The God of binding dilemmas (Ezekiel 14:1-11)

Commenting on Ezekiel 14:1-11, Robert Jenson says:

We encounter again the mysteriously simple relation between the Lord's will and our wills. The antimony appears everywhere in scripture. Jesus tells his hearers that no one can come to him except those whom the Father gives him, and he does this in a speech aimed at bringing his hearers to him (John 6:65). In the case always adduced when theology takes up this matter, the Lord hardens Pharaoh's heart against letting Israel go and then destroys him for not letting Israel go (Exod. 7:3-5; 12:1-16). 

We should ask ourselves: if we find predestination offensive, what would we rather have the Lord do? Let us go the ways of our rebellion, to the destruction that terminates those ways? Or turn history over to our wise rule? Or, as Ezekiel here portrays God's rule, be himself in some mysterious way responsible also in our iniquities? One may of course say that God is surely not bound by such dilemmas. But that would be true only if he withdrew from his history with us; if he soldiers on with creatures who are both finite and fallen, he too faces alternatives. One may say that God should not in the first place create a history that poses such choices. But what other sort of history would we, in our great wisdom, institute?1

Most noteworthy, I think, is Jenson's commitment to God not withdrawing from history with us. That is to say, God is intimately involved in all of history. Then we should ask, what does he reveal about his involvement in history and with us? Is he so transcendent that he is entirely distant, decreeing all things which come to pass a long, long time ago, far, far away (while remaining there), and only "coming down" to visit his people here and there, from time to time, for the purpose of letting us know how distant and transcendent he always has been? 

Or is it because he is transcendent that he is also imminent, decreeing all things that come to pass, including his own personal involvement and interaction with men? If the former, then God is fully responsible in and for all our iniquities. If the latter, then God is only responsible for his choices--both his eternal decree and his personal involvement, moment by moment, with men who make choices freely (that is, by their own volition). When men make sinful choices, God not only responds accordingly, moment by moment, but he also works things out according to his eternally good purpose and pleasure.

Perhaps one way to apply this is to use Jenson's example of Pharaoh. God hardens Pharaoh's heart and God destroys him for not letting Israel go (whom he would eventually command to let go). But the human author of Scripture does not inform us about what volitional decisions of Pharaoh brought about or provoked God's decision to harden Pharaoh's heart, as revealed to Moses in time and space. Instead, the human author of Scripture informs us about one limited aspect of God's eternal decree, one limited aspect of God's over-arching plan for saving his people and glorifying his name in the Earth. 

But if God is intimately involved and deeply committed to his image-bearers, then why not assume that Pharaoh's own sins had provoked or moved the Lord to harden his heart? Yes, I realize that the Lord tells Moses that he would harden Pharaoh's heart before the narrative shows his heart being hardened. But does that really change the historical possibility that Pharaoh had already provoked the Lord to the point of planning a hardening of his heart? Only God knows anyway. It seems that it's entirely likely that Pharaoh was always confronted with alternatives--alternatives which could have kept him from the Lord's hardening. But if that's the case, then the Lord faces alternatives as well, alternatives in time and space among his image-bearers. If that's the case, then the Lord binds himself by such dilemmas and such dilemmas fully comport with the eternal decree of the Father, the provision of the Son, and the work of the Holy Spirit, all of which we only know about in an extremely limited manner anyway, as it has been revealed in Scripture.

1.  Robert W. Jenson, Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible: Ezekiel [Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2009], p. 119 

5th century Preterist exegesis of Matthew 24

In a fifth century document commonly referred to as Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum, the author makes a number of fascinating remarks concerning Matthew chapter 24. Of particular interest is his repeated reference to Jesus' statements about the destruction of Jerusalem. The author clearly believed that the prophetic statements of Jesus in Matthew 24 involved, in the very least, literal historical fulfillment in the Jewish wars leading up to the destruction of the Temple in 70A.D. But he also imposes a convenient distinction between a "spiritual Jerusalem and a physical Jerusalem," making it possible for many of Jesus' statements to also apply to the "spiritual Jerusalem" (i.e. the Church), which spans the entire course of church history until the final consummation.

The length of his comments are far too lengthy to record in full (spanning more than 20 pages), so I will condense each section accordingly, focusing mainly on his insights concerning the "physical Jerusalem":

But he [Jesus] answered them, "You see all those, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another, that will not be thrown down." 

