offering a more complex view, Calvin says that her actions “certainly flowed from no other source than her faith,” but “her faith was mixed with unjust and immoderate zeal.” Noting the way that Calvin suggests sin arising from faith, the editor of his commentary notes, “This is a dangerous position, however it may be modified or explained.” John Calvin, Genesis, 85. As I will suggest, there is a better approach than framing Rebekah’s actions as singularly sinful.

[4] Duguid, Genesis, 252–53.</sup>

If the cosmos has changed over time, as redemptive history has moved through “five worlds” from creation (Genesis 1–2) to the new creation (Revelation 21–22), then there have also been covenantal changes, too.

In the beginning, God made a covenant with Adam (Gen. 2:15–17; cf. Hos. 6:7), which is often called the “covenant of works.” Then, after the flood, God re-established a covenant with Noah and all creation. As Genesis 9:8–17 reports, God hung his bow in the sky as a sign that he would not flood the whole earth again. To this day, whenever the rainbow appears in the sky, it reminds him and us of that covenant. And though other covenants have come and gone (think: Abrahamic, Mosaic, Levitical, Davidic), the Lord continues to uphold the world he made, until he makes all things new.

That new creation is described most completely in Revelation 21, as it begins, “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more” (v. 1). As John envisions the new creation, he sees a day when the first earth (the one upheld by Noahic Covenant) is no more. This glorious future corresponds to Paul’s testimony in 1 Corinthians 15:24, when he says, “Then comes the end, when he [the Son] delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power.”

In short, there is a day coming when everything will be made right. This will be the consummation of new creation. And from the vantage point of the Old Testament, the Prophets anticipated its arrival as one climactic moment, when everything in the world would be changed at once. Like New Year’s Eve, which transitions one year immediately into the next, the Old Testament saw the end of time in a similar fashion. And with hopes of salvation and the coming of the Messiah, they prophesied about a new king like David (Isa. 9:6–7), the arrival of the Holy Spirit (Joel 2:28–32), a new covenant (Jer. 31:31–34), and a host of other blessings associated with this new age.

Yet, when the kingdom of God finally arrived (Matt 4:23–25; 9:35; 12:28), and the new covenant was sealed with Christ’s blood (Heb. 9:11–28), and the Spirit was poured out in Jerusalem (Acts 2), it did not immediately end the old age. In fact, it did not even terminate the old covenant, as the temple, priesthood, and sacrifices would continue for forty years (Acts 21:26). Rather, as Jesus prophesied in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21), the “evil and adulterous generation” (Matt. 12:39) would be given a short period of time to repent, believe, and leave Jerusalem (Matt. 24:15–21) before the fiery judgment of God cut down Israel’s tree (Matt. 3:10).

Long story short, the perspective from the Old Testament receives fresh insight with Christ’s incarnation. While the Old Testament offered true shadows of the future, the person and work of Jesus Christ provided greater clarity. Instead of the darkness of the Old Age disappearing immediately and entirely, as it was expected, the Son of God brought God’s light into the world. Now, the light of Christ has dawned and is continuing to displace the darkness, so that the two ages are now overlapping. The new age has broken into time. Yet, the old age still remains, even as its days are numbered.  

The Two Ages
 
To get specific, the language of “two ages” is derived from the way Jesus and his Apostles described the time frame of world events. For instance, Jesus could speak of the “present age” and the “age to come.” And after using this terminology in Matthew 12–13, he defines his terms in Matthew 24. Just the same, Paul, Peter, and the author of Hebrews describe the two ages, too; while John incorporates other terms to speak of the end of the age and the coming of a new creation.

As far as the word itself, aion can be translated “age,” or “world,” or “eternity,” and it conveys the idea of an indefinite period of time, or an era, whether in the past or future. More specifically, the word “age” is also used to express “the object of eschatological expectation, as in eternal life (John 4:14), the eternal kingdom (2 Pet 1:11), the heavenly body (2 Cor 5:1), and the eternal fire (Matt 18:8).” [1] In this way, there is some flexibility in the word, but the term carries a temporal meaning, with specifics being found in relationship to which “age” is in view.

Historically, those who have studied the Bible have always recognized the various “ages,” even if they have understood the time periods and terms differently. In Sunday School, I have attempted to outline many of the common features of inaugurated eschatology (the already and not yet), while also considering how different eschatologies have variously understood the relationship between the first age and the age to come. For instance, some employ these terms to distinguish the old age (under Noah) from the new (under Christ), while others speak of the Judaic age (under the Mosaic Covenant) and the Christian age (under the New Covenant).

In Sunday School, I will press the details of these approaches a bit further, with a few fun stick-figure diagrams. But for now, I want to simply enumerate the verses in the New Testament that describe the two ages. For while there are differences in how premill-, postmill-, and amill- positions interpret these passages, all Christians must do something with them. So, here’s the list. Take time to read the verses and come ready to discuss their meaning.

This Present (Evil) Age
 

• Matthew 12:32. "And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

 

• Luke 20:34–35. "And Jesus said to them, 'The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, 35but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, . . .”

 

• Romans 12:2. Do not be conformed to this world [aion], but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

 

• 1 Corinthians 1:20. "Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?"

 

• 1 Corinthians 2:6. "Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away."

 

• 1 Corinthians 2:8. "None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."

 

• 1 Corinthians 3:18. "Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise."

 

• 2 Corinthians 4:4. “In their case the god of this world [aion] has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”

 

• Galatians 1:4. “. . . who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father.”

 

• Ephesians 1:21. "...far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come."

 

• 1 Timothy 6:17. "As for the rich in this present age..."

 

• Titus 2:12. "...to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age..."

 

• Hebrews 9:9 "(which is symbolic for the present age)..."

  The Age to Come (7x)
  

• Matthew 12:32. "And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

 

• Mark 10:30. “ . . . who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.

 

• Luke 18:30. “ . . . who will not receive many times more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life.”

 

• Luke 20:34–35. "And Jesus said to them, 'The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, 35but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, . . .”

 

• Ephesians 1:21. "...far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come."

 

• Ephesians 2:7. “So that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.”

 

• Hebrews 6:5. “ . . . and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, . . .”

  The End of the Age(s) (7x)
  

• Matthew 13:39–40, 49. “ . . .and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 40 Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. . . .  So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous

 

• Matthew 24:3. As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

 

• Matthew 28:20. “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

 

• 1 Corinthians 10:11. “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.”

 

• Hebrews 9:26. “For then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

  Things Present / Things to Come
 

• Romans 8:18. “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.”

 

• Romans 8:38. "For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers,

 

• 1 Corinthians 3:22. “ . . . whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future . . .”

 

• 1 Corinthians 7:26. “I think that in view of the present distress it is good for a person to remain as he is.”

 
 What Time Is It?
 
 In the end, these time stamps help us ascertain the way in which the New Testament explains what time it is. And as the list shows, there is both a present age and an age to come. Likewise, there is evidence that there were multiple ages in the past, that were coming to an end (1 Cor. 10:11; Heb. 9:26). But at the same time, there is evidence of multiple ages coming in the future (Eph. 2:7). Put together, we can see why a full macro-eschatology must consider each of these ages and how they relate to one another.

In all, there is more to consider than just the verses that talk about the ages. And even in the list above we can see temporal language that doesn’t use the word aion. Nevertheless, the two ages are critical for understanding how the Bible presents the work of God from beginning to the end. And as we have considered the five worlds and two ages and the seven covenants, we will be prepared to think about the last days, the Day of the Lord, and even the last hour. But that will come in the weeks ahead.

For now, take time to read, review, compare, and consider the verses above and how they help put the big picture of God’s eschatology in place. For truly, macro-eschatology is not an esoteric approach to the Bible, but it emerges from the Bible itself.
 
   [1] Rebecca Skaggs, “Time,” in Lexham Theological Wordbook, 2014.

Last Sunday I introduced something I called “macro-eschatology.” Macro-eschatology is an approach to redemptive history that sees the end of things (eschatology) as fulfilling, restoring, and superseding the beginning of things (protology). At the center of this approach to reading the Bible is the person and the work of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who stands at the center of God’s plan to unite all things in creation. As Ephesians 1:9–10 tell us, Christ is the one who will unite heaven and earth, as it was always planned and purposed.
 
Accordingly, if we are going to develop a biblical eschatology, it must begin with a biblical protology, for the new creation will be patterned after the first creation. Yet, we cannot discern that new creation without a sufficient grasp of the first creation. Pursuing that end, macro-eschatology begins by following the patterns found in Genesis 1–11 (e.g., marriage, Eden, the tree of life, etc.). Then, with those types pointing us in the right direction, we can trace the story of the Bible all the way to Christ and the new creation.

In other words, eschatology “by the Book” does more than just look at individual passages of Scripture; it also reads the Bible on its own terms and allows the whole Bible to inform our eschatology. Without denying doctrinal questions related to the return of Christ and the meaning of the millennium, this approach prioritizes themes that repeat in Scripture. Indeed, if the final goal of the world is a new creation, then it makes the most sense to start with the first creation.

Seeing the World God Made
As I shared in the Sunday School class, a good place to begin is by observing a fivefold pattern that starts with (1) God creating (2) man in his image, before Adam (3) sinned and God responded with (4) judgment and (5) salvation. In Warren Gage’s insightful book, The Gospel of Genesis, he identified these five themes in the creation story of Genesis 1–7, which repeated in a new creation story in Genesis 8–11. Following his lead, we can see more clearly the macro-structure of redemptive history, as outlined in Figure 1.

Fig. 1: The History of the World ^[1] 

GENESIS 1–7	GENESIS 8–11 > GENESIS 12 . . .
CREATION 1. Waters of chaos cover the earth, Gen 1:1–2 2. Spirit hovers upon face of the waters, Gen 1:2 3. Dry land emerges, vegetation brought forth, Gen 1:12 4. Old world finished, God rests, Gen 2:2	THE NEW CREATION 1. Waters of Noah cover the earth, Gen 7:18–19 2. Dove “hovers” upon face of the waters, Gen 8:9 3. Olive leaf betokens emergence of dry land, Gen 8:11 4. Present world finished; God receives sacrifice of rest, Gen 8:21
ADAM 1. Man commissioned in God’s image, Gen 1:26 2. Man commanded to fill the earth, Gen 1:28 3. God brings animals to Adam for naming, Gen 2:19	NOAH, THE NEW ADAM 1. Man recommissioned in God’s image, Gen 9:6 2. Man commanded to fill the earth again, Gen 9:7 3. God brings animals to Noah for delivering, Gen 7:15
The World That Was — FALL 1. Adam sins in a garden, Gen 3:2 2. Adam partakes of fruit of knowledge, Gen 3:6 3. Adam shamefully naked, Gen 3:7 4. Adam’s nakedness covered by God, Gen 3:21 5. Adam’s sin brings curse upon seed, Gen 3:15	The World That Now Is — THE FALL RENEWED 1. Noah sins in a vineyard, Gen 9:20 2. Noah partakes of fruit of vine, Gen 9:20 3. Noah shamefully naked, Gen 9:21 4. Noah’s nakedness covered by sons, Gen 9:23 5. Noah’s sin brings curse upon seed, Gen 9:25
CONFLICT OF SEED 1. Cain, condemned to wander, founds wicked city of Enoch, Gen 4:17 2. Seth, with son Enosh, begins to call upon Name of LORD, Gen 4:26 3. Daughters of man taken to wife by sons of God, Gen 6:2	SEED CONFLICT RENEWED 1. Noah’s sons, to avoid wandering, found wicked city of Babel, Gen 11:4 2. Shem’s descendant Abram begins to call upon Name of LORD, Gen 12:8 3. The harlot Babel seduces the sons of Zion throughout the ages, cf. Dan 1:1; Isa 47:1–15; Rev 17–18
SALVATION THRU JUDGMENT — GENESIS 6–7 1. God raises up Noah to save his family, Gen 6:9 2. God makes a covenant with Noah to bless his offspring, Gen. 6:18 3. God floods the earth, but preserves a remnant, 1 Pet. 3:21 4. The old world passes away before a new world comes, 2 Pet 3:5–7	SALVATION THRU JUDGMENT 1. God raises up Abraham to save the world, Gen 12:3 2. God makes a covenant with Abraham to bless his offspring, Gen 22:18 3. God begins a long history of judgments and salvations for Israel, until Christ comes 4. When Christ dies and rises to heaven, the old world passes away as a new world is founded

 
Five Worlds
  Building from Warren Gage’s observations in Genesis 1–11, we can go further to see the way God created multiple worlds. That is to say, the “very good” world that God made in Genesis 1 is radically changed by sin. No longer does man have the chance to ascend the hill of the Lord by keeping the original covenant (the covenant of works or the covenant with Adam). Instead, when Adam sinned he invited death to permeate the whole of creation (see Rom. 8:20–21).

  Likewise, some two millennia after Adam, the fallen world is remade again. As God destroys the first world in the flood, he creates a new world, which appears to have a place (sheol) that was not present in the first creation. Perhaps, God prepared this place after Adam’s fall, but on the basis of New Testament testimony, but there is no such record. Instead, on the basis of three New Testament texts, I am inclined to see the formation of sheol as tied to the judgement of the flood. (Even as this leaves a question as to what happened to the souls of the dead before sheol).

 Here are the three key tests. In Matthew 25:41, Jesus speaks of eternal fires being prepared for Satan and his angels. The language of prepared is different than create, and the need for this place of judgment comes after Satan and his angels sinned. If, as I read Genesis 6, the angels sinned by consorting with women and God judged the world in response, it is likely that the fall of Satan and the fall of angels occurred at different times—the first in Genesis 3, the next reported in Genesis 6.

