Man Shall Not Live on the New Testament Alone

By David T. Lamb

     What do Christians do with the Old Testament, with its weird laws, brutal violence, and unpredictable God? Some are confused by it, some are afraid of it, and some simply ignore it. Our confusion, fear, and avoidance of the Old Testament has led to a severe problem. Like a doctor examining a patient, Brent Strawn examines our Old Testament habits and makes a dire diagnosis that supplies the title of his new book: The Old Testament Is Dying: A Diagnosis and Recommended Treatment.

     Strawn’s analysis is divided into three sections. The first two focus on the problem (Part 1: “The Old Testament as a Dying Language” and Part 2: “Signs of Morbidity”), while the final section offers a solution (Part 3: “Path to Recovery”). Strawn’s grave assessment should cause great concern to any who believe, along with Paul the apostle, that all Scripture is divinely inspired and profitable for teaching (2 Tim. 3:16). But his suggested treatment should be a source of great hope.

     A Disappearing Language | Strawn bases his diagnosis on empirical data from a 2010 Pew Forum survey (inspired by Stephen Prothero’s 2007 book, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know-And Doesn't). In addition, he draws on patterns of Old Testament usage in popular sermons, hymns, and songs, and in the The Revised Common Lectionary: Episcopal Edition (a daily Bible-reading plan used by certain Protestant denominations). Despite widespread claims of religiosity among the US population, Strawn’s evidence strongly suggests that most American Christians are relatively ignorant of basic truths about the Bible, particularly the Old Testament—and that trends in sermons and worship are contributing to the problem. For the most part, the Old Testament is ignored, and even when it isn’t, only a narrow selection of familiar texts are read, sung, or taught.

     To convey the severity of the problem, Strawn uses two helpful metaphors (medical and linguistic), and terminology from these realms permeate the book. While the book’s title emphasizes the medical analogy (the Old Testament as dying patient), the linguistic analogy plays a larger role in illustrating the book’s point. Strawn conceives of the Old Testament as a language that has been disappearing due to neglect and avoidance by the church. When people fail to learn the language in its full complexity, they end up essentially recreating it in a simplified, pidgin form.

     In the middle of the book, Strawn looks at the problem from a different angle by focusing on three problematic groups: New Atheists, Marcionites, and “Happiologists” (Joel Osteen–types). New Atheists like Richard Dawkins misrepresent the Old Testament with flat, overly literal readings. Strawn insightfully points out some of the problems with Dawkins’s use of Scripture. Despite what Dawkins claims, Genesis 19 (an account of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) doesn’t present Lot in anything like a positive light. And while Genesis 22 is a difficult text, it is abundantly clear that Abraham was being tested and that ultimately God did not want him to sacrifice his son.

• 1     God Behaving Badly: Is the God of the Old Testament Angry, Sexist and Racist?
• 2     Prostitutes and Polygamists: A Look at Love, Old Testament Style
• 3     The Historical Writings: Introducing Israel's Historical Literature
• 4     Righteous Jehu and his Evil Heirs: The Deuteronomist's Negative Perspective on Dynastic Succession

Repentance and Reformation

By R.C. Sproul Jr. 6/1/2010

     The Protestant Reformation is called the Reformation for a good reason. It is not called the First Reformation or Reformation II, as if they happen every so often. I have never been asked, when referencing the Reformation, “Of which Reformation do you speak?” Renewals? Of course. Revivals? Who could doubt it? There has been only one Reformation, precisely because they are rather hard to come by. Those of us who long for another, then, might be wise to search out that spark that started the Reformation. Where did it all begin? Was it with Martin Luther’s stirring speech at the Diet of Worms, his firm resolve to stand on the Word of God? Perhaps. Did it start earlier, in Luther’s study, as he exegeted key texts on justification? Maybe. Did it start with his fiery speech before he dropped the papal bull announcing his excommunication into the flames? One could so argue.

     Most of us, however, celebrate Reformation Day on October 31, not the anniversary of any of the above but the day Luther nailed the Ninetyfive Theses to the door in Wittenberg. That hammer striking the nail ignited the spark that started it all. If we want a new reformation, and such we ought, we should look no further than the very first of those theses, which reads, “When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said ‘Repent,’ He called for the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.” If we would find reformation again, we must repent of our failure to live lives of repentance. We will change the world out there when we change the church in here. We will change the church in here when our own hearts are changed. That happens only as we repent and believe the gospel.

     One of the great blessings of the Reformation was the destruction of that perspective that cleaves the world in two. Rome divided the world into a spiritual and a natural realm — one good, the other at best neutral. The Reformation carried with it the notion of the priesthood of all believers and the principle that all our lives are lived coram Deo, before the face of God. The Bible became for our fathers the sourcebook for wisdom not just on how to get one’s soul saved but on how to justly govern a culture, how to understand work, how to raise up godly seed. That creation-affirming spirit drove both the Pilgrims and the puritans across the ocean to fulfill their errand in the wilderness. In more recent times, heroes of the faith such as Abraham Kuyper and Francis Schaeffer have carried the banner of reformation into broader and broader spheres. For all this blessing we must give thanks. We ought also, however, to be on our guard. In reaction against the dangers of pietism — the view that suggests that all we ought to be concerned about is our own souls and not the world around us — too many of us have dishonored the blessings of piety. Worse still, we have missed the hard truth that it is piety that drives the engine of reformation.

     That piety that drives reformation, however, is Reformation piety. That is to say, we will get nowhere if we seek to change the world by our own spiritual bootstraps. Reformation piety is not a mere commitment not to dance, drink, or chew, and not to date girls that do. No reformation will ever be built on the foundation of our own spiritual ardor. Reformation piety is a piety that breathes the very air of repentance. It sets aside the camel-swallowing, gnat-strangling propensity we all have of looking at our own sins through a microscope and looking at the sins of others through a magnifying glass. We instead ought to be, as Luther was before us, haunted by our own sin long enough to cry out for the grace of God. And then we believe.