If some city rebelled against its earthly king, does he not remove the rights from that city and send his soldiers to make it desolate so that the city that did not recognize the power of its king in good times can know it in bad times and that its very desolation can attest how previously the good graces of the king had benefited it? But this nation rebelled against me, the heavenly king, ruined my law, scorned my commandments, killed my servants, raised their ungodly hands against me and further plots to kill me unless my immortal nature would defend me. So I will remove the pledge of my truth from it, that is, the Holy Spirit. I will remove my army, that is, my holy angels who protected it, so that here a stone will not stand upon another stone. Therefore, when salvation departs from it, perdition must rule it. 

As he [Jesus] sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?" 

That is, when will these things be so that stone will not remain on stone, as you say? ...[T]hey ask that first question of their own accord and for their own sake... [for] we never saw the destruction of that temple... 

And Jesus answered them, "Take heed that no one leads you astray." 

[T]he apostles asked... "What is the sign of the destruction of Jerusalem?" ...for at the end of the Jewish nation Jerusalem was destroyed, which seemed to be Jerusalem but really was not. ...[T]he Lord does not say distinctly which signs pertain to the destruction of Jerusalem...[so] the same signs may seem to pertain both the manifestation of the destruction of Jerusalem and to the manifestation of the end of the world... What can we say then? If we wish to fully understand in a spiritual manner these signs of famine, wars, and earthquakes, they cannot pertain to the manifestation of the destruction of Jerusalem because then spiritually a nation did not rise up against nation, that is, a heresy did not rise up against heresy. ...The physical Jerusalem existed, which already has been besieged figuratively, but there is another, spiritual Jerusalem, namely, the church of Christ, which also must be tested to the end of the world and still is being tested. Therefore, just as there are a spiritual Jerusalem and a physical Jerusalem, so also those signs of which the Lord speaks must be understood both in a spiritual sense and in a physical sense. When understood physically, they indicate the destruction of the physical Jerusalem, but when understood spiritually, they indicate the testing of the church at the end to come.  

"And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars." 

He was saying that at that time there would be rumors of physical battles, which the Roman emperor was preparing against Judea. For just as it is accustomed to happen in the preparation of war while leaders are chosen and an army is gathered and counted, a rumor runs around, especially to those against whom the army is being prepared. But as Josephus explains, after the army entered Judea, it did not immediately turn to Jerusalem but to the individual cities of that region, and various wars were first fought and many cities captured, and thus the army besieged Jerusalem last of all.1 So he commanded his disciples, "See that you are not alarmed," but fulfill the task of your preaching. The spiritual Jerusalem has the physical Jerusalem as its type. For unless that temple had been destroyed, the observance of that Law would not easily have been restrained. But it was destroyed so that even if the Jews wanted to keep the Law later, they could not. 

"For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom." 

At that time all the nations and the kingdoms, which seemed to be under the rule of the Romans, were gathered against the Jewish nation, and nearly all their kingdoms were gathered against the kingdom of the Jews. ...[N]early all those nations and kingdoms were stirred up against one nation, Judea.  

"And there will be famines, plagues, and earthquakes in various places." 

Whoever reads Josephus can find out what are the plagues and famines and earthquakes before Jerusalem was captured.2 

"So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)." 

Some say that the abomination of desolation was the image of Caesar that Pilate put in the temple. But the Evangelist Luke more accurately interprets what is the desolating sacrilege. For in the place where the current passage of Matthew and Mark write, "But when you see the desolating sacrilege," in that very passage Luke writes, "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near." And so he says who are in Judea, namely, in order to show by the other resemblance of the explanation of this passage what is the desolating sacrilege standing in the Holy Place. For there was an army of foreigners and the Roman emperor standing around Jerusalem, which up until then was holy. Peter also explained this in Clement.3 Finally, the text itself also showed that this is the desolating sacrilege. For it is as if he goes back over all those things that he had said earlier and summarized them briefly and says, "So when you see the desolating sacrilege...standing," that is, "When you see those very battles now standing around Jerusalem, which you had previously heard about." ...The Roman army is called the desolating sacrilege because he would make the souls of many Christians desolate of God. For before the Romans captured Jerusalem, for half a week Christ bore by his doctrine the constant sacrifice of the Jews from his midst. For it is said that he taught for three years and six months; that number makes half of seven years, so that that sacrifice that was constantly in use would be removed from their midst and the sacrifice of praise would be offered with their voice and the sacrifice of righteousness in works and the sacrifice of peace through the Eucharist. But up until the end of the age there was an uproar because the Jewish custom of offering sacrifices was never rectified.  

"Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; let him who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house." 

[N]ote that when he says, "Let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains," it is possible to understand this physically according to history at the time of the Romans. 

"For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be." 

[E]ven if the Jews were sinners up to the time of Christ, nonetheless they were his children, not his enemies, and so every wrath that fell on them was a chastisement coming out of mercy, not a condemnation coming down in anger. But when the Lord was crucified, they ceased to be his children and became his enemies. For that reason now no longer corrective chastisement came on them, but an eradicating condemnation. For Jerusalem was captured by the Assyrians and was repaired again. It was destroyed by Antioch and rebuilt again. It was invaded a third time by Pompey, and again it was repaired. For just as before the day of a person's death comes, he indeed seems to be ill but is not able to die, so also Judea was vexed before Christ but was not destroyed. But after they had committed that horrible patricide, crucifying the Son of the Father and bringing death on him from whom they received life--and what is worse, killing their Lord though they were servants and killing God through they were mortals--he struck them with such a blow that they never have been healed. For just as they committed such a crime as has never been committed nor ever will be again, so also such a sentence came on them as never has come nor ever will.4 

1.  Josephus, Jewish War, 3-4
2.  Ibid. 4:285-86 
3.  Pseudo-Clement Recognitions of Clement 1.65 (see A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, eds., Ante-Nicene Fathers, 10 volumes. [Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature, 1885-189; Reprint, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1951-1965; Reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994], 8:94
4.  Thomas Oden & Gerald Bray, eds., Ancient Christian Texts: Incomplete Commentary on Matthew (Opus imperfectum), volume 2 [Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010], pp. 371-388

Literary Structure of Matthew 14-17

As I have noted in an earlier post, chapters fourteen through seventeen of Matthew's gospel comprise one complete narrative section. For simplicity's sake, I said that this section begins in chapter fourteen, but that section actually begins at the end of chapter 13, in verse 53, "when Jesus had finished" his discourse of parables (13:1-52). The structure of this narrative section is also chiastic:

A)  Jesus visits his hometown and his suffering for the Kingdom is foreshadowed by the prophet John (13:53-14:13)

   B)  Jesus feeds 5,000 Jews and is confronted by Pharisees about "bread" (14:14-15:20)

      C)  Jesus flees to the district of Tyre & Sidon and is confronted by a Canaanite woman of greater faith than the Pharisees: she loves even the "bread crumbs" which fall from the Master's table (15:21-28)

   B')  Jesus feeds 4,000 Gentiles and is confronted by Pharisees about "bread" (15:29-16:12)

A')  Jesus visits Caesarea Philippi and his suffering for the Kingdom is prophesied (16:13-17:27)

The literary parallels are even more obvious when compared section by section (as seen below):

A)  13:53-14:13 

• Jesus "came into" (ἐλθὼν εἰς) his hometown
• The people ask questions about Jesus: what they think of him, whose "son" (υἱός) is this man?
• Jesus affirms he is a "prophet" (προφήτης) who is not welcome in his own "household" (οἰκίᾳ)
• Jesus inadvertently "offends" (ἐσκανδαλίζοντο) some Jewish brothers
• Jesus flees because Herod's wife had "John the Baptist" (Ἰωάννης ὁ βαπτιστής) "deliver" (δός) his head to her on a platter
• Herod thinks Jesus is "John the Baptist" who has been "raised from the dead" (ἠγέρθη ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν)
• Jesus could not do many mighty works there because of their "unbelief" (ἀπιστίαν)

B)  14:14-15:20

• Jesus is followed by "great crowds" (πολὺν ὄχλον)
• Jesus feeds 5,000 Jews
• Jesus crosses the Sea of Galilee & "got into the boat" (ἀναβάντων εἰς τὸ πλοῖον)
• Jesus is confronted & challenged by Pharisees and scribes
• Jesus speaks to his disciples about the Pharisees and eating "bread" (ἄρτον)