Adding weight to this reading, 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 both describe the way God judged angels who sinned, by leaving their proper abode.


In both texts, there is affirmed a temporary judgment upon the angels until the final judgment comes. Likewise, Peter names the place (tartarus, not hell) and Jude affirms the chains under gloomy darkness to suggest a subterranean place of holding. This fits with doctrine of sheol in the Old Testament. Put together, we have reason to see sheol as being formed by God in response to the sin of the angels at a time coordinate with the flood.

At the same time, the world after the flood is preserved by God in a way distinct from before the flood. In Genesis 9 Noah becomes a new Adam, but also, he is given a “new” covenant. In this covenant with creation, God promised to never flood it again with water (see Gen. 9:8–17). This is the world that stood for another two millennia—from the days of Noah until the “days of Noah” returned (Matt. 24:37), as Christ’s death, resurrection, and ascension remade the world again.

Indeed, the world that carries the story of redemption from Noah to Jesus is no longer with us. Rather, when Christ ascended to heaven, he purified God’s temple made without hands (Heb. 9:24–26), as he threw down Satan (Revelation 12) and a made place for his saints to dwell with him (Ps. 68:18; Heb. 12:22–24). In this way, the finished work of Christ perfected heaven, by removing everything unclean, and it “emptied” sheol by bringing all the saints dwelling in Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:23) into glory.

As a result, the world put under Christ’s feet (Eph. 1:22–23) is not the same as it was when Noah stepped off the ark or when John the Baptist stepped into the Jordan River. That world saw God’s righteous saints die and go to sheol, where they were “gathered to their people” (see e.g., Gen. 25:8; 35:29; 49:29, 33; Num 20:24, 26; 27:13; 31:2; Deut. 32:50) or “their fathers” (Judg. 2:10; 2 Kgs 22:20). But when Christ died for his people and brought the spirits of the righteous made perfect to heaven, the world changed—heaven was cleansed, sheol was emptied (at least, partly), and all of the conflict between the righteous and the wicked came to the earth, animated by the local presence of Satan (1 Pet. 5:8).

This fourth world is the one we inhabit. Yet, we often do not appreciate the differences between Worlds 1–3 and our own world. Most often, we know that we live in a fallen world, and we know that one day a new world is coming. But rarely, do we consider how this fallen world has been remade twice, even as it awaits one final restoration, as God in Christ regenerates all things (cf. Matthew 19:28).

Remarkably, that forthcoming new creation has already begun in this age, but it is has not been completed. That consummation of the new creation is what will commence when Christ returns and separates once-and-for-all the righteous and the wicked (see Matt. 25:41–46). After all, this was the plan from the beginning. And by studying the protology of Genesis 1–11, it helps us understand eschatology as the Bible (and the cosmos) presents it.

Therefore, take time to review Figure 2 and the five stages of world history.[2] For if we are going to understand and appreciate the new creation that is already (2 Cor. 5:17) and not yet (Rev. 21:1–22:5), then we must consider how God made the world in the first place, how he has remade it on more than one occasion, and how he is even now bringing his new creation (the age to come) into his old creation (this age).

As argued in Sunday School and as I am explaining here, this macro-eschatology gives us confidence in what God has done, is doing, and will do. And more, it shows us how our Creator is working all things in this fallen world to bring about a new world without sin, death, or evil. Truly, that is good news. And it is worth our time to study the Bible’s protology to better understand our own eschatology.

  Fig. 2: The Five Stages of World History

	First World   Genesis 1–2	World 2   Genesis 3–7	World 3   Genesis 8–Acts 1	World 4   Acts 2–Revelation 21	New World   Revelation 21–22
Heaven	Holy God Holy Angels _  _  _  _  _  _   Very Good Original Man Wholly Upright	Holy + Defiled God Satan Divided Angels	Holy + Defiled God Satan Divided Angels	Holy God Holy Angels Righteous Saints	Perfect God Holy Angels United in Christ Very Good Glorified Man Wholly Upright
Earth		In Conflict Righteous  Wicked	In Conflict Righteous Wicked	In Conflict Righteous Wicked Satan
Under the Earth	No Sheol!	Sheol??	Sheol! Unclean Spirits Righteous Man Wicked Man	Sheol (Emptied) Unclean Spirits Wicked Man	Hell Satan Unclean Spirits Wicked Man

On Sunday, we will take another step to see more of what I’m calling Macro-Eschatology. And next week, on the blog, I’ll add more, too. Lord willing.
  For His Glory and your joy in Christ,
  Pastor David
  
 
 
   ^{[1] Warren Gage, The Gospel of Genesis, 16. Everything on this chart is from the original, except the last section. Gage’s view of history only sees two worlds, maybe three (if a new world comes after the final judgment). As I will show below, it is better to see the second world as terminating at the time of Christ in his ascension, not in the final judgment, as Gage has it. Gage’s proposal gets Genesis 1–11 correct, but misses the cosmic effects of Christ’s exaltation.
   [2] In Sunday School, I listed four worlds, because I did not account for the first world—the world described in Genesis 1–2.}

Last week, I introduced fourteen key words for understanding some basic concepts in the study of last things (eschatology). Today, I will complete this basic glossary with fourteen more terms, in hopes that these definitions will help improve present and future discussions about eschatology. Be sure to listen to the introductory Sunday School series to catch up on the fun. And don’t miss the handout on Sunday morning, where I will put all the terms in one place.
 
(15) The Intermediate and Final States. What happens when we die? The answer to that question depends on one’s relationship to the triune God. Today, the Christian dies and enters heaven, while the unbeliever dies and goes to hades (Greek) / sheol (Heb.). Until the Final Judgment, the Intermediate State is the place where a soul remains as it awaits the consummation of the age, when the saints will be raised bodily to enter eternal life. The wicked will also be raised from Sheol to experience eternal destruction in hell (= the Lake of Fire). These ultimate conditions in the new creation or hell are called the Eternal State. Notably, before Christ ascended to glory, the righteous died and entered “Abraham’s Bosom” (Luke 16:22), which is a place in Sheol, where the righteous dwelt in comfort, awaiting Christ’s deliverance (see Ps. 16:9). Now that Christ has come, the believer’s rest is found in heaven.
 
(16) Latter / Last Days. In the Old Testament, this term is a biblical expression that looks forward to the end-times. “Latter days” begins in Genesis 49:1 with Jacob’s prophecy about his twelve sons, and it continues to pick content in the Law (Num. 24:14; Deut. 4:30; 31:29) and the Prophets (Isa. 2:2; Jer. 23:20; Dan. 2:28; 10:14; Hos. 3:5; cf. Joel 2:28). In the New Testament, the Apostles tell us the last days have arrived (Acts 2:17; Heb. 1:2), and this may be interpreted in one of three ways: (1) *Futurists see the last days as something still to come, (2) *Inaugurated Eschatology (and *Idealists) see the last days as continuing through the church age, and (3) *Preterists understand the last days as describing the end of the Jewish age (which may or may not be the same as the *Old Age).

(17) Man of Sin / Lawlessness. This is the man named by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2. In context, the man of lawlessness is a figure who will come in the future. As he explains, the mystery of lawlessness has already begun, but Paul anticipates future apostasy that intensifies when the restrainer is removed. From Paul’s mysterious descriptions, *Futurists (both *premill- and *amill-) identify this Man of Sin as the Antichrist who usher in and be active during the *Tribulation, while *Preterists identify this Man of Sin with Nero, who is restrained by Claudius when Paul wrote the letter (ca. 51–52 AD). Claudius (41–54 AD) is the Roman Emperor before Nero (54–68 AD), whose name is a play on words with the Latin claudere which means restraint.
 
(18) Millennium. One thousand years of peace about which Christians like to fight. Okay, no, that’s not it. The millennium is a period of one thousand years, according to Revelation 20. And this number is either taken literally as 1000 years or as a symbolic number for a perfect long period of time (10x10x10). Depending on how one reads Revelation 20, this period of time might consist of the whole church age (*amillennialists), a superlative golden age that comes at the end of the church age, but before Christ returns (*postmillennialists), or a time of 1,000 years after Christ returns, when he reigns glorified saints and non-glorified unbelievers until the final judgment (*premillennialists).
 
(19) Parousia. This is the Greek word for “coming,” and its theological use is normally related to Christ’s Second Coming. Yet, the word itself has the idea of “presence.” Jesus uses the word only three times in Matthew 24:27, 37, 39, in answer to the disciples question about his parousia (Matt. 24:3). Across the New Testament, the word is by Paul to speak of his own presence (see e.g., 2 Cor. 10:10; Phil. 2:12). Paul also uses it to speak of Christ’s “coming” (1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23). Yet, the language of Christ’s coming is broader than just his Second Coming, as is evident with Jesus’s warnings to the churches Revelation 2:5, 16; 3:10, 11.
 
(20) Premillenial(ism). One of three main views of the *millennium. In the early church, this position emerged among those who denied a heavenly *Intermediate State. Looking forward to Christ’s earthly reign, this view was prominent among men like Irenaeus, Tertullian, and others. Historic Premillennialism understands the millennium as coming after a period of great tribulation on the earth. Christ will reign over glorified saints and unglorified unbelievers, until the final judgment and the commencement of the *Eternal State. *Dispensational premillennialism understands this millennium as coming to the earth after a seven-year period of *Tribulation. These 1,000 years are necessary to fulfill God’s land promises to the people of Israel. After these 1,000 years, the final judgment, the *Eternal State will commence.

(21) Preterist. This term comes from the Latin word for “past” (praeter) and it has the idea that New Testament prophecies came to fulfillment in the first century, and specifically before 70 AD when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. A preterist reading of the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 21) or Revelation understands Jesus’s condemnation of Jerusalem as fulfilled in 70 AD. While preterism (or partial preterism) is a legitimate approach to reading the New Testament, full preterism (or hyper-preterism) is a heresy, because it denies any future promises to be fulfilled in Christ’s return, the bodily resurrection, or the consummation of the new creation.

(22) Postmillenial(ism). One of three main views of the *millennium. This eschatological position affirms Christ’s return after the millennium. Historically, this view has often affirmed a future golden age (1000 years or a long-sustained period), where the nations would be Christianized. Puritans believed this golden age would come by way of world evangelization. And some (who were not Dispensational) saw the future in-gathering of the Jews as the sign of that millennium was present. Others who hold this position would see the whole church age as the millennium (like *amillennialism). The difference would be that postmillennialism would see a Christianization of nations before Christ returned.

(23) Protology. The study of first things (protos). This is an often neglected doctrine that complements and directs eschatology, the study of last things (eschatos). If eschatology ends with a new creation, then it is necessary to know what the first creation was. What did God make? And why? Protology answers those questions from Genesis 1–3, as it shows God’s purposes in his creation. For instance, if the world ends with a cosmic marriage, a cosmic temple, and royal priests eating from the tree of life (Revelation 21–22), then it is necessary to see how those created realities in the beginning prepare the way for the end.

(24) Rapture. The word “rapture” comes from 1 Thessalonians 4:17, which reads, “we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up (harpazo) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” In context, Paul is describing the Lord’s *Parousia, and this passage is the key text for the Dispensational view of a secret rapture that precedes the *Tribulation. On that view, Christ will come in the clouds and remove the church from the earth, so that the seven years of judgment can commence. Among historic premillennial and amillennial views, the word rapture (harpazo) is set for the return of Christ and is public, visible, and accompanied by a shout of an archangel and a loud trumpet blast (1 Thess. 4:16). Some *preterists understand this passage, with its unique language “in the clouds” as describing the translation of the saints from earth to heaven.

(25) The (Great) Tribulation. The term “great tribulation” comes from the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:21; cf. Matt. 24:9, 29). Yet, this term itself comes from Daniel 12:1. Thus, it is a period of great calamity, “such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be.” Depending on how one reads Jesus’s words in the Olivet Discourse (*Futurist or *Preterist) will determine in large part how one sees this period. *Dispensationalism combines the seventieth week (Daniel 9:24–27) with the Tribulation and identifies it with a seven-year period after the *Rapture. Other *Futurists see the world conditions devolving until there is a Great Tribulation at the end of the church age, before Christ returns to establish his earthly kingdom (*premillennialism) or make his final judgment (*amillennialism). *Preterists understand this period as the *Last Days of Jerusalem, where God will pour out his covenant curses upon Israel for rejecting his Messiah and his Holy Spirit.

(26) Two Ages, Old Age, and New Age. The Bible has been summarized as two men (Adam and Jesus) and two trees (the one in Eden and the one on Calvary). Under this rubric, we might also say that the Bible has two ages—the old age and the new. Or, the first creation and the new creation. From the vantage point of the Old Testament, everything in the future looked like one bright new creation age. Yet, when Christ came, he ushered in the kingdom of God in two-parts. With *inaugurated eschatology, he came first to die for the sins of his people, and he is coming again to make all things new. Thus, the two ages overlap. Thus, the old age is associated with Adam, sin, death, evil, and judgment. The new age is associated with Christ and all of his new covenant blessings. Put differently, he has brought about the new creation, and that reality is here (2 Cor. 5:17), but not fully here (see Revelation 21). Unlike the heretical, hyper-preterists who believe the new creation is fully here (despite the ongoing presence of death and sin), we who look to the future with hope are awaiting Christ’s return when he will make all things new.

(27) Resurrection. In John 5:25–29, Jesus teaches us that resurrection comes in two forms. There is the resurrection to life that comes by way of regeneration and new spiritual life. This is the resurrection of the soul from death to life, and all those who experience this blessed resurrection will are secured a bodily resurrection on the last day, which is the second resurrection. Jesus says that on the last day the graves will be opened and all the dead will be raised, some to eternal life and others to condemnation. This is the general resurrection, which will lead to the final judgment, where Christ separates the sheep from the goats (Matt. 25:31–46). Those who have their names written in the Book of Life will receive their inheritance, a place in God’s new creation. But those whose names are missing, will be thrown into hell, for an eternal conscience torment. Importantly, the *Final State for the blessed and the damned is a bodily existence, that is determined by Jesus Christ the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18), who has been given authority to judge all humanity (Acts 17:31).

