new office/meeting space

“And when the LORD your God brings you into the land that he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give you—with great and good cities that you did not build, and houses full of all good things that you did not fill, and cisterns that you did not dig, and vineyards and olive trees that you did not plant—and when you eat and are full, then take care lest you forget the LORD, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. It is the LORD your God you shall fear. Him you shall serve and by his name you shall swear. You shall not go after other gods, the gods of the peoples who are around you— for the LORD your God in your midst is a jealous God—lest the anger of the LORD your God be kindled against you, and he destroy you from off the face of the earth. (Deut. 6:10-15)

Come see the new office/meeting space we now possess.  When you see it remember that God has given us a space that we did not find, and furnished it with furniture that we did not purchase and remodeled it with material and labor we did not provide.  He is working in our midst- don’t miss it.  When you remember these things realize that He expects us to put more faith in Him, not in spaces and material blessings.  Church get ready because it is time to step up and step out in faith and fill the spaces He has given us.  These blessings are merely the place setting for the main course which is making more disciple-making disciples through the personal investment of our lives.

-matt

The Place of Music in Church

on Sunday i made the point that we must be careful to equate singing in church with reaching a higher spiritual plane than washing dishes, we do not enter into a higher encounter with God. This is a nuanced point. The key issue is the place congregational singing has in our worship of God. here is a well balanced article on the subject- comment and let us know what you think.

The Place of Music and Singing in Church (http://www.theologian.org.uk/pastoralia/music.html)
by Vaughan Roberts

From beginning to end, the Bible is full of music and song. The first musician, Jubal, makes his appearance as early as Genesis 4, where we are told that “he was the father of all who play the harp and flute” (v.21). As we turn the pages, we find many who follow in Jubal’s musical footsteps. Moses sang a song of praise after the Exodus; Deborah sang after the victory over Sisera; King David played the harp, and wrote many of the Psalms; the Lord Jesus sang a hymn with his disciples at the last supper; Paul and Silas sang a hymn of praise to God in jail; and the book of Revelation tells us that there is plenty of singing in heaven as the heavenly choir joins in praise to God »1

The Bible makes it clear that we are not to wait until heaven; it contains frequent exhortations to us to sing. For example:

“Come let us sing for joy to the Lord” (Ps. 95:1)

“Sing to the Lord a new song, for He has done marvellous things” (Ps. 98:1)

“Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19)

The question we are addressing in this chapter is, “Why?” Why does the Bible encourage us to sing and make music to the Lord? We will look at the answer shortly: we are to sing to praise God and to encourage one another. But first we will consider an answer that is often given today, but which has no basis in Scripture.

“Entering God’s Presence”

I received some publicity for a large Christian conference which urged me to attend with these words: “Join us for dynamic teaching to set you on the right path, and inspiring worship where you can meet with God and receive the energy and love you need to be a mover and shaker in today’s world. … Alongside our teaching programme are worship events which put you in touch with the power and love of God.” Do you see the implication of what is said there? Bible teaching is good; it sets you on the right path. But it is through ‘worship’, by which they mean singing, that we meet with God and are put in touch with his love and power.

Some years ago I was on a mission in London. After one of our meetings, another team member came to me and said: “Why don’t you hold out your hands when you sing?” I have nothing against that practice. There are examples of it in the Bible. It can express something physically of what you feel in your heart. But I could not see why it seemed to matter so much to my friend. So I asked him, “Why should I?” He replied: “Because if you hold out your hands, you’ll receive a blessing from God. He will come close to you and you’ll feel his presence with you”.

He was expressing the view of many: we meet with God as we sing praise to him, especially when we do so in a particular way. The role of musicians and ‘worship leaders’ is to facilitate that encounter. Here are some of the comments I read during a quick look at the back of some Christian praise CDs:

“Songs that lift up the name of Jesus, combined with music that moves the body, provide an avenue for the listener to enter into the presence of the Lord”.

“There are many kinds of music that enable us to enter the presence of God. We hope that this collection will bless you”.

“We are committed to helping people world wide experience the manifest presence of God”.

“The liver shiver”

Those musicians clearly equate ‘entering God’s presence’ with a feeling. That conference publicity leaflet I mentioned earlier spoke of “spine-tingling moments of worship”. A friend of mine refers to “the liver shiver”. I guess we know what he means. No doubt there have been moments when we have felt our whole bodies tingling. Our emotions have been switched on and it has been almost as if we have been transported out of ourselves.

We are all different, so the experience is induced in us by different things. Some find that dimly lit medieval buildings, candles, plainsong and formal choirs do it for them. Others are left cold by all that. Acoustic guitars, drums and synthesisers are what they need. Those two settings could hardly be more different, but many devotees of both are united by the belief that the ‘buzz’ they experience is an encounter with God. That is the moment of true worship in their minds, when they enter the presence of God himself and he draws close to them.

If that is how they think, it is no wonder that they go to Christian meetings looking, above all, for an experience. They would not put it like that. They would say that they want to meet with God; but it is the same thing, as they equate meeting with God with a feeling. They are looking for a choir, group or band that will deliver the experience they want. If their spine tingles or their liver shivers, they go home satisfied. They have had a good ‘time of worship’; they have met with God. But have they?

How do I know that my experience is a genuine encounter with the living God? Music has great power to generate emotion. No doubt you have been deeply moved at a concert or just listening to a favourite CD – Beethoven or the Beatles, Rimsky-Korsakov or Robbie Williams. But you did not call that an experience of God. How can you be sure that the feeling you had at that Christian meeting was God’s presence with you rather than just the effect of some good music?

The Bible never teaches that a feeling can take us into the presence of God. If that had been possible, God would have sent us a musician rather than a saviour. Only Christ can take us into the Most Holy Place in heaven, where we have direct access to the Father through faith in him.

The very common view that ‘worship’ is essentially a time of singing through which we are drawn close to God has a number of harmful consequences:

The consequences of viewing music as an encounter with God

1: God’s word is marginalised

In churches and Christian Unions all over the world, the time given to Bible teaching is less and less. Many do not want to think; they want to feel God’s presence with them, and they look to music to give them that feeling. But we only encounter God through faith in Jesus, not through music. And how can we have faith in him unless we hear about him? Paul writes: “Faith comes through hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17).

What is more important to you: music or the Bible? When you choose a church, do you choose the one that has the best music group or the one that teaches the Bible best? Music is important. I will have much more to say about that later. But it would be possible to survive in our faith without it. But we could not survive without God’s word. It is by his word that God brings us into relationship with himself as we hear about Jesus and put our faith in him. It is also by his word that we are maintained in our Christian faith as the living God addresses us with both challenges and encouragements.

Some respond by saying: “That is fine; we do need the Bible. But we also need the Spirit. God speaks to our minds through his word, but he deals with our emotions through his Spirit”. But that reveals a serious misunderstanding of the relationship between God’s word and God’s Spirit. The Bible never allows us to split the two. The Spirit of God is the divine author of the Bible and continues to speak through it today »2 The word of God is “the sword of the Spirit” »3. So, if we want to be in close touch with the work of God the Spirit, it is vital that we listen to his word.

