You are currently browsing the monthly archive for January, 2009.
It’s interesting to see that there are significant parallels between the story of Noah and the flood and the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Here are some comparisons:
1. In Noah’s day, “the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and…every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (Gen. 6:5). In Lot’s day, the “outcry against [Sodom's] people [had] become great before the LORD” (Gen. 19:13) and there were apparently not even ten righteous people in the city (Gen. 18:32).
2. Noah “found favor in the eyes of the LORD” (Gen. 6:8). Lot tells the two angels of the Lord, “Behold, your servant has found favor in your sight” (Gen. 19:19).
3. Noah is saved from destruction along with his wife, his sons, and his sons’ wives (Gen. 7:7). Lot is saved from destruction along with his wife (until she is turned into a pillar of salt) and his two daughters (Gen. 19:15-16).
4. God promises to Noah that in seven days “I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground” (Gen. 7:4). When Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, the text says that “the LORD rained [same word as Gen. 7:4] on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven. And he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground” (Gen. 19:24-25).
5. In Noah’s time, God destroyed the earth by water. In Lot’s time, God destroyed the cities by fire.
6. Jesus couples the story of Noah and the flood with the story of Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah when he explains to his disciples what the days of the Son of Man will be like (Luke 17:26-30).
7. Peter also links the two stories to show that “the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment” (2 Pet. 2:9).
It appears, then, that Lot is a lot like Noah.
I was going over Matthew 2 the other day. The wise men had come to Jerusalem searching for the one who had been born king of the Jews. Herod sent them to Bethlehem to find the child. They left, and the star that they had seen earlier went ahead of them and stopped over the place where Jesus was. I’ll let Matthew continue:
“When they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy. And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him” (Matthew 2:10-11).
Notice that Matthew makes it plain that the wise men worshiped Jesus. I’m sure the mother and child were an awesome pair to behold: the virgin who had conceived and her boy the Son of God. If Matthew had said simply, “and they fell down and worshiped,” there could have been ambiguity about who they were worshiping. But the text says clearly that they fell down and worshiped him.
The wise men worshiped Jesus.
They didn’t worship his mother.
One of the perpetually difficult (and, I think, invigorating) areas of biblical studies is how the New Testament uses the Old Testament. For example, Matthew says of Joseph, “And he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, ‘Out of Egypt I called my son’” (Matthew 2:14-15).
Matthew is quoting from Hosea 11:1, which says (together with verse 2), “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. The more they were called, the more they went away; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning offerings to idols.”
How did Matthew get Jesus’ relocation to Egypt out of Hosea 11:1? Well, first of all, I think it shows us a lot about who Matthew understands Jesus to be (namely, the true Israel), but I would like to bring in some helpful remarks Greg Beale has made in We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry on this issue. It’s originally one paragraph, but I’ll break it up to make it easier to read:
Thus New Testament, or Old Testament writers before them, can build on earlier Old Testament texts that they interpret and develop creatively, though the creativity is to be seen in understanding such texts in the light of the further developments of a redemptive-historical epoch in the Old Testament, or developments in the light of the later events of Christ’s coming and work.
In this respect, part of the creative development lies merely in the fact that fulfillment always fleshes out prior prophecy in a way that, to some degree, would have been unforeseen by earlier Old Testament prophets. Another way to say this is that progressive revelation always reveals things not as clearly seen earlier.
Geerhardus Vos’s metaphor for this creative development between the Testaments is that Old Testament prophecies and texts are like seeds and later Old Testament and New Testament understandings of the same texts are like plants growing from the seeds and flowering; from one angle the full-bloomed plant may not look like the seed (as in botanical comparisons), but careful exegesis of both Old and New contexts can show, at least, some of the organic connections. (pg. 29)
The issue is certainly more complex than a single paragraph can address, and there are others who have different views on this subject, but I share this excerpt in the hopes that it will be a helpful stimulus to further reflection.
Are you the kind of person who feels energized by a nap, or do you wake up feeling like you’ve been tread underfoot by an elephant? If you are the first kind of person, how long is your ideal nap?
I personally enjoy naps very much when I can take them. Sometimes I wake up feeling like elephant sandals, but it’s so worth it. Ideal napping time: 1.5-2 hours. Sometimes micro-naps are all I can budget for, but I find that they’re a lot like cotton candy: sweet but unfilling.
Mark Driscoll blogs about Rick Warren’s prayer at Obama’s inauguration yesterday:
Rick Warren is a brother in Christ. Having spoken with him on the phone, spent time at his church, and shared dinner with him, I can assure you that he loves the Bible, loves Jesus, loves pastors, loves the church, and has a heart for the world. If you want to criticize him, of course you can. But remember, if you lived your life under the scrutiny that he does, you would likely be even easier to criticize. Also, remember that much of the criticism against him is often by those who, rather than praying for his ministry, criticize it out of jealousy. And, just so you know, not everything you read on the Internet is true.
