Category: Biblical Observations

So that they might find God

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Always interesting to read ancient literature (OK made me sound as if I am very well-read… I simply mean the Bible!!) and think about what world view is being expressed. Normally ancient world-views of (say) cosmology are not ‘corrected’ but the conclusions drawn about God are certainly not simply a mirror of the other contemporaneous cultures. Creation is like that… even more basic than a flat earth (thank God for the firmament (sky) that stops the water leaking through – not a 2023 weather forecast framework), but the God revealed is not the god(s) who has humans providing food for the gods… other way round. God is for us; we are not here to appease this God. Jumping forward we read that Paul in Athens gave some amazing perspectives:

From one ancestor he made all peoples to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live, so that they would search for God and perhaps fumble about for him and find him—though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said,
‘For we, too, are his offspring.’ (Acts 17: 26-28).

One humanity: maybe Paul believed in a literal ‘Adam and Eve’, maybe he did and we don’t have to. If so it would not make us smarter than Paul, simply that we live in different eras. It is not what we know, it is how we live that is the measure. Whatever we believe about (scientific) origins, there is one humanity. Hence all war is civil war.

God is close to all, and even stronger than that, is that of the boundaries and times are not in place in order that God would not be found. ‘So that… find him’. We do not have to deny any insight (revelation?) about God in other faiths to affirm the uniqueness of Christ. Christ is final – Heb. 1 – and he is not simply the way to God but the way through which we know who this God is, that this God is in familiar relationship with us, for Jesus is ‘the way… to the Father‘.

Boundaries… Paul is clearly reflecting on a foundational understanding from Deuteronomy, where we read:

When the Most High apportioned the nations,
    when he divided humankind,
he fixed the boundaries of the peoples
    according to the number of the gods;
the Lord’s own portion was his people,
    Jacob his allotted share (Deut. 32:8,9).

We have 2 manuscript strands – according to the number of the ‘gods’ (sons of God: angelic) or sons of Israel. The former seems stronger, but regardless we have God fixing the boundaries and this is clearly what Paul is acknowledging. However…

He speaks these words in the context of the Imperial rule of Rome. That which establishes its own boundaries (termed oikoumene) and one that ignored previous boundaries. Is Paul now acknowledging that Rome’s universal boundary is the one God has established and set in place, or is he suggesting that at the same time as the Empire sets its boundaries that we should be looking for the boundaries that people inhabit so that they might (stumble around – yes, but) find God?

We see artificial boundaries that have been set – Africa set by Europe; colonial rule drawing arbitrary boundaries in many places. I reflect back some 20+ years ago I was given a ceremonial arrow by a native American chief to give me safe travel in and out of ‘north America’. Those first-nations did not recognise the 49th parallel, knew their own territory, and sought to outwork what it meant that fellow-nations occupied other territory within the wider land (not trying to idealise the situation; am well aware that they did not all co-habit singing ‘kumbaya’ around a shared camp fire).

[I appreciate that there are various views about ‘Brexit’, but to use the Bible on ‘nations’ to suggest that God wants to give ‘sovereignty’ to the UK for example is to suggest that ‘nation’ and ‘nation-state’ are the same I think is to miss what is going on…]

I am playing with the idea that we have boundaries at two levels. Ones that are imposed… no problem working within those – Paul worked within the Empire and simply used the Roman names for the various territories where he travelled; and perhaps boundaries that are from the land – if from the land then more likely to be ‘from God’.

God is at work… and at work in structures that are far from perfect. Maybe the EU weakens the pull to arrogant sovereignty. Maybe it suggests we are one people.

Maybe the various pulls for independence – the breaking up of the UK – is an imperfect shadow of a God movement that emphasises there are boundaries that cannot be imposed through powers that say so elsewhere.

Maybe the future will be more based in the locality, in the city, in the regions. Maybe that might help uncover God-boundaries, that will align us more with ‘the sons of God’ and enable a greater amount of positive stumbling so that God might be found?

All very speculative, but I suspect something is going on. If so we should expect all kinds of disputes over boundaries.

And back to Paul… he spoke those words into the one-boundary scenario of the Roman Empire. No need to fear Imperial power; but the need to affirm God-boundaries without needing to impose them. They will be discovered, and I am sure there are many overlapping boundaries.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Galatians comments as a pdf

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

A little while back I put a few posts together on Galatians, commenting on the confrontational writer (with huge respect, not critically I add!!). I have put those posts, with some fresh editing, together as a pdf & also in epub format (most non-kindle ereaders). It is part of a bigger project… I wrote four books in 2020 with the title ‘explorations in theology’. I am now planning to put together various small volumes that extend that series, with the extra phrase, theology ‘and practice’. Maybe 3 volumes per year, anyway this will be Volume 1.