2: Our assurance is threatened

If I associate the presence of God with an experience, what happens when I no longer feel it? I am bound to assume that I am no longer close to him. So I may suffer a crisis of faith when I move from a church with a large music group. My new church does teach the Bible, but Mrs Jones’ organ playing can never deliver the high that I used to get in the last place.

But our assurance of God’s love does not depend on our feelings. It depends on the finished work of Christ. My feelings cannot take me any closer to God or further from him. If I trust in Christ then I am already in God’s presence by faith, “seated with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:6). So I must look to him if I want assurance, not to my feelings, which go up and down.

Charles Spurgeon once said: “I looked at Christ, and the dove of peace flew into my heart. I looked at the dove, and it flew away”.

3: Musicians are exalted

Huge expectations are placed on musicians. They are asked to play a priestly role and bring us into the presence of God by producing an experience. Churches are increasingly appointing ‘worship leaders’ who bear the weight of this expectation on their shoulders. If they fail to deliver, they are soon replaced by someone else. The most skilful discover what it is that works for their particular congregation. They know the songs, instruments and key changes that produce the desired effect. They are in great demand at conferences and conventions. Their names appear prominently in all the publicity.

There are dangers in all this. We can be too quick to give significant responsibilities to musicians. That young man may be a brilliant guitar player and have a dynamic, up-front manner, but how well does he know the Bible? Do the songs he chooses teach the truth clearly, or do they convey unbiblical emphases? Does he leave us with a sense of the wonder of Christ or just with a warm glow? The best Christian musicians will not primarily be seeking to produce an experience, which is easily manufactured once a few techniques are learnt. He or she will be pointing to Christ and focusing attention on the truth about him.

4: Division is increased

If I identify an experience with a genuine encounter with God, and only a certain kind of music gives me that experience, then it will be very important to me that that kind of music is played regularly in my church or Christian Union. That will cause no problems if everyone shares my tastes. But if others feel they need different kinds of music, there is bound to be trouble. That explains why music is one of the greatest causes of division in Christian circles. There is very little tolerance about. Particular music styles are associated with an authentic encounter with God. Those with other preferences are dismissed as unspiritual old fuddy-duddies or mindless, frothy youngsters.

But the style of music is irrelevant. Of course we will have our preferences, but they are of no significance compared with the words that we sing. Truth is ultimately what matters, not tunes.

All I have said so far has been designed to warn against too high a view of music. But we must not overreact and go to the opposite extreme. The Bible has a high regard for the place of singing in the Christian’s life and so should we. It gives two reasons for why we should sing:

We should sing to praise God
We should sing to encourage one another

Why should we sing?

1: We should sing to praise God

Praise should be one of the characteristic activities of the Christian. The apostle Peter tells us: “You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (1 Pet. 2:9). We have been called to belong to God for the purpose of declaring his praises.

Praise is natural

C.S.Lewis wrote: “All enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise unless (sometimes if) shyness or the fear of boring others is deliberately brought in to check it. The world rings with praise – lovers praising their mistresses, readers their favourite poet, walkers praising the countryside” »4 The Christian’s praise of God should be just as natural. We should be so excited about who God is and what he has done for us that we want to tell others.

A stranger knocked on my door recently. I invited him in and he began to tell me his story. A number of years earlier, he had had a row with his parents and walked out of home. His life went downhill rapidly and he ended up in Oxford in a terrible state. He was homeless, depressed and on drugs. “I was in the gutter”, he said. But one day he knocked on the Rectory door of St Ebbe’s and spoke to one of my predecessors. He was pointed to the Lord Jesus and his life was turned upside down. He trusted in Christ for forgiveness and asked for his help to change. Within days he was back home and the recovery had begun. He finished: “I am now a qualified barrister, I’m married and we’re expecting our first child. I am still trusting Christ. I owe everything to him and I just wanted to tell someone”.

It was not difficult for that man to tell his story. If something wonderful has happened to us, we long to spread the news. It would be very strange if you kept news of a baby, a promotion or a good exam result entirely to yourself. And it should be strange if we never tell others the wonderful news about a God who loved us so much that he sent his Son to die for us so that he could pick us out of the gutter. Whenever we do that, whether to a Christian or a non-Christian, we are praising him. But praise will also include speaking or singing to him directly.

When we praise God we are engaged in the activity which is most authentically human, for we are doing that for which we were created. We are made in God’s image to reflect his majesty. God’s goal in calling us to belong to him as Christians is that we might be “for the praise of his glory” »5 A friend of mine has said: “A song of praise is like a mirror we hold up to God, reflecting his glory back to himself” »6

Emotions and singing

If it is natural to praise, it is also natural to sing. James writes: “Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise” (Jas. 5:13). Singing is one of the ways in which we express our emotions. I said earlier that we should not equate emotions with the presence of God. I might get ‘the liver shiver’ when my side scores a goal at a football match or I listen to some beautiful music at a concert, but I do not say, “I’ve met with God”. We should not assume that we have encountered God just because we get emotional. It might simply have been the skill of the musicians or the beauty of the songs that moved us. But please do not conclude from that that we should be wary of all emotion.

We should be emotional about our faith. Those of us who come from the United Kingdom can be more British than biblical. We tend to be scared of showing any emotion. We can sing of the most wonderful truths with an expression on our faces that would be appropriate in a morgue. But why do we think God tells us to sing? Surely it is because singing enables us to express our emotions. It is not the means by which we enter the presence of God, but it is one of the ways in which we can express our joy at the wonderful truth that we are already there in Christ. Sometimes songs will help us to express the emotion that we already feel. On other occasions they will begin to trigger emotions, as the music helps us to feel something of the wonder of the truths we are singing about. The words “ransomed, healed, restored, forgiven” might not move us especially when we see them written on a page; but they can come alive as we sing them and reflect on all that they describe.

God-focused songs

The fact that we sing to praise God should mean that our songs are focused on him, not us. There is certainly a place for telling him how we feel about him. There are plenty of examples of that in the Psalms. Some of them are intensely personal. Psalm 18, begins: “I love you, o Lord, my strength”, or Psalm 89: “I will sing of the Lord’s great love for ever”. But the Psalms of praise are never simply subjective declarations of the Psalmists’ feelings. The objective reasons for those feelings are always given, namely the greatness of God. For example: “The Lord is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer” (Ps. 18:2) or “Your love stands firm, you established your faithfulness in heaven itself” (Ps. 89:2).

Too many of our contemporary songs place an excessive emphasis on us, how we feel about God and what we will do for him, and not enough emphasis on him. We can only express our love for him if we are first reminded of his love for us. That is where our focus must be: “We love because he first loved us” (1 Jn. 4:19).

