Month: May 2018

The Significance of the Sermon on the Mount: 10 Reflections from Herman Ridderbos

/ davidsschrock / 4 Comments

sermon05What is the Sermon on the Mount about?

That question has puzzled pastors, theologians, and Bible scholars for centuries. While large volumes have been written on the subject, sometimes a slimmer response is helpful. On that note, one finds great help from the late Dutch New Testament scholar Herman Ridderbos.

Writing a chapter on the Sermon on the Mount (“The Significance of the Sermon on the Mount,” in When the Time Had Fully Come: Studies in New Testament Theology, 26–43), Ridderbos explains the eschatological nature of Christ’s kingdom and how the arrival of Christ’s kingdom as a fulfillment of the Law and Prophets helps us understand and apply Jesus’ famous words.  Continue reading →

The Artistic Evangelist: Seeing the Structure of Matthew’s Gospel

/ davidsschrock / 4 Comments

quino-al-110318-unsplash.jpgIn his theological commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, The Sermon on the Mount and Human Flourishing, Jonathan Pennington spends chapter five outlining the structure of Matthew’s Gospel and the Sermon on the Mount, in particular. Following Robert Gundry’s observation that Matthew is a book filled with “literary and theological art,” Pennington alerts the careful reader to the way Matthew organized his Gospel.

What follows are a few observations about the way Matthew wrote his Gospel and how the whole book is held together with a discernible fivefold structure. Tomorrow, I’ll provided a detailed outline of the Sermon on the Mount. Continue reading →

Unshakeable Faith: Seeking Christ Through Haggai’s Temple – Part 2 (Haggai 2:1–23)

/ davidsschrock

haggai04

Unshakeable Faith: Seeking Christ Through Haggai’s Temple (pt.2)

The book of Haggai centers on God’s great promise to restore the temple during the days of Judah’s return from exile (520 BC). In this little book, there are four messages from the Lord. The second, third, and fourth messages in Haggai are all found in chapter 2, and respectively they speak about the temple (2:1–9), the priesthood (2:10–19), and the kingdom (2:20–23). These were the three focal points of this week’s sermon.

As we considered in this sermon the Lord encouraged the people by telling how he was restoring his dwelling place to Jerusalem, his priesthood to Levi, and the kingdom to Zerubbabel. Yet, we also learn that this restoration is not immediate or ultimate. Rather, like so many things in life, his plans fit into his larger aims bringing his Son to the world and leading his people to place faith in the Son.

In this week’s sermon, we place this book in the larger plan of God’s redemption and learn how Haggai helps us understand what God was doing and now has done in Christ. You can listen to the sermon online. Discussion questions and resources for further study are found below. Continue reading →

“I Will Shake the Earth”: Reading Haggai in Canonical Context

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

jay-dantinne-199087-unsplash.jpgHow should we understand the earth-shaking, temple-making promises of Haggai 2?

Twice in this short book, “Haggai the prophet” announces that heaven and earth will be shaken by the Lord (2:6–7 and 2:21) and that on the other side of this cosmos-shaking event (or events), the Lord will establish a greater temple (2:9) and restore hope for David’s throne (2:22–23). Because of the apocalyptic nature of these words, some have seen in them a prediction for a future millennial temple. For instance, Mark Rooker says when addressing the temple in Ezekiel 40–48, “Similar references to a temple in the messianic kingdom include Isaiah 2:2–4 and Haggai 2:9” (A Case for Premillenialism, 130–31). Likewise, David Turner writes,

The prophet Haggai alludes to the fact that this temple was unimpressive when compared with the first. However, the word of the Lord confirms to Zerubbabel the promise that God is with the nation. With words that anticipate Revelation 21:24–26 and 22:2, Haggai 2:6–9 promises that God’s judgment of heaven and earth (cf. Heb. 12:26) will result in the nations’ bringing their glory to the temple. Thus its latter end will be characterized by a greater peace and glory than that of the first temple. (David L. Turner, “The New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:1–22:5,” in Dispensationalism, Israel, and the Church, 269).

