Reception and Application of Old Testament Themes in Worship - The Temple

          The Israelite nation held the exclusive title of the people of God for many years and there is nothing that signified this more than the ark and the temple. While the Hebrews did not have their Promised Land they were nomads, slaves, and wanderers. The precursor to the temple called the tabernacle still revealed the glory of God and His presence among the people but it was the establishment of the temple that brought stability and certainty. The ark of the Lord would find its resting place in the temple. Sacrifices and atonement took place in the temple. In short the temple truly symbolized the house of God.

            The Lord sent His servant Moses away

from the people to give him the law and instructions for the tabernacle, which is the precursor to the temple. “Then Moses entered the cloud as he went on up the mountain. And he stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights” (Exodus 24:18, NIV). Jesus also was led by the Spirit away from the people to be prepared for forty days. This will be examined further as we progress. The point here is that there was a great deal of care and detail placed on the plans and function of the tabernacle/temple.

            This is for good reason as the temple was far more than a building to the Hebrews, it was the one place on the planet where heaven and earth met. “The temple, like its predecessor the tabernacle, was regarded as a meeting-point between heaven and earth, the place where the transcendent Lord of all was pleased to manifest his glory in the midst of his people Israel.”[1] Purification and the redemption from sin through the sacrifice of blood took place at the temple.

It contained elements of both humanity as well as divinity and it was through the temple that God was able to interact with His people.

            The temple was intended to bring in peoples from all nations as a refuge and place of prayer. This may come as a surprise for today’s believer but the temple was the starting point in fulfilling the

covenant of Abraham. The temple was to be a blessing to all the nations. “These I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isaiah 56:7, ESV). While the temple has changed from the First Covenant to the New, the promise that it will be a blessing to all the nations is still in effect.

            Jesus fulfills the First or Old Testament and in doing so also fulfills the function of the temple. Just like the Apostles after Jesus had to refute false teachings, the Lord also makes His stand against false theology concerning the temple as well.  ^“Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. ^‘It is written,’ he said to them, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers’” (Matthew 21:12-13, NIV). A house of prayer for all peoples and yet those in leadership placed sacrifices of convenience in the same section dedicated to the foreigner for prayer.

            The temple was essentially robbed of its function. This was done by the same means that can nullify the Word of God. Tradition and even practicality acts as that little bit of yeast that can work its way through the entire batch of dough. As with anything the pendulum can swing dramatically. The temple itself was not to be worshipped but the One who dwells within the temple is the object of our praise.

Thus says the Lord: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the Lord. But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word.’ (Isaiah 66:1-2, ESV)

God reminds the people that while He may rest in the temple He is One who is greater than the temple.

            As Jesus prepares Himself to fulfill His mission we are allowed to hear the conversation Jesus has with the Samaritan woman. The Samaritan woman tells Jesus that the Jews tell her people they can only truly worship at the temple in Jerusalem. Jesus does not hesitate to get to the point and informs her that, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24, NIV). This should sound familiar to the Isaiah 66 passage referenced earlier. “But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit and trembles at my word.”

            This is the most sacred of tasks as the temple required a holiness and seriousness in order to allow its proper function. If Jesus were to attempt to become the new temple He would need to be blameless and without sin. This is easily said and we are accustomed to reading these words but we must recall that Jesus is the Son of Man as well. “The tabernacle testifies in its structure and function to the holiness of God. Aaron bears the engraving on the diadem, ‘Holy to Yahweh’ (28:36). The priests are warned in the proper administration of their office ‘lest they die’ (30:21), and the death of Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10.1) made clear the seriousness of an offense which was deemed unholy to God.”[2] The statement that Jesus makes to the Samaritan woman literally put His life on the line.

            Jesus is the new temple. We will not be focusing on how His followers become the temple in Christ but rather just on His role as Lord and Messiah. As Jesus upholds His role as Lord we must also uphold our role as servant. The follower today cannot merely gather information and proclaim their righteousness by way of temple sanctuary. “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Amend your ways and your deeds, and I will let you dwell in this place. Do not trust in these deceptive words: ‘This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord’” (Jeremiah 7:3, ESV). While the temple was in place it performed its role but the temple did not save without sacrifice and the obedience of the worshipper.

            Jesus is both human and divine and therefore can provide that place where heaven and earth meet once more. The temple is in place to this day but the worshipper is still called to be of truth and spirit. “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21, NIV). Both covenants make this clear concerning the temple, contrite in spirit and trembles at my word versus worshipping in spirit and in truth. This theme of worshippers being obedient to the will of God is nothing new. It stands as one of the foundational statutes in having a relationship with God.

            From the Law of Moses to the grace of Jesus the theme remains the same. Both should produce a worshipper who worships in truth and in spirt, who is contrite in spirit and trembles at His word. One of the easiest rhetorical devices used in the Scripture is repetition. “Although the basic unit of thought remains the individual line, the most recurring feature of Hebrew poetry is repetition.”[3] When we see warnings or sayings multiple times this is by design and demands our focus and attention. It calls to our most basic understandings of parenting and childhood. There is a reason for the frustration a parent feels when they say, “How many times have I told you…”

            Today’s contemporary follower of Jesus must worship in the temple. They must also recognize the temple is not a building any longer. The temple did not exist for man’s glory and even with all the effort and attention to detail placed in its construction man could never take credit for God being among them. “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands” (Acts 17:24, NIV). So why worship in the temple today? Jesus is the temple and He is both Spirit and truth and this is what the Father seeks.

            When we marvel at the wrong object we can be assured that the Lord will redirect us towards His Son the true temple and the true object of our worship and awe. “And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down’” (Mark 13:1-2, ESV). Jesus is the One who forgives our sins through His own eternal and everlasting sacrifice of blood. Jesus is the one place where heaven and earth meet through His own person being both human and divine. Jesus fulfills the covenant of Abraham and is the blessing to all the nations. In Him we become the house of God.  

---

[1] Peterson, David. Engaging With God: A Biblical Theology of Worship. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992, 81.

[2] Deffinbaugh, Robert L. Exodus: The Birth of The Nation. May 17, 2004. https://bible.org/seriespage/32-tabernacle-dwelling-place-god-exodus-368-3943#P3537_1339631 (accessed March 7, 2017).

[3] Köstenberger, Andreas J. , and Richard Patterson. Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2011.

Finding the Heart of a Passage

          Finding the heart of a passage or getting to the root of a matter has always been the most effective way to understand or deal with an issue. This is because the individual pursuing the heart of a matter is no longer dealing with symptoms but is instead at the core of an issue. This is much the same as when dealing with an illness. The individual can continue to fight off the sniffles or cough but until they recognize the problem is not the cough but the virus there will be no real progress made. The aim of this essay is to not focus on the symptoms or effects of the selected texts in Ephesians and Colossians but to hone in on the cause or heart of the passages.

            Although the goal is to reach the heart of the passage we will have perspectives added to both selections in order to understand these passages in the context of church and Christ. Ephesians 2:17-22 will carry the concept of the church while Colossians 1:15-20 will be our text as Paul describes Christ. These two concepts work in perfect unity as both rely on one another in order to maintain proper function, much like the wings of an airplane. This may come across as offensive to some as no believer would place anything on parallel with Christ and rightly so. This paper will not attempt to do that either but rather show their coexistence and intertwined dependence upon each other.

            The concept of the church is always being taught in the New Testament because it was in fact new. The Christ has come, now what? The church in Ephesus was no different and was in need of Paul’s direction on church life. The first two versus in text Ephesians 2:17-22 set the stage of what the church was supposed to represent. “He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.”

(Ephesians 2:17-18, NIV) Like many of the churches the Ephesians were attempting to pull rank over one another. Paul begins his teaching with the calling of Christ to those far and near.

            This concept is one of unity regardless of position or heritage. This can be stated boldly as Paul follows this thought with the fact that both have access to the Father by one Spirit. This theme of “one” presents itself over and over throughout Ephesians and is in reference to the church. Paul is communicating the ideals and representation of what the body of Christ, the church, should function as existentially. “The Ephesian Letter presents the basic structure which humanity needs for the true expression of communal life. That structure is the fellowship of believers in Jesus Christ, which constitutes the essence of what we call the Christian Church.”[1] For the church to function as a body it must unify under those same guidelines, i.e., the heart is not more important than the lungs.

            This understanding must produce something. “Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” (Ephesians 2:19-20, NIV) Since Jesus has brought peace to those that are far as well as near both are members of his household. In a household there is no difference to the father, all his children are sacred and in this Paul demonstrates God’s justice and mercy. “The Church is the universal community designed by God to transcend and embrace all differences of race, station, and sex that divide mankind. It constitutes the pattern for all true community, so that the surest way to achieve human harmony in the secular order is to extend the bounds of the Christian community throughout the world.”[2] No ranking system, even for those who bore titles within the church.

            “In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the

Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.” (Ephesians 2:21-22, NIV) Paul gives another example of unity in the Spirit by describing how all of this far and near, no longer strangers, and household concepts come together. In him we are joined together in order to become a holy temple but only as a community of believers can we represent this temple. Paul closes this text with a powerful reminder that when we are unified God lives with us through His Spirit.

            The Ephesian church had to be addressed in this manner as they were competing for prominence and concerned with only their own well-being. This is common in the world and perhaps this is the exact dividing line Paul was attempting to draw for the church. “It is addressed to Christians who were tempted to be unloving, divisive, selfish, arrogant, and overly concerned about their own rights. The congregation was ‘in danger of disintegration because of a competitive spirit creeping in among the members.’”[3] The heart of the passage concerning the church is that there is no difference between the members because Christ has called them all regardless of worldly position or ambitions.

            Colossians is a letter that reminds the church why it must live the way it does. It is one thing to make all the rules for a church and have a list of expectations but without a purpose or direction the church would fade into no more than a social club. It was not uncommon for the Apostles to give direction to the church by way of their doctrine or code of ethics. However, this was not a legalistic routine by any means as each would share in the context of the specific church in need. “The core words and ideas are the same (submission), the same groups are addressed (slaves, husbands/wives), the "Christian living" context is the same. It is evident however, that Peter, while using the same basic source, edited his material for the situations he faced.”[4] The Colossian church also had its own situation that needed to be addressed.

            We see a different theme in the Colossians letter from the Ephesians in that Christ was not at the center of the church. It can be difficult to separate the ends from the means at times especially when the leaf is green so to speak. The letter to the Colossians is not so much concerned with the function of the church but rather the direction. False teachers had slipped in and were spreading fine sounding ideals throughout the church. “In 2:8, Paul says that the Colossian believers are being taken captive by a false philosophy, by empty deceit, and this is ‘according to human tradition, according to the elemental beings of the world (στοιχεία του κόσμου) and not according to Christ.’”[5] Regardless of the logic or philosophy there is but one foundation for the church.

            Colossians 1:15-20 reminds the church that Christ is supreme and that all things are under Him. This is said in direct response to the issues facing the church. Both concepts of church and Christ are being brought together here. The church does not operate outside of Christ but rather under Him as the head of the body. Therefore, no other teaching can be accepted for church life outside of Christ. These letters or the bible for that matter were not written to express some theological ideals. The theology is already expressed in Christ, what is left is living the teaching of Jesus within the body, showing ourselves to be His.

The Ephesians are given a lesson about how the church lives because of Christ, while the Colossians are shown how the church operates under the authority of Christ. “The theological ideas of Scripture do not arise from systematic theology but from the interplay of ancient texts and ideas with current events and problems (all happening within the passage itself!). The Bible is a process of recording events and interpreting them for the community of faith.”[6] Christ has the supremacy of all and He has called all into peace, therefore the church must respond in accordance with the grace given to it.

---

[1] Mackay, John Alexander. "Church order, its meaning and implications: a study in the Epistle to the Ephesians." Theology Today 9, no. 4, 1953: 450-466, 450. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed January 23, 2017).

[2] Mackay, John Alexander. "Church order, its meaning and implications: a study in the Epistle to the Ephesians." Theology Today 9, no. 4, 1953: 450-466, 450-451. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed January 23, 2017).

[3] MacLeod, David J. "Imitating the incarnation of Christ: an exposition of Philippians 2:5-8." Bibliotheca Sacra 158, no. 631, 2001: 308-330. 310. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed January 25, 2017).

[4] GCU, Lecture 5. "BIB-621 New Testament Exegesis: Epistles and Revelation." Grand Canyon University. Phoenix, AZ, 2016.

[5] Blackwell, Benjamin C. "You are filled in him: theosis and Colossians 2-3." Journal of Theological Interpretation 8, no. 1, 2014: 103-123, 105. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed January 24, 2017).

[6] GCU, Lecture 5. "BIB-621 New Testament Exegesis: Epistles and Revelation." Grand Canyon University. Phoenix, AZ, 2016.

Worldview Formation

          The core values that make up my worldview are faith in God followed by a lack of faith in humanity. I do not trust myself let alone other people and this is not a self-esteem issue, just my conclusions on what makes a human a human. Of course through God and His Son and Spirit I have many bonds of trust with others as long as faith in God is our foundational bond. It has been my experience and perhaps upbringing to expect others to come up short. Yet, the effort any of us make in being more than sinful is an absolute encouragement. In the end I would not summarize my worldview as negative but one of accepting who we are and who we are not.

            In truth my upbringing played a tremendous role in shaping my worldview as I watched my mother do the impossible time and again with no one to celebrate with. As a single parent she needed help in areas we can all take for granted. I can remember several moving days when others said they would help out but in the end it was just mom and I packing and loading the U-Haul truck. I remember as a child the impact certain passages had on me as a result of these experiences. “All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.” (Matthew 5:37, NIV)

Perhaps more dramatically I can recall just how spiteful I was towards those that did not keep their word and the only peace I found was in accepting that they may be demons in disguise (this is from a child’s mind and I do not think this way as an adult): “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.” (2 Corinthians 11:14, NIV) Again, I will mention that I saw myself in this light as well, knowing that I had let down my mother and others on many occasions. This was not a view forged from a “righteous me” versus the world by any means.

            Another foundational element in shaping my worldview is the idea of being in a family. It was just my mother and I for many years until I was sixteen and being a part of a family was very desirable. It was then troublesome to watch my home church become less of a family and more of a high powered non-profit organization. There is no doubt this factors in to my views on church and church culture. This has been a double-edged sword for me as there have been many positives in this understanding as well. Ministry for example has always become family because I believe I would be teaching something other than Christ if it did not.

            The challenges have also been the benefits in ministry. Family is messy and it may not have the “look” of Christian conformity but then again what does that look like. I can think of many very different examples all stemming from the same book. The challenge has been when others have a voice and realize it will be heard. Those labelled as trouble makers are usually asked to come over to my house and this is how we like it. When brothers and sisters come to an understanding that they are competent to instruct one another a new chapter is open to them. It also becomes problematic in that we no longer care to be students now that we finally have the microphone and an audience.

            The only leadership I have ever experienced to be successful is through complete weakness. Sharing failures and hurts while finding comfort in our Lord is by far more powerful than the most epic of sermons and believe me I love to preach. Removing yourself from the constant spotlight and allowing others to share their conviction is a great way to remain a student and not a guru sitting on a high hill. Making the declaration that you have no original material and that the Gospel of Alex Moghadam (your name here) will fail you and lead you astray but the Gospel of Jesus brings salvation and peace should be a bit of a mantra.

            I will share a story that truly inspired me to change my ways even though my ways were taking me exactly where I wanted to be.  As a campus ministry leader many years ago one of my roles was to preach every third Sunday for the church and every Wednesday for the campus. I would put in so much time and effort into my sermons and there was fasting and dedicated prayer to accompany the effort. On Sunday I was always welcomed by the church and would see and hear things from the pulpit that would set my soul on fire so to speak. I had older men that I respected tell me how gifted I was as a speaker and I saw folks cry and could only think that they must be right.

            Perhaps they were and perhaps I can deliver a message with clarity and impact but that is not the point here. One Wednesday with the campus ministry I addressed some attitudes in the ministry only to find out that my example was the cause of these attitudes. There was a spirit of competition between the brothers that had nothing to do with seeing God glorified. Each was out for their own glory. I was humbled as I recalled how Jesus handled a competitive spirit in His own ministry and how He was able to settle it so quickly. It would be easy enough to say it is because He is Lord and this is true but He was also man and He served His disciples and did not seek a spotlight. 

            It took me weeks of serving my ministry for my words, even as I used the Bible, to have the kind of meaning they needed to. The pulpit is a dangerous place as it is in my opinion just another piece of wood God’s people can fall in love with over Him. This experience helped to shape my view because when I was the next preacher to take over the world I had no personal or lasting impact with my ministry but when I was Alex the defeated sinner in need of a Savior I had real strength. 

Exegetical paper of Deuteronomy 5:1-21

Deuteronomy 5:1-21

            The Ten Commandments comprise the foundation of the Jewish faith. In Deuteronomy 5:1-21 Moses proclaims the Ten Commandments to the people a second time. This essay will examine the context of Deuteronomy 5:1-21 and address why the commandments are repeated for a second time. The essay will identify the type of law, whether salvation driven or obedience based, Deuteronomy 5:1-21 aligns with. It will answer the question, what was the nature of adherence required by the Ten Commandments? More specifically this essay will respond to why the law was there and what purpose it served. After addressing these topics concerning the Decalogue they can then be applied in a modern context. Deuteronomy 5:1-21 must be given proper context, understanding the features of the law which formed the basis of the covenant between God and man is vital in applying them to our lives today.

            The Ten Commandments provide a foundation for the people Israel on how to be Israelites. As a people belonging to God there was to be holiness present in Israel and in this the glory of God would be on display for the rest of the world. Deuteronomy 5:1-21 was not merely an additional reminder to the people to obey their God; it was a gift from God. “The Law shows God's justice, love, and high standards, but one should not fail to see God's mercy even in the midst of these.”[1] The gift and blessing of the Ten Commandments was that Israel always had a way back to God, for this reason the Ten Commandments had a vital role in the lives of the people.

            The law was given to Israel not as a means to salvation but to show them to be a people of salvation. The law is then given to the people so they might obey their God out of love and not fear. “The Mosaic law was not, and never was intended to be, the means of establishing a relationship with God. Instead, it was a means of regulating Israel's relationship with God that had already been established, being guidelines for those already ‘saved.’”[2] This additional giving of the law in Deuteronomy was given as a reminder that God is for His people and this will not change as they enter the Promised Land. This is consistent with the book of Deuteronomy as the hearers were given reassurances of God’s love and faithfulness in the face of impossible odds.

Deuteronomy 5:1-21 provides the reader with a different contextual base from the original proclamation in the Exodus account. In this case the audience was different. The audience was still all Hebrews but of a different generation and in a different mindset from the previous Exodus generation. The location was different and the obstacles of their immediate future presented different challenges. “Rather, Deuteronomy represents a recontextualization of the earlier material, as Moses addresses a different audience from those who heard the law given at Sinai/Horeb.”[3] This demonstrates how the law was applicable regardless of situation or location just as the words of God are today.

            The Ten Commandments cover many types of law, considering the wide range of topics listed. From family, civil, and moral issues the Ten Commandments act as a base for legal questions in Israel. Deuteronomy 5:1-21 brings to light the type and nature of the law as the people were reminded of the requirements and direct nature of the Commandments. These are apodictic laws that state absolute principles, as opposed to casuistic laws that apply the principles. “Apodictic law, on the other hand, is categorical assertions of right and wrong. Apodictic laws are not presented in the form of cases (“If . . . then . . .”) but as declarations.”[4] The Ten Commandments fall under the apodictic type, meaning that the law is indisputably true and thus it is appropriate to announce the law to the people again at Horeb.

            The law was given as the very words of God, written by His hand and void of human intervention. This more than qualifies the Ten Commandments as indisputable and therefore above all other laws they will come into contact with. God’s covenant with Israel is proclaimed in Deuteronomy 5:1-21 before entering the Promised Land so that old temptations do not take hold of the people again. “A few chapters later (ch. 23) the same prophet traces the origins of the Israelite tendency to stray after foreign gods to their time in Egypt (see below). These passages unambiguously affirm that the Hebrews worshipped foreign gods, identified as ‘the idols of Egypt’, during this pre-exodus period.”[5] The law was more than a set of instructions for Israel, it was a peace treaty hand written by the Lord God.

The requirements of the laws are clearly stated in Deuteronomy 5:1-21, literally written in stone and unyielding to the passing of time or environment. This creates a clear, concise and coherent law the people can follow and understand. Laws that are clearly written and received provide the basis for justice while giving the reader a basis for understanding. “But in seeking to properly understand the relevance of the text for a contemporary audience, it is clearly necessary to begin with a proper understanding of exactly what the law is requiring or forbidding.”[6] God is showing the people how to be His own people and has not minced words in doing so.

            It is the nature of the law that motivates or inspires the people to obey God fully. The penalty of the law is much the same as we see in all legal writings however the outcome of obeying the law takes new meaning in Deuteronomy 5:1-21. The Ten Commandments are applied to the people as a whole and all share in the responsibility of representing their glorious God through obeying Him. This is true even for Moses the law provider, whereas in many cultures we see an absence of legal requirement for the law-givers or ruling authorities. “By contrast, in the revelation of the Decalogue this theme is omitted. Moses joins his peers as listener. God now speaks directly to his people: ‘And God spoke all these words, saying’ (20:1 RSV).”[7] The authority of the law is revealed as the chosen instrument of God, Moses, the worker of miracles and the rescuer of Israel, listens and adheres to the law as does Israel.

            The requirements of the law were unifying as they applied to the whole of Israel. Although Moses was the chosen instrument of God in the rescuing of His people, Moses was a part of the people like everyone else. “Strictly speaking, the Decalogue is not a collection of laws. Various factors set it apart from other legal collections of the Pentateuch. First, God speaks it directly to the people; at this stage Moses does not act as an intermediary (20:1, 19; cf. Deut. 4:1213; 5:45, 2227).”[8] This was not Moses’ law and therefore he could claim no exemptions from it as he would come to find out during an angered outburst that cost him his chance to enter the Promised Land (Numbers 20:12).

            Deuteronomy 5:1-21 is necessary to solidify the purpose of the Ten Commandments. Moses again plays a crucial role in solidifying the true identity of Israel as God’s chosen people. “At the very least, it also contained the powerful vision of the Covenant people, a unique concept of service to God and Devotion to His ways which is the source from which stem all other aspects of Judaism, including its ethical and ritual codes."[9] This is the second time we see the commandments listed out fully and it sets a tone for the people of God going forward. In order to receive the Promised Land from God the people would need to be ready for the challenges ahead of them.

The people needed to understand that their success was dependent on their relationship with God. “This sense of total devotion to Yahweh was necessary for Israel’s survival and success as the people of God. Israel could not be a paradigm for the nations in terms of what it means to be human in relationship with God if the people were just like the nations in terms of idolatry.”[10] Before entering the Promised Land they would need to be Israel and not Egyptian refugees, and the law provided this identity for them. Moses acted as mediator but his intention was to give the people a vision of their King.

            The Ten Commandments are listed out a second time by design and intention not only for Israel but for those who would become His children. The law can be set aside by the modern Christian follower as it is labelled unnecessary and burdensome. More so the Christian believer can view the law as abolished or absent from the Christian faith and ideals. Jesus did not say he was going to abolish the law, however, but to fulfill it. Given that Jesus fulfilled the law, how does it apply to us?

The law was put in place to provide more than judicial and civil laws but to provide an understanding of God’s intention and heart for His people. The penalties against a rapist, for example, can be viewed as barbaric to our modern sensibilities as we want to think that God only forgives. The penalty could have been soft but then we would not understand God’s feeling about rape. “In fact, it wasn't: the Bible could have ordered that a rapist cannot marry his victim, but must provide financial support for her for his entire life.”[11] Whether or not we agree with the penalty we are quickly apprised of God’s feelings towards this vile act.

The law is applied in spirit through the life we pursue in Christ and in this way the law can be fulfilled. The pursuit of New Testament living should not be viewed as easy nor should grace be used as a license to sin. By no means is this true. It is wise to recall that the law was more than a set of rules and regulations but a gift to the people for purposes of identity. “We noted there that law for the Israelites was not about earning salvation through the keeping of a set of rules but was a means by which God’s people were to live out relationship with God as a witness to a watching world.”[12] Just as the law showed the world a people belonging to God it now shows the world a people in Christ, the fulfilment of the law.

            This is not to say that the law is required in strict obedience for the follower of Jesus today as there is a New Covenant in place, but this does not abolish the former. We are no longer under a theocracy as the Hebrews were, or at least not in the United States, but we remain accountable to the Messiah Jesus who judges by grace with the law still standing as a pillar of righteous behavior before God. We are under grace and not law but the law does not play the role of a villain in our narrative.  Just as Moses proclaimed the Ten Commandments again in Deuteronomy 5:1-21 Israel was reminded of the God they serve and the glory He is worthy of, we too make every effort to obey Him in love so that the world may know Him.

---

[1] Lecture 1. "HTH 611: Old Testament Exegesis - Pentateuch." Grand Canyon University. Phoenix, AZ, 2014.

[2] Joe M. Sprinkle, "Law and narrative in Exodus 19-24." Journal of The Evangelical Theological Society 47, no. 2, 2004: 235-252. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed May 22, 2016).

[3] Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009, 137

[4] Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009, 138

[5] Nicholas P. Lunn, "Let my people go!' The exodus as Israel's metaphorical divorce from Egypt." Evangelical Quarterly 86, no. 3, 2014: 239-251. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed May 24, 2016).

[6] Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009, 141

[7] Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005, 179

[8] T. Desmond Alexander, From Paradise to the Promise Land - An Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012.

[9] Robert A. Hammer, "New covenant of Moses." Judaism 27, no. 3, 1978: 345-350. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed May 23, 2016).

[10] Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009, 143

[11] Morgan Reinhart, "What God Has Brought Together." Humanist. Nov/Dec, Vol. 72 Issue 6, 2012: p8-11. 3p. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed May 22, 2016).

[12] Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009, 136

Ethical Issues Debate: Same-Sex Marriage

Ethical Issues Debate: Same-Sex Marriage

Opening Statement: Against

            The church should not be involved in this matter. This may seem as if I am taking a weak stance on same-sex marriage but it is just the opposite. I will prove that the church need not be involved in the same-sex marriage debate and should accept whatever the ruling, both state and federal, concerning same-sex marriage. Truly the only time a stand should be made is when the ruling authorities come knocking on our doors and demand the church to officiate a same-sex marriage. I am convinced that the same-sex marriage issue has little to do with church function and operation and more to do with a clever plot against it by an old enemy.

            Christians must be able to present the Gospel of Jesus as attractive and this is an idea that has been so stretched at times we no longer have a functioning definition of it.  That said we still ought to be respectful, humble and direct in the presentation of our practiced faith and subsequent ethics.

“Discussions of human sexuality and marriage today are beyond a tipping point in our culture and churches. All sides seem unable to listen and put forth actual arguments, but this need not be the case. As Christians, we can and must work to change how the Christian community approaches these issues (without changing what we believe to be God's design for sex and marriage)” (Lecture 5 2015)[1].

The Christian church and community is just that: Christian. The world around us may not subscribe to our faith and, in fact most will not, and therefore our ethic on marriage will also be unaccepted. This should be of no surprise except in light of the fact that we have become comfortable being the largest and most dominant religion in the United States and the world.

            The Christian way of leadership is through service and sacrifice not billboards and protests. It is Jesus that shows us just how this works in the life of a Christian: “If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer” (1 Corinthians 1:6, NIV). There are in fact many holidays and ceremonies that have started with theological roots and have been twisted by the world with little to no uproar. Where are the angry protesters at concerning the image of Saint Nicholas from a pale overweight man to the Middle Easterner who attended and participated in the council of Nicea?

            To give an example, same sex marriage is legal within the states and so is alcohol. I have yet to become an alcoholic even though this evil exists in the world around me and the same is true with any other legal principal in place that goes against Scripture. Being righteous has nothing to do with forcing others to see the world as we do.

“By contrast, the prohibition against same-sex relationships affects only a discrete minority directly, and is consonant with the culture many of us were born into. We should perhaps beware of easy paths to righteousness, and especially of those paths that lay burdens upon others while not laying them upon ourselves” (Wirenius 2014, 524-525)[2].

Most have embraced the separation of church and state and I think this is good as there is a definite separation of church and world we must also recognize. Jesus brought salvation to the people He did not place God on to the people.

            We are competent to instruct one another as Scripture tells us (Romans 15:14) but we must not allow the context of this statement pass us by. The one another statement used here are other Christians not the world. In fact, only within the church is judgment even allowed because we have the mind of Christ and can discern spiritual matters. The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of same sex marriage and this is its right to do so as they are they judges of this land. Church and state are indeed separate and each has a responsibility to their members. The church is not the law of the land nor should it be.

Popularity and prosperity have made it easy to forget that our ideals are not the norm and that we are the persecuted not the rulers. “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me” (Matthew 5:11, NIV). Why would anyone persecute us if we did not think and act differently? It is easy to forget that we build the kingdom of God by means of the Spirit and not the flesh. The Bible also records the many times we, as His followers, have failed in marriage both metaphorically and practically. “The biblical record also includes repeated examples of the difficulty of sustaining polygamous relationships in the face of the inevitable jealousies and intrigues among wives and children competing for their husband’s/father’s attention and blessing (consider the patriarchal narratives in Gen 12—50)” (Stassen and Gushee 2003, 303)[3]. If our hands were clean we would be allowed to throw the first stone but as it stands we are all in need of grace and mercy.

Opening Statement: For

            I will contest my colleague’s opinion as it is my stance that the church is obligated to officiate and govern same sex marriages.

“The Court itself manifested the major social shift in attitudes toward gays and lesbians by accepting homosexuality as normal and immutable and endorsing the view that same-sex couples are worthy of respect. However, the Court recognized that others may not personally share the Court’s own view” (Hermann 2016, 376)[4].

 

Even the courts recognize that although their ruling is final and binding it may not sit well with others. Thi

s does not negate or lessen the impact and authority of the court’s decision. Whatever separation there is between church and state some lines have been forever blurred. The churches in the United States enjoy a tax exempt status as well as receiving federal grants every year. So the separation of church and state is not an argument that can be made only when it is convenient to do so.

            Whether the churches would admit it or not they have become a social standard in American culture and many want access to their exclusive club. “The churches often castigated homosexuality as an abomination forbidden by God in Leviticus, darkly coloring their parishioners' perceptions of lesbians and gays. In response, gays and lesbians were generally ambivalent toward faith” (Hoffman 2011, 125)[5]. This new law is about equality in this country and this includes acceptance in the church. This is not to say that the churches would then be flooded with gay members but it would be their right to join in so inclined.

            The church has lost its origins and as such should not be treated as some sacred city on a hill but should be a public place of worship. “If the Bible is true, then we should be stoning people to death for heresy, adultery, homosexuality, worshiping graven images, and ‘other imaginary crimes’” (Copan 2011, 23)[6]. Long gone are the days of having a child stoned to death because he or she was disobedient to their parents. Many churches in the United States have already recognized this and have begun a sweeping reform of archaic practices and traditions.

            Love and acceptance are not just for the heterosexual anymore and many churches and church leaders have accepted this and are at the forefront of the new church movement in America.

“And the list is growing: Clergy from the Episcopal Church will be able to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies after the church’s General Convention recently approved a new definition of marriage. Another mainline Protestant denomination, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), voted to formally sanction same-sex marriage earlier this year” (Masci and Lipka 2015)[7].

This is the new image of God and He is progressive and truly compassionate towards all who would seek Him. The result will be an increase in faith in America and not a folding of values and morals, until now there has been no room for the homosexual and their partner living out of wedlock.

Now those partners are legally married and this should be recognized under the church just as it is under the constitution. Same sex marriage is this century’s cultural and spiritual revolution and revival. Holding on to a marred past when a bright future is before it is both ignorant as well as arrogant. The church has been allowed to duck and dodge so many responsibilities that the rest of us must hold to because of some ancient and mythical law. With a new law in place the church no longer has a place to hide. The new era is before us and the Supreme Court is for us, who could be against us?

Many of us do not agree with the laws of our state or government but we obey them, understanding that these are the terms of our nation. Should an illegal alien gain residency in the United States he or she will be expected to obey the laws of the land even if they do not agree with a law they formerly knew. This is appropriate and in line with the reasoning behind having governing bodies make laws. The protection and promotion of the general welfare of its members and in this case citizens.

In closing I would ask that you image a world where religion is no longer looked down upon as bigoted and inclusive as it has been in the past. A world where religion stands for the same light it has wanted to portray to the world since its inception. “Religion is a robust explanation for homonegativity in a number of global contexts. Most empirical literature studies this relationship by measuring people’s religiosity, including their frequency of organizational participation or extent of belief in religious dogma” (Spina 2016, 37)[8]. No more negativity and no more name calling, a true utopia.

Rebuttal:

            That was a very convincing argument albeit from a very acute perspective. First I would point out that it is not only the church that has rules or a code that needs to be followed within the United States. More importantly I would like to add context to your argument. When I go to watch the Chicago Bears play football I am not expecting to see the Lakers come out on to the field. I went to Soldier Field on purpose knowing full well this is the home of the National Football League’s Chicago Bears organization. To expect to see anything different would be a lack of understanding on my part as to why I bought a ticket in the first place.

            That is to say the church is under the laws of God and not of the land and must therefore abide by His law first and foremost. You are correct in saying the judges of the Supreme Court have both the authority and right to change or make laws in this country because that is their jurisdiction. No man has ever been giving the authority or right to change God’s laws but in fairness this is a bed we have made ourselves to sleep in. “Without denying the reality of ‘principalities and powers’ (Eph. 6:12), we do well to ponder this: What actions and attitudes have we imbibed that contribute to our culture’s dismissing our ethics? Our homophobia has revealed our fear and prejudice” (Galli 2015)[9].

            Through our pursuit to deny same sex marriage in the United States because of our faith in God we have gone beyond our own jurisdiction and have opened the doors for others to go beyond theirs as well. “No one serving as a soldier gets entangled in civilian affairs, but rather tries to please his commanding officer” (2 Timothy 2:4, NIV). For instance, the government could declare that Tuesday is going to be Satan day and wearing red is encouraged. This would not affect me in the slightest because I would not get entangled by it. Remember Daniel who insisted on praying three times a day to His God not knowing of the new law in place and subsequently how he was rescued by God because of his faith?

            We as Christians would do well to understand that marriage is defined for us in Scripture but it also reminds us that we are but sheep among the wolves. Marriage has deep theological roots and as such it is under attack and this is natural.

“Christians must remember that marriage is a theological matter, first and foremost, not purely social or cultural. The bible begins and ends with a wedding. Nuptial imagery is pervasive throughout the Old and New Testaments, where it serves to elucidate God's relationship with his chosen people” (Stiegemeyer 2014, 129)[10].

It is proper to protect the flock from wolves that would attack however the sheep are taken care of by the shepherd while in the pen not outside of it. Remember that apartheid, the holocaust, slavery and colonialism were all legal. We are not so much talking about ethics as we are power and influence which is an illusion the church must let go of. 

            The defense that my colleague has put together sounds wise and even has subtle hints of righteousness but in the end it is a disguise. We must remain on guard as our enemy does not attack from the front where the shepherd is but from the back. “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14, NIV). We have made the bed we are now sleeping in with our homophobia and our involvement, fighting with the flesh (world) using weapons of flesh (the world) under the banner of Christ. The ruling has been given and same sex marriage is legal but I stand by my initial response: The church should not be involved in this matter.

---

[1] Lecture 5. "HTH-610: Current Ethical Issues Facing Church and Society: Life, Love, and Human Sexuality." Grand Canyon University. Phoenix, 2015.

[2] Wirenius, John F. "Swallowing the camel: biblical fidelity, same-sex marriage, and the love of money." Anglican Theological Review, 2014: 505-525.

[3] Stassen, Glen H., and David P. Gushee. Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context. Westmont, IL: IVP Academic , 2003.

[4] Hermann, Donald H. J. "EXTENDING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF MARRIAGE TO SAME-SEX COUPLES: THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION IN OBERGEFELL V. HODGES." Indiana Law Review, 2016: 367-396.

[5] Hoffman, Scott W. "'Last night, I prayed to Matthew': Matthew Shepard, homosexuality, and popular martyrdom in contemporary America." Religion and American Culture, Winter 2011: 121-164.

[6] Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament God. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011.

[7] Masci, David, and Michael Lipka. "Where Christian churches, other religions stand on gay marriage." Fact Tank: News in the Numbers. December 21, 2015. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/21/where-christian-churches-stand-on-gay-marriage/ (accessed April 8, 2016).

[8] Spina, Nicholas. "The Religious Authority of the Orthodox Church and Tolerance Toward Homosexuality." Problems of Post-Communism., 2016: 37-49.

[9] Galli, Mark. "Six Things To Do after the Supreme Court Decision on Gay Marriage." Christianity Today. June 26, 2015. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2015/june-web-only/6-things-to-do-after-supreme-court-gay-marriage-decision.html (accessed April 9, 2016).

[10] Stiegemeyer, Scott. "Robert George's natural law argument against same-sex marriage." Concordia Theological Quarterly, 2014: 129-153.