The Continuity of Theological Concepts: A New Covenant Reading of Old Covenant Texts
While studying and teaching Zechariah 9-14 near Beirut, Lebanon I was challenged to think about the meaning and relevance of those chapters to Lebanese believers who often suffer because of the animosity between Lebanon and the very nation and people who are mentioned in those chapters. Does an alleged promised restoration of Israel and Jerusalem bring comfort or chagrin to believers in Lebanon? After all, are not Arabic speaking believers and Jewish believers in the Middle East the true people of God? Are they not the ones who should expect to share in the triumph of God? Does present day Israel have a “favored nation” status that trumps the “holy nation” of the church (1 Pet 2:9-10)?
Furthermore, does not a similar conundrum exist for those of us who live in North America? Do these texts have anything relevant to say to a largely Gentile church? Do we simply rejoice because ethnic Israel is to be restored or do we rejoice because the triumph which the old covenant nation expected is the triumph that belongs to all of those who are children of God through faith in Jesus Christ? Admittedly, the question of relevancy should not be determinative in the understanding of biblical texts but it does raise questions that might not be raised otherwise.
Additionally, not only does the difficulty of finding relevance in Zechariah 9-14 to Lebanese and North American believers pose a challenge, but so does a careful reading of the New Testament. Reading the Old and New Testaments separately, one might conclude that two distinct and contrasting Bibles exist (Old Testament and New Testament) written to two distinct peoples (Jews and Christians) with only shared lessons of moral application or common interest in the promised Messiah. Otherwise, one might conclude that God has distinct purposes for Jews and Gentiles. While interpreting texts in isolation from the larger corpus of Scripture makes this conclusion textually possible, a canonical reading of the Bible questions whether it is theologically justifiable and whether it adequately represents the biblical-theological message of the Bible which centers in the restoration of God’s original purposes as presented in Genesis 1-2, distorted in Genesis 3-11, given new hope in Genesis 12, and consummated in the coming of the Messiah.
Admittedly, a “pre- New Testament” reading of Zechariah 9-14 and the Old Testament on its own may lead one to conclude that ethnic Israelites are the people of God, earthly Jerusalem is the city He has chosen, He is present in the Jewish temple, the enemies of Israel will be defeated and Gentiles will make their way to Jerusalem, the Messiah will come humbly on a donkey and in glory with a display of power, etc.
However, Christians cannot read the Old Testament on its own because it is not on its own. It is part of the Christian Bible which includes both Old and New Testament. The Old Testament is a book of introduction, preparation, and expectation; the New Testament is a book of conclusion, denouement, and fulfillment. The OT informs the NT by giving background, promises, and a developing story line. The NT finalizes the story line and sees promise come to fulfillment.
The OT helps us understand the NT by introducing theological concepts which are continued in the NT, such as God, creation, sin, redemption, kingdom, people of God, temple, holy city, enemies, exile and restoration, etc. The NT expands on these concepts often giving them new clarity in light of the full and final revelation that comes with the advent of Jesus Christ.
Though there is continuity of theological concepts, there is discontinuity in the contextualization of these concepts. I suggest that in both the Old and New Testaments God addresses His people in language and terms that they generally understood, yet retaining a bit of mystery, because the ultimate reality, which God brings in the triumph of the Messiah, defies the ability of human language to fully convey.
If in the future believing Jews of the old covenant see the New Jerusalem coming out of heaven and witness the triumph of God over all evil and enemies, would they say, “I’m disappointed that it did not turn out ‘literally’ as portrayed in the language of the OT.” No, they would likely say, “This fulfillment not only satisfies all which God promised but goes far beyond what could be expected. Thank you, Lord.”
