Think Wink.

Michael F. Bird at Euangelion has posted a great read on Paul’s argument found in Galatians 3:10-14, specifically how Paul uses the Old Covenant citations. Here are some highlights.

Moyise schematizes Andrew Das’ argument as follows:

1. Dt. 27.26 rightly threatens a curse to all who do not keep the law.
2. It is evident that no one keeps the law perfectly.
3. Hence, everyone is under a curse.

4. Lev. 18.5 promises life to those who keep the law.
5. It is evident that no one keeps the law perfectly.
6. Hence, no one receives life through the law.

The underlying premise here is did the law and subsequent Jewish interpreters believe that the law required perfect obedience? The fact of an atonement system in Judaism and Sanders’ critique of Judaism as merit orientated have usually assumed to count a view of perfect obedience as being required for “salvation”. What can we say?

First, I think we need to keep in mind Paul’s two major universal premises which are (a) universal judgment, and (b) God’s desire to bring Gentiles into the family of Abraham. Towards that end, Paul is engaging in a redemptive-historical argument so as to show that the Sinaitic covenant brings curses not life. As the learned Joel Willitts states: “In other words, to be related to the Sinai covenant is to be related to the age (or historical period) of unfaithfulness and judgment (covenantal curse). On the other hand, being related to the new eschaton signified in the terms pistis (3:23) means being related to the age of faithfulness and blessing (covenantal promise) through Christ’s redemption.”

Again we see that the NT authors read their Bibles in a redemptive-historical way. They read the Bible along its storyline Thus Paul could see that the Law given by Yahweh to Israel via Moses only brought curses upon his people. That is what one sees when he just reads the Old Covenant story, Israel is being cursed by God over and over again. The New Covenant changes that. Being saved by grace through faith in the finished work of Jesus no longer means curse but righteousness and justification.

Martin Luther and the Dead Sea Scrolls

Evangelical Training

Justification

Here James White discusses with a caller the subject of presuppositional apologetics–defending Christianity by examining one’s presuppositions. It is one of the best ways to engage one who opposes Christianity. In this video, White speaks about this in regards to the liberal views and “higher critical” (hehehe) methods in the realm of the OT.

James White on Steve Gregg

James White on John 3:16-17

James White and Molinism

Here is a video from a week or so ago where James White talks to a caller on his webcast about Titus 2:13 and its Granville Sharp (G#) construction and how to show the Jehovah’s Witness (JW) the truth about Jesus being Yahweh. Enjoy and I hope this helps when you hear the knock on the door.

Luke 10:21-22 and Joy

Here is a translation that I have been working on for some time and got up a couple days ago at Trying To Translate. You should go there and see some amateur translation of the NT and even some discussion of the Greek, Hebrew, and Latin of the OT. It’s fun. Honzo and I have been working on it for some months. Read more

Justification

A Hard Decision for Me

The Law in Galatians 3 from a Redemptive-Historical Perspective

On Wednesday-nights, my pastor has been preaching through a series on Christian liberty. This past Wednesday the topic under Christian liberty was the Sabbath. Here is the sermon:

Here is my response to this sermon so listen to it before reading on.

First, Pastor Tim’s introductory remarks were quite comforting because he was willing to express his discomfort with men in the faith who are GIANTS. Spurgeon, Edwards, and many others he was willing to voice disagreement with and that speaks volumes. It tells us that not every Christian has it right, that we must continually check our position against the text of the Scripture. Pastor Tim’s growth and change in position says that he did that.

Second, Pastor Tim’s exegesis of Romans 14 and the other passages were, as always, spot on. Pastor Tim has an uncanny and can-only-be-explained-by-the-leading-of-the-Spirit (My inner comic nerd says, hehehehe) ability to get in and behind the text to its intent. He has the gift of διδάσκαλος, teacher (cf. Ephesians 4:11; 1 Timothy 2:7).

However before one can get into issues like Sabbath, one must understand the role of the Law of Moses and the Old Covenant in the life of the New Covenant believer. Before he went to Galatians 4, he needed to go to Galatians 3. Because the issue of are we obligated to the Old Covenant Law in someway must be understood and addressed first. And under a Covenant and Dispensational reading of the text, one gets two very different answers that are based upon faulty hermeneutics. I wish he would have taken the time to show us that the Old Covenant has passed away and been replaced by the New Covenant. It was only a temporary covenant and a pedagogue for Israel until the Messiah and faith came (cf. Galatians 3:23-25). Thus the Sabbath command is no longer in effect as prescribed by Yahweh through Moses.

