Scripture:
Luke 2:42, 49
[42] And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom;
[49] And he said to them, "How is it that you sought me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?"
[50] And they did not understand the saying which he spoke to them.
John 2: 13, 16, 17
[13] The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
[16] And he told those who sold the pigeons, "Take these things away; you shall not make my Father's house a house of trade."
[17] His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for thy house will consume me."
John.14:1-7
[1] "Let not your hearts be troubled; believe in God, believe also in me.
[2] In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?
[3] And when I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.
[4] And you know the way where I am going."
[5] Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?"
[6] Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.
[7] If you had known me, you would have known my Father also; henceforth you know him and have seen him."
Comment
After having read these verses many times, the thought of Jesus teaching us all about “my Fathers house” in two separate context, did make me want to learn more.
I have searched for an explanation for quite a while now and found the following insight (edited for brevity):
**************************************
The account of the first Passover in John (2:3–3:2) has prepared the reader to interpret the death and resurrection of Jesus in the third Passover (John 11:55–20:3) as the destruction and rebuilding of the true Temple, and nothing less.
We have here several significant deployments of Temple terms and images.
First, the phrase, “Father’s house,” in John 14:2 recalls the nearly identical description of the Temple in John 2:6 (“my Father’s house”). The two expressions are certainly close enough for the connection to easily be made, yet there is a subtle, theologically significant alteration.
In John 2:6 the phrase used in the Septuagint translation describes the Temple, the palace, and other large buildings in the Temple complex.
In John 14:2, however, the phrase also means “house,” but frequently tends toward a more personal and familial rather than architectural sense—“household,” “home,” or even “family.”
A shift is taking place in John 14:2–3 as compared with John 2:6: The sense of the new Temple is being extended from Jesus’ physical body to the community of God, that is, to God’s “household” or “family.” The Temple concept is being applied to what the later Church tradition would call the Mystical Body of Christ.
The Temple reference in the phrase “Father’s house” is confirmed by other Temple allusions in these verses. The reference to a “house” with “many rooms” could not fail to bring to mind the Jerusalem Temple, the largest and most multi-chambered edifice known to the Jewish reader. Indeed, the Temple’s “many rooms” are immortalized in certain passages of the Old Testament (Ezek. 40–42).
Jesus is telling his disciples that his departure is necessary to prepare a Temple sanctuary for them in which they will dwell with him. Frequently this is understood in terms of a heavenly, eschatological fulfilment—the disciples will dwell with Jesus forever in the “Temple” of heaven.
Jesus clearly speaks of the disciples “abiding” in Christ even now, in this life.
One also must be cognizant of John 4:23: “If a man loves me … my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.” Thus, Jesus goes to prepare a (holy) “place” for the disciples, with dwellings for them, but simultaneously the Father and Son will come to the faithful disciple and make their dwelling with him.
Therefore, John 4 taken as a whole, describes a mutual indwelling of Father and Son with the disciples, a mutual indwelling which is treated at greater length and more explicitly in the (Eucharistic) vine discourse of John 5:–7, with its stress on “abiding” or “dwelling”. All this suggests that Jesus’ promise to prepare a Temple in which the disciples shall abide will be realized now, in this age, through the mutual indwelling of the disciples, the Father, Son, and Spirit.
The disciples will be constituted a Temple by the Spirit, whom the Father and the Son will send after Jesus departs. The idea of the disciples as Temple—a concept also present in the scrolls found at Qumran —resonates on a deep level with other themes of the last discourse, especially when these are understood in light of Old Testament Temple traditions.
The Temple was the dwelling place of the name of God, the glory of God, and indeed, of God himself.
Compare these characteristics of the Temple with what is said about the disciples during the last discourse:
they are the locus of the name of God: “I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me out of the world. … I have made known to them your name.”
They have received the glory: “The glory which you have given me I have given them, that they may be one even as we are one” (John 17:22).
They are the dwelling of God: “the Spirit of Truth … dwells with you, and will be in you” (John 14:17);
“If a man loves me. … We will come to him and make our home with him” (14:23).
Source: Temple, Sign, and Sacrament: Towards a New Perspective on the Gospel of John
Scott W. Hahn - St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology
Showing posts with label '4 Scott Hahn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label '4 Scott Hahn. Show all posts
Sunday, June 26, 2011
John 4:2 - Greater Works
Scripture John 4:2
He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.
Comment
The term “works” (erga) is used as a synonym for “signs,” that is, referring to Jesus’ miracles, in many places in the gospel.
What could it possibly mean that the disciples will do the same “works” and even greater “works” than Jesus?
It could mean that the apostles would perform miracles, even more spectacular ones than those Jesus performed. There are two problems with this interpretation.
First, a historical problem. While Acts does record the apostles, especially Peter and Paul, performing miracles similar to those of Jesus himself, one would be hard pressed to argue that they exceeded the “grandeur” of, say, the raising of Lazarus or the resurrection itself.
Second, a theological problem. The “signs” and “works” Jesus performed were never ends in themselves. In fact, his comment, hinting at a kind of exasperation, in John 4:48 (“Unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe”), suggests that the performance of miracles was a concession to a lack of faith among his contemporaries (compare John 20:29), but not a practice Jesus thought should be normative.
Thus, the thesis that the “greater works” refers to miracles performed by the disciples that would “outdo” those of Jesus himself faces some formidable objections.
But what other interpretive options are available?
One clue to the nature of the “greater works” is the explanation given at the end of Jesus’ statement, “Because I go to the Father.”
Taken at face value, this is not much of an explanation: there seems to be no reason why Jesus’ departure to the Father would result in the disciples accomplishing greater works than those of Jesus himself. The statement must be taken in conjunction with John 6:7: “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counsellor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.”
The reason the disciples will perform “greater works” is not because of the absence of Jesus, but because Jesus’ departure will result in the gift of the Spirit, through which the disciples will be empowered to perform these works.
Another clue is the pattern we have observed—that, in the aftermath of performing signs, Jesus attempts to move those who have witnessed the sign from the “earthly” to the “heavenly”—from the physical miracle to that to which it points.
In John 3, Jesus tries to move Nicodemus from thinking of the “signs” in terms of “earthly things” (a physical re-birth) to “heavenly things”—rebirth by the Spirit, inseparably tied to baptism.
In John 6, he urges the people not to seek earthly bread through another multiplication miracle, but heavenly bread—himself and his Eucharistic presence, through which the Spirit gives life.
And without doubt, in Jesus’ hierarchy of significance, the Eucharistic bread of his “flesh” is “greater” than the bread created by the multiplication of loaves.
Could the “greater works than these” that the disciples will perform include the divine works of baptism and Eucharist carried out by the power of the Spirit?
This was noted long ago by Oscar Cullmann: “The “sacraments have this in common, that in the time after the resurrection they take the place of the miracles performed by the incarnate Christ.”
At least the following conclusions may be warranted exegetically: whatever the “greater works” will be, they will not be performed apart from the power of the Paraclete sent by Jesus; and whatever they are, they will not be unrelated to the rebirth of baptism and the nourishment of the Eucharist, toward which Jesus’ own “works” pointed.
That the “greater works” to be performed by the disciples do indeed relate in some way to baptism and Eucharist is supported by some of the imagery in the last discourse itself. (section of text at this part of article was removed for sake of brevity of email)
The major block of teaching in John’s third Passover narrative is the last discourse, which implies that the disciples will be formed into a new Temple through the work of Christ (John 4:2–3), and strongly emphasizes the commissioning of the disciples to continue the ministry of Christ after his departure.
The disciples will, in fact, perform “greater works” than those Christ has displayed, once the Spirit is given to them.
There is reason to think these “greater works” are related to the celebration of baptism and Eucharist, because in John 3 and 6 Jesus himself indicates that the reality of these two sacraments are of more value than the sensible “signs” he has performed.
A possible sacramental sense of the “greater works” is supported by the fact that Jesus’ commission to “wash feet” and to “abide in me” have baptismal and Eucharistic connotations respectively.
It is possible, then, that in the last discourse, we are to see that one of the ways the “works” or “signs” of Jesus will be continued is through the Spirit-empowered administration of baptism and Eucharist.
Source: Temple, Sign, and Sacrament: Towards a New Perspective on the Gospel of John
Scott W. Hahn - St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology
He who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.
Comment
The term “works” (erga) is used as a synonym for “signs,” that is, referring to Jesus’ miracles, in many places in the gospel.
What could it possibly mean that the disciples will do the same “works” and even greater “works” than Jesus?
It could mean that the apostles would perform miracles, even more spectacular ones than those Jesus performed. There are two problems with this interpretation.
First, a historical problem. While Acts does record the apostles, especially Peter and Paul, performing miracles similar to those of Jesus himself, one would be hard pressed to argue that they exceeded the “grandeur” of, say, the raising of Lazarus or the resurrection itself.
Second, a theological problem. The “signs” and “works” Jesus performed were never ends in themselves. In fact, his comment, hinting at a kind of exasperation, in John 4:48 (“Unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe”), suggests that the performance of miracles was a concession to a lack of faith among his contemporaries (compare John 20:29), but not a practice Jesus thought should be normative.
Thus, the thesis that the “greater works” refers to miracles performed by the disciples that would “outdo” those of Jesus himself faces some formidable objections.
But what other interpretive options are available?
One clue to the nature of the “greater works” is the explanation given at the end of Jesus’ statement, “Because I go to the Father.”
Taken at face value, this is not much of an explanation: there seems to be no reason why Jesus’ departure to the Father would result in the disciples accomplishing greater works than those of Jesus himself. The statement must be taken in conjunction with John 6:7: “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counsellor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.”
The reason the disciples will perform “greater works” is not because of the absence of Jesus, but because Jesus’ departure will result in the gift of the Spirit, through which the disciples will be empowered to perform these works.
Another clue is the pattern we have observed—that, in the aftermath of performing signs, Jesus attempts to move those who have witnessed the sign from the “earthly” to the “heavenly”—from the physical miracle to that to which it points.
In John 3, Jesus tries to move Nicodemus from thinking of the “signs” in terms of “earthly things” (a physical re-birth) to “heavenly things”—rebirth by the Spirit, inseparably tied to baptism.
In John 6, he urges the people not to seek earthly bread through another multiplication miracle, but heavenly bread—himself and his Eucharistic presence, through which the Spirit gives life.
And without doubt, in Jesus’ hierarchy of significance, the Eucharistic bread of his “flesh” is “greater” than the bread created by the multiplication of loaves.
Could the “greater works than these” that the disciples will perform include the divine works of baptism and Eucharist carried out by the power of the Spirit?
This was noted long ago by Oscar Cullmann: “The “sacraments have this in common, that in the time after the resurrection they take the place of the miracles performed by the incarnate Christ.”
At least the following conclusions may be warranted exegetically: whatever the “greater works” will be, they will not be performed apart from the power of the Paraclete sent by Jesus; and whatever they are, they will not be unrelated to the rebirth of baptism and the nourishment of the Eucharist, toward which Jesus’ own “works” pointed.
That the “greater works” to be performed by the disciples do indeed relate in some way to baptism and Eucharist is supported by some of the imagery in the last discourse itself. (section of text at this part of article was removed for sake of brevity of email)
The major block of teaching in John’s third Passover narrative is the last discourse, which implies that the disciples will be formed into a new Temple through the work of Christ (John 4:2–3), and strongly emphasizes the commissioning of the disciples to continue the ministry of Christ after his departure.
