In Exodus 19:6, Yahweh says that He is making Israel a "kingdom of priests." In the context of Scripture to this point in the story, we only have three examples of "priests": Melchizedek priest of Salem, Potiphera priest of On in Egypt, and Jethro priest of Midian.
This creates a striking picture of "priests." So far priests are all gentiles, outsiders, God-fearers from a distance. And all three are instrumental in providing rest for the people of God. Melchizedek provides a feast of bread and wine and blesses Abraham after his battle with the five kings. Potiphera gives his daughter in marriage to Joseph, and the priests of Egypt are at least in the background of Joseph's care for his family and the rest of the nation of Egypt (cf. Gen. 46-47). Finally, Jethro (like Potiphera) gives his daughter in marriage to God's appointed deliverer, Moses (like Joseph), and it is Jethro who shows up after the battles with Pharaoh and Amalek to eat bread with Moses and the elders of Israel (like Melchizedek). And Jethro gives Moses counsel for organizing the people so that they might "go to their place in rest" (Ex. 18:23).
If we consider Joseph a sort of extension of the ministry of the priests of Egypt, all three are significant for the bread they share with the people of God, for the rest they give during hard times.
When Yahweh says that He is making Israel a kingdom of priests, He means that He is making Israel a nation of Jethros, a kingdom of Melchizedeks, a family of Josephs who have bread and sabbath for the world.
[Insert typological significance for Christ as priest according to order of Melchizedek.]
Friday, February 25, 2011
Kingdom of Priests
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Sodom=Egypt=Jerusalem
Revelation 11:8 aligns Sodom and Egypt "where also our Lord was crucified" which is of course Jerusalem.
Sodom is a type of Egypt which is a type of unbelieving Jerusalem.
In Sodom, God's people were vexed and mistreated, and the messengers of God were persecuted. And ultimately, Sodom was destroyed.
In Egypt, God's people were enslaved and mistreated, and the messengers of God were rejected. And ultimately, Egypt was destroyed.
In Jerusalem, God's people were oppressed and enslaved, and the messengers of God were rejected and killed. And ultimately, Jerusalem was destroyed.
Monday, February 07, 2011
Holiness is a Community
Fifth Sunday after Epiphany: Exodus 15:22-16:36
Introduction
Before all worlds, God was a community. God was a family. God was a society. God was Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And while our God was completely satisfied in His own fellowship, in His own communion, in His own society, He created this world. And while this was completely unnecessary in one sense: He did not need this universe, He did not need creation. Nevertheless, it was not merely arbitrary either, it was not thoughtless or meaningless. God created because He wanted to, because of Who He is, because of how He is. In other words, God created because He is a community, because He is a family, a society.
Many societies fear change. Sometimes friends feel threatened when new friends join the fellowship. Communities seem fragile, and change is sometimes seems like the great enemy. We fear new things, new people, new obstacles, and we naturally tend to cling to what is familiar, what we’re used to, the old ways. When things get dangerous, uncertain, unpredictable, we long to go back, back home, back to familiar faces, back to the way things used to be, back to the good old days. It seems safer, more reasonable, less dangerous.
But the sheer fact of creation flies in the face of this sentiment. Or it at least questions whether safer, reasonable, and less dangerous is to be preferred. If the old ways really were better, then it would have been better for God not to create. But God sets the standard of what is preferable. His goals and mission and preferences are the best goals, mission, and preferences. And for all the perfection of His existence before creation, for all of its security and glory and perfection, He still chose to do something else, to do something new, to create the universe. But rather than see God’s perfection and security and freedom as at odds with His decision to create, we ought to see God’s perfection and security and glory and freedom as the reason why He created. And the categories of safety and security really are helpful ways to think about this: God was so eternally satisfied and glorified, so secure, so safe, so at peace with His own being, His community, His fellowship, that creation could only be more glory, more delight, more perfection. In other words, it was God’s community, His fellowship, the unity of the persons of the Trinity which, at least in part, drove His desire to create, to do something new. It is the community of God’s being that aims and drives for a future.
Creation itself bears some of this pattern out: The days of creation witness a God who creates new things day after day and relentlessly breaks His creations apart, rearranges, and reunites. We noted last week, that God created a world that seems dangerous and wild, but while man is in fellowship with the Creator God, man is safe and secure and may enter the Sabbath rest of God on the seventh day. God’s declaring the seventh day holy and resting from His work is an embodiment of God’s declaration that all of creation is very good. For God to rest and enjoy His work is for God to delight in all the newness, all the change, all the future that God has brought into being. For God to invite Adam and Eve into that rest is for Him to share that delight, that safety, that security, that holiness with them. For however long that perfection lasted, that fellowship of God and man and creation was a sanctuary, a safe and holy place. In that holiness, in that sanctuary, that community, Adam and Eve were like children in a nursery. All their food was provided, they were safe and secure.