God-focused singing

The fact that we are addressing God as we sing should mean that we do so with reverence. That certainly does not rule out joy and fun. Those who object to children’s songs with actions, for example, are surely going too far. But we should remember that, as someone has put it, “We approach the almighty God, not the all-matey God”. He is our loving Father but he is also our awesome, holy creator. We should approach him with both love and “reverent fear” »7. We can be intimate, but not casual; confident, but not presumptuous. Those of us who lead the singing at Christian meetings should be careful with the words we use and the manner we adopt.

Reverence should also mean that we will pay attention to the words we sing. It is so easy to switch into auto-pilot without letting the lyrics engage with our minds at all. God deserves better than that. John Wesley wrote is his ‘Rules for Methodist Singers’ “Above all, sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in very word you sing. Aim at pleasing him more that yourself or any other creature. In order to do this, attend

strictly to the sense of what you sing and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually”.»8

Musicians should seek to play, not to impress others, but to bring glory to God. Everything we do can be an expression of praise. We can use all sorts of instruments for the purpose. Psalm 150 alone speaks of the trumpet, lute, harp, timbrel, strings, pipe, and loud clashing cymbals. I take it that was a fairly representative sample of the instruments that were available at the time. Any kind of instrument can be used as a means of praising God.

2: We should sing to encourage one another

“Be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” (Eph. 5:18-19).

Paul is not urging us to receive a one-off experience when he instructs us to “be filled with the Spirit”. The verb he uses is in the present continuous. A better translation is: “keep on being filled with the Spirit”. He follows that command with a string of participles, which are lost in our English translations, which spell out what it means in practice.

The original reads like this: “Keep on being filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs; singing and making music in your heart to the Lord; always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ” (vv.18-21). It is striking that three of those five participles are to do with singing. Spirit-filled Christians sing.

Speak’ does not mean that we are only to read the words; it includes singing. We tend to assume that our songs are addressed only to God, but Paul tells us that we are also to sing to ‘one another’. We saw in the previous chapter that Christians in the New Testament met together primarily to encourage one another, and we are to do that even as we sing.

In Colossians Paul writes: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in you hearts to God” (Col. 3:16). Our singing should be one form of our ministry of God’s word to each other. We all need to be built up in our faith. That happens through sermons, Bible studies, conversations and also as we sing. Our songs should be one of the ways by which we are taught the truths of the Bible.

So, when we sing, we are not simply a collection of individuals praising our God; we are a community addressing one another. There are many examples of that in the Psalms. Psalm 95, for example, is not so much a song of praise to God as an exhortation to his people: “Come, let us sing for joy to the Lord; let us shout aloud to the Rock of our salvation (v.1). It then strengthens that appeal by reminding us of reasons why he is worthy of our praise: “For the Lord is the great God, the great King above all gods. In his hand are the depths of the earth, and the mountain peaks belong to him” (vv.3-4).

The rehearsal of great truths about God simultaneously brings praise to him and encouragement to us. Most songs therefore have two audiences: heavenly and earthly. We should keep both the vertical and horizontal dimensions in mind as we choose songs and as we sing them.

The power of music

Music has the power to embed words deeply into our minds. The advertisers know that well. The Cadbury’s jingle from the 1970s is playing in my mind even as I write: “Everyone’s a fruit and nut case …” It is only marginally better than the more recent ‘Magic Moments’ tune.

The power of music is also evident in the Christian world. One Christian leader has said: “I don’t mind who writes the theological books so long as I can write the hymns.»9” He was reflecting on the great influence that our songs have on our theology. That can be harmful. The heretic Arius, who denied the divinity of Christ in the Fourth Century, used brief choruses with catchy tunes to spread his message. But if the words are good, the effect can be very positive.

I was greatly helped in the early months of my Christian life by the words of songs that I sang at a camp I attended soon after my conversion. Some were simply verses of Scripture put to music: “My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow me ……” Others were distillations of biblical teaching: “At the cross of Jesus, pardon is complete; love and justice mingle, truth and mercy meet. Though my sins condemn me, Jesus died instead; there is full forgiveness in the blood he shed.” Others were exhortations to live the Christian life: “Be valiant, be strong, resist the powers of sin; the fight is long, the foe is strong, but you shall win; for through the power of Christ, the stronger than the strong, you shall be more than conqueror; be valiant, be strong.”

The tunes may sound dated now, but the words are still true. It is no exaggeration to say that I received as much biblical teaching and encouragement from those songs as from Bible studies and talks. My Christian understanding was largely formed by what I sang because those were the words that stuck with me. We must not underestimate the influence of the songs that we sing. One theologian said once: “Show me your songs, and I will tell you your theology.” That means that great care must be taken in the choice of songs.

Choosing songs

If we want to ensure that our songs are edifying to others we should consider four questions about them:

a: Are they true?

It is tempting simply to select the songs which are the most popular. But what do they teach? Are they faithful to Scripture? Is it really true that I can trade in my sorrows and sicknesses for the joy of the Lord, as one song I have been invited to sing suggests »10? And will God give us all the ground we claim»11?

We should not leave song-writing to those who are gifted musically but who may not have much grasp of theology. The best of the classic hymns, like Charles Wesley’s “And can it be”, are full of profound theology. There is an urgent need for more contemporary songs which follow in that tradition. They need not be long. One truth clearly stated can be enough. The Bible itself should provide many of our lyrics. The Psalms are a rich resource which are not used nearly enough.

A learned academic from one of the colleges in Oxford came to St Ebbe’s recently. He came up to me at the end of the meeting and pointed to some words on the song sheet and said: “Is that true? Can we sing it?” I was pleased that he asked that question. We should be concerned only to sing what is true. I was also pleased to be able to tell him that the words under suspicion came straight from Psalm 45.

b: Are they God-focused?

Our songs need to be focused on God, not simply so that we can praise him, but also so that we can be encouraged. If the majority of our songs are focused on ourselves, our feelings and expressions of devotion to God, we will have little to sustain us for the rest of the week.

How have I been edified by singing: “I will dance, I will sing, to be mad for my King; nothing, Lord is hindering the passion in my soul. And I’ll become even more undignified that this; some would say it’s foolishness, but I’ll become even more undignified than this. And this. Na, na, na, na, na-hey (x7) Here I, here I, here I, here I go” »12? There is a place for the subjective, but it should always be a response to the great objective truths about God. Feelings come and go, but the truth never changes. It is the truth about God that drives my desire to keep worshipping him with all my life, even when that is hard.

c: Are they clear?

Songs may be true and God-focused, but they will still not build anyone up unless they are also clear.

We slip into jargon so easily: “On the wings of eagles, we ride upon the breeze of your Spirit’s lifting, our minds are being freed from the things that have torn us, and taken life away, once more soaring higher, freedom breaking in again” »13. What does that mean?

Of course we should be able to use imagery and metaphor in our songs. Clarity does not demand dull expression. But the imagery should be such that it conveys the truth of which it speaks, rather than leaving us scratching our heads.

d: Are they unselfish?