C)  15:21-28  Jesus withdraws to Tyre & Sidon and is confronted by a Canaanite woman of great faith



B')  15:29-16:12

• Jesus is followed by "great crowds" (πολλοὶ ὄχλοι)
• Jesus feeds 4,000 Gentiles
• Jesus crosses the Sea of Galilee & "got into the boat" (ἐνέβη εἰς τὸ πλοῖον)
• Jesus is confronted & challenged by Pharisees and Sadducees
• Jesus speaks to his disciples about the Pharisees and their "bread" (ἄρτων)

A') 16:13-17:27 

• Jesus "came into" (ἐλθὼν εἰς) the district of Caesarea Philippi 
• Jesus asks questions about about the people: what they think of him, and who the "son" (υἱὸν) of man is 
• The people think Jesus is "one of the prophets" (ἕνα τῶν προφητῶν)
• The people think Jesus might be "John the Baptist" (Ἰωάννης ὁ βαπτιστής) 
• Jesus speaks about John the Baptist's death (7:12-13) and himself being "delivered" (παραδίδοσθαι) by Jewish authorities and then "raised from the dead" (ἐγερθῇ ἐκ νεκρῶν)
• Jesus does a mighty work among his "faithless" (ἄπιστος) generation 
• Jesus doesn't want to "offend" (σκανδαλίσωμεν) a collector of Herod's temple-tax outside his "house" (οἰκίαν)

Literary Structure of Matthew 18

In light of a bible study I'm preparing to teach soon, I recently searched through a number of commentaries to dicipher the literary structure of Matthew chapter eighteen. The most valuable commentary I found pertaining to the literary structure was Davies and Allison's volume in the ICC. Upon further reflection though, I wasn't entirely convinced that Davies and Allison outlined chapter eighteen correctly, so I dove into the text myself and came up with something far more fluid. It also ends up being a chiastic structure as well, instead of the triad which Davies and Allison produced. Below is how I see Matthew chapter eighteen. 

Literary Structure of Matthew 18

A)  18:1-4 – Becoming like Children in the Kingdom of Heaven: Humility before brethren who turn-back

B)  18:5-9 – If a brother causes another brother to stumble

C)  18:10-14 – Do not despise the Father’s lost sheep

B’) 18:15-22 – If a brother sins against another brother

A’)  18:23-35 – What the Kingdom of Heaven is like: Forgiveness of brethren who ask for it

A)

      1          At that time the disciples came to Jesus and said, “Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

      2          And He called a child to Himself and set him before them,

      3          and said, “Truly I say to you-all, unless you-all are turned-back and come-to-be like children, you-all will not come-into the kingdom of heaven.

      4          “Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

B)
5 “And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me.      

      6      But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

      7          “Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!

      8          “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire.

      9          “If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell.

C)

   10          “See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven.

   11          [“For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.]

   12          “What do you think? If any man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go and search for the one that is straying?

   13          “If it turns out that he finds it, truly I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine which have not gone astray.

   14          “So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones perish.

B’)

   15          “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

   16          “But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three  witnesses every fact may be confirmed.

   17          “If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

   18          “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.

   19          “Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for

                  them by My Father who is in heaven.

   20          “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”

   21          Then Peter came and said to Him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?”

   22          Jesus *said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.

A’)

   23          “For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his  slaves.

   24          “When he had begun to settle them, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him.

   25          “But since he ^adid not have the means to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.

   26          “So the slave fell to the ground and prostrated himself before him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.’

   27          “And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.

   28          “But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay back what you owe.’

   29          “So his fellow slave fell to the ground and began to plead with him, saying, ‘Have patience with me and I will repay you.’

   30          “But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.

   31          “So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.

   32          “Then summoning him, his lord *said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.

   33          ‘Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?’

   34          “And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.

   35          “My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.”

Israel vs. Abel, Cain vs. Jesus

The story of Adam's two sons, Cain & Abel, is a miniature story of Yahweh's two sons, Israel & Jesus. 

Cain is the firstborn, and is given precedence within the unfolding story. He is also given a name which resembles the theme of a new "creation." ("Cain" means "created" or "forged") Abel is the secondary, lesser son of the story, and is given a name by his parents which resembles this fact. Abel's name means "mist" or "vapor," which illustrates partly what must have been the expectation of is parents when they named him. Cain was the firstborn son, the son of promise, and was therefore named in light of a new creation and hope for Adam's seed--hope that Cain would strive alongside God and conquer evil in the land for the glory of Yahweh. Abel, on the other hand, is given the name that implies striving with the wind, a life that is fleeting and vanishes away like vapor. 

A similar image of Jesus and Israel is given to us as well. Israel was Yahweh's firstborn son, the son of promise. Israel was "created" by God to be the hope of the nations, conquering God's enemies and bringing rest in the land for the glory of Yahweh. Israel even means "one who strives with God" or "God strives." Jesus' name means "Yahweh saves" and is related to the word which means to "cry out to Yahweh." Jesus is the greater Abel who cries out to Yahweh for help, and whom Yahweh saves.  Israel, on the other hand, is the one who strives with God but fails to enter God's rest because of his evil deeds, becoming the one with whom God strives against. 

Another parallel idea is seen in the offerings of Cain and Abel. Cain offers to Yahweh a tribute offering all by itself, whereas Abel offers an entire animal with it's best portions--it's fatty portions--along with his tribute offering (which is reminiscent of the required ascension offering and tribute offering together on Yahweh's altar). Because of this act of faith, Yahweh reckons Abel as "just" for his offering. Cain, on the other hand, is not accepted because of his offering. Cain offers the work of his own hands and nothing more, as though Yahweh should accept Cain's own works alone before he offers anything more (an ascension offering perhaps??). Cain has faith in his own works alone, which is the same thing as saying that Cain has faith in himself, not Yahweh. 

Cain is then given a warning and a subsequent opportunity to repent of his angry countenance: Sin is crouching at the door, but he can rule over it. He can overcome it by doing what is good, offering to Yahweh what is acceptable and pleasing in His sight. We all know the way Cain responds to Yahweh's merciful warning though. Like Israel with Jesus, Cain slays Abel because his deeds are righteous. And like Yahweh's treatment of Cain, Israel was given an opportunity to repent and turn to Christ in faith before he was cut off from the people of God. 

Adam's firstborn destroyed the brother who was least esteemed, just as Israel--Yahweh's firstborn--did with Jesus. And just as the blood of Abel cried from the ground after his brother slew him, and still speaks to us today (Gen. 4:10; Heb. 11:20), even so the blood of Jesus speaks today as well (Heb. 12:24). Like Abel's righteous blood which cried out to Yahweh for justice after Cain slew him, and was heard because of his righteous deeds done in faith, even so Jesus' blood cried out and was heard by Yahweh. Yahweh then saved him from the grave because he was just, because his deeds were righteous altogether, because he literally offered the best sacrifice before Yahweh--the sacrifice of himself as the spotless lamb--along with his tribute offering, his works done in faith. 

Moreoever, just as Adam fathered a son named "Seth" (meaning, "appointed one") in his own likeness, after his image, even so Jesus, the second Adam, would appoint children to walk faithfully in his footsteps, in his own likeness, after his image.

Rest and conquest in the wilderness

Almost all of chapters eleven and twelve in Matthew's Gospel seem to take place on the Sabbath,1 and revolve around a theme of conquest and rest for those who follow Jesus. John the Baptist sends disciples to Jesus, asking him if he’s “the Coming-One” (ὁ  ἐρχόμενος), to which Jesus responds by alluding to himself as the one Isaiah described as bringing rest to Israel (Isa. 35). In Isaiah 35, Israel is a "wilderness" and desert-land being restored with the glory and majesty of God Himself (vv. 1-2). Israel is also like a fatigued man in this wilderness, wandering around with weak hands and knees; but God Himself is coming to save them (vv. 3-4). God is coming, and pools of water follow His visitation to cool the scorching heat of burning desert sand and quench the thirsty ground. Even the places of this wilderness where predators used to lie down and wait for their prey will become inhabitable again because of the great flood of salvation promised to follow Him (vv. 6b-7). At that time the redeemed shall walk on a highway paved by the Lord, a highway of holiness that leads to Zion and is characterized by peace and rest (vv. 8-10).

1.  All these events most certainly did not take place on the Sabbath (as Luke’s account shows), but the only explicit time indicators mentioned by Matthew seem to relate all these occurrences on the Sabbath. Every other event in this section occurs “at that time,” which is a more general reference to a time around that Sabbath.