(28) Sheol / Hades. Sheol is the Hebrew word for the “realm of the dead.” And Hades is the Greek equivalent. Under the old covenant (before Christ rose to heaven), all the dead descended to Sheol, where there were two places to remain. The righteous rested in Abraham’s bosom. The wicked were tormented among the shades (spirits). When Christ died, he descended to Sheol (not Hell) to announce his victory (1 Pet. 3:19). When he rose to heaven, he delivered the saints to glory (Heb. 12:22–24), to remain with him until all enemies have been put under his feet (Psalm 110). At the point, the final judgment will come and the new creation will commence, bringing an end to the *Intermediate State and securing the *Final State.

Eschatology is a word that means the study (-ology) of last things (eschatos). And in that study there are lots of words that are familiar (*resurrection), unfamiliar (*preterist), and debated (*rapture). Likewise, terms like *millennium and *tribulation are ones that have multiple definitions, and figures like the *antichrist, whose common description may or may not match John’s use of the word.

Knowing that sound doctrine and fruitful discussions require clear definitions, it is helpful to have good grasp on the words we use when studying eschatology. For instance, the *millennium has been described as 1,000 years of peace over which the church has fought. Humorous as that perspective is, it reveals something true. So much debate comes from being quick to speak and slow to understand what someone else is saying. And so, one goal for our Sunday School series is to better know and define our terms—all within the bounds of our statement of faith.

Because our statement does not limit the millennium to one view, there is room at OBC for premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism, so long as those who hold such views keep the gospel at the center and affirm all the other central tenets of eschatology (e.g., the bodily resurrection of Christ, the reality of heaven and hell, and return of Christ to consummate the kingdom). Truly, there are eschatological doctrines on which we must agree, but there are others that invite biblical study and earnest discussion. And in those moments of discussion, it is vital to define our terms and to understand how others might define them differently.

To that end, here are thirteen terms that you need to know. Next week, we’ll add another thirteen. Notice as you read them some of the familiar words will include different shades of meaning, depending on who is using them. And it is my aim here to facilitate understanding, more than to argue a particular position. You can let me know how I do.

(The words with *asterisks are the words which are being defined.)

Eschatology in Alphabetical Order

(1) Amillennial(ism). One of three main views of the *millennium. Prior to the twentieth century, this view was usually referred to as *postmillennialism, as it sees Christ’s return as coming after (post) the millennium. Abraham Kuyper distinguished this view from other forms of *postmillennialism, which see millennium as a golden age coming at the end of the church age. Amillennialism does not deny a millennium, even if the alpha-privative (a-mill) seems to deny the millennium. Rather, this view believes Revelation 20 teaches that Christ reigns in heaven during the church age, with the saints joining him on thrones there.

(2) Antichrist. This term is often used to describe a composite figure who is predicted to come at the end of time before Christ returns. He will persecute Christians before he is destroyed by Christ. In the Bible, however, the word antichristos is only used four times—never in Revelation; only in 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7. Additionally, the word is used a second time in 1 John 2:18, and it is in the plural. While some conjoin the *Man of Sin (2 Thess. 2:3) with the *Beast from the Sea (Rev. 13:1–10) to form a composite world ruler who opposes Christ (the Antichrist), John uses the term more precisely—antichristos is restricted to false teachers who deny Christ in the flesh.

(3) Apocalypse. The word (apokalypsis) means unveiling or revelation, not the end of the world. This is the technical term for John’s Apocalypse. Historically, apocalyptic literature was a unique type of Jewish writing that arose during the Second Temple period (between Malachi and Matthew). It offered a vision of God in heaven to those who were suffering on the earth. In the Old Testament, Zechariah, parts of Daniel, and parts of Isaiah are “apocalyptic.” The Olivet Discourse is also apocalyptic. In Revelation, John receives an apocalyptic vision of heaven from Jesus and about Jesus.  And the best way to understand this apocalypse is to compare it to other parts of Scripture, as this vision of heaven employs imagery from all over the Bible.

(4) Ascension. Forty days after Jesus rose from the dead, he ascended into heaven (Act 1:9–11). This exaltation fulfilled Psalm 110 and Daniel 7:13–14, and it set in motion the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2) and everything else that commenced in the New Testament. See Ephesians 1, Hebrews 1, Revelation 1—all of these books start with Christ’s Ascension. As far as eschatology goes, the reality of Christ receiving all authority in heaven and earth (Dan. 7:13–14; Matt. 28:18) is too often overlooked. But any solid eschatology must keep Christ and his ascension central. And those systems that pay little attention to Christ’s Ascension are in danger of missing the way Christ’s ascension to heaven changed the world (Hebrews 9; Revelation 12).

(5) Beast, The. Technically, there are two beasts. Using imagery from Daniel, Revelation 13 describes the Sea Beast (vv. 1–10) and the Land Beast (vv. 11–18). *Futurists understand the first beast as describing the final Antichrist, and the second beast as a false prophet pointing to that Beast. *Idealists take the beasts as representative of rulers of state and leaders in the church, respectively. These emerge throughout the history of the church, with one final antichrist coming at the end of time. *Preterists understand the Sea Beast to be associated with Rome in the first century, while the Land Beast is associated with Israel and her apostate priests who allied themselves with Rome, until they were destroyed by them.

(6) Beast, The Mark of the. In Revelation 13:18 we find the “mark of the beast,” which is a marker associated with allegiance to this earthly ruler. This mark of the beast should be contrasted with the mark of the saints (Rev 7:3; 9:4). The earth-dwellers who are destined for destruction will have a mark that is associated with their trust in the beast, while the servants of the Lord who are destined for heaven have a mark that protects them from the wrath of the Lamb. The number 666 has been associated with Nero, whose name (by gematria) totals six hundred-sixty-six. Others take this number symbolically as the number of imperfect man. The number 666 may also related to Solomon’s gold in 1 Kings 10:14 and 2 Chronicles 9:13.

(7) Dispensationalism. This is a system of reading the Bible with seven different dispensations, and a strong emphasis on Israel. That is to say, all the promises to Israel must be fulfilled literally, which is why it calls for a future millennial reign that prioritizes Israel. The secret *rapture of the church, the seven-year *tribulation, and two judgments separated by the *millennium are key aspects of the doctrine. Historically, the system traces its roots back to John Nelson Darby (1800-82), but has changed over the years, with three distinct phases of dispensationalism: Classical (C. I. Scofield), Revised (Charles Ryrie and John Walvoord), and Progressive (Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock). Through the influence of Hal Lindsay (The Late Great Planet Earth), Tim LaHaye (The Left Behind series), Billy Graham’s crusades, and Dispensational Bible colleges and seminaries, Dispensationalism has been the most prominent eschatology in America over the last century.

(8) Dragon, The. The Dragon is the devil, Satan, and the serpent from the beginning. Revelation 12 gives us the fullest identification of this enemy of God, and Revelation 20 describes his binding (vv. 1–6) and his ultimate destruction (vv. 7–10). While an enemy of God, Satan is a created being and a defeated foe. In Revelation, he is depicted as a Dragon who will be defeated by the Lamb of God and all those who trust in the Word of Christ.
(9) Futurist. One of four primary ways to read John’s Apocalypse. This approach to Revelation, which is typical of Dispensationalists and other premillennialists, sees the events of Revelation as taking place at the end of time and leading up to the return of Christ to judge the world. While recognizing Revelation 1–3 are written to contemporary churches in Asia Minor, this approach to Revelation believes John is describing events at the end of time.

(10) Historicist. One of four primary ways to read John’s Apocalypse. While variously conceived and altered to accommodate the events of history, this view sees Revelation as a map of the church age. This includes the rise of Islam, the division of the church (East-West), and the pope as being the Antichrist. Historically, this view has had many proponents (e.g., Matthew Henry and Jonathan Edwards), but today it is held by Seventh Day Adventists, but few others.

(11) Idealist. One of four primary ways to read John’s Apocalypse. This approach to Revelation, which is typical of *Amillennialists who read the book as a series of repeating cycles (William Hendrickson and GK Beale), understand the book to present the conditions of the world between Christ’s ascension and his second coming. Affirming an *inaugurated eschatology, this view does not see Revelation describing events in the first century (*preterist) or at the end of time (*futurist), but as repeating pattern of spiritual warfare.

(12) Inaugurated Eschatology. Describing the *kingdom of God and its attendant blessings (spiritual and material), this concept sees the end-times as present and future. Often employing the language of already and not yet and the schema of *two ages, inaugurated eschatology is a view of redemptive history that is accepted independent of one’s millennial position. Rejecting the view that says every was completed in 70 AD (hyper-preterism) or everything is still future (hyper-dispensationalism), this view affirms the arrival of Christ’s kingdom, while still holding out hope for future events (e.g., the return of Christ, the final judgment, and the new creation.)

(13) Kingdom of God. God’s people, in God’s place, under God’s rule. That is how Graeme Goldsworthy summarizes the kingdom of God. And these three concepts might be the best way to conceive of this eschatological theme. For in the New Testament, the kingdom of God is preached (by Jesus and the Apostles) but never defined. Instead, its origins go back to God’s covenants with Adam, Abraham, Israel, and David. And so, when Jesus comes to receive David’s kingdom, he does so as an obedient son of Israel, the promised seed of Abraham, and the perfect man who mediates the new and everlasting covenant. Thus, the Kingdom of God is not simply a future reality for Jesus, but it is a theme that runs through the whole Bible.

Next week we will continue with the other half of the ABC’s.

For His Glory and your joy in Christ,
Pastor David

When I teach Systematic Theology to seminarians, I make students read two books on eschatology and I recommend about twenty. Since we are beginning a Sunday School series on the subject of eschatology, I wanted to share that list with you. For those who are following along in the series, you don’t need to read any of these books. But for those who would like to do the reading, here’s a good start, complete with a one or two sentence blurb about each.

The Three Most Important Books on Eschatology

Benjamin Gladd and Matthew Harmon, Making All Things New: Inaugurated Eschatology for the Life of the Church (2016). This is my go-to book for eschatology. Not only is it written by two godly men who disagree on the millennium (Gladd is Amill; Harmon is Premill), but it shows how eschatology works in the Bible and the church. If you only read one book, read this.

Graeme Goldsworthy, The Gospel in Revelation (2006). Q. What is Revelation about? A. The Gospel of Jesus Christ. Chances are, that is not how most people answer that question, but this Australian scholar does. And I would encourage anyone who has avoided Revelation for any number of negative feelings to read this Christ-filled look at Revelation. (If you look to buy this book, it’s part of a three-for-one set: The Goldsworthy Trilogy).

Brian Orr, The Olivet Discourse (2024). NT eschatology begins with Jesus’s Olivet Discourse. And in this book, Brian Orr provides a verse-by-verse reading of Matthew 24 that show how Jesus’s words are best understood in the historical context of the first century.

Multiple Views in One Book

Robert G. Clouse (ed.), The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (1977). George Eldon Ladd and Anthony Hoekema are two of the most consequential theologians of the twentieth century. Throw in Loraine Boettner and Herman Hoyt, and you have an introduction to varying approaches to what John means in Revelation 20, when describes the millennium.

Darrell Bock (ed.), Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond  (1999). Written a generation later, Kenneth Gentry provides one of the best one chapter explanations of postmillennialism you can find, while Craig Blaising present the premillennial view from a Progressive Dispensational approach. And Robert Strimple rounds out the volume defending Amillennialism.

Historical Perspectives

Charles E Hill. Regnum Caelorum: Patterns of Millennial Thought in Early Christianity (2001). With meticulous research, Hill shows how early church fathers who denied the intermediate state (i.e., Christians reigning in glory) affirmed an earthly millennium. If you want to know what the millennium views of the early church were, this is your book.

Iain Murray, The Puritan Hope (1975).  Murray’s classic text was the book I read (ca. 2003) that taught me that postmillennialism was not a utopian wish dream. It did not convince me of the position when I read it, but it showed how many serious students of the Bible affirm postmillennialism. In fact, it was the predominant eschatology of the Puritans and most of the Protestants who founded our country.

Daniel G. Hummel, The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism: How the Evangelical Battle Over the End Times Shaped Nation (2025). Dispensationalism has been the most popular eschatology in America for more than a century, but that doesn’t mean that this system is monolithic. From Darby (classic) to Ryrie (revised) to Bock (progressive), various Dispensationalisms have developed over time. And in this narrative history, Daniel Hummel tells the story of Dispensationalism as it has developed in America.

Historic Premillennial

George Eldon Ladd. The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (1964). Is the kingdom of God present or future? Ladd answer yes to both. Defending something called “inaugurated” eschatology, he shows how the kingdom of God is present and future. Much more than a book about the millennium, Ladd argues for a view called historical premillennialism.

Craig Blomberg and Sung Wook Chung (eds.). A Case for Historic Premillennialism (2009). Advancing the position of Ladd, all the while citing ancient sources, this book makes the case for a millennial reign of Christ, without arguing for a pre-tribulation rapture. Across evangelicalism, from D. A. Carson to Jim Hamilton, historic premillennialism is a common view. And this book argues for that position.

Amillennial

Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (1979). This is the most clear and compelling book I’ve read on amillennialism, the view that Revelation 20’s “millennium” speaks about the church age. Yet, this book is so much more than just a book on millennial views. It covers all the aspects of eschatology, both personal and cosmic.