     It was, in the end, faith that brought us the Reformation, and only faith will bring us another. We did not change until we learned that we cannot change ourselves. We did not enter into purity until we understood, by His grace, that only His purity would do. That Reformation faith, however, did not end with our own salvation. Neither did it leap from our own salvation to remaking the world. Instead, it moved from saving faith to sanctifying faith, from repenting to believing. Then, all heaven began to break loose.

     Jesus said much the same thing. He told us to stop our fretting and worrying about this thing and that. He reminded us that this is how the unbelievers behave. We are called to faith. We are called to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness. Repenting and believing is the very pathway into the kingdom, the very coin of the realm. It is, in turn, how we come to possess that righteousness that is His rather than our own. When we do this, and stop our incessant worrying and plotting about everything else, it turns out that everything else takes care of itself. All these things are added unto us.

     The life of repentance and faith — this must needs be our only “strategy.” Repent and believe, and reformation will follow. Jesus said so. Luther said so. Here we stand. We can do no other. So help us God.

After the Revolution

By Albert Mohler 6/1/2010

     Welcome to the Brave New World of new media. Over the last two decades, we have experienced nothing less than a revolution in the ways that information is gathered, manipulated, published, and disseminated. And, as is the case with any development of this magnitude, Christians must give careful consideration to our responsibility in the context of this new digital age.

     Years ago, Nicholas Negroponte of the MIT Media Lab declared the revolution as a shift from atoms to bits — digital bits of information shared computer to computer. Even in 1995, that looked like an overstatement. We now know that it was not. The old world of media was about paper, books, newsprint, and film. The new world is digital, appearing mainly on electronic screens. The great media transformation has been described as a shift from dead trees to live screens, opening unprecedented opportunities for the sharing of information.

     Looking back, it is now clear that the development of print — the Gutenberg Revolution — was a major factor in the spread of the Reformation. Books and Bibles could now be printed in mass quantities, and printing presses could be easily hidden and hastily reassembled.

     The printed word became the context for public conversation. Theological disputations, political debates, and philosophical arguments took shape in books, pamphlets, and other forms of printed media. Christians responded by placing a premium on literacy and engaging print media with a sense of missionary zeal.

     A second revolution in communication came mainly in the twentieth century, with the development of the film industry and broadcast media. Once again, Christians quickly came to understand their responsibility to listen carefully to the public conversation that now shifted to radio, television, and cinema.

     The third great transformation in modern communications is the Digital Revolution — the great shift of information and entertainment to the internet and an ever-expanding universe of digital appliances. The digital world is home to the new media, a constellation of new modes and technologies of communication. Once again, the public conversation has shifted in light of this revolution. The world has gone digital.

     The migration of information to digital formats happened with stunning speed, leaving newspapers, magazines, and the major television networks facing the possibility of extinction — at least in their present form. The impact of the revolution is still unfolding. The internet is now home to millions of weblogs (blogs) that drive the news and shape opinion often before the major media know what is happening, much less what to say about it. Webpages offer a seemingly endless stream of news, information, entertainment, analysis, gossip, and nonsense. The digital world flattens hierarchies. A teenager might be writing that blog that scoops a major news network on a major story. The great challenge for most of us is not access (the challenge of the old media) but adequate filtering. The digital world is all about open communication — the gatekeepers of old media are no longer in control. How do we find what we need and disregard all the rest?

     The New Media world includes social media, as the world is increasingly and incessantly connected. The 350 million registered users of Facebook would, taken together, constitute one of the largest nations on earth. Twitter, the microblogging phenomenon, is now a major platform for instant news and analysis. Like every information revolution, the digital revolution and new media present Christians and the church with both enormous challenges and unprecedented opportunities.

     In 1 Peter 3:15, the faithful Christian is described as “always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” Christians must be engaged in the public conversation that goes on all around us. Like the old media of print and airwaves, the new media demand our attention — not just because they are the conduits of what is new, interesting, and entertaining — but because these are the media currently shaping the minds around us, igniting the interest of the public, establishing what our friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens understand as reality.

     Like the Reformers who seized the opportunity afforded by the Gutenberg Revolution, we must see the world of new media as an arena for Christian truth-telling. Our engagement with new media is driven by impulses that are evangelistic, missiological, and grounded in apologetics.

     We must be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you” in the context of new media as well as the media platforms of old. We rightly treasure the printed book, but we are also aware that the public conversation is now largely online.

     Like every information revolution, the rise of new media requires Christian discernment. At the same time, there is no way we can ignore this challenge and deny the revolution. We can hardly expect to explain the hope that is in us when we aren’t even part of the conversation.

The Blessings of the New Media

By Ed Stetzer 6/1/2010

     Popular and emerging forms of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and blogging are all around us. Yet many pastors and church leaders have been reluctant to embrace them. These new forms of media have become a very present part of our culture, and while abuses and misuses are often pointed out, I would like to suggest that when used in the best ways, the new media are a blessing and aid to our churches, pastors, and church planters.

     As I see it, social media assist churches and Christian leaders in at least four ways:

Social Media Assist in Community

No, Twitter is not biblical community. And I don’t believe there is such a thing as an “internet church.” Social media itself cannot create enough community for us to live as God intends, but they can be a part of it.

     Those who attempt to find community exclusively online will miss out on the fullness and authenticity of relationships God intends for us to have face to face. Gathering together ( Heb. 10:25 ) requires feet and faces, not just electrons and avatars. Therefore, when a Christian seeks to be a part of a local church only by live streaming the worship service and conversing on message boards, he is short-circuiting the fellowship of the saints and his own spiritual growth. Yet, I do not believe that virtual community and real community are enemies. I see them more as friends, the former as a help to the latter. Unfortunately, for too many theologically-minded pastors, their aversion to the abuses of social media has distracted them from the opportunity they provide.

     While social media cannot replace real-life interpersonal relationships, they can assist in building real community by connecting people in ways that allow them to share both the big and small things of life. Web services such as Facebook allow people who might see one another only during church on Sunday, or midweek in smaller community groups, to continue to share aspects of life they would not otherwise. This allows friends to look into the parts of life we share and respond with encouragement or exhortation.