The Passover and the crossing of the Red Sea are something like the birth of the nation of Israel. Israel is an infant in the wilderness, and like all babies, Israel cries because he is hungry and thirsty. And as God frequently does, He provides nourishment for infants magically.
The Text: We are looking at two episodes shortly after the crossing of the Red Sea. First, Israel comes to the bitter waters of Marah and the subsequent provision of an oasis in Elim (15:22-27), and second, Israel comes to the barren Wilderness of Sin and the subsequent provision of Manna (16:1-21). Finally, God continues to teach Israel about what it means to be a holy Sabbath people (16:22-36). A number of elements in these stories point back to the Exodus explicitly and implicitly. The explicit references refer to Yahweh’s deliverance from Egypt and the wonders He did in Egypt (15:26, 16:12, 16:32). The miracle at the water reminds us of the first and last ‘wonders’ performed by Moses in Egypt, and the “tree” reminds us of Moses’ rod (15:23-27). The time stamp reminds us that this is exactly one month since the Passover (16:1, cf. 12:1-6), and the instructions for collecting the Manna remind us of some of the instructions for the Passover: every man is to gather according to each one’s need, according to the number of persons (16:16, cf. 12:4) and they are not to leave any leftovers for morning (16:19, cf. 12:10). The complaining of Israel explicitly references life in Egypt (16:3), and Yahweh’s provision is therefore a direct answer to that complaint: they had “meat” and “bread” in Egypt and now Yahweh provides “meat” and “bread” in the wilderness (16:12). Like little kids, at least some of the Israelites do the very things that Yahweh says not to do, saving some of the food for the next morning (16:20), going out to gather manna on the Sabbath (16:27). These commands, these laws (16:4, 28) require Israel to live in freedom. Slaves must horde and worry about whether there will be another meal, but Israel must learn to live like kings. This means gathering only what they need each day, this means trusting God to provide for all their needs, and this means spending a full day resting in His provision every week. Holy people have access to the holy God, and this means living in safety, security, and peace. But perhaps the Passover/Exodus allusions imply that this holiness means learning to be open to God’s future (Dt. 8:1-5).
Ruling Well & Gratitude: The cancer of sin is a bestial tendency, leaving only a remnant of humanity at the mercy of instincts and passions. But freedom means reckoning ourselves dead to sin and alive to God (Rom. 6:8-14). Complaining is one such sin and a lack of faith. Complaining is always sin against the grace of God, and complaining is ingratitude. And ingratitude is blind and believes lies (16:3).
Living Sabbath: This means living like children. We need to ditch childish fear and embrace childish faith in the Father (Mt. 6:25-34). Historically, the Christian Church has delighted in the Lord’s Day as a weekly Sabbath day, a day to rest and celebrate the Lord’s provision for His people, but if our entire lives are not marked by that kind of faith and joy and carelessness, we’re just pretending. Holiness is a community (Ex. 16:16). This holiness includes a code of conduct, but more fundamentally, it is loyalty to a people, a family, a society: Jesus is God with us. It is in the safety and security of that community that we are freed to pursue the future, open to whatever God does next, but also fearless and bold to pray for and enact the future. This means that our membership vows and baptisms mean far more than we like each other and ‘everybody loves Jesus.’ Our loyalty to Christ and to one another has implications for education, employment, health insurance, food, housing, everything. This cannot become a separatist colony since if this truly is the community of the Trinity, then it is ever open to the future and ever open to the world.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Time, Space, and Holiness
All the days of creation are concerned with the creation of matter in various states: light, land, plants, animals, etc. And the days "stack" up on top of each other. The first day is the creation of light and darkness: Day and Night. And that is necessarily the beginning of the "evening and morning" cycle. But every day after the first day stacks up on top of the first day, experiencing an "evening and morning." The rest of creation does the same. While it is not explicitly mentioned in every detail, later days assume the presence of the former days.
Waters are gathered together in one place on day 3 from the ones that were separated to form the firmament on day 2. Stars and lights are set in the firmament on day 4, and birds fly across the face of the firmament on day 5. The earth that God formed on day 3 is used for the forming of the animals and man on day 6 and so on. The days stack up.
This has implications for our understanding of time. The past penetrates into the present and the future. Time stacks up.
But what the first six days indicate is that time is a kind of space. There is "room" in a day for a certain amount of work, a certain amount of *stuff*, but God builds, plants, forms, separates, and names within the "space" of a creation day.
But then God does something radically different on the seventh day. On the seventh day God stops working, He stops creating, and He sanctifies, makes holy the seventh day because He rested from all of His work which He had created.
In one space of time, God planted a garden. In another space of time, God formed the oceans. In another space of time, God painted the birds and invented fish.
