Exegesis and Theology

The Blog of Brian Collins

More on the Tabernacle

by

Enns observes a few key textual factors that point to the tabernacle as a recreated Eden.

Commentators for centuries have noticed that the phrase ‘the LORD said to Moses’ occurs seven times in chapters 25-31. The first six concern the building of the tabernacle and its furnishings (25:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 34; 31:1), while the final introduces the Sabbath command (31:12). It seems clear that the purpose of this arrangement is to aid the reader in making the connection between the building of the tabernacle and the seven days of creation, both of which involve six creative acts culminating in a seventh-day rest.

Peter Enns, Exodus, NIVAC, 509. [The weakness of the observation is the clustering of the sayings in ch. 30; why does it not occur consistently at key points of the building process?]

Interestingly the very next event recorded (Ex. 32) is a fall. There a couple of occasions in Scripture in which there is a "recreation" followed by a fall. (The Flood is one example. The passage is full of creation language. It is as if the world is washed clean and recreated. And the next recorded incident after God’s rainbow covenant with Noah is a fall). These passages emphasize the depth to which sin is engraved in the human person. To remove sin there will need to be a real recreation.

Also important to notice, the fall in Exodus 32 puts God’s presence among his people in jeopardy.

The Threefold Office of Christ – Part 12

by

Ezra and Nehemiah recount the restoration of a remnant of Israelites to the land. Jerusalem and the temple were rebuilt. Yet the people were caught in the same sins that led to the exile (Ezra 9; Neh. 5, 13).

Haggai and Zechariah ministered as prophets during this period. Haggai confronted the people for once again breaking the covenant and calling its curses down on their heads (Hag. 1). But he also closed the book with a note of hope for the Davidic dynasty. God told the Jeconiah, the last Davidic king, He would cast him away even if he were a signet ring on God’s right hand. Now Haggai tells Zerubabbel, Jeconiah’s grandson, that God chose him to be a like signet ring—one that God is not going to cast off.

Zechariah saw a vision of Joshua, the high priest, covered in filthy garments (Zech 3:1-3). This was a picture of Israel in her sins. [Three reasons exist for identifying Joshua as symbolic of the entire people. First, the priests represented the nation before God. Second, God responds to Satan’s accusations by saying that He has chosen Jerusalem (Zech 3:2). Third, God purposed to remove iniquity from the land (Zech 3:9).] Yet the Lord had these filthy garments replaced with clean garments. This symbolized the removal of iniquity and the gift of purity.

In this context, God told Zechariah the solution to Israel’s sin problem is found in his "servant the Branch." Other references to the Branch in the Old Testament equate this figure with the Davidic Messiah. The timing of this promised removal of iniquity is linked to "vine and fig tree" language (Zech 3:10). Micah 4:1-7 uses vine and fig tree language in connection with the rule of the Lord from Zion. The Micah passage is parallel to Isaiah 2. The prophet Isaiah identifies the Lord who rules from Zion and the Davidic Messiah.

In Zechariah 6:9-15 Joshua, the high-priest is symbolically crowned to indicate that the Branch would be “a priest on his throne” (Zech 6:13). As the book progresses Zechariah predicts a king that will come “having salvation” (Zech 9:9). He is contrasted with false shepherds (Zech 10-11). When that king comes he is found to be the Lord (Zech 14:9). Yet he is a pierced Lord (Zech 12:10) who provides a fountain of cleansing for the people’s sin and uncleanness (Zech 13:1). The Lord the king is thus able to do what the sacrifices were intended to do. In the end the whole earth will be made holy to the Lord (Zech 14:20-21).

Free Commentary on Matthew and Mark

by

Phil Gons has information on a free commentary offer from Logos:

In an effort to promote the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series, Logos is giving away the Matthew, Mark volume by David L. Turner and Darrell L. Bock for free—no strings attached! Make sure to use coupon code CORNERSTONE.

NOTE: If you don’t already have a Libronix Customer ID, make sure to download the free Libronix engine and create a Libronix Customer ID before you grab this commentary.

It’s a limited-time offer. Spread the word!

Turner has also recently written a commentary on Matthew for the Baker Exegetical set.

Machen and Hermann

by

Long before Machen wrote Christianity and Liberalism, he studied in Germany under the Ritschlian, Wilhelm Hermann.

Machen wrote home about the experience:

The first time that I heard Herrmann may almost be described as an epoch in my life. Such an overpowering personality I think I almost never before encountered—overpowering in the sincerity of religious devotion . . . .

My chief feeling with reference to him is already one of the deepest reverence . . . . I have been thrown all into confusion by what he says—so much deeper is his devotion to Christ than anything I have known in myself in the past few years . . . . Hermann affirms very little of that which I have been accustomed to regard as essential to Christianity, yet there is no doubt in my mind that he is a Christian, and a Christian of a peculiarly earnest type.

cited in John Piper, Contending for Our All: Defending Truth and Treasuring Christ in the Lives of Athanasius, John Owen, and J. Gresham Machen (Crossway, 2006), 123.

This reveals the fallacy of equating Christianity with piety apart from doctrine. It was an error the young Machen almost succumbed to and an error about which the older Machen tried to warn the church.

The Tabernacle and the Presence of God

by

The Tabernacle was a visible symbol of God’s presence among his people (Ex 25:8). This was a blessing not to be under-appreciated. When Adam and Eve were thrust from Eden, they were thrust from the presence of God. The Tabernacle was the first step toward God dwelling with his people once again.

Interestingly, it seems that all of the furniture described in Exodus 25 reinforces the concept of God’s presence.

The ark is the first piece of tabernacle furniture mentioned. It is the "supreme post-Sinai symbol of the Presence of Yahweh" (Durham, 350 cited by Enns, 511). Since Scripture reveals that Yahweh was enthroned between the cherubim (1 Sam 4:4; 2 Sam 6:2; Ps 80:1; 99:1), the ark, with the cherubim on its lid symbolizes Yahweh’s throne.

The table also testified to God’s presence with his people. The twelve (=tribes) loaves of bread laid on the table were called "bread of the Presence" (ESV, NASB, HCSB, NIV; "shewbread," KJV; Heb, לחם פנים). Leviticus reveals that the priests were to eat this bread each Sabbath in the Holy Place, which probably indicates God’s fellowship with his people.

The lamp is made to look like a tree, and several commentators think the lamp is meant to symbolize the tree of life (Staurt is the most helpful on this point; he makes the best use of cross references).

If the lamp does indeed picture the tree of life, the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies was like a miniature Eden built in the wilderness [G. K. Beale has some similar ideas in The Temple and the Church’s Mission, but he argues Eden was a "temple." I think this argues backwards; the tabernacle and temple were like Eden]. This is an Eden that is also a continual reminder of sin, however. The people are still barred from the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies. Only priestly mediators are permitted to enter there.

Frame says the biblical story "is the narrative of God coming to be with his people as their Lord, in his control, authority, and presence" (DCL, 273). The construction of the Tabernacle is a major step toward the realization of God dwelling once more with man. It also reveals the need for the remainder of the plan of redemption.

Machen on Doctrine and Christianity

by

But, it will be said, Christianity is a life, not a doctrine. This assertion is often made, and it has the appearance of godliness. But it is radically false, and to detect its falsity one does not even need to be a Christian. For to say that ‘Christianity is a life’ is to make an assertion in the sphere of history.

. . . . . . . . . .

About the early stages of this movement [that is, Christianity] definite historical information has been preserved in the Epistles of Paul, which are regarded by all serious historians as genuine products of the first Christian generation. The writer of the Epistles had been in direct communication with those intimate friends of Jesus who had begun the Christian movement in Jerusalem, and in the Epistles he makes it abundantly plain what the fundamental character of the movement was.

But if any one fact is clear, on the basis of this evidence, it is that the Christian movement at its inception was not just a way of life in the modern sense, but a way of life founded upon a message. It was based, not upon mere feeling, not upon a mere program of work, but upon an account of facts. In other words, it was based upon doctrine.

J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism (Eerdmans, 1923), 19, 21.

Bavinck on "Son of Man"

by

Herman Bavink’s Reformed Dogmatics contains one of the best treatments of Christology to be found. At one point he includes a helpful discussion of the title "Son of Man."

