Messianic Prophecy. Messiah in Prophets, Part 1. CA314 LESSON 13 of 24. Louis Goldberg, ThD

Transcription

1 Messianic Prophecy CA314 LESSON 13 of 24 Louis Goldberg, ThD Experience: Professor of Theology and Jewish Studies, Moody Bible Institute In our last lesson we were discussing the sin offering, talking about one instance of a type associated with the tabernacle and later temple worship. We had discussed what the sin offering meant to the individual Israelite offerer; then we began to also discuss what this means by way of type. And we pointed out that Christ fits as the antitype for the sin offering, and in our belief in Him, He takes the place of an animal and instead of receiving life from an animal, as the picture was in the Old Testament situation, when we believe on Him today, we receive His life, the life of Christ. It is an eternal life, but it is also a life of quality; that is, when His life is in us, we are enabled to live victoriously over the temptations and sins of this world. When we set up the hermeneutics of the type, we find perhaps two similarities: the first, death by substitution. As from the Old Testament now, as the sin offering animal died when identified with the offerer s sin, Leviticus 4:4 for example, so Christ died for the ungodly, for it is the sin of the ungodly that causes the death of Christ (Romans 5:8 and 10). All this is made personal when the Old Testament offerer realized and believed, that is, from the Old Testament point of view, and made personal in today s situation when we realize and when we believe upon Jesus Christ. A second similarity is the life in return. And so as the Old Testament offerer became a believer when he realized the life of the animal could be his when he would accept it by faith, so we receive eternal life when we receive Christ. And as I said, it is not only eternal life, but it is also a life of quality. We see this just from a couple of Scripture passages very quickly, John 3:16 and John 5:24. We might also say further by way of application, Paul applied this in 2 Corinthians 5:21, where we read, He [that is, God] made Him [that is, Christ]... to be sin on our behalf. And there you have the first part of that situation: when we become identified with Christ, He takes our sins from us and He becomes sin. Then the verse continues, so [in order] that we might become [be made] 1 of 7

2 the righteousness of God in Him. And here we recognize that we receive His life; His life is in us when we believe on Christ, and therefore we are righteous. We are righteous because we have His life in us. So 2 Corinthians 5:21 is an application by way of type and antitype relations, and we see this for today s situation. This should be a way that you can lay out the rest of the lessons concerning the tabernacle following what we have said already concerning the hermeneutics of typology, finding the type associated with the tabernacle and then finding the corresponding antitype; that is, finding the link between Old and New Testament, and then lay it out as we have already indicated. As, and then whatever the Old Testament situation is; so, and then whatever the New Testament antitype situation is. We turn in this lesson to the next block of Scripture; that is, the messianic prophecy in the Prophets. And here, again, we have to be selective. We can t cover every prophetic passage that the prophets use concerning the Messiah and every passage which the prophets use concerning the national aspects of Israel and the rest of the nations in the messianic kingdom. Before we begin to handle various passages of Scripture, however, I think it is necessary that we lay down a philosophy of understanding this matter of the messianic kingdom. I m not going to go into all the arguments pro and con for an amillennial viewpoint or a premillennial viewpoint. I m going to assume that my student knows what is meant. If he wants to pursue this further, Charles Feinberg, his book on amillennialism or premillennialism, should be a good introduction and explanation of the subject [Millenniallism: The Two Major Views, enlarged 3rd ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980)]. Furthermore, J. Dwight Pentecost in Things to Come [1958; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1964] also puts the discussion so that the student can grasp it readily. But I want to as a philosophy opt for a little different approach to this matter of handling the prophetic Scriptures. We re well aware that two main concepts of the kingdom have been held by Christians over the past century. Some proponents of covenant theology have emphasized that God has a redemptive program for a people of God beginning in the period of the Old Testament and continuing to the present day, according to Louis Berkhof in his Systematic Theology [various editions]. Dispensational concepts of the kingdom assert the difference between Israel and the church and insist that we live in one dispensation today and that the messianic kingdom is still in the future as another dispensation. J. Dwight Pentecost in his Things 2 of 7