As I read Zechariah 9-14 and similar texts in light of the New Testament I look for theological concepts that are continuous between the testaments and interpret them in light of the fuller and final revelation of the New Testament. For instance, the theological theme of “people of God” is represented primarily by Israel in the Old Testament. Yet, we understand in the New Testament that the true “seed” of Abraham were those who had the faith of Abraham, regardless of ethnicity (Rom 2; Gal 3; 1 Pet 2). The “holy city” of the Old Testament was physical, geographical Jerusalem; in the New Testament the holy city is the New Jerusalem (Heb 12:18-24, Rev 21, 22). Furthermore, the New Testament even suggests that Abraham knew that the physical reality of “land and city” anticipated something more than earthly geography (Heb 11:10, 16; Rom 4:13). The theme of “temple as the place of God’s presence” in the Old Testament was primarily confined to the tabernacle and temple of ancient Israel; in the New Testament, Jesus is ultimately the temple (John 2:19—destroy this temple), believers and the church are the temple (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19), and there is no need of a temple in the new order because God’s presence pervades everything (Rev 21:3, 22).
There are other shared themes such as the ultimate triumph of God, the defeat of enemies, the removal of sin, the transformation of nature, the restoration of the cosmos, the establishment of worship and holiness. In Zechariah 9-14 all of these concepts are portrayed in old covenant language at times exceeding the limits of that language, anticipating the inauguration of the greater realities of the New Covenant and ultimately the consummation.
Old Testament saints had a “two-age” view of history—the age in which they lived and the age to come. The age to come anticipated the advent of the Messiah and the Day of the Lord in which God’s people would be delivered and His enemies would be judged. The age to come was depicted in terms that related to the age in which they lived though the seed of old covenant concepts blossoms into the unforeseen beauty of new covenant realities.
The New Testament declares that “the age to come” was inaugurated at the first advent of Christ (Lk 1:67-80; Acts 2:29-36), that we live in the age that was anticipated (1 Cor 10:11—“on whom the end of the ages has come”), but, though the age has already come, it is not yet consummated, so we anticipate the consummation at His Second Advent (2 Thess 1:5-10).
Consequently, New Covenant believers live between two worlds: having entered the kingdom (Col 1:13) but waiting for the consummate kingdom (Rev 11:15); having become part of the new creation (2 Cor 5:17), yet waiting for the consummate new creation (Rev 21); being seated in the heavens with Christ (Eph 2:6), yet living as strangers on earth (1 Pet 2:11); having witnessed the triumph of Christ over sin, Satan, and death (Col 1:13-15), yet awaiting the consummate world of righteousness (2 Pet 3:13); having tasted in the Spirit the inheritance to come (Eph 1:13-14), yet awaiting consummate glory (1 Pet 5:1).
jpdsr51 Bio
Dr. John P. Davis is currently Lead Pastor of a church plant in Philadelphia, PA. Grace Church of Philly is a gospel-centered city church seeking to reach people of all nations. John received the BA in Bible (Greek minor) at Bob Jones University, MDiv from Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary, the ThM in OT from Westminster Theological Seminary, and the DMin from Biblical Theological Seminary. His ThM thesis was on A Critical Evaluation of the Use of the Abrahamic Covt. in Dispensationalism. His DMin project/dissertation was on Common Factors in the Practice of Ongoing Personal Evangelism. John has pastored two other churches in PA and two in NY. Three were church-plants.
- 81 views
[G. N. Barkman] Ted,I just looked outside, and the trees are barren (literally) and my neighbors are talking English with each other (also, literally). So I’m pretty sure I’m not in Jerusalem. Oh, also, I would have remembered landing at Ben Gurion Airport. Sheesh, the security there makes the TSA look like altar boys.
How can one be a New Covenant believer and NOT an inhabitent of Jerusalem?
“which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.” (Galatians 4:24-26)
Blessings,
Greg
But yet, tomorrow I”ll practice the Lord’s Table in a literal fashion, and fellowship around Christ’s promises (taken literally) that objectively qualify one as wretched as I to have a hope in His New Covenant accomplishments, namely, the forgiveness of sins.
Putting the two literal points together, Here I stand (OK, sit.).
[Ted Bigelow]But you are seated with him in heavenly places (Eph 2:6) :)[G. N. Barkman] Ted,I just looked outside, and the trees are barren (literally) and my neighbors are talking English with each other (also, literally). So I’m pretty sure I’m not in Jerusalem. Oh, also, I would have remembered landing at Ben Gurion Airport. Sheesh, the security there makes the TSA look like altar boys.
How can one be a New Covenant believer and NOT an inhabitent of Jerusalem?