Interestingly, none of the big books of dispensational eschatology that I have on my shelf (e.g., Millennialism: The Two Major Views by Charles L. Feinberg; Things to Come by J. Dwight Pentecost; Christ’s Prophetic Plans by John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue; The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism by Robert Saucy) address Haggai exegetically. Pentecost lists Haggai 2:1–9 as one of the passages he will later expound on the concept of God’s kingdom in the Old Testament (442), but he never returns to this passage. In fact, the most comprehensive exegetical statement I’ve found on Haggai is contained in the MacArthur Study Bible, where the comments interpret Haggai as testimony to a millennial kingdom with a rebuilt temple. Here are two examples.

2:6, 7 I will shake. The shaking of the cosmic bodies and the nations goes beyond the historical removal of kingdoms and the establishment of others, such as the defeat of Persia by Greece (Dan. 7). Rather, the text looks to the cataclysm in the universe described in Rev. 6–19, the subjugation of the nations by the Messiah, and the setting up of His kingdom which will never be destroyed (cf. Dan. 2:44; 7:27; Zech. 14:16–21; Matt. 25:32; Luke 21:26; Heb. 12:26; Rev. 19:19–21). (1334)

2:9 this latter temple. The Jews viewed the temple in Jerusalem as one temple existing in different forms at different times. The rebuilt temple was considered a continuation of Solomon’s temple (cf. v. 3). However, the eschatological glory of the millennial temple, i.e., the latter temple, will far surpass even the grandeur of Solomon’s temple (the former temple). I will give peace. This peace is not limited to that peace which He gives to believers (e.g., Rom 5:1), but looks ahead to that ultimate peace when He returns to rule as the Prince of Peace upon the throne of David in Jerusalem (Is. 9:6–7; Zech 6:13; Acts 2:30). (1335)

From these comments, we get a clear perspective of a dispensational reading of this passage. But is that the best reading? Should we conclude that Haggai, dated to 520 BC in the second year of the reign of Darius (1:1), is talking to the people of Israel about a future kingdom and temple that comes on the other side of the messiah, whose kingdom they have not yet seen or understood? I don’t think so, and in what follows I will aim to provide an interpretation of Haggai 2 that pays closer attention to the historical context of his message and the canonical message of the kingdom of God come in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

In other words, instead of constructing a brick and mortar temple in the future with the words of Haggai, we should see how his words speak to the remnant addressed in his book (1:12, 14; 2:2) and then how they speak to the people on whom the end of the ages has come (1 Corinthians 10:11). Continue reading →

A Hole in Our Holy Temple? Toward a Whole Bible Vision of God’s Dwelling Place

/ davidsschrock / 3 Comments

david-rodrigo-336783-unsplash.jpgThe MacArthur Study Bible is a treasure trove for commentary on the Bible. Many weeks in preparation for preaching I look at its notes, and profit from its historical, grammatical, and theological observations. This week, however, as I read its commentary on Haggai, I couldn’t help but notice some biblical data missing from a table on the temples in the Bible.

While not expecting comprehensive commentary in a study Bible, I was puzzled by the way the dispensational theology of the editors may have led them to excise some key biblical data. For those familiar with Simeon Trust, this is a classic example of the framework running over the text—in this case, the text is the whole Bible.

From the looks of it, this otherwise helpful table on the temples in the Bible—well, except for the dispensational stuff, again—has left some significant holes in the Holy Temple. In other words, as the following chart defines the terms, a temple must be “a place of worship, a sacred or holy space built primarily for the national worship of God” (italics mine).

Italicized are two words/ideas that encapsulate the problem. Are temples only built for national worship? What about the heavenly temple where God abides and angels and all nations worship God? Also, must a temple be built with physical materials? What about Jesus’s words in John 2, where he said that this temple would be torn down and he would raise it up in three days? Does built apply to flesh and blood?

What’s missing in this chart are key elements of a biblical theology of the temple, which touches on so many other elements of Christology, ecclesiology, and eschatology. Moreover, even within the chart the definition at bottom does not hold up for all the data given.