My second critique is that he did not delineate between what is done by the Christian on Sundays and the Sabbath day. He did a good job of arguing against going to church because it is the Sabbath moved to Sundays. Because we don’t go to Sabbath, it isn’t necessarily a sin to go watch the Chiefs play (…wait as bad as they are it might be). But why should I go to church on Sunday mornings? Why would he look unfavorably at my forsaking to gather together with fellow believers to encourage and be encouraged to do good works of love in faith? Is it just because Hebrews 10:25 says so? Can that be done on any other day than Sunday? Couldn’t I just get together on Thursdays with some Christian friends, have fellowship and some time in the Word and we all exhort one another to love others? This is a looming question that I hope to be answered in the coming weeks.

A Key Term

The Gospel of the Glory of Christ pt 4

Galatians 3:0-14 and Michael F. Bird

The following video is an interview that many might have seen by Mark Driscoll where he speaks with my favorite contemporary pastor Dr. John Piper (well except for my own pastor, Paster Tim Junhke). In this video you will learn things about Piper that really bring him down to planet earth and show that he has warts, ugly warts. And I love it. One can never see a preacher’s struggles from the pulpit or in a book. But being given the opportunity to peer behind the curtain and into his own life shows the ugliness and really helps put the person in perspective. Thank you Mark for the interview and thank you Dr. Piper for being so open. I hope the readers enjoy seeing this video as much as I did.

No related posts

When I preach a sermon, I have to have a full manuscript in front of me. I don’t read it to the congregation but I have to get my thoughts down and then memorize them. It is the way I am and that is how God has wired me to preach. I don’t have shorthand notes or anything like that. The following two links are the sermon notes for Mark Driscoll and James White. Wow.

Mark Driscoll on John 17

James White on John 3

H/T: Alpha and Omega Ministries: The Great Sermon Notes Controversy

My Favorite Sermon

Voddie Baucham and Sardis

The Great Privilege

The following pdf essay on Galatians 3:23-25 is a great read. It shows how Paul argues against the Judaizing heresy redemptive-historically. Paul is reading the the Scriptures in historic sequence or along the Bible’s storyline and shows that the Law was only to be a pedagogue to Israel until the Messiah came. Then the role of the Law is over and is replaced by the New Covenant. I hope you guys will read this essay and learn how many New Testament writers read the Bible, redemptive-historically.

Why The Law Then? A Biblical Theology of Law in Galatians by Chris Poteet

(H/T: Biblical Theology Briefings - BeginningWithMoses.org)

Galatians 3:0-14 and Michael F. Bird

Martin Luther and the Dead Sea Scrolls

Redemptive-Historical Preaching and Charles Dennison

Here is a video from a debate this weekend by James White on the crucifixion of Jesus with a Muslim. I love the line at the beginning about the Hebrew language.

James White on Steve Gregg

James White on MBTS Resurrection Debate

James White on John 3:16-17

So far, I have been enjoying Geoff John’s Action Comics arc on Brainiac. As you can see from the art, the characters look like the Chris Reeves and Margo Kidder characters from the 1970s and 1980s movies. That is only the icing on the cake for the beautiful job done.

My main point though is that I am thinking that for a reboot of the Superman franchise by WB, this story might be a great story to utilize. It would help bring in Krypton and Superman’s alien past as well as bring in a villain that isn’t Lex Luthor in Brainiac. It would help to bring out a more realistic hero, not a dark one like Batman, that is easier for contemporary audiences to identify with. One of the themes so far in the arc is that Brainiac criticizes Superman for considering himself human instead of embracing his alien heritage. This story arc even works in Lord Zodd from Superman II.

The one glaring difficulty is Supergirl. She plays a central role in the story as Johns is diving into her origins as much as Superman’s. If the movie writers could somehow remove her without compromising the story’s awesomeness or place her into the movie without being a distraction from Superman, I’d be fine with that. This is one of the problems that was encountered by adding Robin and Batgirl into the Batman movies–and to a large degree the Joker in The Dark Knightmovie (To be fair, some of that distraction was caused by Heath Ledger’s untimely and unfortunate death). They distracted the audience from Batman, the person they wanted to see on the big screen in the first place! Supergirl would probably do this in a reboot movie.

Warner Bros. I hope you seriously consider this eight-part(?) series by Geoff Johns as a possible script for your Superman reboot. While I liked Superman Returns, its time to see a real Superman villain that will put Superman in a situation where Superman has to fight his way out. Brainiac will present an intelligent nemesis as well as one that Superman will need all of his super strength and super powers to beat. It’s what Superman fans want and it’s what Superman fans deserve. No more movies that would have worked in the 1970s, give us something that works today!

Transformers: The Movie

Who Are You?

It’s Very Familar