“which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.” (Galatians 4:24-26)
Blessings,
Greg
But yet, tomorrow I”ll practice the Lord’s Table in a literal fashion, and fellowship around Christ’s promises (taken literally) that objectively qualify one as wretched as I to have a hope in His New Covenant accomplishments, namely, the forgiveness of sins.
Putting the two literal points together, Here I stand (OK, sit.).
church - www.gracechurchphilly.com blog - www.thegospelfirst.com twitter - @johnpdavis
Your comment, homey and humerous as it is, does nothing to deal with the text in Galatians. It would appear that your “literal vs. figurative” blinders are so large that you may be hindered from accepting inspired NT truth.
At the risk of sounding condescending, which is not my intent, I do pray that you will be able to lay your dispensational glasses aside long enough to intersect honestly with this text.
Warm regards,
Greg
G. N. Barkman
Jeremiah 31:31-40
31 “Look, the days are coming”-[this is] the Lord’s declaration-“when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32 [This one will] not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt-a covenant they broke even though I had married them”jj-the Lord’s declaration. 33 “Instead, this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days”-the Lord’s declaration. “I will place My law within them and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be My people. 34 No longer will one teach his neighbor or his brother, saying: Know the Lord,ll for they will all know Me, from the least to the greatest of them”-the Lord’s declaration. “For I will forgive their wrongdoing and never again remember their sin.” 35 This is what the Lord says: The One who gives the sun for light by day, the fixed order of moon and stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea and makes its waves roar- the Lord of Hosts is His name: 36 If this fixed order departs from My presence- [this is] *The bracketed text has been added for clarity. the Lord’s declaration- then also Israel’s descendants will cease to be a nation before Me forever. 37 This is what the Lord says: If the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below explored, I will reject all of Israel’s descendants because of all they have done- [this is] the Lord’s declaration.
38 “Look, the days are coming”-the Lord’s declaration-“when the city from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate will be rebuilt for the Lord. 39 A measuring line will once again stretch out straight to the hill of Gareb and then turn toward Goah. 40 The whole valley-the corpses, the ashes, and all the fields as far as the Kidron Valley to the corner of the Horse Gate to the east-will be holy to the Lord. It will never be uprooted or demolished again.”
That we all share in a heavenly birth, being born from above (John 3), does not change this promise. You mistakenly assume too much of this text and in turn, only bring confusion to God’s faithfulness to his unbreakable promises.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[jpdsr51] But you are seated with him in heavenly places (Eph 2:6) :)Given the choice between a great cup of coffee with you in Philly, and enjoying Christ with you and Greg in heaven, I’ll take… hmmm, do they serve coffee in heaven?
[Greg Barkman] Your comment, homey and humerous as it is, does nothing to deal with the text in Galatians. It would appear that your “literal vs. figurative” blinders are so large that you may be hindered from accepting inspired NT truth.Well, at least I accomplished homey, but the humor part, well… maybe not so much ;)
At the risk of sounding condescending, which is not my intent, I do pray that you will be able to lay your dispensational glasses aside long enough to intersect honestly with this text.
To answer the question, Greg, there is a literal heavenly Jerusalem, which figuratively (taking Paul’s words here in Galatians literally) is the mother of all of us who have placed our faith in Christ alone for salvation, as contrasted with a figurative Mt. Sinai. Mother is a metaphor. The Jerusalem in the heavenlies didn’t actually give birth to us, God did. We are not in the NC becasue of the heavenly Jerusalem. Its a metaphor to draw a contrast between a law-based approach to salvation vs. a faith-based approach to salvation. So I’m only “of, not in” the heavenly Jerusalem. Metaphorically speaking.
When Paul refers to Jerusalem in Gal. 4, he refers to the heavenly Jerusalem literally, but uses it to make a metaphor. When he refers to Jerusalem in Romans 15:19 he refers to the earthly Jerusalem literally too.
Care to join us for coffee?
The Holy Spirit has already done that for us in Hebrews 8:7-13, where He tells us the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 is fulfilled in the NT Church. Whatever other details remain to be worked out, we must start with the inspired revelation that the new covenant made with “the House of Judah and the House of Israel” is the one Jesus Christ inaugurated with His blood and is the very covenant that assures every believer in Jesus Christ, whether Jew or Gentile, a home in Heaven.
