Paul’s Psalm 44

Reading through Romans 8 the other day I noticed that Paul quotes Psalm 44:22 in the middle of his argument:

 8:35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 8:36 As it is written, “For your sake we encounter death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 8:37 No, in all these things we have complete victory through him who loved us! 8:38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor heavenly rulers, nor things that are present, nor things to come, nor powers, 8:39 nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Paul in this chapter has been discussing our relationship with God, through Christ, and the inability, now as sons of God, to be separated from God. We now call out, “Abba!” and are kept in this relationship. In this relationship then Paul asks if anything out there can possibly separate us from God, whether “trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?” (v.35) and then Paul quotes the psalm. So let us take a little look at the psalm that Paul quotes.

Psalm 44, the psalm quoted in Romans, begins with the psalmist recounting God’s provision and watching over the people of Israel: “You, by your power, defeated nations and settled our fathers on their land; you crushed the people living there and enabled our ancestors to occupy it.” But then at verse 9 the psalm switches the mood: ”But you rejected and embarrassed us! You did not go into battle with our armies,” and we see God’s hand turning away from the people of Israel. In the midst of the psalmists lament of God’s handing over of the Israelites we get the verse Paul quotes: “Yet because of you we are killed all day long; we are treated like sheep at the slaughtering block” (Psalm 44:22). As the psalmist discusses distress, persecution, danger, and swords he points out that he and his people are like sheep being slaughtered. From this persecution the psalmist calls God to rouse himself, to protect his people.

Paul then seems to make this connection now that because Christ has come, because we are now drawn into relationship with the Father, unlike the psalmist we now no longer fear the sword, the danger, the persecution, the distress. Paul takes the psalmist’s lament and turns it around, showing that the one the psalmist had been waiting for, the salvation from his enemies has now come and that no enemy, or sword, or persecution can separate us from God. Paul is building his argument from the OT and showing that what they had been waiting for has now come, and nothing can separate us from God’s salvation. We no longer wait, for we have now seen God rouse from his sleep and ”rescue us because of [his] loyal love!” (Ps. 44:26)

Chronicles to Luke/Matthew

We were discussing in Old Testament History and Poetry class the other day the genealogy of Chronicles and how the chronicler sets up the genealogy to help clarify his view of history: the chronicles genealogy starts at Adam and rushes to David, gets to David and slows down, and then continues on. The chronicler’s genealogy emphasizes the importance of David in all of history, that the genealogy of Israel is rushing towards that one man, and from him all history revolves itself. It is not Moses, or Abraham, or Israel(Jacob) but David. Which got me to thinking about genealogies.

In Matthew and Luke are two different genealogies, and scholars have commented on how they prove Jesus right to the Davidic throne and legitimizes Jesus family line. But what if, like Chronicles does, it also points out Jesus importance in all of history. In Matthew especially we see the book beginning with genealogy (a genealogy following the genealogies of Chronicles if the OT is taken in TaNaK order), rushing from Abraham, stopping at David, picking up again to Exile, then up to Jesus. And after that, the book slows down and tells us the story of Jesus, what he has done, who he is, his death and resurrection. And Luke begins with Jesus, and traces itself backwards to Adam, not even bothering to stop, as Matthew did, at David or Abraham, but continues to Adam, as if laying out that from Adam all history has been moving to the time when Jesus would come, which when he does the book of Luke slows down, explaining Christ, and then after his death, much like Chronicles does, goes on to further explain the acts of the apostles in Acts, sort of like a 2 Chronicles in the NT.

So what do you think? Could the genealogies not only legitimize Jesus but also act as an explanation of what all of history has been moving towards, the focal point on which everything was coming to, and is now moving from? Could Luke and Matthew use the genealogy to rearrange history?

Cameron

Unity in the Farewell Discourse (John 13-17)

I’ve been reading Leslie Newbigin’s The Open Secret this week–great read!–and stumbled upon something I wanted your thoughts on (actually, regardless of your thoughts, I just want to hold on to this layout of the passage!).  Without too much ado, here’s the quote:

The fourth Gospel does not repeat this account of the words spoken at the supper which is given, with some variations, in the first three.  In its place we have the long discourses (John 13-16) which lead up to the great prayer in which Jesus, in consecrating himself to the Father, consecrates his disciples to be sent out into the world to continue his mission.  These discourses give a sketch of hte way that lies before the disciples as they go out to represent Jesus in the world.  They are to be servants one of another just as Jesus has served them (13:1-20).  They are to show whose they are by their love of one another (13:34-35).  They will find abiding places which the Father provides for them on the way, and they know the way–Jesus himself (13:36-14:11).  His going to the Father will open the way for a much more vast ministry which will be marked from their side by love and obedience and from the Father’s side by the gift of the Spirit, his abiding presence, and his peace (14:12-31).  Through this mutual abiding they will bring forth fruit (15:1-17).  The world will hate them, but the hatred of the world will be the occasion for the witness of the Spirit (15:18-27).  The Spirit will in fact go before them to convict the world and to guide them into the fullness of the truth (16:8-15).  They will share in the travail of the world’s new birth, but they will have peace in him (16:16-33).  And so these men, to whom Jesus has made the Father fully known (17:1-8) and whom he has guarded from evil (17:9-14), are to be launched into the life of the world as the continuance of his mission and in the power of his consecration (17:15-19).  In fact, the glory of God, the glory which tabernacled in the midst of Israel in the wilderness and which dwelt in Jesus (John 1:14), will dwell with the disciples so that the world may recognize in them the sinn of the divine mission of Jesus (17:20-23).

Maybe I’m not a good reader, or maybe I haven’t paid attention during the messages that explained this before, but this is the first time I’ve heard a good, unifying explanation for the whole of the Farewell Discourse.  And I love that the whole thing revolves around mission.  So good!

Obeying the book of Revelation

Last week as I began reading Revelation I didn’t make it far before I hit a snag.  Actually, I only made it three verses, until I landed on this:

Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy aloud, and blessed are those who hear and obey the things written in it, because the time is near!

This of course, got me to thinking, “How does one obey the book of Revelation?”  The journey that ensued and consumed the last week of my devotional time with the Lord came out something like this…

To “obey” Revelation means essentially to worship Jesus.  Revelation is “prophecy” (1:3; 22:7)–the spirit of which is “testimony about Jesus” (19:10).  Testimony about Jesus defines those who are for Him (1:2, 9; 6:9; 11:7; 12:11, 17; 15:5; 17:6; 19:10; 22:16–testimony about/for Jesus seems to be the primary designator of Christians in Revelation; 10:7; 11:10; 22:6–of prophets testifying about Jesus; 11:18; 16:6; 18:20, 24 of prophets testifying about Jesus in parallel with “saints”) and defines those who are false prophets (2:20; 16:13; 19:20; 20:10) because their testimony leads people to worship someone other than Jesus (19:20).

Twice John tries to worship the angel who speaks with him.  Twice the angels forbid him and urge him to worship God.  The first time (19:10) this urging appears to elaborate what it means to “hold to the testimony about Jesus”.  Alternately, the second exhortation to worship (22:9) appears to elaborate what it means to “obey the words of this book” (which is itself a testimony about and revelation of Jesus, 1:1).

Repeatedly (7x in the opening 3 chapters) we hear the refrained exhortation: “The one who has an ear had better hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22).  Rather than being an aside to those reading the Spirit’s words to the churches in chapters 2-3 (i.e. an aside to us), I believe it makes more sense that the Spirit’s “word” should be that which comes after chapters 2 and 3.  One reason for this is in the repeated blessing on the one who obeys the words of the prophecy (1:3; 22:7).  Essentially John says, “Blessed are you if you obey [1:3]…Now that you’ve heard, you’ll be blessed by obeying [22:7].”  Notice: the blessing at hearing is NOT repeated in chapter 22.  Instead, John curses anyone who, having haerd, chooses to add to or take away from the prophecy.

As for timing, I believe the book’s own timetable seems to make the most sense.

• “The time is near (1:3; 22:10)
• “…must happen very soon” (1:1; 22:6)
• “little longer” (6:10)
• “There will be no more delay!” (10:6)

UPDATE: I’ve been wondering lately if maybe our living in the last days has more to do with the NT idea that in Jesus’s resurrection the final restoration has already begun and than it has to do with the number of years before Jesus’ return.  More on this later perhaps?  We’ll see.  Back to Revelation…

Lastly, the imminent expectation of Revelation’s occurring is also bolstered by John apparent placement of himself in that group which would experience the persecution of Revelation “very soon” in 1:8 (“I John…who shares with you in persecution”).  If the book is something imminently to happen (which does not preclude its being future yet still, so don’t get too nervous if this messes with your chart) then I think the repeated exhortations to endurance are not idle (2:10, 24; 3:11; 13:10).

In light of all these thoughts, here is my proposed outline for the book:

I.  Introduction to the revelation and testimony to Jesus Christ (Ch. 1)

II.  Exhortations to the Churches called to live in response to the revelation/testimony about to be given (Ch 2-3)

III.  ”What must happen soon” (22:6) so that the world might repent and turn from their blasphemies (9:20-21; 11:13; 16:9, 11, 21) to worship God (19:10; 22:9) with all who are His (4:1-11; 5:8-14; 7:1-12; 11:13, 15-19; 14:1-3; 15:1-4; 16:5-7; 19:1-8) (Ch 4-22:5)

IV.  Closing exhortation to obedience: worship and come to Jesus in the brief time before He comes (22:6-21)

I’ve been slow in my approach to Revelation in past years, so this is among the first of my forays into understanding this infamously difficult book.

Thoughts?  Questions?  Shared questions?

The Rich Young Ruler

In a post titled “The Formerly Rich Young Ruler” Halden Doerge of InhabitatioDei.com suggests that the Rich Young Ruler who leaves Jesus “sorrowful” and “looking sad” (Mk. 10:22) may actually have some redemption in the story.  You can read the whole post here for Doerge working out the implications of what I have represented here, but this is the part I really wanted to get your input on:

In a previous post about the story of the rich young man (Mark 10:17-21) I suggested that there’s no reason to think that the man did not indeed go away intending to do as Jesus commanded, by selling all his possessions and following him. In the comments someone suggested that there is a tradition that suggests Barnabas may be the rich young man in question here. I did some digging and couldn’t find much of anything on that point, but I did find another possibility that actually has support from the text of Mark itself.

Could it not be that the young man in question is simply Mark himself? I think we may catch a hint of this conclusion in Mark 14:51-52 where the narrative tells us that “A certain young man was following [Jesus], wearing nothing but a linen cloth.” This unidentified young man is generally thought — at least in all the commentaries I’ve come across — to be Mark.

Now, it could be that Mark just wanted to throw in some superfluous information by describing the nature of the young man’s (lack of) clothing, but given the intentionality that characterizes the narrative patterns of Mark I’m inclined to doubt it. Why tell us that the young man was dressed only in a sheet that he had wrapped around himself? Why make a point of the fact that he was following Jesus? Could it be that the complete lack of possessions, even clothing, his young age, and his description as actively following Jesus are meant to point us back to the story of the rich young man? Seems like a pretty valid connection to me. I don’t think there’s anyone else mentioned in the gospel of Mark who might qualify for this. Let us follow this line of thought. . .

Here are my questions: What do you think of this possibility?  Is Mark making purposeful connection or is this beyond the text’s intention?  Please add your own questions to this as well.