The disciples will, in fact, perform “greater works” than those Christ has displayed, once the Spirit is given to them.
There is reason to think these “greater works” are related to the celebration of baptism and Eucharist, because in John 3 and 6 Jesus himself indicates that the reality of these two sacraments are of more value than the sensible “signs” he has performed.
A possible sacramental sense of the “greater works” is supported by the fact that Jesus’ commission to “wash feet” and to “abide in me” have baptismal and Eucharistic connotations respectively.
It is possible, then, that in the last discourse, we are to see that one of the ways the “works” or “signs” of Jesus will be continued is through the Spirit-empowered administration of baptism and Eucharist.
Source: Temple, Sign, and Sacrament: Towards a New Perspective on the Gospel of John
Scott W. Hahn - St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology
Monday, December 28, 2009
Matt 12:38-41 and Matt 16:1-4 : Jonah and Rome
Matt 12:38-41 and Matt 16:1-4 : Jonah and Rome
Matt 12:38-41
Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to him, "Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you." But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
The men of Nin'eveh will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.
Matt 16:1-4
And the Pharisees and Sad'ducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. He answered them, "When it is evening, you say, `It will be fair weather; for the sky is red.' And in the morning, `It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah." So he left them and departed.
Comment
Jonah was sent up to Assyria and Assyria is going to come down and destroy Israel in 721/722.
So Jonah goes up to Assyria before God uses Assyria to deal with Israel.
That is a critical point for understanding Jonah.
Jonah as a prophet undoubtedly knew Gods plan. The plan was to use Assyria to chastise Israel.
Now Jonah is a patriotic Israelite. He loves his people even though he knows they are sinful.
So when he gets the message from God “Go to Nineveh and preach a message of repentance saying in 40 days you are going to be destroyed.“
How would Jonah as a patriotic Israelite respond to a call from God? “Go preach to Nineveh, the capital city of Assyria. The military empire destined to conquer your own people”. You would think he would not be interested in giving them a second chance. If God is going to destroy them why do I need to preach?
Jonah knows if they survive God will use Assyria - Nineveh to chastise and destroy my people. So what does he do?
He is not a cowardly prophet. He is a patriot! He hops on the next ship to Tarshish moving in the opposite direction from Nineveh.
Here comes the storm and the sailors are wondering why, Jonah tells them and so they throw Jonah overboard. The great fish swallows him, it doesn’t say a whale by the way. A lot of people have trouble understanding or appreciating the message of Jonah because they wonder how can a man live in the belly of a great fish for three days. Some defenders of the faith point out that people in fact have survived inside a large fish for two or three days.
I think people miss the point because in Matthew 16 Jesus speaks of the sign of Jonah. What is the sign of Jonah?
The sign of Jonah is being in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights like the Son of Man will be in the earth for three days and three nights. But I think there is something more to it than that. I think that in fact there is a lot more to it than that.
How would Jesus have understood His own usage of the sign of Jonah when speaking to His own contemporaries?
When you go back to Jonah you realise of course he wasn’t really a cowardly prophet, he was a patriotic prophet who is willing to lay down his own life for his countrymen because in effect by fleeing in the opposite direction and not going to Nineveh, Assyria but heading for Tarshish, he was in effect saying throw me overboard. I would rather die than go to Nineveh and preach a message of repentance which will have the effect of causing the Assyrians to repent so God doesn’t have to destroy then in 40 days. Instead He will be able to use them to chastise, to uproot, to destroy my own fellow Israelite countrymen.
He is prophet who is willing to lay down his life. So when he is thrown overboard he is swallowed by the great fish.
I don’t think we have to solve the problem of how could he have survived in the fish for so long.
How could the fish have gotten indigestion and coughed him up there in Nineveh which isn’t really close to any ocean.
I think what happens is more miraculous and I think the Book of Jonah suggests as much.
This is my own interpretative opinion but when you read Jonah’s prayer prayed from the belly of the fish in Jonah 2, he doesn’t speak about the belly of the fish in verse 2 he says ‘out the belly of Sheol I cried’. That is the underworld, the netherworld. He goes on to talk about in verse 6 how he prayed to the Lord to bring up my life from the pit. In other words, there are some suggestions here that what Jonah experiences are not just the indigestion of a big fish but a sort of death.
Then coming up out after three days wouldn’t just be indigestion it would be a kind of resurrection or a resuscitation. So when he comes out again he finds himself there in Nineveh and finally and somewhat reluctantly he begins to preach the message and it has its full effect. The king of Nineveh hears it, rises up takes off his robe covers himself with sackcloth and ashes and proclaims three days of repentance and fasting. It has its effect because Gods wrath is averted, the decree of destruction is lifted and Jonah responds –how? What is baffling for many people is Jonah chapter 4. ‘It displeased Jonah exceedingly. He was angry.’
Well why would he be angry if they repented?
Now we understand because Jonah knows their repentance means their survival and their survival points to the usefulness by God in chastising Israel.
And he prayed to the Lord and he said “I pray thee Lord, is this not what I said when I was in my country” That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish for I knew that you were a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger.” In other words, I knew you were going to do this.
I was afraid your mercy might extend beyond the Jews and Israel.
Even to the Assyrians who were in a sense the most terrible people of the day.
They knew shock tactics in destroying people. Decimating populations.
Jonah had every reason humanly speaking to make Nineveh the last spot on his prophetic itinerary and he says to the Lord “I knew you’d do this and you did it” and now they are spared.
And within 40 years Nineveh turns on Israel, Jonahs own country and destroys it utterly.
So what do we have? A perfect sign of Jonah for Jesus!
Because Jesus does in effect what Jonah did.
That is, Jesus preaches a gospel not just to his countrymen who he wants to spare.
He lays his life down for his countrymen but he also goes and proclaims the Gospel to the gentiles.
And so the wicked Romans hear it, they repent so that God spares them even in spite of their wickedness and 40 years after Jesus death and resurrection, Rome is used by God in a way that is remarkably similar to how God used Nineveh and Assyria to bring covenant judgement and punishment upon the Jews in 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple.
That is so significant. I believe we need to understand it much better.
Source: Scott Hahn - “Our Fathers Plan” Bible Study
Matt 12:38-41
Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to him, "Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you." But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
The men of Nin'eveh will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.
Matt 16:1-4
And the Pharisees and Sad'ducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. He answered them, "When it is evening, you say, `It will be fair weather; for the sky is red.' And in the morning, `It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah." So he left them and departed.
Comment
Jonah was sent up to Assyria and Assyria is going to come down and destroy Israel in 721/722.
So Jonah goes up to Assyria before God uses Assyria to deal with Israel.
That is a critical point for understanding Jonah.
Jonah as a prophet undoubtedly knew Gods plan. The plan was to use Assyria to chastise Israel.
Now Jonah is a patriotic Israelite. He loves his people even though he knows they are sinful.
So when he gets the message from God “Go to Nineveh and preach a message of repentance saying in 40 days you are going to be destroyed.“
How would Jonah as a patriotic Israelite respond to a call from God? “Go preach to Nineveh, the capital city of Assyria. The military empire destined to conquer your own people”. You would think he would not be interested in giving them a second chance. If God is going to destroy them why do I need to preach?
Jonah knows if they survive God will use Assyria - Nineveh to chastise and destroy my people. So what does he do?
He is not a cowardly prophet. He is a patriot! He hops on the next ship to Tarshish moving in the opposite direction from Nineveh.
Here comes the storm and the sailors are wondering why, Jonah tells them and so they throw Jonah overboard. The great fish swallows him, it doesn’t say a whale by the way. A lot of people have trouble understanding or appreciating the message of Jonah because they wonder how can a man live in the belly of a great fish for three days. Some defenders of the faith point out that people in fact have survived inside a large fish for two or three days.
I think people miss the point because in Matthew 16 Jesus speaks of the sign of Jonah. What is the sign of Jonah?
The sign of Jonah is being in the belly of the fish for three days and three nights like the Son of Man will be in the earth for three days and three nights. But I think there is something more to it than that. I think that in fact there is a lot more to it than that.
How would Jesus have understood His own usage of the sign of Jonah when speaking to His own contemporaries?
When you go back to Jonah you realise of course he wasn’t really a cowardly prophet, he was a patriotic prophet who is willing to lay down his own life for his countrymen because in effect by fleeing in the opposite direction and not going to Nineveh, Assyria but heading for Tarshish, he was in effect saying throw me overboard. I would rather die than go to Nineveh and preach a message of repentance which will have the effect of causing the Assyrians to repent so God doesn’t have to destroy then in 40 days. Instead He will be able to use them to chastise, to uproot, to destroy my own fellow Israelite countrymen.
He is prophet who is willing to lay down his life. So when he is thrown overboard he is swallowed by the great fish.
I don’t think we have to solve the problem of how could he have survived in the fish for so long.
How could the fish have gotten indigestion and coughed him up there in Nineveh which isn’t really close to any ocean.
I think what happens is more miraculous and I think the Book of Jonah suggests as much.
This is my own interpretative opinion but when you read Jonah’s prayer prayed from the belly of the fish in Jonah 2, he doesn’t speak about the belly of the fish in verse 2 he says ‘out the belly of Sheol I cried’. That is the underworld, the netherworld. He goes on to talk about in verse 6 how he prayed to the Lord to bring up my life from the pit. In other words, there are some suggestions here that what Jonah experiences are not just the indigestion of a big fish but a sort of death.
Then coming up out after three days wouldn’t just be indigestion it would be a kind of resurrection or a resuscitation. So when he comes out again he finds himself there in Nineveh and finally and somewhat reluctantly he begins to preach the message and it has its full effect. The king of Nineveh hears it, rises up takes off his robe covers himself with sackcloth and ashes and proclaims three days of repentance and fasting. It has its effect because Gods wrath is averted, the decree of destruction is lifted and Jonah responds –how? What is baffling for many people is Jonah chapter 4. ‘It displeased Jonah exceedingly. He was angry.’
Well why would he be angry if they repented?
Now we understand because Jonah knows their repentance means their survival and their survival points to the usefulness by God in chastising Israel.
And he prayed to the Lord and he said “I pray thee Lord, is this not what I said when I was in my country” That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish for I knew that you were a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger.” In other words, I knew you were going to do this.
I was afraid your mercy might extend beyond the Jews and Israel.
Even to the Assyrians who were in a sense the most terrible people of the day.
They knew shock tactics in destroying people. Decimating populations.
Jonah had every reason humanly speaking to make Nineveh the last spot on his prophetic itinerary and he says to the Lord “I knew you’d do this and you did it” and now they are spared.
And within 40 years Nineveh turns on Israel, Jonahs own country and destroys it utterly.
So what do we have? A perfect sign of Jonah for Jesus!
Because Jesus does in effect what Jonah did.
That is, Jesus preaches a gospel not just to his countrymen who he wants to spare.
He lays his life down for his countrymen but he also goes and proclaims the Gospel to the gentiles.
And so the wicked Romans hear it, they repent so that God spares them even in spite of their wickedness and 40 years after Jesus death and resurrection, Rome is used by God in a way that is remarkably similar to how God used Nineveh and Assyria to bring covenant judgement and punishment upon the Jews in 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple.
That is so significant. I believe we need to understand it much better.
Source: Scott Hahn - “Our Fathers Plan” Bible Study
Jonah 1:1-4 : Jonah and Jesus
Jonah 1:1-4 : Jonah and Jesus
Now the word of the LORD came to Jonah the son of Amit'tai, saying, "Arise, go to Nin'eveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness has come up before me." But Jonah rose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the LORD. He went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish; so he paid the fare, and went on board, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the LORD. But the LORD hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up.
Comment
That's why I am excited to share with you the latest Bible study on the Book of Jonah, which I've just finished teaching in my home on Sunday evenings. When I first announced that our next Bible study would be on Jonah, someone responded : 'But Scott, we already know about Jonah, he's the cowardly prophet that got swallowed by a whale. Right?' Not exactly.
For one thing, Jonah wasn't a coward, but a patriot. For another, nowhere is the "great fish" identified as a whale. In fact, a few other misconceptions were corrected as well. As a result, all of us came to a much deeper appreciation of Jonah, who probably is , after all, the best-known -- but least understood -- of all the Old Testament Prophets! " In this series, "we discover how this famous prophet only uttered one single prophecy, covering just one verse -- and it never even came true! Why not?
Well, hold on to your Bibles and get out your highlighters and notebooks because I am going to show you how the Book of Jonah is not just a parable with elements of satire, and it's not just an allegory. It's also "prophetic history," as demonstrated by several converging strands of evidence: from the OT historical books and the words of Jesus, through the writings of the rabbis and the Church Fathers. And like the prophets before him like Hosea, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah, Jonah prophesied through his actions as well as his words. The elements of the Jonah story--the fish, the plant that dies, the worm the east wind--are a prophecy "acted out."
In this series we'll look at why Jonah ran away when God sent him to Nineveh. Was he afraid of the cruelty of the Assyrians? Was Jonah a coward, afraid of Nineveh which was the capital of a brutal nation known for its terrorist tactics? Or did Jonah know through the words of other prophets that Assyria was destined to destroy Israel and therefore, being a patriot, didn't want to see them repent, but actually wanted to see them destroyed? But we are only beginning to scratch the surface. We'll look at why God gave Nineveh 40 days to repent and the significance of 40 in Scripture. I will also deal with the questions I know are burning in your mind like, 'Did Jonah actually get swallowed by a fish? Did he survive it, or did he die and then rise? Are there recorded instances of people surviving similar experiences?' I'll answer these questions as well as others you may not have thought to ask. Finally we'll examine the Jonah typology: What is the "sign of Jonah" that Jesus promised to the Pharisees (Mt 12:38-41)? How does the Jonah story parallel passages of Matthew's Gospel? and why did Jesus call Peter the "son of Jonah"? Jonah is not just a big fish story, as you'll learn. Do we have to believe that Jonah was swallowed by a whale--and survived? It's too fantastic. And yet, if we can't believe that, how can we believe that, say, a crucified Son of Man would rise from the dead? I know you will enjoy listening to this series as much as I enjoyed presenting it and I look forward to many more of these Bible studies with you in future series."
Your Brother in Christ,
Scott Hahn
Now the word of the LORD came to Jonah the son of Amit'tai, saying, "Arise, go to Nin'eveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness has come up before me." But Jonah rose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the LORD. He went down to Joppa and found a ship going to Tarshish; so he paid the fare, and went on board, to go with them to Tarshish, away from the presence of the LORD. But the LORD hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up.
Comment
That's why I am excited to share with you the latest Bible study on the Book of Jonah, which I've just finished teaching in my home on Sunday evenings. When I first announced that our next Bible study would be on Jonah, someone responded : 'But Scott, we already know about Jonah, he's the cowardly prophet that got swallowed by a whale. Right?' Not exactly.
For one thing, Jonah wasn't a coward, but a patriot. For another, nowhere is the "great fish" identified as a whale. In fact, a few other misconceptions were corrected as well. As a result, all of us came to a much deeper appreciation of Jonah, who probably is , after all, the best-known -- but least understood -- of all the Old Testament Prophets! " In this series, "we discover how this famous prophet only uttered one single prophecy, covering just one verse -- and it never even came true! Why not?
Well, hold on to your Bibles and get out your highlighters and notebooks because I am going to show you how the Book of Jonah is not just a parable with elements of satire, and it's not just an allegory. It's also "prophetic history," as demonstrated by several converging strands of evidence: from the OT historical books and the words of Jesus, through the writings of the rabbis and the Church Fathers. And like the prophets before him like Hosea, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah, Jonah prophesied through his actions as well as his words. The elements of the Jonah story--the fish, the plant that dies, the worm the east wind--are a prophecy "acted out."
In this series we'll look at why Jonah ran away when God sent him to Nineveh. Was he afraid of the cruelty of the Assyrians? Was Jonah a coward, afraid of Nineveh which was the capital of a brutal nation known for its terrorist tactics? Or did Jonah know through the words of other prophets that Assyria was destined to destroy Israel and therefore, being a patriot, didn't want to see them repent, but actually wanted to see them destroyed? But we are only beginning to scratch the surface. We'll look at why God gave Nineveh 40 days to repent and the significance of 40 in Scripture. I will also deal with the questions I know are burning in your mind like, 'Did Jonah actually get swallowed by a fish? Did he survive it, or did he die and then rise? Are there recorded instances of people surviving similar experiences?' I'll answer these questions as well as others you may not have thought to ask. Finally we'll examine the Jonah typology: What is the "sign of Jonah" that Jesus promised to the Pharisees (Mt 12:38-41)? How does the Jonah story parallel passages of Matthew's Gospel? and why did Jesus call Peter the "son of Jonah"? Jonah is not just a big fish story, as you'll learn. Do we have to believe that Jonah was swallowed by a whale--and survived? It's too fantastic. And yet, if we can't believe that, how can we believe that, say, a crucified Son of Man would rise from the dead? I know you will enjoy listening to this series as much as I enjoyed presenting it and I look forward to many more of these Bible studies with you in future series."
Your Brother in Christ,
Scott Hahn
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Gen 2:7 – The Breath of Life
Gen 2:7 – The Breathe of Life
Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Comment - The birth of the Church
The birth of the Church, accomplished in the mystery of Christ’s Passover, is concretely manifested in important gestures and in words: ‘The evening of the same day, the first day of the week...Jesus came...and said to them: “Peace be with you. As the Father sent me, so am I sending you”.
After saying this he breathed on them and said: “Receive the Holy Spirit. For those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven”’ (Jn 20:21–23).
Very sensitive to biblical symbolism, John notes that the event dates from the first day of the week. According to the biblical account, creation began at the beginning of a week. The Breath of God hovered over the water; through the action of the Breath, Adam awakened to life. On this other first day of the week, Jesus breathes on the disciples. The gesture is creative, the Church is created in the Spirit of the risen Jesus.
Source: Holy Spirit of God
Scott Hahn
Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Comment - The birth of the Church
The birth of the Church, accomplished in the mystery of Christ’s Passover, is concretely manifested in important gestures and in words: ‘The evening of the same day, the first day of the week...Jesus came...and said to them: “Peace be with you. As the Father sent me, so am I sending you”.
After saying this he breathed on them and said: “Receive the Holy Spirit. For those whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven”’ (Jn 20:21–23).
Very sensitive to biblical symbolism, John notes that the event dates from the first day of the week. According to the biblical account, creation began at the beginning of a week. The Breath of God hovered over the water; through the action of the Breath, Adam awakened to life. On this other first day of the week, Jesus breathes on the disciples. The gesture is creative, the Church is created in the Spirit of the risen Jesus.
Source: Holy Spirit of God
Scott Hahn
John 8:38-43 - Fatherhood
John 8:38-43 - Fatherhood
I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father." They answered him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
Comment
Why emphasise Fatherhood?
What about motherhood, brotherhood or sonship?
Make them more foundational!
Fatherhood is not appreciated these days.
Without fatherhood, you can’t have motherhood, brotherhood or sonship.
Fatherhood is the basis for life.
It is the source of love and the origin of authority.
Source: Scott Hahn
I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father." They answered him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
Comment
Why emphasise Fatherhood?
What about motherhood, brotherhood or sonship?
Make them more foundational!
Fatherhood is not appreciated these days.
Without fatherhood, you can’t have motherhood, brotherhood or sonship.
Fatherhood is the basis for life.
It is the source of love and the origin of authority.
Source: Scott Hahn
2 Maccabees 2:4-8 and Revelation 11:19 – 12:2 – Ark of the Covenant
2 Maccabees 2:4-8 and Revelation 11:19 – 12:2 – Ark of the Covenant
2 Maccabees 2:4-8
The same document also tells how the prophet, following a divine revelation, ordered that the tent and the ark should accompany him and how he went off to the mountain which Moses climbed to see God's inheritance. When Jeremiah arrived there, he found a room in a cave in which he put the tent, the ark, and the altar of incense; then he blocked up the entrance. Some of those who followed him came up intending to mark the path, but they could not find it. When Jeremiah heard of this, he reproved them:
"The place is to remain unknown until God gathers his people together again and shows them mercy.
Then the Lord will disclose these things, and the glory of the Lord will be seen in the cloud, just as it appeared in the time of Moses and when Solomon prayed that the Place might be gloriously sanctified."
Revelation 11:19 – 12:2
Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.
Comment
The small empire built up by David and expanded by his son Solomon broke up after Solomon died (see 1 Kings 12). The two small kingdoms of Israel and Judah could not stand up against the great world powers. First Israel fell to Assyria (see 2 Kings 17:1-6); then Judah fell to Babylon (see 2 Kings 25).
The prophet Jeremiah had warned the people of Judah that God's judgment was coming upon them. But he had also predicted a time when God would build up His people again and make a "new covenant" with them (see Jeremiah 31:27-34).
A story in 2 Maccabees 2:4-8 tells us that Jeremiah prepared for that time by hiding the Ark of the Covenant on Mount Nebo.
Since that time, the Ark has never been seen on earth again.
The Ark would not be seen again until the time when God showed His mercy and gathered His people together again. But when would that be?
Luke uses parallel language and images to make his point about the Ark of the Covenant. But John, the author of Revelation, tells us directly that he saw the Ark of the Covenant - the holy object that had been lost since Jeremiah's time - in a vision. This is a strange string of images, almost overwhelming - like much of the book of Revelation. But certainly the statement that the Ark of the Covenant was visible must have caught the attention of the first people who heard the vision.
If the Ark had been seen, then the time Jeremiah spoke of must have come: the time when "God gathers his people together again and shows them mercy," the time when "the glory of the Lord will be seen in the cloud, just as it appeared in the time of Moses" (see 2 Maccabees 7-8)
And indeed the sights and sounds are the same as in the time of Moses - storm and earthquake:
"There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm" (see Revelation 11:19).
"On the morning of the third day there were peals of thunder and lightning, and a heavy cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled . . . Mount Sinai was all wrapped in smoke, for the LORD came down upon it in fire. The smoke rose from it as though from a furnace, and the whole mountain trembled violently" (see Exodus 19:16, 18)
Naturally, we want to hear more about the rediscovered Ark of the Covenant.
