Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog

In Jeremiah 29:1-23 was preserved a letter which Jeremiah wrote to those Judahites who were exiled with Jehoiachin king of Judah to Babylon around 593 BCE, encouraging the Judahites to expect a protracted exile and to seek the welfare of the city in which they had found themselves. Yet the Greek Septuagint also preserved an additional text often called the Letter of Jeremiah. What is this Letter of Jeremiah? What is its relationship to the Book of Baruch (1 Baruch)? Did Jeremiah ben Hilkiah the prophet, or Baruch his secretary, write it? How should Christians regard the Letter of Jeremiah?

The Letter of Jeremiah purported itself to be a letter which Jeremiah the prophet sent along with those Judahites being exiled to Babylon in the wake of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 586 BCE (Letter of Jeremiah 1:1 / Baruch 6:1). The Letter of Jeremiah has been preserved in Greek; most scholars believe it was written originally in Hebrew or Aramaic. In the Greek Septuagint, the Letter of Jeremiah was preserved as an independent text; in the Latin Vulgate, it was preserved as the sixth chapter of the Book of Baruch; in the Ethiopian tradition, it was reckoned with the “Rest of Jeremiah” with some other apocryphal materials.

While the Letter of Jeremiah does seem to be an independent composition, most English versions of the Apocrypha follow the Latin Vulgate’s lead, and thus it can be often found as Baruch 6:1-73; it can also be found and read online here. The letter began as if Jeremiah were writing to the Judahites to be exiled in Babylon on account of their sins, and should expect to be there for quite some time, up to seven generations (Letter of Jeremiah 1:1-3 / Baruch 6:1-3). The point of the work would be set forth in the Letter of Jeremiah 1:4-7 / Baruch 6:4-7: in Babylon the Judahites would see all kinds of gods made from all kinds of materials, highly regarded by the local inhabitants who would encourage the Judahites to join in their service; they should instead serve God alone, and His angel would be watching over them there.

The rest of the Letter of Jeremiah featured a series of polemical arguments and exhortations against such idolatry. Such statues could not talk or move but would collect dust; their priests pilfer some of the precious materials made for the statue for their own regular or nefarious purposes; even if they held a scepter or a weapon, they proved unable to defend themselves; the doors of the temples were locked lest robbers enter and steal; the statues are blackened by smoke and animals freely move around on and among them and are consumed by them; therefore, they should not be feared or honored as gods (Letter of Jeremiah 1:8-23/ Baruch 6:8-23). All the gold and gifts showered upon such gods were for naught, for they are not felt or enjoyed by them; if the statue fell over, they could not get up themselves, but would need to be set back up by people; priests sell the sacrifices offered to these gods for their own profit or use the food for themselves without regard to the poor; therefore, they should not be feared or honored as gods (Letter of Jeremiah 1:24-29 / Baruch 6:24-29). How can such things be called gods when food was made for them which they would never eat, priests would rave before them but nothing would happen, nothing happened whether one acted well or poorly toward them, and they were not able to actually do anything good for anyone in distress or trial (Letter of Jeremiah 1:30-39 / Baruch 6:30-39)?

The Letter of Jeremiah then indicted some of the Babylonians for their practices, bringing the mute to Bel and praying they would speak, or the women waiting to take part in sacred prostitution and then deriding those who were not taken for being less attractive (Letter of Jeremiah 1:40-44 / Baruch 6:40-44). The author wondered how anyone could believe such statues could well and truly represent gods since the priests consult regarding where to hide them when calamity arises, neither the statues nor the ones who made them would live very long, they can be easily taken and plundered, and they cannot raise up kings, justice, or resistance in any way, shape, or form; pretty much everything else proves more useful than such “gods” (Letter of Jeremiah 1:45-59 / Baruch 6:45-59).

The Letter of Jeremiah struck at the heart of such idolatry by considering many of the natural forces often divinized or considered part of the domains of various gods and goddesses in ancient societies, demonstrating how they were not gods themselves but all reflect the hand of God and accomplish His purposes: the sun, moon, stars, lightning, wind, and fire (Letter of Jeremiah 1:60-69 / Baruch 6:60-69). The Letter of Jeremiah concluded by comparing such idol statues to scarecrows: they sat and did nothing and would rot and be consumed, and therefore the upright would not revere such idols or the gods they claimed to represent (Letter of Jeremiah 1:70-73 / Baruch 6:70-73).

Did Jeremiah ben Hilkiah really write the Letter of Jeremiah? The Letter of Jeremiah was never considered canonical as part of the Hebrew Bible, although some early Christians reported at least some Jewish people maintained a “Book of Jeremiah” which included the canonical books of Jeremiah and Lamentations along with the apocryphal Book of Baruch and Letter of Jeremiah. Some early Christians considered the Letter of Jeremiah as part of the works of Jeremiah and considered it inspired and canonical; some other early Christians maintained many doubts about its authenticity, and deemed it apocryphal and pseudepigraphal.

The Letter of Jeremiah no doubt took its inspiration from passages like Jeremiah 10:11, the only verse written in Aramaic in an otherwise Hebrew text, and Isaiah 44:9-20, and from them expressed this powerful polemic against idolatry. But it would prove very challenging to coherently argue Jeremiah ben Hilkiah himself was behind the Letter of Jeremiah, especially comparing the expected timeframes between Jeremiah 1:29 (seventy years) with the Letter of Jeremiah 1:3 (seven generations). Some have even attempted to date the writing of the Letter of Jeremiah to the middle of the fourth century BCE on account of the “seven generations” timeframe; it would make more sense than to suggest a sixth century authorship, but it could also be a sort of rhetorical flourish, indicating a longer exile than had been anticipated. The Letter of Jeremiah is thus generally considered to be an apocryphal and pseudepigraphal work of the Second Temple Period; its terminus ad quem must be somewhere in the middle of the second century BCE, since the Letter of Jeremiah seems to be cited in 2 Maccabees 2:1-3, and a portion of the Letter of Jeremiah in Greek was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QJeremiah).

Therefore, like the Book of Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah most likely represents an apocryphal work written by some anonymous Second Temple Jewish person. Does this mean the Letter of Jeremiah can provide no benefit to Christians? By no means! The Letter of Jeremiah was cited in 2 Maccabees 2:1-3 and found among parts of the Dead Sea Scrolls for the same kind of reason it would remain popular among many early Christians: it well expanded upon the prophetic indictment and condemnation of idolatry. It was not as if Jewish people would be exposed less to the service of idols and intense pressure from those who honored them after the prophets ceased speaking; far from it, in fact! Today we may not think what is presented in the Letter of Jeremiah was bold or controversial, but it would have been very much so in the world of antiquity, both under the dominance of Near Eastern powers like Babylon and Persia as well as Western powers like the Macedonians and Romans. Most of the people around the Jewish people believed the idols represented the gods and goddesses behind the natural forces which could give them health and prosperity or its complete opposite. To forthrightly denounce these statues as lifeless and powerless, and all the forces being served as gods or as the power of gods as really under subjection to the God of heaven remained just as necessary in the latter Persian period and the Ptolemaic, Seleucid, and Roman periods as they had in the days of Assyria and Babylon.

Christians also must be on guard against idolatry, even though our forms of idolatry rarely involve statues in temples (cf. 1 John 5:21). While we do best to recognize the Letter of Jeremiah as apocryphal and pseudepigraphal and therefore not canonical or inspired, we can also appreciate its exhortation and message and what it would have meant for the Jewish people in antiquity, perpetually surrounded by people serving statues as gods, and allow it to help inform how we view and approach the world of Second Temple Judaism which shaped Jesus, the Apostles, and therefore the New Testament and the Christian faith as we know it. May we turn aside from all idols and serve the true and living God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Works Consulted

Letter of Jeremiah. (accessed 2025/11/24).

The post The Letter of Jeremiah appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Our subject matter today represents an awful, terrible distortion and perversion of God’s good gifts of life, youth, and sexuality. We would rather not have to discuss such matters; such behaviors and the forces at work to justify or rationalize them, however, thrive in the darkness, and would rather us not consider them and to continue to look away. We owe it to all those who have been affected by such ungodly behavior to present the light of Jesus and the Gospel in regards to these matters, yet fully understand why what we are about to consider might be too much, too difficult, or too painful for many.

Throughout time, various forces have conspired in various ways to sexualize children of different ages for different purposes. There have always been some who have desired to treat children as objects of their sexual desire and fulfillment, no matter what it might mean for that child’s development, health, and life.

These days we speak of such behaviors according to three different categories: pedophilia, in which an adult or older teenager experiences sexual attraction toward prepubescent children (defined generally as younger than 12); hebephilia, in which an adult experiences sexual attraction toward children of pubescent age (defined generally as 10 to 14); and/or ephebophilia, in which an older adult experiences sexual attraction toward children of later adolescent age (defined generally as 13 to 19). “Pedophilia” is often used as shorthand to refer to any or all of the above phenomena.

While some of our definitions or delineations regarding these phenomena might be of more recent coin, the tendencies remain quite ancient. The ancient Greeks remain infamous for the practice of pederasty among the elites, in which an older man of means would show romantic affection for a younger man in his young adolescent or teenage years. We can see the celebration of such relationships in the texts of many of the Greek philosophers (e.g., Plato’s Symposium). Similar kinds of relationships also existed in cultures in parts of Africa, Asia, and Oceania; most of them involved same-sex relationships among men or women.

While many cultures throughout time have considered pedophilia shameful, both hebephilia and ephebophilia were normalized, and remain normalized, in many cultures to this day. Minimum ages of consent and age of marriage in many societies was as low as 11 or 12 in a good number of places until fairly modern times; to this day it is not unheard of to hear of girls of 11 or 12 being married off in some parts of the world, although in all such circumstances it would require parental consent.

While most everyone in Western society today finds the prospect of families marrying off their 11- or 12-year-old daughters revolting, their societies also not long ago normalized the sexualization of children. Popular love songs of the 1950s and 1960s attest to the idolization of sixteen-year-old girls. Many among the elite would maintain inappropriate relationships with teenage girls; sometimes such behavior proved scandalous, yet many such people retained their employment and social standing. Child sex abuse, which we today believe takes place to at least 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys, may not have been considered approved or appropriate behavior, but it certainly did not come with the kind of condemnation and stigma we maintain for such behaviors today. Some today, in a misguided nostalgia, seek to continue to justify hebephilia/ephebophilia, attempting to create stronger distance between these phenomena and pedophilia, and seeking to rationalize and justify sexual attraction to and the pursuit of very young women.

Jesus affirmed God’s intention for a healthy expression of sexuality within marriage from the beginning: a man should leave his father and mother and cling to his wife, and the two become one flesh (Matthew 19:4-6; cf. Genesis 2:24). Anyone thus married who nurtures sexual desire for anyone else commits adultery in his or her heart (Matthew 5:27-30).

The Apostle Paul had much to say regarding porneia, “sexually deviant behavior,” often translated “sexual immorality”: he often condemned it as a work of the flesh and declared those who participated in such things would not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Galatians 5:19-21). Paul would elaborate on the concern: one could not well glorify Jesus and join a member of His body, a Christian, to a sex worker (in Greek, porne; 1 Corinthians 6:12-17). The person who commits porneia (related to porne, and thus can overall be understood as “the kinds of things one would do with a prostitute”) sins against him or herself, and Christians should instead glorify God in their bodies (1 Corinthians 6:18-20).