Here is the pdf… read here or choose to download the file.

Galatians Vol 1Download
SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Story or text?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

At the end of the last post I wrote that we need to recover ‘the story beyond the text’. In writing that I am suggesting that there are diverse ways of approaching Scripture. One way would be to view the various texts as somehow dropping out of the sky in a timeless fashion, for surely the Bible is inspired in such a way that each and every text is ‘the word of God’. That would seem to be a way in which we were respecting the authority of the book we consider is our sacred Scriptures. Not my approach.

Story. It seems hard to get away from that. The books of Moses – the ‘law’ – do have some ‘do this / do not do this’ that could be classified as giving us (actually them not us) a set of laws, but the majority of the first five books (the law) are in the form of narratives recounting what took place – story. So much historical reflection in the other books… not a ‘Thus saith the Lord’ without a historical context. The Gospels – narrative. Yes there is teaching and instruction within them but all four essentially present us with ‘Jesus did this, he said this in this setting’ and so on right through to an account of the last days of his life; far more narrative than a set of teachings. Acts – story. The letters – most are in response to ‘in this setting and time with what they are facing I will write this to them’… historical context (so for example even the BIG doctrinal letter of Romans instructing us to pay our taxes is not a simple instruction, but is written into the context of Rome and street protests that were about to erupt over, within months, the taxation situation). Revelation – a context of observing Rome’s policies and values with a wonderful intersection then of earthly observation and apocalyptic vision that interprets and explains what was visible to one and all.

Story is what makes up the majority of our book.

And cos there is story we don’t have to defend all of it as ‘this is literal’. Maybe Jonah was a historical character, probably not though… and probably not even if Jesus thought he was (though I don’t think Jesus thought he was). Certainly I see no reason to suggest an ‘Adam and Eve’ in the sense of six / seven day creation and happened in this way (literally). What I think we need to think about is not the literalistic nature or not but more what would be the story being told. The story of creation would certainly adjust many eschatologies… the ‘first word’ and the ‘last word’ should surely be better aligned than ‘everything will burn up’. Probably the seven days resonate with the seven days of preparation for the Temple before it was filled with the glory of God. Somehow that would align those ancient stories more with the stories of the day from other cultures (and totally transcend them all) and give us (as Christians) a major connection between Genesis 1 and 2 with our comments on Revelation 21, with the whole of creation as a Temple. I think the only burning up in the end will be the various iterations of the ‘left Behind’ type of literature!

Story is so challenging. What if – hold on to your seat belt – Paul planted ekklesiai in each place as he knew that was essential, essential as the first phase of his activity, but that once he had done that maybe there would be a second phase, one that we do not read of in Scripture? We might try and copy phase 1 with our claims of being a biblical church because we read what was done, but fail to understand the why of what he was doing?

Story… and an uncompleted story. I am not suggesting we can continue to write the Bible… but we can and must continue to tell the same story, but it would seem to me that we are not in the same ‘chapter’ of where the Bible brings the story up to. If we do something different that tells a story that is incompatible with what has gone before we will prove to be truly unbiblical; likewise if we simply line up texts and align to them without consideration to the story it will also result in us being unbiblical.

So much could be said about the levels of story that are in our Scriptures – the detailed explanations as to why David (and Solomon) were God’s choices in the earlier historical books of Samuel but once we come to Chronicles no need to ascertain that (abnormal) choice of David and Solomon was from God as those nasty northern kingdoms have gone and only the faithful to David remain, would be one example.

And conflicts within Scripture – now we come to another area of great richness. Take the ‘wisdom books’. Proverbs is clear, there are no exceptions. Job… in some ways an exception… then Ecclesiastes, with the only human who has value is a dead one! Three contributions that we wrestle with so that we come to a level of wisdom that one monolithic approach would not help us get there. Life is complex and the intra-canonical dialogue (probably disagreement) serves us well.

Story, and with the interpretive centre being in the story of Jesus for God has spoken in ‘the Son in these last days’ in a defining way. The Jesus story – now that transforms the whole story.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Babylon… a strange land?