Social Media Assist in Communication

Social Media Assist in Inspiration

Social Media Allow Better Introductions

Conclusion

• 1     Comeback Churches: How 300 Churches Turned Around and Yours Can, Too
• 2     Transformational Church: Creating a New Scorecard for Congregations
• 3     Breaking the Missional Code: Your Church Can Become a Missionary in Your Community
• 4     Viral Churches: Helping Church Planters Become Movement Makers
• 5     Planting Missional Churches
• 6     Lost and Found: The Younger Unchurched and the Churches that Reach Them
• 7     Subversive Kingdom: Living as Agents of Gospel Transformation
• 8     Christians in the Age of Outrage: How to Bring Our Best When the World Is at Its Worst
• 9     Compelled by Love: The Most Excellent Way to Missional Living
• 10     Planting New Churches in a Postmodern Age

Get Real

By Keith Mathison 6/1/2010

     I do not care for shopping malls. I have not reflected on the reasons for my dislike for any significant amount of time. It’s just a gut-level, visceral reaction I have when I enter one of these buildings. I like the main streets in small towns with local shops that have their own unique atmosphere. Malls seem to want to mimic small-town main streets in some ways, but with their cookiecutter franchises that are like the stores in every other mall in every other city, they are the exact opposite of small-town main streets. In fact, they have contributed to the gradual extinction of small-town main streets.

     On those occasions when I do have to enter a mall, I often sit on one of the benches outside the store while my wife shops. It’s a good place to do some people watching, and there are some interesting characters inhabiting the malls. Not too long ago, while sitting on one of these benches in a local suburban mall, I turned and saw a bizarre sight. Several young boys, about eleven or twelve years old, were walking in my direction. It appeared that every one of them was trying to copy the fashion style of the so-called “gangster rappers.” They were wearing oversized baggy jeans with their boxer shorts exposed. They had their caps on sideways. It was the full getup. To top it off, it was evident that they were trying to appear menacing.

     I couldn’t help the thoughts that went through my head in rapid succession: “Did your parents let you out of the house looking like that? Are you aware of the girls behind you giggling hysterically? Do you know you’d be a lot scarier without the Pokemon T-Shirts?” You get the point. They looked silly, but they didn’t know they looked silly. They were posers, pretending to be something they weren’t, and they were failing spectacularly.

     Sadly, pre-teens are not the only ones who sometimes pretend to be something they are not. Many grown men and women who should know better do similar things. The clichéd mid-life crisis is a perfect example. How many times have you seen an overweight fifty-something-year-old man trying to look and act as if he is in his twenties again? Some men do not seem to realize that unbuttoning Hawaiian shirts halfway down their chests, wearing gold chains, and driving Corvette convertibles does not cause people to be transported back in time.

     The same phenomenon exists in the church. I cannot begin to count the number of times I’ve visited or been told by others of churches that have adopted some kind of new worship service, not because it is who they are, but because they think it will make them more acceptable to a younger crowd. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but churches that do this do nothing other than make themselves look as silly as those twelveyear- olds in the mall. And the younger crowd isn’t fooled for a moment. Like a middle-aged man trying to hide his baldness with a comb-over, the truth is obvious to everyone.

     This phenomenon is also evident in some pulpits. Occasionally one comes across preachers who embrace a manner of speaking that is completely unnatural for them. Some attempt to adopt the mannerisms and enunciation of preachers they admire and respect, even though such mannerisms and ways of speaking are not their own. Some put on airs. I’ve heard some go so far as to attempt accents that are unnatural to them when they preach. Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Impersonating a Victorian-era Englishman in the pulpit should be.

     There is a potential danger in such behavior, aside from looking silly, because saying something in a way that is forced and artificial can very easily distract people from hearing what is being said. If the content of what is being said is a political speech, a classroom lecture, or something similar, the consequences may be minimal. If the content of what is being said is the gospel, the consequences may be eternal. There is no need to place such obstacles in the way of biblical truth.

     The prophets and apostles came from all spheres of life. Some were priests. Some were farmers. Some were fishermen. And yet they proclaimed God’s Word. Peter and John, for example, did not pretend to be educated philosophers or Pharisees when they proclaimed the gospel (Acts 4:1–12). Their listeners recognized quite easily that they were “uneducated, common men” (4:13). Peter and John understood that their identity was not the important question their listeners needed to be thinking about. The truly important question their listeners needed to consider was the identity of Jesus.

     Whether we were born black or white, rich or poor, let us be honest about who we are, recognizing that our true identity is found in Christ. Let us not place unnecessary stumbling-stones in the paths of unbelievers. Let us leave the playacting, pomposity, and pretentions to the experts in Hollywood, where bad impersonations are expected.

Per Amazon, Keith A. Mathison (MA, Reformed Theological Seminary; PhD, Whitefield Theological Seminary) is dean of the Ligonier Academy of Biblical and Theological Studies and an associate editor of Tabletalk magazine at Ligonier Ministries. He is editor of When Shall These Things Be: A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism and associate editor of The Reformation Study Bible. He lives in Lake Mary, Florida, with his wife and children.

• 1     Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope
• 2     The Shape of Sola Scriptura
• 3     Given for You: Reclaiming Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper
• 4     From Age to Age: The Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology
• 5     Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God?
• 6     A Reformed Approach to Science and Scripture
• 7     Not a Chance: God, Science, and the Revolt against Reason
• 8     When Shall These Things Be?: A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism

Jesus AD

By Robert Jeffress 2023

Jesus AD

     We saw earlier that Jesus came at a fraught time in Israel’s history. But He also came at an ideal time. The Pax Romana, or Roman peace, meant there was no existential threat for people to worry about. They had the luxury of being able to focus on spiritual matters. The intricate road system the Romans built facilitated the spreading of the gospel. Most of the people in the world spoke the same language, Koine Greek, which made sharing the gospel and writing the New Testament much easier. The polytheism, or worship of many gods, that had been a part of Roman and Greek culture was giving way to a renewed interest in monotheism, the worship of one God. And four hundred years of spiritual drought among the Jewish people was coming to an end as a renewed interest in Scripture was starting to take hold.

     The stage was set.

     God’s perfect timing ensured that Jesus’s message would resonate, travel, and transform. The movement that started in a small village in occupied Israel more than two thousand years ago changed the world like nothing else before or since.