Our songs should encourage us to sing to one another. If they are all in the first person singular they will allow us to think only abut ourselves and God. We could do that on our own. Our direction should also be directed to others around us. It is gloriously true that as I “behold the man upon a cross” I see “my sin upon his shoulders.” That personal element has an important place in Christian songs. But it is also good to be reminded in the same song that God’s love is for all God’s people: “How deep the Father’s love for us” »14.

Unselfishness should also influence our song selection in the sense that we should be thinking about what will most edify others, rather than what we ourselves most want to sing. Love should be the controlling influence in our decisions about what we decide to include in our meetings »15. It is a good sign if the older people in a fellowship are often saying: “Let’s have more modern songs for the youngsters” and if the younger ones are saying: “Let’s have more hymns for the older folk.”

Singing and playing horizontally

If we grasp that one of the reasons why we sing is to build up others, we will make sure that we have them in mind. We will be aware of the horizontal dimension and not just the vertical. I should not sing, “This is our God, the servant King, he calls us now to follow him” »16 with my eyes closed. I should be singing to you. And, whatever the words, I should sing up. No one is encouraged by a dirge.

Those who play should also have others in mind. Some musicians are more concerned about their performance than serving others. We have all heard of choirs who have resigned because they have been restricted to one anthem a fortnight, or pianists leaving churches because they are no longer allowed to choose the songs. There is an old joke circulating among ministers: “What is the difference between an organist and a terrorist?” “You can negotiate with a terrorist.”

It can be very hard for musicians. They often have to play music that they do not like or that is not very challenging for them. Other songs might give them a chance to show off their talents better, but that is not the object of the exercise. One of the world’s most gifted organists was a member of our congregation until recently. You would not have known it. That is not because he did not play well, but rather because he resisted the temptation to perform.

“The noble art of music”

We have seen that some have too high a view of music and see it as a means by which we encounter God. The Bible does not teach that. But it does give singing an important role. We are to sing to praise God and to encourage one another. Martin Luther once wrote: “(After) the word of God, the noble art of music is the greatest treasure in the world” »17.

Superhero movies and the despair of atheistic science

Why all the superhero movies right now? It is my theory that in an age where science is constantly telling man that he is a zero, a random accident of chemicals, superhero movies rebel against that by showing man triumphing over the blind process of atheistic evolution to bring meaning. These heroes rise above the sense of purposelessness that Dawkins brand of science leaves us with and shows man’s rebellion to the idea that he is nothing.

What is ironic, is that in each hero flick the thing giving man meaning and purpose is the self sacrificing Christ-like hero. It seems obvious that man needs a savior and when atheism claims God is dead man makes up a hero to take His place…even one in tights, to bring him out of the purposelessness of being called a nothing.

What do you think?

bold humility- boldmility

our bodies were made to look out not in. And when we breathe our last breath and our life flashes before our eyes it will be defined by moments made up of others. You will not see yourself in your memories- only others. Why would you waste these defining moments staring at your own belly button? Why would you waste these moments bold about your needs and humble about the needs of others and the cause of Christ?

Profane beauty

I believe our society is in a sad state. Every place we turn we are bombarded with sex and sensuality. You would think that this would cause us to hold this idol in high regard. The sad fact is that we have done just the opposite. Walking along the beach, everywhere I turn there are females of all ages wearing almost nothing. We have taken something meant to be special and made it profane. We are expected to see near naked people and act normal; as if they were fully clothed. Society has profaned its favorite idol. Truly, there is nothing sacred.

As a Christian I can appreciate the wonderful modesty of God. He is not profane or common even though He is everywhere. If only our women felt the same.

Is. 45:15-16 ¶ Truly, you are a God who hides himself,
O God of Israel, the Savior. All of them are put to shame and confounded;
the makers of idols go in confusion together.

Recovering rationality

We must remember that as Christians we have the very thing the world needs. We have the reality of God as a fixed point of reference and through Christ we have the solution to sin. These things often do not compute at the philosophical level however. What does compute is the idea that in the reality and certainty of the cross we have the possibility to know things. It means that there can be an escape from the philosophies that say we are mere machines destined by our chemicals and environments. Francis Schaeffer sums this up well when he says:

“Christianity has the opportunity, therefore, to say clearly that its answer has the very thing modern man has despaired of — the unity of thought.  It provides a unified answer for the whole of life.  True, man has to renounce his rationalism; but then, on the basis of what can be discussed, he has the possibility of recovering his rationality.”

What do you think?

my frustration

I love what i do.  i am privileged to get to study and preach the Word of God.  I a privileged to serve men, women, and children.  i get to help them become the ministers God has called them to be.  This is a wonderful calling and it is summed up in that i get to make disciple-making disciples.  We are all called to this task but in different ways, but for me i feel blessed beyond measure that i get to do it the way i do.  

All that said, the thing that fatigues me is not the ministry nor is it the study or the counseling or the always changing schedule and demands.  The thing that fatigues me more than anything is seeing so many who share my calling-that of being a Pastor- who spend their time speaking and writing about drivel.  If God is real and vibrant why are there so many cliches in christendom.  I am too naive to understand why so many who claim to share my passion do so through recycled sermons and trite gimmicks.  Honestly i wonder, is this simply another derivative of my own passion?  i am tempted to say yes, that is until i read the Bible.  How can one who claims to be commissioned by God to shepherd His people do so with such worldly methods and gimmicks?  With such llittle Biblical instruction?  With such disdain for the holiness of God in worship?  What am i supposed to feel when yet another church is planted that tells people that they just want to help them in their relationships or their finances or their sex?  i will assume the best motives for these men but i remain unconvinced that they are coming to this mcfaith through a prayerful study of the Word of God.  

Paul says it this way:

Eph. 4:11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers,

Eph. 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 

Eph. 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 

Eph. 4:14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 

Eph. 4:15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 

Eph. 4:16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

At some point every pastor is called to raise up MATURE followers of Christ.  If you are reading this and are at a church that is not committed to creating mature men and women of faith- disciples who make disciples- i urge you to run for your life.  

interpreting prophecy – double fulfillment

I am posting this as a note from Sunday’s sermon.  As a little background, as i am teaching on Mark 13, I am using the idea of double fulfillment to demonstrate how Jesus spoke both about AD 70 AND the end of days mixed together.  This is in response to the rising preterism that is sweeping churches today.  the following is an excerpt from a theological journal article written by Craig Blomberg.

