Exegesis and Theology

The Blog of Brian Collins

Righteousness exceeding that of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 5 and 6

by

It seems that a good bit of the Sermon on the Mount flows from Jesus’ statement: “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:20).

The remainder of chapter 5 provides Jesus’ hearers with six examples that demonstrate the common understanding of the Law did not rise to Jesus’ expectations of righteousness. (In some cases this was due to a mishandling of the law [e.g., Matt. 5:33-37, 43-47]; in other cases this is due appreciating only the external aspects of the law [e.g., Matt. 5:2-26, 27-30]—something Israel’s prophets condemned; in other cases this is due to a failure to see that the law pointed beyond itself to a higher ethic [e.g., Matt. 5:38-42; 31-32; with Matt. 19:8-9]).

The expected standard is stated in Matthew 5:48: “You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Chapter 6 continues the focus on righteousness. It begins with the governing statement: "Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.” [Note the interesting connections between this verse and Matt. 5:12, 16.]

What follows (Matt. 6:2-4, 5-15, 16-18) are three examples: Don’t give alms to be noticed; don’t pray to be noticed; don’t fast to be noticed.

Jesus and the Law in the Sermon on the Mount

by

This is an attempt to understand Jesus’ teaching about the Law in Matthew 5:17-20.

Jesus’ announcement of the arriving kingdom evidently raised questions about the continuing place for the Law. This may have especially been the case if His hearers made the correct connection between the coming kingdom and the New Covenant, a covenant that Jeremiah said would not be like the covenant made at Sinai (Jer. 31:31-32).

Jesus’ clarification has been itself confusing for some interpreters. There are a number of false interpretations that can be cleared away at the outset.

First, when Jesus said that he did not intend to abolish the law, he was not saying that Christians would be obligated to obey every part of the Old Testament law until the end of the world. Hebrews 10:18 has made it clear that Jesus’ death brought an end to the sacrificial system. Jesus himself declared all foods clean, rendering the Old Testament food laws no longer binding on God’s people (Mark 7:19; cf. Acts 10:15). Even within Matthew 5, Jesus is going to make some changes to the Mosaic law (see for instance Jesus’ comments about divorce in light of Matt. 19:8-9).

Second, some people argue that when Jesus says that he is not going to abolish the law, he means the moral law rather than the civil or ceremonial law. But the moral, civil, ceremonial distinction was developed during the Middle Ages. It can’t be read back into the New Testament.

The key to understanding the passage is to understand what Jesus meant by “fulfilling” the law. Matthew uses this term fifteen other times in his gospel and in all but three he is referring to the fulfillment of the Old Testament. In these other passages Jesus doesn’t necessarily fulfill a direct prophetic prediction; but in every case he fulfills the Old Testament by being that to which it pointed forward.

In relation to the Law, Jesus fulfills the Old Testament by bringing about the kingdom in which it is possible to live in the way that the Old Testament pointed toward.

This means that the Old Testament retains its validity until heaven and earth pass away and all is accomplished even though it is no longer the binding covenant of God’s people. Thus one who “looses” an Old Testament commandment comes under God’s disfavor. What God actually demands for entrance into the kingdom of heaven is a righteousness far beyond that of Israel’s most scrupulous law-keepers.

Thoughts on Judges – (1:1-20)

by

Judges opens as though the great victories recounted in the book of Joshua will continue. Before the chapter ends, however, failure after failure becomes apparent.

A close look at the opening of the chapter reveals that all was not well even in Israel’s successes. Though Judah conquered Bezek and Jerusalem, Bezek was treated in the same manner as the Canaanites treated their captives. He was not put to death as the law demanded (Deut. 7:1-4).

Nevertheless, “The LORD was with Judah, and he took possession of the hill country, but he could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain because they had chariots of iron” (Judg. 1:19). This looks, at first, like a statement of success.

But the final part of the sentence raises a question. Why would iron chariots matter? God had promised that he would deliver nations mightier than Israel over to his people (Deut. 7:1-2). Joshua told the people of Ephraim and Manasseh that they would triumph over enemies with iron chariots (Josh 17:16-18). Within Judges itself, Sisera’s nine hundred iron chariots (Judg. 4:3) posed no problem when God had determined to give Israel the victory.

Judah’s inability to drive out the inhabitants of the plain is thus a subtle indicator that not all is well with Judah.