     That’s the big-picture view of Jesus’s work after His life on earth. What’s more important is the practical application: what His life means for us today. God the Son, the third core belief of Christianity, presents us with two unique opportunities and challenges.

Jesus Presents Us with a Decision to Make

     Some people believe Tom Hanks is the greatest actor in Hollywood. Some people believe James Buchanan is the worst president in US history. Both statements make for interesting conversation starters. In certain circles, they might even trigger spirited debate. Ultimately, though, it doesn’t really matter how we respond. There are no consequences for our belief or unbelief.

     At the opposite end of the consequence spectrum, we have this quote from Jesus: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (John 14:6). Spiritually speaking, that puts the ball in our court.

     As Paul explained in Colossians 1:15–20, Jesus has proven Himself to be sufficient for us. Paul was writing to Christians who were tempted to believe that Jesus was not enough, that they needed something else: Jesus plus good works. Jesus plus the Old Testament law. Jesus plus a certain philosophy.

     Paul reminded the Colossians of Jesus’s credentials: Jesus existed before the world was made. He created the universe. The wind and waves obey Him. He sustains the universe. He holds everything together and keeps it from spinning into chaos.

     Paul explained that Jesus was and is the head of the church. He is the “firstborn from the dead” (v. 18) — the first person to be raised in a new body that was free from sin, that would never grow sick or die. The Greek word for “firstborn” (prototokos) is the word from which we get our English word prototype. Our resurrected bodies will be modeled on Jesus’s resurrected body.

     Paul pointed out that Jesus is central to salvation. Through Him, God reconciled us to Himself. With our sin, we made a unilateral decision to leave our relationship with Him. We chased after other things and other people. God would have been completely justified in ending His relationship with us. He could have said, “You want to be separated from Me? Why not go ahead, then, and spend the rest of eternity separated from Me?” That would have been a just decision. But God loves us too much for that to happen. He took the first step toward reconciliation by sending His Son to die for us (Rom. 5:8). Jesus made it possible for us to have peace with God. His death was sufficient payment for our sins.

     Paul’s point was this: if Jesus Christ is sufficient to create and sustain the universe, to deliver us from the power of death, and to restore our relationship with God, don’t you think He’s sufficient to entrust with our lives?

     Jesus’s statement is unequivocal: I am the way. His résumé gives us no reason to doubt Him. We must decide whether to accept His truth—to embrace it and build our lives on it—or to reject it. And from God’s perspective, any response other than fully accepting it is rejecting it.

Jesus Presents Us with a Future to Embrace

     Putting our faith in God the Son opens a new future to us and unlocks a new perspective on the world around us. As we wrap up this look at the third core belief of Christianity, let’s consider three things that happen when we align ourselves forever with Jesus Christ.

     First, we accept that we’re only travelers in this world. If you’ve enjoyed an extended stay in a foreign locale, you know the sense of dislocation that can set in. No matter how hard you work to embrace local customs, you’re still a foreigner. You don’t quite belong, not like the citizens of that region. Your citizenship lies elsewhere.

     Paul said that, as Christians, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil. 3:20). That makes this world our foreign locale. That realization creates both an opportunity and a responsibility for us. The opportunity is knowing that everything we experience and endure in this world is temporary, a drop in the bucket of eternity. Knowing that there’s an end to our struggles can give us the perspective we need to thrive in the midst of them.

     On the flip side, because of the temporary nature of this world, we have no reason to get too attached to the things in it, especially if they interfere with our walk with Christ. We have to guard against getting bogged down by earthly pursuits when there are so many opportunities to pursue things of eternal significance.

     Second, we put our treasure in things above. Figuratively speaking, we look at life through a jeweler’s loupe. An experienced jeweler isn’t dazzled by a diamond’s sparkly exterior. Instead, she examines the stone closely, with a neutral gaze. By looking through a loupe, she’s able to see tiny cracks in the surface of the diamond, as well as blemishes and imperfections that are invisible to the naked eye. She gets a sense of the diamond’s true value.

     Likewise, with a Christlike perspective, we can see the cracks and imperfections in the things of this world that are considered valuable. Popularity is fleeting. Money doesn’t buy happiness. Power corrupts. Comfort is a trap.

     We can also spot the things that are truly valuable. Serving others changes lives. Studying God’s Word pays enormous dividends. Pursuing His will for our lives results in ultimate fulfillment and joy.

     Third, we experience the beautiful tension Paul talked about. In his letter to Philippian believers, Paul said, “For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain. But if I am to live on in the flesh, this will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose. But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better; yet to remain on in the flesh is more necessary for your sake” (1:21–24).

     On the one hand, we eagerly anticipate the things we can do for God on earth and celebrate the blessings we experience here. On the other hand, we recognize that the glory that awaits us in heaven is far greater than anything we could ever hope to experience here on earth.

     In other words, we celebrate the win-win of our existence — the existence made possible by God the Son.

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 76

1 In Judah God is known;
his name is great in Israel.
2 His abode has been established in Salem,
his dwelling place in Zion.
3 There he broke the flashing arrows,
the shield, the sword, and the weapons of war. Selah

4 Glorious are you, more majestic
than the mountains full of prey.
5 The stouthearted were stripped of their spoil;
they sank into sleep;
all the men of war
were unable to use their hands.
6 At your rebuke, O God of Jacob,
both rider and horse lay stunned.

By John Walvoord

Exhortation to Israel and Babylon to Recognize God

     Isaiah 46:1–13. Bel, a deity of Babylon, is described as bowing down, and Nebo, another deity, “stoops low” (v.  1 ). The Babylonians carried images of these gods in some of their triumphant festivals, but by contrast, God carried Israel (vv.  3–4 ). Israel was urged to remember God as the One who declared the end from the beginning (vv.  8–10 ), whose purpose would be fulfilled (v.  10 ). God would bring salvation to Israel (vv.  11–13 ).

The Gods of Babylon

     Isaiah 47:1–15. The destruction of Babylon, the “Virgin Daughter of Babylon,” was predicted (v.  1 ). Babylon was compared to a slave woman grinding flour with the millstones (vv.  2–4 ). The judgment of God on Babylon was painted in graphic terms (vv.  5–15 ). Her astrologers would not be able to save her (vv.  13–15 ).