Blessings,
Greg Barkman
G. N. Barkman
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K] John and G.N., could either of you explain how the Galatians text does away with the promise that ethnic Jews will in fact live in the land repeatedly promised to them by God even in the explicit New Covenant OT passage? Here, let me quote it for you:According to the end of verse 40, the city anticipated cannot be an alleged millennial Jerusalem for only the final destination (New Heavens and Earth New Jersusalem, etc) for all true descendants of Abraham (believers - Gal 3) has an eternal quality (Rev 21:1).
Jeremiah 31:31-40
31 “Look, the days are coming”-[this is] the Lord’s declaration-“when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. 32 [This one will] not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt-a covenant they broke even though I had married them”jj-the Lord’s declaration. 33 “Instead, this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days”-the Lord’s declaration. “I will place My law within them and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be My people. 34 No longer will one teach his neighbor or his brother, saying: Know the Lord,ll for they will all know Me, from the least to the greatest of them”-the Lord’s declaration. “For I will forgive their wrongdoing and never again remember their sin.” 35 This is what the Lord says: The One who gives the sun for light by day, the fixed order of moon and stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea and makes its waves roar- the Lord of Hosts is His name: 36 If this fixed order departs from My presence- [this is] *The bracketed text has been added for clarity. the Lord’s declaration- then also Israel’s descendants will cease to be a nation before Me forever. 37 This is what the Lord says: If the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below explored, I will reject all of Israel’s descendants because of all they have done- [this is] the Lord’s declaration.
38 “Look, the days are coming”-the Lord’s declaration-“when the city from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate will be rebuilt for the Lord. 39 A measuring line will once again stretch out straight to the hill of Gareb and then turn toward Goah. 40 The whole valley-the corpses, the ashes, and all the fields as far as the Kidron Valley to the corner of the Horse Gate to the east-will be holy to the Lord. It will never be uprooted or demolished again.”
That we all share in a heavenly birth, being born from above (John 3), does not change this promise. You mistakenly assume too much of this text and in turn, only bring confusion to God’s faithfulness to his unbreakable promises.
P.S. Can you save your preaching for Sunday mornings? Thanks.
church - www.gracechurchphilly.com blog - www.thegospelfirst.com twitter - @johnpdavis
[Ted Bigelow] Given the choice between a great cup of coffee with you in Philly, and enjoying Christ with you and Greg in heaven, I’ll take… hmmm, do they serve coffee in heaven? quote]
Actually you can have both now. You are welcome to Philly anytime for coffee with me and we are already seated together with Christ in the heavens. My desire, despite theological differences, is to enjoy now in gospel-centered fellowship the exisitng spiritual reality of our union with Christ and unity with each other.
church - www.gracechurchphilly.com blog - www.thegospelfirst.com twitter - @johnpdavis
This text explicitly says that in the NC several things will happen, including the land. You judge it unacceptable because of your assumptions.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
[James K] Here is a perfect example of a text that is completely turned on its head simply because you desire to squash the promises of God into your concept of the church.A diatribe is not an answer to what I wrote.
This text explicitly says that in the NC several things will happen, including the land. You judge it unacceptable because of your assumptions.
church - www.gracechurchphilly.com blog - www.thegospelfirst.com twitter - @johnpdavis
[James K] Here is a perfect example of a text that is completely turned on its head simply because you desire to squash the promises of God into your concept of the church.Actually James, the intent in understanding the relationship of the OT promises to NT fulfillment is not to rob believing Jews of God’s promises, but rather to see how those promises are expanded to give them more than what they expected and to include believers from all nations, which was always God’s intent. Believing Jews get more not less than was promised and we are included. I’m happy with that! It seems that you want to keep Jews in a land destined for destruction rather than have them enjoy the endless New Creation.
This text explicitly says that in the NC several things will happen, including the land. You judge it unacceptable because of your assumptions.
church - www.gracechurchphilly.com blog - www.thegospelfirst.com twitter - @johnpdavis
I would encourage you to do some research on the new creation model of eschatology. Russell Moore, Craig Blaising, Douglas Moo, and others are advocates. You would then understand what the New Creation actually is.