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Babylon becomes the place of Exile for the people of God and as with so many biblical themes / passages there are different approaches we can take as Scripture seems to swing one way and another on it… either indicating that a multiplicity of interpretation is the best way to go, or (my preference) there is continual intra-canonical debate (disagreement?) which we are invited into, with the question being ‘so Martin how do you respond?’. Ultimately I have to give my answer… an assessment of my life (then) will not be on what had discerned about the various texts but how my life had been lived out.

I prefer the latter (entering the dialogue / disagreement) as Scripture in all its inspiration is first of all described as ‘useful’ (2 Tim. 3:16) and when we read further about the usefulness it is not so that we come to some level of correct beliefs at a head level but ‘correct’ responses and actions so that we can be involved in ‘every good work’. Behaviour over belief.

Babylon and the Exile. The place where they felt they could not ‘sing the songs of the Lord in a strange land’ so they ‘hung up their harps on the willow trees’. Away from the ‘promised’ land. Jeremiah is an interesting character. Not one who followed the pattern that was common, but suffered at the hands of his compatriots because he could not bring them a positive word about God’s deliverance, and refused to say that the Jerusalem temple would be the guarantee that all would go well (a clear forerunner of Jesus, who takes a similar line some 600+ years later).

Babylon the place where the synagogue develops. Ever so practical for how can a people remain distinct in such a place? Meet weekly, focus more on the scrolls than the story. Safety first. Safety – we so desire that, but it can prove to be something false that hinders us… after all the people of God are like the wind – a level of unpredictability to them.

The level of dislocation that Jeremiah’s compatriots experienced means we cannot be very critical of how they journeyed in the land of Exile, but we have a great advantage over them. After all they understood that their destiny was tied up with a specific land – ours is not. They understood that there was something distinct about their Jewishness, we understand that God is pulling a people from every tribe and nation together. Any criticism must be a critique of us in the light of their situation, and as with so much of Scripture if we allow the critique to come our way we can develop along a good path.

Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat what they produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare. For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Do not let the prophets and the diviners who are among you deceive you, and do not listen to your dreams that you dream, for it is a lie that they are prophesying to you in my name; I did not send them, says the Lord (Jer. 29:5-9).

Seek the shalom of the city (translated welfare but the word is shalom… that rich Hebrew word that does not mean the absence of unrest / war, but the positive presence of well-being because everything is ordered in a godly way, where everyone can find a path to their destiny); pray on behalf of Babylon; fulfil there the creational command to ‘multiply’.

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem:
    “May they prosper who love you.
Peace be within your walls
    and security within your towers.” (Ps. 122:6,7).

Pray, peace (shalom) and security (verb is ‘to prosper‘)… for Jerusalem. Same sentiments as for the place of Exile. Jerusalem held a special place in their hearts, and this Psalm is one of the pilgrims travelling to the city… But Babylon likewise has to hold a special place!

We might be able to suggest that the place of exile is temporary with the hope of returning to Jerusalem. Temporary for them, but for us? Jerusalem to the ends of the earth… Matthew (the Jewish gospel of fulfilment) indicates with his genealogy of Jesus (somewhat ‘manipulated’ to fit a nice pattern of 14’s, and even after the rather creative choice of who he lists it is still a little challenging to get it to be strict pattern of 14’s – ah well, Scripture is to be ‘useful’ for life!) that the exile is coming to an end with the amazing phrase that ‘Jesus will save his people from their sins’ for he will be ‘Emmanuel’ (God with us – at last after the Exile is finally over). Exile was because of their sins, but in Jesus it was ending. So maybe here they are back in the land of promise, and the temporary exile is over? But the end of Mathew’s Gospel is wonderfully provocative with the well-known ‘Great Commission’ sending the disciples to all nations (Gentiles) being a contrasting parallel to Cyrus commission to restore Jerusalem and the temple. Maybe the exile was temporary for the Jews of Jeremiah’s day; it seems permanent for us, but not simply permanent, it is transformed. There is no place that we are exiled from in the sense of one day we will return to a land… we are permanently placed in Babylon with the knowledge that we carry a passport from another place – ‘our citizenship is in heaven’. This ‘citizenship’ is not even close to meaning that ‘heaven is our true home’ but in the fulfilling sense that wherever we are we are to ‘seek the prosperity of the city’ so that ‘shalom‘ (an environment where people can enter successfully on their path to their destiny).

