Covenant Terms

Posted on December 13, 2017 by Don Merritt

Genesis 17

On a certain day Abram was going about his business as usual when God came to him out of the blue…

When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.” (17:1-2)

For the first time in the relationship, God is giving Abram covenant terms (conditions) that he must follow, beginning in verse 1 with “walk before me faithfully and be blameless.” In the next several verses (3-8) God promises Abram that he will not only have a son, but that he will be the father of many nations, and changes his name to Abraham. As the father of nations, he will also be the ancestor of kings, and God’s covenant will extend to all of Abraham’s descendants, and those of his entire household. The land of Canaan will be their homeland and they will take possession of it, something Abram had not yet been able to do. There is another condition as well, for all males must be circumcised.

In 17:9-14 God makes it abundantly clear that each and every male must be circumcised as a sign of the covenant, including anyone in the household who is not a blood relation and that if they do so, God will be their God, and the God of their descendants. If they do not do so, they are to be cast out.

Sarai is also to be blessed, for she in spite of their ages, will bear a son through whom the covenant will pass to future generations; her name was changed to Sarah.  Abraham’s reaction was to laugh, for how could they produce children at their ages? He suggested that Ishmael could be the son through whom the covenant would pass, but God, while willing to bless Ishmael with a great nation of his own, insisted that Abraham and Sarah would have the Son of Promise; they would name him Isaac, and he would be born within the year. To his everlasting credit, Abraham stopped laughing and was circumcised on that very day, along with all of the males in his household.

Let’s take just a moment and ask ourselves a simple question: Why did God wait around until Abraham was 99 and Sarah was 90 to fulfill His promise to give them a son − was He too busy in another galaxy or something?

While we’re asking ourselves questions, let’s ask another one: Why did the Son of God come to earth as an infant born to a teenager in a manger in Bethlehem instead of coming on the wings of angels into downtown Jerusalem?

I can suggest one answer: God’s power is best seen when the humans in the picture are weakest. Certainly a son born to a 90 year old, fathered by a 99 year old is just as unlikely as a child born to a virgin, for as we know, both are not possible in the normal course of events.

In both cases there would be no doubt that God Himself was responsible for the birth of a promised son.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

“I AM”

Posted on December 13, 2017 by Don Merritt

mljfrmmaaa

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

John 8:58

This verse comes at the end of a rather long discussion between Jesus and the Jewish leaders that began with the validity of His testimony, and moved to a discussion of both His and their paternity, and now has simply come down to who exactly Jesus is (John 8:12-59). Jesus was quick to tell them in vv. 54-55 that He is God’s Son.  In the next verse He tells them that He knows Abraham’s thoughts as well when He says that Abraham looked forward to this day and rejoices in it. It is important to note that Jesus did not say this so as to speculate on what Abraham would have thought, but instead He is stating it as a fact; He is acting as a witness to it.

This completely blows their minds.

Their response in verse 57 is not one of amazement but is instead ridicule; they are marginalizing Him again so as to reduce or eliminate His credibility with the rest of the people.  Verse 58 is the tipping point in the discourse:  Jesus claims to be God.  To make the statement that Jesus made here is one that is direct, to the point and undeniable in its meaning.  “Before Abraham was born, I am!”  Jesus is telling them two things, first that He has been around since before Abraham; He isn’t thirty-something, He’s at least 2,000 years old.  Second, notice that Jesus didn’t say “before Abraham was born, I was alive” no, He said “I am”.  I Am is the name God used to identify Himself to Abraham, thus Jesus is telling them that He is none other than God in the flesh.  They understood this, and since they knew blasphemy when they heard it, they proceeded to grab for stones with which to execute Him.  Jesus slips away, for His time had not yet come to die.  It is worth pointing out that for all of the reasons Jesus cited, these people did not stop to consider the possibility that He might be telling the truth.

These great men of God, these teachers, lawyers and scholars were actually following the devil, and their haste to shut Jesus up when He states the greatest truth of all is a poignant reminder to all of us that we must “continue in His word” to ensure that we are recognizing the truth when it is spoken in this difficult and dark age in which we live.