William Hendrikson, More Than Conquers (repr. 2015). New Testament scholar and biblical commentator, William Hendrikson introduces a way of reading Revelation that moves in cycles. Instead of reading Revelation as a blueprint for the future (Premill) or a book that was (largely) fulfilled in the first century (Postmill), Henrikson shows how Revelation offers a series of repeated images that all speak of the same reality—Christ is reigning over the church, even as the devil afflicts the world. If you struggle to understand how Revelation 20 can mean anything but a future, literal 1,000 year reign of Christ, this is your book.

Postmillennialism

R. C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return? (2015). Classic Sproul. If you want a lucid explanation to a debated subject, read this book. Starting with the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24) and moving to address all the major elements of biblical eschatology, this great theologian offers a postmillennial interpretation of the New Testament.

Kenneth Gentry. He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (2021). Not to be confused with Peter Gentry (who spoke at our men’s retreat), Ken Gentry is a retired pastor and prolific author. If any writer pushed me to affirm postmillennialism, it would be the biblical arguments compiled by Kenneth Gentry, especially his reading of Revelation. He Shall Have Dominion is long, but it rewards the patient reader with a biblical defense of partial-preterism (the view the New Testament was mostly written before AD 70 and Christ’s judgment on Jerusalem in that year). If you need more exegetical support than Sproul provides, turn here.

Finally, should you find reading any of these books too demanding, here are more than a dozen concise essays on a host of eschatological themes. They do not all agree with one another. I do not agree with all of them. I don’t even agree with everything I wrote here, but they are each attempts to faithfully grapple with all Scripture says about the last things. (To find out which ones I agree or don’t agree with and why, come join our Sunday School class on May 10).

Keep this tab open on your phone or computer and read these essays as we go along.
The Two Ages (Benjamin L. Gladd);  The Course of This Age (David Schrock);  The Resurrection of Christ and the Age to Come (Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.);  The Return of Christ, The Rapture Question, and The Tribulation and the Antichrist (Alan S. Bandy);  The Future of Ethnic Israel (Jared Compton); Death and the Afterlife, The Resurrection, and The Final Judgment (Paul R. Williamson) The Day of the Lord (Jason De Rouchie); Views of the Millennium (Alan S. Bandy);  The New Heaven and New Earth (Matt Emerson);  Preterism: Has All Prophecy Been Fulfilled? (Fred Zaspel); The Kingdom of God (Christopher Morgan); Universalism: Will Everyone Finally Be Saved? (Daniel Strange) Hell as Endless Punishment (Denny Burk);  Degrees of Punishment in Hell (Albert N Martin and Fred Zaspel).
If you are interested in keeping up with all things eschatological in the days ahead, be sure to follow my blog: DavidSchrock.com. I’ll put further resources on that page.

This Sunday we come to the end of one section in Genesis (Genesis 12–24), as chapter 25 transitions from Abraham to his two sons (Ishmael and Isaac), to Jacob who will predominate the next eleven chapters (Genesis 26–36). As Exodus 6:3 identifies the covenant Lord as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it is vital for us to see how these chapters work together to tell the story of God’s promises to the patriarchs, and how those original promises are fulfilled during the days of Moses, even as they find their ultimate end in Christ (John 5:39).

Indeed, to understand what we read in Genesis requires keeping our finger on the text and our eyes on the horizon. As Christian Scripture, Genesis should be read historically, as a book written to the people of Israel who left Egypt on the way to the promised land. At the same time, it should also be read covenantally, meaning that we should be aware of “when” this book is written (in the days of Moses, around 1400 BC) and when the story is set (in the days of the Patriarchs, around 1800 BC). And finally, we should read the Bible Christologically, with an eye for the way that the Spirit of Christ is using these inspired words as arrows pointing to Christ.

In other words, we cannot simply read Genesis as ancient history. And we can’t read it as spiritual allegory either, as if the historical events, persons, places, and institutions do not matter. Far from it. As we saw with Mount Moriah—the historical provision of a ram caught in the thicket occurred on the very mountain where David would offer a sacrifice to seek the Lord’s mercy to remove the plague caused by his sin (2 Sam. 24:18-25). Equally, this was the historic place where Christ himself would die, when he gave his life to remove the deadly plague of sin for all who trust in him. From Genesis 22 alone, we can see how the historical events have prophetic significance.

The same will be true in Isaac and Jacob’s life. And as we begin to look at these sons of Abraham, we will learn how their lives continue to reveal the story of salvation. For that reason, we will call this next series “Seeds and Salvation.”

Reading the Bad Parts “Good”

Still, for all the ways Genesis 25 and following continues to keep the storyline of redemption moving toward Christ, we should also pause and consider how to read those parts in the Bible that don’t make sense—either culturally or morally. For instance, what about polygamy? Why does the Bible have so many men with multiple wives?

As Leviticus 18:18 declares, God clearly forbids the taking of a second (rival!) wife. Likewise, by comparison to God’s created purposes for marriage, multiple wives deny God’s good design and invite all sorts of trouble (see Deut. 21:15–17; 1 Sam. 1:5–6).

And yet, what do we find in Scripture? Polygamists a plenty. For instance, in Genesis 25:6, when Moses eulogizes this godly man, he mentions without any condemnation the fact that Abraham had multiple “concubines” (=second wives). Earlier in Genesis 16, we met one of these of women. Her name was Hagar, and she was the mother of Ishmael, on Sarah’s request. And now, as Abraham is laid to rest beside Sarah, we are introduced to another concubine named Keturah (cf. 1 Chron. 1:32).

Now, it is possible that Abraham married Keturah only after Sarah died. As his time line goes, he had time to remarry and have six children. Although, there is some suspicion about this later marriage, because of how Romans 4:17 understands Abraham’s physical condition (“as good as dead”). And so, commentators like Iain Duguid suggest that Keturah was married earlier and dismissed when Isaac was born. I actually believe Duguid is mistaken here and that Genesis introduces Keturah here, because that is when she became Abraham’s wife and gave him six sons. Nevertheless, the question of polygamy remains, and it is one we will address this Sunday, if only briefly.

Three Ways to Read Scripture Well

For now, however, let me offer three reminders for reading Genesis wisely, so that ethical enigmas and apparent contradictions don’t become unnecessary stumbling blocks.

First, remember that the Bible is often descriptive, not prescriptive.

Certainly, the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and the Epistles of Paul are largely prescriptive. But there are many parts of the Bible that describe historical events without offering moral imperatives. In cases of polygamy with Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon, keep this principle in mind and look for the ways that the story invites wisdom.

Second, wisdom is found by reading every story with the Law of God in mind.

Said more forcefully, the Bible assumes that you, the reader, are familiar with the Law. That means when it says in Genesis 4 that Cain had two wives, you should know this is a big problem. And you know this is a problem because Genesis 2:24 just defined marriage as a union between a man and woman. But Moses, who is writing Genesis, is writing it with the moral framework of the Law in mind. And so, for anyone to read Genesis 4 or Genesis 25 or Genesis 29 (Laban’s deception of Jacob, which led to his polygamy) properly, they must know what the Law says.

Accordingly, if you want to read the Old Testament well, you will have to regularly read Exodus–Deuteronomy. Without a careful understanding of those books, one will miss the subtle ironies and the legal problems of text. And more, because the authors of the narratives assume the Law of Moses, they won’t tell you: “And this addition of wives is a problem.” No. The authors of Scripture expect you to know that. Or to say it more positively, as you read the whole Bible with a growing knowledge of the Law, you will understand the Bible better.

Third, watch for the result of the action.

In Genesis 25, we see that Abraham gives gifts to his children, the sons of Keturah, but then he sends them away to the East. One interpretive option here is that they are sent out on mission, bringing faith to other lands. Maybe. But if we learn anything from the cardinal direction East, we know in Israel that this is a movement away from the Lord. Cain moved East when he departed from the Lord, and priests moved west when they ascended the steps in the temple to approach God. Thus, the Eastward direction of Abraham’s sons suggests distance from God, not missional activity.

Still, what does this teach us about polygamy? It teaches that instead of having one big happy family, Abraham has to separate his offspring from one another. Equally, the four mothers of Jacob’s twelve sons also experience rivalry, and that rivalry is passed down to their children. Indeed, the reason why God forbids polygamy (Lev. 18:18) is because of the rivalry it creates. And in every place where a godly man marries multiple wives the result is bad. Thus, even if you don’t have the legal knowledge of Moses, the end of polygamy’s story is never good—at least, not as good as God designed it. And seeing this, helps you draw the right application from the Bible—let one man marry one woman for life.

Beholding God’s Grace in Abraham’s Life . . . And Yours

As we will see this weekend, there is more to say about the deviation from God’s law, and part of that story includes the grace that God gives to Abraham and his offspring in spite of their errors. Indeed, one of the main points that Genesis 25 stresses is grace—both common grace and saving grace. And thus, to be ready to see and hear what God has for us on Sunday, read Genesis 25 and also Romans 8.

Those two chapters will help you see much of God’s grace. And this Sunday, as we enter into the eulogy of Abraham’s death and the narrative of Abraham’s life, we will see how God showered his grace upon this man—warts and all. Truly, this is our hope too—that God will be gracious to us, too, despite the messes that we make. On Sunday, this is what we will see. And until then, keep reading the Bible wisely, as you see the wisdom of God in all of its pages.

For His Glory and your joy in Jesus,
Pastor David

If you have been around OBC for any length of time, you know that we value the structure of the Bible. That is to say, we believe that because God inspired every word in Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:19–21), he also inspired the literary shape of those words. For instance, the five books of the Psalter were arranged to mirror the five books of Moses and to tell the story of King David and his greater Son. Likewise, in books like Deuteronomy, a careful reading shows us that Moses arranged his fifth book (or at least chapters 6–26) around the Decalogue (Ten Words) listed in Deuteronomy 5.

In other words, to understand the message of any given book requires learning the arrangement of that book. If you read last week’s reflection, you saw how Genesis is ordered in Genesis 1–11, as well as Genesis 12–24. In addition to recounting the story of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph by means of their respective generations (see “these are the generations” in Gen. 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:27; 25:12, 19; 36:1, 9; 37:2), Moses arranges Genesis chiastically.

In Scripture, a chiasm is a literary structure that follows the ABCBA pattern. And in his overview of Genesis, Jim Hamilton offers this outline:

1:1–2:3, Creation
                  2:4–4:26, Toledot of Heaven and Earth
                                    5:1–9:29, Toledot of Adam
                  10:1–11:9, Toledot of Noah
11:10–26, Toledot of Shem


11:27–32, Genealogy of Terah                    
                  12:1–9, Blessing of Abraham: Land, Seed, Blessing
                                    12:10–20, Sister Fib 1 (Exodus Preview)
                                                      13–14, Lot
                                                                        15 Eliezer, Faith, Covenant, Exodus,
                                                                        16 Hagar, Ishmael,
                                                                        17 Circumcision, Covenant with Isaac
                                                      18–19, Lot
                                    20:1–18, Sister Fib 2
                  21–22, Birth of Isaac, Offering of Isaac, Reiteration of Blessing
22:20–24, Genealogy of Nahor


23, Sarah’s Death
                            24, A Wife for Isaac
25:1–11, Abraham’s Death (see Isaac’s death in 35:27–29)


25:12–19, Ishmael and Isaac Toledots (25:12; 25:19)
                  25:20–26:5, Rebekah’s Children Struggle in Womb, God’s Promise to Isaac
                                    26:6–35, Isaac Deceives Philistines and Has Strife
                                                      27:1–28:9, Stolen Blessing and Flight to Paddan Aram
                                                                        28:10–22, Jacob’s Dream at Bethel
                                                                                       29:1–30, Laban Deceives Jacob
                                                                                              29:31–30:24, Jacob’s Children Born
                                                                                              30:25–43, Jacob’s Flocks Born
                                                                                        31, Jacob Deceives Laban
                                                                        32, Jacob Sees Angels and Wrestles with God
                                                      33, Jacob Blesses Esau and Returns from Paddan Aram
                                    34, Sons of Jacob Deceive and Have Strife with Hivites (Shechem)
                  35, God’s Promise to Jacob, Rachel Dies Birthing Benjamin
36:1–43, Esau Toledot (2x, 36:1; 36:9)


37:1–11, Joseph Dreams
                  37:12–36, Jacob Mourns “Death” of Joseph
                                    38:1–30, Judah and Tamar
                                                      39:1–23, Joseph Enslaved in Egypt
                                                                        40–41, Joseph, Savior of Egypt
                                                                                          42–43, Journeys of Brothers to Egypt
                                                                                                        44, Joseph Tests His Brothers
                                                                                                        45, Joseph Reveals Himself
                                                                                          46:1–28, Journey of Family to Egypt
                                                                        46:28–47:12, Joseph, Savior of His Family
                                                      47:13–31, Joseph Enslaves Egypt
                                    48:1–49:27, Blessing of Joseph and Judah
                  49:28–50:14, Joseph Mourns Death of Jacob
50:15–26, Joseph Provides


If you pay careful attention to this proposal, it offers two valuable observations for us. First, it follows the generational markers (toledots), which suggests that the author Moses is intending to organize Genesis in this way. Second, it puts the longest chapter in Genesis, the marriage of Isaac and Rebekah, at the center of this book.

While we may puzzle over why this story of marriage is the central chapter in Genesis, I believe it is related to the whole message of the book. Going back to Genesis 3:15, God promises a seed who will come and bring salvation to the world. Set in the context of God’s judgment upon the serpent, God makes the first gospel promise in the Bible. Accordingly, this verse is often called the protoevangelium (first gospel). And as we read Genesis, we find a recurring theme of seed warfare (e.g., Cain v. Abel) and repeated stories where the seed is endangered and/or the woman is barren.