Seems that is in line with what I have posted on Revelation 21.

Babylon, our Babylon is indeed a strange land. But our goal is not to escape, to ‘go’ somewhere else… but to see some measure of ‘heaven on earth’ in that place. No Temple there… and even any synagogue pattern has to be a stepping stone to recovering the story beyond the text.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Revelation 21:22-27

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb. And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it. Its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there. People will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations. But nothing unclean will enter it, nor anyone who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

The New Jerusalem… no Temple. Such a contrast to the Jerusalem that John had known. That city was renowned throughout the Roman Empire, and noted for its Temple, occupying around 20% of the entire city. Jerusalem was not a city with a Cathedral (Canterbury, for example)… it was a Temple with streets and houses outside of it, hence at Passover time it could host all the pilgrims, many of whom sleep overnight outside the city on the Mount of Olives (hence the need for Judas to show the soldiers where Jesus was located). The contrast could not be greater. A Jerusalem without a temple could not be computed, and of course 70AD prefigures the New Jerusalem with the destruction of the Temple. How many mourned for the passing of the Temple, here however John helps us understand why the Temple had to go. There can be no Temple where there is the presence of ‘the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb’. Any ‘temple’ is temporary. Tie this to the opening verse of the chapter and we have a vision (understatement!):

I saw a new heaven and a new earth – but no sea… I saw a New Jerusalem – but no Temple.

Today is shaped by what we see for tomorrow; we might work with stepping stones toward tomorrow, but stepping stones are not marking the finish of the journey simply the pathway. Again the vision is of the total transformation of all things, to work with the one who makes all things new.

And wonderful confusion is thrown our way. This city / Temple that fills everything, that is the bride provides light for the nations to walk in a healthy / holy direction (‘disciple all nations’), with its gates never closed (so what is outside the city?) and allowing the glory from the nations to come in, but not allowing anything unclean to enter… Is the bride the city? For sure… Can others enter? Seems that way.

I appreciate what we have here is visionary, apocalyptic imagery; but such imagery is present to communicate what we might term ‘reality’.

The identity of the Bride is for sure those who are ‘in Christ’; there seems to be those who do not get to participate in this future (‘second death’) and there seems to be room for some kind of extremely blurred edges with gates that are closed only to that which is unclean.

I am glad for the confusion! Does me good.

I am challenged by the scale of the vision. A transformed world. If John on Patmos, in captivity could communicate that kind of vision, maybe I in my small world can hold in some way to it too, along with all the ‘what will that look like?’ questions. The future, even when a little blurred to sight, is more than enough to shape me… and the rest of humanity.

Thank you John. Thank you MLK… The dream is alive.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Revelation 21:9-21

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” And in the spirit he carried me away to a great, high mountain and showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God. It has the glory of God and a radiance like a very rare jewel, like jasper, clear as crystal. It has a great, high wall with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates are inscribed the names that are the names of the twelve tribes of the Israelites: on the east three gates, on the north three gates, on the south three gates, and on the west three gates. And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
The angel who talked to me had a measuring rod of gold to measure the city and its gates and walls.. The city has four equal sides, its length the same as its width, and he measured the city with his rod, twelve thousand stadia; its length and width and height are equal. He also measured its wall, one hundred forty-four cubits by human measurement, which the angel was using. The wall is built of jasper, while the city is pure gold, clear as glass. The foundations of the wall of the city are adorned with every jewel; the first was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, the fifth onyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, the twelfth amethyst. And the twelve gates are twelve pearls, each of the gates is a single pearl, and the street of the city is pure gold, transparent as glass.

We come to the identity of the bride that has been prepared. ‘In the spirit’ is the fourth time we read this phrase in the book of Revelation. First time is in the opening chapter that sets the whole book in motion: a vision of the resurrected, glorified Jesus… second time is a big overview vision of the throne room of God, a vision that stands in total contrast to the throne of Caesar with his 24 advisors around his throne; third time is a vision of Babylon and her judgement… and here is the final ‘in the Spirit’ marker. Jesus – throne – the battle and opposition – and the eschaton.

Twelve gates, twelve angels, twelve apostles, twelve tribes, twelve foundations. Twelve… always symbolising government, understood not as ruling over in a dominion sense but being the means through which the ‘kingdom’ of God comes. ‘Let your will be done on earth as it is in heaven’ is now fully fulfilled.