And John goes on to describe what he sees: "a woman clothed with the sun" (see Revelation 12:1).
In our modern Bibles, there is a chapter division between the appearance of the Ark of the Covenant and the description of the "woman clothed with the sun."
But chapter divisions were added in the Middle Ages (in the twelfth century) to make the books of the Bible easier to refer to.
John did not make any divisions: he wrote straight through from Revelation 11:19 to Revelation 12:1 without a break.
In the dream-like but deeply significant logic of John's vision, the Ark of the Covenant is "a woman clothed with the sun."
But does this passage in Revelation really refer to Mary? Some say the woman represents Israel or the Church, and certainly she does. John’s use of rich symbolism is well known, but it is obvious from the Bible itself that the woman is Mary.
The Bible begins with Genesis with a real man (Adam), a real woman (Eve) and a real serpent (the devil) — and it also ends with Revelation with a real man (Jesus, the Last Adam, 1 Cor 15:45), a real woman (Mary the New Eve, Rev 11:19—12:2) and a real serpent (the devil of old). All this was foretold in Genesis 3:15.
Source: a Bible Study from SalvationHistory.com (that is why you see all of the scripture references in brackets)
Plus the inserted text at the end is from
Steve Ray’s article about the Ark of the New Covenant
2 Maccabees 2:4-8
The same document also tells how the prophet, following a divine revelation, ordered that the tent and the ark should accompany him and how he went off to the mountain which Moses climbed to see God's inheritance. When Jeremiah arrived there, he found a room in a cave in which he put the tent, the ark, and the altar of incense; then he blocked up the entrance. Some of those who followed him came up intending to mark the path, but they could not find it. When Jeremiah heard of this, he reproved them:
"The place is to remain unknown until God gathers his people together again and shows them mercy.
Then the Lord will disclose these things, and the glory of the Lord will be seen in the cloud, just as it appeared in the time of Moses and when Solomon prayed that the Place might be gloriously sanctified."
Revelation 11:19 – 12:2
Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.
Comment
The small empire built up by David and expanded by his son Solomon broke up after Solomon died (see 1 Kings 12). The two small kingdoms of Israel and Judah could not stand up against the great world powers. First Israel fell to Assyria (see 2 Kings 17:1-6); then Judah fell to Babylon (see 2 Kings 25).
The prophet Jeremiah had warned the people of Judah that God's judgment was coming upon them. But he had also predicted a time when God would build up His people again and make a "new covenant" with them (see Jeremiah 31:27-34).
A story in 2 Maccabees 2:4-8 tells us that Jeremiah prepared for that time by hiding the Ark of the Covenant on Mount Nebo.
Since that time, the Ark has never been seen on earth again.
The Ark would not be seen again until the time when God showed His mercy and gathered His people together again. But when would that be?
Luke uses parallel language and images to make his point about the Ark of the Covenant. But John, the author of Revelation, tells us directly that he saw the Ark of the Covenant - the holy object that had been lost since Jeremiah's time - in a vision. This is a strange string of images, almost overwhelming - like much of the book of Revelation. But certainly the statement that the Ark of the Covenant was visible must have caught the attention of the first people who heard the vision.
If the Ark had been seen, then the time Jeremiah spoke of must have come: the time when "God gathers his people together again and shows them mercy," the time when "the glory of the Lord will be seen in the cloud, just as it appeared in the time of Moses" (see 2 Maccabees 7-8)
And indeed the sights and sounds are the same as in the time of Moses - storm and earthquake:
"There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm" (see Revelation 11:19).
"On the morning of the third day there were peals of thunder and lightning, and a heavy cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled . . . Mount Sinai was all wrapped in smoke, for the LORD came down upon it in fire. The smoke rose from it as though from a furnace, and the whole mountain trembled violently" (see Exodus 19:16, 18)
Naturally, we want to hear more about the rediscovered Ark of the Covenant.
And John goes on to describe what he sees: "a woman clothed with the sun" (see Revelation 12:1).
In our modern Bibles, there is a chapter division between the appearance of the Ark of the Covenant and the description of the "woman clothed with the sun."
But chapter divisions were added in the Middle Ages (in the twelfth century) to make the books of the Bible easier to refer to.
John did not make any divisions: he wrote straight through from Revelation 11:19 to Revelation 12:1 without a break.
In the dream-like but deeply significant logic of John's vision, the Ark of the Covenant is "a woman clothed with the sun."
But does this passage in Revelation really refer to Mary? Some say the woman represents Israel or the Church, and certainly she does. John’s use of rich symbolism is well known, but it is obvious from the Bible itself that the woman is Mary.
The Bible begins with Genesis with a real man (Adam), a real woman (Eve) and a real serpent (the devil) — and it also ends with Revelation with a real man (Jesus, the Last Adam, 1 Cor 15:45), a real woman (Mary the New Eve, Rev 11:19—12:2) and a real serpent (the devil of old). All this was foretold in Genesis 3:15.
Source: a Bible Study from SalvationHistory.com (that is why you see all of the scripture references in brackets)
Plus the inserted text at the end is from
Steve Ray’s article about the Ark of the New Covenant
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Jesus in the Garden
Typology is found throughout the Bible and helps us better understand God’s Word.
Typology can be said to be where the stories in the Old Testament and New Testament match.
As Saint Augustine said: the New Testament concealed in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New.
In Romans 5:14 Paul specifically calls Adam a type of Christ – a foreshadowing of Christ –a dim image that Christ would later perfect and fulfil.
If we are going to understand what Jesus did in the New Testament, we have to go back and look at what the first Adam failed to do.
And so, when we go back to Genesis Chapter 2, God created man and put him in the garden. Verse 15 says The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to cultivate it and to keep it. Now that word ‘keep’ is a very interesting word. In Hebrew it is ‘shamar’ and it literally means to guard, to protect, to preserve. And so you have to ask yourself at that point, guard it against what? We don’t know at that point.
Verse 16 and 17 goes on to say: the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." That is what we call the ordeal in the early story – keep and guard this garden but don’t eat from that one tree or the penalty will be death.
Then God creates Eve and He takes Eve from Adams rib, creates and fashions Eve and brings Eve to Adam and the two become one flesh. It is implied that Adam will have to teach Eve that we have to guard the garden and she may say “Guard it against what?” He would reply “I’m not sure at this point, but if we eat of that one tree we are going to die”.
And that is the issue, obedience and death. God has created us in His image and likeness which means that we have an intellect and a will.
In Genesis Chapter 3, the serpent comes into the garden. Now that word serpent is not a cute little garden snake. The word serpent is the word “nahash” in Hebrew, and it is also translated to the great Leviathan, a sea monster, a large venomous creature. The serpent says immediately to the woman "Did God say, `You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?"
Now that’s a question right away. Not "Does God exist, but can you trust Him?". The woman gives an explanation what to eat and the serpent replies "You will not die”. Now the question is “Where is Adam here?” Adam has a responsibility to guard and protect the garden and his bride, but he is very silent. Why was Adam silent in the garden and why did he let Eve to answer on his behalf?
It is likely that he was scared, very scared! In the Hebrew, the sentence is incomplete when the serpent says “Did God say? and there is a veiled threat in the snakes question that is “if you don’t eat of that fruit you are gonna die because you are gonna mess with me".
God says "You will die if you eat it. I am implying here that you are gonna mess with me if you do eat it” Adam is stuck in the middle. He has several choices. One, does he entrust himself to the Father, as Peter told us to do in his letter and say Father I need help what should I do?, Or does he roll up his sleeves and say to the enemy “You are not getting my bride, you are not getting this garden and I am willing to even suffer and die for what God has told me to do". But he is silent. Naturally it is pride that causes the fall of Adam and Eve, but it looks here like Adam is afraid to suffer and they end up falling.
What is interesting after this, is the curse. In Genesis 3:15 God says “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." The Early Church Fathers tell us this is the proto-evangelium, the first announcement of good news and the answer to the problem of original sin is going to involve a deep bruising and it will be in the heel. Christ is the head we are the body.
In verse 16, God says “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” What is He saying to Eve? God is saying "I am going to help you see how to love. Here is the penalty, you are going to give yourself to your husband, you are going to love your husband, the result will be pain. You are going to have pain, in childbirth, but it results in fruit, the birth of a child". And God says to Adam, "You are going to work the fields, you’re going to sweat, there are going to be thorns and thistles".
But what’s going to come out of the field, fruit - bread. Jesus has assumed the curse of Adam upon Himself, the curse of sweat, the curse of blood and thorns. What God is teaching them at this point is that “You’re afraid to suffer and trust Me when I told you something to do, I am going to help you learn what real love is all about”.
Now if you go to the New Testament, you will see the opposite of this in Jesus. We asked the question earlier, "Why did Jesus come?"
People say, He came to die for my sins, but He came to more than just die. Because if He came to just die, He would have done it right away and got it over with. But Jesus came to do a few other things. He was silent on death. He ran away from death at every turn before Matthew 16, but then in Matthew 16 He gives the keys to Peter and establishes the kingdom. Then immediately after establishing the kingdom, what does He bring up. In Matthew 16:21 it says “From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.” Now you remember back in Genesis, what did the enemy say to Adam “you surely shall not die”.
And that is the issue, you are not gonna die. There is an easier way Adam, there is an easier way to get on in life separate from God. Right away when Jesus said to the disciples “I am going to suffer, I am going to die”, Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him saying “God forbid it Lord, this shall not happen to you”. And Jesus realising what’s happening here, that he is entering his ordeal as the last Adam and about to enter the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus says to Peter “Get behind me satan, you are a stumbling block to me for you are not setting your mind on Gods interests but mans”.
And so Jesus then enters His ordeal when he goes to His garden and there is an uncanny parallel between the Garden of Gethsemane and the first garden with Adam and where Jesus (the second Adam) enters the garden, and you know the story in Matthew 26 where Jesus underwent tremendous agony in the garden to the point of death.
What’s interesting about the story is that in Matthew 26:36-38 it says “Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsem'ane, and he said to his disciples, "Sit here, while I go yonder and pray. And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zeb'edee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. Then he said to them, "My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me."
The same wording that we see in the Old Testament ‘keep watch, keep the garden’ is used by Jesus when he said "Keep watch with me" and then He does what Adam failed to do. He entrusts himself to the Father which is not what Adam did. Adam was filled with pride and he was silent. Then in Matthew 26:39-42 it says: And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, "My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt." And he came to the disciples and found them sleeping; and he said to Peter, "So, could you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak." Again, for the second time, he went away and prayed, "My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, thy will be done."
And that is the difference in the last Adam and the first Adam, Jesus totally entrusted Himself to the Father in doing what the Father asked Him to do. He poured Himself out in complete love, complete offering and He sets the example for us that we can trust the Father even if it there is suffering involved, even if there is pain involved in the redemption of man. We know that Jesus rose from the dead and so we look at His life and we say I may suffer with Him now but I will be glorified with Him later.
The second Adam, Jesus, went into the Garden, was sinless and was also tested. Jesus went to the tree and laid down His life for His bride, the Church.
The Cross becomes the Tree of Life as the Early Church Fathers called it.
In the deep sleep of Adam, from his side came forth Eve.
The second Adam, Jesus, went to the tree and in the deep sleep of death came forth blood and water which represented the waters of Baptism and the blood of the Eucharist as the Early Church Fathers understood it. The blood and water was the sacramental material from which the New Eve, the Church, is formed.
The Two Trees
Adam and Eve were not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden
Eating of the fruit wounded them, it killed them spiritually speaking. It wounded the human race with the poison of sin
The second tree was the Tree of Calvary, upon which Christ hung on the Cross.
And the fruit of that tree, the Tree of Calvary, the Holy Eucharist, is the antidote to the poison that was introduced into the world through Adam and Eve.
In one garden, the Tree of Life brought about death and in another garden the Tree of Death brought about Life.
Eve, the first mother of the living was at the foot of the first Tree and Mary, the second Eve, is at the foot of the second Tree
The Apostle John goes out of his way to inform us that the Cross and the Tomb were in a garden.
For the first Christians, Mary was also seen as the second (or New) Eve, the woman who undoes by her obedience the sin that Eve brought by her disobedience.
The first Eve listened to a fallen angel and succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.
Mary listened to an unfallen angel and thus brought about, through Jesus, our redemption.
Christ was conceived in Mary’s womb, and therefore is “bone of (her) bones and flesh of (her) flesh.” We read in Genesis 2:23 Adam exclaim, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”.
What really blew my mind in the midst of all of this was realising that in this Garden of Gethsemane, guess who the bride was? You and I. You and I are standing there and Jesus is rolling up His sleeves and saying “OK I am going to offer myself for you” and now that we’re redeemed He joins us with himself and says walk as I walk, love as I love. We can use your suffering for the redemption of the world also.
Scripture supporting ‘joining our suffering with Jesus’
Collossians 1:24 -
2 Cor 12:9 – thorn in the flesh
2 Cor 4:8-11,14
2 Corinthians 1:5 – We share in Christs suffering
*****
Jesus goes into the garden. Jesus goes to the tree and undoes what Adam did and does what Adam failed to do.
Adam failed to lay down his life for Eve. Jesus says “Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his beloved.”
Why would Adam fear death at that stage if he hadn’t sinned, for God said “Eat of the tree and you will die”
Jesus also hadn’t sinned and sweated blood and felt ‘death’ in the garden.
The devil was defeated by Jesus as the devil has the power of death.
Jesus did what Adam failed to do as scripture says “Perfect love casts out fear”
Mother Teresa said once “It is not possible to LOVE GOD except at ones own expense”
Source: (primarily) Jeff Cavins plus Scott Hahn, Steven Ray and Patrick Madrid
Typology can be said to be where the stories in the Old Testament and New Testament match.
As Saint Augustine said: the New Testament concealed in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New.
In Romans 5:14 Paul specifically calls Adam a type of Christ – a foreshadowing of Christ –a dim image that Christ would later perfect and fulfil.
If we are going to understand what Jesus did in the New Testament, we have to go back and look at what the first Adam failed to do.
And so, when we go back to Genesis Chapter 2, God created man and put him in the garden. Verse 15 says The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to cultivate it and to keep it. Now that word ‘keep’ is a very interesting word. In Hebrew it is ‘shamar’ and it literally means to guard, to protect, to preserve. And so you have to ask yourself at that point, guard it against what? We don’t know at that point.
Verse 16 and 17 goes on to say: the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may freely eat of every tree of the garden. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die." That is what we call the ordeal in the early story – keep and guard this garden but don’t eat from that one tree or the penalty will be death.
Then God creates Eve and He takes Eve from Adams rib, creates and fashions Eve and brings Eve to Adam and the two become one flesh. It is implied that Adam will have to teach Eve that we have to guard the garden and she may say “Guard it against what?” He would reply “I’m not sure at this point, but if we eat of that one tree we are going to die”.
And that is the issue, obedience and death. God has created us in His image and likeness which means that we have an intellect and a will.
In Genesis Chapter 3, the serpent comes into the garden. Now that word serpent is not a cute little garden snake. The word serpent is the word “nahash” in Hebrew, and it is also translated to the great Leviathan, a sea monster, a large venomous creature. The serpent says immediately to the woman "Did God say, `You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?"
Now that’s a question right away. Not "Does God exist, but can you trust Him?". The woman gives an explanation what to eat and the serpent replies "You will not die”. Now the question is “Where is Adam here?” Adam has a responsibility to guard and protect the garden and his bride, but he is very silent. Why was Adam silent in the garden and why did he let Eve to answer on his behalf?
It is likely that he was scared, very scared! In the Hebrew, the sentence is incomplete when the serpent says “Did God say? and there is a veiled threat in the snakes question that is “if you don’t eat of that fruit you are gonna die because you are gonna mess with me".
God says "You will die if you eat it. I am implying here that you are gonna mess with me if you do eat it” Adam is stuck in the middle. He has several choices. One, does he entrust himself to the Father, as Peter told us to do in his letter and say Father I need help what should I do?, Or does he roll up his sleeves and say to the enemy “You are not getting my bride, you are not getting this garden and I am willing to even suffer and die for what God has told me to do". But he is silent. Naturally it is pride that causes the fall of Adam and Eve, but it looks here like Adam is afraid to suffer and they end up falling.
What is interesting after this, is the curse. In Genesis 3:15 God says “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel." The Early Church Fathers tell us this is the proto-evangelium, the first announcement of good news and the answer to the problem of original sin is going to involve a deep bruising and it will be in the heel. Christ is the head we are the body.
In verse 16, God says “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” What is He saying to Eve? God is saying "I am going to help you see how to love. Here is the penalty, you are going to give yourself to your husband, you are going to love your husband, the result will be pain. You are going to have pain, in childbirth, but it results in fruit, the birth of a child". And God says to Adam, "You are going to work the fields, you’re going to sweat, there are going to be thorns and thistles".
But what’s going to come out of the field, fruit - bread. Jesus has assumed the curse of Adam upon Himself, the curse of sweat, the curse of blood and thorns. What God is teaching them at this point is that “You’re afraid to suffer and trust Me when I told you something to do, I am going to help you learn what real love is all about”.
Now if you go to the New Testament, you will see the opposite of this in Jesus. We asked the question earlier, "Why did Jesus come?"
People say, He came to die for my sins, but He came to more than just die. Because if He came to just die, He would have done it right away and got it over with. But Jesus came to do a few other things. He was silent on death. He ran away from death at every turn before Matthew 16, but then in Matthew 16 He gives the keys to Peter and establishes the kingdom. Then immediately after establishing the kingdom, what does He bring up. In Matthew 16:21 it says “From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.” Now you remember back in Genesis, what did the enemy say to Adam “you surely shall not die”.
And that is the issue, you are not gonna die. There is an easier way Adam, there is an easier way to get on in life separate from God. Right away when Jesus said to the disciples “I am going to suffer, I am going to die”, Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him saying “God forbid it Lord, this shall not happen to you”. And Jesus realising what’s happening here, that he is entering his ordeal as the last Adam and about to enter the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus says to Peter “Get behind me satan, you are a stumbling block to me for you are not setting your mind on Gods interests but mans”.
And so Jesus then enters His ordeal when he goes to His garden and there is an uncanny parallel between the Garden of Gethsemane and the first garden with Adam and where Jesus (the second Adam) enters the garden, and you know the story in Matthew 26 where Jesus underwent tremendous agony in the garden to the point of death.
What’s interesting about the story is that in Matthew 26:36-38 it says “Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsem'ane, and he said to his disciples, "Sit here, while I go yonder and pray. And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zeb'edee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. Then he said to them, "My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me."
The same wording that we see in the Old Testament ‘keep watch, keep the garden’ is used by Jesus when he said "Keep watch with me" and then He does what Adam failed to do. He entrusts himself to the Father which is not what Adam did. Adam was filled with pride and he was silent. Then in Matthew 26:39-42 it says: And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, "My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt." And he came to the disciples and found them sleeping; and he said to Peter, "So, could you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak." Again, for the second time, he went away and prayed, "My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, thy will be done."
And that is the difference in the last Adam and the first Adam, Jesus totally entrusted Himself to the Father in doing what the Father asked Him to do. He poured Himself out in complete love, complete offering and He sets the example for us that we can trust the Father even if it there is suffering involved, even if there is pain involved in the redemption of man. We know that Jesus rose from the dead and so we look at His life and we say I may suffer with Him now but I will be glorified with Him later.
The second Adam, Jesus, went into the Garden, was sinless and was also tested. Jesus went to the tree and laid down His life for His bride, the Church.
The Cross becomes the Tree of Life as the Early Church Fathers called it.
In the deep sleep of Adam, from his side came forth Eve.
The second Adam, Jesus, went to the tree and in the deep sleep of death came forth blood and water which represented the waters of Baptism and the blood of the Eucharist as the Early Church Fathers understood it. The blood and water was the sacramental material from which the New Eve, the Church, is formed.
The Two Trees
Adam and Eve were not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden
Eating of the fruit wounded them, it killed them spiritually speaking. It wounded the human race with the poison of sin
The second tree was the Tree of Calvary, upon which Christ hung on the Cross.
And the fruit of that tree, the Tree of Calvary, the Holy Eucharist, is the antidote to the poison that was introduced into the world through Adam and Eve.
In one garden, the Tree of Life brought about death and in another garden the Tree of Death brought about Life.
Eve, the first mother of the living was at the foot of the first Tree and Mary, the second Eve, is at the foot of the second Tree
The Apostle John goes out of his way to inform us that the Cross and the Tomb were in a garden.
For the first Christians, Mary was also seen as the second (or New) Eve, the woman who undoes by her obedience the sin that Eve brought by her disobedience.
The first Eve listened to a fallen angel and succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.
Mary listened to an unfallen angel and thus brought about, through Jesus, our redemption.
Christ was conceived in Mary’s womb, and therefore is “bone of (her) bones and flesh of (her) flesh.” We read in Genesis 2:23 Adam exclaim, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”.
What really blew my mind in the midst of all of this was realising that in this Garden of Gethsemane, guess who the bride was? You and I. You and I are standing there and Jesus is rolling up His sleeves and saying “OK I am going to offer myself for you” and now that we’re redeemed He joins us with himself and says walk as I walk, love as I love. We can use your suffering for the redemption of the world also.
Scripture supporting ‘joining our suffering with Jesus’
Collossians 1:24 -
2 Cor 12:9 – thorn in the flesh
2 Cor 4:8-11,14
2 Corinthians 1:5 – We share in Christs suffering
*****
Jesus goes into the garden. Jesus goes to the tree and undoes what Adam did and does what Adam failed to do.
Adam failed to lay down his life for Eve. Jesus says “Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his beloved.”
Why would Adam fear death at that stage if he hadn’t sinned, for God said “Eat of the tree and you will die”
Jesus also hadn’t sinned and sweated blood and felt ‘death’ in the garden.
The devil was defeated by Jesus as the devil has the power of death.
Jesus did what Adam failed to do as scripture says “Perfect love casts out fear”
Mother Teresa said once “It is not possible to LOVE GOD except at ones own expense”
Source: (primarily) Jeff Cavins plus Scott Hahn, Steven Ray and Patrick Madrid
Genesis 1:26-27 - Let us make man in our image
SCRIPTURE - Genesis 1:26-27
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
COMMENT
You see an intimacy when you read that God decides to make one creature and only one creature in “Our image after Our likeness”.
God uses that word. When you come to Genesis 1 and 2, you notice God is creating by the power of His Word – “Let there be light, Let there be this and that” and by the shear power of Gods Word everything comes into existence. On Day 6 though, the language changes from “Let there be this and Let there be that” to “Let Us make man in our Image after Our likeness”. Suddenly it’s plural. It’s first person plural.
Theologians can debate why there is a change of language. You know there are various theories as to what that change of language means. Some people suppose that it is the plural of majesty, you know the way kings talk “We decree”. But that doesn’t explain why it wasn’t used before when creating the other things. Others suggest, that perhaps God is speaking to the angels, but once again nothing is mentioned of angels co-creating with God in Genesis. I don’t think the Early Church Fathers were off the mark in seeing in Genesis 1:26-27, a trace, a foreshadowing of something that wouldn’t become really clear until the New Testament.
And that is, when God makes man in their image, in “Our image after Our likeness”, He does it in a very significant way. We read about how God makes man male and female. Now He made dogs and cats with a distinction of gender but the distinction between male and female is only mentioned explicitly when God creates man in our image after our likeness to show us that in God’s plan this distinction between male and female is not merely biological but there is something theological. There is a mystery here planted as a seed that is waiting to unfold in human history.
When we realise that God makes man in the image and likeness of God there is a relational meaning to that. Theologians and philosophers debate what it means to bear the image and likeness of God. We have a rational mind, a free will and all of that is true but for the people who were reading this book, the ancient Israelite readers, would have recognised that the very next occurrence of the phrase “image and likeness” is found in the opening verses of Genesis 5 where we discover that Adam became a father of a son named Seth in his own image and likeness. So there is a concrete relational meaning to what it means for us to bear the image and likeness of God.
God has destined us to be more than just rational creatures. He has destined us. He is calling us to enter into a family bond.
The fact that God makes man male and female suggests something more intimate.
To become all that God has made us to be, we must grow ever more perfectly in his divine image. That means we must give ourselves completely. We grow perfect in the image of God only as we “become Christ”, in communion with Christ and in communion with others, in communion with the Church.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
COMMENT
You see an intimacy when you read that God decides to make one creature and only one creature in “Our image after Our likeness”.
God uses that word. When you come to Genesis 1 and 2, you notice God is creating by the power of His Word – “Let there be light, Let there be this and that” and by the shear power of Gods Word everything comes into existence. On Day 6 though, the language changes from “Let there be this and Let there be that” to “Let Us make man in our Image after Our likeness”. Suddenly it’s plural. It’s first person plural.
Theologians can debate why there is a change of language. You know there are various theories as to what that change of language means. Some people suppose that it is the plural of majesty, you know the way kings talk “We decree”. But that doesn’t explain why it wasn’t used before when creating the other things. Others suggest, that perhaps God is speaking to the angels, but once again nothing is mentioned of angels co-creating with God in Genesis. I don’t think the Early Church Fathers were off the mark in seeing in Genesis 1:26-27, a trace, a foreshadowing of something that wouldn’t become really clear until the New Testament.
And that is, when God makes man in their image, in “Our image after Our likeness”, He does it in a very significant way. We read about how God makes man male and female. Now He made dogs and cats with a distinction of gender but the distinction between male and female is only mentioned explicitly when God creates man in our image after our likeness to show us that in God’s plan this distinction between male and female is not merely biological but there is something theological. There is a mystery here planted as a seed that is waiting to unfold in human history.
When we realise that God makes man in the image and likeness of God there is a relational meaning to that. Theologians and philosophers debate what it means to bear the image and likeness of God. We have a rational mind, a free will and all of that is true but for the people who were reading this book, the ancient Israelite readers, would have recognised that the very next occurrence of the phrase “image and likeness” is found in the opening verses of Genesis 5 where we discover that Adam became a father of a son named Seth in his own image and likeness. So there is a concrete relational meaning to what it means for us to bear the image and likeness of God.
God has destined us to be more than just rational creatures. He has destined us. He is calling us to enter into a family bond.
The fact that God makes man male and female suggests something more intimate.
To become all that God has made us to be, we must grow ever more perfectly in his divine image. That means we must give ourselves completely. We grow perfect in the image of God only as we “become Christ”, in communion with Christ and in communion with others, in communion with the Church.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Genesis 2:1-4 - Why does God rest on the seventh day?
SCRIPTURE – Genesis 2:1-4
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation. These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
COMMENT
God finished his work of creation by resting on the seventh day.
Why does God rest on the seventh day?
It is not because He needs the rest but because He knows we will need it.
He becomes our Father and we become His children.
Remember our Lord said “the Sabbath was made for Man, not Man for the Sabbath”.
God blessed and made holy the seventh day.
You have to understand God’s purpose for resting.
By sanctifying or making holy, God wants us to set the seventh day apart from the other days.
God uses the seventh day to reveal to Man his ultimate destiny. Man was made on the sixth day along with all the beasts. We work like all of the animals/beasts, but unlike the rest of the animals we have been created with the capacity that is divine. We are able to pray to God, we are able to love God as children love their father.
The sixth day is not enough for us. God knows that we are not made for work but for worship. We are not made to labour or for kingly dominion. We are not made for the earth but for heaven.
The Sabbath is the seventh day and the Hebrew word for “seven” is sheba. Yet sheba stands for not only for a number. Sheba is also a verb, and it means to swear a covenant oath – literally, to “seven oneself”. (see for example Abrahams covenant oath in Gen 21:27-32) The number seven is the unmistakable sign of a covenant. With the seventh day, God was making a covenant with mankind. God took Adam and Eve into His family. God made them His children.
With this shift in relationship comes a corresponding shift in language. In the first chapters of Genesis, we read of God as “Elohim”, a formal name, usually translated into English as “God”. Elohim evokes the divine power in the act of creation. In the second chapter, however – immediately in the wake of the seventh day – God appears as “Yahweh Elohim”, which is usually translated into English as “the Lord God”. “Yahweh” –which only appears after the seventh day, is a personal name, a family name.
God is not just our creator but our Father.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work which he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation. These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
COMMENT
God finished his work of creation by resting on the seventh day.
Why does God rest on the seventh day?
It is not because He needs the rest but because He knows we will need it.
He becomes our Father and we become His children.
Remember our Lord said “the Sabbath was made for Man, not Man for the Sabbath”.
God blessed and made holy the seventh day.
You have to understand God’s purpose for resting.
By sanctifying or making holy, God wants us to set the seventh day apart from the other days.
God uses the seventh day to reveal to Man his ultimate destiny. Man was made on the sixth day along with all the beasts. We work like all of the animals/beasts, but unlike the rest of the animals we have been created with the capacity that is divine. We are able to pray to God, we are able to love God as children love their father.
The sixth day is not enough for us. God knows that we are not made for work but for worship. We are not made to labour or for kingly dominion. We are not made for the earth but for heaven.
The Sabbath is the seventh day and the Hebrew word for “seven” is sheba. Yet sheba stands for not only for a number. Sheba is also a verb, and it means to swear a covenant oath – literally, to “seven oneself”. (see for example Abrahams covenant oath in Gen 21:27-32) The number seven is the unmistakable sign of a covenant. With the seventh day, God was making a covenant with mankind. God took Adam and Eve into His family. God made them His children.
With this shift in relationship comes a corresponding shift in language. In the first chapters of Genesis, we read of God as “Elohim”, a formal name, usually translated into English as “God”. Elohim evokes the divine power in the act of creation. In the second chapter, however – immediately in the wake of the seventh day – God appears as “Yahweh Elohim”, which is usually translated into English as “the Lord God”. “Yahweh” –which only appears after the seventh day, is a personal name, a family name.
God is not just our creator but our Father.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Genesis 2:18 - It is not good that the man should be alone
SCRIPTURE – Genesis 2:18
Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him."
COMMENT
After each act of creation, God looked at what He had made and pronounced it “good”. To crown His work, God created man on the sixth day and gave him dominion over all the earth. Only then did God look at His work and declare it “very good”.
Adam lived in a world custom made for his pleasure, a world without sin, suffering, or disease – a world where work was always rewarding, a world that, Genesis tells us, was unstintingly good. Yet God Himself looked upon this situation and, for the first time in the Scriptures, pronounced that something was “not good”. He said “It is not good that man should be alone” (Gen 2:18).
What a remarkable statement!
Remember, this took place before the Fall of humankind, before sin and disorder could enter creation. Adam lived in an earthly paradise as a child of God, made in God’s own image. Yet something was “not good”. Something was incomplete. The man was lonely.
Adam’s world seemed complete. He had a good job, a beautiful home, dutiful pets, and plenty to keep him busy. Yet he was incomplete. Even as the ‘image of God’. He was only complete when the woman, Eve, joined him in life. The man and his wife become “one flesh”.
For “God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth’ ”.
The image of God was made complete with the creation of the family. Only then was Eden truly paradise.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Then the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him."
COMMENT
After each act of creation, God looked at what He had made and pronounced it “good”. To crown His work, God created man on the sixth day and gave him dominion over all the earth. Only then did God look at His work and declare it “very good”.
Adam lived in a world custom made for his pleasure, a world without sin, suffering, or disease – a world where work was always rewarding, a world that, Genesis tells us, was unstintingly good. Yet God Himself looked upon this situation and, for the first time in the Scriptures, pronounced that something was “not good”. He said “It is not good that man should be alone” (Gen 2:18).
What a remarkable statement!
Remember, this took place before the Fall of humankind, before sin and disorder could enter creation. Adam lived in an earthly paradise as a child of God, made in God’s own image. Yet something was “not good”. Something was incomplete. The man was lonely.
Adam’s world seemed complete. He had a good job, a beautiful home, dutiful pets, and plenty to keep him busy. Yet he was incomplete. Even as the ‘image of God’. He was only complete when the woman, Eve, joined him in life. The man and his wife become “one flesh”.
For “God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth’ ”.
The image of God was made complete with the creation of the family. Only then was Eden truly paradise.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Genesis 3:9-13 - Why did Adam do it?
SCRIPTURE Genesis 3:9-13
But the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" And he said, "I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself." He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" The man said, "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate." Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent beguiled me, and I ate."
COMMENT
Why did Adam do it?
The sin that Adam commits is a sin of pride and disobedience.
Why would an upright and unfallen man succumb to pride and disobey a command when he seemed to have everything.
He was the man who had everything!
It was interesting to me in analysing the problem to notice in Judaism there is really no doctrine of original sin, there is really no claim being made to have found the answer the question “Why did he sin?”
They could not grasp the stories ultimate meaning anywhere in the Old Testament. It is revealed only in the life and death of the resurrected Jesus.
It is almost as though we couldn’t understand the question of the Old Covenant and the fall of Adam until the New Covenant came and Jesus as the New Adam did what Adam should have done and undid what Adam did. So Jesus not only cured the illness, He diagnosed it.
Before that it was undiagnosed, a mystery illness.
Adam is in bliss, living in paradise and when he finds Eve he is in a state of marital ecstasy. What more could Adam want?