In this way Paul critiqued and condemned the pagan Greco-Roman society in which he lived, for it normalized visiting with sex workers. Likewise, he perceived the justification or normalization of same-sex sexual relations in Greco-Roman society as a result of their rejection of the God of heaven as God and their elevation of things He created to the place of gods (cf. Romans 1:18-27). While Paul’s concerns go beyond pederasty in Greek society, they certainly would include it. Paul would also warn Christians about sexual uncleanness and lustfulness, and encouraged all Christians to strive for holiness, honor, and purity in their sexuality and expressions thereof (Galatians 5:19-21, 1 Thessalonians 4:1-7).

Other aspects of what God has made known in Christ and in Scripture can be brought to bear on these considerations. The marriage bed is undefiled when husbands and wives love one another and display mutual respect and submission (Ephesians 5:21-33, Titus 2:1-15, Hebrews 13:4, 1 Peter 3:1-7). Attempts to overpower or lord power over others are not commended in Christ; they are deemed as the way the Gentiles and the world work, and it should not be so among Christians, who should seek to serve one another in humility (Matthew 20:25-28, 1 Peter 5:1-4). Christians are also called upon to submit to the earthly authorities and respect the sword of justice they wield (Romans 13:1-7).

On account of all of what God has made known in Christ and through Scripture, therefore, Christians should stand against and resist the sexualization of children.

There can be no defense, justification, or rationalization of any adult sexual behavior with children of any age, whether it be pedophilic, hebephilic, or ephebophilic sexual behaviors. Young children have no capacity to be sexual beings; even as they are developing sexually, adults should be providing them guidance and support as to how to best manage their development and maturity, and any sexual practices imposed upon them can only corrupt and degrade their humanity and sexuality. Pedophilic, hebephilic, or ephebophilic sexual behaviors are sexually deviant behaviors and should be roundly and forthrightly condemned.

For far too long, Christians have made too easy and convenient associations between those who participate in same sex sexual behavior and pedophilia, as if anyone who has same sex sexual desires would also naturally have pedophilic desires. As we have seen, the witness of Scripture provides condemnation of same sex sexual behaviors as well as pedophilic behaviors, and both are appropriately deemed sexually deviant behaviors. No doubt there are some who have both same sex and pedophilic sexual desires, but one does not require the other.

Most Christians recognize the sinfulness of pedophilic, hebephilic, and ephebophilic sexual behaviors and well and often condemn them, at least in the abstract. Sometimes it seems the level of concern or hostility regarding such behaviors has to do with how well or poorly those accused of doing such things align with preferred political, social, and cultural viewpoints: many Christians seem quite willing to castigate and condemn the inappropriate sexual behaviors of those “on the other side,” but conspicuously fall silent when some on “our side” are exposed.

Unfortunately, many times it is those who profess Christ who are accused of acting on pedophilic, hebephilic, or ephebophilic desires and have committed child sexual abuse. Sometimes other Christians have responded appropriately by appropriately disciplining those who would do such things, handing them over to the appropriate secular authorities so they might suffer the appropriate secular consequences, and have sought to provide appropriate encouragement, strength, and support to those who have survived their predations. Unfortunately, far too many times other Christians have responded poorly. Christians have too often shielded child sexual predators from accountability from secular authorities. Christians have too often instead attempted to foist blame upon the children involved, as if they “seduced” the adult or encouraged the adult to act the way s/he did in some way or another.

Sadly, in some of these unfortunate and sinful reactions to such behaviors by Christians, the normalizing of hebephilic and ephebophilic tendencies is manifest. Yes, boys and girls in their teenage years are beginning to experience sexual maturity and thus sexual desire. Yes, in previous times and cultures, and even in some cultures today, girls were married off often by their late teens, and even in their early- to mid-teen years. There might well be times in which boys and girls will think, feel, and act in sexual ways which ought to be reserved for marriage, either among fellow young people or even toward adults. Yet in all these matters we must remember such young people remain children, and adults have no business or right sexualizing them and/or participating in sexual behaviors with them. Instead, Christian adults should continue to strive to maintain their bodies in holiness and purity. If they transgress, they should make no excuses for their behaviors, and they certainly have no justification in blaming children for their own moral failures as adults.

Likewise, Christians would do well to be on better guard against grooming behaviors. Grooming, in a sexual context, takes place when an adult works to establish an emotional connection with someone in a more vulnerable or less powerful position and/or their family members, all with a view of gaining greater access to that person in order to develop a sexual relationship with them. Those who have and wish to act on pedophilic, hebephilic, and/or ephebophilic behaviors will often participate in grooming in order to gain the trust of the child so they can eventually sexually abuse the child. Grooming is a great perversion of the kind of relationships Jesus would have Christians cultivate with one another; after all, it is good, right, and appropriate for older Christians to take a spiritual interest in the welfare of children and young people and to provide appropriate encouragement, mentorship, and support. Distorting and perverting such adult and child relationships by introducing sexual exploitation is damnable and shameful.

What stands behind all the various matters we have considered today is the sexualization of children, and Christians therefore do best when they stand firmly against any and all sexualization of children. We do well to forthrightly condemn all pedophilic, hebephilic, and ephebophilic sexual behaviors, and we should condemn any attempt by older people to sexualize young people in any way, shape, or form. We should condemn all child sexual abuse, and seek to provide appropriate encouragement, strength, and support for all those who have survived child sexual abuse. May Christians fully stand against any and all sexualization of children while finding ways to support and strengthen children who have been sexualized, and thus glorify and honor God in Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Against the Sexualization of Children appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” Numbers 1:1-25:11 bore witness to the experience of the generation which YHWH delivered from Egypt: preparation of the camp and Tabernacle for entry into Canaan, persistence in rebellion, its condemnation, and the fulfillment of that condemnation. After the new census of Numbers 26:1-65, much of the focus in Numbers shifted to the new generation and preparing them to finally entering the land of Canaan in Numbers 27:1-36:13, fully manifest in the commandments and instructions given regarding where Israel had camped, defining the land of Canaan and how it should be conquered, and provisions of cities for Levites and for refuge in Numbers 33:1-35:34.

Numbers 33:1-49 featured Moses’ record of all the places Israel encamped from the day after the Passover when Israel departed from Ramses in Egypt to their final wilderness camp in the rift valley plains of Moab along the Jordan River (cf. Exodus 12:37-Numbers 33:49); it is the only passage in the Book of Numbers which explicitly credits Moses as its author. We do not know the specific sites behind most of the locations mentioned; most of them had been forgotten in antiquity. We have better estimations of the sites toward the beginning in Egypt and toward the end in Midian and Moab.

The plainness of much of the list proves notable: camping in the Wilderness of Sinai was addressed with as much fanfare as many of the camping sites during the forty years of wandering, even though much transpired at Sinai (Numbers 33:15-16). But we also do well to notice the particular points at which Moses provided greater detail: how the Israelites left Egypt “with a high hand,” or defiantly, while the Egyptians buried their dead and YHWH was vindicated by His judgment of their gods (Numbers 33:3-4); the springs and palm trees in Elim but no water at Rephidim (Numbers 33:9, 14; cf. Exodus 15:7, 17:1-8); Aaron’s death on Mount Hor, and noting his death after forty years of wandering and at 123, and the king of Arad hearing of the Israelite approach (Numbers 33:38-40; cf. Numbers 20:24-28, 21:1-3).

We can understand why the list of campsites was preserved: even if Israelites would not be able to visit or ascertain exact locations for most of those listed, it provided attestation for all the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites by the hand of Moses himself. But why was it placed at this point in the Book of Numbers? After all, it could have arguably been placed anywhere between Numbers 22:1 and the end of the book. We may not know exactly why the camp list was placed here, but it remains consistent with a general pattern which can be seen throughout the last section of the Book of Numbers: while the younger generation might be preparing to enter the land YHWH promised them, their context and situation was very much determined by all which had taken place beforehand. It was good to be reminded of all the places Israel had to go in order to get to the place where they now stood.

Having recounted all the places where Israel had encamped, YHWH gave commandment and instruction to Moses for Israel regarding the conquest they would soon begin (Numbers 33:50-56). YHWH charged the Israelites to dispossess the current inhabitants of the land and to destroy all the objects and places of their religious veneration (Numbers 33:50-53). Israel should then apportion the land of Canaan amongst their tribes by lot and proportional to the size of the tribe: the greater the tribe, the more land (Numbers 33:54). If the Israelites would not dispossess the people of the land, they would cause them great trouble, and YHWH would do unto the Israelites as He had planned to do to the Canaanites and others in the land (Numbers 33:55-56).

Having charged Israel to dispossess the inhabitants of Canaan and to apportion the land by lot, YHWH then instructed Moses regarding the boundaries of the land Israel would possess in Numbers 34:1-15. The boundaries established in Numbers 34:1-12, on three sides, comported to the consistent expectations before and afterward: the Mediterranean Sea on the west; the edge of the Shephelah to the Dead Sea on the south; the Jordan River on the east. The northern boundaries, however, would suggest Israel would be in possession of a lot of territory in Lebanon and Syria. Only in Ezekiel 47:13-48:35 do we find any comparable description of Israelite territory, and even then, Ezekiel’s prophecy was no doubt rooted in what was promised and expected based on Numbers 34:1-12. Numbers 34:13-15 reiterated the inheritance of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh in Transjordan without explicitly delineating its boundaries.

YHWH then listed out the leader from each tribe which He was choosing to represent each tribe in the land selection process in Numbers 34:16-29. Eleazar the high priest, Joshua, and Caleb represented the only names already familiar to us; the rest of the tribal leaders were named here for the first time, and seem to represent entirely different families from within each tribe than before.

Having addressed the conquest, the land to be apportioned, and who would represent each tribe to portion out the land, YHWH then gave instruction to make provision for the Levites to dwell in the midst of their brothers (Numbers 35:1-8). Israel should give forty-eight towns in which the Levites would dwell throughout the land of Israel: the six cities of refuge which would soon be described as well as forty-two others; the number of towns per tribe should have been proportional to tribal size (Numbers 35:6-8). The Israelites were to give the Levites the town and grazing land around the town; the exact dimensions of the grazing land seem contradictory between Numbers 35:4 and Numbers 35:5, but perhaps the two thousand cubits defined its frontage and the one thousand cubits its depth (Numbers 35:1-5).

In Numbers 35:9-34 YHWH explained the cities of refuge in greater detail. There would be six cities in total, three on each side of the Jordan River (Numbers 35:13-14). The cities of refuge would provide a secure place for anyone who killed another person accidentally (Numbers 35:9-12, 15). YHWH did not want Israel to live under any kind of confusion or delusion: shed blood defiled the land on which the blood was shed, and the only way the land could be expiated of its bloodguilt involved some kind of death (Numbers 35:33-34; cf. Genesis 9:5-6). To this end, YHWH provided a few examples of what we would call first degree murder: if a man struck another with an implement of iron, stone, or wood, and killed him, in such cases the avenger of blood must kill the murderer to make atonement (Numbers 35:16-21). But then YHWH gave provision for cases we would call involuntary manslaughter: if a man threw a rock without seeing anyone or struck a man without enmity and kills someone without intending to do so, the community would adjudicate between the one who committed the involuntary manslaughter and the avenger of blood (Numbers 35:22-24). If the community judged the case as one of involuntary manslaughter, the community would then be compelled to escort the man back to the city of refuge to which he fled, and he must live there until the high priest dies, after which he can return to his city (Numbers 35:25). But if the man would leave the city and the avenger of blood come upon him and kill him, there would be no bloodguilt for the avenger of blood (Numbers 35:26-29). YHWH also made provision, insisting upon capital punishment for all cases of first degree murder, rejecting attempts to pay some kind of ransom instead (Numbers 35:31-32).