As we move into the Christmas season and look forward to our celebrations, perhaps we too should stop and ask ourselves just who it was who was born in that Bethlehem manger so long ago; clearly He was not just the son of an obscure carpenter.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Human Custom, Tradition and God’s Promises

Posted on December 12, 2017 by Don Merritt

Genesis 16

The Christmas Story would never be complete without an examination of the friction between human customs and traditions and the promises and ways of God. In our text, Sarai is getting old, yet she has never conceived a child. She knows that God has promised a son to her husband, but so far, God hasn’t come through with the heir. Custom in those days dictated that if an important person like Abram didn’t have an heir by his wife, then she could conceive a child through her slave girl, and Sarai encouraged Abram to use this option to help God get the job done, one might say. Abram took his wife’s advice, and Hagar, the slave girl, became pregnant.

From this point forward, there would be no end of grief for Abram and Sarai; there are consequences to such things as they had done.

Hagar, realizing that her stock was rising, became unpleasant with her mistress, and Sarai complained of this to her husband who seems to have tried to wash his hands of the entire matter. Sarai sent the pregnant Hagar away into the wilderness… where Hagar had an encounter with the angel of the Lord. It would seem that God was disapproving of such treatment as Hagar had received at the hands of Sarai.

For our purposes in this survey, I will leave the details of this continuing saga for you to read on your own should you choose to do so. I must point out however, that there is a great lesson for us to apply as we celebrate Christmas, for in doing so, we must come face to face with the awesome promises of God, promises that have been fulfilled as well as a few which have yet to be culminated. At the same time, we deal every day with human custom and tradition, especially at this time of year, and sometimes these come into conflict.

I am curious to see if you have any thoughts on this: This Christmas season, when custom, tradition and God come into conflict, which will we choose? I know that in my personal case, I always say that I will choose God’s promises over tradition and custom, and yet I am always under pressure to compromise so that we can have both. There’s always a way to justify doing things, don’t you agree?

Yet this is what Abram and Sarai did, they compromised, and they came to regret that compromise, in fact it nearly tore them apart at one point.

Or… maybe you don’t see any conflicts at all. If so I’m sure we’d be interested to hear about that view as well.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

The Night When God was Naked Before Man

Posted on December 12, 2017 by Don Merritt

I like nativity scenes; they are the one thing we see around us this time of year that actually have something to do with what we are supposed to be celebrating. Yet sadly, even most nativity scenes, whether sculpted or painted… and certainly those that are reenacted… don’t portray reality.

When Joseph and Mary arrived in the City of David on that fateful day, there was no room at the Inn and they found shelter in a “manger”. We think of this as being like a barn, a really nice barn, but it would have been more like a cave where animals are penned up. Such a place would not be charming, rustic or romantic, it would most likely have been a stinking hole, a place lower than low.

We depict the scene with radiating light, a kind of heavenly ambiance, but in addition to the stench, it also would most likely have been dark, cold and damp, infested with flies… yuk.

We often see paintings of Mary after giving birth looking as if she has just put on her best gown after a day at the spa, but if you have ever been a mother who just gave birth, of have been with a mother who just gave birth, you know very well that is a lie. Giving birth is nothing if not messy, sweaty and bloody, and mothers are not looking their best at that particular time.

In our songs about this amazing event, we see the Baby Jesus sleeping so peacefully; “not a cry he makes”… Seriously?

Later on a bunch of shepherds arrived to pay homage after an encounter with a squad of angels, and we depict them in their Sunday best as though shepherds were anything other than the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder of the time.

Yes dear reader, we romanticize the entire scene, and that is a great shame.

Look at what Paul said about Jesus:

Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

Philippians 2:6-8

When Jesus was born in that manger, there were no divine trappings of any kind; it was cold hard reality. Jesus left glory behind entirely when He came to earth and He was just like we are in every way. He grew hungry, thirsty and tired, He sweated, He needed bathroom breaks, He had body odor, He caught colds… there was nothing about Him that set Him apart from anyone else in the physical sense; according to Isaiah, he wasn’t even good looking. In the manger, He entered this world naked; on the cross He left this world naked in the physical sense.