So, to fill in the holes, I’ve modified the chart below, explained the distortions in this table, and outlined why five additions should be included in any temple. From this modified chart, we do get a more complete sense of all the temples in the Bible, although I’m still not convinced about the two temples associated with the Millennium. But I’ll save that for another day.

For now, let’s consider all the temples in the Bible. If you can think of another one, please let me know. Continue reading →

Unshakeable Faith: Seeing Christ Through Haggai’s Temple — Part 1 (Haggai 1:1–2:9)

/ davidsschrock

haggai04.jpg

Unshakeable Faith: Seeing Christ Through Haggai’s Temple

This Sunday we began a two-week series on the book of Haggai. If you are not familiar with this little book, it is the tenth book in the Minor Prophets, and its four-fold message serves as a turning point in the Twelve, as the Book of the Twelve shifts from looking at God’s judgment (Nahum–Zephaniah) to the restoration of God’s people (Haggai–Malachi).

In this week’s sermon, we considered the hopeful message of this prophet, who called the people to seek God first and to finish rebuilding the temple. In his first message (1:1–11), Haggai rebukes the people, the leaders, especially, for prioritizing their own comfort before the Lord’s worship. Thankfully, unlike the previous minor prophets, the people  obeyed God’s word and repent (1:12–15). In response, Yahweh promised to be with them and strengthen them as they rebuild his temple (2:1–9).

In this word of encouragement, God tells them that a day is coming in the future when he will shake the heavens and the earth, only to establish a greater kingdom with a greater temple. Thus, Haggai not only has a message for the Jews returning from exile in 520 BC, but also has a message for us. And by listening to his message, we see more clearly all God has done and is doing in Christ.

Therefore, Haggai is far more than a short word from the Lord to an ancient people. Rather, like a sturdy hinge, it swings the message of the Twelve towards God’s grace and the coming of Christ.

For those interested, you can listen to the sermon online. Discussion questions and additional resources are listed below. Continue reading →

Finding Unity in The Minor Prophets

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

roman-kraft-136249-unsplash.jpgHow do we put the Minor Prophets together?

That has a been a topic of discussion on this blog and at our church over the last few months. As we’ve preached Jonah, Nahum, and (now) Haggai, we’ve paid careful attention the literary structure of the Twelve. With help from Paul House and David Peterson and Jim Hamilton, we’ve considered how the Twelve is put together and how that arrangement influences our reading and interpretation.

Today, we continue that study with a fewbook qualifications and theological considerations from Richard A. Fuhr and Gary Yates. In their recent book, The Message of the Twelve, these two Liberty professors provide a reading of the Minor Prophets that finds unity in the “theological message . . . that emerges when these books are read as a collective whole” (42). In this approach, they engage with the differences between the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the Masoretic Text) and the  Septuagint (LXX), the chronology of the books, the catchwords that may contribute to their order, and the overall theological message that unites these books. While more reserved in their approach than Paul House and his plot line reading of the Twelve, their theological approach helps identify some key themes in the book.

In order, we will consider some of their observations, which help us read the Minor Prophets as a theological whole. Continue reading →

Seeing Exodus 19:1–8: A Literary Structure

/ davidsschrock

dmitry-ratushny-67024-unsplashIn his outstanding monograph on Exodus 19:5–6, A Royal Priesthood: Literary and Intertextual Perspectives on an Image of Israel in Exodus 19:5–6, John A. Davies provides a literary/chiastic structure of Exodus 19:1–8. Paying careful attention to the voices (first, second, third person; single or plural) and the contents of these eight verses, he shows two chiastic structures that organize this wonderful passage.

In any study of Exodus or the priesthood, this passage is crucial for our understanding, so I share his outline here for our consideration (p. 35).