We can see the fulfillment of all which YHWH laid out in His commandments and instructions in Numbers 33:50-35:34 in the Book of Joshua. The conquest was set forth in Joshua 1:1-12:24; yet some of the land had not been conquered, and would ultimately not be fully conquered, and all of the inhabitants which the Israelites did not dispossess would indeed become a snare and a source of great pains for Israel (Joshua 13:1-7; cf. Numbers 33:50-56). The land was apportioned out in Joshua 13:8-19:51, although greatly circumscribed in the north in comparison to what was described in Numbers 34:1-12 (cf. Numbers 34:1-29). The cities of refuge were defined in Joshua 20:1-9: Kedesh of Galilee, Shechem of Ephraim, and Hebron of Judah west of the Jordan, and Bezer of Reuben, Ramoth of Gilead, and Golan of Bashan east of the Jordan (cf. Numbers 35:9-34). The rest of the Levite cities were determined in Joshua 21:1-42 (cf. Numbers 35:1-8). The author of the Book of Joshua then solemnly testified how YHWH gave Israel the land He promised to their ancestors, and not one of His promises to them was left unfulfilled (Joshua 21:43-45).

In this way YHWH gave commandments and instruction to Israel regarding the conquest, how the land would be apportioned and by whom, and the establishment of Levitical cities and the cities of refuge in Numbers 33:50-35:34 to prepare Israel for what they would soon accomplish. The Book of Joshua would then bear witness, in the same exact order as Numbers 33:50-25:34, for YHWH’s faithful fulfillment of His promises.

But if the Book of Joshua well recorded how YHWH proved faithful to all His promises to Israel, how come the more northerly lands encompassed within Numbers 34:1-12 were never truly conquered? It proves difficult to come to a firm and robust conclusion, but it is worth noting how the boundaries of the land of Israel as described in Numbers 34:1-12 substantially represents the territory of Canaan as defined, and controlled, by the Egyptians during most of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1525-1208 BCE). We can therefore understand Numbers 34:1-12 as YHWH asserting His sovereignty over the lands of Canaan over which Egypt had formerly asserted its authority. If we entertain the later date theory of the Exodus, such would represent an actual substantive transition of authority: after Merneptah’s incursion in 1208 BCE, Egyptian authority over Canaan faded away, and despite a few later incursions and the assertion of authority over the land, Egypt would never rule over Canaan again the way it had beforehand. YHWH had defeated Egypt and its gods, and YHWH would now give the land of Canaan to whomever He willed. Much of it would go to the Israelites; because of their faithlessness, however, part of the land would not be theirs, and they would suffer all kinds of affliction and oppression from the hands of their neighbors throughout the period of the Judges.

The Book of Numbers would continue with the Gileadites speaking with Moses regarding the provisions made for the daughters of Zelophehad in Numbers 36:1-12; perhaps this narrative was placed here since it took place chronologically after all the previous instruction and before Moses’ final exhortation set forth in the Book of Deuteronomy, but we have addressed it in greater detail when speaking of YHWH’s original provision for the daughters of Zelophehad in Numbers 27:1-11. The Book of Numbers ended with Numbers 26:13, establishing what had come before as the commandments and decisions YHWH commanded Israel through Moses in the rift valley plains of Moab; such was intended to be the coda of the material which began very similarly in Numbers 26:3.

The Book of Numbers does not seem to have a dramatic ending. Yet perhaps such was the point: at its end, as it was at its beginning, Israel was still bemidbar, “in the wilderness,” as the Book of Numbers is named in Hebrew. The wilderness was the end for almost everyone in the generation of Israel whom YHWH led out of Egypt. The Transjordan lands would be the final destination for the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half of Manasseh. But for the rest of Israel, the wilderness was never intended to be the end of their story. Israel ended the Book of Numbers as much in transition as at its beginning, but in a very different place, both concretely and in terms of maturity and development. It required a long, circuitous, and painful route, but YHWH’s purposes for Israel at the beginning of the Book of Numbers had been satisfied by its end: Israel was organized militarily and societally for the conquest which they were about to undertake. So the Book of Numbers represented the preparations, events, commandments, and instructions for Israel to be prepared to conquer the land of Canaan between the establishment of the Law and the Tabernacle cult in Exodus and Leviticus and Moses’ final speech to Israel and his ultimate demise preserved in the Book of Deuteronomy. All would be fulfilled according to the purposes of YHWH. May we take strength and encouragement from the example of Israel and all YHWH accomplished in and through her and prove faithful to God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Camps, Land, and Cities appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

So then, my dear friends, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence but even more in my absence, continue working out your salvation with awe and reverence, for the one bringing forth in you both the desire and the effort – for the sake of his good pleasure – is God. Do everything without grumbling or arguing, so that you may be blameless and pure, children of God without blemish though you live in a crooked and perverse society, in which you shine as lights in the world by holding on to the word of life so that on the day of Christ I will have a reason to boast that I did not run in vain nor labor in vain. But even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice together with all of you. And in the same way you also should be glad and rejoice together with me (Philippians 2:12-18).

We are to work out our own salvation, yet God is the one empowering us to do so for His good pleasure? How can that be? Which is it?

Philippi was a Roman colony in Macedonia (part of modern Greece); Paul first visited the area and preached Jesus around 51 (cf. Acts 16:11-40). Paul wrote to the Christians in Philippi most likely around 60-61 from Rome while living under house arrest there (cf. Philippians 1:1). Paul thanked the Philippian Christians for their joint participation in his ministry and prayed for them to abound in love and make good decisions to share in Jesus’ praise at His return (Philippians 1:1-11). He explained how his circumstances had worked to advance the Gospel; if he were to die, he would go and be with Christ, but he was confident he would continue to faithfully serve God, and the Philippian Christians, while in the body (Philippians 1:12-26). Paul set forth his main exhortation: the Philippian Christians should live as citizens of the Gospel, standing firm together in it, and to suffer well for God in Christ (Philippians 1:27-30). Paul had begun establishing and defending this exhortation by encouraging the Philippian Christians to be of the same mind and to seek the interests of one another and not just themselves, and encouraged them to maintain the mind of Christ, to suffer humiliation in order to be exalted on the final day (Philippians 2:1-11). Paul continued the probatio, the main body of the letter detailing how the Philippian Christians might live as citizens of and to stand firm within the Gospel, with specific applications for the Philippian Christians in Philippians 2:12-18.

Paul continued with a message of confidence in the Philippian Christians as continuing in their obedience to Jesus even more in his absence as in his presence; he then challenged them to work out their salvation with fear and trembling, remaining confident God was willing and working within them for His good pleasure and purposes (Philippians 2:12-13).

Philippians 2:12-13 has represented a hotbed of dispute over the past fifteen hundred years on account of the divergence of views regarding the relationship between divine grace and human freedom. Those who tend to prove more deterministic emphasize and highlight Philippians 2:13 and seek to sublimate Philippians 2:12 under it; those who resist a strongly deterministic viewpoint tend to emphasize and highlight Philippians 2:12 and make much less of Philippians 2:13. Many commentators will go out of their way in their attempts to cast aspersions on either “work out your own salvation” or “God working within you to will and to work,” and such says far more about the commentators than it does about Paul or Philippians 2:12-13.

The challenge does not come from Paul or what he wrote in Philippians 2:12-13; the challenge exists because of how partisans have developed their theology in reaction to one another over the past millennium and a half. Paul himself found no contradiction in what he wrote in Philippians 2:12-13, and neither should we.

Therefore, as opposed to trying to emphasize one aspect of Philippians 2:12-13 over the other, we do far better to understand how everything Paul said in these verses remains true together. The Philippian Christians had heard the Gospel, accepted it as the life-giving message it represented, and began following and serving Jesus as Lord. Paul commended them for their continued obedience to Jesus Christ as Lord. He encouraged them to keep obeying Jesus, and in so doing they were “working out” their salvation. It was the work God had given them to do.

At the same time, God was working within the Philippian Christians to will and to work for His good pleasure. God was not violating their free will; instead, they freely submitted to Him and His purposes made known through the witness of Paul, and, no doubt, by heeding the promptings of His Spirit within them. God was working within the Philippian Christians; the Philippian Christians were working out their salvation. Both of these things can be true at the same time; as they were for the Philippian Christians, so also should it prove true for us today.

The New English Translation (NET) well represents Greek meta phobou kai tromon as “with awe and reverence,” shifting away from the more “literal” American Standard Version’s (ASV) rendering “with fear and trembling,” in Philippians 2:12. While the Hebrews author did speak of God as a consuming fire, and therefore should be served with reverence and awe in Hebrews 12:28-29, the emphasis within the New Testament seems more akin to John’s testimony regarding the perfect love of God casting out fear, as in 1 John 4:7-28. However we may have learned of God or proven terrified at the prospect of the consequences of disobedience in former times, God in Christ through the Spirit calls all Christians to grow in maturity in His love (cf. Ephesians 3:14-21, 1 John 4:7-28). Terror at the prospect of the consequences of disobedience can take us only so far; we do better to cultivate a proper awe and reverence for God for all He has done for us in the creation and in Christ, constantly overwhelmed by the unfathomable depths of the love God has displayed toward all of us in Jesus. We therefore best understand Paul encouraging the Philippian Christians, and us by extension, not as encouraging us to be constantly terrified of what God may do to us if we prove disobedient, but to grow and appreciate His majesty and love for us, and to respond accordingly.

Paul then exhorted the Philippian Christians to do all things without grumbling or arguing (Philippians 2:14). If they did so, they would remain pure and blameless children of God in a crooked and perverse society, shining as lights by holding onto the word of life (Philippians 2:15-16a).

As in all aspects of Paul’s probatio in Philippians 2:1-4:1, it remains possible he already has in mind whatever was going on between Euodia and Syntyche (cf. Philippians 4:2). Nevertheless, as with so much of what we have already seen in the Philippian correspondence, it would seem Paul was encouraging the Philippian Christians to continue doing what they were already doing: they already have been living as children of God, pure and blameless despite the perversity around them, shining as lights by means of how they held fast to the word of life.

Therefore, we probably do better to understand Paul as providing encouragement for the Philippian Christians to remain faithful to Jesus in these matters, highlighting an ever-present challenge and concern. We also do well to understand the story of the exodus generation of the Israelites behind Paul’s wording in Philippians 2:14: do not be grumblers like they were in the wilderness, condemned by God to suffer the very fate they complained about (cf. Numbers 14:26-28).

The example of the generation in the wilderness provides needed context and perspective for our understanding. Grumbling, complaining, and constant argument of the kind we can read about in the Book of Numbers represent works of the flesh and not manifestations of the fruit of the Spirit; they tear down community and well and successfully represent the incursions of the Evil One and his purposes among the people of God. They do not include providing critique of ways in which the people of God may have fallen short of God’s purposes and/or have accommodated themselves to the world, nor would they include standing firm for the truth of God in Christ through the Spirit before those who would resist or undermine it. As in all such things, the motivations and purposes of what is being said and done go a long way in determining whether one is being more like a member of the wilderness generation or maintaining a faithful “prophetic” like stance.

