Thursday 18 April 2019

Who Does He Think He Is?


It was a kangaroo court, his accusers looking for an excuse to execute him. His crime was that he had become too prominent, too influential, attracting thousands to follow him. It had gone beyond his constant conflict with their belief system, which systematically stripped away its pretense and showed them up for their hollow hypocrisy. That was bad enough - a nettling challenge to their control. But if that same influence was noticed by their Roman masters, all of the might and wrath of that fearsome empire would come down on them, sweeping away the nation - their nation. And with it, their influence, their coveted corner of power. That could not be allowed to happen.
So, he had to go.

And a surreptitious, private assassination wouldn't do. They had to contrive a public discrediting and condemnation. Something that would depose him in the eyes of the populace, and at the same time, make him, not them, the subject of ultimate Roman vilification. The rights and wrongs of it were irrelevant - what mattered now was expedience.
They took him at night, deserted by his disciples and betrayed by one of his own. They tried him at night -illegal, but speed was what counted. Foregone was all the procedure laid down by law. No public statement of what he was being accused of. No appeal for witnesses to come forward in his defence, and no time allowed for that. The very law they boasted to uphold - the Law of Moses - was conveniently abandoned in order to serve their purpose,
And so here he stood, before them now, at their mercy. The paid liars had uttered their calumnies. Now, looking for something -anything - he himself would say that could be twisted to their advantage, he is challenged:
"The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.”"
“You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26 vs 63,64)
In the original language, the question is heard as a statement with raised inflection at the end to make it a question. Like this:

"You are the Messiah, the Son of God?"

Jesus' reply is simply 'your words!' You said it!
Obviously, he is not toeing their line. But he is not denying their stated truth - he has clearly made this profession elsewhere. Just seeing right through their game. He will not allow them to put their words in his mouth, not for their ends. But then, what an astounding addition:
From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven
 They may account him 'worthy of death', but it is the Lord of life who speaks. He, not they, determines this outcome -"from now on ..." This is stunning. They may well put him to death. But that is not the finale! Jesus is determined that all present hear what he says; it applies to every one of them. Indeed, what they now accomplish will serve two ends:
  1. Jesus will reign with his Father
  2. Jesus will return to judge
And so it is for us. 
For all who place him 'on trial'. Those who will seek to manipulate what he reveals concerning himself. Those who ask straight questions should be vitally prepared to deal with his straight answers. If he truly is the Promised One of Israel, the Son of God, the time to reckon with the response is now. For those who will not will nevertheless be subject to - be enemies of - his ongoing rule. And, at his coming again, let them ask themselves, where will they then find themselves?

The real question, then, is not 'who does he think he is'. But rather, 'who do YOU say he is'. Because if he is who he says he is, he is the one most important person in all of history to be heard. And heeded.

Sunday 10 March 2019

Reflections on 2 Corinthians 3 - Part 4

Surpassing, Transforming Glory

So what is Paul saying in his use of the Exodus incident in relation to the new covenant?
In our session with Dr Gary Williams, referred to in Part 1, we looked at the comparison between the experience of Moses at Sinai and that of Peter, James and John on the mountain upon which they witnessed Jesus' graphic transfiguration. Mark records that episode thus:
" After six days Jesus took Peter, James and John with him and led them up a high mountain, where they were all alone. There he was transfigured before them. His clothes became dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could bleach them. And there appeared before them Elijah and Moses, who were talking with Jesus. Peter said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let us put up three shelters—one for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.” (He did not know what to say, they were so frightened.) Then a cloud appeared and covered them, and a voice came from the cloud: “This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!” Suddenly, when they looked around, they no longer saw anyone with them except Jesus. As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus gave them orders not to tell anyone what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen from the dead. They kept the matter to themselves, discussing what “rising from the dead” meant." (Mark 9 vs 2 - 10)
There are many similarities. Peter, in his second letter, refers to this also:
" For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain." (2 Peter 1 vs 16 - 18)
It is not insignificant that Peter refers to this location as 'the sacred mountain'. We can only imagine the stunning (and terrifying) impact these events had upon the onlookers. Dr Williams drew our attention to the fact that both incidents are restricted in their revealing, and following, their is some kind of concealment commanded. Moses veils his face. The disciples are commanded not to tell anyone what they have seen until after the resurrection. I will come back to this. Let us first note that in both we have:
  • The revealer of the glory
  • The observer(s) of the glory
  • The receivers (ultimately) of the glory
 With Exodus 34,
  • The revealer is God Himself
  • The observer is Moses
  • The receivers are the Israelites
In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul draws his parallel thus:
  • The revealer is Christ - He 'radiates' this splendour in such a way as to radically alter His appearance - even His clothes. He is the source.
  • The observers are the Apostles
  • The receivers are the Corinthians (and beyond, all those who receive the Apostolic witness)
Therefore we see plainly that Paul's 'we' in this chapter is the Apostles, the eye-witnesses to Jesus.As John says:
"We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." (John1 vs 14)
We have noted before, but let me say again, that the giving of the Law on Sinai, and the incident in Exodus 33 where Moses asks to see God's glory are distinct. Previous to the great sin of the golden calf incident, the stone tablets, with the Law inscribed, had been given with no reference to attendant glory. We conclude that it is not the Law itself which is glorious. The glory attends the Law, it is not synonymous with it.

Unveiled Communication

Now we can clearly understand the impact of what Paul is saying. In their preaching of the Gospel, which also comes with glory, the Apostles are unlike Moses, who veiled his face. The Apostles deliver and pass on to their hearers  the glory they have beheld in the revealed Person of the Son of God WITHOUT obscuring the full vision of those who receive it - such is their boldness. Although Paul was not on that mountain, as an Apostle, he too has been a party to the same vision of the resurrected Lord. Thus his apostleship is being substantiated.

What did Moses hide?

The question arises as to what it was that Moses did not want the Israelites to see. We have seen that they glimpsed the glory of the radiance in his face as he communicated with them after he had spoken with God. But when he had finished doing so, he veiled his face until he next entered the Tent of Meeting to stand before God again. The result was that the Israelites were not allowed to 'look steadily', or 'gaze intently' at him. Their examination of this phenomena was not allowed to continue. Paul says that this was ...
"to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away." (2 Cor 3 vs 13)
And this is where many have concluded that it was the radiance which 'was passing away'. But why would Moses merely wish to hide from them the fact that the radiance was fading? What purpose would this achieve?

It is more probable that what Paul is referring to as 'transitory' is, in fact, the whole of the old covenant. When Christ came, the complete order would be fulfilled and exceeded by the new covenant, instituted by God's Son. How could Moses, at God's direction, be heard to construct an intricate system of worship, priesthood and law, for the governance of God's old testament people in His given land, when all of it would ultimately give way to something far greater, with any degree of authoritative substance? Thus God directs that this eventual outcome would not be revealed to the Israelites until their covenant was at an end. In a similar way, the disciples of Jesus are not to pass on what they observe on the mount of Transfiguration until the full disclosure of the meaning of Jesus' death and resurrection is made - only then would that revelation be fully meaningful. Only then would it achieve its given purpose. This was its 'telos' - its end. And, as in Romans 10 vs 4, 'telos' can mean 'goal' - ultimate purpose:
"Christ is the culmination(telos) of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes."
Richard Hays, in his excellent book "Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul", argues strongly for this:



And, in his paper entitled
"Did the Glory of Moses' Face Fade? A Re-examination of katargeo in 2 Corinthians 3:7-18",
William Baker makes a powerful argument for the view that the word normally translated 'fade' in many translations should really be rendered  'obscured'. His summary:
"The translation of katargeo as "fade" in 2 Cor 3:7-18 has little justification outside biblical literature or within it. Most scholars have abandoned this translation as inaccurate. Yet, it persists in modern Bible versions. Examination of the lexical evidence finds no support for this translation nor does reexamination of the Exod 34:19-24 context that the word is intended to describe. Moses' face does not diminish in its glory; it is merely blocked or "rendered ineffective" by the mask. Finally, examination of 2 Cor 3:7-18 reveals that a translation of "hinder "or "block" best accounts for Paul's understanding of the Exodus situation within his own purposes."
https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_2000_a_01_Baker_MosesGlory2Cor3.pdf

The 'Same Veil'

Paul takes the picture further. He goes on to say that beyond Israel's experience in the wilderness, even to current times, when Moses is read, there is the same failure on the part of the readers to be able to perceive and understand what it is saying. The 'blindness' persists. Now, however, the veil is not over the face of Moses, it is over the heart of the reader - of course, it must be so after Moses had died. But it is 'the same veil' - in other words, it operates in exactly the same manner. In Christ, it is removed - those Jews who believe in Him are then able to perceive that all of that former covenant pointed to Him. So, just as when Moses enters again into the very presence of the living God, he removes the veil, so it is that in Christ (what claim, there, to His divinity!) the veil is removed. Whereas the unbelieving Jew cannot see the glory of Christ in the writings of Moses, the believing Jew has full disclosure of all that this means. Another quote from William R Baker's paper " Did the Glory of Moses' Face Fade? ":
" Even Jews, Paul says, who have been shut off from the full glory of the Lord since Moses donned the veil, will find the freedom to gain full access to God when they come to belief in Christ. This, Paul says in 3:12, is the message he preaches "freely," or "boldly" (parrhsia), since he is not encumbered by a veil as was Moses. He preaches this message across the board which makes his ministry, though based on the same glory of God as Moses', superior to his. What was denied Israel by Moses' veil in Christ has been opened wide to all people. A personal relationship with God himself is now available to all. This is Paul's gospel"

Surpassing Glory 

Paul draws magnificent conclusions from all this. First is an a fortiori argument - from a lesser to a greater:
If the ministry that brought death, and was transitory came with glory, then ...
... how much greater glory must attend the ministry that brings righteousness, and is eternal.
He acclaims:
"For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory."
Undeniable, is it not, that the revealing of the Son of God from heaven must be accompanied and attested by all the radiant glory of which creation is capable. So much so, that Paul says compared to this, what went before is as nothing. Like comparing a candle flame to the sun. 'We beheld it', the Apostles cry - 'we ourselves were eyewitnesses'. We saw it with our own eyes, it was displayed before us with unremitting majesty. The Voice of the Father acclaimed Him. And, at the end, death could not contain that glory. It burst forth from His tomb to shine as an everlasting light. Paul likens this to Moses standing before the divine, holy throne. As he had once requested 'Show me your glory', and that revelation had changed his face for the remainder of his life to reflect what he had witnessed, so it was that the Apostles had viewed surpassing glory, and were thereafter emanators of that same glory before all who would approach with a heart of faith.

Transmitted Glory!

Now we can see precisely what Paul is saying. the 'we' to which he refers is the 'we' of the Apostles, who personally and directly saw this latter, surpassing glory in the face of Christ. 
"For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ." (2 Corinthians 4 vs 6)
It is this Apostolic witness which Paul regards as the new covenant equivalent of the radiance emanating from the face of Moses. And of this greater glory, he says,

"We are not like Moses"

For whereas Moses veiled his face when he came from surveying that lesser glory, before those to whom he spoke, the Apostles do not. Here it is - the nature of that new glory ...
"... the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." (2 Corinthians 4 vs 4)
And what the Apostles do, in their Christ-appointed ministry is to plainly set forth their witness, unveiled - unlike Moses. There is neither dissemination nor distortion. If there is a failure to apprehend, it is caused by the blindness of heart due to unbelief:
"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." (2 Corinthians 4 vs 3,4)
The veil is no longer over the face of those to whom the glory was revealed. It is now over the hearts of those who do not perceive.

Transforming Glory

 "And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit." (2 Corinthians 3 vs 18)
 But for those who see, there is the vision of all of the wonder of what God shows them, through the Apostolic witness, and ...
... this reception, this view of Him, has the effect of transformation. It changes the observer to make them not only a reflector of that glory, but a 'likeness' of its source. We become like Jesus, even as we gaze. This privilege, this wonder is not reserved for the Apostles only. 'We ALL' are affected thus - the Apostles themselves, and those who see the radiance of the gospel light through them.

The Apostolic Word

It remains for us to mark what this means for us, who do not share the Apostolic age. The Apostles are no longer with us - how is this process now active? There is only one conclusion, is there not? That which they did once in their very persons is now done through their written works - the inspired word of God. Here is what now comes direct to us 'from the Lord, who is the Spirit'. In it, we gaze upon the surpassing radiance of this infinitely greater glory. Through it, and our absorption of it, our meditation upon it, we receive what those blessed men were appointed to transmit to us. In it, we see His face and gaze upon that incredible beauty. And by it, we are being transformed into His likeness. Not by any given law. But by the Lord 'who is the Spirit'. And we are exhorted to 'open wide our hearts' to them, even as they have opened wide their hearts in all they have written, in God's wonderful word, our Bible.

Sunday 28 October 2018

Reflections on 2 Corinthians 3 - Part 3

Old Glory

We can be fully assured that the Apostle Paul was thoroughly conversant with the events which accompanied the giving of the Law to Moses on Mount Sinai. We can be equally sure that, as an appointed Apostle, writing Scripture under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he knew and was thoroughly convinced of the difference the new covenant makes. Thus we must pay careful attention, not only to what he tells us about those earlier events, but also to what he says it means for us who are in Christ.

Two Tablets of Stone - Given Twice!

Reading the Mosaic account in the book of Exodus shows how, whilst Moses is high up on the mountain receiving the two slabs upon which God engraves the Ten Commandments, the people he God has used him to rescue are abandoning themselves to idolatry and immorality at its foot. Moses had said to them:
"Do not be afraid. God has come to test you, so that the fear of God will be with you to keep you from sinning." (Exodus 20 vs 20)
And the presence of God was attended with glory:
"When Moses went up on the mountain, the cloud covered it, and the glory of the Lord settled on Mount Sinai. For six days the cloud covered the mountain, and on the seventh day the Lord called to Moses from within the cloud. To the Israelites the glory of the Lord looked like a consuming fire on top of the mountain. Then Moses entered the cloud as he went on up the mountain. And he stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights." (Exodus 24 vs 15 - 18)
Moses alone enters that thick cloud. Moses receives not only the Ten Commandments, but instructions regarding the Aaronic priesthood, along with many other commandments and instructions, including how to construct the tent of meeting. Of this last, God says:
"For the generations to come this burnt offering is to be made regularly at the entrance to the tent of meeting, before the Lord. There I will meet you and speak to you; there also I will meet with the Israelites, and the place will be consecrated by my glory." (Exodus 29 vs 42,43)
But the people tire of waiting, a golden calf is cast from Egyptian gold, and they bow down to it. The consequence is that when Moses descends from his encounter with God, there is righteous anger, judgement - and the stone tablets are shattered. It is only the mediatorial intercession of Moses that stays Gods hand from destroying them. But Moses pleads for more than mercy and forgiveness. He petitions that, despite their great sin, God would nevertheless go with His people into the land of promise. And this God agrees. Yet, Moses is not done. His next request of this great God, whom he has come to know so well, should stagger us. For Moses asks:
“Now show me your glory.” (Exodus 33 vs 18)
And this, God arranges:
"I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence."
Again, God reiterates the Ten Commandments, but this time, it is Moses, not God, who engraves them on the stone tablets (Exodus 34 vs 27,28). The first two tablets had been inscribed by the finger of God. But the second two were written by the hand of man. And - note this - that in the old covenant ministry of faithful Moses, the glory of God is displayed in His goodness and in the proclamation of His name, Yahweh.

Moses' Radiant Face

I have taken some time to go through all this. More detail is given in the text - I have just given summary. But it is this second occasion to which Paul alludes in 2 Cor 3. Exodus, again:
"When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the Lord. When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the Lord had given him on Mount Sinai.

When Moses finished speaking to them, he put a veil over his face. But whenever he entered the Lord’s presence to speak with him, he removed the veil until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the Lord." (ch 34 vs 29 - 35)
 Note that the appearance of Moses' radiant face occurs after his seeing the glory of God in this 'close-up-and-personal', intimate manner. It is not mentioned when he comes back to the people with the first two stone tablets, which are then destroyed. Therefore, I conclude, along with Paul, that this phenomena is not so much attendant to the giving of Law itself (it didn't happen the first time) as it is to the ministry of Moses. 2 Corinthians 3 vs 7 refers:
"Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory ..."
The stone tablets did not shine! It was the living face of the mediator which retained the light of the glory of God.

Second, it seems reasonable to think that this retained splendour was as a result of the more intensive revelation of God's glory. There is a Jewish tradition that this radiance did not fade - at least, not until he died. We shall see that this inference is not what 2 Corinthians 3 is saying.

The reason for emphasising this is that Covenant Theology wants to assert that there is continuity between the glory of the old covenant and that, although far greater, of the new. And that therefore this 'underlining' of the Law carries its authority through. But Paul is clear in his statement that the ministry which included the Law was what 'came with' glory. The glory was attendant to the ministry.  Spurgeon says:
"I would have you notice that this communion with God included intense intercession for the people. God will not have fellowship with our selfishness. Moses came out of himself, and became an intense pleader for the people; and so he became like the Son of God, and the glory descended on him. How he pleaded! With what sighs and cries he besought Jehovah not to destroy the men who had vexed his Holy Spirit!"
 We see, then, that this ministry goes far beyond the giving of the Law, and all the other commandments too.

Third, we need to note that there were three 'phases' here, not two. Here are the verses again from Exodus 34:
" 33 When Moses finished speaking to them, he put a veil over his face. 34 But whenever he entered the Lord’s presence to speak with him, he removed the veil until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, 35 they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the Lord."
So, we have:
  1. Moses in the Lord's presence - unveiled
  2. Moses communicating to Israel what God had said - unveiled and radiant
  3. Moses after he had finished conveying God's commands - veiled until he again goes in to speak with the Lord. 
We see, then, even from Exodus, that although the initial reaction to the splendour emanating from the face of their leader was great fear, such that they ran from him, Moses brings them back. And after this, they regularly observe this shining, when he emerges from the Tent of Meeting to speak with them. Thus, as Paul notes, to avoid their being afraid is not the explanation for Moses' veiling of his face. We shall see what that is in due course.

The Shekinah Glory

'Shekinah' is not a Bible word. But the Jews used it to describe the visible glory exhibited by the personal presence of God. Exodus 40 vs 34 - 38 tells us that God's glory so filled the newly-erected tabernacle that even Moses could not enter:
"Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. Moses could not enter the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.

In all the travels of the Israelites, whenever the cloud lifted from above the tabernacle, they would set out; but if the cloud did not lift, they did not set out—until the day it lifted. So the cloud of the Lord was over the tabernacle by day, and fire was in the cloud by night, in the sight of all the Israelites during all their travels."
Similarly at the dedication of Solomon's newly-built temple:
"When Solomon finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the Lord filled the temple. The priests could not enter the temple of the Lord because the glory of the Lord filled it. When all the Israelites saw the fire coming down and the glory of the Lord above the temple, they knelt on the pavement with their faces to the ground, and they worshipped and gave thanks to the Lord, saying,
“He is good; his love endures forever.”" (2 Chronicles 3 vs 1 - 3)
 ***
Thus we observe that the glory of God is not to be thought as attaching to the Law of Moses, but rather to the whole of the covenant between God and Israel. It demonstrates the very presence of the Lord Himself within the 'ministry' of covenant. In the next and final part of these 'reflections', I will consider what Paul is actually saying in 2 Corinthians 3.

Saturday 13 October 2018

Reflections on 2 Corinthians 3 - Part 2

Glory!

In this seminal chapter, Paul says that both the old and the new covenant ministries 'came with glory'. He then goes on to state that the glory of the latter 'surpasses that of the former. Much of his illustration is concerned with this 'glory'. So it will benefit if we arrive at an understanding of what he means by the word.

It is evident that'glory' is not an object in and of itself. Rather, it is a quality which each of the two ministries 'came with'. The Greek word 'doxa' means judgement or opinion, and this gets extended to express 'good reputation' or 'honour' or 'majesty'. The Hebrew word behind it carries the meaning of 'weight' or 'importance'.

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul demonstrates the foolishness of disparaging the resurrection body because it will be different to our current mortal bodies - inconceivable to his sneering opponents. 
"But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” How foolish!" (vs 13)
He states that all kinds of created, astronomical structures have different kinds of bodies. And that each has its own type of 'doxa' - glory:
" There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor." (vs 40, 41)
'Glory', then, is not a purely spiritual thing. Natural things can have 'glory'. It can be considered as the way that human senses are impacted by or impressed by the object - it is the 'shining'; that which gives us the 'wow' factor. We look at a sunset and we describe it as 'glorious. Or the magnificence of a splendid horse in full stride. Or even a distinguished human ruler or leader.

The Glory of God

When it comes to God, His glory can either be revealed or concealed. Jesus refers to the glory which He shared with the Father before the worlds were made (John 17 vs 5):
"Now, Father, glorify me with your own self with the glory which I had with you before the world existed." (John 17 vs 5)
He says that He has 'glorified' and will glorify His Father, and that the Father will 'glorified' Him:
" I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do." (John 17 vs 4)

" Jesus said these things, and lifting up his eyes to heaven, he said, “Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may also glorify you" (John 17 vs 1)
He also speaks of glory brought to Him by His disciples:
"All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them." (John 17 vs 10)
...the glory given to His disciples by Him:
"I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one" (John 17 vs 22)
... and, stunningly, He speaks of the cross in terms of His glorification:
"Jesus replied, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified." (John 12 vs 23)
... and finally, the glory He desires His followers to eventually see, in His presence:
“Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world." (John 17 vs 24)
So, without exaggeration, all that the Father has done and will do in and through His Son is pervaded by glory, and suffused with mutual glorifying. In conclusion, then, we can say of the glory of God, that:

  • It is shared between Father and Son before creation
  • It spills from heaven itself at the incarnation (Luke 2 vs 9, 14)
  • It manifests in the person and work of the Son throughout His earthly life (John 1 vs 14)
  • It is displayed in the cross, where the love of God is declared
  • It floods from the empty tomb  (Matthew 28 vs 2,3)
  • It will fill all of heaven for eternity
And then, we must not bypass this:
"... so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless" (Ephesians 5 vs 26,27)
The purpose of Christ is invested in the glory of those who are His. The church which bears His name.

Thursday 11 October 2018

Reflections on 2 Corinthians 3 - Part 1

2 Corinthians 3 is a crucial chapter in the understanding of the relationship between the old and the
new covenant. Paul is engaged, for a good proportion of the letter, in defending his being recognised as a true Apostle. It would appear that there were those who had come to the church at Corinth, or who had arisen from their midst, who were claiming themselves to be 'the' authoritative leaders to whom these believers should listen and who they should follow. Paul makes no secret of the fact that he is not interested in a battle of egos. Personality is not to be the grounds on which the issue is decided. So what is? Paul is abundantly clear. It is the nature and character of the 'ministry' the Apostle delivers.

Who is the 'we'?

I recently had the privilege of attending a 'Pastor's Study Day' on the subject of 'the Christian and the Law of God', run by Dr Garry William's. I am grateful to him for his careful examination of this passage, alongside Exodus 34, from which Paul draws a dynamic parallel. It is this that has prompted these further thoughts.

Paul makes statements such as:
"Since we have such a hope, we are very bold, not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at the outcome of what was being brought to an end." (2 Corinthians 3:12-13 ESV )
It occurs to me that it is essential to understand exactly who it is that Paul is speaking of. This will help us understand the thrust of the passage. It is easy to just assume that he means 'believers' - members within the new covenant as contrasted with those who were in the old covenant. If so, he is making a general point about our accessibility to God, made possible by Christ. But I think we will see that that does not make the best sense of the flow of his argument at all. That it is better to see this as a distinguishing authentication of his call to be an Apostle. True, later in his discourse on chapter 3, he widens to include 'we all', and speaks of the effects of various factors on the individual's hearts. But he doesn't begin there.

Will the Real Apostles Please Stand Up?

Paul begins chapter 3 by dismissing the need for a kind of spiritual cv in order to be recognised as a true Apostle. Is it to be about 'letters of recommendation'? Such human mechanisms would be wide open to abuse, their acceptance or rejection a matter of mere subjective analysis on the part of the recipients. Who would be in a position to write such a thing? Who could truly know? Endless argument and bickering would ensue. No, Paul says, this matter is down to God, not man:

"Such is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." (2 Corinthians 3:4-6 ESV)

'Claims' are not enough. The only grounds for 'sufficiency' comes from God, not from human means at all.

What he is saying, in essence, is that what distinguishes an Apostle, what makes him what he is, is not the man himself. Rather, it is his ministry. So the question to decide is this. Is this 'candidate' for consideration as Apostle ad-ministering from God?

The 'Men Commendments' of the New Covenant

What Paul does here is to demonstrate that the new covenant is eminently superior to the old covenant. And that this is his ministry, which he serves. His 'letter of recommendation' is not a written document at all, rather, it is the actual church at Corinth. And here is his first contrast. Remarkably, significantly, it is here that he begins to place the two covenants side by side.

"And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts." (2 Corinthians 3:3 ESV)
When Moses descends from Mount Sinai, the authentication of his leadership in the eyes of the Israelites is that God has given him the tablets of stone engraved with the Ten Commandments. This is ‘the result of his ministry’. Indeed, way back at the burning bush, God had indicated that the proof to Moses himself that it was God who had sent him was to be that he, and all Israel with him, would worship God 'on this mountain' (Exodus 3/4).

In the new covenant, there is to be a critical difference. Paul's 'licence' to be an Apostle is seen by everyone and anyone as:
  • The living entity which is the church at Corinth, not cold stone tablets 
  • Written on the beating, loving heart of the Apostle, not engraved in stone tablets, carried in hands 
  • Written with God's 'Spirit-ink', not mere words and letters 

Moses could be called 'the Apostle of the old covenant. Paul's intention here is to compare the covenant callings to their respective ministries. And thus he will illustrate that the new covenant vastly surpasses the old. Initially, he demonstrates that Moses' passes through to Israel the relationship with God which is governed by the Law. Whereas that of the new Israel is governed by the Spirit of God Himself. Moses brings the Ten Commandments. Paul's Apostleship embeds the concerns of those who are saved into his very heart, engraved there by the inner work of this Spirit. This is ‘the result of his ministry’.

Confidence and Competence

Paul is not diffident about this. He states that his confidence is rooted in Christ, and stand up in the very presence of God. It is a robust confidence, and it leads to competence in this new ministry of the life-giving Spirit, contrasted with the old ministry of the letter, which, he says, kills. If any of his so-called competitors are peddling a kind of rehashed Mosaic law, in any respect, they are dealers of death, not life.

We need to note that the Apostle is referencing something quite specific here. He is not saying that it is the ‘written-ness’ of God’s communication which causes death – after all, he is actually writing a letter himself! He is explicitly speaking about the old covenant, within which the effect of God’s given law, on those two stone tablets, was to bring about condemnation and death. And, quite obviously, it was not the words themselves, but rather the sombre fact that no-one could perfectly live up to what was being commanded.

Bold Behaviour

Thus, Paul says, because of the nature and character of the new ministry, as compared to the old, this results in different behaviour on the part of those who exercise it – bold behaviour.

“Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold.” (vs 12)

The ‘we’ speaks of the way those who have received, first-hand, from the Lord what they now pass on in their gospel conduct themselves before their hearers. Not like Moses, who obstructed the view the Israelites had of his encounter, face to face, with God (albeit at their request). No, rather, the Apostles of Christ show forth, in their lives and in their preaching, all of the fullness of what they have witnessed, with no veiling. The Apostle John says:

“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1 vs 14)
And Peter attests:
“For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.” (2 Peter 1 vs 16 – 18)
Elsewhere, in 1 Corinthians, Paul states ‘what I received from the Lord, I passed on to you’.

Of all that has been revealed to these men, chosen by Christ Himself to bear witness, nothing is hidden from their hearers. And this is the witness which we see and read when we open our New Testaments. Bold, Spirit-written, words of life. For us, this means that what we have in the Apostolic word, in our Bibles, is not only reliable, it is complete. Nothing is withheld from us that we need for the fullest understanding of who Christ is and what He has made us in Himself.

More about this chapter in the next article.

Monday 23 October 2017

Will There Be Law In Heaven?

This is the question I recently posed in two of our New Covenant Theology groups on Facebook, inviting thoughts and discussion. I will reveal my reason for asking that, along with my own thoughts. Interestingly, the response from both ‘sides’ of the ever-ongoing ‘law for believers’ debate is in agreement – a resounding ‘No’! In support of that, the consensus seems to argue that as law is to do with the control of sinful behaviour, and there will be no sin in heaven, there will thus be no need for God’s law. Indeed, Paul says to Timothy:

“We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.” (1 Timothy 1 vs 9 – 11)

It is not difficult to see where this conclusion comes from, and I agree with the argument. But, strangely, I do not agree with the conclusion. I think there will be law in heaven. Follows my explanation.

Priesthood and Law

Hebrews is key when we are considering the old covenant. There is an important statement in chapter 7 which, I believe, helps us to answer my question. Verse 12 says:
“For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.”
The writer’s argument is contained in the preceding verse:
“If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?”
So he is establishing that there is an inseparable union between ‘the law given to the people’ and the priesthood. Why? Because it is the law that ‘establishes’ the priesthood. We can actually state this two ways:

  1. The law determines the priesthood, and,
  2. The priesthood enacts and administers their law

The one is completely interwoven with and interdependent on the other – you cannot pull them apart.

The purpose of a particular priesthood, its‘raison d’etre’, is to put into effect its particular law.

We see this very clearly with the Levitical priesthood. Intricate instruction is given to Moses concerning the appointment of the Aaronic priesthood. There are no exceptions. And of course, this requirement was adhered to throughout Jewish history, even following the Exile. Strict lineage had to be proven beyond doubt for all who would function a God’s priest.

Secondly, the functioning of the priesthood exegetes and applies the Mosaic Law to the community of Israel – they 'publish' and they ‘police’ it.

So, Hebrews argues, if the priesthood is replaced by another (the meaning of the word ‘change’ means ‘replaced’ not just ’altered’), there must also be a replacing of the law. If, and only if, the old law was still in place, and continued to function, would the old priesthood order continue.

A New and Better Priesthood

Hebrews goes on to demonstrate that in the covenant of Christ, we have such a change occurring. Jesus is a High Priest ‘after the order of Melchizedek’ (vs 11, 17). Thus the Levitical priesthood is dispensed with – made obsolete – by its replacement. And gloriously, we see that He is the ‘substance’ of which the old covenant priesthood and law was just a ‘shadow’:
“The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.” (vs 18,19)
So along with the obsolescence of the old priesthood, the Law of Moses is no more. It is replaced by whatever it was the ‘shadow’ of, whatever acts in the place of ‘law’ in the administration of Christ - the 'better hope' of which the writer speaks. And about this, Hebrews, of course, has much more to say, all of which exalts and proclaims the unique, singular, wholely effective functioning of Christ as our High Priest. He is now, for each and every believer; for the church through all the ages, the only Priest we will ever need. He is the eternal High Priest, who ministers in the very presence of the living God on our behalf. He is the eternal High Priest  …
‘on the basis of the power of an indestructible life’ (vs16), 
the Son, who has been made perfect forever.’ (vs 28). 
Praise be to His Name!

Thus, we are presented with the eternal credentials of the ever-living Son of God.

High Priest – Forever

Now here is the intriguing thing. If the priestly ministry of the Son is eternal, then so must be whatever acts for ‘law’ (the 'better hope') in His ministration. We see that ‘covenant’ is the ‘wrapper’ which defines all of these components, explaining clearly how God is relating to its members. The covenant is God’s established, regulative outline of how He acts within it. Whilst the covenant endures, so does the component priesthood-and-law combination within it. The New Testament – the revelation of God’s Son, and the subsequent ‘unpacking’ of that ‘super-nova’ of God’s truth – makes it clear that the institution of the new covenant (with all of its components) has made the old redundant – all of it. And that this is God’s final word. There will be no further covenant. There will be no new priesthood. And there will be no ‘new law’.

In other words, what functions in the community of the glorified saints of Christ then will be no different to what functions in the community of the justified-but-not-yet-glorified saints now. What WILL differ is our state of being. But Jesus – the risen, glorified, ascended Lord – will be just as much our great High Priest then as He ever was. Douglas Moo argues that it is not that we are in some kind of interim state in anticipation of the resurrection glory to come. But rather, that in and through Christ, and the Spirit He has sent to the church, God has already begun His kingdom work in us – the Gospel inaugurates it. That will be revealed – not begun – when Christ returns. And this means that heaven will not be the start of a new ‘order’ or dispensation. Rather, it will be the consummation of the current one.

So what does this mean for our question?

Eternal ‘Law’

I would suggest that whatever you take to be ‘the Law of Christ’ as Paul refers to in Galatians 6 vs 2, is actually ‘eternal law’. It is functional from its institution, and it will not end, neither will it be replaced, because the Priesthood of Christ will never be replaced. There will be no further ‘change’ in the priesthood, therefore it follows that there will be no further ‘change’ in the ‘law’ which

a) Institutes the priesthood, and
b) Is regulated by it.

And this has some interesting ramifications. It means that whatever commands of the New Testament, as the word of God for us, relate to our pre-glorified condition only, cannot be a part of the ‘eternal law’. Because they will pass away at the end of this present age. Two observations:

  1. Commands relating to how we live, in Christ, which deal with sinfulness, cannot be included in ’the Law of Christ’.
  2. Commands relating to evangelising in the fallen world, also, cannot be included in’ the Law of Christ’.

… simply because these two circumstances will not exist in heaven, all New Testament imperatives which concern themselves with these two considerations will not be required – they are temporal and temporary, not eternal.

Conversely, it can be argued that any aspects of what we are commanded within our covenant which will carry over into glory are at least ‘candidates’ for what could be called ‘the law of Christ’, because they will also be true and active under the ongoing Priesthood of Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 13, Paul is concerned with differentiating what will ‘remain’ from what will ‘pass away’ He says:
“ Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.”
“And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” (vs 13)
So Paul actually identifies a third category of commands which cannot be a part of this ‘law of Christ’ – that which relates to the gifting of the church for her functioning within this word; these gifts are not required in heaven; they will be unnecessary.

It follows, then, that the new commandment of Jesus, that His disciples love one another as He has loved them IS the hub of this ‘eternal law’, because it endures beyond our mortal lives, and beyond the dissolution of this heavens and earth, and the new creation of the heavenly ones. We WILL carry on both loving God and loving one another throughout eternity. Perfectly so!

I leave this with my brothers and sisters to think and pray through. I have my own views on what Paul intends by his singular use of the phrase ‘law of Christ’ in Galatians 6. What I have attempted to do here is to demonstrate that whatever view is taken, it must be coherent with the ongoing priesthood of Christ – it cannot be for this life only. I believe that such an examination will lead us on to understand it more, in the light of the Biblical hermeneutic, whatever our starting point.

Saturday 21 October 2017

Living for the Lord - Bareback!

Thinking about the difference between old covenant lifestyle, under the Law of Moses, and new
covenant lifestyle in the Spirit of God, perhaps we struggle to find the agreement between obedience and our freedom in Christ. The vigorous, ongoing debate between the respective views over whether there is or there  is not a 'law' in play for believers contrasts two legitimate desires.

On the One Hand ...

Those who want to insist there is such a law are concerned with our obedience to God, in committed and specified choices and activities in our Christian living. Thus, they say, there have to be law-like commanding going on in the New Testament Scriptures which function in the same way as Mosaic Law did in the old covenant, binding the believer in law-like function, and holding him accountable. There is, then, a definitive prescribing in God's word for our lifestyle, which stand against any thought that we can just do as we 'feel' the Spirit is leading us.

... And On The Other ...

Those who want to emphasise that we are not under law, but rather under grace, and that we are to live lives led by the Spirit who indwells us are concerned to explore, to the glory of the risen Lord, all the joy and freedom, within the parameters of a holy life, unrestricted by the law-keeping of the old covenant. In its place, they argue, is the guiding hand of the Spirit, who imparts not only God's standards, but the very desire to live to them.

Concessions and Allowances

There needs to be grace on both sides. For the concern on the other is good. But the tendency is for both 'sides' of the argument to push the conclusions of the other to extremes, and then to accuse accordingly. Law-obedience tends to legalism (but doesn't have to end up there). No-Law living looks like, or could lead to, licence and licentiousness (but, again, doesn't have to end up there).

On Both Hands!

I have recently discovered what appears to me to be an excellent - and in my view, quite beautiful - analogy to illustrate this difference. It comes from an area of life I know very little about. Horseriding.

Cowboys and Native Americans!

We are used to seeing riders on horseback, if not in the flesh, on the TV. We view them adequately equipped with all the 'tack' which has become part and parcel of that scene. Saddles, stirrups, bits and reins all contribute to the horseman or horsewoman's control of the animal they are mounted on. But my mind goes to the Wild West movies of my youth. When the cowboys rode as described. But the 'native Americans' did not. They rode - bareback! Vastly different styles of riding, I am sure you will agree. The question arises; how do riders control their mounts without any of the 'gear'? And this is what I researched. The answers are intriguing. A quote from the website www.equinespot.com:
"The Native American Nez Perce Indians were some of the greatest horsemen on the Plains. They rode their bareback horses with such skill as to be the envy of Lewis and Clarke, the settlers of the Old West and the American cavalry too."
How did they do that? Here's how it works. I quote again:
"Developing as great sense of balance isn't the only benefit to riding bareback. You will find a beautiful channel of communication opens up between you and your horse. Without several inches of blanket and leather saddle between you and your horse, you will feel their every move. Your horse was always been moving and sending signals to you, but now you are suddenly much more aware of them. When bareback, you can feel your horse’s intentions clearly and respond faster. This channel of communication goes both ways. The horse can feel your every move as well. With such close contact between horse and rider, you’ll find yourself responding too and sending out ever more and more subtle signals. This beautifully silent communication between horse and rider becomes nearly invisible to the observer. Horse and rider are like one. It doesn't get any better than that!"
Essentially, the artificial aids may make life easier for the rider to control the horse, but that is the lazy way. What they do is to impose several 'layers' between horse and rider, which destroys much of the communication between two living beings. Bareback riders learn how to so interact with their animal, that the horse responds to subtle signals - and co-operates. Something in the horse's makeup delights to do so, to please its master. And vice-versa. Because their is no intervening, sensory depletion in cues which flag the horse's behaviour, the rider can anticipate and respond accordingly in a speedy manner. The summary above is apt. The horse and the rider are as one.

Spiritual Horseriding

This seems to me to exactly illustrate the way that external, law-command-and-keep dynamics work in the old covenant. God's law imposes His will on a people who are resistant in their nature to obedience to it. Structure and function make it work. Even where the hearts of those within the covenant are faith-filled and complicit, yet this law is an imposed law, not-natural to those it is placed upon. The requirements of God may well be called 'demandments' rather than 'commandments'. This Law  is described in the New Testament as "a burden neither we nor our fathers were able to bear" (Acts 15 vs 10). Faith in those time points God's true Israel, the remnant within physical Israel, to the day when the love of God's standards will be implanted within the hearts of His own children. When the Messiah came and the Spirit was poured out.

But the way the poured-out, Christ-exalting Spirit of God now works within believers is no longer like that. What God has done is to remove the intervening insulating and artificial 'saddlery' from His interaction with the believer. The Spirit-believer relationship works like the bareback rider-horse does. The will of God for us is communicated by this amazing presence of God, right within our being, in the Person of His Spirit. He speaks still, authoritatively, from His word, and its importance and place in all of this is unquestioned. But because of the 'skin-to-skin' contact, He is able to relate to us - and from us - all that Christ wants for us in our new life in Him. We become 'as one'.

Thus the picture of obedience within each and every believer is still that of volitional and active response and responsiveness - and responsibility (and 'response-ability'!). And yet, there is also an intensely personal 'woven-in' experiential aspect of this which employs our faculties. Paul counsels, in Ephesians 5:

"Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God." (vs 1&2)

and ...

" Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness,righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord." (vs 9&10)

'Follow God's example' - 'Christ's example'.
'The way of love' - 'all goodness, righteousness and truth'.
'What pleases the Lord'

'Understand what the Lord’s will is'
'be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit. Sing and make music from your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.'

The intimate interface between our spirit and God's Spirit is a part of what is essentially new in the new covenant. God does not drive us from His 'saddle', as the old covenant had Him do. God rides 'bareback.