The invitation for Warren to pray at the inauguration of Barack Obama was met with criticism from seemingly every side. Regardless, he did what 1 Timothy 2:1–3 commands: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior.” His prayer honored the same Jesus Christ that all true Christians worship as God. Sure, people will quibble over parts such as creation or the mention of Martin Luther King Jr., but such quibbling reveals more about the critics than it does the prayer. After all, what could have been more appropriate than simply quoting Jesus’ own prayer and letting Jesus have the final word to the watching world?….
Finally, today is a good day to follow brother Rick’s example and pray for our nation and its leaders. While we are at it, it would be good to also pray for Rick and the other pastors, that Jesus would be honored in our churches and from our pulpits.
Also, Christianity Today has a helpful overview of comments from the Christian blogosphere on the inauguration.
Bilbo Baggins was not a Christian. But he helps me to see Jesus. In The Hobbit Bilbo comes upon a hoard of treasure guarded by a miserly and hotheaded dragon named Smaug. Compare his reaction to Matthew 13:45-46: “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.”
Smaug lay, with wings folded like an immeasurable bat, turned partly on one side, so that the hobbit could see his underparts and his long pale belly crusted with gems and fragments of gold from his long lying on his costly bed. Behind him where the walls were nearest could dimly be seen coats of mail, helms and and axes, swords and spears hanging; and there in rows stood great jars and vessels filled with a wealth that could not be guessed.
To say that Bilbo’s breath was taken away is no description at all. There are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful. Bilbo had heard tell and sing of dragon-hoards before, but the splendour, the lust, the glory of such treasure had never yet come home to him. His heart was filled and pierced with enchantment and with the desire of dwarves; and he gazed motionless, almost forgetting the frightful guardian, at the gold beyond price and count. (pg. 194)
I saw an ad in a December WORLD magazine for a new book by Steven Lawson called “The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards.” Looks interesting.
Here’s a description of the book from the ad:
Jonathan Edwards is well known as perhaps the greatest theologian the United States has ever produced. In this practical biography, Dr. Steven J. Lawson considers the unique focus and commitment with which Edwards sought to live out the Christian faith. Edwards’ life is examined through the lens of the seventy resolutions he penned in his late teens, shortly after his conversion, which cover everything from glorifying God to repenting of sin to managing time. In Edwards’ example, there is helpful instruction for all believers.
Crystal and I still have our Christmas tree up. It’s probably partly due to sloth or busyness, but it just looks nice in the corner. In fact, I kind of don’t want to take it down. It isn’t distinctively Christmas-looking, after all. We never put up any ornaments, there’s no tree-topper, and it is sprinkled with white lights and footed with a white skirt. It looks wintry. Big…but wintry. It even has one of those push-buttons on the electrical cord that turns on the lights. It makes me feel all warm and techno-savvy every time I press it.
CNN reported today that U.S. airlines have gone two years without a fatality. That’s really good, considering there have only been four single fatality-free years since 1958, according to the article.
Maybe flying is the way to go.
I’d love to hear what form of transportation scares you the most. Are you an aerophobiac? Or does driving get your goat? Mopeds? Snowmobiles? Hang gliding? Anything’s fair game.
To be honest, I think walking places scares me the most. After all, I’m a pretty vulnerable creature when I’m out ambling on the concrete. People can stop me. I can get frozen toes. I can’t talk to myself like I can in the car. When I’m driving, people know I’ve got places to be. I’m protected. I’ve got my own little me-tank on rubber wheels. Just keep on going, thank you.
Somehow, I don’t think Jesus would talk that way.
As I was walking out of a building the other day, I passed a set of full-length mirrors on the wall and began musing about all the purposes a looking glass serves. We use them to drive, we use them to pop pimples, we use them to see around corners and back down grocery aisles. I think, though, that mirrors ultimately serve two purposes:
1. Mirrors exist to tell the truth. We depend on mirrors to give us an accurate representation of what’s in front of them. The cosmetics industry would be all awash and my unibrow would be all a-shaggied if we couldn’t see a faithful facial image. Think of all the car accidents that would happen, too.
2. Mirrors exist to deceive. Mirrors can make rooms look bigger and produce aisles look more leafy and stuffed. And it’s not the mirrors’ fault. They’re giving an accurate rendering of those heads of lettuce. It’s just that those images are intended to communicate something that is not altogether accurate. Fun house mirrors are another beast entirely, but I think they fall nicely under this category, as well.