Two remarkable aspects are noted about the ‘size’ of the city. It is cubic – length, breadth and height are the same. That points us back to the only other shape in Scripture that is cubic – the very holy of holies; and the size is the size of the then known world – more or less the size of the oikoumene, the Imperial kingdom that was offered to Jesus by the ‘devil’. The Temple in Jerusalem was a compromise… courts for women, for Gentiles, and ultimately a ‘holy of holies’ marked out as sacred. All exposed (exploded) by the death of Jesus, with a curtain ripped in two. And here the ultimate – no more courts, only a holy of holies, the presence of God in fullness throughout all of creation. Truly a parousia (an appearing) of God, a making visible of the reality that is hidden. Little wonder we will read ‘I saw no Temple’ in the city!

The measurement used was of gold – symbolic of wealth that comes from creation – and the measurement was both a human and an angelic one (I think a better translation would be ‘by human measurement, which is also an angel measurement). Angels and humans at last in harmony; both servants of God working together. We tend either to ignore the angelic, or we colonise their activity. Imagine if both are free to work their side of the partnership!

The one story of Scripture comes together. The foundations from the apostolic work; the gates from the call of the twelve tribes. Gates that protect, that allow for prosperity and release; foundations that are for the total transformation of the world. Again we come to see that the work of the kingdom is not to be reduced to ‘hands up for salvation’ and then we ‘plant a church’ but to work for the total transformation of the world, with a focus on the foundations.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Revelation 21:6-8

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Then he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life. Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God, and they will be my children. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, the sexually immoral, the sorcerers, the idolaters, and all liars, their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.”

What a great way to start verse 6: ‘It is done’. A completion… what began with ‘in the beginning’ has a ‘in the end’ conclusion. The idea that God began meticulously dealing with the chaos, through a process of shapes and filling them, to commission humanity to continue the work, and then at the end it all burns up is both crazy and so against the story of Scripture. The seven day creation account is parallel to the 7 days of preparation for the final coming of God into the OT Temple… here in this chapter we read of the coming of God into his/her Temple – what began as a possibility in Genesis is a definite in Revelation; a God coming to a couple in the evening into a piece of creation now comes to (redeemed) humanity permanently in the whole of creation. ‘It is done’, followed by the two ways of tying the start to the finish – alpha and omega, beginning and end. Such a way of presenting it underlines that we are dealing with one story from Genesis to Revelation, and once we deviate from the story, simply taking verses out of their place in the story we will end up with some major deviations. Hence, we have to develop some form of narratival understanding of Scripture rather than textual adherence.

The goal for humanity is termed the eschaton, from which we get our word eschatology; there is another word for ‘end’ – telos; this is not used for our destiny, only God is (in verse 6) the telos. A little speculation but maybe the eschaton is not the telos, is not the final, final, final state. The creative God might just continue to create? Speculative, for sure.

The translation I am using says that those who overcome (a consistent theme in the book) will be ‘my children’; the text actually has ‘my son’. I think here is surely an echo to Jesus as ‘my beloved Son’, and before that to Israel as ‘my son’. ‘In Christ’ is so important in the NT; I consider it gets us round (actually I consider it straightens us up!) common concepts of ‘election’. Jesus is the elect one… if we are in Christ we are elect in him and hence from the foundation of the world. This is not arbitrary election of some (and damnation of others). Jesus is the elect one and the location for our election. If I am in him I am elect.

There is a second death in Revelation, prepared for the devil and his angels, and here we do not have a Universalist hope – a sidenote there are enough ambiguities in Scripture that prevent us being the one who sits on the throne and draws a line of ‘in / out’. Assuming this is speaking of a future for some it seems to me that the future is not one of eternal punishing (something ongoing) but of eternal punishment (a judgement passed after which there is no more life). I hold that conditional immortality – only God has immortality (‘It is he alone who has immortality’ 1 Tim. 6:16) and that immortality is given to those that he gives it to, as the immortality of the soul is not found in Scripture; post-Eden there is a barrier to the tree of life ‘so that they may not live forever’, etc… – is what fits best here. The fire and sulphur is a reference to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. All that went in the fire was destroyed, the end was final, this was a second death after which there is no more life.

That then is my take on it… As for God’s take on it?

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Revelation 21:2-5

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying,
“See, the home of God is among mortals.
He will dwell with them;
they will be his peoples,
and God himself will be with them and be their God;
he will wipe every tear from their eyes.
Death will be no more;
mourning and crying and pain will be no more,
for the first things have passed away.”
And the one who was seated on the throne said, “See, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this, for these words are trustworthy and true.”