A  People of Israel camp at the mountain (third person plural verbs) (vv. 1–2)

B  Moses’ ascent and Yhwh’s summons (third person singular verbs) (v. 3a)

C  Divine instruction regarding delivery of message to Israel (second person singular verbs) (v. 3b)

D  Divine declaration concerning Israel (second person plural verbs) (vv. 4–6a)

C’  Divine instruction regarding delivery of message to Israel (second person singular verbs) (v. 6b)

B’  Moses’ descent and summons to the elders (third person singular verbs) (v. 7)

A’  People of Israel respond (third person plural verbs) (v. 8a) Continue reading →

On the Priesthood: A Personal Update and Prayer Request

/ davidsschrock / 4 Comments

sergio-souza-285121-unsplashIn 2013 I finished my dissertation, A Biblical-Theological Investigation of Christ’s Priesthood and Covenant Mediation with Respect to the Extent of the Atonement. While the theological question it answered pertained to the extent of the atonement, the bulk of its pages (nearly 400 of them) considered a biblical typology of priesthood from Genesis to Revelation. In subsequent years, I have written a occasionally on the subject.

But this year marks the first time I am picking up pen to publish on the subject. Under the banner of “If the Lord wills,” I have three (maybe four) writing assignments in the next 12 months.

  • First, in the next edition of the SBJT, I am writing on Exodus 19:4–6 and how this key passage transforms the priesthood from a patriarchal assignment of firstborn sons to a legislated position in the nation of Israel.
  • Then, at ETS I am offering a paper called “A Family of Royal Priests: Why the Priesthood of Believers Must Be ‘In Christ.'” This paper will engage with Andrew Malone’s fine work on the priesthood, God’s Mediators. In my review of his book, I suggested a weakness regarding his division of Christ’s priesthood and the new covenant priesthood of believers. In this paper, I will attempt to show how the priesthood of believers is united to Christ through the believers participation in the new covenant and identity in Christ. If you are at ETS this year, come join me for the paper.
  • Third, I hope to submit an article to an undecided journal on what “mediator” (mesites) means in the book of Hebrews. This is something I wrote up a few years ago, but one that seems to fill a gap in the discussion about priesthood and mediation. If you know of any journals that would be interested in such a article, let me know :-)
  • Fourth, I am under contract with Crossway to publish a book on the biblical theology of the priesthood in 2019. This book will fall in the Short Studies in Biblical Theology series. In preparation for that book, I am working on the three aforementioned articles. As it goes, my hope is to take the technical work in these previous studies to produce a more popular book on the priesthood.

All in all, I share these things to solicit prayer for these works and to mention that I will probably have an increasing number of blog posts on the priesthood in the next 9–12 months. Should you want to dialogue on this subject, please free to engage with these posts. The best theology and exegesis is done in community and I welcome any questions or insights you have on the subject.

Soli Deo Gloria, ds

Photo by sergio souza on Unsplash

Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth: Daniel Block’s Answer to a Feminist Reading of Nahum 3

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

explicit

In the Bible there are many explicit images, stories, and words. Read Genesis 34, Genesis 38, Ezekiel 16, the Song of Songs, or Paul’s use of the word skubala (Philippians 3:8) and you will come in contact with holy writ that would require an ‘R’ rating if put to film. Yet, because the medium of God’s Word is not visual, but literary, it both reveals and conceals graphic content.

In the wisdom of God, he has given us Scripture that is both explicit as to sex, violence, and all manners of vice, all the while retaining its holy perfections and purity. Still, not all interpreters of God’s Word are able to “see” this. And sadly, many bring their biases to the text of Scripture, and instead of letting the pure word of God renew their minds, they distort God’s Word, even portraying God in blasphemous ways.

One such example of this comes from Judith Sanderson’s commentary on Nahum 3. Since our church is preaching through Nahum right now, I felt it might be helpful to highlight this passage, especially the way Sanderson comments on Nahum 3:5–6:

5 Behold, I am against you, declares the Lord of hosts, and will lift up your skirts over your face; and I will make nations look at your nakedness and kingdoms at your shame. 6 I will throw filth at you and treat you with contempt and make you a spectacle.

In the Women’s Bible Commentary, a commentary with an unashamed feminist perspective, Sanderson interprets the judgment oracle against Nineveh as portraying God as someone who “rap[es]women when angry.” In full context, this is what Sanderson says,  Continue reading →