Here are a few key quotes:

Taking all this [previously discussed exegetical material] into consideration, we realize that with this name Jesus intends to distinguish himself from and position himself above all other humans. The name also undoubtedly implies that he was truly human, akin not only to Israel, but to all humans; yet it simultaneously expresses the fact that he occupies an utterly unique place among all humans.

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 3:250

It does not follow that the people in general, or that even the disciples, on hearing the name, immediately thought of the Messiah. The opposite is likely the case, because he was never attacked on account of this title. People perhaps understood by it only that he was special, that he was an extraordinary human being, a fact that was immediately substantiated by his words and works. But for that very reason this name afforded Jesus an opportunity to cut off in advance all misunderstanding about his person and work, and to gradually inject into that name and unite with it the peculiar meaning of the messiahship that, in accordance with the Scriptures, was inherent in it to his mind.

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 3:250

So then Jesus chose this name for himself to make known: (1) that he was not just the Son of David and King of Israel but the Son of Man, connected with all humans and giving his life as a ransom for many; (2) that he nonetheless occupied an utterly unique place among all humans, because he had descended from above, from heaven, lived in constant communion with the Father during his stay on earth, and had power to forgive sins, to bestow eternal life, to distribute to his own all the goods of the kingdom; (3) that he could not grasp this power violence as the Jews expected their Messiah to do, but that as the Servant of the Lord, he had to suffer and die for his people; and (4) that precisely by taking this road he would attain to the glory of the resurrection and the ascension, the elevation to God’s right hand, and the coming again for judgment."

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 3:250f.

The Threefold Office of Christ – Part 11

by

Ezekiel continued Jeremiah’s theme of destruction coming on the failed prophet, priest, and king (Eze 7:26-27; 23:26-28). Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel condemned the shepherds of Israel (Eze 34:1-10, 17-19). The oracle of judgment is divided into two parts. The hope proffered after the first oracle is Yahweh’s declaration, “I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep” (Eze 34:11-16). The hope after the second oracle of judgment is the exaltation of the Davidic king (Eze 34:20-24).

In the restoration oracle of chapter 37, the hope of the Davidic king is once again placed before the people (Eze 37:22-28). In his vision of the great city-temple Ezekiel describes a figure called the “prince.” He seems to symbolize the right rule that the people will experience during this time (cf. Eze 45:9). Interestingly this prince seems to be involved in both kingly and priestly work. He leads in Sabbath and festival worship (It is worth noting that he is able to go through the gate by which the Lord entered the temple.).

The prophet Daniel, like Ezekiel, wrote during the exile. He envisioned God establishing a kingdom that would overcome the wicked human kingdoms that controlled the world throughout human history (Dan 2:44).

This dominion was granted to a person identified as “like a son of man” (Dan 7:13-14). In Genesis 1:28 God told humans that He intended for them to rule over the beasts. After the Fall, however, man was not able to fulfill this command as God intended. Instead, as Daniel 7 indicates, man has become bestial. But the Son of Man, in Daniel’s vision, will one day rule over the beasts. He will conquer those rulers who have become bestial in their exercise of dominion. He will be the ruler who will rightly exercise dominion over all the earth.

Daniel also looked forward to the day when definitive atonement would be made (Dan 9:24) and he relates this to the cutting off of the Messiah (Dan 9:26).

Machen on Liberalism

by

Machen on why liberal concessions to naturalism were wrongheaded:

In trying to remove from Christianity everything that could possibly be objected to in the name of science, in trying to bribe off the enemy by those concessions which the enemy most desires, the apologist has really abandoned what he started out to defend.

J. Gresham Machen, Christianity and Liberalism, (Eerdmans, 1923), 7-8

Christianity and Liberalism for $6.50

by

Westminster bookstore is offering J. Gresham Machen’s Christianity and Liberalism for 6.50 (+S&H). This is a must read book.

Machen’s thesis is reflected in the title. Liberalism is not Christianity; it is another religion. This gets at the root of the Fundamentalist objection to ecumenical endeavors with with liberals.

For further Machen resources, see John Piper’s biographical sermon and the biographies by Hart and Nichols (Hart’s is the more detailed, but I profited more from Nichols).