After the sight of the new creation John records that he saw the New Jerusalem, again he uses kainos to describe it, though when he describes it this is not an earthly Jerusalem that is renewed. It comes down from the throne of God and occupies space beyond any earthly city (and as later we will note unlike the earthly Jerusalem there is no temple within it). This New Jerusalem is the bride ready for her husband – Jesus. Later we will look at the identity of that bride.

Then comes the outworking of all persistent movement in Scripture… to put it in our language, God changes post-code. The dwelling place (tabernacling verb) is with humanity. The language used is of movement from heaven to earth, whereas so much of evangelical faith has been of a movement in the other direction and the hope being expressed of the so-called ‘rapture’. So opposite of Scripture and would be so unknown among the Jewish faith expressed throughout the Old Testament and during the time of Jesus.

There is a little quaint aspect with ‘God being their God and they will be God’s peoples’; peoples (plural:  λαοὶ) might simply be a way of saying ‘people’ (as translated in many English versions) but maybe there is a little insight here into what is somewhat mysterious – are there different people groups that God identifies with? Does the in / out division ultimately fail us?

The list of what is no more also gives sight to what is here now but then those aspects will have gone. The first things, the things we are acquainted with will be something of the past… when God makes all things new… and even the tense used indicates how God acts; he is making all things new. This is God by nature, the God we partner with. And it is not making new things as if there was no value on the experiences of a former era, but God is continually renewing all things, and in the vision there will be such a transformation that what taints experiences will be no more.

A future vision… but a present focus.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

A run through Revelation 21

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Been thinking a bit about Revelation 21 (actually also been thinking would love a tattoo with:

Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶ γῆν καινήν (I saw a new heaven and a new earth) combined with:
‘I have a dream’).

Anyway, tattoos or not, the words have been spoken out by John and MLK has echoed them, and they are eternal words with power. Of course we can suggest Revelation is future but only in the sense that in critiquing political / Babylonish power structures we are still longing for the full outworking of what John saw. The book is prophetic not predictive.

I am of the camp that we await a very specific appearing of the age to come through the Person of Jesus, and in that sense I am very conservative, but I am also very cautious in that ‘who knows’ and are we going to be more right in our expectation than the Jews of the first Century were? And whether conservative or cautious the one thing that seems clear (I hope it is clear!!) is that we are to pray for the kingdom to come, the will of God be done on earth as in heaven. So maybe this is to be the future , it certainly has to be the way we pray – hence I have no time for ‘AntiChrist will come with a one world government’. I have no time for it primarily because to make that idea work one has to combine all kinds of scriptures one with the other, and it is certainly not clear that they are all speaking of the same thing.

If the above is unclear let me try one more time… I expect the fullness of the ‘new creation’ to only be manifest when we have what we term ‘the return of Christ’… but given that we are to pray ‘let your kingdom come’ maybe we have misunderstood the return of Jesus, and that the return of Jesus is the restoration of all things. Either way we pray, long for and work for a transformation of this world… not through domination but through going wherever the Lamb travels.

[And a little ‘footnote’ I don’t think this has anything to do with replacing those in power with some good little Christians so that they take over and make all things nice (meaning crush nasty people and dictate that only things God likes will prevail and be implemented! As well as being as un-kenotic as it comes such an approach also assumes too much that the shape is OK and all we need what fills it to be different. There are three steps in creation – CHAOS, shape and fullness. We have shapes – shaped from Babylon, and we pretty much have fullness of those shapes. A future must first go back to CHAOS, so that we can find some shapes that are worthy to be filled, that can be viewed by the God who hopefully will then say ‘that is good’.]

The first verse of Rev. 21:

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 

‘Heaven and earth’ here and in Gen. 1 is a merism for ‘all creation’. It takes the two end points with an inclusion of everything in between: ‘I searched high and low’ does not mean I did not search anything in between! So John saw a new (kainos) creation. Jesus is the firstborn through the resurrection of creation; creation has a hope because of Jesus; indeed part of material creation has gone ahead, for his body (material physicality) is not to be found in the grave. The resurrection is the hope for us all… and the hope for all of creation. This was a central theme in Paul (and something he insisted was a present and not simply a future reality)… the only thing that counted was ‘new creation’, and this changed everything. To hold on to old ways of being holy simply meant that the person was now a transgressor(!) and that our sight of everyone (not simply those who were ‘in Christ’) was transformed; and that all old categories were abolished.