In time, Sarah had Issac (Genesis 21), who was the long-expected seed of promise (Gal. 4:23, 28). And in Genesis 24, we now see how this seed of promise will find a bride to carry on the story of salvation. Just as God gave Abraham a son of promise, so God will do the same for Isaac. But for that to happen, he will need to find a wife. And that is what this story is all about.

Indeed, marriage is a key theme in Genesis, because it is a key institution in humanity. And as Ephesians 5 tells us, the union of a man and woman is a mystery that actually points to Christ and the church. That is to say, when a man marries a woman, he is taking the role of Christ and the bride is playing the part of the church. And thus, every marriage—knowingly or unknowingly—is picture of the gospel.

So what does that mean for Genesis 24?

It means that the central chapter of the book is all about the gospel. And actually, the connections between Isaac and Rebekah’s marriage and the gospel of Christ go far beyond the surface connections of marriage and redemption. Rather, the whole plotline of Genesis 24 reveals more than twelve points of contact between Genesis and Jesus. And this Sunday, we are going to look at them, as we see how this long and winding chapter reveals the glories of Christ and his plans to save the world.

So before Sunday take time to read Genesis 24. It’s a long chapter and the more you familiarize yourself with the passage, the more you will get out of it. Additionally, pray for our time together and for those who are coming to church with you. As we learned in our series on liturgy, the Lord walks among his lampstands on the Lord’s Day, and so we should be ready to commune with him as we come to worship on Sunday.

As the Lord allows, I will look forward to seeing you on the Lord’s Day.

For His Glory and your joy in Jesus,

Pastor David
 

As you know, the book of Genesis is so named because it is a book of beginnings. Genesis 1–2 tell us about the beginning of the world. Genesis 3 tells us about the beginning of sin, while Genesis 4–11 begin to show us how God brings salvation through judgment. Then after Genesis 10–11 begin to show the spread of the nations, Genesis 12 introduces us to a man named Abram who will be the source of salvation for the world. In other words, while God’s promise of redemption is first heard in Genesis 3:15, Genesis 12–22 show us how the gospel was preached beforehand to Abram, later named Abraham (cf. Gal. 3:8).

Since 2023, we have been walking through the book of Genesis under the three sermon series: Creation and Covenant (Genesis 1–3), Salvation and Judgment (Genesis 4–11), and Promises and Patriarchs (Genesis 12–24).

Starting this Sunday, we will be return to Genesis 23. And in a few weeks, we will pick up our fourth series in Genesis: Seeds and Salvation (Genesis 25–36). And as the Lord allows, we will consider the saving works of God from the stories of Isaac, Jacob, and their families.

As we have seen previously, God made a covenant with Abraham, promising him an offspring who would inherit the cosmos (Rom. 4:13). In the days of Abraham, the birth of Isaac fulfilled this gracious promise. But it did not exhaust the promises of God. As Hebrews 11 explains, Abraham looked forward to a city whose architect and builder was God. And as Galatians 3:16 says, the ultimate fulfillment of God’s covenant with Abraham is found in the birth of Christ.

Thus, reading Genesis is not simply an exploration in historical beginnings. It is also a vital revelation for understanding the ways God brought salvation to the world, and how he planned the end from the beginning (Isa. 46:9–10). And more than that, we learn how God works in the world, so that we can know him more fully and worship him more completely. Indeed, this is why we read the Old Testament and take our time going through books like Genesis. And beginning this Sunday, we will pick up where we left off, as we come to the death and burial of Sarah.

Resurrecting the Storyline of Genesis
Now admittedly, it is tempting to think a story about a man buying a cave for his dead wife from an ancient tribal chieftain doesn't have anything to teach us today. But as we will see, Abraham’s shrewd acquisition of the cave at Machpelah avoids capitulation to the world and its giants (which is a problem that still confronts us). Yet, Abraham’s engagement with the Hittites does more than give worldly wisdom; it also reveals the way Sarah’s burial is itself a testimony to Abraham’s faith in the resurrection. How so?

Well, that is what we will look at this Sunday. But for now, as we resurrect the book of Genesis, let me remind you of the storyline so far.

In Genesis 1–11, we find one creation story, followed by another. That is to say that after God made the world in six days, he destroyed the first world with a global flood. But then in that cosmic judgment, he saved eight people and made new creation. And if Bruce Waltke, An Old Testament Theology (pp. 307–080, is correct about Genesis 1–11, then the arrangement of these stories looks something like this.

1:1–6:8	CREATION	6:9–11:32	A NEW CREATION
1:1–2:3	A. Creation out of chaotic water with divine blessing	6:9–9:19	A’. Creation out of chaotic water with divine blessing
2:4–3:24	B. Sin involving nakedness, seeing/covering nakedness; curse	9:20–23	B’. Sin involving nakedness, seeing/covering nakedness; curse
3:15–4:16	C. Division of humanity into the people of God and the enemies of God	9:24–27	C’. Division of humanity into the people of God and the enemies of God
4:8	D. No descendants of sinful murdered younger, righteous Abel	10:1–5	D’. Descendants of younger, righteous Japheth
4:17–24	E. Descendants of sinful Cain: builds a city	10:6–20	E’. Descendants of sinful son Ham: builds multiple cities
5:1–32	F. Descendants of chosen son Seth: ten generations to Noah	10:21–32	F’. Descendants of chosen son Shem: ten generations to Terah
6:1–4	G. Downfall: unlawful unions – angels and women	11:1–9	G’. Downfall: unlawful union – men and angels (Tower of Babel)
6:5–8	H. Brief introduction to a faithful savior: Noah	11:27–32	H’. Brief introduction to a faithful savior: Abram

More simply, Genesis 1:1–6:8 shows us a world created, fallen, judged, saved, and made new. And then in Genesis 6:9–11:32, the pattern repeats. Noah is a new Adam, and like the first Adam he falls and his offspring are divided on the way to judgment and salvation. This is how Genesis 1–11 begins. And it sets up the world of Abraham, where God chooses a new covenant mediator (Abraham) to bring salvation to all who trust in Abraham’s offspring.

And notably, if Genesis 1–11 offers an observable structure, so does Genesis 12–22. And it looks like this:

Gen 11:27–32 – Milcah and Nahor
          Gen 12:1–9 – The Promise to ABRAHAM – The Lord Who Blesses
                    Gen 12:10–20 – Sarai is My Sister
                             Gen 13­–14 – Lot is Rescued by ABRAHAM as Judgment Falls
                                     Gen 15 – The covenant is conferred
                                             Gen 16 – Ishmael is Born – The Lord Who Sees
                                     Gen 17 –  The covenant is confirmed
                            Gen 18–19 – Lot is Rescued by ABRAHAM as Judgment Falls
                     Gen 20–21 – Sarah is My Sister
           Gen 22:1–19 – The Sworn Oath to ABRAHAM – The Lord Who Provides
Gen 22:20–24 – Milcah and Nahor

As God reveals himself to Abraham, he orchestrates a series of events to establish his covenant. This begins with God choosing Abraham in Genesis 12, making a covenant with him in Genesis 17, introducing a covenant sign in Genesis 17, and providing a sacrificial ram in Genesis 22. Along the way, we can see how Abraham’s faith grew, and how God led Abraham to look for the city, whose architect and builder is God. Indeed, by way of promising Abraham a land and a people, plus his own blessed presence, God made plans for redeeming the world he had made—a world now cursed by sin.

In all, these two outlines show us that God’s plans of redemption are keyed to resolve the problems found in creation. And actually, if you look carefully, the two early sections of Genesis are linked by an overlapping genealogy with Milcah and Nahor. Grammatically, this confirms that Genesis is one, unified book. But also, it keeps our eyes on the first promise (Gen 3:15)—that God was going to bring a son who crush the head of the serpent, even as his own heel would be bruised.

Seeing the Glory of Jesus in Genesis
All in all, Genesis is a glorious book. And the more you look at it, the more glory you see. And this Sunday, we will re-enter the book at the center section (Genesis 23–25). With great care, we find that Sarah’s death (ch. 23) and Abram’s death (ch. 25) bookend the longest chapter in Genesis (ch. 24). And lest we think that this arrangement is accidental, we will see that the longest chapter of the book is also a story that foretells the gospel of Jesus Christ.

But that story of a Father sending a servant to a find a bride for his son comes next week. For this week, we are looking at Genesis 23 and the way that a burial plot in Hebron offers resurrection hope for Abram, Isaac, Jacob, and all who trust in their promised Son—Jesus Christ.

So take time to read Genesis 23 and pray for our worship gathering. On Sunday, we will see more of our resurrected Lord from the pages of Genesis. And I will look forward to seeing you then, as the Lord allows.

For His Glory and your joy in Jesus,

Pastor David

Last year, we began a new Good Friday sermon series called “The Cross and the Crowd.” From 2018–2024, we looked at the seven statements of Christ on the cross. And last year, we started a new Good Friday series, where we considered the impact of the cross on the various people—individuals and groups—who stood around the cross. Or, as we will see this year, some who did not stand around the cross.

As one of the twelve, Judas Iscariot, if he had not scattered, should have been standing at the cross. For this is where John was, as well as many of the women in Jesus’s life. Yet, for reasons which made Judas become infamous, he was not at the cross. Instead, he hung himself when he discovered that his actions sentenced an innocent man to death.

Tragically, Judas saw no hope when he looked to Jesus. For reasons known and unknown, he traded the whereabouts of Jesus for thirty pieces of silver. At a time before satellite tracking, Judas offered to Jesus’s enemies something they could not find on their own—the location of Jesus. And so, on the night before Christ was hung on a tree, Judas became the first cause of Jesus’s crucifixion.

Certainly, there were other parties involved—the chief priests, the Roman soldiers, Pontius Pilate, Herod, and others—but none of these figures could have brought Jesus to the cross, unless Judas brought a crowd with swords and clubs to Jesus. And for his efforts, Judas received the redemption price of a slave (Exod. 21:32)—thirty pieces of silver.

And on Good Friday, we considered what thirty pieces of silver tell us about Jesus, Judas, and our own approach to Christ. And here I want to offer a few related reflections.

What Zechariah 11 Says
You may remember, thirty pieces of silver is also what Zechariah received when the people of Israel resisted him. In Zechariah 11:12–13 we read,

12 Then I [Zechariah] said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver. 13 Then the LORD said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD, to the potter.

With symbolic action, this scene both addresses the problems of Zechariah’s day and previews what will transpire with Judas, the priests of Jerusalem, and Jesus—only with that preview will come some ironic reversals, too. So, let’s consider the original context and then how Zechariah 11 helps us understand Judas’s coin exchange.

In the days after the exile of Judah, the Lord called Zechariah to take up the form of a shepherd twice. First, he would be a righteous shepherd (Zech. 11:4–6), whom the people would reject (Zech. 11:7–14). Then again, he would wear the apparel of the shepherd again—whether literally or symbolically, commentators are not in agreement. Only, in this second shepherd-action (Zech. 11:15–17), he was to play the part of a wicked and foolish shepherd, whereby the people would be destroyed.

As many have noted, Zechariah 11 is perhaps the hardest chapter in a difficult book. And part of that challenge is the timing of Zechariah’s prophecy. As he takes two staffs (Favor and Union) and breaks them to show the breaking of the covenant people, it is likely that Zechariah writing around 520 BC looks back in time to the exile. Yet, as one reads all of Zechariah 9–14, it is a section that points ahead to a time when Christ will be the shepherd, the sacrifice, and the source of salvation. Truly, these six chapters are equal to Isaiah 53 for explaining the final week of Christ’s earthly life. And in Zechariah 11, one part of that story is the thirty pieces of silver.

In Zechariah 11, the prophet breaks the staffs to show the judgment coming upon the people. And for his service, he receives payment from the sheep traders, which he mockingly calls a “lordly [or handsome] price.”

In actuality, thirty pieces of silver is poor sum—as it is the price of a slave. And so, the prophet rejects the wage, when the LORD tells him to throw it back into the temple (the house of the LORD). And by means of that rejection, the downfall of the nation is sealed. And in Zechariah 11:15–17, we see Zechariah take on the form of a shepherd again, which symbolizes the rise of Gentile shepherds who will strike the flock.

As I read it, these symbolic actions which look back upon the destruction of Jerusalem foreshadow a coming reality, when the nation’s wickedness will again invite destruction and God will bring in foreign kings to destroy the flock. As history rhymes, the same situation arises in days of Jesus. And for the price of a slave, the king of the universe will be sacrificed.

What Zechariah 11 Reveals
First of all, Zechariah 11 reveals a day when Israel will be led by wicked shepherds who are looking to kill Jesus. Equally, for those in Israel who are not looking to kill Jesus, many like Judas, are looking to Jesus for illicit ends—money, power, liberation from Rome, etc. Confirming this, John 6 tells us that Jesus knew Judas was a devil in his midst. But ironically, this is revealed as many followers of Jesus leave him, because he tells them that he has come for more than providing food for their stomachs.

At the same time, Jesus, who is the true shepherd, is going to be sacrificed as a sacrificial lamb. This is a point that Zechariah 12–13 will make. Yet, in Zechariah 11 itself we learn that the people will give Zechariah a slave price of silver. This reveals their estimation of this man of God, and his rejection of the money also confirms their wickedness.

Fast forward to Judas. He is a follower of the Lord, like Zechariah, but he is not a true believer. While Judas may have followed Jesus with hopes of receiving a kingdom, his true character is found in the way he stole money from the poor (John 12:4–6). Accordingly, when Satan entered him, he was used by the devil to bring Jesus into the hands of the wicked shepherds. Yet, as God is sovereign over the wicked machinations of men, this act of betrayal was used for better purposes—namely, the forgiveness of sins that Zechariah 12–13 would describe.

Focusing on the silver pieces alone, however, we discover another important point from this coin exchange—namely, that Jesus was sold into the hands of the priests like a slave. In other words, the slave-price of the coins not only made it possible for Jesus to be captured. It also indicated the kind of crucifixion he would have. As he himself identified himself as a slave who came to serve and not to be served (Matthew 20:28), so this silver exchange confirmed that point: Jesus was the servant who would die for his people's sins.

And on Good Friday, we will consider the life and death of Judas, as it reveals the meaning of Christ’s death and resurrection. And conversely, we will see how the cross of Christ reveals our own hearts, as we consider why we follow our Lord.

So, join us tonight at 7:00pm for our Good Friday service. Then, on Sunday come at 10:00am, as we celebrate the resurrection of Christ. For Easter, we will look at 1 Corinthians 15:12–19 and the historical basis for believing in the resurrection. In short, we have a great weekend ahead. And I look forward to seeing you, as we lift our eyes to the risen Christ.

The week from Palm Sunday to Easter Sunday has been called Holy Week for millennia, and we invite you to set apart this week with us as we remember the events leading to Christ’s crucifixion and prepare to celebrate our Lord’s resurrection. To help guide you through this week, we are sharing a Bible reading plan below and links to a daily devotional series and Spotify playlists.

A Bible Reading Plan
We invite you to read through one or more of the gospel accounts of Holy Week listed below. I recommend that you select one or two Gospel accounts to read each day and alternate with the other gospels in following years.

1. Palm Sunday | Jesus Enters Jerusalem
Matt 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-11; Luke 19:28-44; John 12:12-50

2. Monday | Temple Cleansing and Bethany
Matt 21:12-17; Mark 11:12-19; Luke 19:45-48

3. Tuesday | Temple Confrontations and Olivet Discourse
Matt 21:18-26:1; Mark 11:20-13:37; Luke 20:1-37

4. Spy Wednesday | Betrayal and Anointing
Matt 26:3-16; Mark 14:1-11; Luke 21:38-22:6

5. Maundy Thursday | Passover Meal, Arrest, and Denials
Matt 26:17-75; Mark 14:12-72; Luke 22:7-65; John 13:1-18:27

6. Good Friday | Crucifixion
Matt 27:1-61; Mark 15:1-47; Luke 22:66-23:56a; John 18:28-19:42

7. Saturday | The Tomb
Matt 27:62-66; Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56b

8. Resurrection Sunday | He is Risen!
Matt 28:1-20; Mark 16:2-8; Luke 24:1-53; John 20:1-21:25

As you look through these readings, there are a few things you should notice. First, not every event is recorded in each Gospel, as some Gospels are more concise, while others are more detailed. Second, the Gospel of John has significantly more content on this week, as the second half of the book is focused on the last week leading to Christ’s death and resurrection.

Some of these texts are more action focused and quick moving as they recount specific events, while others hold longer sections of Jesus’ teachings such as the debates at the Temple followed by the Olivet Discourse on Tuesday, and then the Upper Room Discourse on Thursday.

As you read, pray that the Lord would open your eyes to behold his wonders (Ps 119:18), and that His Word would work on your heart (John 20:31; Luke 24:32).

A Daily Devotional and Spotify Playlists
We also invite you to watch or listen to this devotional series for each day of Holy Week. Accompanying each of these videos are Spotify playlists that are curated to give you a daily soundtrack of songs reflecting on Christ.

Media Library
For more content, sermons from past years on Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday are also available in our media library.

This Week
We invite you to join us for our Palm Sunday dinner, Tuesday’s Hymn Sing, our Good Friday worship service, and Resurrection Sunday morning.

We look forward to this week of remembering the work of Christ, celebrating His resurrection, and rejoicing and worshiping our Lord together.

Blessings in Christ,
Pastor Ben

As we have discussed over the course of our series on liturgy and as will be introduced in Sunday’s sermon, we are making some changes to our communion elements and how they will be distributed in the worship service. Starting on Easter Sunday (April 5), we will have communion wine and freshly baked bread (while still having unfermented grape juice and gluten/dairy free bread, too). The reasons for bread and wine can be seen in last week’s blog post and will be revisited in this week’s sermon. Needless to say, this change is not simply a matter of personal preference, but one of theological import.

We believe bread and wine best symbolize the Lord’s body and blood, and we believe that these elements are preferable for representing our Lord as we come to the Table. Still, with the change of elements come a change in their distribution. And that is what I want to share here, complete with a (s)eating chart.

Here are ten things you need to know as you prepare for the Lord’s Supper in just a few days:

1. The Elements. All elements will be kept in the front of the sanctuary. So there are no elements to pick up before service. These elements will be bread and wine, along with grape juice and gluten/dairy free bread.  

2. Timing. Elements will be made available after the sermon and after an introduction to the Lord’s Table. Members will then be invited forward to pick up the elements and return to their seats.

3. Fencing the Table. As before, “fencing the table” is a simple instruction for the way that communion is for church members and for guests who have also been baptized in Christ. (We do not restrict paedobaptists, worshipers who come from gospel-believing Presbyterian churches, from the Lord’s Table).

4. Confession of Faith. After the Lord’s Supper is introduced, we will confess our faith together. This confession will come by reciting the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, or some other statement of our faith. We have confessed these statements in service before, but not before the Lord’s Table.  

5. Music and Ushers. Following this confession, the musicians will begin to play instrumentally, while our ushers dismiss the rows to pick up the elements, starting with the front rows, and moving backward. As each Sunday will have different numbers and distribution of people, this will require some flexibility and patience.  If you are not sharing in the Lord’s Table, please feel free to remain seated, though you might need to get up briefly to let someone in or out of your row.

6. The Table. You will find the bread (regular or gluten/dairy free) and the cup (wine or grape juice) clearly marked on the table. Each table will be served by an elder. If any questions arise, they are there to assist. Pick up the bread and the cup and return to your seat, and we will take them together as we always have done.

7. Expected Challenges. We understand the challenges of having small children or other complicating factors. If we find repeated problems, we will address those. But we believe the best solution is for members and their families to patiently assist one another in moving to the Table and picking up the elements. In cases where someone is unable to walk to the front, we will make arrangements to bring the elements. Additionally, when someone in your row does not take communion, whether that is an unbaptized child or a visitor, we are suggesting they remain seated or simply exit the row and then return to their seat, while those getting communion walk up a center aisle to the tables.

• If you’re seated in a side row, you will walk up a center aisle (see green arrows on the floorplan below), and return to your seats by the side aisle.
• If you’re seated in a center row, you will also walk up a center aisle (see  green arrows on the floorplan below) and return to your seats by the same center aisle.

8. Singing. As our congregation processes to get the elements, the musicians will lead us in a communion hymn. As the congregation comes back to their seats and the song finishes, we will take the meal together.

9. The Communion. The pastor officiating the communion meal will pray and give instructions for the congregation to take the bread and then the cup.

10. The Overall Effect. While we expect that these changes will take a little more time in service, we seek to glorify the Lord in this and we believe it is worthwhile. For not only do we honor our Lord by taking bread and wine/juice, but the slower communion meal gives us time to offer prayers of thanksgiving to God for his Son and for the body of Christ who has been assembled by his finished work on the cross.

Finally, for those who might have any remaining questions, we will run through this together on Sunday evening, March 29, when we come together for our members meeting. On that night, we will enjoy a fellowship meal downstairs and then we will take communion together in the sanctuary with the new communion elements and distribution. Additionally, we will troubleshoot any logistical challenges or questions that arise. Until then, if you have further questions, please share them with your community group (who will be discussing the Lord’s Supper this week) or with any elder.

We are delighted to be able to look for ways to better apply God’s Word, and we truly believe that taking the communion elements in this way affords us the opportunity to do that.

For His Glory and your joy,

Pastor David

In John’s Gospel, the first of seven signs is found at a wedding feast in Cana. Accompanied by his family, Jesus is called upon to address the shortage of wine. In response, Jesus says to his mother, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come” (John 2:4). In this brief exchange, John sets his Gospel on a collision course for the moment when the hour does come and Jesus addresses his mother again as “woman.” John 19:26–27 records these words from the cross, “Woman, behold, your son,” which is immediately followed with a word to John, himself, “Behold, your mother!”

Clearly, the Gospel of John is directed toward the cross of Christ, as is everything else in the Bible. From the promise of the woman’s seed crushing the serpent’s seed (Gen. 3:15), to the ram provided as a substitute for Isaac (Gen. 22:13–14), to the myriad of sacrifices in Leviticus, to the poetic description of the crucifixion (Psalm 22), the Bible has been looking forward to the day when the Son of God would die for the sins of this people.

In fact, for those reading John’s Gospel, the promise of pardon had already been disclosed in John 1:29, when John the Baptist looked to Jesus and declared, “Behold, the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” Accordingly, when we come to Jesus’s first sign, we have an inkling of what John is trying to show us—namely, that Jesus, who is the Son of God, has come to bring salvation to sinners like us. And if this is the message of John, as well as the whole Bible, it is also the good news (read: gospel) that repeats in our worship services too.

As we have seen throughout our series on liturgy, the proclamation of the gospel comes each week in the assurance of pardon, where in response to our confession of sin, we are reminded of Christ’s person and work, and why our sins which are red like crimson, can be made white like snow (Isa. 1:18). Still, this time of consecration in our service is not the only places we hear the gospel. The gospel (and the law) will be a regular staple as we hear from the counsel of God, the moment in our service when we hear the Scriptures read and explained.

By comparison, however, the place where the gospel is made most visible is in the Lord’s Table, where the bread and the cup provide a visible, tangible, and ingestible declaration of God’s good news for us in Christ. And as our church begins to make a few changes to the way we celebrate this communion, I want to offer a brief theology of the Lord’s Supper (this week), followed by some practical guidelines for our new practice of receiving the elements (next week).

A Sevenfold Theology of the Lord’s Supper
To fully understand the symbolism that is baked (and fermented) into the Lord’s Supper would require a full biblical theology, something like T. K. Dunn’s Take and Eat: From Fall to Feast. Short of that, I can say the Lord’s Supper takes up themes of creation and cultivation, work and rest, Passover and covenant meals (think: Melchizedek), priests and kings, and much more. In the New Testament, the Lord’s Supper is one of two ordinances given by Jesus—baptism being the other. The Lord’s Supper is explained in each of the Synoptic Gospels, as well as 1 Corinthians 11. And for those with eyes to see it, Hebrews, Revelation, and John all contribute to our understanding of the Lord’s Supper, too.

So long story short, eating food in the presence of God is no small topic in the Bible. In fact, eating food wrongly in God’s Garden is what brought sin into the world (Genesis 3:1–6). And if we are reading Scripture rightly, only those who eat food rightly today have assurance of enjoying the communion with God in eternity. And so, while a collection of essays, or sermons, or both, is needed for this subject, I want to highlight seven key points of doctrine that may help you take up and eat, when you come to the Lord’s Table.

1. Take and Eat

The first thing to say about the Lord’s Supper is that when Jesus gave the meal to his disciples, he was reversing the curse brought about the Serpent. That is to say, when Satan led Adam and Eve to rebel, he did so by means of saying, “Take and eat.” As Genesis 3:1–6 records, the Serpent offered good food to the first couple. And instead of keeping God’s Word and waiting for the Lord (cf. Gen. 2:17), they ate the fruit in violation of God’s command and brought judgment upon themselves and all creation, too (Gen. 3:14–19). In other words, Adam and Eve ate without God’s permission or God’s presence. And as a result, a food that was intended to bless Adam and Eve with the knowledge of good and evil, became the source of sin and death.

Truly, every time man eats without giving thanks to God, he abides in that curse (cf. Rom 1:21; 1 Tim. 4:1–5). Just the same, when a man or woman attempts to feed themselves, by trusting in themselves, their works, and their works-righteousness, they are continuing to miss the bread that is offered to us in Christ (cf. Isa. 55:1–3). Yet, when someone is redeemed by the grace of God, and his heart is turned to Christ, and the Spirit gives him repentance and thanksgiving, then he is prepared to sit at the Lord’s Table, where God invites his people to come and enjoy the food he provides. In this way, the food we eat during communion calls us away from our works and reminds us of Christ’s finished work.

“Take and eat” is not just a word of choreography that ensures the congregation eats together. It is a divine word of grace, written down in Scripture, that tells the redeemed that they have received favor from the Lord and can rest in his presence. Truly, eating the communion meal at church has deep theological meaning. And it is worth our effort to understand all that is there.

2. Work and Rest

Following from this command to eat, we can say that the Lord’s Supper is received when the church celebrates the Sabbath. Just as the people of Israel ate the manna when God fed them in the wilderness (Exod. 16:1–36), and just as Moses put one jar of manna in the ark of the covenant (Exod. 16:33–34; Heb. 9:4), to commemorate God’s provision for Israel, so those who approach the mercy seat of God on the Lord’s Day, are to remember the finished work of Christ. Indeed, in John’s Gospel Jesus is presented as the bread of life and the one that we must consume by faith, in order to have life (John 6:35–40). Strange is may sound (at first), Jesus teaches us to feed on him (John 6:52–59), and when we take the Lord’s Supper we are doing just that. By Christ’s finished work, we are taught to leave our works behind and to rest in him.

Indeed, under the new covenant, weekly Sabbath observance is not so much a command to physically cease working, although there is something about that. We are embodied souls, after all. But every Lord’s Day, when the church gathers and partakes of the bread and the cup, our faith is renewed because we are ceasing to work for our daily bread—something we must do on the other six days (2 Thess. 3:7–10). Rather, we are proclaiming the finished work of Christ to one another, and we are remembering what God has done for us in Christ.

3. Remembering and Reminding

If we are remembering what Christ has done, we are also reminding the Lord of his promises to us in Christ. Now, the idea of reminding the omniscient God of his promises may sound odd, or even blasphemous. Are we implying that God has forgotten us? No, not at all. Rather, we are saying that as we come to the table, we are coming in prayer and supplication, needful for God to remember all that he has promised us in Christ.

When we pray, we are bringing before God his promises and we are asking him to honor his Word. Indeed, prayer does not change God’s mind or twist God’s arm. But according to the way God’s work in the world, prayer is necessary. That is to say, the Holy Spirit leads in our prayers and when he does, he brings us into God’s work. In God’s economy, all three persons—Father, Son, and Spirit—work without any separation or independence. And accordingly, when God works for our good, he leads his people to pray and to ask God to pour out his blessings. The same can be said of the Lord’s Table. When we come to the Lord’s Table, it is not only a word of remembrance for us, it is a prayerful reminder to God.

Now, to see this more fully, we need to consider how covenant signs worked in the Old Testament. For instance, the sign of the rainbow was not just given to remind humanity of God’s covenant; it was also given to remind God of his promise to never destroy the world with a universal flood. Genesis 9:13–15 read, “I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh.”

I could be mistaken, but I suspect that our memory remembers this passage differently. But clearly, this covenant sign is designed to remind God, even as the testimony of Scripture reminds us of how the rainbow reminds God.

Similarly, the sign of circumcision (Gen. 17:11) and the sign of the Sabbath (Exod. 31:13) spoke to both God and man. That is to say, these created signs recalled God’s promises to his covenant people, even as circumcision and Sabbath passed on the covenant from one generation to the next. Finally, Psalm 89 compares David’s covenant sign, the throne, to the sun and the moon, which bear testimony to both God and man. Long story short, the covenants that God made with his people in the Old Testament were given signs so that both parties would remember the arrangement. In fact, when the people broke covenant with God in the case of the golden calf, Moses himself stood before God and pleaded for them on the basis of God’s covenant promises (see Exodus 32–34).

To complete the picture, the chief priest in Israel functioned as the designated mediator who stood before God to remind him of his covenant. In fact, this is made plain in Exodus 28, where the priestly garments included the “stones of remembrance” (v. 12). These stones had the names of the twelve tribes written on them, and when Aaron wore his priestly garments in the Holy Place he brought the tribes “to regular remembrance before the Lord” (v. 29). Said differently, by means of this priest and his holy garments, the people of God were blessed by the Lord who remembered them (cf. Psalm 133). But also, if and when the priest failed to bring the people before God, the people suffered (Mal. 2:1–9). Indeed, the work of bringing to remembrance the promises of the covenant before God is vital for the blessing of the people. And this is what the priests who served at the altar were supposed to do—but often didn’t!

Thankfully, today our great high priest lives to intercede for us. And that means that as he reigns in heaven, he makes effectual prayer for all of his people (Heb. 7:25). Nevertheless, when the Lord calls us to worship and commands us to take and eat, he is not simply calling us to remember his finished work. He is also bringing to mind the promises that God to his people. And so, we can say that just like the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants reminded both parties of the covenant, so too, the Lord’s Supper remembers and reminds God and man of the promises of grace found in the new covenant. And lest we think that coming the Lord’s Table is optional, it is in this meal—which signifies the finished work of Christ—that we are bringing to remembrance all the blessings of the new covenant.

4. Passover and Covenant

The Lord’s Table is more than a covenant meal, however. It is also a promise of the redemption that came through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the Lord instituted the supper on the night before he was crucified, and as he associated the bread with his body and the cup with his blood, so also he connected this meal with the Passover.
Remember, Christ was crucified during the week of Passover. And the time and place where Jesus instituted this meal was during the Passover Celebration. In this way, he took the bread and blessed it and gave it to his disciples. Yet, if we look carefully, we discover that Jesus did not take the cup. As he states in Luke 22:18, “I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” Thus, while he gave the cup to his disciples, he waited for the cross to drink his wine, which he did when he tasted the sour wine on the cross (Luke 22:36).

In this way, we can see how the Passover meal anticipated Christ’s own Passover sacrifice, where his flesh was torn for us. Likewise, on the cross, he drank the wine, indicating the way that he drank the bitter cup in his death. Thus, in ways that go beyond symbolism, Jesus became the communion elements on the cross. He was the bread of life torn for us. And his blood was poured out for the forgiveness of our sins. And in these two ways, he became the fulfillment of the Passover, while at the same time he also became the substance to which the Lord’s Supper now points.

Indeed, when we partake of the bread and cup today, we are remembering the king who was crucified in our place and the priest who made himself the sacrifice for our sins. We are not re-presenting the death of Christ, or suggesting that the elements become the body and blood, as in the Catholic mass. Rather, our elements tell the story of how Jesus fulfilled all of the Old Testament sacrifices on the cross. In this way, Jesus became the sacrificial lamb who took the place of God’s firstborn, and now all those who are promised a shared inheritance with Christ in his kingdom celebrate Christ’s death and resurrection whenever we gather.

5. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper

Staying in the Old Testament, we can also make an important observation for who eats the Lord’s Supper. In Israel, those who ate the Passover were the ones circumcised and brought into the covenant. In other words, those outside the covenant did not eat of the Passover meal. As Exodus 12:48–49 explains, those from outside of Israel could enter into the covenant by circumcision, but uncircumcised males could not eat.

Likewise, when Israel entered the Promised Land, they celebrated Passover. As Joshua 1–5 records it, this came after they passed through the Jordan River. And by way of typology, it gives us a pattern that those who eat the Passover are the same as those who pass through the waters of baptism. Remember, 1 Corinthians 10 identifies the Red Sea as the baptismal waters for Moses. Those who passed through the sea with Moses were, according to Paul, baptized into their redeemer. Similarly, when Joshua took the place of Moses, we might say that the second generation of Israel was baptized into Joshua, when they passed through the flood waters of the Jordan River (Joshua 3–4) and entered into the blessed rest of the land (see Josh. 21:43–45).

In all, we can see that those who were given the Passover meal in the land were, typologically-speaking, baptized, circumcised believers. That is to say, while the first generation died in the wilderness because they failed to believe God, the second generation proved to be genuinely faithful to the Lord, through the superior mediation of Joshua. In this way, we have a pattern of baptism and Passover in Joshua that would eventually be fulfilled in the greater Joshua, whose baptism and Passover meal superseded anything found in the Old Testament.

Now, there’s a lot more we could do to shore up these connections, but don’t miss the order and connection between baptism and Passover. Just as it would be impossible to eat the Passover without passing through the flood waters, so too it is impossible to (rightly!) eat the Lord’s Table without baptism. Water baptism for the believer is the initiating rite for the new covenant; the Lord’s Table is the ongoing rite. And the former should always precede the latter and make it obvious who should partake of the table.

For fathers and mothers leading their children to the table, the simplest answer to who should eat and who should abstain is this: Are they baptized? The question is not—Do they have faith?— as determined by the child, the parent, or the pastor. The question is, what has the church said? Has the church exercised its royal authority (the keys of the kingdom) to baptize them and invite them to priestly service in God’s house and royal access to the bread and the wine? That is the question, and by keeping the church’s relationship with the child in view, it helps everyone keep our minds on the lines of Scripture. And this is especially true, when we see how eating at the table signifies royal priesthood.

6. Priest and King

Returning to the patterns of eating and drinking in the Bible, it is vital to see how priests and kings eat and drink. For by their food, you will know them. To say it differently, if Christ is the royal priest who invites us to eat at his table, we need to see how his table also makes us royal priests—not priests alone or kings alone, but royal priests.

For starters, in Leviticus we learn that the priests are able to eat at the altar of God. Likewise, the nation of Israel that was chosen by God to be a kingdom of priests is given access to eat at the tabernacle when they enjoyed the peace offering. Still, for all the ways that priests could eat meat from the altar (Lev. 6:26, 29; 7:6, 31–34) and bread in the presence of the Lord (Lev. 24:5–9), priests were directly forbidden from drinking wine.

Leviticus 10 says that priests ought not to drink wine. In context, it seems that a failure of judgment led the sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, to offer strange fire on the altar. Likewise, Nazirites when they committed themselves to act like priests and serve the Lord entirely, they were forbidden from drinking wine (Numbers 6). Furthermore, when making judicial decisions, which is a priestly task (Lev. 17:8–13), kings were instructed to abstain from wine too (Proverbs 31:4–5). Put together, there seems to be a pattern that those serving, working, or judging before the Lord were to abstain from wine. Wine was reserved for periods of peace and rest. And so, when men were called to work, to war, or to weigh matters of legal importance wine was forbidden.

Nevertheless, fermented grape juice was the proper drink for a wedding feast (John 2), or when kings returned from war (Gen. 14), or when work was done (Eccl. 9:7), or when kings rested on their throne (Esther 1:7; 5:6; 7:2). To say it differently, wine was inappropriate for those working and serving (i.e., doing priestly tasks), but it was entirely appropriate for celebrating peace, prosperity, and rest. As Psalm 104:14–15 puts it, God gave wine to gladden the heart (cf. Judg. 9:13; Eccl. 10:19). And thus, there is a place in the Bible for wine. And at the Lord’s Table, this goes double.

For not only does sweet wine tell us that Christ’s work has been completed and all bitterness removed, but it also reminds us that the king who would not drink wine on the night before his crucifixion has now entered his kingdom. And how do we know? He serves wine to his people, as he gathers the children of his kingdom to worship God. Indeed, when we sit down at the Lord’s Table, we are not simply coming as priests eating the bread of the presence. We are also kings who have been given wine. Again, the wine symbolizes the peace and blessing that Christ achieved on the cross, and it tells us that we are not simply servants in the household of God, but also friends (John 15:14).

Under the old covenant, the priests could not drink wine, because their work was never complete. And just the same, the kings could never eat the bread of the presence, unless like David they were doing priestly things (1 Samuel 22; Mark 2:23–28). But now, as Christ has been exalted as the true and final royal priest (Psalm 110), this king of peace and whose priestly sacrifice made us all righteous, invites us to sit down and to enjoy the bread of his presence and the fruit of his vine—just like Melchizedek did with Abraham when he returned from war (Gen. 14:18).

In his own day, Jesus said that he would not drink of the vine until he entered his kingdom. But now he has entered his kingdom, and every Sunday, we gather to partake of the food he prepares for us. And while, we do not physically see Jesus, as he reigns in heaven and we abide on the earth, the physicality of this meal nourishes our bodies and our souls. And more, it reminds us that while the reign of Christ is mediated by his Spirit today, his kingdom is not wholly immaterial either. Rather, it is a spiritual kingdom we can taste and touch, which is why we want the elements of our communion to properly reflect his glory, which brings us back to John 2.

7. Bread and Wine

In Jesus’s first sign, he comes to a wedding feast where the wine has run out, and to resolve the problem he takes water from six stone water jars—stone jars used for ceremonial cleansing—and he makes new wine. In this way, he brings peace and joy back to the wedding. Yet, as John makes clear, this wine miracle is a sign, and one that points to the significance of wine flowing afresh in Israel.

In Amos 9, a passage that promises the reconstruction of David’s tent, we read these words, “‘Behold, the days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when the plowman shall overtake the reaper and the treader of grapes him who sows the seed; the mountains shall drip sweet wine, and all the hills shall flow with it. I will restore the fortunes of my people Israel, and they shall rebuild the ruined cities and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and drink their wine, and they shall make gardens and eat their fruit’” (Amos 9:13–14).
Without making all the connections, it is worth noting how this prophet looked to a day when a new David would restore joy to the house of Israel. And one sign of that new day would be the mountains dripping wine and the people rejoicing in the fruit of that vine. As noted before, wine symbolizes joy, rest, peace, and prosperity. Wine is most appropriate at a wedding, because the guests are celebrating the love of the lover and the beloved (read Song of Songs). And it is not by accident that Jesus begins his new covenant ministry with such a sign.

It is also not accidental that Jesus calls himself the true vine and his people the branches (John 15). In their lives, God’s people are to abide with him and to bear fruit, as the joy of the Spirit gives them life. And one way, God’s people abide in God’s love is by means of weekly communion that eats the bread of God’s presence and drinks of the vine.

Now in our day, many churches (especially Baptist, Bible, and Independent churches) use grape juice. This goes back the temperance movement of the nineteenth century and a Methodist by the name of Thomas Welch, of Welch’s Grape Juice fame. Holding a view that went beyond the bounds of Scripture, he believed that consuming alcohol, in all forms, was sinful. Yet, a careful reading of Scripture reveals something else. Drunkenness is sin (Gal. 5:19–21; Eph. 5:18) and any form of addiction to any material substance violates God’s commands (cf. Prov. 23:29–35). But clearly, Jesus drank wine (Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:33–34), Paul urged its medicinal use (1 Tim. 5:23), and the participants of the Lord’s Table in Corinth were undeniably drinking wine, not juice.

And how do we know? Because Paul says not to get drunk at the Lord’s Table (1 Cor. 11:21). This both indicates that the cup they served was fermented and that the portions were more than a thimble. It also means that someone can misuse the good elements of communion, too. So, by all means, the church must use wisdom with the bread and the wine. And for those who are morally opposed or physically unable to drink wine, they can and should drink juice at the table. Yet, for those have read the Scriptures and believe that wine is the biblical element, we will soon be offering wine in our communion meal.