Grumbling, complaining, and constant bickering and arguing are things we should expect to find and see in the world; they existed in first century Philippi, and they remain in twenty-first century America. Yet they represent the crooked, perverse ways of the world; if we would be pure and blameless children of God, we should resist such things, and instead build one another up in our most holy faith.

By speaking of the Philippian Christians as shining as lights, Paul evokes Jesus’ message about disciples in Matthew 5:14-16, and its conclusion naturally followed: their fellow Philippians would base their understanding of the light of God in Christ through the Spirit in the Gospel by how the Philippian Christians lived. The Philippian Christians already were thus bearing witness for Jesus in their community, and they did so well by holding onto the word of life. Is that word of life the Word of God made known in Scripture or the Word of God made flesh in Jesus? As always in the New Testament, the answer is yes, for the written Word is consonant and consistent with Jesus, the embodied Word of God. And it is the word of life, as also described by John in 1 John 1:1-2: in Jesus was the light and life of humanity, and in God in Christ through the Spirit we can find life and have it abundantly, and outside of God in Christ through the Spirit there is no real life (John 1:4, 10:10).

Paul concluded he would have reason to boast he did not run or labor in vain when the Lord Jesus would return if the Philippian Christians thus behaved as he had encouraged in Philippians 2:14-16a (and, arguably, throughout Philippians 2:1-16a; Philippians 2:16bc). Even if Paul were being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of the faith of the Philippian Christians, he was glad and rejoiced with all of them, and they also should be glad and rejoice with Paul (Philippians 2:17-18).

In this way Paul returned to his themes in Philippians 1:15-25: he remained under house arrest in Rome. While he maintained strong confidence in his imminent vindication and deliverance, he was not naïve in understanding the vagaries of Roman politics: he might well find himself soon executed for his witness for Jesus. While Paul always lived in light of Jesus’ imminent return, the prospect of his demise, even if remote, certainly focused Paul’s thinking all the more on the day of Jesus.

Drink offerings were generally wine or beer poured on top of animal and grain sacrifices before YHWH at the Tabernacle or Temple (e.g. Exodus 29:40-41, Leviticus 23:13, 28). There was something about the drink offering which struck Paul as well reflecting his own experience in serving and glorifying Jesus at the end, for he returned to the same theme in 2 Timothy 4:6. Perhaps the drink offering was the final step in making the offering; perhaps Paul saw something in the pouring out of the beverage which strongly resonated with his experience in serving the Lord Jesus and dying for Him. Whatever the reason behind it, the image has proven compelling and potent throughout the years, and many servants of the Lord Jesus have strongly identified with it.

While Paul could speak of how he was poured out, and would have every reason to imagine this pouring out as the end of his own sacrifices, he very consciously and deliberately brought the Philippian Christians into the metaphor: Paul imagined himself as the drink offering poured out on the sacrifice and service of their faith. Paul had exhorted the Roman Christians to consider themselves as living sacrifices in Romans 12:1; the Philippian Christians already were embodying this living, sacrificial faith, and Paul wanted them to imagine it as well honoring and glorifying God, with his own ministry and sacrifice providing the final or finishing touch. Throughout his letter to the Philippians Paul will emphasize their joint participation together in the faith and work of ministry in Christ, and he did not neglect this emphasis in his imagery. Paul did not make it all about himself, and neither should we; God is glorified by the servants of Jesus jointly participating in the faith, as living sacrifices individually and collectively for the Lord Jesus Christ.

All of this talk from Paul about standing before Jesus when He returned, and being poured out as a drink offering, could be easily seen as dark, depressing, and distressing. It certainly sounds like the reflections of a man who found himself in dire straits and without much time left in the world. But Paul did not want to leave the Philippian Christians, or us, in such distress: he was glad and rejoiced in the Philippian Christians, and he wanted them to be glad and rejoice in him (Philippians 2:17-18). We tend to look toward his similar exhortation in Philippians 4:4 to a similar end, and for understandable reasons. Yet, in many ways, Paul’s emphasis on joy and rejoicing at this moment in the context proves all the more compelling. Yes, he was in dire straits. Yes, he might die for Jesus. Even if he did not yet die for Jesus, he was in a disadvantaged and socio-culturally shameful position. There was very little in his fleshly situation which would make a person happy. But he rejoiced in their shared faith in Jesus and their hope of vindication in the resurrection. He did not want them to focus on his distress, although he also did not downplay or minimize the challenges he was experiencing. Instead, he wanted them to rejoice and be glad along with him because of how Jesus strengthened and sustained them all in what they were enduring, and they would be able to share in the resurrection in Him because of it all.

We are not Philippian Christians living in a Roman colony under the skeptical, watchful eye of Roman authorities. But we do well to share in the life and faith of God in Christ through the Spirit with Paul and the Philippian Christians, working out our salvation in awe and reverence, and confident God is willing and working through us according to His good pleasure. We should avoid grumbling and arguing, prevalent in the world, but live in the light and life of the Word of God in a crooked and perverse society. And may we live our lives as living sacrifices for God, pouring ourselves out for Jesus and one another by God’s strength through His Spirit, and be glad and rejoice in and with one another for all we share in the Lord Jesus Christ. May we share in the faith of God in Christ through the Spirit as made known through Paul so we might share in the resurrection of life as well!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Working Out God’s Work appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Hebrews author, James, Peter, John, and Jude all wrote to various groups of Christians at various points in the first century. They may have addressed different issues and challenges, but they all grounded everything they taught in the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus of Nazareth, and what it all meant for those who believe in Him.

For convenience, we often characterize Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude as the “General,” or “Catholic/Universal” Letters of the New Testament, since they all seemingly wrote to a wider audience than one specific congregation or individual like Paul did. We should never let this categorization, however, obscure the distinctions and variety among these letters. The letters were most likely written across the whole of the second half of the first century: James wrote no later than 60, perhaps as early as the 40s, and we believe John wrote his letters in the 80s or 90s, with the rest likely somewhere in-between. James wrote to the Jewish Christians of the Diaspora; Peter’s first letter was written to Christians in the Roman provinces of much of modern-day Turkey; we assume John’s letters had particular relevance to Christians in the area of Ephesus and the province of Asia; despite its name, the letter to the Hebrews’ audience cannot be manifestly discerned from the material within the letter, but much of the circumstantial evidence seems to point to Christians in Rome; the specific audience of 2 Peter and Jude knew who they were, but little evidence remains for us to discern who they might be. James, Peter, and John bore witness as having personally seen and experienced Jesus in His life, death, and resurrection; the Hebrews author and Jude both speak as if one level removed from the Apostles, although as James’ brother, and thus Jesus’ half-brother, we presume Jude had eyewitness experience of Jesus himself (cf. Hebrews 2:4, Jude 1:17-18).

Jesus’ life featured quite prominently in many of these letters. While John spoke of Jesus as the Word of life and the Light in whom Christians should walk, and both 1 and 2 John were written in large part to insist upon Jesus as having lived in the flesh, the Hebrews author well explicated what it meant: Jesus was truly the new and living way, the Pioneer of our salvation, having been tempted in all points without sin, learning obedience in what He suffered, and embodying the faithful high priest in all He suffered (cf. Hebrews 2:5-18, 4:14-10:25, 1 John 1:1-6, 2:18-27, 4:1-4, 2 John 1:6-9). James and Peter both make much of the expectation and willingness to suffer since Jesus suffered (James 1:2-4, 1 Peter 2:21-25, 4:1-19). Furthermore, their instruction to Christians was strongly shaped by what Jesus taught and embodied (James 1:27, 2:1-26/Matthew 25:31-46, James 4:10, 1 Peter 5:6/Matthew 23:12, James 5:12/Matthew 5:37, 1 Peter 5:1-4/Mark 10:42-45). Peter even made explicit appeal regarding his witness of Jesus’ life: he appealed to his experience of Jesus and God the Father in the Transfiguration to assure Christians their faith was not based on myths and fables (2 Peter 1:16-19; cf. Mark 9:2-13). We do well to remember the ancient testimony regarding the Gospel of Mark as Mark’s compilation of Peter’s witness of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, and we can see the points of continuity between that witness and what Peter wrote in his letters.

The Hebrews author, James, Peter, and John grounded much of their exhortations in Jesus’ death. Jesus had spoken of His death as providing atonement for sin and representing the new covenant in His blood; the Hebrews author would provide the fullest exposition on Jesus’ sacrifice, as the fulfillment of what had been spoken regarding David’s Lord as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek in Psalm 110:1, 4 (and going all the way back to Genesis 14:17-24 for context), Jeremiah’s expectation of a new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and the satisfaction of the heavenly reality behind the earthly copy of the Tabernacle and Temple so central to Israelite religion (cf. Hebrews 4:14-10:25). Peter likewise made much of Jesus’ death as providing atonement and healing, and encouraging Christians to prove willing to likewise suffer (1 Peter 1:2, 19, 2:19-25, 3:18, 4:1, 12-13). John well grounded his exhortations to Christians to love one another in the love Jesus displayed toward us in dying for us and being the propitiation of our sins (1 John 3:16, 4:10).

Jesus’ resurrection on the third day proved a very major theme in the Book of Acts and Paul’s letters, yet not nearly as much within these general letters. The Hebrews author considered instruction regarding the resurrection as “elementary” and something he was passing over in order to focus on other themes (Hebrews 6:1-2), and did make reference to Jesus’ resurrection in his doxology in Hebrews 13:20. Thus the Hebrews author presumed Jesus’ resurrection throughout his explication, and chose instead to focus his meditations on Jesus’ life, death, ascension, lordship, and imminent return. Peter strongly affirmed how both the Christian hope of eternal life and the efficacy of baptism were anchored in Jesus’ resurrection in 1 Peter 1:3, 3:21. While John never explicitly mentions Jesus or the resurrection in his letters, 1 John 3:2 seems to be an encouragement to Christians to recognize how they will be like Jesus in the resurrection when He appears in His return. We should not assume a lack of explicit mention or emphasis on Jesus’ resurrection in the general letters means its authors do not find it important or somehow would deny it; instead, they all presumed the truth of Jesus’ resurrection in what they taught and encouraged, and did not feel the need to place as much emphasis on the resurrection in these letters as proved necessary in the Book of Acts and among Paul’s letters.

In general, as with Jesus’ resurrection, so with His ascension: James, John, and Jude may not mention it, but they presume it as part of how they exhorted and encouraged their fellow Christians. Peter spoke of Jesus as ascending into heaven in 1 Peter 3:22. The Hebrews author made much of Jesus’ ascension as the means by which He could purify the heavenly places and present Himself as the offering for sin in Hebrews 7:1-10:18, thus becoming the high priest in the order of Melchizedek and fulfilling Psalm 110:4. Furthermore, Jesus’ resurrection and ascension both undergird the elided but necessary conclusion to all of the exhortations to endure suffering by the Hebrews author, James, and Peter: Christians should prove willing to endure suffering like Jesus so they might share in Jesus’ vindication and victory, manifest in His resurrection and ascension (more fully seen in Philippians 2:5-11).