John uses the kainos word for new, not neos. Kainos newness is not ‘I destroyed the old thing… look here is something totally new’, but rather carries the sense of ‘re-newed’, or we might use the term ‘transformed’. The transformation of the whole of creation – a vision beyond one that we carry, for sure, but one that includes everything we hope for.

And in this newness he did not see any sea, for it was ‘no more’. In the original creation we have three elements: heavens, earth and the middle element of ‘waters’. Waters above and waters below. Everything from heaven could only come to earth through the element of the waters. The waters / sea were symbolic of resistance, of everything that was not controllable. The disciples were amazed at one who could control the waves (‘what kind of human is this?’); Jesus walked on the water… The beast that arises out of the earth follows the beast that arises out of the sea in Revelation; the sea was the means by which trade took place in Babylon / Rome; the trade being unjust and also involved trading in ‘human souls’.

For us now there is a sea… there is a resistance… we pray for heaven to come but we have to deal with the unruly for it come… Maybe even we can read in this verse the need for and a vision of the transformation of all trade. It is for this reason we need to take note of ‘they will not be allowed to trade (buy and sell)’ with caution about all we are involved in economically but also to realise that there is another interchange in Scripture, that of giving and receiving. It is more blessed to give than to receive, so the shift has to be into ‘what I have I give to you’, rather than how can I earn money (and using such an approach we have to radically redefine how Scripture uses the term ‘work’)… and in that we discover that God gives an increase to the giver, hence of the increase of his government there will be no end. The giver receives and there are no losers!!

A new creation – where ultimately all who have passed away and are in Christ will be resurrected (hope was always in Scripture for the receiving of the blessings of God here… not there) is what we pray for. We live in the light of it, so our actions are to be a witness to the hope that is in us; it is not here yet… maybe we await for the parousia, maybe the parousia awaits this to happen… either way we need our vision corrected on a daily basis (what do we see?) and we pray ‘let your kingdom… the fullness of creation come… on earth as in heaven’.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Galatians – winding down

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Biblical Observations

Final chapter:

My brothers and sisters, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. Take care that you yourselves are not tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves. All must test their own work; then that work, rather than their neighbor’s work, will become a cause for pride. For all must carry their own loads.
Those who are taught the word must share in all good things with their teacher.
Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow. If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh, but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all and especially for those of the family of faith.
See what large letters I make when I am writing in my own hand! It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh who try to compel you to be circumcised—only that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. Even the circumcised do not themselves obey the law, but they want you to be circumcised so that they may boast about your flesh. May I never boast of anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me and I to the world. For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything, but a new creation is everything! As for those who will follow this rule—peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.
From now on, let no one make trouble for me, for I carry the marks of Jesus branded on my body.
May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers and sisters. Amen (Gal. 6:1-18).

Ever so practical (after the rant… the necessary rant, so we will call it ‘after the clarity to establish reality’). Bear one another’s burdens, and we must carry our own loads. Then he picks up the pen himself (v. 11 and following) and brings things back to what I consider is his view on the world, so much so that circumcision, that central sign of Israel’s covenant is not an issue (so can never become an issue, and by implication, neither can the law as a whole be made into an issue), only NEW CREATION counts; the change of era is here, that is the ONLY issue. Nothing is the same NOW. Everything else is viewed through the new reality of new creation, new creation that has been brought into being through the cross.

And a comment on ‘the Israel of God’. One can argue that Paul always uses the term ‘Israel’ to apply to ethnic Israel, and that could be true. However here he is using the term and writing of God’s Israel in a book where he has stressed who are Abraham’s descendants – those of faith where there is no Jew / Gentile divide, hence I favour that he is using the term (and remember he is a Jew) of those of faith, regardless of ethnicity. The sentence that contains this phrase immediately follows that of ‘circumcision not counting’ and only ‘new creation’ having value. If he is (and I am not convinced that he is) using the phrase to have an exclusive ethnic content it would be following the discussion with Judaism as to who is Israel, as ‘not all Israel is Israel’. Either way, he using the term primarily, or exclusively, as a faith term. And ending the letter with ‘brothers and sisters, so let it be’ might be a normal way to close off but in the context of this letter it was totally appropriate. He a Jew by ethnicity and they Gentiles are one family.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink
Perspectives