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – Leadership

by

The book emphasizes Joshua as the godly successor to Moses. Joshua was not the Prophet like Moses, but he was a leader like Moses. The close of the book that notes that Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua and the elders who survived him foreshadows that Israel stopped serving him when no leader like Moses followed. Judges concludes by noting the need for a king, which of course has a messianic implication.

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – Holiness

by

If the Israelites were to subdue the land and live out the dominion mandate as a kingdom of priests to the rest of the world, holiness or purity of worship was absolutely necessary.

Genesis 15:16 and Leviticus 18:24-25 indicates that placing the Canaanites under the ban was a judicial matter, but the Canaanites were put also under the ban so that Israel would not be adversely affected by the Canaanites (Deut. 7:1-4; 20:17-18). Israel would not be an effective priest to the nations (Ex. 19:6; Deut. 4:5-8) if it succumbed to the sins of the Canaanites.

Thus, ironic as it may sound, the extermination of the Canaanites seems to include a missionary motive.

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – Obedience

by

As noted previously, Israel’s obedience to the covenant stipulations bookends this book. The importance of obedience is stressed in the body of the book through examples of Israel’s disobedience (e.g., Achan, the Gibeonites).

If Israel was to live out its purpose for living in the land—showing the nations what good and wise dominion of the earth looked like—it had to live in obedience to the covenant.

Ominously, Joshua closes the book by telling the people that they will not be able to serve the Lord (Josh. 24:19).

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – Covenant

by

Because the promises God kept were covenant promises, the covenant is a theme in Joshua.

The covenant theme also appears in the opening and closing of the book. In both places Israel is exhorted to keep the Mosaic Covenant.

The Ark of the Covenant is emphasized in chapter 3 with the crossing of the Jordan and in chapter 8 with the renewal of the covenant.

Joshua, Fulfilled Promises, and the Abrahamic Covenant

by

One reader sent an e-mail in response to the post on the fulfillment of God’s promises: “You should deal . . . with whether or not that part of the Abrahamic covenant is still in force if Joshua says the land was given to the people.”

This actually raises a fairly big issue within Joshua itself. Some passages in Joshua seem to say that the entire land had been conquered (Josh 10:40-42; 11:16-23; 21:43-45). Other passages seem to say that there was more land to conquer (Josh 13:1; 18:3).

This seeming discrepancy should not be blown out of proportion. For instance, Joshua 11:23 reads, “So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the Lord had spoken to Moses,” immediately after noting that there remained land to conquer in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh 11:22).

It is important to remember exactly what God spoke when he promised the land to Moses (Josh 11:21; 21:45). In Deuteronomy 7:22, God said, “The LORD your God will drive out these nations before you little by little. You will not be able to destroy them all at once; otherwise, the wild animals will become too numerous for you” (HCSB).

In other words, God had given to Israel the land as a whole, but, just as he had said, there still remained land to conquer little by little: the border lands and pocks of resistance within each tribe’s territory.

As to the Abrahamic covenant being fully fulfilled, this becomes more of an issue in 1 Kings 4:20-21. That passages says Solomon ruled all the land by the Abrahamic Covenant according to the specified boundries (Gen. 15:18). It is important to note, however that this land was promised to Israel as an “everlasting possession” (Gen. 17:8). That was not fulfilled either in Joshua’s day or in Solomon’s.

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – God’s Promises

by

The reception of the land both in general and in many particulars was the fulfillment of promises that God had made to the patriarchs and to the nation. The fulfillment of these promises is especially noted in Joshua 21:43-45: “Thus the LORD gave to Israel all the land that he swore to give to their fathers. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. And the LORD gave them rest on every side just as he had sworn to their fathers. Not one of all their enemies had withstood them, for the LORD had given all their enemies into their hands. Not one word of all the good promises that the LORD had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass.”

Thoughts on the Theology of Joshua – Land

by

Land is the key theme of Joshua. The book opens with God commanding Joshua to lead the people across the Jordan in the land that he is going to give them. The body of the book focuses on the conquest and allocation of the land.

The roots of this theme reach back to the dominion blessing of Genesis 1:26-28. The ability to carry out dominion over the earth as intended by God was lost apart from redemption.

The promise of land was given to the Israelites as a part of God’s redemptive plan. Like the original dominion blessing, the promised land was given by God, but the recipients were to act on the gift to bring it to fruition.

Joshua shows the dominion blessing in the context of the Fall. The land must be conquered from human enemies who have corrupted the land with their sin. The sinners are to be exterminated from the land, and God’s people are to live in the land in accordance to God’s covenant regulations. In this way the nations will be able to see what a land under righteous dominion looks like.