To speak personally, I can count on one hand the number of times I have tasted wine. I am by all definitions a teetotaler. Yet, in studying the Scriptures, I have come to a conviction that wine is what God ordained his saints to enjoy when they are called to take and eat and drink. Wine warms the body (and the soul), in a way that juice does not. It’s fermentation symbolizes the maturation that comes with the wisdom that kings need to rule. And its sweetness recalls the joy that is ours, knowing that Christ took the bitter cup. In all of these ways, wine includes important symbols that point to the substance of Christ.

Similarly, the leavened bread symbolizes the risen Christ. Whereas the Jewish Passover ate unleavened bread to remember the hasty departure from Egypt, the loaf we share will be leavened to remember Christ’s resurrection. Next week, I will share a number of logistics for receiving elements in service that do not come packaged in plastic. But for today, I close with the value of knowing what you are tasting and seeing.  How easily we can forget the meaning of the bread and the cup. And in this meditation and in the March 22 sermon, we are answering the question: What are we eating? We do this not to get sidetracked with unnecessary nuances, but because Jesus said: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:24). Yet, “do this” requires some careful reflections.

The Lord’s Supper is not an ordinance we can eat or not eat as we see fit. Rather, it is plays a central role in our worship service and our personal and corporate experience with our Lord. And so, as I offer these seven reflections to you, I urge you to consider them, search the scriptures to examine them, and then eat and drink with faith as you come to the Lord’s Table this Sunday and on every Lord’s Day. There are so many glorious facets to the Lord’s Supper, and every time we commune with God we should bring them to mind. For now, I offer these seven reflections, and I pray they may spur others as you continue to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, especially as we come to the Lord’s Table.

The Hope Desk: A Podcast of Occoquan Bible Church

We are glad to announce the launch of a new podcast for the encouragement and discipleship of the saints at Occoquan Bible Church!

Pastor David, Pastor Ben, and Matt Wood will discuss various aspects of church life and fellowship in each episode. It is our prayer that this podcast will be edifying and encouraging to our church family.

God-willing, new episodes will drop each Monday. We plan for each episode to be short and something that you can easily listen to during your commute or a trip across town.
This podcast is now available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and the OBC Media Library.

Pray with us that the Lord would be glorified through this effort, and that the body of Christ at OBC would be built up and encouraged.

Have you ever noticed how the Psalms are divided into five books? If you pull out a modern English translation of the Bible, nearly all of them place “Book 1” in front of Psalm 1. “Book 2” shows up in front of Psalm 42. “Book 3” precedes Psalm 73. While “Book 4” and “Book 5” stand at the top of Psalm 90 and Psalm 107, respectively.

Why is that? The answer to that question relates to the order of the Psalms, in general and the way that Ezra, or some inspired prophet like Ezra, arranged the Psalter so that it would tell the story of David’s suffering and glory (Book 1), David’s kingdom (Book 2), the sons of David’s demise (Book 3), the return of the Divine King (Book 4), and the installation of a new and greater David (Book 5). Indeed, the arrangement of the Psalter is not accidental, and it plays a vital role in understanding the book, the history of Israel, and God’s plans of salvation for the world.

A few years ago, we looked at the outline of the Psalms and you can find a plethora of resources on reading the psalms “canonically” (according to their arrangement) here. But suffice it to say, the five hymn-books of David are meant to extend and exceed the five books of Moses (Genesis–Deuteronomy). And for reasons that we will see this Sunday, this extension has everything to do with singing.

Indeed, as we have recently considered where, and who, and how we worship, we have not given any time to the subject of songs, hymns, and spiritual songs. Matt Wood taught a series by that title, and if you were not in Sunday School, you should go listen to it. But in this sermon series on liturgy, we have focused on the location, participants, and forms of worship. But this Sunday, that changes as we look to the Bible’s songbook, the 150-song collection that we know as Psalms. And to prepare for Sunday, there are two things you need to see—(1) the shape of the Psalter and (2) the place of singing in the Bible.

Seeing the Psalter
First, if you treat the Psalms as a random collection of Israel’s greatest temple hits, you will miss the message of the Psalter. As I hinted above, the Psalms have a discernible storyline from David, to David’s sons, to David’s greater Son, Jesus Christ. In fact, as I have tried to show in a more technical article, Psalm 2 is the promise of great son of David who will sit enthroned on Mount Zion. And Psalm 110 is the fulfillment of that promise in the Psalter itself. And not surprisingly, when the Apostles saw the son exalted on high, in his ascension, they wrote their Gospels and and Epistles with the exalted Christ in view—even conjoining Psalm 2 and Psalm 110 in places like Hebrews 5:5–6.

Now, if we had more time, we could look further at the whole Psalter—and if you’d like to know more, catch me Sunday and I’ll point you in the right direction. But for now, I want you to consider how Book 5 proceeds when the Lord is seated on the throne. And the best way to do that is with an outline of Psalms 107–50 and an open Bible.

Psalms	Storyline
107	Song of Thanksgiving for God’s Deliverance – Melodic Line for Book 5
108–09	Songs of Petition for God to Save – Summons God’s “Right Hand”
110	The Enthronement of the Royal Priest – This psalm celebrates Christ’s enthronement in heaven and his salvation and judgment on earth
111–17	7 Hallelujah Songs – These psalms celebrate Christ’s coronation (Ps 110)
118	Song of Praise for the Day of the Lord – This psalm pairs with Psalm 110 to tell of Christ’s death and resurrection (v. 24, “This is the day . . .”)
119	22 Stanzas of the Law – This psalm evidences the joy of the New Covenant saint who delights in the Word of God
120–34	15 Songs of Ascent – These psalms bring worshipers into God’s presence
135–37	3 Songs of Praise (135), Thanksgiving (136), and Lamentation (137)
138–45	8 Songs of David – These psalms narrate the new covenant realities of spiritual warfare
146–50	5 Songs of Praise – These psalms conclude the whole Psalter

In these 44 psalms, we have storyline of Jesus Christ after he has been seated at God’s right hand in heaven. Remember, Psalm 110 is the most cited psalm in the New Testament (see, e.g., Matt. 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42, 43; Acts 2:34, 35; Heb. 5:6; 7:17, 21). And as such, it tells us that when Christ ascended to heaven, he made a way of worship for his people and he made a way of spiritual warfare on the earth. Lest we think that Christ is inactive on his throne. Psalms 111–145  tell us how Christ is bringing his kingdom from heaven to the earth, so that all creation might redound in his praise (Psalms 146–50).

As you have time, read Book 5 with consideration for the ways that Christ has fulfilled Psalm 110 and is now creating worshipers from every nation; he is writing his law on their hearts; he is leading them to sing praises to him in heaven; and he is commissioning them to go into the world with the gospel message of salvation and judgment. Indeed, while the entire Psalms functions as prophesy; Book 5 is the most prophetic part of the book, as it points directly to new covenant realities.

Knowing this, take time to review this outline as you read Psalms 107–150. On Sunday, we will see how these psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs lead us in worship, and how they both inform our order of service and prepare us for descending the hill of the Lord, where we will meet a host of difficulties and dangers, until when return to the Lord’s Mountain.

Singing in Service
Second, and this will be mercifully shorter, the Psalter teaches God’s worshipers how to sing, what to sing, and (in some ways) in what order. Big picture first, the Psalms move from lamentation to praise. If you were to count them all up, you would find that the lamentations are frontloaded in the psalter, and the hymns of thanksgiving and praise are stacked in the back. Indeed, in Book 5, we begin with two psalms of lamentation and petition (Psalms 108–09), and then we have only one other notable imprecatory psalm (Psalm 137), which calls for the downfall of God’s enemies. Technically, there are others doleful parts of Psalms 138–45, but this is set in the context of spiritual warfare—as the new David leads the battle against persisting enemies (cf. Ps. 110:4–7).

Aside from this big picture, the order of Book 5 also helps us to see how singing is part and parcel of the whole order of service. Now, it wasn’t always this way. As Peter Leithart, in his book From Silence to Song, helped me to see, the worship of Moses largely lacked music. Yes, there were some silver trumpets to be played when the people marched (Num. 10:1–9) and when they offered sacrifices (Num. 10:10), but if you look throughout the five books of Moses, aside from Exodus 15, you will be hard pressed to find music.

By contrast, David’s five books are nothing but song. And not only do they range over the whole human experience—joy and sorrow, guilt and forgiveness, petition and praise, etc and etc—but they tell the story of salvation. And, as we see in Book 5, we anticipate a coming savior who will be praised by people from every nation. Notably, this is why Psalm 107 begins the book. It tells of salvation from all people and all places. And knowing that the throne of David died in the dust of Psalm 89, we have good reason to see how this final book anticipates the coming salvation of Jew and Gentile alike in the finished work of Christ. And in that future hope, now fulfilled in Christ, we can see how the people of God sing praises for the law written on their heart (Psalm 118), how they praise God for bringing them into his heavenly temple as new covenant priests (Psalms 120–134), and how when they return to the earth, they do so with praise (Psalm 135), thanksgiving (Psalm 136), and lamentation (Psalm 137).

This is the reality of new covenant worship today. We are invited into the presence of God, but not all things are seen as submitting to Christ today (Heb. 2:5–8). Christ is the one who leads us in worship (Heb. 2:11–12), but that worship is intermittent, so long as we live on the earth. Unlike the spirits of the righteous made perfect who now live on the mountain of the Lord, praising God without tiring, we who walk through the valleys of this world, must go to battle Monday through Saturday (Psalms 138–45), so that we might return to worship on the Lord’s Day (Psalm 118:24), always anticipating the day when all things will be made new and the praise of the Lord will be universal. This is how the Psalter ends in Psalms 146–50. And every time we gather for worship and sing praises to our exalted priest-king (Psalm 110), this is the universal reign of Christ that we are proclaiming the nations.

Putting All The Pieces Together
Thus, it behooves us to continue to refine our liturgy by the revelation of God in the Psalter. And this Sunday, that is where will be, as we look at the place of song, and how Psalms 107–50 teach us to sing—both when we gather and when we depart.
As the Lord allows, I look forward to seeing you on Sunday. Until then read some or all of Psalms 107–150 and pray for our time to be profitable and filled with praise.

Finding Middle C(s): Another Step Toward Liturgy

On a piano, Middle C is the key that organizes all the others. For beginners, therefore,  Middle C plays a critical role in locating all the other keys, notes, and scales.

By comparison, when we look at our 5 C’s of liturgy (Call to Worship, Consecration, Counsel of God, Communion, and Commission), we discover that God’s Word is at the center. As noted from Exodus 19–24, the centrality and volume of God’s speech on Sinai gives his word pride of place. Equally, everything in the service builds up to that moment when God’s Word is expounded. And then, everything else in the service flows from God’s speech, as communion responds to God’s Word and the commission impels the saints to go into the world with the Word on their lips.

Such is the pattern of worship that is found at Sinai, and one that we will continue to think about this weekend.

Yet, before going too far in Sinai’s liturgy, let me offer an important caution that protects us from over-reading the Bible. The caution is this: God did not inspire a section of liturgies to be put in the back of the Bible. Thus, while various traditions have written books that order all their services, the Bible itself does not have one mandated order of service. Instead, in places like Hebrews 12, Revelation 1, and Exodus 19–24, we find a series of parallel worship services. And this means that in our sermon series, we are attempting to learn that choreography and apply it wisely to our own service. This is how we have arrived at the Five C’s.

Effectively, these Five C’s help us remember what we are doing in the service and why. And more importantly, they help us teach the liturgy to our children and those who are new to the faith. Therefore, it would be sheer folly to claim that this order of service is the only way to worship God. Yet, it would be equally foolhardy to ignore the importance of liturgy, and the many places in Scripture that teach us how to worship God, including Leviticus.

In Leviticus, the Lord speaks to Moses on Mount Sinai and he gives him instructions for ascending the mountain. In fact, the whole book is shaped like a mountain, or at least a chiasm.


The Five Sacrifices (chs. 1–7)

                  Priests Ordination (chs. 8–10)

                                         Ritual Holiness (chs. 11–15)

                                               The Day of Atonement (chs. 16–17)

                                         Moral Holiness (chs. 18–20)

                  Priests Qualifications (chs. 21–22)

The Blessings of the Sacrificial Calendar (chs. 23–27)


From this point of view, we can see how Leviticus is an instruction manual for priests who will serve at God’s altar. And today, knowing that Christ has fulfilled the ceremonial laws of Leviticus, we can learn much about worship by studying this book. And this Sunday that is what we will do as we turn to Leviticus 9 and the offerings found therein.

These three sacrifices—the sin offering ,the ascension offering, and the peace offering— are the ones that offer confession, bring consecration, and lead to communion. With a variation on our five-fold liturgy, these sacrifices help us to see what happens at the center of the worship service and what it means to be made living sacrifices before our living God.

Indeed, consider how the New Testament uses imagery from the altar (see Rom. 12:2; 15:14–16; 1 Cor. 9:13; Phil. 2:17; 2 Tim. 4:2; Heb. 13:10) to explain our new covenant service before the Lord. This priestly language proves our worship is not disconnected from the Old Testament; it has simply moved to a higher key. We’ve gone from the Middle C of Leviticus to the Higher C of Jesus. Still, to sing on key with Christ, we must attend to the sacrifices that prepared the priests for service at the altar. And so, this Sunday that is our goal, as we consider confession, consecration, and communion, as revealed in Leviticus 9.

To prepare for Sunday, therefore, read Leviticus 9 and Hebrews 13. Also, pray for the service, that our worship would be pleasing and acceptable to God, even as we continue to refine our liturgy at OBC. As the Lord allows, I look forward to worshiping with you on Sunday.

For His Glory and your joy in Christ,
Pastor David