I have appreciated this discussion. Thanks.
1 Kings 8:60 - so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God and that there is no other.
I keep saying though that a better focus (than the antiquity question) is on the texts involved and letting them speak.
There is indeed a similarity between the interpretative processes leading to pre-millennialism generally and dispensationalism specifically, but that is true only of contemporary pre-millennialism. The “chiliasm” that occurred in certain segments of the early church bears little resemblance to modern pre-mill in form or function. Modern pre-millennialists, of whatever variety, all embrace some idea that the Abrahamic covenant demands certain things to occur regarding Israel in the future. Or, they believe that a certain level of literalness in reading Revelation demands it. The early church chiliasts clearly and repeatedly insist that the Church is the true inheritor of the promises of Abraham, and none of them appeal to grammatical-historical hermeneutics to prove their position. Some of the chiliasts held to the 6-day/6000-year model of history, in which the world ends after 6000 years, issuing in the seventh “millennium.” I put “millennium” in quotation marks because several of the chiliasts seem to have regarded the seventh day of history as eternal, and most held to a single general resurrection at the return of Christ, with no future judgment at the end of the millennium (since they don’t mention the millennium ending). Here’s a decent blog post that makes most of these points, but you can find them fairly easily in the primary source writings: html
Charlie, I read “Puritan Lad’s” blog entry and find him unconvincing on this point. I would say that he misrepresents Ireneus in a sorry way, even saying he was postmillennialist. Many scholars have written on Ireneus (conservative and liberal, confessional and free church), and are rather unanimous on the view that he was premillennial. Puritan Lad seems to pick and choose for his conclusions. Ireneus was premillennial in both the ancient and modern sense. He stressed (can you believe it?) a literal interpretation of Old Testament prophecy. There are many examples in Ireneus. Here is one:
If, however, any shall endeavour to allegorize [prophecies] of this kind, they shall not be found consistent with themselves in all points, and shall be confuted by the teaching of the very expressions [in question]. For example: “When the cities” of the Gentiles “shall be desolate, so that they be not inhabited, and the houses so that there shall be no men in them and the land shall be left desolate.”47654765 Isa. vi. 11. “For, behold,” says Isaiah, “the day of the Lord cometh past remedy, full of fury and wrath, to lay waste the city of the earth, and to root sinners out of it.”47664766 Isa. xiii. 9. And again he says, “Let him be taken away, that he behold not the glory of God.”47674767 Isa. xxvi. 10. And when these things are done, he says, “God will remove men far away, and those that are left shall multiply in the earth.”47684768 Isa. vi. 12. “And they shall build houses, and shall inhabit them themselves: and plant vineyards, and eat of them themselves.”47694769 Isa. lxv. 21. For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one… .
Now all these things being such as they are, cannot be understood in reference to super-celestial matters; “for God,” it is said, “will show to the whole earth that is under heaven thy glory.” But in the times of the kingdom, the earth has been called again by Christ [to its pristine condition] , and Jerusalem rebuilt after the pattern of the Jerusalem above … .
For as it is God truly who raises up man, so also does man truly rise from the dead, and not allegorically, as I have shown repeatedly. And as he rises actually, so also shall he be actually disciplined beforehand for incorruption, and shall go forwards and flourish in the times of the kingdom, in order that he may be capable of receiving the glory of the Father. Then, when all things are made new, he shall truly dwell in the city of God.
(Against Heresies 5.35.1-2)
Alas, even the Ante-Nicene Fathers were influenced by the Enlightenment ;)
Jeff Brown
Questions of eschatology have long been points where believers agree to disagree. It certainly is not a central defining point of theology.
The recently delivered paper which Dr. Davis linked to above is worthy of reading. The author stresses that the big “rift” between CT and dispensationalism didn’t have to happen in the first place, and might still be closed with a mutual admission of how close in many respects the two sides are.
Here’s that link again:
http://ntresources.com/documents/DSG2010_Mangum_DispCovRift.pdf
Striving for the unity of the faith, for the glory of God ~ Eph. 4:3, 13; Rom. 15:5-7 I blog at Fundamentally Reformed. Follow me on Twitter.
Discussion