But when God stops working, the "space" is filled not with "nothing" since the nothingness has been displaced by creation. Rather, the "space" of the seventh day continues to be filled by "all His work which God had created and made."
To sanctify that, to bless the seventh day is to pronounce a benediction on the whole week, all of the work, all of creation. In other words, for God to call the seventh day "holy" is for God to name the creation a holy place. The seventh day is a sanctuary, a space in time which extends in all directions spatially, claiming all of creation as holy space.
But this naming also extends backwards in time. In God's blessing of the seventh day, the previous days are blessed and pronounced holy. This is true by virtue of those artifacts which persist in time -- all the *stuff* that God made is still there when He blesses everything on the seventh day. But there also seems to be a sense in which sanctification, calling something/someone "holy" penetrates into the past. Events stack up on top of one another, but they are and remain permeable to holiness.
In the beginning, God created a sanctuary, a holy place: the universe.
Saturday, December 04, 2010
Glory and Provision
One other thought on the Spirit as a glory and covering:
In both Genesis and in Isaiah, at least part of the point has to do with provision and protection. A husband provides for his bride, and this is exactly what Yahweh did in the Garden of Eden and what Yahweh promises to do for His people in Isaiah. He insists upon being the one who clothes them and feeds them. That is the sign that He is in fact their Husband. Feeding themselves and clothing themselves or allowing others to feed and clothe them are acts of infidelity and adultery.
And surely this is what Jesus has in mind when He urges His disciples not to worry about what they will eat or drink or what they will wear (Mt. 6:25). When Jesus says that we cannot serve two masters/lords, perhaps another fitting translation would be no one can serve two "husbands." No bride can have two husbands; you cannot be married to both God and mammon.
Therefore, Jesus say, if God is your husband/lord/master, then trust Him to provide for all of your needs. Be a faithful bride, and do not worry, do not fear. God has the entire world at His disposal; He owns the cattle on a thousand hills. He still has all of the treasures of Eden at His fingertips. His provision and abundance is His glory to cover us with.
It is His glory to multiply our flour and oil, to multiply the loaves and the fish, to pay our bills, to provide for all our needs according to His riches in glory.
Bridal Glory
I see that Peter Leithart has also commented on this "covering" language, and He noted that it can also refer to bridal chambers (cf. Ps. 19:6, Joel 2:16).
And this fits with the Edenic imagery. Eden was the original trysting place, where God was married to His people, where the bride was naked and unashamed, and where Yahweh covered His bride with His glory.
Covering for Shame or Glory
In Isaiah 3:16-4:6, Yahweh says that He will strip the daughters of Zion bare, but then in their nakedness, He says that they will be beautiful fruit (4:2), holy (4:3), cleansed/purged (4:3), and glorious (4:4). And over all the glory will be a "covering," a "tabernacle," a place of refuge from the sun and the rain (4:5-6).
For Israel to be stripped bare is for Israel to be returned to the Garden of Eden where Adam and Eve were naked and not ashamed and where they had free access to God. In that state, God's own glory and Spirit was the "covering" for Adam and Eve.
But after Adam and Eve sin they see their own nakedness and are ashamed. So they sew fig leaves together to cover their nakedness, but later God provides clothes for them. God wanted to be their covering; He wanted His glory to be their shelter. He gave them food and shelter in the garden, but they rebelled and sought to clothe themselves and feed themselves. They sought their own food and glory. This, Isaiah says, will still be the instinct of some even after Yahweh has stripped the daughters of Zion bare. They will plead with a man to give them his name but they will insist upon providing their own food and clothing (Is. 4:1).
Type your summary here
While it's not the same word for "covering" in Genesis, the word is used in a few contexts that are similar. David flees Jerusalem in shame, "covering" his head and crying (2 Sam. 15:30). Haman's head is "covered" in shame (Est. 6:12, 7:8). In Jeremiah people "cover" their heads in shame (14:3-4).
There will always be a covering, the question will always be which covering, whose glory will cover us? And in Isaiah, Yahweh says He will strip Jerusalem bare so that she might come back into the garden and be covered in the glory of the Spirit.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
SHAQAT
The Hebrew verb "SHAQAT" is rather fascinating.
It makes it's OT debut in Genesis 6 describing the earth which has become corrupt (Gen. 6:11-12). And then God immediately uses it to describe what He is going to do to the world. He's going to "destroy" all flesh (6:13, 17). And eventually, He vows never to "destroy" all flesh again (Gen. 9:11, 15).
Later, it is used eight times, to describe the destroying of Sodom and Gomorrah, both in Abraham's discussion with Yahweh and in the events that follow (Gen. 18-19).
It is used to describe Onan's insolent behavior toward his brother's wife, Tamar. Literally, he "destroys" his seed on the ground so that his brother has no offspring (Gen. 38:9). And for this wickedness, the Lord killed him (38:10).