God Keeps His Promises

     Isaiah 48:1–22. Israel would resist acknowledging God and would break her oaths given to Him (vv.  1–6 ). God promised to continue to refine Israel (vv.  7–11 ). God again asked Israel to remember how much greater He is than any idol and prophesied that He would fulfill His purpose (vv.  12–15 ). In exhorting her to leave Babylon and return to her Promised Land, God reminded her of all He had done for her, but predicted that unless she followed Him, she would not find peace (vv.  16–22 ). These prophecies are fulfilled in history and prophecy.

Israel’s Coming Redemption

     The general theme of  Isaiah 49–57 is that the Servant of the Lord would ultimately be Israel’s protector and deliverer. In these chapters, sometimes servant refers to Israel herself, but in other instances to  Jesus Christ as the Servant of the Lord, who would be Israel’s deliverer.

     Isaiah 49:1–7. The Servant will be called by the Lord before He is born (v.  1 ). The ministry of the Servant will be to bring Israel back to God (vv.  5–6 ). In the prediction of the coming salvation by the Servant, He is also declared to be “a light for the Gentiles” (v.  6 ), referred to in  Luke 1:79; 2:32; cf.  Isa. 42:6. Though “despised and abhorred by the nation” in His first coming ( 49:7 ), He will bring Israel back to God in the millennium.

     Isaiah 49:8–13. The prediction is made that the Servant will be triumphant in fulfilling God’s covenant with His people (v.  8; cf.  Jer. 31:31–34 ). Israel will come from all directions to be restored to her Promised Land ( Isa. 49:12 ). This is fulfilled in history and prophecy.

The Certainty of Israel’s Restoration

     Isaiah 49:14–26. In spite of these prophecies, however, Israel will feel she was forsaken (v.  14 ). God assured her that this was not the case and that He would not forget her (vv.  15–18 ). Though Israel returned from Babylon as a small nation, when finally regathered by Christ at His second coming she will be a large nation (vv.  19–21 ). Then her land will seem too small for her (v.  20 ). The return of the children from the captivity, however, foreshadows the ultimate gathering of the nation as a whole, an event which is yet to come (v.  20 ). The triumph of Israel will be recognized by the Gentiles (vv.  22–24 ). In the process of her deliverance and God’s judgment on her oppressors, God will reveal Himself as Israel’s “Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob” (v.  26 ). This is fulfilled in history and prophecy.

The Servant Obedient in Humiliation

     Isaiah 50:1–11. God described Himself as a husband who had temporarily divorced his wife because of sin (v.  1 ). Israel was referred to as one sold as a slave. The One who was speaking was the Servant of the Lord. God’s power is such that He could redeem them out of any situation (v.  2 ). The submission of the Servant to the will of God led to His rejection and ridicule (v.  6; Matt. 27:28–30; Mark 14:65; 15:19–20; Luke 22:63 ). Those who want to follow the Servant of the Lord in obeying God should trust in the Lord instead of in their own light ( Isa. 50:10–11 ). This prophecy was fulfilled in the first coming of Christ.

God Able to Fulfill His Promises to Israel

     Isaiah 51:1–23. Israel was exhorted to look at Abraham and Sarah, and to the Lord as the One who would fulfill the promises of blessing. The description of the situation corresponds to the millennial kingdom, when there will be universal joy and righteousness (vv.  3–5 ). God’s salvation will last forever (v.  6 ). God was extolled as the One who would be able to bring the ransomed back to Zion (v.  11 ). God, who is her Creator, will comfort Israel (v.  12 ). His power is greater than the power of Israel’s oppressor (vv.  12–15 ). The cup of God’s wrath drunk by Israel will be given to her oppressor (vv.  17–23 ). This prophecy is fulfilled in history and prophecy.

The Coming Salvation of God

     Isaiah 52:1–6. Though God dealt with trouble in this way, Israel was exhorted to look forward to God’s restoration. When restored, Israel will know that the Lord has done it. This will be fulfilled in the millennium.

     Isaiah 52:7–12. The scene described goes beyond the restoration of Israel after the captivities and envisions the millennial earth and Jerusalem as its central city (vv.  8–10 ). This will be done for all the nations to see.

The Suffering Servant to Be Exalted

     Isaiah 52–53:12. In the process, the Servant of the Lord will suffer ( 52:13 ), a prediction of the sufferings of Christ in connection with His crucifixion. The result will be, however, that blessings will extend to many nations (v.  15; cf.  Rom. 15:21 ).

     The great messianic prophecy of  Isaiah 53 is devoted to the description of the death of Christ. Portions of this section of  Isaiah are quoted in the New Testament. Israel’s rejection of Jesus was pictured (v.  1; cf.  John 12:38; Rom. 10:16 ). He had no outward beauty, and He was despised and not esteemed ( Isa. 53:2–3 ). Those in Israel who understood that Christ had died for them recognized that He took their infirmities on Himself (vv.  4–6; cf.  Matt. 8:17 ). The Servant was afflicted because of Israel’s transgressions. The truth was summarized in  Isaiah 53:6: “We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” The Servant was compared to a lamb being brought to the slaughter because He did not open His mouth. His death made it impossible for Him to have physical descendants (vv.  7–8; Acts 8:32–33 ). His “grave” was “with the wicked” but also “with the rich” ( Isa. 53:9; 1 Peter 2:22 ). The Servant died in the will of God because “his life” was made “a guilt offering” ( Isa. 53:10 ). This prophecy was fulfilled in Christ’s death, with the blessing to be fulfilled in the millennium ( Mark 15:3–4, 27–28; Luke 23:1–25; John 1:29; 11:49–52; Acts 8:28–35; 10:43; 13:38–39; 1 Cor. 15:35; Eph. 1:7; 1 Peter 2:21–25; 1 John 1:7–9 ).

     His spiritual offspring would spring from His death and resurrection ( Isa. 53:10 ). His ultimate victory over the wicked is described in verses  11–12 (cf.  Luke 22:30 ).

The Future Glory of Israel

     Isaiah 54:1–17. The future glory of Israel and Jerusalem was portrayed in graphic language. She was compared to a barren woman who nevertheless has many children (v.  1 ). She was told to spread out and settle in various cities because of her increased descendants. God described Himself as her “husband — the LORD Almighty is his name — the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer” (v.  5 ). Though Israel was abandoned for a moment, God promised to keep His everlasting covenant and shower her with everlasting kindness and compassion (vv.  7–8 ). His treatment of Israel will be like His treatment of Noah, and His “unfailing love for you will not be shaken” (vv.  9–10 ). The fact that God will not need to rebuke Israel again (v.  9 ) described her millennial kingdom.

     Jerusalem will be as a city built of precious stones (vv.  11–12 ), which is similar to the description of the New Jerusalem in  Revelation 21–22. The reference is, however, to the city of Jerusalem in the millennium rather than the eternal state ( Isa. 54:11–12 ). In the closing verses of the chapter, Israel is declared to be free from tyranny and terror, and God Himself will be her defender against attack (vv.  14–17 ).

The Promise of Salvation

     Isaiah 55:1–13. An invitation was extended to all who were thirsty and who had no money to come and partake of wine and milk without price or cost (vv.  1–2 ). God will make an everlasting covenant with Israel as He did with David (v.  3 ). In the enforcement of this invitation, God reminded Israel that she should listen to and seek the Lord while He may be found (vv.  3–7 ). The closing verses of the chapter continue to set forth the wonder of God’s care in nature as well as in the proclamation of His Word that will not return empty (vv.  8–11 ). The prophecy promises that Israel will have great joy in the coming kingdom. All nature will join in rejoicing at God’s blessing (vv.  12–13 ).

     All of the blessings described in this chapter are related in verse  3 to “an everlasting covenant with you, my faithful love promised to David.” Just as the promises of David and the promises of his kingdom are everlasting and sure to be fulfilled, so Israel’s expectation of her restoration and joy in the future millennium were prophesied.

          __________________________________________________________________

Every Prophecy of the Bible: Clear Explanations for Uncertain Times

The Continual Burnt Offering (Luke 5:8)

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

July 17

God could not pass the sinner by,
His sin demands that he must die;
But in the cross of Christ we see
How God can save, yet righteous be.

The sin alights on Jesus’ head,
‘Tis in His blood sin’s debt is paid;
And Mercy can dispense her store.
Stern Justice can demand no more.

The sinner who believes is free,
Can say, “The Saviour died for me;”
Can point to the atoning blood,
And say, “This made my peace with God.”
--- A. Midlane

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     7. I come now to the crowning point--viz. that the sacred Supper, on which the Lord left the memorial of his passion formed and engraved, was taken away, hidden, and destroyed, when the mass was erected. While the supper itself is a gift of God, which was to be received with thanksgiving, the sacrifice of the mass pretends to give a price to God to be received as satisfaction. As widely as giving differs from receiving, does sacrifice differ from the sacrament of the Supper. But herein does the wretched ingratitude of man appear,-- that when the liberality of the divine goodness ought to have been recognised, and thanks returned, he makes God to be his debtor. The sacrament promised, that by the death of Christ we were not only restored to life once, but constantly quickened, because all the parts of our salvation were then completed. The sacrifice of the mass uses a very different language--viz. that Christ must be sacrificed daily, in order that he may lend something to us. The Supper was to be dispensed at the public meeting of the Church, to remind us of the communion by which we are all united in Christ Jesus. This communion the sacrifice of the mass dissolves, and tears asunder. For after the heresy prevailed, that there behoved to be priests to sacrifice for the people, as if the Supper had been handed over to them, it ceased to be communicated to the assembly of the faithful according to the command of the Lord. Entrance has been given to private masses, which more resemble a kind of excommunication than that communion ordained by the Lord, when the priestling, about to devour his victim apart, separates himself from the whole body of the faithful. That there may be no mistake, I call it a private mass whenever there is no partaking of the Lord's Supper among believers, though, at the same time, a great multitude of persons may be present.

8. The origin of the name of Mass I have never been able certainly to ascertain. It seems probable that it was derived from the offerings which were collected. Hence the ancients usually speak of it in the plural number. But without raising any controversy as to the name, I hold that private masses are diametrically opposed to the institution of Christ, and are, therefore, an impious profanation of the sacred Supper. For what did the Lord enjoin? Was it not to take and divide amongst ourselves? What does Paul teach as to the observance of this command? Is it not that the breaking of bread is the communion of body and blood? (1 Cor. 10:16). Therefore, when one person takes without distributing, where is the resemblance? But that one acts in the name of the whole Church. By what command? Is it not openly to mock God when one privately seizes for himself what ought to have been distributed among a number? But as the words, both of our Saviour and of Paul, are sufficiently clear, we must briefly conclude, that wherever there is no breaking of bread for the communion of the faithful, there is no Supper of the Lord, but a false and preposterous imitation of the Supper. But false imitation is adulteration. Moreover, the adulteration of this high ordinance is not without impiety. In private masses, therefore, there is an impious abuse: and as in religion, one fault ever and anon begets another, after that custom of offering without communion once crept in, they began gradually to make innumerable masses in all the separate corners of the churches, and to draw the people hither and thither, when they ought to have formed one meeting, and thus recognised the mystery of their unity. Let them now go and deny their idolatry when they exhibit the bread in their masses, that it may be adored for Christ. In vain do they talk of those promises of the presence of Christ, which, however they may be understood, were certainly not given that impure and profane men might form the body of Christ as often as they please, and for whatever abuse they please; but that believers, while, with religious observance, they follow the command of Christ in celebrating the Supper, might enjoy the true participation of it.