All of the authors of the general letters affirm Jesus as Lord and Christ, the Son of God (Hebrews 13:20, James 1:1, 2:1, 1 Peter 3:22, 2 Peter 1:11, 1 John 5:20, 2 John 1:3, Jude 1:4, 25). The Hebrews author’s exposition on Jesus as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek rooted in Psalm 110:4 always had the natural association and connection with Psalm 110:1 in mind: Jesus offered Himself for sin, (was raised from the dead), ascended to the Father, and now sits at the right hand of God, reigning as Lord and Christ (cf. Hebrews 10:12-14). Peter used the same language from Psalm 110:1 in 1 Peter 3:22, as he had in Acts 2:34-35. Everything written in these letters was done so under the recognition Jesus is Lord and Christ, and humanity can only find life and truth by following and serving Him. Thus the Hebrews author, James, Peter, John, and Jude all encouraged Christians to faithfully serve Jesus as Lord, and all of their specific concerns and exhortations were directed to this end, whether to continue to serve Jesus faithfully after many years and trials (Hebrews), in how they treated one another and approached various challenges in life (James, 1 John, 3 John), to prove willing to suffer hostility or worse and doing good anyway, entrusting themselves to a faithful Creator (1 Peter), or to stand firm in the apostolic witness against false teachers (2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, Jude).

The expectation of Jesus’ imminent return also featured prominently among the general letters. The Hebrews author earnestly looked forward to Jesus’ return bringing salvation and encouraged Christians to endure a little longer to that end, but warned regarding a fearful expectation of judgment for those who persist in sin (Hebrews 9:27-28, 10:26-39). Peter could only expect the Christians of Asia Minor to endure suffering by entrusting themselves to God in Christ and their beautiful hope of salvation and confidence in judgment of those who mistreated them (1 Peter 1:3-9, 4:5, 12-19); he also set forth expectations about the Lord’s return and a new heavens and new earth so Christians might not be dismayed at those who scoffed at the prospect of Jesus’ return (2 Peter 3:1-14). John wanted to encourage Christians in the eternal life they would share in Christ, and they would be as Jesus is (1 John 3:1-3, 5:11-13). Jude made a similar appeal to the testimony of the Apostles regarding the end time as did Peter, and exhorted Christians to anticipate the mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ which would provide life (Jude 1:17-23; cf. 2 Peter 3:2-3).

Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude have their various purposes and provide various forms of exhortation and instruction to Christians. The life, death, resurrection, ascension, and lordship of Jesus undergirded everything written in these letters. Their authors would often make the associations and connections between their messages and the Gospel explicit: the Hebrews author brilliantly set forth much of the meaning of Jesus’ life, death, ascension, and lordship in his exposition, James and Peter made much of Jesus’ instruction in their own exhortations, and everything John was about was founded on Jesus having come in the flesh, fully God, fully man, suffering and dying, so we might share in love and eternal life in God. They all encouraged and warned Christians regarding their conduct in light of Jesus’ imminent return. Yet even when they did not explicitly speak of aspects of the Gospel, their teaching and exhortation only made sense in light of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return.

Thus we can perceive how thoroughly the Gospel is enmeshed in the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letter of James, the First and Second Letters of Peter, the First, Second, and Third Letters of John, and the Letter of Jude. However much they may make appeal to aspects of the Hebrew Bible or make specific references to various issues bedeviling the Christians to whom they wrote, the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus remained foundational and pivotal for all their messages and exhortations. They all, in their various ways, exhorted Christians then and now to “get rid of every weight and the sin that clings so closely, and run with endurance the race set out for us, keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of our faith” (Hebrews 11:1b-2b). May we recognize the importance of the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus of Nazareth to the “general” letters of the New Testament, well follow Jesus, and obtain the resurrection of life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Gospel in the General Letters appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

They had conquered the land on which they stood. It seemed to be a good land. They would settle here. But would it go well for them?

The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” Numbers 1:1-25:11 bore witness to the experience of the generation which YHWH delivered from Egypt: preparation of the camp and Tabernacle for entry into Canaan, persistence in rebellion, its condemnation, and the fulfillment of that condemnation. After the new census of Numbers 26:1-65, much of the focus in Numbers shifted to the new generation and preparing them to finally entering the land of Canaan in Numbers 27:1-36:13, as well demonstrated in the legislation regarding offerings and payment of vows in Numbers 27:1-30:16 and the ideal military campaign of Numbers 31:1-54.

According to Numbers 32:1-5, the Israelites of the tribes of Reuben and Gad had a lot of cattle, and perceived all of the land in which they were occupying, the Transjordanian territory of Jazer and Gilead, to be good for raising cattle. They therefore asked Moses, Eleazar the high priest, and the leaders of Israel if they could obtain the lands of Sihon and Og as their possession, and not cross the Jordan River with the rest of the Israelites.

Moses was not a fan of this proposal. He laid into the Gadites and Reubenites, asking them if they were trying to frustrate the conquest of Canaan, and insinuated they were rebelling against YHWH and His purposes like their fathers did when the spies brought back a bad report, and would cause another generation to be abandoned in the wilderness (Numbers 32:6-15; cf. Numbers 13:1-14:45).

Was Moses overreacting? We could definitely understand if he had been not a little traumatized by all he had experienced with the former generation of the Israelites, and proved overly fearful of yet another instance of an unfaithful or rebellious spirit arising in the Israelites. Perhaps Moses also had in mind a historical experience of looking upon the lands to the east of the Jordan River, believing them good for livestock, and choosing to live there as opposed to the western lands: Lot’s choice of the lands around Sodom (Genesis 13:1-18). Abraham’s descendants, the Israelites, would inherit the lands west of the Jordan River; Lot’s descendants, the Ammonites and Moabites, would inherit and live in the Transjordan lands (cf. Genesis 13:8-17, 19:30-38).

Nevertheless, in Numbers 21:21-35, YHWH had given Israel victory over the Amorite kings Sihon and Og, who had controlled a significant amount of the Transjordan, from the Arnon (which emptied into the middle of the Dead Sea) all the way up to around Mount Hermon (roughly east of Sidon of Phoenicia). Sihon and Og had no doubt conquered this land from the Moabites and Ammonites, respectively, but since the Israelites had defeated them, the land could be possessed by the Israelites.

The Gadites and Reubenites worked to allay Moses’ fears and suspicions in Numbers 32:16-19. They would not abandon their fellow Israelites in the conquest of Canaan: they would first build sheepfolds and cities, establish some fortified towns to protect themselves, and then send the (vast majority of) their men equipped for battle to go and fight with the Israelites on the western side of the Jordan River. They would not return until the conquest had been satisfactorily completed, and they would not expect an inheritance on the western side of the Jordan River.

Moses seemed satisfied by this: if they would indeed fight with their fellow Israelites on the western side of the Jordan River until the land was subdued, then they could obtain the Transjordanian territories as their inheritance; if they rebelled and did not do so, however, they would sin against YHWH, and their sin would find them out (Numbers 32:20-24). The Gadites and Reubenites confirmed the word of Moses in Numbers 32:25-27.

Moses then gave orders and communicated the situation to the rest of Israel: the Gadite and Reubenite forces would cross over and fight with the Israelites to conquer Canaan, and all Israel would then affirm the Transjordanian territories as their possession; if they would not cross over and fight, they should be given a land possession in Canaan, west of the Jordan River (Numbers 32:28-30). The Gadites and Reubenites affirmed this, and it was established (Numbers 32:31-32).

In Numbers 32:33, the narrator related how Moses thus had given the Gadites, Reubenites, and half of the tribe of Manasseh the lands of the Amorite kings Sihon and Og. He detailed the cities the Reubenites rebuilt in the more southerly lands north of the Arnon and Moabite territory, and the cities rebuilt by the Gadites to the north of Reuben, which would also include the area in which Israel was presently encamped, in Numbers 32:34-38. The narrator then explained how the descendants of Manasseh, Machir, Jair, and Nobah, took Gilead, the territories north of Gad, ostensibly all the way to Mount Hermon, and dispossessed the Amorites there, in Numbers 32:39-48.

But was it not merely the Gadites and Reubenites who requested the Transjordanian territories in Numbers 32:1-32? Where did some of the descendants of Manasseh come from? The text in Numbers provided no explicit answer. When Joshua called upon the Transjordanian Israelites to remember their vow and to cross over with the Israelites to conquer Canaan, he appealed to Gad, Reuben, and half of Manasseh, thus presuming the half tribe of Manasseh had already established their possession of Gilead before the other half conquered and received its share west of the Jordan (cf. Joshua 1:12-18). According to Joshua 17:1-9, Manasseh was allotted Gilead, Bashan, and a good amount of the territory immediately to their west across the Jordan River, all the way to the Mediterranean Sea.

Numbers 32:1-38 thus explained for later Israelites how two and a half Israelite tribes ended up with territorial allotments in the Transjordan. The Gadites, Reubenites, and Manassites who lived across the Jordan River seemed to maintain some anxiety regarding whether the Israelites of the future would consider them part of Israel, as would be made evident in the affair of the altar of witness narrated in Joshua 22:1-34.

Thus Israel considered Gilead, Bashan, and Jazer in the Transjordan as part of its territories. When Israel was strong and faithful, the Israelites possessed the land strongly; but whenever Israel was weaker or less faithful, the Ammonites, Moabites, and Aramaeans would assert their claims and overrun the land (cf. Joshua 21:27, Judges 11:1-28, 1 Kings 4:13, 2 Kings 10:33, 13:25). Yet Israel would only maintain these lands until 732 BCE, when Tiglath-pileser III king of Assyria conquered the Transjordan territories of Israel and exiled its inhabitants (cf. 2 Kings 15:29). The territory was considered the Decapolis and Perea in the time of the New Testament, and was primarily Gentile and pagan in population (cf. Mark 4:25, 5:20, 7:31). Today, most of this Transjordanian territory is part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, but the uppermost parts of Gilead extend into the Golan Heights, occupied by the State of Israel yet still claimed by the Syrian Arab Republic.

The settling of the Gadites, Reubenites, and some Manassites in the Transjordan territories in Numbers 32:1-38 exemplified all the transitions taking place toward the conclusion of the Book of Numbers. The memory of the past remained vivid, reflected in Moses’ biting and fearful response to the request of the Gadites and Reubenites. The new generation, however, was not like their fathers: they wanted to prove faithful to YHWH and the commitment to conquering the land of Canaan. At no point in the witness of the Hebrew Bible are the Reubenites, Gadites, or some Manassites deemed as somehow less faithful because their possessions were east of the Jordan River. They wanted to share in Israelite identity and to benefit from the good land upon which they found themselves. In this way the Gadites, Reubenites, and some Manassites were the first to obtain their land and portion in Israel, and by the decree of Moses no less. It would not be long before the rest of Israel would cross over the Jordan and receive their inheritance as well. May we learn from the examples of the people of God who came before us, and prove faithful to God in Christ through the Spirit in order to obtain the resurrection of life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Settling in Transjordan appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Saul of Tarsus saw the Risen Lord Jesus on the road to Damascus and then devoted his life to the proclamation of His Gospel. He would have much to say and teach regarding the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return of Jesus of Nazareth in all the correspondence he maintained with the Christians and churches with whom he was associated.

Saul of Tarsus, better known as Paul, descended from Benjamin in Israel, and was educated as a Pharisee under the feet of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3, Philippians 3:5). He proved quite zealous for the customs of Moses and was motivated by that zeal to persecute the earliest Christians (cf. Acts 22:3-5). While traveling to Damascus to round up any Christians there, he saw Jesus in heaven in the resurrection (Acts 9:1-8). Paul would receive the Gospel by means of revelation from Jesus, who sent him to preach that Gospel primarily among the people of the nations, often called the Gentiles (Acts 9:15-16, Galatians 1:11-12). After spending a few years in Tarsus and Antioch of Syria, Paul began traveling to proclaim the Gospel in Asia Minor, Greece, and ultimately Rome for a period of around twenty years (ca. 46-65 CE; Acts 13:1-28:31, 2 Timothy 4:1-22). Paul would help those who heard his message and accepted it organize into local congregations, and he would often visit them and encourage them (e.g. Acts 18:22-23, 20:1-2). But Paul could not be everywhere at all times; therefore, he also maintained correspondence with both churches and individual Christians, and many of Paul’s letters have been preserved for us in the New Testament.

Jesus’ life did not feature prominently in Paul’s letters. It is not as if Paul denied Jesus’ life or considered it without meaning or value: Paul spoke of Jesus as an Israelite and descendant of David in the flesh in Romans 1:2, Galatians 4:4, and His willingness to take on flesh and the humiliation thereof in Philippians 2:5-8. Paul also made reference to Jesus’ instruction regarding divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:11-13 and the institution of the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 (cf. Luke 16:18, 22:17-20); in 1 Timothy 5:8, Paul quoted and called Scripture what Jesus said in Luke 10:7, the only explicit quotation of a New Testament writing in another part of the New Testament and considered Scripture. Paul’s exhortations toward Christian living may not feature direct quotes of Jesus’ teaching, but they do demonstrate having been profoundly shaped by what Jesus had taught (e.g. Romans 12:1-21, Galatians 2:10, 6:10, etc.). While some have tried to make much of Paul’s lack of emphasis on Jesus’ life, we do well to remember how Paul was not a witness to Jesus’ life, bearing witness primarily to His resurrection and receiving the Gospel by revelation from Jesus Himself (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:8-11, Galatians 1:11-12), and how his correspondence did not represent the sum of all he taught within the churches. We should not assume a lack of emphasis on Jesus’ life in Paul’s letters means Paul did not put much emphasis on Jesus’ life or should cast aspersions on us doing so.

In his correspondence Paul reflected much on the death of Jesus, and he invested significant efforts into making sense of what God accomplished in it: he would go so far as to say he came to Corinth knowing only Christ and Him crucified in 1 Corinthians 2:2, and how he had been crucified with Christ in Galatians 2:20. Paul did speak of Jesus’ death as vicarious and sacrificial for our sins, considering Jesus the new Adam, able to atone for sin through His death on the cross (cf. Romans 5:12-21, 2 Corinthians 5:21). Paul would make much of the degradation and humiliation inherent in death on a cross, and very much wanted Christians to understand how they should humble themselves and expect suffering likewise (e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:18-31, Galatians 2:20, Philippians 2:5-9). To Paul, Jesus’ death on the cross represented His victory and triumph over the powers and principalities (cf. Colossians 2:15). Paul did not shy away from understanding Jesus’ death as redemptive, as seen in Galatians 3:13, 4:4-5, Colossians 1:14. Paul also made much of Jesus’ death as conciliative, reconciling God and mankind, Israelite and Gentile, and ultimately as redemptive for the entire cosmos, the great and powerful testimony of God’s love for us (Romans 5:6-11, Ephesians 2:1-22, Colossians 1:19-22).

Yet the resurrection of Jesus was as important as His death, if not more so, in Paul’s messages for the churches. In Romans 1:4, Paul understood Jesus as having been empowered as the Son of God in His resurrection (cf. Psalm 2:7-9): Jesus is the Christ not only because He suffered and died but also because He was raised from the dead. Resurrection from the dead would be a hard sell in a Greco-Roman milieu heavily influenced by Platonism and therefore hostile to the material creation, and Paul marshaled all his rhetorical skill to persuasively argue for the resurrection of Jesus, and the resurrection in general, to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 15:1-58. In that exhortation Paul insisted on Jesus’ resurrection as according to the Scriptures and certified by eyewitness testimony (1 Corinthians 15:1-11); presented the counterfactual if Christ were not raised, including the confession we all would remain in our sins if Jesus had not arose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:12-19); again portrayed Jesus as a second Adam, the basis for the hope of our own resurrection and to be made alive in the body forever (1 Corinthians 15:20-22, 45-49; cf. Romans 5:12-21); and introduced the illustration of the firstfruits to explain how Jesus arose first and now how we all await our resurrection at His return (1 Corinthians 15:23-29; cf. Exodus 23:16-19). A similar confidence regarding our resurrection in terms of Jesus’ resurrection animated Philippians 3:20-21; according to Philippians 3:4-10, Paul considered everything he had obtained as trash so he might strive to know Jesus in His suffering and death so as to also know His resurrection.

Nevertheless, if we attempt to pit Paul’s understanding of Jesus’ death and resurrection against each other, we have not well discerned his purposes in his messages to the churches. Paul was thoroughly transformed by the good news of how the Jesus the Christ lived, died, suffered, but then arose by the power of God in the Spirit: his consistent message featured sharing in Jesus’ humiliation, suffering, and death in order to share in His life. Thus Paul understood and described baptism as a spiritual death and resurrection in Romans 6:1-11; so Paul summarized his own life and hope, and the expectation for Christians to do likewise, in Romans 8:9-11, 17-18, Philippians 2:5-11, 3:4-16, etc.

Jesus’ ascension, like Jesus’ life, did not feature prominently in Paul’s letters. Paul was well aware Jesus had ascended; he had seen Jesus as the Risen Lord in heaven (cf. Acts 9:3-6). Paul did speak of Jesus’ ascension in Ephesians 4:8-10, likely alluding to Psalm 68:18 in the Greek Septuagint, and doing so in order to explain how Jesus was able to fill all things in the church. Paul thus did confess Jesus as having ascended to the Father and did take opportunities to explain its purpose and relevance for Christians when necessary.

Paul’s letters display Paul working out for Christians what Jesus’ lordship meant for their lives. Paul referred to Jesus as Lord around 250 times in all of his correspondence, and he manifestly primarily understood Jesus as his Lord (e.g. 2 Timothy 1:8, 1:18). Paul also well understood “Christ” as the Anointed One, the Messiah, and thus the King, receiving power and authority (e.g. Romans 1:4). He meditated on Jesus’ cosmic power and authority over all things in Colossians 1:15-18, and always understood how Jesus’ lordship was part and parcel of His life, death, and resurrection (cf. Colossians 1:13-14, 19-23). Few passages better illustrate how Paul expected Christians to consider and work out what Jesus’ lordship meant for their lives than Romans 14:1-15:7: Christians should receive one another as Jesus received them, always remembering how He is the Lord, He will judge, and how we should do all things for the Lord and not judge the servant of another. To this end all of Paul’s letters feature his instruction and exhortation in how Christians and churches can well serve Jesus as Lord by means of emulating His life, suffering, and death, so they might share in His resurrection.

As we have seen, Paul’s strong hope was in sharing in Jesus’ resurrection, and Paul expected Jesus to return soon in judgment and to inaugurate the resurrection. Paul made much of Jesus’ return to judge the living and the dead, manifest in Romans 2:1-11, 16, 2 Corinthians 5:10, and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9. He meditated at length regarding what the day of resurrection and the resurrection body would be like in 1 Corinthians 15:20-58, very much expecting Christians to look then like Jesus does now in His resurrection body in Philippians 3:21. But much of what Paul had to say about the expectation of Jesus’ return was to counter false narratives suggested about it, manifest in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, and perhaps even over-enthusiasm about it in 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15. We have every reason to believe Paul had confidence Jesus would return soon, but such should not mean we have any right to suggest Paul would perceive some kind of failure in what he taught since Jesus has not yet returned after almost two thousand years. “We” in 1 Thessalonians 4:13 are “we who are alive” when the Lord returns; in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11, Paul emphasized the importance of always being prepared and always encouraging one another, maintaining the confidence we would all receive the resurrection of life somehow or another. Even after almost two thousand years, Paul’s words in Romans 13:11 remain true: our salvation is closer now than when we first believed. Maranatha (Our Lord, come) indeed (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22!

Paul’s letters, therefore, remain saturated with the Gospel of Jesus Christ regarding which Paul proved unashamed (Romans 1:16). In Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, Paul perceived the demonstration of God’s grace, love, and righteousness, fulfilling all He promised to Israel, and making known His righteousness and essential characteristics (Romans 1:17). Paul sought to model his own life after Jesus’ life, sufferings, and death, and encouraged his fellow Christians to do likewise, so they might all share in the exaltation of His resurrection (Romans 8:17-18, 2 Corinthians 4:16-5:10). Paul made much of how God reconciled Himself to His people Israel, to all people, and in fact the whole cosmos in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, and lordship, and accordingly exhorted Christians to receive and welcome one another, living in shared faith as the body of Christ, whether Jewish or Gentile, rich or poor, male or female, free or slave (Romans 1:1-15:7, Galatians 3:1-5:16, 1 Corinthians 11:1-14:40, Ephesians 1:1-6:18, Colossians 1:1-4:1). Paul very much lived according to his hope in Jesus’ return, the judgment, and the resurrection of life, and encouraged Christians to imitate him to the same end (2 Corinthians 4:1-5:10, Philippians 3:1-21, etc.).

We do well to consider how Paul spoke of the Gospel, in each component and as a whole, in all of his letters. He had worked to understand how his life needed to change because of what God accomplished in Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and would accomplish in His return, and worked out what it all meant for the various people to whom he preached and ministered in the Mediterranean world of the late Second Temple Period Jewish and Greco-Roman milieu. We should seek to imitate Paul as he imitated Jesus by deeply considering how the Gospel should profoundly affect and shape our lives, and proving willing to humble ourselves, suffer, and perhaps even die like Jesus so we might share in Jesus’ resurrection!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Gospel in the Letters of Paul appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

So whoever knows what is good to do and does not do it is guilty of sin (James 4:17).

When human beings think about sin, they normally think about “sins of commission”: doing wicked things. We recognize those who commit sexual sins, murder, lie, cheat, steal, or do other such things as “bad” or “evil” people. If we are able to avoid committing such sins, we often pride ourselves on being “good, moral people.” Many people believe that as long as they are these “good, moral people,” avoiding these terrible acts of sin, God will accept them as they are and save them.

This is nothing new. In the days of Jesus, the Pharisees also defined themselves in this way. They prided themselves on their “righteousness,” which meant that they did not commit acts of wickedness and they scrupulously held to many of the laws that God had made (Luke 18:11-12). Their fellow Jews certainly respected them and accepted the notion that this righteous exterior was acceptable to God. The Pharisees and others were the “good, moral people” of their day and age.

But is God pleased when people just avoid acts of wickedness?

Jesus condemns those very Pharisees who considered themselves to be good and righteous people. He did not condemn them for the things they did in accordance with God’s will; they were condemned for not accomplishing the “weightier aspects” of the Law (Matthew 23:23). How can this be?

In James 4:17, James demonstrates that the definition of sin and morality that many people accept is quite flawed. Yes, it is true that sins of commission are wrong, and will condemn a person if they do not repent of them (1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Nevertheless, James indicates that there are also sins of omission– to fail to do the right thing is sinful!

This is a much more challenging definition of sin, and Jesus exemplifies it in the story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-37. The priest and the Levite would be reckoned as “good, moral people,” and yet they sinned by violating the command to love your neighbor as yourself when they did not help the man in need (vv. 31-32; cf. Leviticus 19:18). The Samaritan, who would not fit the Jewish definition of a “good, moral person,” nevertheless proves himself by helping the man in need (vv. 33-37). The priest and the Levite would have abhorred the sins of the robbers who beat the man. In the end, however, they are just as guilty of sin by not helping the man in need as the robbers for beating him!

It is not enough for us just to avoid terrible sins; we must also seek to do the right thing. We must not only avoid hate; we must also show love. We must not just steer clear of conflict; we must work to make peace. We should not do anything to harm our neighbor; we should also love him as ourselves. We must avoid the works of the flesh of Galatians 5:19-21; we must also strive to manifest the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22-23. Doing the wrong thing and not doing the right thing are equally sinful before God! Let us strive not to only avoid evil but also to do good when we have opportunity, and exhibit true righteousness!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post A Challenging Declaration appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

YHWH had not forgotten the matter of Baal of Peor. He had judged the Israelites who had compromised themselves there. Now would come vengeance against those who induced the Israelites into doing so.

The Book of Numbers was aptly named bemidbar in Hebrew, for it bore witness to Israel’s experiences “in the wilderness.” Numbers 1:1-25:11 bore witness to the experience of the generation which YHWH delivered from Egypt: preparation of the camp and Tabernacle for entry into Canaan, persistence in rebellion, its condemnation, and the fulfillment of that condemnation. After the new census of Numbers 26:1-65, much of the focus in Numbers shifted to the new generation and preparing them to finally entering the land of Canaan in Numbers 27:1-36:13, as well demonstrated in the legislation regarding offerings and payment of vows in Numbers 27:1-30:16.

In Numbers 31:1-2, YHWH commanded Moses to exact vengeance on the Midianites in order to begin fulfilling the vow YHWH had made to this end in Numbers 25:16-18 on account of the matter of Baal of Peor; Moses would not be gathered to his people in death until he did so. Moses thus commanded Israel to prepare, and they did so: from each tribe an ‘eleph of soldiers (generally translated “thousand”; it might have a more ancient meaning of just a military contingent), with twelve thousand soldiers in all, with Phinehas ben Eleazar in charge of the holy articles and trumpets (Numbers 31:3-6). Why Phinehas was chosen rather than his father was not explicitly stated: some suggest it was to make sure Eleazar would not come into contact with anything defiling, while most believe it probably has something to do with Phinehas having shown such zeal in the matter of Zimri and Cozbi, turning away YHWH’s anger in the matter of Baal of Peor (cf. Numbers 25:6-15).

Moses sent the army out, and they achieved phenomenal success: they slaughtered every man of Midian, including Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five Midianite “kings,” as well as Balaam ben Beor; they took all the women, children, herds, flocks, and goods as plunder; and they burned all the Midianite cities and encampments (Numbers 31:7-11). Since there would be Midianites alive to oppress Israel in Judges 6:1-8:21, we do best to understand “every man of Midian” as “every man of Midian with whom they came into contact”; likewise with the women, children, and destruction of cities and camps. The text calls the rulers of the Midianites “kings,” but they were more like chieftains than rulers over some kind of centralized nation-state. The death of Balaam ben Beor seems surprising since Balaam was last seen returning to his home, ostensibly away from the Midianites, in Numbers 24:25; the text provides no basis upon which to speculate what might have changed, but we have every reason to believe Balaam ben Beor was again among the Midianites and thus met his demise.

The victorious Israelites brought back all they had plundered to the Israelite camp in the plains of Moab; Moses, Eleazar, and the leaders met them outside the camp (Numbers 31:12-13). Moses burned with anger against the military leaders, wondering why they allowed the women who had seduced them into serving Baal of Peor at Balaam’s instigation to live, even though they suffered a plague on account of it (Numbers 31:14-16). Moses thus commanded them to kill every male child and every woman who had been intimate with a man; the virgin women would become the possession of the Israelites, whether to take as wives or maintain as slaves (Numbers 31:17-18).

Only at this point did Moses finally provide the crucial detail which connected the Balaam cycle of Numbers 22:1-24:25 with the matter of Baal of Peor in Numbers 25:1-18. From his blessings, Balaam knew YHWH would always take Israel’s side against external threats. If he were truly pious and oriented toward God, he would have left well enough alone. But for the sake of his reputation and fee, and recognizing YHWH’s anger could be stirred up against His people if they served other gods, Balaam had given counsel to the Moabite and Midianite leaders to encourage their women to seduce Israelite men to this very end. No wonder YHWH wanted Moses and Israel to avenge themselves on the Midianites for following Balaam’s advice, and why Balaam was singled out for death. While Balaam might well have been honored in many Levantine cultures as a pious and wise prophet, we now better understand why he would become a by-word for treachery and greed among the people of God (cf. 2 Peter 2:15, Jude 1:11, Revelation 2:14).

Moses also gave commands regarding seven days of purification outside the camp for anyone who had killed anyone or touched a dead body, consistent with the provisions previously made for purifying those who had come into contact with the dead (Numbers 31:19-20; cf. Numbers 19:1-22). Eleazar the priest added further instructions regarding purifying metallic objects with fire and water and non-metallic objects with water (Numbers 31:21-24).

YHWH then commanded Moses regarding all the spoils of war which the Israelites had obtained: they were to be divided into two parts, one for the soldiers who participated in the battle, and the other for the community of the people (Numbers 31:25-27). A tribute was to be taken from each share for YHWH: one life from every five hundred from the spoils given to the soldiers to be given to Eleazar as a raised offering to YHWH, and one life from every fifty given to the community for the benefit of the Levites (Numbers 31:28-30). A raised offering, or a heave offering, was lifted before YHWH but then given for the benefit of the priests; thus, the animals given to priests and Levites would be for their use and consumption, and the women for slaves, not human sacrifices.

The list of plunder and the dedicated tribute was then enumerated in Numbers 31:31-47: 675,000 sheep, 72,000 cattle, 61,000 donkeys, 32,000 virgin women, appropriately divided as YHWH had commanded. “Thousand” in Numbers 31:31-47 is also ‘eleph in Hebrew, as in Numbers 31:4-6, and may be subject to the same kind of ambiguity. Questions are asked regarding numbers like 32,000 virgin women not because of any lack of confidence in YHWH’s ability to give overwhelming victory to the Israelites, but simply on account of the sheer population size it would require relative to what we currently understand about the population of the Levant in the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages.

The military officers then approached Moses: they had taken a census of the men who had gone out to fight Midian, and not one was missing (Numbers 31:48-49). They had felt compelled to bring an offering of all the gold ornaments they had seized to make atonement for themselves before YHWH; it weighed 16,750 shekels and it was brought into the tent of meeting as a memorial before YHWH (Numbers 31:50-54).

For what sins did the military officers believe they needed atonement? Perhaps they felt they sinned when Moses was angry at them for having not killed the women and male children (cf. Numbers 31:14-18). Whereas the text did not come out and explicitly speak of Israel as thus putting Midian “under the ban,” or herem in Hebrew, it would nevertheless have been understood as a kind of holy war since YHWH commanded them to take vengeance on Midian (Numbers 31:2); in these instances, everything would be dedicated to YHWH, and YHWH would make provision for how all the spoils would be managed. We can therefore understand why the military officials would bring everything, including the women who had been intimate with men, back as part of the spoils. While the text does not explicitly say the military officers fulfilled Moses’ commands, it provides every reason to believe they did so.

But it is also possible the military officials wanted to atone for the sin of the census itself, since any such census was supposed to be done at the command of YHWH to prepare for a military campaign, and to take such a count in any other context was presumptuous and rebellious (cf. 2 Samuel 24:1-25). But the astonishing result of the census was to demonstrate the extraordinary faithfulness of YHWH and His manifest endorsement of the entire affair, since not one soldier was killed.

As modern readers, our attention in a passage like Numbers 31:1-54 gravitates toward the military action and its immediate effects, primarily set forth in Numbers 31:1-17. We might wonder why such a small force would be marshaled; we certainly have a lot of moral and ethical qualms regarding the wholesale slaughter of ostensibly thousands of men, women, and children, let alone regarding the forced marriages or slavery for the women who were not killed. We are tempted to pass over the rest of the text more lightly as just more legislation for Israel which can make our eyes glaze over when reading or studying. But we do well to step back from our modern biases and emphases and consider well the text in its context, for then we can perhaps better understand what this passage really set forth for Israel, and why it was placed here.

Numbers 31:1-54 was not presented in the immediate wake of the matter of Baal of Peor and YHWH’s command for vengeance in Numbers 25:1-18. Instead, another census is called, demonstrating how all the former generation had died in the wilderness as YHWH had promised; matters of inheritance and Moses’ ultimate demise were set forth; what offerings Israelites were to present when in their land, and when, were described, as well as how vows should be managed (Numbers 26:1-30:16). While Numbers 26:1-30:16 did address past matters in some way or another, the legislation given primarily looked forward to life in the land of Israel, and especially so in terms of Numbers 28:1-30:16.

The military campaign against the Midianites very much looked back to the past: it represented the settling of the final score regarding the former generation and one which no doubt impacted the younger generation as well (Numbers 25:16-18, 31:1-2). Yet consider well how the military campaign against Midian was narrated: each tribe provided an ‘eleph, a military contingent, no more, no less, and not one soldier was lost in the contest (Numbers 31:1-6, 48-49); the Israelite army met with complete success, killing all the men, burning down villages and encampments, and taking the spoils (Numbers 31:6-12); the soldiers purified themselves and their gear according to the commandments (Numbers 31:19-24); the spoils were divided according to YHWH’s command, with half going to the soldiers, half to the community, with relatively small portions of each going to YHWH and thus the priests and Levites as tribute (Numbers 31:25-47); and the military officers dedicated their golden plunder to YHWH (Numbers 31:48-54). The only “transgression” featured Moses’ anger at the military officers for having not already executed the women who had been intimate with men, and we have every reason to believe Moses’ purposes were accomplished and his anger turned away (cf. Numbers 31:14-18).

We can therefore consider Israel’s vengeance against Midian as essentially the ideal military campaign, set forth in great detail in Numbers 31:1-54 as a paradigm for Israel to remember and follow once they entered the land of Canaan and fought the battles YHWH commanded them to fight. An ‘eleph from each tribe symbolized the equality of the tribes in this kind of shared action. Slaughtering all the men and enslaving the women and children were a matter of course for ancient Near Eastern warfare; the additional slaughter of the women who had been intimate with men and male children was explained as unique punishment for Midian because of the matter of Baal of Peor. Soldiers would need to purify themselves and their gear because they had spilled blood and become ritually impure by coming into contact with dead bodies. Spoils were to be divided equally among soldiers and the community, with only a small percentage dedicated to YHWH: this proved quite anomalous in the ancient Near East, for we have many examples in which the vast majority of the spoils would go to the king, the gods, and/or the soldiers who fought. At the same time, those who wanted to offer their spoils to YHWH were recognized and honored for doing so.

Therefore, even though the military campaign against Midian by necessity looked backward to fulfill YHWH’s vow of vengeance, the narrative of the events was presented to provide Israel with a paradigm for how all future military campaigns should be managed. While we today might focus much more on the battle itself, the narrative in Numbers placed the focus much more on the legislation YHWH provided in the wake of the battle and how the Israelites obeyed that legislation. Many more men would be cut down by the Israelites, and women and children enslaved by them, as the narratives in Joshua and beyond would make known, and it would all follow the pattern set forth with Israel against Midian in Numbers 31:1-54.

It is therefore not for us to attempt to resolve today the discomfort we experience when we see the command to kill and enslave carried out by Israel so many centuries ago. Our hope today is in Jesus the Christ as Lord, who suffered, died, and was raised again in power; we hope and trust if we suffer for Him, we will share in a resurrection like His (cf. Romans 8:17, Philippians 3:20-21). In Christ we are called to love our enemies and pray for them, and not try to kill them or inflict violence upon them in any way, shape, or form (cf. Luke 6:27-36, Romans 12:16-21). We do well, however, to seek to understand what God made known to Israel in its appropriate context, and appreciate how God provided His legislation and purposes to His people. May we also seek to understand the ways in which God would have us serve Him in Christ, and follow after those patterns, and share in the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Ideal Military Campaign appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Psalm 3:1-8, ASV translation, as prose:

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
YHWH, how are mine adversaries increased! Many are they that rise up against me.
Many there are that say of my soul, “There is no help for him in God.” Selah.
But thou, O YHWH, art a shield about me; my glory and the lifter up of my head. I cry unto YHWH with my voice, and he answereth me out of his holy hill. Selah.
I laid me down and slept; I awaked; for YHWH sustaineth me. I will not be afraid of ten thousands of the people that have set themselves against me round about. Arise, O YHWH; save me, O my God: for thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone; Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked. Salvation belongeth unto YHWH: Thy blessing be upon thy people. Selah.

Psalm 3:1-8 ASV according to Hebrew parallelism (as marked in BHS):

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.
YHWH, how are mine adversaries increased! / Many are they that rise up against me.
Many there are that say of my soul / “There is no help for him in God.” Selah.
But thou, O YHWH, art a shield about me / my glory and the lifter up of my head.
I cry unto YHWH with my voice / and he answereth me out of his holy hill. Selah.
I laid me down and slept / I awaked for YHWH sustaineth me.
I will not be afraid of ten thousands of the people / that have set themselves against me round about.
Arise, O YHWH / save me, O my God /
For thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone / Thou hast broken the teeth of the wicked.
Salvation belongeth unto YHWH / Thy blessing be upon thy people. Selah.
For the Chief Musician on stringed instruments.

Psalm 3 in the Scottish Metrical Psalter of 1650:

A Psalm of David, when he fled from Absalom his son.

1 O Lord, how are my foes increased?
against me many rise.
2 Many say of my soul, For him
in God no succor lies.

3 Yet thou my shield and glory art,
th’ uplifter of mine head.
4 I cried, and, from his holy hill,
the Lord me answer made.

5 I laid me down and slept; I waked;
for God sustained me.
6 I will not fear though thousands ten
set round against me be.

7 Arise, O Lord; save me, my God;
for thou my foes hast stroke
All on the cheek-bone, and the teeth
of wicked men hast broke.

8 Salvation doth appertain
unto the Lord alone:
Thy blessing, Lord, for evermore
thy people is upon.

Psalm 3 is fairly straightforward. Only the first set of versets features intensification; most versets in Psalm 3 simply denote progression. Psalm 3:1-6 prepare for the exhortative petition of Psalm 3:7, expressing the number of foes and the dire situation so as to justify the demand for action and deliverance; as is consistent with lament Psalm 3:8 concludes with affirmations of confidence and faith in YHWH. YHWH as shield in Psalm 3:4 is the only metaphor of note; the shield is the Hebrew magen, a small shield for light infantry to ward off attack (cf. Genesis 15:1, Deuteronomy 33:29, 2 Samuel 22:2-3). In context Psalm 3:4 “holy hill” is to be taken quite literally, since David is confident that YHWH maintains His presence on Zion in Jerusalem. “Save me” in Psalm 3:7 shares the same root as “no help” in Psalm 3:3 along with “salvation” in Psalm 3:8; David calls for YHWH to do the very thing his foes are convinced will not take place, and since we can read this Psalm and know that David’s rule continued, we know that YHWH has answered and vindicated him.

In Psalm 3:2, 4, 8 we are introduced to selah. We do not know the precise meaning of selah; the Septuagint renders it as diapsalma, an interlude of strings; Jerome in the Vulgate rendered it as “always”. Some wish to emend the term to a Hebrew word meaning “raising the voice to a higher pitch.” Of all the possible variants the Septuagintal understanding would make the most sense but we cannot know for certain.

Psalm 3 is a psalm of lament.

Psalm 3 is the first Psalm with a superscription and also a context: David wrote Psalm 3 and did so when fleeing from his son Absalom (ca. 1000-970 BCE; 2 Samuel 15:1-16:23). As David learns of all of his former associates who have turned to Absalom he speaks of how his enemies have multiplied; they taunt him with confidence that God will do nothing for him (Psalm 3:1-2; “soul” should not be understood in new covenant terms but as the whole person). Meanwhile David believes YHWH is a shield around him; he has the confidence that if he asks, God will answer, and will do so from His dwelling place in Jerusalem even if it is now in physical possession of Absalom (Psalm 3:3-4). David maintains trust in YHWH: he went to bed and arose again since YHWH sustained him, and he does not fear even ten thousand people who arrayed themselves against him (Psalm 3:5-6). David implores YHWH to arise and save Him, for He will overcome David’s wicked foes [Psalm 3:7; the use of the perfective denotes confidence that it will be done and does not imply it has already been done (grammatically “precative perfective”); “break the teeth” involves “rendering harmless,” if not literal in its expected execution (Job 29:17, Psalm 58:6-7)]. David closes with a benediction of faith in YHWH, for salvation belongs to Him, and he asks for YHWH’s blessings on His people (Psalm 3:8). In context we must remember how physical and concrete the words and expectations remain: David is looking for political rescue, the defeat of Absalom and his forces, and restitution to his throne in Jerusalem.

Immediately after the confidence of the wisdom of trusting in YHWH and YHWH’s affirmation of the Davidic king in Jerusalem in Psalms 1 and 2 the Psalter continues with five psalms of lament, as if juxtaposing the great power and confidence one can have in YHWH with moments of trial, distress, and pleading for His salvation. YHWH has made promises yet sometimes in life they seem remote and distant; the Psalter already expresses the vagaries and difficulties of life as truly experienced in reality. In Psalm 2 YHWH installs the king on the throne; in Psalm 3 the son of the king dethrones the anointed father. In Psalm 2 the Davidic king has power; in Psalm 3 he must be delivered from those over whom he used to rule. In Psalm 2 the king is installed in Jerusalem; in Psalm 3 the king has run away from Jerusalem, and yet trusts in YHWH to arise from His holy hill there in Jerusalem to rescue him. Yet throughout it all confidence in YHWH is maintained, for such faith in YHWH and His blessings for His people is the high concern for the Psalter.

Psalm 3 originates with David in response to a dire threat to his crown and his life; he trusted in YHWH and YHWH delivered him. Psalm 3 would have been relevant at other times during the period of the monarchy and for the Davidic king: when the Assyrians invaded Judah the Rabshakeh taunted Hezekiah and Judah with a similar message to Psalm 3:1 (701 BCE; 2 Kings 18:35). Hezekiah and Judah responded by maintaining their trust in YHWH and were vindicated (2 Kings 19:35-37).

In terms of the Temple cult Psalm 3 would have given voice to any Israelite petitioner who felt ostracized and/or betrayed by his fellow man. Psalm 3 would serve to remind the petitioner that his sustenance and confidence comes from YHWH and YHWH would make sure righteousness was upheld and wickedness punished.

During the exile and in the Second Temple period Psalm 3 would serve as the necessary reality check after Psalms 1 and 2: YHWH has promised much, the Messiah will break those who rage against YHWH, but until then, Israel is surrounded by enemies who are confident of victory. Psalm 3 would give voice to those in such distress, especially those directly encountering persecution by the pagan powers of the time, and sustain the hope and faith of the Israelites in YHWH.

As David felt surrounded by enemies and trusted in God for his salvation and rescue, so Jesus likewise was surrounded by enemies when He was betrayed, tried, and crucified (Matthew 26:1-27:56). As David called for YHWH to “arise” and “save” him, YHWH vindicated Jesus by raising Him from the dead in triumph over death and His foes and thus He is able to save all who trust in Him (Romans 1:4, 5:6-11, 8:1-3). In turn the followers of Jesus would suffer at the hands of their enemies all around them and took comfort in Psalm 3, seeing in it the solidarity of Jesus with His followers and using it as a prayer for the people of God. They meditated on Psalm 3:5 and understood it Christologically, and by extension, of their own hope: they would “lay down” in death and would “arise” in the resurrection (cf. Romans 8:17-25)!

In the monastic era Psalm 3 would become part of the morning office of prayer. “Pseudo-Bede” marked the appropriateness that this is the third psalm, understood as speaking of resurrection as Jesus was raised on the third day (1 Corinthians 15:4). Many commentators spoke of the parallelisms between David and Absalom and Jesus and Judas in light of Psalm 3.

Throughout the generations believers have taken strength and confidence from Psalm 3 when they felt as if beset and under siege by enemies all around them, be they political or spiritual or both.

We may live in different times in different environments and under a different covenant, yet Psalm 3 can maintain great power for the Christian. We have heard, as Israel did, that YHWH prospers the righteous and makes it go well with him while the wicked suffer and will experience torment. We trust that YHWH has established His Anointed on the throne and has given him power over the rebellious, just as Israel did. And yet, as with Israel, our earthly reality oftentimes can overcome our hope. The righteous should prosper and the wicked should suffer, and yet there are times when the people of God suffer persecution from the hand of those of the world. Those of the world may mock and deride the people of God, confident that they have no justifiable hope in their God. In such a time and place it may seem that God’s rule is a joke, or cruel, or not really present; where did He go? Why is He not acting according to His promises?

If one observed the life of Jesus of Nazareth as He entered Jerusalem and then found Himself betrayed, tried, scourged, and crucified, one would easily wonder the same thing. This is how God allows the righteous to be treated? This is YHWH’s “deliverance”?

Yet, as we know, at that particular juncture the story was incomplete. Yes, Jesus was betrayed, tried, scourged, and crucified, but God raised Him from the dead on the third day in triumph (Romans 6:1-11, 8:1-3). Through suffering Jesus gained the victory; through suffering and tribulation His followers will enter His Kingdom (Acts 14:22, Romans 8:17-18, 2 Timothy 3:12). John saw this in graphic detail in Revelation 12:1-19:21.

Whenever the people of God have suffered on account of their faith they have been reminded to trust in God on account of what He has done, past and present, and what He has promised in the future (e.g. 1 Peter 1:3-12). For Israel it was the Exodus; for Christians, Jesus’ death and resurrection. God is faithful; God knows what He is doing.

Psalm 3 stands at the intersection of promise and trial and points the believer to faith. There are times when we feel that the world is full of foes standing against us, mocking and deriding our confidence in God. They exist. But YHWH God of Israel, the Creator God, is stronger than they; He will vindicate His righteous ones in His good time. We can go to sleep and awake again through God in Christ in confidence of His sustenance; if we are called upon to sleep in death, then we have confidence that we will rise again in the resurrection. Salvation continues to belong to YHWH, and He will bless His people. Let us stand firm in faith and confidence in God, always aware of His care and provision, especially when foes beset us, and obtain the resurrection in Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Psalm 3 appeared first on de Verbo vitae.