While the plague of frogs is said to have "destroyed" the land of Egypt (Ex. 8:20), it is this same word that describes the "Destroyer" who comes on the night of Passover as the tenth plague on Egypt, to kill the firstborn (12:23).
When Israel turns to idolatry at the foot of Sinai, God tells Moses to go back down to the people because they have "destroyed" themselves (Ex. 32:7, cf. Dt. 9:12). Of course it is typically translated "corrupted," but this word seems to call for stronger language. We brush off corruption as a purely 'spiritual' or 'ceremonial' infelicity. But God says that Israel is doing to themselves what He has previously done to the whole world in the flood and what he did to Sodom and Gomorrah.
This is consistent with Deuteronomy's description of idolatry as well: making carved images is an act of suicide, self destruction (Dt. 4:16, 25, 9:12, 31:29). And this continues in Judges as well where Israel's wickedness is described as "corruption/destruction" (Jdg. 2:19). The Midianites come in such great numbers they "destroy" the land (Jdg. 6:4-5), and ultimately the civil waring between the tribes of Israel brings great "destruction" (Jdg. 20:21, 25, 35, 42).
The nearer relative to Ruth who decides not to marry Ruth and redeem her land does not do it because he would "destroy" his own inheritance (Ruth. 4:6). He is an Onan refusing his obligation to his brother.
In Hebrew poetry, SHAQAT becomes a noun which is frequently translated as "the pit" which is a euphemism for death/hades/the place of destruction.
Much of this indicates that God's destruction of people is frequently merely finishing off what they started themselves. Their acts of evil and idolatry are acts of suicide, self-destruction, and when God brings destruction, it is merely more of the same.
Monday, November 08, 2010
My Boy Augustine, Sons of God, Nephilim, etc.
It's been a while since I read Augustine's City of God, but I recently read a few selections in preparation for a class and came across his discussion of Genesis 6 and the sons of God and the giants that were on the earth in those days. And not too long ago, I had a fun little chat with some friends who disagreed with my view of Genesis 6, and lo and behold, I find Augustine saying the same thing as I said.
Augustine asks: "Are we to believe that angels mated with women, and that the giants resulted from these unions?" (Bk. XV, ch. 23)
Augustine basically says maybe they have but that's not what Genesis 6 is talking about.
Augustine grants that biblically speaking it is certainly true that angels can appear in the form of men and so could perhaps go so far as to lust and "mate" with a woman. (And the opposite is at least suggested in the story of Lot in Gen. 18.) And Augustine references extra biblical mythology which gives us far more information on that sort of thing than we need.
Nevertheless, Augustine is not persuaded that that is what is going on in Genesis 6. First, he notes that he doesn't think this story is what Peter is referring to in 2 Peter 2. Rather, he says Peter is referring to the fall of the angels before or at the creation of the world, the same fall in which the devil fell and began tempting Adam and Eve to sin.
Augustine also points out that the description "sons of God" certainly can and does refer to men in the Bible, but realizes that the stumbling block for this view seems to be the fact that the text says that there were "giants" in the earth in those days. But Augustine says that the text seems to indicate that there were giants before and after the intermarriage between the sons of God and the daughters of men. And besides, Augustine notes, there have been giants born throughout human history at various points and this does not require angelic/human sexual unions every time a giant is born.
We know that the sons of Anak and the Rephaim in the days of the conquest were giants (Num. 13:22-33, Dt. 2:11), and David eventually killed Goliath, and David's mighty men struck down others, apparently descendants of the same giants (Dt. 3:11, 2 Sam. 21:16-22). But we have no biblical basis for blaming fallen angels for these big men.
Furthermore, the linguistic connection between the giants in Canaan and the giants in Genesis 6 is the word "nephilim" used only in Gen. 6:6 and Num. 13:33. But this actually proves too much since the "nephilim" of Genesis 6 were apparently destroyed in the flood. If we want "nephilim" to be a technical term for the half-breed offspring of angelic/human intermarriage, then we have to insist that it happened again after the flood, in spite of the fact that there is no mention of it.
The strongest case in my view for not viewing the "sons of God" as angels in Genesis 6 is that it simply doesn't fit the story. The story for the first 5 chapters of Genesis is all about Adam and Adam's family. And we know that Adam was the first "son of God" because he was made in God's image and likeness. Sons look like their fathers. And if you don't believe me, ask Luke (Lk. 3:38). Luke says that Adam was the "son of God" and implies that his genealogy is the genealogy of the sons of God because Jesus too is the "son of God" (Lk. 4:3). But Luke is getting this from Moses.
Moses said that Seth was born in the image and likeness of Adam who was made in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 5:1-3). This means that Seth was a son of God just like Adam who was a son of God. And then Moses proceeds to tell us the genealogy of this family, these "sons of God" (Gen. 5). When the story picks up in Genesis 6 it makes no sense to think of anyone else other than this line of Seth as the "sons of God." Furthermore, it makes no sense for God to be angry with people if it was unruly angels who screwed this world up. God sent the flood to destroy all flesh because human beings sinned, because the descendants of Seth, the sons of God who had begun to call on the name of the Lord, fell into sin like their father Adam. And so God judged them and destroyed them.
Of course some modernist types deny the possibility of angelic/human unions because they don't believe in angels, fairies, magic, or dragons to begin with. And they are well on their way to doubting the virgin birth and the resurrection. And I have no interest in bowing to their small imaginations. But neither would a man like Augustine who was willing to speculate on a whole host of issues.
All that to say, like Augustine, I grant the possibility of some occurrence of a weird angelic/human union, and the abundance of such stories in the mythologies at least invites that sort of speculation. But I don't see it in Genesis 6 and neither does my boy Augustine.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
CRF: Why Words Matter
1. God created the world with words (Gen. 1:3-2:3). (Words are magic.)
2. God created the world through the Son, who is the Word (Jn. 1:2, Col. 1:16). Words are like people. The created world is words that speak (Ps. 19:1-11) and is upheld by the Word (Heb. 1:3). (Very magic.)
3. God gave man the glorious task of imaging Him in his use of words/naming/ruling (Gen. 2:19-20). (Words are still magic).
4. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn. 1:1, Heb. 1:1-3). This is the proof that God’s Word does not return void (Is. 55:11). (Deep magic.)
5. That same Word is spoken in the words of Scripture by the working of the Spirit, and it is sharp and powerful (Heb. 4:6). This is why the prayer of the righteous man avails much (Js. 5). (Our spell book.)
6. Some warnings about the power of words:
a. Some words pierce like a sword (Pr. 12:18)
b. A wholesome tongue is a tree of life (Pr. 15:4).
c. He who has a perverse tongue falls into evil (Pr. 17:20).
d. Death and life are in the power of the tongue (Pr. 18:21).
e. Guarding the tongue is guarding your soul (Pr. 21:23)
f. Bridling the tongue has everything to do with the central tenets of the faith (Js. 1:26).
g. The tongue is powerful and dangerous (Js. 3:5-8).
h. A good life is does not proceed from an evil tongue or speaking deceit (1 Pet. 3:10).
7. Therefore, put away filthy language (Col. 3:8) and coarse jesting (Eph. 5:4). Let it not even be named among you (Eph. 5:3). We begin speaking the truth and speaking words of healing when we confess our sins (1 Jn. 1:5ff).
8. Ultimately, the way we use our words has everything to do with the gospel. Our words either conform to the Word and His word in Scripture or they are at odds. They are either gospel words of resurrection and forgiveness or they are satanic words of condemnation and accusation. The gospel is the declaration of the Kingdom of the Risen Jesus. Is the resurrection true? Has God invaded this world with the Kingdom of His Mighty Word?
9. Tell good jokes. Love the best stories. Curse like Jesus. And bless those who persecute you.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Glory Unmasked
In the Septuagint, the word "exodus" is used a number of times to describe the "going forth" or "arising" of the sun, moon, and stars (Jdg. 5:31, Ps. 19:7, 65:8, Neh. 4:21).
This could suggest a couple of things in a couple of directions: First, when the people of Israel come out of Egypt they are like the sun, moon, and stars arising, they are being born as a nation, a kingdom of priests, rulers of heaven. Israel coming out of Egypt pictured as stars is of course what God originally promised to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob as well. The exodus is the beginning of the fulfillment of that promise. It's not an accident either that the sun, moon, and stars are placed in the firmament on the fourth day of creation (Gen. 1:14) which was placed "in the midst of the waters" dividing the waters above and below (Gen. 1:6-7). And Israel is born and arises out of Egypt in the midst of the waters, passing through the waters of the Red Sea.
Pushing this in the other direction, when the psalmist or others refer to the sun coming forth or the stars coming out in the sky, they are echoing the original Exodus and describing the heavens as constantly reenacting that glorious event.
But if that is true for the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, how much more so is this true for the Exodus of Jesus from the grave? Every sunrise, every night sky blanketed with constellations is an exodus, glory revealed, glory unmasked, man enthroned in heaven.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Christ Cut Off
In Isaiah 53, the Suffering Servant is said to be "cut off" from the land of the living (Is. 53:8). This is not just a euphemism for death. To be "cut off" is to suffer the consequences of breaking covenant (Gen. 17:14, Ex. 12:15).
In the Passover text, to refuse to get rid of the leaven of Egypt, is tantamount to refusing to leave Egypt. But if you are an Israelite clinging to Egyptian ways and life, you will be struck by the tenth plague. You will be "cut off."
For Christ to suffer like "a lamb to the slaughter" (Is. 53:7) and to be "cut off from the land of the living" (Is. 53:8) is to tie both elements of the Passover together. Christ as the Passover lamb dies like an Israelite-Egyptian, an Israelite who has refused to be delivered, refused to be rescued, who prefers slavery in Egypt.
Christ dies under the curse of the covenant, like an Israelite rebel, like an Israelite idolater and slave, so that the covenant breakers might be forgiven, so that the rebels might be reconciled, so that the slaves might go free.
Joseph and Solomon
Joseph is a Solomon at the end of Genesis, a picture of a glorified Adam-King, providing bread for the world. And like Solomon, Joseph married an Egyptian woman. And in so far as these daughters of Egypt were actually converted to Yahweh, and these marriages represent evangelism and the gospel going to the Gentiles, they are glorious previews and glimpses of the New Covenant.
But in so far as these marriages lead to other unfaithful intermarriages with pagan wives, they are the beginning of idolatry and syncretism in Israel. While perhaps Joseph did not personally enter into marriages with unconverted Egyptian women, it is not hard to imagine other Israelite men following his "example" foolishly. Joseph married the daughter of an Egyptian priest, why can't I?
And by the time of Moses, Israel is serving the gods of Egypt (Ez. 20:7-8).
Notice the parallels in the Solomon/Joseph narratives:
Joseph --> idolatry in Egypt --> Exodus --> worshiping a calf in the wilderness
Solomon --> idolatry in Israel -->Divided Kingdom --> worshiping calves in the northern kingdom
Bread in Egypt
Joseph provided bread for Israel in Egypt. In fact, Joseph provided bread for most of the surrounding world in Egypt.
It would not be hard for Israel to slip into seeing the systems and culture of Egypt as the source of Yahweh's provision of this bread (which is partially true), and from there, it is only a short step to mistaking Egypt as the source of bread rather than Yahweh.
Thus, when Yahweh orders Israel to leave the leaven of Egypt behind, He is insisting that He is the One who provides bread for Israel. God can rain bread and meat out of heaven and cause water to gush out of rocks if He wants. And sometimes He uses obvious means (like a prosperous nation) to provide for His people. But either way it is Yahweh who provides bread for Israel, and in so far as Israel comes to trust in Egypt for bread, they are idolaters.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Sons, Daughters, Blood, and Leaven
A friend, Des Jones, points out that in the proto-Exodus stories in Genesis the threat is to the bride and therefore it is an attack on the children of the covenant promised to Abraham. Pharaoh and Abimelech are implicitly co-opting the the "seed" of the woman. And this becomes explicit in the Exodus narrative when Pharaoh orders the murder of the baby boys but explicitly orders the sparing of the daughters of the Israelites. Why keep the daughters alive? Because they are the future brides of Egyptian sons. The Pharaoh knows that cultures are ultimately built on people and their children.
But Yahweh knows this as well, and so when He comes to deliver His people, He strikes down the firstborn sons of Egypt. To strike down the firstborn sons is not merely retribution for the murdered Israelite sons, it is to strike down the virility of Egypt, their potential to raise up a new generation of Egyptians. The firstborn sons are the "leaven" of the culture, the strength of the culture, the evidence of a new generation on the rise.
Therefore Israel must rid themselves of all the leaven of Egypt while striking their houses with the blood of the Passover lamb. If anyone eats anything with leaven in it, that soul will be "cut off." In other words, to eat the leaven of Egypt is to be aligned with the Egyptian firstborn and come under their judgment. But to get rid of the leaven is to renounce Egypt and his strength. It is to reject Egypt as a false husband and to look to Yahweh as the true husband, the only source of life.
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Funerals, Feasting, and Little Ones
In Exodus 10, urged by his servants, Pharaoh offers to let Moses and Aaron and the men of Israel go worship Yahweh in the wilderness. However Moses says that old and young alike, sons and daughters, flocks and herds must go and keep the feast (10:9). Pharaoh insists that only the men go, but Moses goes out from the presence of Pharaoh and the Lord orders him to strike the land with the eighth plague of locusts.
There are a couple interesting points to make. First, the feast to Yahweh must include the children. Later in the law, the requirement specifically stipulates that it is all the males who must present themselves before the Lord three times a year (Ex. 23:17, Dt. 16:16), but it seems (based on this) like it was nevertheless the norm (or ideal) for their families and children to attend with them.
Second, there is an interesting contrast with the observance of Jacob's funeral in Genesis 50 where the text explicitly refers to "their little ones, their flocks, and their herds" that were "left in the land of Goshen." (Gen. 50:7-6). One immediate implication is that a feast to Yahweh is not a funeral. Families and children are ordinarily part of feasts but not necessary for funerals.
Clearly, little ones were part of the celebration of Passover (Ex. 13:8ff), which I believe is the feast that they are asking to celebrate. But this suggests implications for the celebration of the New Covenant passover meal, the Lord's Supper. Just on the surface, one implication would be that the presence or absence of children at the Lord's Supper is the difference between a feast and a funeral.
And, ironically for the Egyptians, it is the feast in which the children participate that becomes the means by which the Angel of Death strikes the firstborn sons of Egypt. When the children feast, the enemy is struck down.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Joseph the Dreamer
When Matthew's gospel opens with a Joseph who has dreams (1:20, 2:13, 2:19, 2:22), we cannot pretend that we have never heard of this sort of thing before. And when Matthew writes: "... an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt..." we ought to even wonder for a brief second exactly where we are in the Bible. Is this the end of Genesis?
Of course there are many other details that confirm exactly where Matthew wants us. We have a child-murdering Pharaoh in the character of Herod, and Matthew explicitly refers to the first Exodus story by quoting Hosea 11. Only God's Son is called out of Egypt in order to deliver Israel.
The geography is all reversed. Israel has become an Egypt, and the Israelite king has become a pharaoh. Instead of fleeing to Midian for safety, the holy family flees to Egypt for safety. And when John comes preaching and baptizing, he is inviting Israelites in the Promised Land to embark on a new Exodus, to cross the Jordan and enter the land again, in a new way.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Posting Security Guards on the Coast of Florida to ward off the Hurricanes
One of my favorite stories in the Old Testament is the tower Babel. I love that story for a number of reasons, but one of them is for how amusing it is. All the nations gathered together in one speech, all proud and excited, planning to build a great city with a tower stretching into heaven. It’s huge, it’s gigantic, it’s worldwide, it’s corporate, it’s got fancy letter head, and all the networks are covering this project. The suits and ties are all there, along with the PhDs and the politicians and the rock stars and scientists. All the talk shows are talking, all the best sellers are musing on this city, this tower, this amazing project. And then the line comes, in subtle Mosaic sarcasm: “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.” And the Lord squinted down at the little red spot on the side walk of the universe, hmm…. He thought, what’s that little pile of ants milling so excitedly about? And the Lord came down to see what all the fuss was about. And while the Tower of Babel project was off to a good start, the text continues to emphasize the fact that God had to go down and see it, go down and scatter them. The Lord of the Universe goes down and gently confuses all the chatter, scatters them, and sends them off in confusion, cute little, pesky people.
And I get the same feeling when I read that they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard. O really? You sealed the tomb and set a guard, did you? How cute. Of course the pretense is that the disciples might come and steal the body, but really, all we’ve seen the disciples do in these last few chapters is run and deny all association with Christ. I hardly think they were real threats. But this sealing, this guarding is about like putting a band-aid on the crack of an enormous hydro-electric dam. This is like posting a few security guards on the coast of Florida to ward off the hurricanes. Yeah, you guys just stand there. Good luck. Just how would you seal the tomb of the Lord of the Universe? Just how would you keep Him in there? Of course they couldn’t, of course they didn’t. And here we are celebrating that fact. And we are still little people, small, insignificant, but in the great grace and mercy of God, He has invited us to sit with Him, to eat with Him, and He loves His people. Your God loves you, and the same God who could not be held down by soldiers and ropes, draws you up by His grace to fellowship with Him.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Joseph and the Gospel
It's no secret that the story of Joseph in Genesis is one of the earliest and most thorough previews of Christ, but the parallels really are striking.
From the son of the Father who is sent to the brothers who mistreat him and "kill" him to the exaltation/resurrection as the Lord of the land, bestowing life-giving bread on the nations, the basic contours of the gospel are all there. Joseph dies for his brothers and family and ultimately the whole world in order to give them life in the great famine. And in the "resurrection" of Joseph and his ascension to the right hand of Pharaoh, the best land in Egypt is bestowed upon Israel. The ascension of Joseph means that he pours out life and grace and gifts on his people.
This morning in morning prayer we read specifically about the revelation of Joseph to his brothers and their return to their father. While the roles and types shift through the story, the brothers' initial disbelief matches the disciples with Christ very well. Similarly, Jacob plays the part of Thomas upon hearing the news that "he is alive." But when the tokens and gifts of Joseph are shown to him, he believes.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Remembering the Magic
Just back a little while ago from giving a talk at Logos School as part of the culmination of their Knights Festival. Today they finish with an enormous feast, plays, and lots of fun. Here are my notes from the talk below.
What is feasting for?
Genesis 1-2 opens with the creation of the world and lots of food. All of the food was “yes,” and only the fruit from one tree was “no.” And we all know what happened. But this establishes a pattern throughout the Bible that repeatedly reveals food and eating and feasting as test.