In a certain sense Adam couldn’t want anything more than that. But the problem is God did!
God created man in a natural paradise but He didn’t create us for it.
He created us for supernatural blessedness with God.
We have the advantage of hindsight, that even though this was earthly paradise, it was penultimate. It was second to last.
It might have been all that Adam would have ever wanted, but God was calling Adam to something more.
Heaven is not Plan B, it was the goal from the beginning that Adam was made for.
It was more than an obediential taste test - a test of “will he or won’t he” eat the apple.
It is really a test of Faith, Hope and Love.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University, Steubenville USA
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
But the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" And he said, "I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself." He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" The man said, "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate." Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent beguiled me, and I ate."
COMMENT
Why did Adam do it?
The sin that Adam commits is a sin of pride and disobedience.
Why would an upright and unfallen man succumb to pride and disobey a command when he seemed to have everything.
He was the man who had everything!
It was interesting to me in analysing the problem to notice in Judaism there is really no doctrine of original sin, there is really no claim being made to have found the answer the question “Why did he sin?”
They could not grasp the stories ultimate meaning anywhere in the Old Testament. It is revealed only in the life and death of the resurrected Jesus.
It is almost as though we couldn’t understand the question of the Old Covenant and the fall of Adam until the New Covenant came and Jesus as the New Adam did what Adam should have done and undid what Adam did. So Jesus not only cured the illness, He diagnosed it.
Before that it was undiagnosed, a mystery illness.
Adam is in bliss, living in paradise and when he finds Eve he is in a state of marital ecstasy. What more could Adam want?
In a certain sense Adam couldn’t want anything more than that. But the problem is God did!
God created man in a natural paradise but He didn’t create us for it.
He created us for supernatural blessedness with God.
We have the advantage of hindsight, that even though this was earthly paradise, it was penultimate. It was second to last.
It might have been all that Adam would have ever wanted, but God was calling Adam to something more.
Heaven is not Plan B, it was the goal from the beginning that Adam was made for.
It was more than an obediential taste test - a test of “will he or won’t he” eat the apple.
It is really a test of Faith, Hope and Love.
Source: Scott Hahn
Professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University, Steubenville USA
Book and/or Audio Interview on: First Comes Love
Romans 5:12-14 - Adam is a type of Christ
SCRIPTURE Romans 5:12-14
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned - sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
COMMENT
In the above verse Paul calls Adam a type of Christ – a foreshadowing of Christ –a dim image that Christ would later perfect and fulfil.
This is an example of typology.
A simple definition for typology is where the stories in the Old Testament and New Testament match.
To illustrate the definition - the Old Testament contains the ‘shadow’ and the New Testament contains the ‘real thing’.
The Old Testament is the ‘negative’ whereas the New Testament is the ‘full colour photo’.
Typology is found throughout the Bible. From the first century to today, typology has been used to better understand God’s Word.
Saint Augustine (354-430 AD) aptly put it “the New Testament is concealed in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New.”
The Two Adams
Unfortunately, by far the best explanation I have ever heard of understanding about what Jesus did in the New Testament by looking at what the first Adam failed to do is a little long (2 pages). So I have decided not to include it. Should anyone want a copy emailed to them just let me know.
Below are two other interesting examples of typology, as it relates to Genesis.
The Two Trees
Adam and Eve were told not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden.
Eating of the fruit wounded them, it killed them spiritually speaking. It wounded the human race with the poison of sin
The second tree was the Tree of Calvary, upon which Christ hung on the Cross.
And the fruit of that tree, the Tree of Calvary, the Holy Eucharist, is the antidote to the poison that was introduced into the world through Adam and Eve.
The word "Eucharist" comes from the Greek noun εὐχαριστία (transliterated, "eucharistia"), meaning thanksgiving. (Definition from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharist)
The Two Eve’s
Adam did not act alone, for Eve cooperated substantially in the Fall of man.
In one garden, the Tree of Life brought about death and in another garden the Tree of Death brought about Life.
Eve, the first mother of the living was at the foot of the first Tree and Mary, the New Eve, is at the foot of the second Tree
The Apostle John goes out of his way to inform us that the Cross and the Tomb were in a garden.
For the first Christians, Mary was also seen as the Second or New Eve, the woman who undoes by her obedience the sin that Eve brought by her disobedience.
The first Eve listened to a fallen angel and succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.
Mary listened to an unfallen angel and thus brought about, through Jesus, our redemption.
Christ was conceived in Mary’s womb, and therefore is “bone of (her) bones and flesh of (her) flesh.” We read in Genesis 2:23 Adam exclaim, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”.
Source: Typology observations from Steven Ray and Patrick Madrid
Transcribed from a radio show titled “Typology of the Passion and Resurrection of Jesus”
Additional observations from Scott Hahn
Note: The typological observation in regard to the title New Eve above is not to be confused with the title the Bride of Christ which refers to Us, the Church.
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned - sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
COMMENT
In the above verse Paul calls Adam a type of Christ – a foreshadowing of Christ –a dim image that Christ would later perfect and fulfil.
This is an example of typology.
A simple definition for typology is where the stories in the Old Testament and New Testament match.
To illustrate the definition - the Old Testament contains the ‘shadow’ and the New Testament contains the ‘real thing’.
The Old Testament is the ‘negative’ whereas the New Testament is the ‘full colour photo’.
Typology is found throughout the Bible. From the first century to today, typology has been used to better understand God’s Word.
Saint Augustine (354-430 AD) aptly put it “the New Testament is concealed in the Old and the Old Testament is revealed in the New.”
The Two Adams
Unfortunately, by far the best explanation I have ever heard of understanding about what Jesus did in the New Testament by looking at what the first Adam failed to do is a little long (2 pages). So I have decided not to include it. Should anyone want a copy emailed to them just let me know.
Below are two other interesting examples of typology, as it relates to Genesis.
The Two Trees
Adam and Eve were told not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil in the middle of the garden.
Eating of the fruit wounded them, it killed them spiritually speaking. It wounded the human race with the poison of sin
The second tree was the Tree of Calvary, upon which Christ hung on the Cross.
And the fruit of that tree, the Tree of Calvary, the Holy Eucharist, is the antidote to the poison that was introduced into the world through Adam and Eve.
The word "Eucharist" comes from the Greek noun εὐχαριστία (transliterated, "eucharistia"), meaning thanksgiving. (Definition from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharist)
The Two Eve’s
Adam did not act alone, for Eve cooperated substantially in the Fall of man.
In one garden, the Tree of Life brought about death and in another garden the Tree of Death brought about Life.
Eve, the first mother of the living was at the foot of the first Tree and Mary, the New Eve, is at the foot of the second Tree
The Apostle John goes out of his way to inform us that the Cross and the Tomb were in a garden.
For the first Christians, Mary was also seen as the Second or New Eve, the woman who undoes by her obedience the sin that Eve brought by her disobedience.
The first Eve listened to a fallen angel and succumbed to temptation bringing sin into the world.
Mary listened to an unfallen angel and thus brought about, through Jesus, our redemption.
Christ was conceived in Mary’s womb, and therefore is “bone of (her) bones and flesh of (her) flesh.” We read in Genesis 2:23 Adam exclaim, “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh”.
Source: Typology observations from Steven Ray and Patrick Madrid
Transcribed from a radio show titled “Typology of the Passion and Resurrection of Jesus”
Additional observations from Scott Hahn
Note: The typological observation in regard to the title New Eve above is not to be confused with the title the Bride of Christ which refers to Us, the Church.
It is finished
When Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished"; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.
John 19:30
Commentary
It all started with a Sunday morning service at the local Evangelical church which my wife and I attended during our last year at seminary. The preacher had just finished an exciting sermon on the meaning of Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary. But something he said stuck with me. In the middle of the message, he raised a simple question: "In John 19:30, what did Jesus mean when he cried, 'It is finished'? What does the 'it’ refer to?" Instantly the standard Evangelical answer came to my mind: Jesus’ words signify the completion of our redemption at that moment.
My mind began racing ahead in search of a solution. It only came after graduation, in my first year as a pastor while studying Scripture in preparing a series of sermons on what we Presbyterians called "the Lord’s Supper."
THE FIRST stage of my discovery process came in studying the Old Testament background to Jesus’ Last Supper. The occasion was the Jewish feast of Passover.
The Passover meal was divided into four parts. First, the preliminary course consisted of a festival blessing (kiddush) spoken over the first cup of wine, followed by the serving of a dish of herbs. The second course included a recital of the Passover narrative and the "Little Hallel" (Psalm 113), followed by the drinking of the second cup of wine. The third course was the main meal, consisting of lamb and unleavened bread, after which was drunk the third cup of wine, known as the "cup of blessing." The Passover climaxed with the singing of the "Great Hallel" (Psalms 114-118) and the drinking of the fourth cup of wine.
New Testament scholars see this pattern reflected in the Gospel narratives of the Last Supper. In particular, the cup blessed and distributed by Jesus is identified as the third cup in the Passover Haggadah. This is apparent from the singing of the "Great Hallel" which immediately follows: "And when they had sung a hymn. . . ." (Mark 14:26).
At this point a significant problem arises. Instead of proceeding immediately to the climax of the Passover, the drinking of the fourth cup, we read: "And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives" (Mark 14:26). While it may be difficult for Gentile Christians unfamiliar with the Haggadah to perceive the serious disorder this sequence represents, it is not lost to Jewish readers and students of the seder. For them, Jesus skipping the fourth cup could be compared to a priest omitting the words of consecration at Mass. The fundamental purpose or goal of the liturgy seemingly was missed.
Not only is the omission conspicuous, it appears to be underscored by the words of Jesus in the preceding verse: "Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of God" (Mark 14:25). It is almost as though Jesus meant not to drink what he was expected to drink.
For one thing, I noticed that my King, Priest, and paschal victim, in his "hour of glory" while suffering on the cross, made a profound gesture: "After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), 'I thirst.'"
More things fall into place upon reading what followed his expression of thirst: "A bowl of sour wine stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth" (19:29). Only John noticed that hyssop was used, the branch prescribed in the Passover law for sprinkling the blood of the lamb (Ex.12:22).
This verse reveals something significant. Jesus had left unfinished the Passover liturgy in the upper room by not drinking the fourth cup. He stated his intention not to drink wine again until he came into the glory of his Kingdom. As we have seen, he refused some on one occasion, right before being nailed to the cross (Mark 15:23). Then, at the very end, Jesus was offered "sour wine" (John 19:30; Matt.27:48; Mark 15:36; Luke 23:36). But only John tells us how he responded: "When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, 'It is finished'; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit" (19:30).
AT LAST I had an answer to my question. It was the Passover that was now finished.
**************
Source: The Hunt for the Fourth Cup By Scott Hahn
John 19:30
Commentary
It all started with a Sunday morning service at the local Evangelical church which my wife and I attended during our last year at seminary. The preacher had just finished an exciting sermon on the meaning of Christ’s sacrifice on Calvary. But something he said stuck with me. In the middle of the message, he raised a simple question: "In John 19:30, what did Jesus mean when he cried, 'It is finished'? What does the 'it’ refer to?" Instantly the standard Evangelical answer came to my mind: Jesus’ words signify the completion of our redemption at that moment.
My mind began racing ahead in search of a solution. It only came after graduation, in my first year as a pastor while studying Scripture in preparing a series of sermons on what we Presbyterians called "the Lord’s Supper."
THE FIRST stage of my discovery process came in studying the Old Testament background to Jesus’ Last Supper. The occasion was the Jewish feast of Passover.
The Passover meal was divided into four parts. First, the preliminary course consisted of a festival blessing (kiddush) spoken over the first cup of wine, followed by the serving of a dish of herbs. The second course included a recital of the Passover narrative and the "Little Hallel" (Psalm 113), followed by the drinking of the second cup of wine. The third course was the main meal, consisting of lamb and unleavened bread, after which was drunk the third cup of wine, known as the "cup of blessing." The Passover climaxed with the singing of the "Great Hallel" (Psalms 114-118) and the drinking of the fourth cup of wine.
New Testament scholars see this pattern reflected in the Gospel narratives of the Last Supper. In particular, the cup blessed and distributed by Jesus is identified as the third cup in the Passover Haggadah. This is apparent from the singing of the "Great Hallel" which immediately follows: "And when they had sung a hymn. . . ." (Mark 14:26).
At this point a significant problem arises. Instead of proceeding immediately to the climax of the Passover, the drinking of the fourth cup, we read: "And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives" (Mark 14:26). While it may be difficult for Gentile Christians unfamiliar with the Haggadah to perceive the serious disorder this sequence represents, it is not lost to Jewish readers and students of the seder. For them, Jesus skipping the fourth cup could be compared to a priest omitting the words of consecration at Mass. The fundamental purpose or goal of the liturgy seemingly was missed.
Not only is the omission conspicuous, it appears to be underscored by the words of Jesus in the preceding verse: "Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of God" (Mark 14:25). It is almost as though Jesus meant not to drink what he was expected to drink.
For one thing, I noticed that my King, Priest, and paschal victim, in his "hour of glory" while suffering on the cross, made a profound gesture: "After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), 'I thirst.'"
More things fall into place upon reading what followed his expression of thirst: "A bowl of sour wine stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth" (19:29). Only John noticed that hyssop was used, the branch prescribed in the Passover law for sprinkling the blood of the lamb (Ex.12:22).
This verse reveals something significant. Jesus had left unfinished the Passover liturgy in the upper room by not drinking the fourth cup. He stated his intention not to drink wine again until he came into the glory of his Kingdom. As we have seen, he refused some on one occasion, right before being nailed to the cross (Mark 15:23). Then, at the very end, Jesus was offered "sour wine" (John 19:30; Matt.27:48; Mark 15:36; Luke 23:36). But only John tells us how he responded: "When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, 'It is finished'; and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit" (19:30).
AT LAST I had an answer to my question. It was the Passover that was now finished.
**************
Source: The Hunt for the Fourth Cup By Scott Hahn
We should be called children of God
SCRIPTURE 1 John 3:1
See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are.
COMMENT
I am not talking about the false certitude of salvation that some claim to possess but I am talking about having a basis for salvation. Hope is the assurance that we possess.
When God conferred the dignity of fatherhood on me, he gave me five of the most wonderful kids in the universe.
When He gave those five kids to me, he gave me an additional gift I didn’t know at the time and that is the gift of assurance of true salvation.
I became certain of one thing I can’t possibly love my kids more than God loves his.
And it does me so much good to think about that.
I can’t love my kids more than God loves his and I can’t begin to describe how much I love my kids.
Sometimes though I still have doubts.
Sometimes I still need assurance then I approach the Lord in prayer and say ”But how do I know I am your kid?”
I know abstractly that you love your kids more than I love mine but how do I know I am one of them”.
The Holy Spirit turns that question around and says “Well how do your kids know that they are your kids?”
I reply, that’s easy.
First of all they live in my house.
Second, they are called by my name, they are called Hahn’s.
Third, they sit at my table.
Fourth, they are my flesh and blood
Fifth, my bride (wife Kimberley) is their mother
Sixth, we are always celebrating together (birthdays, anniversaries and vacations); and
Seventh, I discipline them and I don’t discipline the neighbours kids.
Well the Holy Spirit takes those seven points and says “Scott, look into my Word and what do you find?”
You live in my house (Eph 2, Heb 3). The Church that Jesus established, the one worldwide church is God’s household.
You are called by my name Scott, at Baptism – You were called by the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I call you a child and you call God Abba
Third, you sit at my table – the Lord was sitting at the table when he instituted the Eucharist. The Mass is when we gather as God’s family and we sit at His table.
You share my flesh and blood the Lord says to me, because that’s Holy Communion.
My bride is your mother. The Church is the Bride of Christ, but it is Mater Ecclesiae, Mother Church
We are always celebrating together, especially Advent/Christmas, Lent/Easter, feast days, and
Seventh: The Lord disciplines us, not only through our sufferings but especially through the sacrament of Reconciliation.
I don’t give my kids more solid grounds for assurance than God has given His.
God has given us even greater grounds for assurance that we are His beloved children than any parent has ever given his children.
Source: Scott Hahn
Journey Home - jh36
See what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are.
COMMENT
I am not talking about the false certitude of salvation that some claim to possess but I am talking about having a basis for salvation. Hope is the assurance that we possess.
When God conferred the dignity of fatherhood on me, he gave me five of the most wonderful kids in the universe.
When He gave those five kids to me, he gave me an additional gift I didn’t know at the time and that is the gift of assurance of true salvation.
I became certain of one thing I can’t possibly love my kids more than God loves his.
And it does me so much good to think about that.
I can’t love my kids more than God loves his and I can’t begin to describe how much I love my kids.
Sometimes though I still have doubts.
Sometimes I still need assurance then I approach the Lord in prayer and say ”But how do I know I am your kid?”
I know abstractly that you love your kids more than I love mine but how do I know I am one of them”.
The Holy Spirit turns that question around and says “Well how do your kids know that they are your kids?”
I reply, that’s easy.
First of all they live in my house.
Second, they are called by my name, they are called Hahn’s.
Third, they sit at my table.
Fourth, they are my flesh and blood
Fifth, my bride (wife Kimberley) is their mother
Sixth, we are always celebrating together (birthdays, anniversaries and vacations); and
Seventh, I discipline them and I don’t discipline the neighbours kids.
Well the Holy Spirit takes those seven points and says “Scott, look into my Word and what do you find?”
You live in my house (Eph 2, Heb 3). The Church that Jesus established, the one worldwide church is God’s household.
You are called by my name Scott, at Baptism – You were called by the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I call you a child and you call God Abba
Third, you sit at my table – the Lord was sitting at the table when he instituted the Eucharist. The Mass is when we gather as God’s family and we sit at His table.
You share my flesh and blood the Lord says to me, because that’s Holy Communion.
My bride is your mother. The Church is the Bride of Christ, but it is Mater Ecclesiae, Mother Church
We are always celebrating together, especially Advent/Christmas, Lent/Easter, feast days, and
Seventh: The Lord disciplines us, not only through our sufferings but especially through the sacrament of Reconciliation.
I don’t give my kids more solid grounds for assurance than God has given His.
God has given us even greater grounds for assurance that we are His beloved children than any parent has ever given his children.
Source: Scott Hahn
Journey Home - jh36
Circumcision in Acts
SCRIPTURE - Act 15:5-12
But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up, and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses ."
The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter.
And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith.
Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will."
And all the assembly kept silence; and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.
COMMENT
The early church dispensed Christians with certain ceremonial laws (the yoke) that were a part of the Torah – the Law of Moses.
What’s the yoke?
Some people might say it is the Law of Moses but you can’t say it is the Law of Moses without distinction, because Peter is not saying “Look, we have not been able to resist the temptation of murder or to lie or to commit adultery or to covet and now we are finally free of all of those commandments”.
Hardly! We are not allowed to lie or to steal or to murder or to commit adultery.
So what laws then does Peter speak of when he says this “yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear”.
You may recall in Deuteronomy and all of the additional ceremonies laws that God imposed upon the Israel after the Golden Calf incident because of their idolatry. A sort of penitential discipline that was to last until their hearts were cleansed by faith.
In addition to the Ten Commandments, the simple Law that had been given at Sinai before the Golden Calf, there are all these additional penitential ceremonies added to Israel. These constituted a sort of ceremonial yoke that really isolated and quarantined Israel from the nations because their holiness was much weaker than the sinfulness of the gentiles.
Now that is no longer true. It can be dispensed with.
The coming of the Holy Spirit changed all that.
In the Old Testament if I were to touch a leper, a corpse or a menstruating woman I was unclean.
In the New Testament Jesus comes along and a leper touches him. He is not defiled and the leper was cleansed.
Jesus touches a corpse, He is not defiled and the corpse is raised to life.
Jesus is touched by a menstruating woman, He isn’t defiled and her blood flow stops.
The New Covenant has come with Christ and now the power of holiness greatly exceeds the power of sinfulness.
So all of the walls of isolation and quarantine are torn down.
So Peter is saying in effect “Listen to me. These laws are no longer needed because the Holy Spirit has cleansed our hearts by faith and the Gentiles as well. God has lifted this yoke from us which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear “
and all of the assembly kept silence.
Source: Scott Hahn
Our Fathers Plan Bible Study
But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up, and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses ."
The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter.
And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them, "Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith.
Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will."
And all the assembly kept silence; and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.
COMMENT
The early church dispensed Christians with certain ceremonial laws (the yoke) that were a part of the Torah – the Law of Moses.
What’s the yoke?
Some people might say it is the Law of Moses but you can’t say it is the Law of Moses without distinction, because Peter is not saying “Look, we have not been able to resist the temptation of murder or to lie or to commit adultery or to covet and now we are finally free of all of those commandments”.
Hardly! We are not allowed to lie or to steal or to murder or to commit adultery.
So what laws then does Peter speak of when he says this “yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear”.
You may recall in Deuteronomy and all of the additional ceremonies laws that God imposed upon the Israel after the Golden Calf incident because of their idolatry. A sort of penitential discipline that was to last until their hearts were cleansed by faith.
In addition to the Ten Commandments, the simple Law that had been given at Sinai before the Golden Calf, there are all these additional penitential ceremonies added to Israel. These constituted a sort of ceremonial yoke that really isolated and quarantined Israel from the nations because their holiness was much weaker than the sinfulness of the gentiles.
Now that is no longer true. It can be dispensed with.
The coming of the Holy Spirit changed all that.
In the Old Testament if I were to touch a leper, a corpse or a menstruating woman I was unclean.
In the New Testament Jesus comes along and a leper touches him. He is not defiled and the leper was cleansed.
Jesus touches a corpse, He is not defiled and the corpse is raised to life.
Jesus is touched by a menstruating woman, He isn’t defiled and her blood flow stops.
The New Covenant has come with Christ and now the power of holiness greatly exceeds the power of sinfulness.
So all of the walls of isolation and quarantine are torn down.
So Peter is saying in effect “Listen to me. These laws are no longer needed because the Holy Spirit has cleansed our hearts by faith and the Gentiles as well. God has lifted this yoke from us which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear “
and all of the assembly kept silence.
Source: Scott Hahn
Our Fathers Plan Bible Study
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)