 

Journal: Trinity Journal
Volume: TRINJ 23:1 (Spring 2002)
Article: Interpreting Old Testament Prophetic Literature In Matthew: Double Fulfillment Author: Craig L. Blomberg

Interpreting Old Testament Prophetic Literature In Matthew: Double Fulfillment

Craig L. Blomberga

The mid-to-late-1980s saw a flurry of evangelical interest in the NT’s use of the OT. Moisés Silva and Darrell Bock discussed how one might categorize the various uses in terms of both hermeneutics and text type.1 Walter Kaiser strongly maintained that OT authors consciously intended much of what the NT writers described in terms of fulfillment,2 while Douglas Moo defended a cautious use of sensus plenior.3 Richard Longenecker and Gregory Beale debated the reproducibility of NT exegesis of the Old.4 An anthology edited by D. A. Carson and Hugh Williamson presented a survey of each NT corpus’ use of the OT and key scholarship on the topic.5 But no consensus on any of the major issues was established and evangelical interest seemingly turned to other issues.6 During the

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 18

1990s the majority of the discussion of “intertextuality” between the Testaments, as it is increasingly termed, took place outside evangelical circles and, across the entire theological spectrum, published research consistently narrowed itself to more focused studies of specific passages and themes rather than treating broader hermeneutical questions.7

The new millennium holds out hope for progress on the projects largely abandoned after the eighties, as Carson and Beale are editing a major reference work to be published by Baker on the use of the OT in the New.8 Employing Richard Hays’s categories of quotation, allusion, and echo,9 it is designed to be a fairly comprehensive analysis of the meaning of each major NT reference to the Old and, for full-fledged quotations, an assessment of the OT passage in its original context, its pre-Christian Jewish history of interpretation, the text-form used by the NT writer, and a categorization of the hermeneutic employed in its NT context.10 This project is an extremely welcome development. Focusing simply on the particular area of interest of this essay, the gospel of Matthew, it is noteworthy that the major works on Matthew’s use of the OT are even older than the flurry of more general interest in the 1980s,11 largely because that decade was also spent debating, and for the most part refuting, the notion that Matthew in its overall literary genre corresponds to the Jewish category of midrash.12 My previous research on Matthew has

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 19

suggested that a particular OT prophetic text cited by Matthew often points both to and beyond its immediate historic context, without necessarily affirming all that the gospel writer or the individuals he quotes maintains.13 This phenomenon, which I am provisionally entitling “double fulfillment” emerges particularly prominently in Isaiah. Inasmuch as I know of only one recent study on “Matthew and Isaiah” per se,14 it seems unlikely that this essay will prove too redundant.

Now a clarification is required at the outset. The expression “double fulfillment” at times has been a virtual synonym for sensus plenior, that is, the idea that an OT text has a straightforward literal meaning and a second, more esoteric or opaque meaning, often understood to be part of the divine intent of the text but not consciously in the human author’s mind.15 That is most assuredly not how I am using the expression. Rather, by double fulfillment I mean that in a number of texts from the latter prophets cited by Matthew, and especially in Isaiah, the results of an ordinary grammatico-historical exegesis of the OT text point clearly to a referent within the time frame of the OT books. Yet those same passages, especially when read within the context of their immediately surrounding paragraphs or chapters, disclose a further dimension of meaning never approximated by any OT-age event.

It seems plausible, therefore, to affirm that the prophetic author consciously looked both for a relatively immediate referent and for a more longer-term eschatological fulfillment. Usually Matthew provides more information about the nature of that fulfillment than the prophet could have been expected to know, and normally no intermediate events or processes in between the two fulfillments appear to support Kaiser’s notions of generic fulfillment or single intent.16 On the other hand, more than pure typology—the repetition of theologically significant patterns of God’s actions in history17 —seems at work in these texts, even though Matthew frequently does use simple typology and also appeals to the more direct fulfillment of prophetic promises that had no short-term precursors. If double fulfillment is too confusing a term to describe these uses of Isaiah by Matthew, then by all means a better term may be suggested—it is the concept and not the label with which I am

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 20 concerned. But enough prolegomena; it is time to turn to the texts. I will proceed in their order of occurrence

in the narrative of Matthew.

I. Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23

Because of the controversies spawned by Isaiah’s famous prophecy of a virginal conception, it might seem unwise to begin with this illustration. But in fact it seems to me one of the clearest examples, and one that sets the stage for several others. Despite staunch conservative resistance to the idea,18 I cannot see how the “plain meaning” of Isa 7:15—“before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste”19 —can mean anything other than that Isaiah believes the child he has just described (v. 14) will be born within his lifetime, as a harbinger of the destruction (by Assyria!) of kings Rezin of Aram and Pekah of Remaliah (7:1).20 The language of 8:3 echoes that of 7:14 as Isaiah goes in to the prophetess and she conceives and gives birth to a son. It is no longer controversial to observe that the ‘almah of 7:14 simply refers to a young woman of marriageable age, without settling the question of her virginity.21 Thus it seems most likely that the child of 7:14 is Isaiah’s son, Maher-Shalal- Hash-Baz.22 Isaiah 8:4 reinforces this equation, with language carefully reminiscent of 7:15—“Before the boy knows how to say ‘My father’ or ‘My mother,’ the wealth of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off by the king of Assyria.” Only now Israel is explicitly included among Assyria’s victims.

At the same time, 7:14 also refers to the enigmatic child as Immanuel, “God with us,” the name that recurs in 8:8 and 10. This name likewise links the child with Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz but also points forward to a more distant time when the plans of Israel’s enemies will be thwarted (8:9–10).23 This “bifocal vision” prepares the reader for 9:1–7, which is all about restoration after the punishment begun by Assyria. In this context appear the words musically immortalized by Handel, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given” (9:6a). Against the current critical consensus it is difficult to identify this son, who is an heir to David’s throne, “Mighty God,” “Everlasting Father,” “Prince of Peace,” and governing eternally

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 21

(9:6b–7), with anyone other than Israel’s royal Messiah,24 and we ought not be surprised to learn that that is precisely how the post-Christian Jewish Targum understood it. While dating traditions in the Isaiah Targum proves notoriously difficult, it does seem unlikely that any Scripture would first be taken as messianic in any Jewish context aware of Christian claims for that text.25 We do not know why the translators of the LXX chose parthenos—a term that does imply sexual virginity—to render ‘almah, but it seems reasonable to assume that part of the reason was that they too recognized Immanuel was no ordinary child whose fulfillment was exhausted in the life of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz.26 Certainly no figures in between Isaiah’s day and Jesus’ birth even remotely qualify for this child who is a sign of divine presence;27 hence it seems appropriate to use the expression, “double fulfillment.” Isaiah recognized that his son would be a sign and symbol (8:18), both of God’s activity in his day and of the ultimate child who would comprehensively fulfill the Immanuel promises of chaps. 7–9.28 II. Isa 40:3 in Matt 3:3

The Isa 7:14 quotation formed one of Matthew’s distinctive fulfillment citations that he introduced as the gospel’s narrator. Isaiah 40:3 appears already in the gospel of Mark (cf. Mark 1:2) as a summary of the ministry of John the Baptist. In both gospels, the quotation is introduced as the explicit prophecy of Isaiah, whereas in Matt 1:23 no mention of the prophet’s name appears. Irrespective of debates over the unity and authorship of the sixty-six chapters of canonical Isaiah, chap. 40 clearly marks a major jump forward chronologically to a time after the Babylonian captivity when the Jewish exiles can return to their homeland in Israel. Isaiah 39 concludes the first main section of the book by referring to that coming captivity; 40:2 thus most naturally refers to its end: “Speak tenderly to Jerusalem and proclaim to her that her hard service has

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 22

been completed.” While some commentators restrict the meaning of the preparation of a way for the Lord in v.3 to the (metaphorical) highways smoothed out to welcome a visiting king,29 it seems likely that the straight paths allude to the roads on which the exiles returned to Israel as well, especially in light of the more explicit metaphor to that effect in 35:8–10.30 While individual Jews as well as small groups returned to the Holy Land off and on throughout the centuries until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, only the return initiated by Cyrus in 538 B.C. was ever widely regarded as the return from exile prophesied by so many of the latter prophets. In this respect, we again have one primary referent, this time not within Isaiah’s lifetime, but still well within the period of history during which the Hebrew Scriptures were written.