Consider the Promised Land where great bounty and increase were heaped up for Israel, but in this great blessing there was a great test: how would Israel receive the blessing? Moses knew then and we know now that the people very quickly forgot where all the abundance came from (Dt. 8:7-20).
God is a faithful Father who tests his children with both scarcity and abundance. What is God testing? God is not out to get us, but He does love us and is jealous for our love and fellowship.
So what does God want us to remember when we have tables overflowing and laughter on our lips? He wants us to remember that this world is magic. This food and abundance does not come from pure efficiency, scientific progress, industrial machinery, or even middle class moms and dads who pay for these gifts. If we explain to satisfaction where all the abundance came from, then we fail the test. Of course we see little bits of the puzzle, but most of it should be shocking, strange, miraculous.
Every meal, every feast is like the five loaves and two fish. You can see the fish and the loaves (mom, dad, the grocery store, famers, etc.). But then it turns into a table laden with joy, overflowing with gladness. It turns into tastes which combine magically in our mouths. And smells dance overhead happily with or without us.
We don’t get this wealth, this food, this abundance with our own power and might. It’s the Lord who does this for us and in us and through us.
But faith is a lot like imagination. The movie Hook has a grand scene where the old, stodgy, grown-up Peter Pan is sitting down at a meal with all the lost boys, and they all dig in excitedly, but Peter can’t see or taste or smell any of the food. It looks like a table full of empty plates and empty serving dishes. He has to learn to use his imagination in order to see and smell and taste the food. And he finally sees the food when a food fight erupts. He sees the food when he needs it, when he wants it.
What does it mean that food is magic? It means that if food basically is one of God’s most favorite miracles that we have to live like this is true. God provides for His people. He provides for them in the wilderness, and He provides for them in the Promised Land. This means that feasting should always make us more generous.
Throughout the Old Testament, feasting always includes the poor, the orphans, the widows, and the strangers and foreigners. God commanded three annual feasts for the Israelites, and a weekly Sabbath feast, and the Scriptures go out of their way to remind the Israelites again and again to make sure they invite the poor, the orphans, the widows, the strangers.
But we like to guard good things. We get protective. Of course good stewardship is a Biblical principle. And dumping your piggy bank in the lake is not generosity. But we frequently use “stewardship” as a cover for being stingy. My son, like most boys, is pretty competitive, and loves games and competitions. But I noticed a while ago a pattern: as soon as a good game has been discovered without fail the next thing that will be suggested is a rule. And the rule is meant to protect the game and usually to his advantage. And people never really grow out of that. Special interest groups are basically five year olds trying to get congress to pass rules for their games.
But we do this in all sorts of ways. We have a good thing going with a friend, and we’re a little worried to invite someone else into the group. We have a good thing going at Church, and new faces and new people can bring change. Even schools have to guard against this. We find something that works, that’s really good, and then we start putting fences up, to protect it.
And God asks us, where did that food come from? Where’d that house come from, that city, that school, that fountain, those herds and flocks? Magically out of the ground. And you’re worried about what?
Feasting is a test, but the only way to pass this test is by living this thankfulness everywhere. You can’t go through life grumbling and then come to a feast and suddenly become thankful. If the feast reminds you to be thankful, all well and good, but ordinarily the feast just brings out your heart. If your heart is greedy, then you will be greedy at the feast. If your heart is bitter, then the food will not taste as good. But if you are practicing faith everywhere else, when you get to the table, you’ll see and taste the magic.
Feasting is a test particularly for schools and learning communities. You ought to measure your learning and teaching by your feasting. The food in the garden was the lure for Adam to explore and love the world. Genesis 1 and 2 is basically a treasure map. The test is: do you believe that? Do you believe that world is full of the treasures of God? And I don’t mean vague Sunday School things. You do realize that iPhones are part of treasure that God hid in the world? And Bach sonatas and video games and Shakespeare and lasagna with pepperoni in it. The world is full of wonderful gifts from a wonderful Giver. If we can’t see the food at the table, we won’t be able to see the feast in every class.
Pushing it the other direction, feasting is training for learning. Every class, every period, every year should be seen as a feast. Your teachers are the cooks, and they invite you into their kitchens every day to sample some of the finest tastes they have found in the world. We’re all treasure hunters, and we bring the spoils we have unearthed to class and we share them with you. And this is a good reminder to teachers to serve up the meals well. Learning is feasting. Learning is an act of love, loving creation, loving the world God made, and ultimately loving the God who made it all.
And because God loves us, he invites to the feast, but He’s watching us, testing, making sure we’re still amazed at the magic, making sure we’re giving it away and sharing, proving that we know Him, proving that we know the God who does this magic all around us all the time.
Posts