In between, He taught and healed and brought hope to Mankind that so desperately needs all of these and He did so without pretense or any worldly glamour or greatness; He was naked in the metaphorical sense, for in Jesus God is naked before Man with nothing standing in between.

Nearly two years ago, I wrote a series of posts about our need to be naked before God, to take away everything that comes between us and God and to approach His presence in complete humility and openness.

How hard that can be!

Yet in this, as in all things, Jesus is our model. If only we would resist the temptation to sanitize His story, maybe His humility and humanity would be easier for us to grasp, and we could see how truly awesome His divinity is. Yes, maybe that would make it easier for us to strip away everything that separates us from God in this life.

Posted in Christian Life | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

God Makes a Covenant

Posted on December 11, 2017 by Don Merritt

Genesis 15:7-21

In this passage, the conversation of our last post continues, this time Abraham asks God how he can be sure that God will give him the land of Canaan, an amazing question all things considered. God’s reply is even more amazing: He swears out a covenant.

So the Lord said to him, “Bring me a heifer, a goat and a ram, each three years old, along with a dove and a young pigeon.”

Abram brought all these to him, cut them in two and arranged the halves opposite each other; the birds, however, he did not cut in half. Then birds of prey came down on the carcasses, but Abram drove them away. (15:9-11)

God’s response was to tell Abram to gather certain animals together, which Abram did and cut them in half, laying the carcasses out with the halves side by side. In doing so, Abram consented to the covenant in blood without swearing an oath which is not the Old Testament norm.

Then, God swears an oath:

Beginning in verse 13, God tells Abram that his descendants will be taken to Egypt where they will be enslaved 400 years which is a part of the Covenant we don’t often bring up in Sunday School. Abram will not be involved in that phase as he will have died at a ripe old age. Then God will save the people out of Egypt after they become enriched from the wealth of that land (15:13-16).

Next, God passed through the carcasses in the form of fire, swearing that He gives the Land to Abram’s descendants (15:17-21). Normally both parties would march through the bloody carcasses, symbolizing that if they broke their covenant, this would be their fate, but here only God passes through. Why was it done this way?

There was no way for Abraham to avoid sinning against God because there was no provision for atonement for sins in this covenant; that would come along much later. When you step back and consider these incredible events, you quickly find yourself in one of those “Wow” moments, for God had sworn and passed through the blood on Abram’s behalf. This means that God took the penalty for the sins of Abram and those who would follow upon Himself, setting the stage for our Christmas Story, for when the Lamb of God appeared as a babe in that manger, God was fulfilling His obligation to Abram to pay for his sin.

Merry Christmas indeed!

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

It’s what you make of it

Posted on December 11, 2017 by Don Merritt

Let’s face it, we’re heading into a couple of weeks that can be challenging for most of us; we’re getting into crunch time. At my house, we have a thrill-packed week for sure: I’m double-booked tomorrow night, we have out of town guests Thursday through Sunday, with more family coming for a holiday wing-ding on Saturday plus all the normal things, and oh yes, I need to get ready for Sunday sometime.

There’s shopping that needs to get done, cards to send, houses to clean, social obligations, family obligations, church obligations, work obligations… It can very easily get out of hand and the holidays can end up being more of a curse than a blessing.

So which is it going to be for you− a time of warmth, love and a time of wonder and blessing and closeness to God… or a time of obligation, work and stress that might be better to skip altogether? For me, it’s usually a little bit of both, depending on when you ask. To be fair, the Christmas Season is what we make it− blessing or stress choices we make.