9. We may add, that this perverse course was unknown to the purer Church. For however the more impudent among our opponents may attempt to gloss the matter, it is absolutely certain that all antiquity is opposed to them, as has been above demonstrated in other instances, and may be more surely known by the diligent reading of the Fathers. [657] But before I conclude, I ask our missal doctors, seeing they know that obedience is better than sacrifice, and God commands us to listen to his voice rather than to offer sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:22),--how they can believe this method of sacrificing to be pleasing to God, since it is certain that he does not command it, and they cannot support it by one syllable of Scripture? Besides, when they hear the apostle declaring that "no man taketh this honour to himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron," so also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but he that said unto him, "Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten thee" (Heb. 5:4, 5). They must either prove God to be the author and founder of their priesthood, or confess that there is no honour from God in an office, into which, without being called, they have rushed with wicked temerity. They cannot produce one iota of Scripture in support of their priesthood. And must not the sacrifices be vain, since they cannot be offered without a priest?

10. Should any one here obtrude concise sentences of the ancients, and contend, or their authority, that the sacrifice which is performed in the Supper is to be understood differently from what we have explained it, let this be our brief reply,--that if the question relates to the approval of the fiction of sacrifice, as imagined by Papists in the mass, there is nothing in the Fathers to countenance the sacrilege. They indeed use the term sacrifice, but they, at the same time, explain that they mean nothing more than the commemoration of that one true sacrifice which Christ, our only sacrifice (as they themselves everywhere proclaim), performed on the cross. "The Hebrews," says Augustine (Cont. Faust. Lib. 20 c. 18), "in the victims of beasts which they offered to God, celebrated the prediction of the future victim which Christ offered: Christians now celebrate the commemoration of a finished sacrifice by the sacred oblation and participation of the body of Christ." Here he certainly teaches the same doctrine which is delivered at greater length in the Treatise on Faith, addressed to Peter the deacon, whoever may have been the author. The words are, "Hold most firmly, and have no doubt at all, that the Only-Begotten became incarnate for us, that he offered himself for us, an offering and sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour; to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, in the time of the Old Testament, animals were sacrificed, and to whom now, with the Father and the Holy Spirit (with whom there is one Godhead), the holy Church, throughout the whole world, ceases not to offer the sacrifice of bread and wine. For, in those carnal victims, there was a typifying of the flesh of Christ, which he himself was to offer for our sins, and of the blood which he was to shed for the forgiveness of sins. But in that sacrifice there is thanksgiving and commemoration of the flesh of Christ which he offered for us, and of the blood which he shed for us." Hence Augustine himself, in several passages (Ep. 120, ad Honorat. Cont. Advers. Legis.), explains, that it is nothing else than a sacrifice of praise. In short, you will find in his writings, passim, that the only reason for which the Lord's Supper is called a sacrifice is, because it is a commemoration, an image, a testimonial of that singular, true, and only sacrifice by which Christ expiated our guilt. For there is a memorable passage (De Trinitate, Lib. 4 c. 24), where, after discoursing of the only sacrifice, he thus concludes: "Since, in a sacrifice, four things are considered--viz. to whom it is offered, by whom, what and for whom, the same one true Mediator, reconciling us to God by the sacrifice of peace, remains one with him to whom he offered, made himself one with those for whom he offered, is himself the one who offered, and the one thing which he offered." Chrysostom speaks to the same effect. They so strongly claim the honour of the priesthood for Christ alone, that Augustine declares it would be equivalent to Antichrist for any one to make a bishop to be an intercessor between God and man (August. Cont. Parmen. Lib. 2 c. 8). [658]

11. And yet we deny not that in the Supper the sacrifice of Christ is so vividly exhibited as almost to set the spectacle of the cross before our eyes, just as the apostle says to the Galatians, that Jesus Christ had been evidently set forth before their eyes, when the preaching of the cross was delivered to them (Gal. 3:1). But because I see that those ancient writers have wrested this commemoration to a different purpose than was accordant to the divine institution (the Supper somehow seemed to them to present the appearance of a repeated, or at least renewed, immolation), nothing can be safer for the pious than to rest satisfied with the pure and simple ordinance of God, whose Supper it is said to be, just because his authority alone ought to appear in it. Seeing that they retained a pious and orthodox view of the whole ordinance--and I cannot discover that they wished to derogate in the least from the one sacrifice of the Lord--I cannot charge them with any impiety, and yet I think they cannot be excused from having erred somewhat in the mode of action. They imitated the Jewish mode of sacrificing more closely than either Christ had ordained, or the nature of the gospel allowed. The only thing, therefore, for which they may be justly censured is, that preposterous analogy, that not contented with the simple and genuine institution of Christ, they declined too much to the shadows of the law.

12. Any who will diligently consider, will perceive that the word of the Lord makes this distinction between the Mosaic sacrifices and our eucharist--that while the former represented to the Jewish people the same efficacy of the death of Christ which is now exhibited to us in the Supper, yet the form of representation was different. There the Levitical priests were ordered to typify the sacrifice which Christ was to accomplish; a victim was placed to act as a substitute for Christ himself; an altar was erected on which it was to be sacrificed; the whole, in short, was so conducted as to bring under the eye an image of the sacrifice which was to be offered to God in expiation. But now that the sacrifice has been performed, the Lord has prescribed a different method to us--viz. to transmit the benefit of the sacrifice offered to him by his Son to his believing people. The Lord, therefore, has given us a table at which we may feast, not an altar on which a victim may be offered; he has not consecrated priests to sacrifice, but ministers to distribute a sacred feast. The more sublime and holy this mystery is, the more religiously and reverently ought it to be treated. Nothing, therefore, is safer than to banish all the boldness of human sense, and adhere solely to what Scripture delivers. And certainly, if we reflect that it is the Supper of the Lord and not of men, why do we allow ourselves to be turned aside one nail's-breadth from Scripture, by any authority of man or length of prescription? [659] Accordingly, the apostle, in desiring completely to remove the vices which had crept into the Church of Corinth, as the most expeditious method, recalls them to the institution itself, showing that thence a perpetual rule ought to be derived.

13. Lest any quarrelsome person should raise a dispute with us as to the terms sacrifice and priest, I will briefly explain what in the whole of this discussion we mean by sacrifice, and what by priest. Some, on what rational ground I see not, extend the term sacrifice to all sacred ceremonies and religious acts. We know that by the uniform use of Scripture, the name of sacrifice is given to what the Greeks call at one time thusia, at another prosphopa`, at another teletne`. This, in its general acceptation, includes everything whatever that is offered to God. Wherefore, we ought to distinguish, but so that the distinction may derive its analogy from the sacrifices of the Mosaic Law, under whose shadows the Lord was pleased to represent to his people the whole reality of sacrifices. Though these were various in form, they may all be referred to two classes. For either an oblation for sin was made by a certain species of satisfaction, by which the penalty was redeemed before God, or it was a symbol and attestation of religion and divine worship, at one time in the way of supplication to demand the favour of God; at another, by way of thanksgiving, to testify gratitude to God for benefits received; at another, as a simple exercise of piety, to renew the sanction of the covenant, to which latter branch, burnt-offerings, and libations, oblations, first-fruits, and peace offerings, referred. Hence let us also distribute them into two classes. The other class, with the view of explaining, let us call latpeutiko`n, and sebasticho`n, as consisting of the veneration and worship which believers both owe and render to God; or, if you prefer it, let us call it eucharistiko`n, since it is exhibited to God by none but those who, enriched with his boundless benefits, offer themselves and all their actions to him in return. The other class let us call propitiatory or expiatory. A sacrifice of expiation is one whose object is to appease the wrath of God, to satisfy his justice, and thereby wipe and wash away the sins, by which the sinner being cleansed and restored to purity, may return to favour with God. Hence the name which was given in the Law to the victims which were offered in expiation of sin (Exod. 29:36); not that they were adequate to regain the favour of God, and wipe away guilt, but because they typified the true sacrifice of this nature, which was at length performed in reality by Christ alone; by him alone, because no other could, and once, because the efficacy and power of the one sacrifice performed by Christ is eternal, as he declared by his voice, when he said, "It is finished;" that is, that everything necessary to regain the favour of the Father, to procure forgiveness of sins, righteousness, and salvation, that all this was performed and consummated by his one oblation, and that hence nothing was wanting. No place was left for another sacrifice.

14. Wherefore, I conclude, that it is an abominable insult and intolerable blasphemy, as well against Christ as the sacrifice, which, by his death, he performed for us on the cross, for any one to think of repeating the oblation, of purchasing the forgiveness of sins, of propitiating God, and obtaining justification. But what else is done in the mass than to make us partakers of the sufferings of Christ by means of a new oblation? And that there might be no limit to their extravagance, they have deemed it little to say, that it properly becomes a common sacrifice for the whole Church, without adding, that it is at their pleasure to apply it specially to this one or that, as they choose; or rather, to any one who is willing to purchase their merchandise from them for a price paid. Moreover, as they could not come up to the estimate of Judas, still, that they might in some way refer to their author, they make the resemblance to consist in the number. He sold for thirty pieces of silver: they, according to the French method of computation, sell for thirty pieces of brass. He did it once: they as often as a purchaser is met with. We deny that they are priests in this sense--namely, that by such oblations they intercede with God for the people, that by propitiating God they make expiation for sins. Christ is the only Pontiff and Priest of the New Testament: to him all priestly offices were transferred, and in him they closed and terminated. Even had Scripture made no mention of the eternal priesthood of Christ, yet, as God, after abolishing those ancient sacrifices, appointed no new priest, the argument of the apostle remains invincible, "No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron" (Heb. 5:4). How, then, can those sacrilegious men, who by their own account are murderers of Christ, dare to call themselves the priests of the living God?

15. There is a most elegant passage in the second book of Plato's Republic. Speaking of ancient expiations, and deriding the foolish confidence of wicked and iniquitous men, who thought that by them, as a kind of veils, they concealed their crimes from the gods; and, as if they had made a paction with the gods, indulged themselves more securely, he seems accurately to describe the use of the expiation of the mass, as it exists in the world in the present day. All know that it is unlawful to defraud and circumvent another. To do injustice to widows, to pillage pupils, to molest the poor, to seize the goods of others by wicked arts, to get possession of any man's succession by fraud and perjury, to oppress by violence and tyrannical terror, all admit to be impious. How then do so many, as if assured of impunity, dare to do all those things? Undoubtedly, if we duly consider, we will find that the only thing which gives them so much courage is, that by the sacrifice of the mass as a price paid, they trust that they will satisfy God, or at least will easily find a means of transacting with him. Plato next proceeds to deride the gross stupidity of those who think by such expiations to redeem the punishments which they must otherwise suffer after death. And what is meant by anniversaries and the greater part of masses in the present day, but just that those who through life have been the most cruel tyrants, or most rapacious plunderers, or adepts in all kinds of wickedness, may, as if redeemed at this price, escape the fire of purgatory?

16. Under the other kind of sacrifice, which we have called eucharistic, are included all the offices of charity, by which, while we embrace our brethren, we honour the Lord himself in his members; in fine, all our prayers, praises, thanksgivings, and every act of worship which we perform to God. All these depend on the greater sacrifice with which we dedicate ourselves, soul and body, to be a holy temple to the Lord. For it is not enough that our external acts be framed to obedience, but we must dedicate and consecrate first ourselves, and, secondly, all that we have, so that all which is in us may be subservient to his glory, and be stirred up to magnify it. This kind of sacrifice has nothing to do with appeasing God, with obtaining remission of sins, with procuring justification, but is wholly employed in magnifying and extolling God, since it cannot be grateful and acceptable to God unless at the hand of those who, having received forgiveness of sins, have already been reconciled and freed from guilt. This is so necessary to the Church, that it cannot be dispensed with. Therefore, it will endure for ever, so long as the people of God shall endure, as we have already seen above from the prophet. For in this sense we may understand the prophecy, "From the rising of the sun, even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, said the Lord of hosts" (Malachi 1:11); so far are we from doing away with this sacrifice. Thus Paul beseeches us by the mercies of God, to present our bodies "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God," our "reasonable service" (Rom. 12:1). Here he speaks very significantly when he adds, that this service is reasonable, for he refers to the spiritual mode of worshipping God, and tacitly opposes it to the carnal sacrifices of the Mosaic Law. Thus to do good and communicate are called sacrifices with which God is well pleased (Heb. 13:16). Thus the kindness of the Philippians in relieving Paul's want is called "an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well pleasing to God" (Phil. 4:18); and thus all the good works of believers are called spiritual sacrifices.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion