On the Nature of Repentance

Subscribe in a reader

Old covenant to new covenant. We do well to consider how they relate - the continuity and the discontinuity between them. Everything points to and exalts Christ, the living Son. All that went before was a glimpse, a shadowy 'taster' which promised and sketched what God would do, in Him and through Him, at the fullness of time. We understand the old by examining it through the enlightened eyes of the new. Through His own appointed apostle/prophets, Jesus makes known to us, by writing with their hand what they saw and handled and heard, and by expounding in His word,again, by their hand, all that it means for us. We are greatly blessed, greatly privileged, for we have all this in completion, in our hands. And we are endowed with His Spirit to take that living word out of His book and explode it into vital reality in our very beings.

But I want to ask the question 'where and how did these covenants meet?' Where do we observe the transition from one to another? How does this great eclipse occur, the lesser old covenant becoming overtaken and exceeded by the new, which comes, as 2 Corinthians 3 tells us, with 'surpassing glory'? God was evidently active in those Old Testament revelations, in 'many and various ways' revealing Himself (Hebrews 1 vs 1), so that by the time He sends forth His Son, there is a 'backcloth' of reliable and infallible knowledge of God. The Son is born of a woman, is Himself a man, so we can grasp that there is that about Him which we can know because He shares our humanity. And He is born a Jew under the Law, so that we can appreciate that what has already been revealed is not dispensed with and thrown away, but rather gets swept up into and completed by the greater light of His coming and His truth.

We see that Jesus interacts with the old covenant in various ways, uses it to demonstrate that it is all about Him, none other. So do we best see this 'interface' where old becomes new, perhaps, in His "you have heard that it was said ... but I say to you ... " teachings in the Sermon on the Mount? Or is it in His ascerbic exchanges with the scribes and Pharisees? No, it cannot be there, because there He is dealing with their hypocritical twisting of the Law and its practice, not the old covenant as it really was.

The Last Law Prophet

I have come to see that the moving from old to new covenant happens in the relationship and development that occurs between Jesus and His forerunner, John the Baptist. I hope to provide a more extensive look at this in a book I'm working on, which I will call "The Last Law Prophet and the Grace-bringer". Or something a little more catchy, less cumbersome, if I can find it. But the essence of it is that in the relatively short period of overlap between the ministry of John the Baptist and Jesus the Son, we do, indeed, see the change occur. And I want to point out that in this period, something unique and never to be repeated is going on. But is this just my fanciful thinking? Or are there grounds - good Biblical grounds - for believing that this is what takes place. Well, in fact, Jesus Himself points up this clearly delimited time slot, and has some interesting things to say about it.

When John is in prison, he sends a delegation to Jesus to ask Him the question,

"Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?" (Matthew 11 vs 3)

Now, I know that some have suggested that John, languishing in jail, was having doubts and wanted to check he had not made some dreadful mistake. But I really find it hard to swallow that the man who had heard from God how this Messiah could be identified, then baptised Jesus and saw the Spirit descend on Him to remain was going to second guess all that had happened. No, I think John is doing something quite deliberate here for the sake of his - John's - disciples. But look at what Jesus says after having sent the delegation back to John with His answer. He now addresses the crowd, challenging them as to what they expected John to be. Then He goes on, in verse 12:

"From the days of John the Baptist until now ... "

That is a very carefully defined time slot:-

• 'From' - the first day of public ministry of John, proclaiming that the kingdom is coming,
• 'Until' - now, when John's ministry is complete, God takes him off the scene, and ... the Son of God is proclaiming that the kingdom of God is here.

In other words, the period in which the last law prophet is succeeded by the Son Himself. And when John is confined, and his public ministry is at an end, we read:

"After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God. “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!” (Mark 1 vs 14)

Do you see that there is something quite deliberate about the timing of these respective ministries? The old covenant is giving way to the new. John - and with him, the covenant he represents - is to decrease, as Jesus - and the covenant He is instigating - will increase.

Let me take one aspect of that here - John's message of repentance.

"Repent ... for ..."

"In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea 2 and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”" (Matthew 3 vs 1)

“I baptize you with water for repentance." (Matthew 3 vs 11)

"Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”" (Acts 19 vs 4)

 Realistically, all the Law - all of it - could ever do was to lead Israel to this end, the confession of their sins. It had been given to 'lock them up'; the Law was their custodian. All through the period of time in which it ruled, the old covenant era, its task had been to consign them until God's promised one would come. And once He appeared the wait time would be over, and God-fearers would be brought to explicit faith. Galatians makes this plain. John's preached repentance is preparatory repentance. It paves the way for the coming Lord. So that when God's Son is revealed, the hearts of many are already set to receive Him, even though the majority rejected Him.

Repent ... and ...

But John does not advocate mere lip service. How rife with that plague Israel's history has been! Repentance must be accompanied by life change:

"Produce fruit in keeping with repentance"

he flings at the Pharisees. And there is practical advice as to what this fruit would look like:

"What should we do then?” the crowd asked.
John answered, “Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same.”
Even tax collectors came to be baptized. “Teacher,” they asked, “what should we do?”
“Don’t collect any more than you are required to,” he told them.
Then some soldiers asked him, “And what should we do?”
He replied, “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely—be content with your pay.”" (Luke 3 vs 10 - 14)

This is no less than the old covenant teaching applied - all of the prophets were preachers of the Law of Moses. And this is really my point.

The repentance John the Baptist commands is - was - repentance under Law, something which would never be required again once Jesus had come, had died, and had risen. This is NOT to say that there is no repentance required when sinners turn to Christ - that is the gospel. But there is a difference.

• John's message was - 'repent and wait'
• The gospel message is - 'repent and believe'

Believers in Christ, under the new covenant are never exhorted to show the 'fruit of repentance'. They are told to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit. But of course, at the time of the Baptist, the Spirit had not been given.