I’ve decided that for me, this Christmas is going to be a blessing. If I get everything done just right: great. If I don’t well… that’s great too. I might not be able to make every event, and I might have to drop something from my to do list at some point, but so what?  In the final analysis none of that is really what’s important, is it? What really matters, what we will remember about this year, is time spent with family and loved ones and the time we spent with our Lord, not all of the running around and stress we might subject ourselves to, and that’s why I’m choosing to chill out and only take on what I can comfortably and reasonably do well.

What kind of Christmas Season will you choose?

Posted in Christian Life | Tagged , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

Sunday Sermon Notes: December 10, 2017

Posted on December 10, 2017 by Don Merritt

Title:  Joseph’s Story

Text: Matthew 1:18-25

Joseph was betrothed to Mary, which in that place and time was a process of about a year in length. During that time, the couple was legally married, but their union could not be consummated. During this time, the woman would normally continue living with her parents, and after the appropriate time had expired, she would move to her husband’s house to begin their lives as husband and wife and consummate their marriage.

Since they were legally married, even though they were not living together, the only way this betrothal could be broken was by the death of one of the parties, or by a legal divorce. When our story picks up, Joseph has just found out that Mary is pregnant. Joseph does not know who the father of her child is, but he does know who the father is not. OK, so you are Joseph: What would you do?

Being a righteous man, Joseph recognizes that his betrothed has committed adultery, and that the Law prescribes what must come next. Being a compassionate man, he doesn’t want to initiate formal proceedings and bring Mary to disgrace, so he resolves to present her with a bill of divorce quietly, in front of two witnesses, rather than have formal proceedings, which technically would have her facing a capital crime.

With this all bouncing around in his mind, God steps in.

A messenger of God comes to Joseph and explains the situation (vv. 20-21) telling him that the child has come from the Holy Spirit of God. All of this takes place in a dream and then Joseph awakens. Verses 24 and 25 tell us that Joseph believed this and did as he was instructed, taking Mary into his house, and when the son was born, naming him Jesus; we are also told that Joseph and Mary did not consummate their marriage until after Jesus was born. It’s all well and good for us to read this and accept it without much more thought, but we also know how the story of Jesus ends, so the news that He was the Son of God is already a given in our minds, but what about Joseph? Every December we hear sermons and stories about the great faith of Mary, while Joseph is only mentioned in passing. Clearly, Mary’s faith was amazing, but it always strikes me that Joseph’s was even greater. Maybe it is because I’m a man, but Joseph was still faced with a rather significant choice here; what if that was just a regular old dream and not an angel coming to deliver a message?

Remember: Mary knew she was still a virgin; Joseph only knew he wasn’t the father of her child.

Whatever thoughts and lingering doubts may have been in his mind, Joseph did as he was instructed, and Jesus was of the royal line of David by adoption.

Some might be thinking here that Mary was also of David’s line as seen in Luke’s genealogy, and that would appear to be true. However, Mary was a descendant of David through David’s son Nathan, while Joseph was of David’s line through King Solomon, and the throne was passed down to and through Solomon, not Nathan, thus any claim Jesus would have had to the throne of David, would have been through His adoption by Joseph which, by the way, would be perfectly legal.

Much more important than any claim to the throne at that time, was the fact that Jesus’ actual father was God, and His unique status as royal heir and Son of God will continue to play a major part in his early years that are discussed in the next chapter.

 

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Isaiah 7:14

As a Christian reading this verse as translated in the NIV, and then seeing Matthew’s reference to it in Matthew 1:22-23, it is very easy to say that this is really cool, and then just keep on going. If we do that, we miss something that is both problematic and fascinating. Here is Matthew’s statement:

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

This is the first time Matthew cites the fulfillment by Jesus of an Old Testament prophecy, but scholars have struggled with it for centuries because the original Hebrew of Isaiah doesn’t exactly say what we have just read. In fact, there really isn’t any record of a messianic interpretation of this verse prior to Matthew. There are two reasons for this: First, as I mentioned, the Hebrew doesn’t quite say anything about a virgin, for the Hebrew word Isaiah used was “’almah” which means a young woman of marriageable age; she may or may not still be a virgin. This ambiguity is important to us because Mary’s virginity is the point of the exercise in our Matthew passage.