At the same time, this return from exile never reestablished the Davidic monarchy in complete freedom from imperial overlords according to the models set up before the divided kingdom. Israel’s sins were never fully paid for (v. 2), every valley, even metaphorically, was never raised up (v. 4), and all humanity hardly saw the glory of the Lord (v. 5). Not surprisingly, a pre-Christian Jewish sect like the Essenes in Qumran could believe that they were beginning to experience the more complete or ultimate fulfillment of this prophecy (1QS 8:13–14). Texts like Sir 48:24, 1 En 1:6, and 1 Bar 5:7 could similarly take Isaiah’s text to allude to the eschatological comfort at the end of the age, which no return from exile had yet fully provided.31 Once Jesus’ followers believed that in his ministry God was decisively and redemptively coming to his people, it was natural to associate John the Baptist’s ministry with the preparation for that coming. In light of the already existing Jewish eschatological hopes, it is not implausible to imagine even the Baptist thinking of himself in that same light (as in John 1:23).32 Double fulfillment again appears to be a helpful concept to describe the phenomena involved.33

IIII. Isa 9:1-2 in Matt 4:15-16

The theme of return from exile continues, as Matthew intriguingly associates Jesus’ move to Capernaum on the Sea of

TrinJ 23:1 (Spring 02) p. 23

Galilee with Isaiah’s prophecy of future honor for “Galilee of the Gentiles.” Here we have another one of Matthew’s unique fulfillment formulae. The context in Isaiah is the identical passage that culminates in the prediction of the wonderful child of 9:6, which we have already discussed. Again there is clear bifocal vision present in Isaiah’s prophecy. The gloom for those humbled and in distress, in the area partly contiguous with the territories of the ancient tribes of Naphtali and Zebulun, obviously refers to those afflicted by the invasion by the Assyrians of Israel (v. 1a).34 Yet immediately Isaiah adds, “but in the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles” (v. 1b), a reference to coming restoration after Israel’s two exiles, and a key to understanding the perfect tenses of v. 2 as prophetic: “the people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned.”35 “The way of the sea, along the Jordan” (v. 1b) will thus refer to the highway from the northeast that returning exiles would take to the Sea of Galilee and, for some, on beyond in the direction of the Mediterranean.36

In their euphoria, the first Jews heading home under Cyrus’ edict permitting repatriation might well have imagined that they would live to see the complete fulfillment of these promises of restoration, but it would not take many generations for Israel to realize that much remained unfulfilled. Obviously, no king like that described in 9:6–7 had yet been born. The Qumran sectarians recognized that even they, to some extent, still walked in darkness (1QS 11:10). So Matthew is perfectly understandable when he applies this text to Jesus (by Matthew’s time, recognized in his community as the Messiah) taking up residence in the same geographical area, as he prepares to inaugurate his public ministry of proclaiming the full good news of the in-breaking kingdom—a truly great light for those living in spiritual darkness.37 There is a partial fulfillment within OT times and a more complete fulfillment with Jesus, two events which suggest the expression “double fulfillment.”

 

 

 

Craig L. Blomberg is Professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary in Denver, Colorado. 1

Moisés Silva, “The New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Text Form and Authority,” in Scripture and Truth (ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 147–65, 381–86; Darrell L. Bock, “Evangelicals and the Use of the Old Testament in the New,” BSac 142 (1985): 209-23, 306 –19.

2

Walter C. Kaiser Jr., The Uses of the Old Testament in the New (Chicago: Moody, 1985).

3

Douglas J. Moo, “The Problem of Sensus Plenior,” in Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon (ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 175–211.

4

Richard N. Longenecker, “Who Is The Prophet Talking About? Some Reflections on the New Testament Use of the Old,” Them 13 (1987): 4-8; G. K. Beale, “Did Jesus and His Followers Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts?” Them 14 (1989): 89-96.

5

D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson, eds., It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture (Cambridge: CUP, 1988).

6

Other noteworthy evangelical contributions during the 1980s included S. Lewis Johnson, The Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980); Douglas J. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Sheffield: Almond, 1983); Gleason L. Archer and Gregory Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament (Chicago: Moody, 1983); Vern S. Poythress, “Divine Meaning of Scripture,” WTJ 48 (1986): 241-79; Norman R. Ericson, “The New Testament Use of the Old Testament: A Kerygmatic Approach,” JETS 30 (1987): 337-42; E. Earle Ellis, “How Jesus Interpreted His Bible,” CTR 3 (1989): 341-51; Douglas A. Oss, “The Interpretation of the ‘Stone’ Passages by Peter and Paul: A Comparative Study,” JETS 32 (1989): 181-200. A search of the identical swath of major academic journals and book publishers discloses only two new evangelical contributions of comparable scope to these studies during the 1990s, both by the same author: S. Moyise, “Does the New Testament Quote the Old Testament Out of Context? Anvil 11 (1994): 133-43; id., “The Old Testament in the New: A Reply to Greg Beale,” IBS 21 (1999): 54-58.

7

Most notably, Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders, eds., Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel (Sheffield: SAP, 1997); id., The Function of Scripture in Early Jewish and Christian Tradition (Sheffield: SAP, 1998); James A. Sanders, “Intertextuality and Dialogue,” BTB 29 (1999): 35-44; M. C. Albl, “And Scripture Cannot Be Broken”: The Form and Function of the Early Christian Testimonia Collections (Leiden: Brill, 1999); S. Moyise, ed., The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honour of J. L. North (Sheffield: SAP, 2000); R. Penna, “Appunti sul come e perché il Nuovo Testamento si rapporta all’ Antico,” Bib 81 (2000): 95-104; Craig A. Evans, ed., The Interpretation of Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity: Studies in Language and Tradition (Sheffield: SAP, 2000).

8

D. A. Carson and Gregory K. Beale, eds., Commentary on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Baker, forthcoming).

9
Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale, 1989).

 

10

I have been asked to write the chapter on Matthew, which alone is to amount to about 80,000 words, of which this essay is a small offshoot. It is also a slightly revised form of a paper delivered to the ETS at its annual meeting, November 2001, in Colorado Springs. I am grateful to James de Young and the Hermeneutics Study Group for the invitation to participate and for the flexibility to allow me to tailor my presentation to dovetail with my larger research project.

11

See esp. Krister Stendahl, The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament (Lund: Gleerup, 1954); Robert H. Gundry, The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel (Leiden: Brill, 1967); G. M. Soarés Prabhu, The Formula Quotations in the Infancy Narrative of Matthew (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1976).

12

The debate was triggered by Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982). Key responses included D. A. Carson, “Gundry on Matthew: A Critical Review,” TJ 3NS (1982): 71-91; Philip B. Payne, “Midrash and History in the Gospels With Special Reference to R. H. Gundry’s Matthew ,” in Gospel Perspectives , vol. 3 (ed. R. T. France and David Wenham; Sheffield: JSOT, 1983): 177-215; Douglas J. Moo, “Matthew and Midrash: An Evaluation of Robert H. Gundry’s Approach,” JETS 26 (1983): 31-39; and Scott Cunningham and Darrell L. Bock, “Is Matthew Midrash?” BSac 144 (1987): 157-80.

13
Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), passim. 14

Adrian M. Leske, “Isaiah and Matthew: The Prophetic Influence in the First Gospel,” in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. William H. Bellinger Jr. and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg: Trinity, 1998), 152–69.

15

See the discussion in Kaiser, Uses, 63.

16

Ibid., 66-70.

17

See esp. the classic study by Leonhard Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982; German original 1939).

18
E.g., Robert L. Reymond, “Who is the ‘LMH of Isaiah 7:14?” Presb 15 (1989): 1-15; J. Alec Motyer, The

Prophecy of Isaiah (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993), 84–86. 19
All scriptural quotations follow the NIV.
20

Cf. Michael E. W. Thompson, “Isaiah’s Sign of Immanuel,” ExpTim 95 (1983): 67-71. 21
Thus, e.g., even Motyer, Prophecy , 84 n. 4.
22

Cf. John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 1–39 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 213; Herbert M.

 

Wolf, “Solution to the Immanuel Prophecy in Isaiah 7:14–8:22, ” JBL 91 (1972): 449-56. Contra the view that sees Immanuel as Hezekiah (or a collection of Davidide kings).

23
Cf. Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 210–11; Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed

Church Under Persecution (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 25.
24
See esp. Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 244–48; cf. Motyer, Prophecy , 101–5. 25

Cf. the similar logic used by Joachim Jeremias (“παις͂ θεοῦ,” TDNT 5:697–98) with respect to the suffering servant song of Isa 52:13–53:12. Bruce D. Chilton (The Glory of Israel [Sheffield: JSOT, 1982], 92–93) questions this approach, pointing out that during the earliest rabbinic period (just after A.D. 70) not all Jewish usage would be aware of Christian interpretation. But when a messianic interpretation appears in a widely known source like a major Targum, developed and utilized over a period of centuries, it becomes much harder to assume that none of its tradents were aware of Christian use.

26

Likewise Edward E. Hindson, Isaiah’s Immanuel (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1978), 67–68.

27

Contra what would be required to sustain the approach of Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “The Promise of Isaiah 7:14 and the Single-Meaning Hermeneutic,” EvJ 6 (1988): 55-70.

28

A similar conclusion, at least at the redactional level of canonical Isaiah, arrived at only after postulating an earlier tradition-history involving more than one author, appears in H. G. M. Williamson, “The Messianic Texts in Isaiah 1–39, ” in King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East (ed. John Day; Sheffield: SAP, 1998), 238–70.

29
E.g., Motyer, Prophecy , 300. 30

Cf. Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 259. The Jewish tradition subsequently shifted the focus even more away from the Lord’s coming to the people’s return; see Klyne Snodgrass, “Streams of Tradition Emerging from Isaiah 40:1–5 and Their Adaptation in the New Testament,” JSNT 8 (1980): 27.

31

Cf. George J. Brooke, “Isaiah 40:3 and the Wilderness Community,” in New Qumran Texts and Studies (ed. George J. Brooke; Leiden: Brill, 1994), 130–31.

32

E. W. Burrows, “Did John the Baptist Call Jesus ‘The Lamb of God’?” ExpTim 85 (1974): 246.

33

Cf. Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1–13 (Dallas: Word, 1993), 48: “The words in Isaiah occur in a context of comfort and deliverance from the exile, but they also allude to messianic fulfillment.”

34

E.g., Dan P. Cole, “Archaeology and the Messiah Oracles of Isaiah 9–11, ” in Scripture and Other Artifacts (ed. Michael D. Coogan, J. Cheryl Exum, and Lawrence E. Stager; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 53–69.

 

35

E.g., Paul D. Wegner, “A Re-Examination of Isaiah IX 1–6, ” VT 42 (1992): 103-12.

36

Cf. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew , vol. 1 (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988), 383.

37

Cf. Childs, Isaiah, 80, at least at his “canonical” level of the completed book of Isaiah. On p. 81, he adds that 9:6 “makes it absolutely clear that [the child’s] role is messianic.”

38

These explicit equations make it difficult to follow those who see the near-fulfillment of the “servant” as an anonymous individual in ancient Israel, as, e.g., in Anthony R. Ceresko, “The Rhetorical Strategy of the Fourth Servant Song (Isa 52:13–53:12): Poetry and the Exodus-New Exodus,” CBQ 56 (1994): 42-55; Ronald L. Bergey, “The Rhetorical Role of Reiteration in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isa 52:13–53:12),” JETS 40 (1997): 177-88.

39

For a slightly different kind of progression than that envisioned here, see Hans-Jürgen Hermisson, “Das vierte Gottesknechtslied in deuterojesajanischen Kontext,” in Der leidende Gottesknecht: Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; Tübingen: Mohr, 1996), 1–25.

40

For the need to see an individual here, see esp. Henri Blocher, Songs of the Servant (London: Inter-Varsity, 1975), 67; for the presence of substitutionary sacrifice, John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40–66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 377.

41

Sydney H. T. Page, “The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments,” NTS 31 (1985): 481-97.

42

Martin Hengel, “Zur Wirkungsgechichte von Jes 53 in vorchristlicher Zeit,” in Der leidende Gottesknecht , 49 –91.

43

As stressed in Roger Syrén, “Targum Isa 52:13–53:12 and Christian Interpretation,” JJS 40 (1989): 201-12.

44

Blomberg, Matthew , 145. Cf. Daniel Patte, The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 117.

45

Gundry, Use, 230. Cf. Childs, Isaiah, 422–23, again at the canonical level. Gordon P. Hugenberger would appear to support this perspective as well in “The Servant of the Lord in the ‘Servant Songs’ of Isaiah,” in The Lord’s Anointed (ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and Gordon J. Wenham; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 105–40.

46

Again, contra Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward a Theology of the Old Testament 1978), 215–17.

47
J. Alec Motyer, Isaiah (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1999), 259. 48

(Grand Rapids: Zondervan,

 

Hyun C. P. Kim, “An Intertextual Reading of ‘A Crushed Reed’ and ‘A Dim Wick’ in Isaiah 42.3,” JSOT 83 (1999): 113-24.

49
See esp. Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 108–12. 50

Cf. Geoffrey Grogan, “Isaiah,” in Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 6 (ed. Frank E. Gaebelein; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 254–55: “There can be little doubt that we are intended to make the identification with Israel to begin with that we might be gently led to him who is the incarnation of God’s mind for Israel (cf. Matt 12:15–21).”

51
E.g., R. T. France, Jesus and the Old Testament (London: Tyndale, 1971), 68. 52

W. C. Allen (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew [Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1907)], 145) also notes that the future tense (as in v. 13) in the LXX of Isaiah readily leads to the use of the passage as a prediction of future events.

53

John L. McLaughlin (“Their Hearts Were Hardened: The Use of Isaiah 6, 9–10 in the Book of Isaiah,” Bib 75 [1994]: 1-25) demonstrates the recurrence of this pattern in all three major parts of Isaiah (29:9–10; 44:18; 63:17). The chronological gaps between these passages support this idea that Isaiah understood an ongoing fulfillment to his prophecy concerning Israel’s obduracy.

54
See above, n. 15. Cf. Willis J. Beecher, The Prophets and the Promise (New York: Crowell, 1905), 130. 55

Gundry (Matthew: Handbook , 257) further argues that “completely fulfilled” implies human responsibility and that Matthew’s overall introductory formula is phrased “to avoid any thought of divine causation that might be mistaken as a lessening of human responsibility.”

56

E.g., France, Jesus, 68–69.

57

On the programmatic nature of vv. 9–10 themselves, see esp. Craig A. Evans, To See and Not Perceive: Isaiah 6.9-10 in Early Jewish and Christian Interpretation (Sheffield: JSOT, 1989), 52.

58

Grogan (“Isaiah,” 188) highlights how striking the spiritual parallels between the two situations actually are: “In both cases wrong teaching was based on a mishandling of God’s true revelation, the sacrificial regulations, and the Mosaic Law as a whole respectively. In each case tradition allied to bad theology resulted in a mishandling of Scripture, and in each case the result was a self-justifying complacency in the presence of the most holy God.”

59

C. K. Barrett, “The House of Prayer and the Den of Thieves,” in Jesus und Paulus (ed. E. Earle Ellis and Erich Grässer; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1975), 16.

60
Cf. Childs, Isaiah, 458. 61

 

Motyer, Prophecy , 467. See also 1 Kgs 8:27–30 for the temple as a house of prayer more generally and cf. John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1–33 (Waco: Word, 1985), 249–50.

62

Cf. Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 460–61; Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 500.

63

For a detailed chart of the parallel phraseology of the two parables, see Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27–16:20 (Nashville: Nelson, 2001), 225.

64

On which, see, respectively, Wim J. C. Weren, “The Use of Isaiah 5, 1–7 in the Parable of the Tenants (Mark 12, 1–12; Matthew 21, 33–46),” Bib 79 (1998): 1-26; and George J. Brooke, “4Q500 1 and the Use of Scripture in the Parable of the Vineyard,” DSD 2 (1995): 268-94.

65
Craig A. Evans, “On the Vineyard Parables of Isaiah 5 and Mark 12, ” BZ 28 (1984): 82-86. 66

On the other hand, the larger targumic use of Isa 5:1–7 as messianic makes a Christological interpretation of Jesus’ overall parable both probable and probably authentic. See esp. Johannes C. de Moor, “The Targumic Background of Mark 12:1–12: The Parable of the Wicked Tenants,” JSJ 29 (1998): 63-80.

67
For both allusions, see Evans, Mark 8:27–16:20 , 327–28.
68
N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 280–338. 69

See throughout Carey C. Newman, ed., Jesus and the Restoration of Israel (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1999); and esp. Dale C. Allison Jr., “Jesus and the Victory of Apocalyptic,” in Jesus and the Restoration of Israel , 126–41.

70
Cf. Oswalt, Isaiah 1–39, 306–8. 71
Cf. Motyer, Isaiah, 112.
current : : uid:1891 (drupal) 

the great divide

Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving. See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. (Col. 2:6-10)

Sunday i was preaching on the supremacy of Christ from Mark 11:27-12:44.  The implications of His supremacy are summed up for us in Colossians 2:6-10 where Paul speaks of the supremacy of Christ specifically as it relates to our world view.  

As i think of this idea i realized that the supremacy of Christ implies a rejection of postmodernism.  Let me explain.  According to Wikepedia:

Postmodernism is a general and wide-ranging term which is applied to many disciplines, including literatureartphilosophyarchitecture,fiction, and literary criticism. Postmodernism is largely a reaction to the assumed certainty of scientific or objective efforts to explain reality. In essence, it is based on the position that reality is not mirrored in human understanding of it, but is rather constructed as the mind tries to understand its own personal reality. Postmodernism is therefore skeptical of explanations which claim to be valid for all groups, cultures, traditions, or races, and instead focuses on the relative truths of each person.

If Christ is indeed supreme and if He indeed exists as supreme than in Him rests the idea of antithesis.  This is to say that since Christ is Lord there can be no other.  He claims to be the only fixed point of reference in existence- that is He claims to be the unchanging uncaused cause we know as the God of the Bible.  To say this is at the same time to deny the idea of another God.  This means that there is antithesis (A can never equal non-A).  

This means that a Christian who actually believes in the Christ of the Bible must also reject postmodernism because of its conception of truth.  Truth as rooted in the fixed point of reference of Christ (John 14:6) is unchanging and so then is antithesis.  For a Christian to operate and make decisions from a postmodern world view is then to reject the supremacy of Christ.  Schaeffer describes this very phenomenon in the first page of his book The God Who is There:

The present chasm between the generations has been brought about almost entirely by a change in the concept of truth.

Wherever you look today, the new concept holds the field.  The consensus about us is almost monolithic, whether you review the arts, literature or simply read the newspapers and magazines such as Time, Life, Newsweek, The Listener or The Observer.  On every side you can feel the stranglehold of this new methodology — and by “methodology” we mean the way we approach truth and knowing.  It is like suffocating in a particularly bad London fog.  And just as fog cannot be kept out by walls or doors, so this consensus comes in around us, until the room we live in is no longer unpolluted, and yet we hardly realize what has happened.

The tragedy of our situation today is that men and women are being fundamentally affected by the new way of looking at truth, and yet they have never even analyzed the drift which has taken place.  Young people from Christian homes are brought up in the old framework of truth.  Then they are subjected to the modern framework.  In time they become confused because they do not understand the alternatives with which they are being presented.  Confusion becomes bewilderment, and before long they are overwhelmed. This is unhappily true not only of young people, but of many pastors, Christian educators, evangelists and missionaries as well.

So this change in the concept of the way we come to knowledge and truth is the most crucial problem, as I understand it, facing Christianity today

what do you feel…i mean think?