3 to Come would be a good example of this position. So the lines have been sharply drawn between the two systems, and it seems insurmountable to reconcile the two positions. However, I want to propose a third viable view of the kingdom. Its initial development is seen in a paper by Walter Kaiser entitled The Eschatological Hermeneutics of Evangelicalism, and this is a mouthful but nevertheless I think it s a very good paper that will initiate our discussion. It is in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, spring 1970 issue, pages He presents an alternate scheme of the kingdom based upon an approach taken in the Stone Lectures delivered at the Princeton Theological Seminary in 1905 by Willis Beecher and subsequently expanded in the book The Prophets and the Promise. Both in Beecher s thesis as well in Kaiser s paper there is the hermeneutical possibility because of a divine design to establish the link between the Old Testament historical kingdom and our present age. Beecher builds his case, which makes it possible to move from the Old Testament historical kingdom to the kingdom envisioned by the prophets, because of the unifying phrase the promise, based on the Greek form epangelia, which means the promise. The New Testament writers use this word to demonstrate the validity of maintaining the end of the age hope for the messianic kingdom. Beecher has asserted from Genesis 12:3 that God gave a promise to Abraham and through him to mankind, a promise eternally fulfilled and fulfilling in the history of Israel and chiefly fulfilled in Jesus the Christ. It is the understanding of the doctrine of the promise that gives validity to a biblical philosophy of history regarding God s economy in the kingdoms already mentioned, and it is going to be my assertion that the concept of promise relates to this end of the age hope, or eschatological hope, for the messianic kingdom. First of all, let s talk something concerning the hope for a messianic kingdom. When God called Israel out of Egypt, there was the establishment of the Mosaic covenant with the united people Israel. In this covenant or constitution there were the means by which the line of Isaac and Jacob could establish an identity as a unified people in a historical kingdom. We base this on Exodus 19:6, where it says, You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. It is at this point we see the establishment of the rule of God in the historical kingdom framed in the form expressed by the Mosaic covenant. The people subjects of the kingdom are the people Israel. In other words and in no uncertain terms, it is not enough for the line of Isaac and Jacob to merely be biological descendants of Abraham. There was the increased and added imperative that the line of Isaac and Jacob must identify with distinctives that God gave first of all in the Mosaic constitution. 3 of 7

4 In the outworking of the constitution during the course of history there were many aberrations. Prophets arose to correct and bring a nation in right relationship with God. Prophets stressed the necessity that the people Israel adhere to the original functioning principles of the constitution or face the consequences of a holy God. It was the inconsistencies within the Mosaic constitution that were such a concern for the prophets. The prophets declared that while the Mosaic constitution was good and holy, there were nevertheless serious deficiencies. The problem lay with the people subjects as well as their leaders. At times during spiritual revival both leaders and people would be in right relationship with God, as for example under the preaching of Ezra in Nehemiah 8:9 10 and At other times there would be godly leaders but the people were not right, as in the case when godly King Hezekiah led the nation in revival, 2 Chronicles 29, also chapters 30 and 31. There were also times when a good number of godly people had a decided impact on the nation s course, but then the leaders did not care for the things of the Lord. Manasseh is a good example: upon succeeding his godly father, Hezekiah, he led the nation into sin while many sought to plead with him not to do it, 2 Chronicles 33. In the midst of these trying times the prophets, because of the promise given to Abraham, looked forward to the future and expressed their hope for the messianic kingdom. They voiced their hope that in this prophetic or messianic kingdom the wrongs within the Old Testament historical kingdom of the Mosaic constitution would be rectified. The people subjects in the new messianic kingdom were envisioned to be in right relationship with God, as for example, Joel 2:28, when the Spirit is poured out on all mankind. The leader, the Messiah, was regarded as the ideal king, Isaiah 11:1 5. Therefore, the prophets declared their convictions in adding to the promise concerning various aspects of the nature of this kingdom. Beecher demonstrates in several passages from the Old Testament the promised doctrine by the prophets concerning the kingdom. In this kingdom the mountain of the Lord s house is located as the chief of the mountains, Isaiah 2:4, and that the day comes when swords are beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks and nations learn war no more, Isaiah 2:4. In this era every man will sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one shall make them afraid. Even the nature of the beasts will be changed in that the wolf and the lamb will dwell together while the lion will eat straw like the ox. In the period of the kingdom the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord, suggesting from this statement that the subjects of this kingdom, Jew and Gentile alike, will know the Lord. No kingdom can be without its 4 of 7

5 king. The kingdom is characterized as one of peace, and the one who sits upon the throne of David and rules over his kingdom will ensure judgment and justice in his reign. Even though for hundreds of years in the postexilic and intertestamental periods Israel had no representative of David s line sitting on the throne of David, yet promises of a coming Messiah has validity because of the guarantee of the Davidic covenant. The prophets and other writers of Scripture, who believed in this way as to the line of David, were watching for the time when a king of that blood would be manifestly on the throne. Those who believed in this way were watching for this manifestation, and it was the belief in the promised doctrine, which was the fittest concept to describe the expected king of the kingdom in its new manifestation. And here we have quoted from Beecher in his book on page 302. It would be a fulfillment of the promise in the day when Jew and Gentile alike would acknowledge the Messiah, for the Messiah will restore the preserved ones of Israel and that His salvation may reach to the end of the earth (Isaiah 49:6). Let s also note secondly some distinctives of the messianic kingdom. From what we have seen already there are a number of distinctives that will characterize the messianic kingdom. We enumerate only a few here. One of these is spiritual reduction. All during the period of the Old Testament historical kingdom the messianic constitution made it possible for people to know the Lord as basic truths were presented in the sacrificial system. The messianic age, however, was to be introduced by the sacrifice of the Messiah. Kaiser, in his paper, demonstrated from... 1 Peter 1:10 12 that Peter was emphasizing a fixed time and the circumstances of those times that had definite relationship to the appearance and work of the Messiah. Of particular note is one major aspect of Messiah s function declared by Peter as he understood the prophets messages: namely, the sufferings of the Messiah, the glories of the Messiah, and the order of these events as, for example, the glory that should follow. It was the sufferings and death of Christ related to His sacrifice that would validate all the offerings of the Mosaic system. In the Messiah s death, however, there was to be the further emphasis upon the spiritual redemption of the messianic kingdom. The Old Testament prophets had predicted this as part of the doctrine of the promise. The appearance of Jesus the Messiah to the nation of Israel was to provide exactly for this sacrifice. Only through this atonement could the ideal be realized in the kingdom where all people will know the Lord because they would appreciate for themselves the life of Jesus the Messiah through His death. That life is an eternal life and the quality of life which guarantees victory and power, as 5 of 7

6 we have seen already in the type study of the sin offering. A second distinctive is the extent of spiritual redemption. Another distinctive of major importance was that the spiritual redemption within the kingdom was to be offered alike to both Jewish and Gentile peoples each within their own ethnic context. In order for Gentile peoples to know God during the Old Testament historical kingdom there was the necessity to enter into the ranks of Israel. The record shows that many Gentiles became righteous proselytes and entered into the commonwealth, thereby becoming a part of the people Israel. There is no doubt as well that many of these Gentiles as righteous proselytes were also a part of the believing remnant within the nation of Israel. One such person was Ruth, the Moabite, who is in the line of the Messiah. A special distinctive, however, in the messianic kingdom is that it will not be necessary for Gentiles to join with the nation of Israel in the messianic kingdom. All that will be required is the acknowledgment of the Messiah as the Redeemer as well as His supreme authority in the kingdom. A third distinctive has to do with material and physical benefits. These are associated with the kingdom. Some of these have already been indicated and have to do with the ideal conditions enjoyed by the earth s peoples, as for example the lifting of the curse so that animals can dwell together where they cannot do this now. These are actual, literal conditions which cannot be waved away, and by taking them at their face value it does not mean a shared materialism. [Alva J.] McClain in his book, The Greatness of the Kingdom [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1959], has well stated that a spiritual kingdom can manifest itself and produce tangible effects in a physical world. Let s note some implications of Israel s action concerning the messianic King. At a particular point in history the Messiah came to offer the messianic kingdom to the nation of Israel, and history indicates the tragic decision on the part of Israel s leaders. We need to see an encounter in Matthew 26:63 65, an encounter between Jesus the Messiah and Israel s high priest, Caiaphas. Here we would indicate the official and ultimate offer of the kingdom to Israel. But in the record of the New Testament, what happened to the kingdom comprised of both spiritual and material blessings, considerations of the new covenant and its distinctives has led to the two major views of the kingdom already indicated. We will assert, however, because of the promise indicated by Beecher that the messianic kingdom had its inception with the Jewish Feast of Weeks, Shavuot, or our Pentecost, after Messiah s resurrection; in other words, the messianic kingdom had its inception on the day 6 of 7

7 of Pentecost. Not postponed down to the end of what some have called the church age or not to be said that the messianic kingdom is this church age in toto. We re going to suggest something different. This is going to raise questions, and we re going to talk about a messianic kingdom that should begin at Pentecost and continue on through the age in which we live and yet continue on through a future age yet to be a part of the experience of this earth s peoples. And obviously, this is going to raise some problems. For example, does this mean that the messianic kingdom envisioned by the prophets was ruled out? We say no to this question. There is definitely a kingdom. It is a kingdom, however, explained by the peculiar way the New Testament writers handled the Old Testament prophetic promises concerning the kingdoms. And I would want, as a suggestion for the student, that he take Jeremiah 31, beginning with verse 31, and then also Hebrews 8, beginning with verse 8, and compare them side by side and see if there is an exact comparison or if the Jeremiah 31 passage has anything more to say. A couple of other passages we might suggest are Amos 9:11 and following, and then as it is used by James in Acts 15:16 and following. Won t you do this before our next lesson together? Christ-Centered Learning Anytime, Anywhere 7 of 7