The second problem for scholars is the fact that this verse falls within the larger context set in Isaiah 7:1-2:

When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it.

Now the house of David was told, “Aram has allied itself with Ephraim”; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.

Here’s what happens in Isaiah 7: The kings of Syria and Israel (Northern Kingdom) join in league together to oppose the Assyrians. They ask King Ahaz of Judah (Southern Kingdom) to join with them, but he refuses, so they march on Jerusalem to dethrone him and put a favorable king on the throne (Is. 7:6). God dispatches Isaiah to Jerusalem to tell Ahaz that the two kings will fail if Ahaz will believe God (Is. 73-9). Ahaz doesn’t take Isaiah’s advice, and even considers an alliance with the Assyrians (cf. 2 Kings 16:5, 7; Is. 7:17). The Lord sends Isaiah to Ahaz a second time, this time offering to give Ahaz a sign so that he will believe God, and once again Ahaz refuses (Is. 7:10-12). In 7:14, God, who through Isaiah, gives him a sign anyway.

The sign God gave Ahaz in 7:14 that Matthew quotes is explained further in Isaiah 7:16:

for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.

The prophet goes on to explain that their lands will be laid waste by the king of Assyria, which is what happened, and Ahaz and his kingdom were saved from the threat. Thus, it probably never occurred to Isaiah, or anyone else for that matter, that the son of 7:14 was the future Messiah at all; that is until Matthew got it.

What Matthew saw was a broader meaning that applied to the ultimate fulfillment of God’s promises; consider the larger context of Isaiah 7-11: It is full of the theme of exile (7:18-25; 8:1-10, 19-22) right beside the theme of God’s presence (Immanuel, 8:8, 10) and the clear promise of a great son of David (9:6-7; 11:1). What Matthew understood was that there may well have been a fulfillment in Isaiah’s time of certain prophetic promises, and that those early fulfillments might very well foreshadow an ultimate fulfillment by the Person of Jesus Christ, which is an important concept for us to keep in mind as we go forward in his Gospel.

 

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham: (1:1)

Matthew begins with this verse full of content and contextual implications. It would seem that Matthew is intent on linking the story of Jesus to the larger context of Israel’s history. Notice his reference to “the genealogy of” in language which in the original Greek parallels that of the Septuagint in Gen. 2:4 and 5:1, alongside the names of David and Abraham, two of Israel’s most illustrious heroes. That Matthew uses the terms “Jesus the Messiah” (or Jesus Christ) makes it quite clear that this son of David is special (cf. 2:4; 16:16, 20; 22:42; 24:5, 23; 26:63, 68). In putting the personal name together with the messianic concept, Matthew is referring back to the hopes of an entire Nation.

With the reference “son of David” our author is hearkening back to the glory days of his people and God’s covenant promises concerning the Davidic royal house, David may well be considered the pivotal name in the genealogy for it is mentioned 5 times, and is the only name associated with the title of “king” (v. 6), singling him out of all other royal references as the greatest. Many scholars also point out the presence of the numerical value associated with the Hebrew numeric consonants. For the name David the numerics look like this: d (4) w (6) d (4) or 4 + 6 + 4 = 14. The number 14 is the number of David to be sure, but here it appears that, as some suggest, it has more meaning than that, for it is also arrived at by multiplying 2 X 7. Seven, as we saw in our study of Revelation, is the number of completeness or perfection. Jesus is the second Person of the godhead. Thus, some suggest that 14 is the number of Messiah, and when you compare that to David, and recall that the Messiah would be the son of David, these scholars conclude their case.

As for me personally, I don’t know who is right or wrong about the numbers, but in noticing how often the number 14 appears here, and remembering how the ancient Jews felt about numbers, it appears to me that at the least, Matthew is trying in every way possible to make sure that his readers get “son of David” and “Messiah” out of this discussion.

For our study right now, ask yourself a question: Since Jesus became heir to the throne of David by the adoption of Joseph, how might things have turned out differently had Joseph not obeyed the instruction he received from the angel of the Lord in that dream of his?

Posted in Sunday Class Notes | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Having a Candid Conversation

Posted on December 9, 2017 by Don Merritt

After this, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision:

“Do not be afraid, Abram.
I am your shield,
your very great reward.”

But Abram said, “Sovereign Lord, what can you give me since I remain childless and the one who will inherit my estate is Eliezer of Damascus?” And Abram said, “You have given me no children; so a servant in my household will be my heir.”

Genesis 15:1-3

After Abram and his small band defeated the kings and rescued Lot, after the glorious encounter with Melchizedek, God comes to Abram and Abram shows a bit of cheek, questioning God’s intentions…

Another way of looking at this would be to say that Abram shared the great concern of his heart, for he believed God’s promise, yet he was not a young man, and he felt safe enough in God’s presence to ask that question which was burning within him…

Personally, I think it was the second one; Abram trusted God so much that he was comfortable asking that burning question, not in a demanding or selfish way, but because it was giving him a great deal of grief. Most likely, the answer as to how God would interpret the question is found in His reply:

Then the word of the Lord came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son who is your own flesh and blood will be your heir.” He took him outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars—if indeed you can count them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”

Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness.

Genesis 15:4-6

God didn’t seem to have a problem with Abram’s question, for God obviously knew the concerns of his heart and so He answered the question and brought comfort to him. Since Abram is a model of faith for us to follow, we should all take comfort in this. Abram, as we have already seen, was not a perfect man; he had his share of faults and weaknesses. Yet he believed God’s promises, and in spite of his faults, placed his priority on his covenant relationship with God, and that is what God is looking for in us. He isn’t looking for ways or reasons to cast us off; He is looking for our faith in Him.

And… this is so awesome… God is big enough to handle our questions and doubts and fears.

In the end, Abram believed what God told him, and that belief was credited to him as righteousness. Another way of saying this is to say that Abram believed what God told him, and that made Abram righteous in God’s sight, even though Abram was a sinner.

The same would be true for us today, that God will view us as righteous, in spite of our shortcomings, if we believe His promises: Do we believe His promises?

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Abraham the Warrior

Posted on December 8, 2017 by Don Merritt

Genesis 14

Abram remained conscious of God’s promises; he remained in Canaan and prospered. Lot saw a financial advantage and left Canaan to live on the Jordan plain, taking up his headquarters in Sodom, a town filled with wickedness against God. I don’t know whether or not he prospered there, but in the end, he surely came to regret his choice as war swept into the region and Sodom was defeated along with Gomorrah and their possessions, and Lot himself was carried away by their foes. When word came to Abram, he raised an army of 318 men and went after a vast army, defeated them and seized everything they had, including Lot. Abram was a warrior-hero and the king of Sodom offered him a reward that Abram refused to accept; he would only take his share of the spoils and no more, for his trust was in God alone. Another king came to see Abram, this time it was the King of Salem.

Let’s take a closer look at this King of Salem:

This Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.

Hebrews 7:1-3

The story of Melchizedek and Abraham is found in Genesis 14:17-20, and he isn’t mentioned again, except for an obscure reference in Psalm 110 that is only understood when it is quoted in Hebrews 7.  He came suddenly out of nowhere, and was gone just as quickly, and many scholars believe that Melchizedek is a pre-incarnation appearance of Christ (called a Christiophony).  Clearly there are similarities between the two, but without more evidence, I’ll only say that he was a “type” of Christ.

Don’t go too fast in this passage; you don’t often come across a guy who is both king and priest, in fact that is not the Jewish model at all; only Jesus Himself comes to mind quickly for these two offices.  Note also the similarity of names. Melchizedek is called “king of righteousness” and “king of peace” while Jesus is called “Righteous King” and “Prince of Peace.”   He has no genealogy, no beginning of days or end of life… Very interesting. Here is a comparison chart for Melchizedek and Jesus:

Melchizedek Jesus
A King A King
A High Priest A High Priest
No beginning of days and without genealogy No beginning of days and without genealogy (on his Father’s side)
Ministered bread and wine Ministered bread and wine
Non Levite Non Levite
King of Salem (King of Peace) Prince of Peace (Is 9:6)
King of Righteousness Righteous King (Is 9:7)
Greater than Abraham Greater than Abraham

Isn’t it interesting also that the author says that Melchizedek resembles the Son of God.  I’m having a hard time thinking of another text that makes this kind of statement…

Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder! Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater. In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham, because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor.

Hebrews 7:4-10

Up to this point in Hebrews, we see that Jesus is superior to the angels, and we see that Jesus is superior to Moses, but now we see that Melchizedek is superior to Abraham; in Jewish tradition, nobody is superior to Abraham! Yet when you consider the author’s evidence, it would seem that he has a valid point. Abraham paid a tithe to Melchizedek, this can also be rendered “tribute” which is always paid by the lesser to the greater.  Under the Law, a tithe is paid to the Levites, the priests, and yet the father of all the Israelites paid a tithe to this Melchizedek centuries before the Law, and in a sense, Levi himself was involved in the payment, since his ancestor paid it.

The really amazing statement that the author makes in this section is this: In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living. (7:8) I don’t mean to be overly simplistic, but you just don’t come across writing like this very often; who is this guy?  It’s becoming easier to understand why many scholars have concluded that he must be Jesus pre-incarnation. Of course, the point was also made in verse 7 that the lesser is blessed by the greater.  Clearly, Melchizedek is superior to Abraham, as mind-boggling as that must have been to a Jewish audience.

Before I wrap this up, I think we need to recognize here and now that this section is entirely intentional in the letter, for our author is building up to a massively important crescendo.  As we continue, we will see that not only was Melchizedek greater than Abraham, but that Jesus is like Melchizedek, and as a result, He is also a high priest superior to the Levites, administering a covenant superior to the Law of Moses, and theologically speaking, that’s the ball game.

Posted in Bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 9 Comments

The Suffering Servant

Posted on December 8, 2017 by Don Merritt

Isaiah 53

In Isaiah 53, the prophet describes for us a servant who would be despised, rejected and die; with the result of saving many.  The poem here actually begins with verse 13 of the preceding chapter…

See, my servant will act wisely;
    he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
Just as there were many who were appalled at him—
    his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
    and his form marred beyond human likeness—

Isaiah 52:13-14

Notice in 52:13-14 an account of one who was disfigured beyond the likeness of a man.  Of course this disfigurement was the result of the brutality of men.  He was to undergo terrible treatment, but in the end he would receive great honor for what he had done.  As the poem moves forward into chapter 53, we see that he would be despised in part for who he was; having no apparent nobility or pedigree.  He came from the most humble of roots, and grew up as one who was not beautiful or privileged. (53:1-3) People hid their faces from him; but why?  He was a man of sorrow and hardship who grieved at the way he was received, for who would believe his message?

In verses 4-6 we find that he was oppressed on our account; that he was to bear the afflictions and sins of all of us who have gone astray.  This was no ordinary man, but rather He was One who had come to save the rest of us!  Note the parallels in this poem:

Our Experience His Experience
Grief Bore
Sorrow Carried
Transgression Pierced Through
Iniquity Crushed
Peace Chastening
Healed Scourging

In verses 7-9 the servant is silent during his trial; offering no defense against wrongful accusation.  He bore our guilt upon himself willingly, and was sent away to die.  Nobody would take much notice of his fate, even though he was guilty of no crime.  He would be tortured beyond human endurance, disfigured, ridiculed… and who would care?

Yet, in the final verses we see His triumph.  He would live after death; His “seed” (disciples) would spread over many nations and countless millions would be saved by His suffering.  He would share the spoils of His victory over sin and death with His followers; He had changed the course of human history, and accomplished the purpose of God.

Compare this account with that of the Apostle John: John 12:37-41.  Who is this servant, and how has He affected your life?

Posted in Christian Life | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments