Beröer Suche

Schlagwort: God

  • Surprised by Hope – Part 4

    Surprised by Hope – Part 4

    By Christian / Tom Wright

    This series takes up the main ideas from the book by Bible scholar N. T. Wright Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (German Von Hoffnung überrascht – Was die Bibel zu Auferstehung und ewigem Leben sagt).

    I read the book in the German translation. So the quotes are from the German translation and retranslated into English. The quotes will therefore differ from the English original.

    The strange story of Easter

    As announced at the end of the previous part we will only briefly look at why we can believe the reports in the Gospels about the resurrection of Jesus.

    On the one hand, N. T. Wright argues that discrepancies on the surface do not mean that nothing happened. Just as discrepant testimonies do not. He also explains four features of these narratives that are so extraordinary that they urge us to take them seriously as very early accounts, not as later inventions, as is often claimed.

    1. The Bible is hardly quoted at this point

    Until the resurrection, „all four evangelists rely heavily on biblical quotations, allusions and echoes to make it clear that Jesus‘ death is „scriptural“. … Even though these stories were written down much later, they go back to very, very early oral traditions that were shaped and moulded in the memories of various storytellers before there was time for biblical reflection.“

    2. Women as the first witnesses

    Women were not regarded as credible witnesses in ancient times. Later, unfortunately, women were also dropped from Christian writings and church life – but they appear in all four gospels and are at the centre of everything. So why would anyone invent this of all things?

    3. The portrayal of Jesus

    If a Messiah had been invented to fit the existing scriptures, he would have been portrayed differently. The resurrected Jesus should have been a shining star – but „the resurrected Jesus is portrayed as a human being with a body that is in some ways quite normal and could be mistaken for a gardener or a fellow traveller on the road. Yet the stories also contain clear indications that this body has been transformed. … This kind of account has no antecedent.“

    4. The resurrection accounts never contain the Christian hope for the future

    Almost everywhere else in the New Testament the resurrection of Jesus is mentioned in connection with the ultimate hope that those who belong to Jesus will one day be raised as he was raised, and it is added that this must be anticipated in the present in baptism and behaviour.“

    Each gospel has its own theological interests. You could compare it to four artists portraying the same person. With different accents, but the person is recognisable as the same.

    But the accounts of the resurrection have a common „meaning related to the present age: Jesus is risen, so he is the Messiah and therefore the true Lord of the world; Jesus is risen, so God’s new creation has begun – and we, his followers, have a job to do!“

    But what is ‚God’s new creation‘ and what job do we have to do?

    Part II God’s plan for the future

    The future of the cosmos: progress or despair?

    Doesn’t everyone realise what the future of the cosmos consists of? This is not an astrophysical question. It’s about what God intends to do with his creation. And our cultural context could stand in our way.

    Over the last two hundred years, Western thought has overemphasised the individual at the expense of the bigger picture of God’s creation. What’s more, in much of Western piety, at least since the Middle Ages, the influence of Greek philosophy has been very pronounced. This led to an expectation of the future that bears much more resemblance to Plato’s vision of souls entering an incorporeal bliss than to the biblical image of the new heaven and the new earth.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 108

    This has given rise to two major movements:

    1. The myth of progress
      Originating in the Renaissance and fuelled by the European Enlightenment, there is the utopian dream that there will always be more progress and that the world will always be better. In addition to the social gospel, there were also other Christian movements whose aim was to make the world better and better until God was satisfied. The real problem with the myth of progress, however, is that it cannot cope with the existence of evil.
      „The optimist, the evolutionist, the school of the myth of progress all say that these are just the growing pains of something bigger and better.“
    2. Souls in transit
      The Platonist, the Hindu, the Muslim and, following Plato, the Gnostic, the Manicheans and countless other variants within the Christian and Jewish traditions all say that these are signs that we were created for something completely different, for a world that is not made of space, time and matter, a world of pure spiritual existence in which we happily leave the shackles of mortality behind us once and for all.
      „This Platonic trait entered Christian thought very early on, not least with the phenomenon known as Gnosticism.“

    What the whole world is waiting for

    The early Christians did not believe any of this. „Since most people who think about these things today lean toward one or the other of these views, it is something of a surprise when they discover that the early Christians held a rather different view. They believed that God would do for the whole cosmos what he had done for Jesus at Easter.“ What on earth does that mean? We will now work through this step by step.

    Basic structures of hope

    The hope of the oldest Christianity known to us is characterised by some basic structures.

    Firstly, the disciples were convinced of the goodness of creation. At no point was a cosmological dualism accepted, i.e. a separation into a created world, which is not really good and is not given by God, and a good spiritual world. „The world is good as creation, not as independent or self-sufficient „nature“. There is no evidence of pantheism or panentheism.“ Then N. T. Wright makes a point that we will look at in more detail in another video series:

    At the climax of creation, which according to Genesis 1 consists of the creation of human beings, creation was intended to reflect God, to reflect God back to God in worship and to reflect Him into the rest of creation. The latter is to happen in man’s stewardship of creation.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 122

    Secondly, there was a certain conception of the nature of evil. „Evil is real and powerful within a biblical theology, but it exists neither in creatureliness nor in otherness to God. … Nor does evil consist – this is decisive! – in transience, in decay. … Transience functions as a sign given by God that does not point away from the material world to a non-material world, but from a world as it is to a world as it shall be one day – in other words: it points from the present to the future that God has prepared.“

    What counts is eschatological dualism (the present age and the age to come), not ontological dualism (an evil „earth“ and a good „heaven“).

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 123

    Thirdly, the hope contained an idea of God’s plan of redemption.

    Redemption does not mean a „scrapping“ of what is present in order to start anew, liberated from all that, but rather liberation of what has become enslaved. If evil is now understood not as materialism but as rebellion, the enslavement of people and the world does not consist in embodiment. Redemption from embodiment would mean: Death of the body and the subsequent release of the soul or spirit. However, the enslavement is rather in sin. Redemption from sin must ultimately include not only the goodness of the soul or spirit, but also a new physical life.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 123, 124

    Jesus played a central dual role for his disciples, which can be found in lyrical form in Colossians 1:15-20. This is a revealing passage, but it would go too far to discuss it here. What we should note, however, is that „redemption is the new creation of creation, after the evil that disfigured and deformed creation has been reckoned with. And it is brought about by the same God who is now recognised in Jesus Christ, through whom creation was created in the first place.“

    N. T. Wright breaks down the basic structure and cosmic dimensions of Christian hope into six themes:

    Sowing and harvesting

    In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul uses the image of the firstfruits. Jesus is the first to be resurrected from the dead. The first fruits are about the fact that there will be many more fruits.

    The victorious battle

    In 1 Corinthians, Paul continues with a completely different image that has many biblical antecedents: the image of the king who establishes his kingdom by subduing all enemies. „Paul is clearly articulating a theology of the new creation“. „The gospel of Jesus Christ proclaims that what God did for Christ at Easter, he will do not only for all who are „in Christ“, but also for the entire cosmos. It will be an act of re-creation, parallel to and derived from the act of re-creation when God raised Jesus from the dead.“ And this brings something that has already been said into view: „Jesus was raised bodily from the dead, contrary to the view that says that after his death he began to exist in a new, non-corporeal mode. … If Jesus had passed into some kind of immaterial existence after his death, then death would not be defeated. He would remain intact; he would only be described anew. … But that is precisely what Paul denies. Death as we know it is the last enemy, it is not a good part of the good creation; and therefore death must be defeated if the life-turning God is to be honoured as the true Lord of the world. When this is done, and only then, will Jesus, the Messiah, the Lord of the world, hand over the rule of the kingdom to his Father, and God will be all in all.“

    Citizens of heaven on earth

    Another royal image is found in Philippians 3:20,21, which is important for our hope because it uses a term that leads many to think that they are going to heaven. Once again, it is important to keep the historical context in mind: „Philippi was a Roman colony. Augustus had settled his veterans from the battles of Philippi (42 BC) and Actium (31 BC) there. Even if not everyone had it, everyone knew what Roman citizenship meant. It was Roman citizenship, but they did not live in Rome. Augustus had given it to them so that they would stay in Philippi.

    „So when Paul says: „We are citizens of heaven“, he does not mean that we go to heaven to live there after we have lived this life. What he means is this: The Saviour, the Lord, Jesus, the King – all of which were of course imperial titles – will come from heaven to earth to change the present situation and condition of his people. The key word here is transformation: „He will transform our present humble bodies so that they will become his glorious body.“

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 128, 129

    Jesus will transform the present human body.

    God will be all in all

    In 1 Corinthians 15:28 we find one of the clearest statements about the absolute centre of the future-oriented New Testament worldview: God will „be all in all“ as the goal of all history. „God ultimately intends to fill all creation with his own presence and love.“

    The world was created good, but incomplete. One day, when the forces of rebellion are defeated and creation responds freely and joyfully to the love of its Creator, the Creator will fill creation with Himself so that it remains both an independent being, other than God, and suffused with God’s own life.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 131

    A new birth

    In Romans chapter 8, Paul takes up another image: The image of the new birth. Creation is in a state of slavery, like the children of Israel in Egypt (Romans 8:21). „God’s plan was to govern creation with life-giving wisdom through his images, the human creatures. However, this was always a promise of the future. …. Meanwhile, creation was subject to corruption and decay.“ How does creation emerge from this state? In Romans 8:22, Paul uses the image of a new birth for the whole cosmos itself.

    The wedding of heaven and earth

    Finally, Revelation 21 and 22 use the image of a wedding: „The New Jerusalem comes down from heaven like a bride who has adorned herself for her bridegroom. We immediately realise how different this image is from all the supposedly Christian scenarios that end with the Christian going to heaven as a soul, naked and unadorned, to meet his Creator with fear and trembling.“

    „The end of Revelation describes the final answer to the Lord’s Prayer, that God’s kingdom will come and his will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Paul also talks about this in Ephesians 1:10: God’s plan and promise was to bring all things together in Christ, both heavenly and earthly things.“

    Here we have a sign of the future task that ultimately awaits the redeemed in God’s new world. Far from the often popular idea of sitting on clouds and playing the harp, the redeemed people of God in the new world will be the mediators of God’s love, which will flow out in new ways to fulfil new creative tasks in order to celebrate and spread the glory of his love.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 134

    Conclusion

    Why are all these images and metaphors used in the New Testament? Because we can only form a certain idea with their help. „What we can say about the future is like a series of signs pointing into a bright mist. We have no photograph of what we will find when we arrive.“

    In the next part of this servies we look at some of these ’signs‘ that we find in the Bible.

  • Surprised by Hope – Part 3

    Surprised by Hope – Part 3

    By Christian / Tom Wright

    This series takes up the main ideas from the book by Bible scholar N. T. Wright Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (German Von Hoffnung überrascht – Was die Bibel zu Auferstehung und ewigem Leben sagt).

    I read the book in the German translation. So the quotes are from the German translation and retranslated into English. The quotes will therefore differ from the English original.

    The surprising nature of early Christian hope

    It turns out that the early Christian belief in a hope beyond death was demonstrably based on Judaism and not paganism. N. T. Wright then lists seven important core statements in which early Christian hope clearly differs from that of Judaism.

    First of all, „the resurrection formed the centre of the early Christian hope for the future.“ This sentence is perhaps easy to read over. You probably don’t recognise the implications. N. T. Wright now summarises much more detailed reasons:

    The first Christians did not simply believe in life after death; they more or less never spoke of going to heaven after death. But when they spoke of heaven as a destination waiting for you after death, they seemed to have seen this heavenly life as a temporary stage on the way to the ultimate resurrection of the body. When Jesus told the thief on the cross that they would meet in paradise on the last day (Luke 23:43), paradise clearly cannot be the final destination, as Luke makes clear in the next chapter. Rather, paradise is the glorious garden in which God’s people rest before the resurrection.

    When Jesus explained that there were many dwellings in his Father’s house, he used the word mone for „dwelling place“, which means temporary accommodation. (John 14:2)

    When Paul says that his desire is to „die and be with Christ, which is far better“, he is indeed thinking of a blissful life with his Lord immediately after death, but this is only a prelude before the resurrection. (Philippians 1:23;3:9-11;3:20-21)

    In the terminology of the discussion in the previous chapter, the first Christians held to a two-stage belief in the future. First comes death and whatever comes immediately afterwards; then there is a new physical existence in a newly created world.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 67

    I wouldn’t be surprised if that was quite surprising for you too. And it was at the time. „There is nothing in paganism that comes even remotely close to this belief. This belief is as Jewish as it can be.“ But the first Christians made modifications, all of which can be found in authors as diverse as Paul, John of Patmos, Luke and Justin Martyr, Matthew and Irenaeus.

    1. Within early Christianity, there is more or less no range of beliefs about life beyond death

    „In this respect, Christianity looks like a variety of Pharisaic Judaism. There is no trace of a Sadducean worldview or one that belongs to the Philo’s school of thought.“ „Only in the late second century, a good 150 years after the time of Jesus, do we find people who assign a completely different meaning to the word resurrection than what it meant in Judaism and early Christianity, namely a spiritual experience in the present that leads to an incorporeal hope for the future.“

    2. In early Christianity, the resurrection moved from the periphery to the centre

    „One cannot imagine Pauline thinking without it. Nor should we imagine Johannine thought without it …. Resurrection is of enormous importance in Clement and Ignatius, Justin and Irenaeus. It is one of the key beliefs that enraged the pagans in Lyons in 177 AD and drove them to slaughter several Christians, including the bishop who preceded the great Irenaeus. Belief in bodily resurrection was one of two key things the pagan physician Galen noted about Christians (the other was their remarkable sexual reticence). Take away the resurrection and you lose the whole New Testament, as well as the theology of most of the second-century church fathers.“

    3. The resurrection of a transformed body

    „Within early Christianity, it was part of the core belief in the resurrection from the beginning that the new body would certainly be a body in the sense of a physical object occupying space and time, but that it would also be a transformed body, a body whose material would be created from the old material but would have new properties.“

    But what about Paul in 1 Corinthians 15? An often misunderstood passage. Actually, he explains it quite well and most later writers look back on it. „But unfortunately, many translations completely misunderstand Paul here and use wording that leads to the widespread assumption that Paul is speaking here of a spiritual body in the sense of a non-material body.“ But then Jesus would not have left an empty tomb. „It can be shown in detail, philologically as well as exegetically, that this view is exactly not what Paul meant.“

    The contrast he sets up is not between what we understand by a present physical body and what we understand by a future spiritual body, but between a present body animated by the normal human soul and a future body animated by God’s Spirit.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 70

    „His point is that the future body is imperishable. The present flesh and blood is perishable, condemned to decay and death. That is why Paul says, „Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.“ The new body will be imperishable. The entire chapter, one of Paul’s longest continuous discussions and the decisive climax of the entire letter, is about the new creation, about the Creator God who renews creation and does not abandon it, as Platonists of all colours, including the Gnostics, would like.“

    „But this transformed physicality … does not include a transformation into the light form. This is another point where many go astray and misunderstand the word glory as implying a physical shining rather than a status within the world that belongs to God. This is all the more remarkable because the most famous of the biblical resurrection texts, Daniel 12, says of the righteous who are resurrected that they will shine like the stars. Surprisingly, this text is not quoted anywhere in the New Testament when it comes to the resurrection body, apart from the interpretation of a parable. Where we do find the text, it is used metaphorically for the present Christian witness in the world.“

    4. The resurrection is a two-part event

    This is also centrally evidenced by 1 Corinthians 15 and this aspect is consistently accepted throughout the first two centuries. „No first-century Jew before Easter expected the resurrection to be anything other than the large-scale event that would happen to all God’s people, or perhaps even to all humanity. It would be part of the sudden event during which God’s kingdom, as in heaven, would ultimately come on earth.“

    Since this is the context in which Jesus, the apostles and others said and wrote the words handed down to us, it is also the key to interpretation: „Resurrection, we must always remember, did not mean going to heaven or escaping death or having a glorious existence after death, but coming back to new bodily life after bodily death.“

    Therefore, this becomes a central feature of the surprising hope of the first Christians: „The belief that the beginning of the Kingdom of God consisted in the resurrection itself, which reflected a single person in the midst of human history, in anticipation of the great, final resurrection. The resurrection of Jesus already guarantees and points to that final resurrection of the people of God at the end of history.“

    5. Our task between the resurrection of Jesus and the general resurrection

    The first Christians believed that the resurrection had begun with Jesus and would be completed in the last great resurrection on the last day. They therefore also believed that God had called them to work with him in the power of the Holy Spirit to realise what Jesus had achieved and thereby foreshadow the final resurrection. „It was not merely that God had already heralded „the end“, his kingdom; if Jesus, the Messiah, was the end in person, God’s future arrived in the present, then those who belonged to Jesus, followed him and were empowered by his Spirit, had the mission, as far as they were able, to change the present in the light of that future.“

    6. The resurrection as a methaphor

    „Within Judaism, resurrection could be used both as a metaphor and a metonymy for the return from exile. … So when resurrection is used metaphorically in Judaism, it refers to the restoration of Israel; but from the earliest days of Christianity – and this is all the more remarkable when one considers how Christianity began as a Jewish messianic movement – this meaning has disappeared;“

    The new metaphorical meaning had already taken strong root in Paul’s time: resurrection as a metaphorical reference to baptism (a dying and rising with Christ), and resurrection as a reference to the new life in untiring ethical obedience, empowered by the Holy Spirit, the life to which the believer commits himself.

    7. Resurrection and Messianity

    The link between the resurrection and Messiahship was completely new. „In Judaism, no one expected the Messiah to die, and therefore of course no one imagined that the Messiah would rise from the dead.“

    „But from the earliest beginnings, attested in texts that may be pre-Pauline fragments of very early creeds, the first Christians claimed that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, precisely because of his resurrection.“

    In connection with the actual task that Israel had been given at Sinai (see serie Bearing God’s Name – why Sinai still matters) and the prophecies about the Messiah, the resurrection of the Messiah made perfect sense. It was the fulfilment of what God had planned and intended – even if people had imagined it very differently.

    „This means that we can already rule out the revisionist positions on the resurrection of Jesus that so many authors have advocated in recent years. Many suggest that the first disciples were so overcome with grief at the death of Jesus that they picked up the idea of resurrection from the surrounding culture, held on to it and convinced themselves that Jesus had been raised from the dead, even though they knew, of course, that he had not been resurrected.“

    „Due to the early Christian belief in Jesus as the Messiah, the belief developed very early on that Jesus is Lord and therefore the emperor is not. But even for Paul, both Jesus‘ resurrection and the future resurrection of his people are the basis of Christian loyalty to another king, another lord. Death is the tyrant’s last weapon.“ And so for Christians, the resurrection is not just about ‚life after death‘.

    Resurrection is not a new description of death; it is the overcoming of death and thus the overcoming of those whose power depends on death.

    Despite the scorn and derision of some modern scholars, those who were burned at the stake and thrown to the lions were people who believed in bodily resurrection. Resurrection was never a way to get cosy and gain prestige; … It was the Gnostics who translated the language of resurrection into a private spirituality and a dualistic cosmology, more or less turning the meaning of resurrection into its opposite. It was also the Gnostics who escaped persecution. What ruler would have sleepless nights worrying about his subjects reading the Gospel of Thomas? The resurrection was always predestined to get you into trouble, and it did so regularly.“

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 77

    II think you are beginning to realise why N. T. Wright spoke of a surprising hope. Not only because it was surprising in the first century. But probably also for you – even if you consider yourself a Christian. So even with this topic, you may well realise when reading the Bible that it was not the textual or historical context that was decisive in the interpretation of some passages, but rather assumptions and ideas that we or others put into them – in other words, eisegesis. Take time to think about this.

    So, since the resurrection has a much broader meaning than just that Jesus lived again, it is good to briefly look at whether we can believe these reports. We will then look at what surprising hope there still is in relation to God’s plan for the future. And both in the next part 4.

  • Surprised by Hope – Part 2

    Surprised by Hope – Part 2

    By Christian / Tom Wright

    This series takes up the main ideas from the book by Bible scholar N. T. Wright Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (German Von Hoffnung überrascht – Was die Bibel zu Auferstehung und ewigem Leben sagt).

    Therefore, in this series I would like to present only the main points and encourage everyone to read the book for themselves and check the arguments against the Bible.

    I read the book in the German translation. So the quotes are from the German translation and retranslated into English. The quotes will therefore differ from the English original.

    Well prepared, but no goal in sight

    This is how N. T. Wright describes what this book is about:

    This book deals with two questions that have often been treated completely separately, but which, I passionately believe, belong very closely together. Firstly, what is the ultimate Christian hope? Then: What hope is there for change, for salvation, for transformation, for new possibilities within the present world?

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 21

    Today, there is a vast number of different answers to this question – all of which more or less claim to be based on the Bible. And which one is right? Wrong question. It is better to ask ourselves which view is closer to what the text says. Tom Wright has a good tip on this:

    And since good theology is never based on the opinion of the majority: What does the Bible teach on this subject? What do Jesus and the apostles say?

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 31

    I’m afraid that unfortunately only a few people are really interested in this. But we are all influenced by what we have read, heard and seen since childhood. Ultimately, this is reflected in the behaviour of each individual. If we are living in the end times and will soon be taken to heaven by the Lord and the earth will be scorched with fire anyway, what do we care about environmental problems or climate change now? Not my thoughts, but those of quite a few evangelicals in the USA. And quite a few try to make spiritual contact with the dead. Even certain customs indicate that the conception of many differs significantly from that of Jesus‘ first disciples:

    Funeral customs, new or re-emerging today, bring out the same kind of confusion. The gesture of placing objects next to the deceased in the coffin to comfort or help them in their future lives was until recently described by cultural observers as an interesting custom that has now been abandoned in modern Western society. Meanwhile, gifts for the deceased are making a comeback, with photos, jewellery, teddy bears and the like being placed in the coffin. Nigel Barley recounts stories from a crematorium employee; stories of widows placing a packet of wholemeal biscuits or the deceased’s second pair of glasses and dentures in the coffin. In one case, a widow placed two aerosol cans of glue in the coffin. Her husband had always used it to glue his toupee on. The spray cans caused an explosion, bending the door of the crematorium’s combustion chamber.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 35

    There is probably no better way to summarise the situation than this:

    Most people simply do not know what the Orthodox Christian faith actually consists of.

    Frankly speaking: What we have today is not „the sure and certain hope of the resurrection of the dead“, as the old liturgies say, but the vague and fuzzy optimism that things will somehow be all right in the end.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 36, 51

    Therefore, we will now need to address some key issues relating to our hope based on Scripture:

    1. How can we know anything at all about all these things?
      The Church of England says: In Scripture, tradition and reason. And in an appropriate mixture. „I submit that a good proportion of our present view of death and the afterlife derives from none of these sources, but from cultural impulses which have generated at best semi-Christian informal traditions.“ (S. 53)
    2. Do we have immortal souls, and if so, what are they?
    3. Jesus‘ own resurrection must be the starting point for all Christian thinking on the subject of hope.

    To do this, we have to go back two thousand years in history.

    Early Christian hope in its historical context

    The resurrection of Jesus is described in the New Testament in the Gospels and the letters. However, with certain deviations. If the accounts were exactly the same word for word, it would be said that one source had merely copied from the other. Now, however, we are dealing with eyewitness accounts that differ from one another. This may be a problem for someone who advocates literal inspiration (See video The Canon of the New Testament – Part 9: Inspiration). But is that so unusual? You can see the same thing with eyewitness accounts today. But only in the rarest of cases would one conclude that the event described never took place. So why was the report of Jesus‘ disciples so spectacular?

    Resurrection and life after death in ancient paganism and Judaism

    Tom Wright summarises it like this:

    The ancient world – with the exception of the Jews – insisted that the dead do not resurrect; and Jews did not believe that anyone had already resurrected or that anyone would do so by their own power before the resurrection of the dead.

    As far as the ancient pagan world was concerned, the path to the underworld was a one-way street. Death was omnipotent; you could not escape it and you could not break its power once it had occurred. The ancient pagan world was therefore roughly divided into those who, like Homer’s shadows, would have liked to have a new body but knew they would not receive one, and those who, like Plato’s philosophers, did not want a body because an incorporeal soul was far better.

    Within this world, the word resurrection in its Greek, Latin or other equivalents was never used to refer to life after death. The term resurrection was used to denote new physical life, after life after death, however that was imagined.

    In terms of content, resurrection referred specifically to something that happened to the body; hence the later debates about how God would bring about a resurrection – whether he would work with the existing bones or create new bones etc. Such debates could only occur when it was fairly clear that something tangible and physical would be the end result.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 60, 61

    According to Mark 6:14-16 and the parallel passages, „Herod the Great is reported as saying that he thought Jesus might be John the Baptist, who had risen from the dead – but he did not think it was a ghost.“

    „When the first Christians said that Jesus had been resurrected from the dead, they knew that they were saying that something had happened to him that had never happened to anyone else and that had not been expected at all. They did not say that Jesus‘ soul had entered heavenly bliss.“ (p. 63)

    What was the situation in the Jewish world? Some Jews – like the Sadducees – „agreed with the Gentiles who denied any afterlife, especially a physical afterlife. Others agreed with the pagans who thought of a glorious, albeit incorporeal, future for the soul. Here the philosopher Philo is the obvious example. But most Jews of the time believed in the eventual resurrection of the dead – that is, that God would take care of the soul after death until he would give new bodies to his people on the Last Day, when he would judge the whole world and make it new.“ John 11:24 „I know that he will rise again – at the resurrection on the last day.“

    But didn’t Jesus say in Mark 12:18-27, Matthew 22:23-33 and Luke 20:27-40 that we become angels in the resurrection? Here, too, you have to read the texts carefully (preferably in the original languages): He said to be like (Matthew, Mark) or equal to (Luke) angels. And that was a discussion with the Sadducees, who completely denied a resurrection.

    „Apart from this discussion, the more or less only reference to the „resurrection“ as a whole within the Gospels appears in Matthew 13:43″. And thus quotes Daniel 12:3 and thus the usual view in the Jewish world.

    And what about the isolated reference in John 5:28, 29?

    Do not be amazed at this; for a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come out: those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the bad deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

    John 5:28,29 NASB

    On this Tom Wright writes: „Up to this point he remains squarely on the map of first-century Jewish belief. In contrast to his redefinition of the kingdom and messianicity, he seems to have had little or nothing new to say on the question of resurrection. Except that he then begins to tell his followers that he himself will be killed and then resurrected three days later. …. But the Gospels insist again and again that the disciples simply could not understand what Jesus was saying.“ (p. 65) They discussed among themselves, somewhat confused, what this „rising from the dead“ could mean (Mark 9:10; interestingly reported only in Mark)

    This was not because these disciples simply didn’t know their Bible well enough or were even a little slow on the uptake. The resurrection of a single person before ‚that time‘ was simply beyond their imagination.

    So for them, Jesus‘ crucifixion was the end of all their hope. „Nobody dreamed of saying: „Oh, that’s okay – he’ll be back in a few days.“ Or: „Well, at least he’s in heaven with God now.“ According to Luke 24:21, they were thinking, „We had hoped he was the one who would redeem Israel.“ In other words, „the crucifixion meant that the kingdom had not come, not that it had come. The crucifixion of a „would-be Messiah“ meant that he was not the Messiah, not that he was. When Jesus was crucified, every single disciple knew what that meant: „We backed the wrong horse. The game is over.“

    So this is the context in which early Christian hope was proclaimed. If we keep this in mind, we understand much better the surprising character of early Christian hope, which we will look at in the next part.

  • Surprised by Hope – Part 1

    Surprised by Hope – Part 1

    By Christian

    Can it even be the case that we can still be somehow surprised today with regard to the hope we are given in the Bible? Hasn’t everything already been understood, written and said about it? Does anyone here think they know better than the first Christians, the ‚Church Fathers‘, the great theological thinkers of the Middle Ages and the Reformation?

    We may have already noticed from the list in the last question that the focus here was strongly on the ‚Western Church‘. For example, the ‚Eastern Church‘, i.e. the Greek Orthodox Church and the churches of the Middle East, are missing from the list. Or the further development of Judaism. And all of their hopes are sometimes far apart.

    But can we today know any more about the Old Testament, the New Testament and the context in which they were written than even the Church Fathers? The answer here must be a resounding yes. Why is that the case?

    Because today we have many more sources from antiquity at our disposal and the languages used are better understood. What did the Church Fathers know? They had very few sources at their disposal. Many were part of a local persecuted group and not scholars with access to huge libraries and computers. And they were not even closer to the languages used than we are today. Excuse me? How many of the church fathers do you think could read the Old Testament in Hebrew, for example? Not even a handful! And why do you think Jerome was commissioned to produce a Latin translation of the Bible (later called the Vulgate) at the end of the fourth century? Not only because of the differences in the existing Latin translations. The fact that there were Latin translations shows that most of them did not even know Greek. And Jerome also translated the Old Testament from the Septuagint, i.e. the Greek translation, and his knowledge of Hebrew is unclear. (See the series Serie The canon of the New Testament).

    From the second century onwards, people had already moved far away from Paul’s letters and the texts of the first century in their thinking and reasoning. And the Old Testament was pushed aside as ‚outdated‘. (See the video The Canon of the New Testament – Part 13: Marcion and Other Vanished Christians)

    We should also not overlook the strong influence of Greek philosophy, especially Plato, on Christian doctrine and theology and even Judaism at the time of Christ. When were the doctrines of heaven, hell, purgatory and the immortal soul coined in their present form? Do we find them in the text of the Old or New Testament? With the Church Fathers? Or only from the Middle Ages onwards? We shall see.

    It is therefore a question of going back to the text of the Old and New Testaments with all the possibilities available to us today. What can a biblical scholar say today about what the apostle Paul wrote, for example? Or what can be found in the Gospels? What was the message that Christians heard and proclaimed in the first century? That’s what this video series will be about.

    Fortunately, the book Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church by Bible scholar N. T. Wright is also available in German translation: Von Hoffnung überrascht – Was die Bibel zu Auferstehung und ewigem Leben sagt.

    Therefore, in this series I would like to present only the main points and encourage everyone to read the book for themselves and check the arguments against the Bible.

    I read the book in the German translation. So the quotes are from the German translation and retranslated into English. The quotes will therefore differ from the English original.

    Firstly, I would like to briefly provide some information about N. T. Wright. Not because an argument becomes more important or more correct because a recognised scholar says so. „Nicholas Thomas Wright, better known as N. T. Wright or Tom Wright, was Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at the University of St Andrews, Anglican Bishop Emeritus of Durham (England) and one of the leading New Testament theologians and Life of Jesus scholars in the English-speaking world. He has been a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Oxford since 2019. … Wright is an independent, unconventional thinker who challenges modern and classical interpretations and is difficult to categorise. He sets out complex theological issues in a clear and readable way to make the reader think.“ (Wikipedia) So let’s listen to what someone has to say who has devoted decades of academic research to the text of the New Testament and the Pauline letters in particular.

    Let’s start with an important note in the foreword (p. 14).

    All language about the future, as any economist or politician will tell you, is nothing more than a series of signs pointing into the fog. We are looking through a glass darkly, said St Paul as he looked at what is to come. All our language about future states of the world and of ourselves consists of complex images that correspond more or less well with the ultimate reality. But that doesn’t mean that things are completely unclear or that every opinion about these things is equally valid. And what if someone came out of the fog to meet us? This is, of course, the central, if often ignored, Christian belief.

    N. T. Wright, Von Hoffnung überrascht, S. 14,15

    In this respect, no one should claim to know exactly what the hope and future of a Christian will look like. After all, Paul says that he and his contemporaries could not do this even though they had the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 13:12).

    What hope have you got?

    This brings us to the point where you should briefly consider what hope you have.

    As a Catholic, you probably believe that you will go to heaven after death. But not to hell for eternity. And only briefly in purgatory. Interestingly, heaven and hell were adopted in the Koran and thus the Isalm, although this is not found in either the Old or New Testament. As a Protestant, you probably also hope to go to heaven. But the hell thing … too cruel. Maybe everyone will go to heaven one day? For some, that sounds a lot like Asian religions and philosophies. To be reunited with God (or the universe?).

    I would particularly like to address the hope of Jehovah’s Witnesses and ex-Witnesses – not only because of my own experiences – because it often takes an interesting turn.

    When Jehovah’s Witnesses were still Bible Students, they also essentially believed that they would go to heaven like all Christians. When the hope proclaimed for years that „millions now living will never die“ was not fulfilled in 1925, the move to heaven simply had to be postponed. In the 1930s, the president of the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society, J. F. Rutherford, not only gave his followers the name Jehovah’s Witnesses, but also a new hope: only a small remnant of the literal 144,000 anointed Christians would go to heaven to reign with Jesus. All the others would be ‚other sheep‘ and would remain on earth. (See video Identifying True Worship, Part 8: The Jehovah’s Witnesses‘ Teaching on the ‚Other Sheep‘)

    However, many have now woken up and realised that J. F. Rutherford only justified this doctrine of the ‚other sheep‘ at the time on the basis of his own made-up type and anti-type comparisons. That is why these original articles from the 1930s have not been quoted in the Watchtower literature for a long time. Then everyone would notice.

    But this leads to the following: If there are no two hopes, as Jehovah’s Witnesses teach, but only one hope for all followers of Jesus, then it is the … heavenly one, isn’t it? So the ‚children of God‘ all go to heaven. Welcome to the bosom of the church, I would like to say. But not quite. What about the others? Do they go to purgatory and hell? Well, anyone who has preached for years and decades that the Bible shows that there is no hell and no immortal soul will probably not believe that. But what then? Will such people be ‚destroyed forever‘ at the final judgement? Doesn’t that still sound like something out of the Jehovah’s Witnesses‘ preaching toolbox? And what happens between death as a human being and the future? Are we then ‚in the memory of God‘? Sounds somehow familiar too …

    I wonder how many ‚proof texts‘ have already gone through your head for one thing or another. But we still draw our conclusions far too early. Because we unconsciously still have a lot of ideas as presuppositions in our thinking. And because reading the Bible is usually not enough. Not even with prayer and the Holy Spirit. He would have to perform true miracles because we can neither read the texts in the original languages nor with the context of that time. We do not understand the meaning of the words and phrases. Often we even miss the almost obvious reference to the Old Testament when reference is made to the Septuagint or linguistic images are used. Or the use of certain words and terms in the first century. What was perhaps clear to every follower of Christ at the time is not self-explanatory for us. And even worse: we read terms in the translations and associate them with ideas that the disciples of Jesus in the first century did not even have.

    So the motto now can only be: Back to the text! And back to the context!

    And that’s exactly where we start in the next part.

  • Bearing God’s Name – Part 5

    Bearing God’s Name – Part 5

    By Christian / Carmen Joy Imes

    In this series, we are looking at thoughts from the book Bearing God’s Name – Why Sinai still matters by Carmen Joy Imes.

    In view of what we have looked at in the first 4 parts, the question arises all the more: was that the end of the covenant between God and the Israelites? But then what about the promise he had already made to Abraham that this would be a blessing for all people?

    Who let you in? – Gentiles and the Mission of God

    In 1 Peter 2:9-10 we find the answer, although it could easily be missed by someone who only knows the New Testament. But now that we have already dealt with this topic in the Old Testament, we can recognize what came to the minds of Jewish Christians in the first century when they heard this passage:

    And now you’ve become a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, and a people who were specially selected to announce the virtues of the One who called you out of darkness and into His wonderful light. So, although you haven’t always been a nation, you’re now a nation of God! And although you once knew no mercy, you’re the ones who are now being shown mercy!

    1 Peter 2:9-10 2001 Translation

    Do the words sound familiar? We have quoted them before:

    Now, if you’ll listen to what I say and keep My Sacred Agreement, you’ll be a special people to Me that will be higher than all other nations! ‘And because the whole earth is Mine, you’ll become My holy nation and a Kingdom of Priests.’ ‘Now, [go] and tell this to the children of IsraEl!’

    Exodus 19:5-6 2001 Translation

    By naming the titles from the covenant and thus referring to Exodus 19:5, we also have a reference to Yahweh’s segullah – his personal, special property But to whom are the words in 1 Peter addressed? To the disciples of Jesus in Asia Minor, who are Gentiles! That is why we also read: „In the past you were not his people.“.

    But 1 Peter goes one better: „you are a chosen race“. γένος (genos) „offspring, race, people, nation“ Where does this come from and to whom did it refer exclusively until now?

    Then, all the wild beasts will give praise to Me… Even ostrich daughters and those who are chained. ‘For, into their deserts, I will bring water… Yes, rivers into [all the] dry places For My chosen people to drink. For, they are the people I purchased, And they should describe all My virtues!

    Isaiah 43:20,21 2001 Translation

    The reason for being chosen is still the same: to bear God’s name and thus proclaim his glory.

    And there is another reference, namely to Hosea. Hosea was to name a son as follows: „And he said: Give him the name Lo-Ammi [The name Lo-Ammi means ’not my people‘], for you are not my people, and I am not one of you [It is possible that „I am not one of you“ in Hebrew is an allusion to the explanation of the name of God YHWH in Exodus 3:14 („I will be“)]!“ (Hosea 1:9 Züricher) Only later was he to change this: „And I will sow them for myself in the land, and I will have mercy on Lo-Ruchamah, and to Lo-Ammi I will say, ‚You are my people,‘ and they will say, ‚My God! (Hosea 2:25 Züricher) Peter argues: If God re-adopts his rebellious people, why shouldn’t he do the same with people from the Gentiles?

    1 Peter 2:9 therefore contains a bold formulation: λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν (laos eis peripoiēsin) „a people for his personal possessions“. Whereby the Greek λαὸς (laos) and the corresponding Hebrew ‚am were previously used in the Scriptures exclusively for Israel. But now the Gentiles also have the same commission: „If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. …However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.“ (1 Peter 4:14,16 NIV)

    When Peter speaks of a „royal priesthood“ and „holy nation“, his wording corresponds exactly to the Greek translation of Exodus 19:5,6. But not so with „treasured possession“. Carmen Imes writes about this:

    Peter doesn’t use the Greek word that translates the Hebrew segullah in every other passage (periousios), which would highlight the uniqueness of the treasure itself. Instead, Peter emphasizes the process of becoming Yahweh’s possession by using a slightly different phrase (eis peripoiēsin) found only in Malachi 3:17. This slight shift in phrasing opens up a profound theological possibility.

    Peter’s citation of Malachi is significant because it is the only Old Testament passage where the term segullah refers to a righteous remnant, rather than the entire nation of Israel. In light of Israel’s covenant unfaithfulness, the prophet Malachi had envisioned a future day when Yahweh would select a new segullah made up only of those who fear his name. Malachi had said, “‘They will become mine,’ says Yahweh of Armies, ‘On the day when I prepare a segullah’” (3:17, author’s translation).

    By quoting Malachi directly, Peter shows us that he sees this very promise as having been fulfilled in the believing community made up of both Jews and Gentiles.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    How does Peter come to this conclusion? This is not explained further in 1 Peter. But for the apostle Peter it was clear according to the account in Acts. According to Peter’s vision in Acts 10, he should no longer call anything unclean that is no longer unclean for God. And if God has poured out his Spirit on the Gentiles, then they are part of his people. There is no longer any difference between Jews and Gentiles. The only difference that now exists is the one in Malachi 3:17,18 concerning God’s segullah: not everyone in the community automatically belongs to God’s segullah.

    “On the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty, “they will be my treasured possession. I will spare them, just as a father has compassion and spares his son who serves him. And you will again see the distinction between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve God and those who do not.

    Malachi 3:17,18 NIV

    And Peter argues accordingly at the meeting in Jerusalem according to Acts 15:

    God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.

    Acts 15:8,9 NIV

    And James agrees with him:

    Simon [Peter’s Aramaic name] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles.

    Acts 15:14 NIV

    This must have come as a surprise to his listeners: Because until now, a clear distinction had always been made between „God’s people“ and the Gentiles. Either you are part of Yahweh’s people or you are not. And James justifies this with a quote from Amos 9:12, the text in the Old Testament, which indicates that Gentiles will be included in the covenant without converting to Judaism. Carmen Imes explains this text:

    The Hebrew reads, “that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations upon whom my Name will be invoked” (author’s translation). This could imply military domination. The Greek Septuagint reads, “that the remnant of humankind, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, may earnestly seek me.” Rather than military domination, the Greek translation suggests global conversion. Still, both versions refer to the Gentiles as those “over whom my Name is invoked,” which is the principal point on which James depends. In Hebrew, “Edom” and “humankind” are almost identical, as are “possess” and “seek,” which partly explains the Greek translation.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    With what the apostles, the elders and the whole assembly in Jerusalem then decide, they do not set aside Sinai. What they abolish are the laws whose purpose was to distinguish the Israelites ethnically from the Gentiles. What this may have meant for the Gentile disciples when they heard of the decision can perhaps be better understood if we look at Carmen Ime’s formulation:

    You’re invited! You can follow Jesus just as you are. We discovered that hundreds of years ago the prophets looked ahead to this day, speaking of you who bear Yahweh’s name—Gentiles who belong. Welcome to the family!

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    This is also the goal of Paul’s ministry, as he says in Romans 1:5-8, for example, by incorporating well-known formulations from the Old Testament. And Paul is not preaching a new gospel either, as we have seen in the series „The new perspective on Paul„.

    Our mission

    What does this mean for us today? Carmen Imes sums it up like this:

    Because of the faithfulness of Jesus, we can be marked with God’s name and participate in his mission to bring blessing to all nations.

    Rather than asking if we have to obey Old Testament law, we need to ask what our relationship is to Israel’s covenant.

    Because of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, Israel’s Messiah, we have been granted membership in the covenant. We have been incorporated into his renewed covenant community. His sacrifice ushered in a new era. That reality, paired with our changed cultural situation, means that many of the Old Testament laws no longer function for us as they did for Israel. Obeying them by the letter would not uphold the purpose for which they were given.

    The need for a temple has disappeared, fulfilled in Christ, and therefore sacrifices are no longer necessary.

    Laws that were designed to keep Israel separate as an ethnic group have also been set aside.

    As members of his new covenant community, we have the privilege — the grace — of living as his treasured people.

    Far from irrelevant or obsolete, the Old Testament story tells us who we are. It tells us whose we are. And that changes everything.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)
  • Bearing God’s Name – Part 4

    Bearing God’s Name – Part 4

    By Christian / Carmen Joy Imes

    In this series, we are looking at thoughts from the book Bearing God’s Name – Why Sinai still matters by Carmen Joy Imes.

    In the first three parts, we talked about how the Israelites were organized by Yahweh as a people and trained to bear his name. Their task was so that through them all nations could recognize what kind of God Yahweh is. Bearing God’s name was their free choice and they said at Sinai that they would do anything. After 40 years of wandering in the desert, the next generation did the same. And again they confirm their promise when they are in the Promised Land (Joshua 8:30-35).

    After that, we hardly read anything about Sinai, even though ‚remembering‘ is a key theme of biblical theology. This is surprising when you consider the significance of the events. But the focus should be on remembering the liberation, not a pilgrimage to Sinai or something like that.

    Is that the end of the matter? Hardly, because now comes the time when they should bear the name of God as promised, so that all nations can see that Yahweh is above all others and how superior his rule is. Carmen Imes goes into this in the second half of her book. However, I would like to mention just a few of the many interesting points here.

    Enemy #1

    Some were hostile to the Hebrews: First Egypt’s Pharaoh and his arms, then some nations on the move and finally the kings in the Promised Land. But that was not their most dangerous enemy. Their most dangerous enemy is themselves. Again and again they grumble, rebel or no longer want to enter the Promised Land. Their fear of the people is so contagious that the whole nation is in a panic. What is the problem? They refuse to trust in what Yahweh has promised them.

    This also explains why Yahweh reacts with mercy to similar situations before Sinai. His expectations of the people are low. After Sinai, he has not changed. But his expectations can rightly be higher. He had given them a year to learn to honor him and respect each other. But he sees little progress. The pattern is therefore always the same after Sinai: Grumbling and rebellion result in punishment, prayer brings relief.

    The beginning of fulfillment – and what Yahweh sees

    But finally they are in the Promised Land. The book of Joshua illustrates the fulfillment of Yahweh’s promise.

    Then all the peoples on earth will see that the name of Yahweh is invoked over you, and they will fear you.

    Deuteronomy 28:10 Carmen Imes

    However, it is already apparent here that although they have entered the Promised Land, they are not fulfilling their task of bearing the name of God. We read about the Canaanite woman Raab, who is full of faith, and in contrast also about the unfaithful Israelite Achan. The Gibeonites are more convinced that Yahweh will give the land to the Israelites than they are. „The next generation is off to a wobbly start.“

    They quickly lose sight of the fact that Yahweh has taken them from the nations to belong to him. They would rather be like everyone else. In 1 Samuel we learn that even the priests, whose job it is precisely to uphold the covenant with Yahweh, disregard their sacred duties to such an extent that Yahweh announces that this priestly line will be wiped out. Next, they want a king like the others – and they want it now, when they want it. From the book of Judges we learn that they did not fully carry out Yahweh’s commission to conquer the promised land. It follows this pattern again and again:

    Well, a messenger of Yahweh had traveled from GilGal to The Place of Tears at BethEl, to address the house of IsraEl. There he told them: ‘This is what Yahweh has said: ‘I brought you out of Egypt and into the land that I promised to your ancestors, and I said that I’d never break the Agreement that I made with you. However, I told you not to make any agreements with [the people] who live in this land, and that you were not to worship their gods! ‘Rather, [I told you to] destroy their carved images and to pull down their altars! ‘However, you haven’t listened to My voice, and you’ve done [many bad] things… Therefore, just as I told you, I won’t drive them out from in front of you, so they’ll harass you, and their gods will oppress you!’ Well, after the messenger of Yahweh said all of this to the sons of IsraEl, the people started shouting and crying…

    Judges 2:1-4 2001 Translation

    And as soon as Joshua died, this happened:

    Also, the rest of that generation was laid to rest with their ancestors. So, another generation came along that didn’t know Yahweh or of the things that He had done for IsraEl. Therefore, the sons of IsraEl started doing evil things before Yahweh, and they started serving the BaAls!

    Judges 2:10,11 2001 Translation

    Yahweh sent judges again and again to free them. But even that did not help in the long term:

    Yet, after each Judge died, they’d just go right back to being corrupt – even worse than their ancestors – by worshiping and serving other gods… And they stubbornly refused to abandon their evil ways, which made Yahweh very angry with IsraEl. So He told them: ‘Because this nation has broken the Sacred Agreement that I made with their ancestors and refused to listen to My voice, I will no longer drive away a single man from those nations among them who were allowed to stay in the land by JoShua, son of NaWeh. ‘[I’m doing this] to see whether IsraEl will ever choose to follow and walk in My ways, as did their ancestors.’

    Judges 2:19-22 2001 Translation

    Did things get better in the time of the kings of Israel? There were only a few good kings. When Solomon dedicates the temple, he says in his prayer that all nations may come to know the name of Yahweh. The fact that Yahweh fills the temple with his glory shows that he stands by his covenant with Israel.

    The first important prophet of the time of the kings is Elijah. Not only does he have to face the king and the worshippers of Baal, but in the end he has the impression that his service has been completely in vain. Interestingly, he runs all the way to Mount Sinai, where Yahweh assures him that this is not the case. He is not alone. There are still a few who do not practise idolatry.

    In the end, it was so bad that Yahweh had to exile them from the land – as he had already warned them at Sinai.

    ‘Then they entered the nations where they had been sent, And there they profaned God’s Holy Name. For the nations that lived there were saying: ‘Although these people belong to Yahweh, He has driven them out of their land!’ ‘So, for the sake of [God’s] Name, Which the house of IsraEl profaned, I spared them in all the [lands] where they went.

    ‘I will make My Name holy again, Which is being profaned among gentiles, The Name that you profaned in their midst… Then those nations will know that I am Yahweh,’ Says Yahweh the Lord, ‘When before their eyes, I’m made holy among you.

    Ezekiel 36:20,21,23 2001 Translation

    That was the low point. Instead of bearing God’s name and upholding his holy name, they profaned his name everywhere. One might even wonder whether the covenant they had broken so often still existed at all. After centuries, wasn’t the situation so hopeless that there was no point in continuing? Shouldn’t he just … start again? A new covenant?

    A new covenant – or the renewed covenant?

    Sometimes a fresh start is the best thing. Isaiah asks for this in Isaiah 63: Back to Sinai. The prophet Jeremiah speaks about this in Jeremiah 31. If you are already thinking about the New Testament, then read Jeremiah 31:31-32 carefully:

    ‘Look… The days are coming,’ says Yahweh, ‘When I’ll make an arrangement with IsraEl’s house, As well as with the houses of Judah. ‘I’ll conclude a New Sacred Agreement. That’s unlike the one that I made with their fathers. In the day that I grabbed their hands to lead them from Egypt’s land. But because they didn’t keep My Sacred Agreement, I had to let them go,‘ says Yahweh.

    Jeremiah 31:31-32 2001 Translation

    A new covenant different from the one at Sinai? Well, the covenant partners are the same. And the reason is not that the covenant from Sinai was bad, but because they broke it. Jeremiah describes the new covenant in the next two verses:

    ‘So, this is My [New] Sacred Agreement, that I will conclude with IsraEl then,’ said Yahweh, I will put My Laws in their minds, And into their hearts, I will write them. Then, they’ll be My people and I’ll be their God. ‘There’s no way they’ll then teach their neighbors and brothers. That they must learn of Yahweh; For, all will know Me from the least to the great. And when it comes to their errors and sins… I will kindly forget them!’

    Jeremia 31:33-34 2001 Translation

    The new thing is that every Israelite will be able to internalize this covenant. The covenant from Sinai was reaffirmed several times by the Israelites. Also because a new generation had grown up. But a covenant with a people, passed down from generation to generation through lineage, has not exactly worked well. This renewed covenant is therefore aimed at individuals who have a sincere desire to bear God’s name – just as Yahweh had said.

    Are we overstretching the term ’new‘ in Jeremiah 31? Well, the same prophet also uses this term in Lamentations:

    Because of the Lord’s great love we are not consumed, for his compassions never fail. They are new every morning; great is your faithfulness.

    ‘For the mercies of [God] never end, And His compassions will never fail. Each morning, they’re renewed, And on Him, we can always rely.

    Lamentations 3:22,23 NIV and 2001 Translation

    And he uses the word as a verb: „Bring us back to you, Lord, we want to return. Make our days new, as they once were.“ (Lamentations 5:21 Zurich). Similarly, Ezekiel speaks of a „new spirit“ for his people (Ezekiel 11:17-20), a „new heart“ (Ezekiel 18:31) and a „new spirit“ (Ezekiel 36:24-28).

    But doesn’t Hebrews 8 just refer to Jeremiah 31 and then say:

    So when he called it ‘new,’[Syr] He [automatically] made the former one, ‘old’… And whatever’s grown old and obsolete is soon destroyed.

    Hebrews 8:13 2001 Translation

    But let’s not let the end of the chapter stop us from looking at the context:

    But the author goes on to describe what exactly will disappear: namely, the sacrificial system. Sacrifices brought forgiveness, but they could never cleanse guilty consciences because people kept sinning. The first system of sacrifice, instituted at Sinai, was only temporary. Now that Jesus has given himself once for all, the earthly temple is not necessary. Sacrifices are redundant.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    So did this Sinai story come to an end with the appearance of Jesus Christ? What statements do we find in the New Testament and especially in the Gospels?

    Just give me Jesus – The Gospel witness

    In the texts from the Old Testament that we have read in this series in connection with the Sinai Covenant, we have generally read the name of God Yahweh. If we now continue with the Gospels in the New Testament, we notice an enormous difference: Yahweh no longer seems to appear – at least not in the manuscripts that have come down to us. Instead, it is always about Jesus.

    But the Gospel of Matthew in particular was written in such a way that a continuity is shown here: The child Jesus is called the Christ. (Matthew 1:16), the Greek form of Messiah, the anointed one. But his name is Jesus, which has the meaning: „Yahweh saves.“ (Matthew 1:21,25). If we had heard and read the name in Hebrew or Aramaic, the language in which Matthew was possibly first written, we might already have noticed a parallel to the time of Sinai: At Sinai, Moses has a right-hand man Hoshea, whose name has the meaning, „he saves.“ (Numbers 13:8). Moses changed his name to Yeshua, which means „Yahweh saves“ (Numbers 14:6). And Jesus is nothing other than the Latin form of the Greek Iesou, which is the translation of the Hebrew Jehsua: „Yahweh saves“.

    But that is by no means all. The Gospel of Matthew was structured and written so creatively that Mount Sinai and the events play a major role. Here is just a brief overview:

    • The Gospel of Matthew is divided into 5 blocks, which imitate the 5 books of Moses.
    • Before that, there is an introduction with the story of Jesus‘ parents‘ fleeing to … where? Egypt! It is a reverse Exodus story.
    • When the situation is safe again, they return from Egypt to the Promised Land, repeating, so to speak, Israel’s exodus from Egypt and entry into the Promised Land.
    • Next we read that he is baptized in the waters of the Jordan. This reminds us that the Israelites first crossed the Sea of Reeds and then the Jordan.
    • Then Jesus is sent by the Spirit where? Into the desert. For how long? 40 days.
    • There the Isarealites were tempted to turn away from Yahweh. And that is where Jesus is tempted. And what is Jesus quoting from? „Jesus chooses precisely those chapters of Deuteronomy where Moses is reminding the Israelites of the lessons they ought to have learned in the wilderness, lessons Jesus knows by heart.“

    What lesson does Jesus teach through his answers to the temptations? „No way to success is the right way if it violates the covenant. … The Messiah has passed the test that Israel failed.“

    The Gospel of Matthew focuses on five sermons preached by Jesus. And so the first block of Jesus‘ teachings is known as the Sermon on the Mount. A mountain is the context that Matthew mentions here for a reason. And Jesus also ties in with Sinai: „Do not think that I have come to set aside the law or the ‚words of the‘ prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.“ (Matthew 5:17) Someone may think that ‚fulfill‘ means that Jesus ‚fulfilled‘ a condition, so to speak, and thus abolished the law. But when the law was given to Israel at Sinai, there was never a clause like this: Should anyone ever keep the law completely, then it is abolished, finished, obsolete. Let us remember: the point was that they, as images of God, bear his name! And for the transgression of the law there was the system of sacrifices. There is no clause that ended the covenant. Therefore, the New Geneva Translation states in the footnote: „but to give full effect.“ If anyone thought that the Sinai and the law had now come to an end, Jesus teaches them something different. On the contrary, he is very uncomfortable about the fact that the Israelites have let it slide and raises the bar to the level that Yahweh had intended with the law: „Do not think that it is enough if you have not broken the law according to the letter, because Yahweh does not want you to think and feel that way in your heart!

    Is Jesus now „the prophet like Moses“ who is to come, as it says in Deuteronomy 18:15? If you consider the context of Deuteronomy 18, then you realize that Yahweh would not only send a prophet to give guidance in the face of idolatry. And that there would also be false prophets and how to recognize them. Acts 3 and 7 also apply this text accordingly. Jesus is also not just a prophet like Moses – he is greater. He is the ‚Son of Man‘, the Lord of the Sabbath, for example (Matthew 12:8)

    In the transformation scene in Matthew 17, there are again many references to Mount Sinai. It happens … on a mountain. The face of Jesus shines. A cloud, glory, the voice of God. Moses and Elijah, who both saw God’s glory – at Sinai.

    If you read further in the New Testament, you will be astonished to find that „reverence transferred seamlessly from Yahweh to Jesus, without explanation or apology.“

    And Jesus continues things the way Yahweh started them:

    But the Lord said to him:
    ‘Go on, because this man is the one I’ve chosen to carry [or to bear] my name before nations, kings, and the sons of IsraEl.

    Acts 9:15 2001 Translation

    And this was not only Paul’s task. The idea that the disciples of Jesus should ‚bear his name‘, just as the Israelites were to ‚bear the name of God‘, is found again and again in the New Testament. In James 2:7 it says: „Is it not they who blaspheme the good name proclaimed over you?“ This phrase is rather unguided in the Greek text because it mirrors the Hebrew phrase used for Yahweh’s name being proclaimed over Israel (Deuteronomy 28:10).

    x

  • Bearing God’s Name – Part 3

    Bearing God’s Name – Part 3

    By Christian / Carmen Joy Imes

    In this series, we are looking at thoughts from the book Bearing God’s Name – Why Sinai still matters by Carmen Joy Imes.

    In the second part, we talked about what changed at Sinai. The Hebrews became God’s „personal property“, „his treasured possession“. However, from the cognates of the Hebrew word segullha with other languages of the time, it is clear that it was also applied to someone in a special relationship with the king. „They have a role that corresponds to their status. Their status is to be a special treasure. Their role is to be a priestly and holy community in the midst of the nations.“ (J. T. Wright, from Carmen Imes‘ book).

    This is also expressed in the ’Ten Commandments‘, which are referred to as ’10 words‘ in the Torah and are instructions rather than laws in the modern sense. The first two ‚words‘ already show what the Hebrews‘ task was: 1. worship only Yahweh. 2. represent him well. Whoever gets to know the Hebrews should get to know God. In this way they would carry the name of Yahweh among the nations.

    Now what?

    Not everything is said with ‚the Law‘. They need further, ongoing guidance from Yahweh:

    ‘{Look!} I’m going to send My messenger to you in order to keep you headed in the right direction; for he will lead you into the land that I have prepared for you. Be sure to listen to him… Obey him! He won’t give in to you, because he carries My Name.

    Exodus 23:20-21 2001 Translation

    Is that why we repeated the law in Genesis? One reason was certainly that 40 years had passed and a different generation was living than at Sinai. But it is also interesting that the structure of Deuteronomy has some similarities with ancient treaties. For example, between the great king and the vassal kings. The agreement, the covenant, between Yahweh and the Hebrews is confirmed once again.

    This is interesting because the covenant was broken by the Hebrews just after they had agreed to keep everything: Moses was not yet down from the mountain with the two tablets of stone, they violated the first commandment and made a golden calf. Moses smashing the stone tablets of the covenant was a clear sign that the covenant had been broken.

    Was Yahweh now completely surprised that the Hebrews so soon stopped keeping their words?

    Next, [Moses] took the scroll of the Sacred Agreement [that he wrote] and read it to the people.
    And they [again] said: ‘We will do and pay attention to everything that Jehovah has said.’

    Exodus 24:7 2001 Translation

    Has Yahweh now carried out the punishment for breaking the covenant justly but harshly? That is what the great kings of that time did. And according to Exodus 32, he would have been prepared to do so. This is also how many imagine the ‚God of the Old Testament‘. In fact, however, we have skipped a few chapters between chapters 24 and 32 that show something else: Grace!

    Grace? Between Exodus 24 and Exodus 32 there are 7 chapters that once again show Yahweh’s grace in the ‚law‘, in the covenant with the Hebrews. These contain detailed plans for the sanctuary. So God’s first response to the Hebrews‘ agreement was 7 chapters of instructions for His sanctuary, the means by which they can obtain forgiveness if they break the covenant. This is grace.

    And that’s not all: Genesis 1-7 contains the instructions for priests. Tiresome to read if you’re not one. But let’s not overlook the repeated refrain: „and … shall be forgiven“.

    Another side thought: Yahweh’s covenant with the Hebrews, the law, is therefore characterized by grace. A large part of the provisions revolve around how to forgive. No one is exempt. The provisions are for everyone in the people up to the high priest himself. So how could anyone think that without this they would stand righteous before Yahweh by their own works? And if the Hebrews didn’t think so, what is Paul discussing? We looked at this in the previous series „The new perspective on Paul„.

    Were the Hebrews ready for the Promised Land?

    Ready to roll

    Moses himself was of a different opinion:

    Thereafter, Moses said to Yahweh: ‘{Look!} You told me to lead these people on, but You haven’t shown me where You want me to go yet. ‘You’ve also told me that You know me better than all the rest, and that You care for me… So now, if I’ve found favor in Your eyes, show Yourself to me so I can see You. Then I’ll know that I’ve found favor in Your eyes, and I can be sure that this great nation is truly Your people.’ And [God] replied: ‘I’ll pass before you, to satisfy you.’ Then [Moses] said: ‘But if You aren’t going to [travel] with us, don’t make me go either! ‘For, how would anyone know for sure that these people and I have found favor with You, unless You go with us? [And if You should choose to go], both Your people and I’ll be glorified above all the nations of the earth.’ Well at this, the Lord told Moses: ‘I’ll do this thing that you’ve asked, because you’ve found My favor and I’ve put you above all the rest.’

    Exodus 33:12-18 2001 Translation

    Moses had internalized the lesson: without Yahweh they were nothing. „Everything they were was bcause of who he was. The same is true of you and me. What matters most about is is to whom we belong.“

    What did the Hebrews still lack? The book of Numbers. It begins with the instruction of Jahweh to number the people. Then comes the order of the camp of Israel, etc. … Hardly anyone reads Numbers. But let’s not forget: this book was not written for us, but for them!

    God’s vision takes shape concretely on the pages of Numbers. It’s practical. For people who have only known life as slaves and have had little practive at self-determination, God meets them where they are and makes their task straightforward. Follow me. Camp here. Eat this. Line up in this order.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    The enumeration has a completely different effect. The Hebrews were simply slaves. The names of the ruling families of Egypt were remembered. But now it is quite different. It is as if Yahweh is saying to them: You no longer belong to Pharaoh. You belong to me. You are not insignificant. Your families will be remembered from now on as the beginning of a new nation.

    What are they still missing? The priestly blessing of Yahweh.

    The Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron and his sons, ‘This is how you are to bless the Israelites. Say to them: “ ‘ “The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face shine on you and be gracious to you; the Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace.” ’ “So they will put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.”

    Numbers 6:22-27 NIV

    In blessing by his name, he is seentially placing his name upon his people. Yahweh had already claimed them as his own at Sinai. Now he istitutes an official blessing to serve as a regular reminder. From this moment they are identified as his.

    It is the clearest indication in Scripture of Yahweh actually putting his name on his people.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    As an aside, the Hebrew word eleph, which is usually translated as ‚thousand‘, is used in the census in Genesis 4. The only difference is that there are no numbers in the Hebrew text as we know them. However, the resulting large number of Hebrews of over 2 million does not agree with archaeology, the space available on their journey or, above all, with the Bible itself. In Genesis 3:43, the total number of firstborns is given as only 22,273. This gives a ratio of 1:50 and each Israeli mother should have had an average of 100 children. The word eleph is also rendered elsewhere not as 1000 but as ‚clan‘ or military unit. A number of about 10 men per eleph is consistent with other data in Genesis and historical sources. This gives a figure of perhaps around 22,000 men, women and children.

    Still an impressive amount. And more than enough for the foundation of this new nation of Yahweh. Under his leadership and with his blessing, they would continue to grow. And lest they forget all that we have discussed so far, Yahweh has a spectacular plan: every year the Israelites are to set aside a day to commemorate the last night in Egypt. This is so important to Yahweh that anyone who was unable to celebrate it should do so the following month.

    By constantly remembering all the events and what Yahweh has done for them, one thing is impressed on them: they bear Yahweh’s name.

  • Bearing God’s Name – Part 2

    Bearing God’s Name – Part 2

    By Christian / Carmen Joy Imes

    In this series, we are looking at thoughts from the book Bearing God’s Name – Why Sinai still matters by Carmen Joy Imes.

    In the first part, we saw how events at Sinai are framed in the text of the books of Moses in order to emphasize their significance. And that the Israelites first had to get to know Yahweh and build trust in him.

    What is changing at Sinai

    Now the Israelites have been wandering through the desert for three months until they reach Sinai. What comes next? What did they expect? Had Moses told them what Yahweh had said years before at the burning bush?

    And God replied: ‘I will be with you! This [place] will serve as the sign that I’m sending you.’ sThen when you bring My people out of Egypt, you must serve God on this mountain.’

    Exodus 3:12 2001 Translation

    For Moses, the crucial part was: „I will stand by you“. The decisive factor was not who Moses was, but whose he was. In that situation, God therefore also revealed his name to Moses. This may not be a big deal to some, but it was back then. Most other gods were known under a pseudonym to keep people at a distance.

    At Sinai, everything changes.
    At Sinai, the Hebrews discover who they are and, more importantly, whose they are.

    Sinai is about worship. God’s first instruction at Sinai lays the foundation, a new spiritual route. If we do not understand it, we may well misunderstand everything that follows.

    Then Moses climbed the Mountain of God, and God called to him on the mountain, saying:’ You must say this to the house of Jacob and report [My words] to the children of IsraEl: ‘You’ve seen all that I’ve done to the Egyptians, and how I lifted you as on the wings of eagles and drawn you close to Me. Now, if you’ll listen to what I say and keep My Sacred Agreement, you’ll be a special people to Me that will be higher than all other nations!’ And because the whole earth is Mine, you’ll become My holy nation and a Kingdom of Priests.’’ Now, [go] and tell this to the children of IsraEl!’

    Exodus 19:3-6 2001 Translation

    Yahweh begins with a description of his grace! Grace in the books of Moses? Perhaps we are too fixated on the laws – and our understanding of laws today. We will come back to this again. But this is about Yahweh’s grace. He does not reproach the Hebrews for their behavior so far. He shows that it was his desire to bring them to him and not their merit. And then comes this Hebrew word: segullah (pronounced SEH-gull-ah).

    To fully grasp the significance of Israel’s new status, I need to teach you my favorite Hebrew word: segullah (pronounced SEH-gull-ah). In the NIV, it’s appropriately translated as “treasured possession,” but it helps if we understand the wider use of this word. … Sehgullah appears eight times in the Old Testament.

    The related ancient languages of Ugaritic and Akkadian both employ an equivalent word to refer to someone who enjoys a special status in relation to the king, a covenant partner who is especially treasured and entrusted with greater responsibility.

    In the Aramaic translations of the Old Testament, the segullah is described as “beloved.”

    They are to be a “kingdom of priests,” serving as his ambassadors to the nations, and a “holy nation,” set apart for God’s purposes. In my all-time favorite book, The Mission of God, Christopher J. H. Wright emphasizes that Israel was chosen in order to bless the nations. He says, “They have a role that matches their status. The status is to be a special treasured possession. The role is to be a priestly and holy community in the midst of the nations.”

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    The law of Moses was a gift for Hebrews. That shows their answer. And how Moses spoke about it or later Psalm 119. Other gods did not answer people. You never really knew what they wanted or why they seemed angry. They had to be appeased. Yahweh is very different: He even speaks directly to the Hebrews. He says clearly what he wants and what is not acceptable. The law is like a fence that protects them and helps them to live a prosperous life within it.

    One more note on the word ‚law‘:

    The English word “law” is both too narrow and too misleading to accurately translate the Hebrew word torah. It is better translated as “instruction.” Torah encompasses a wider scope of material than just laws. And “law” is not the best word to describe what the Torah contains.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    The Ten Commandments – Commandments?

    The Ten Commandments are in the Bible – but they are never called that! Excuse me? In fact, Exodus 34:28 speaks of 10 ‚words‘:

    The Hebrew word dabar can also mean ‚matter‘ as well as ’thing‘. This is fitting, because it contains more than just commandments, as we will see in a moment.

    Let’s look at the second misconception that is often encountered: How many panels were there? And how were they described? There are many images of them on the internet. I once took one from Jehovah’s Witnesses from 2020 because they always emphasize how thoroughly they ‚investigate‘ for their pictures:

    Jehovahs Wittnesses, Our Christian Life and Ministry—Meeting Workbook—2020 August page 7
    How many words do you see?

    x

    “And Moses turned and he went down from the mountain, and the two tablets of the covenant document [eduth] were in his hand, tablets inscribed on both sides, inscribed on front and back” (Exodus 32:15, author’s translation).

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    We see two tablets but very few words. In Hebrew, the ’10 words‘ only consist of 171 words. But there must be a lot more on the back. Well, it’s just an illustration. More importantly, however, we also find here the idea that two tablets were necessary because the text would not have fitted on one. This is not the case. Rather, the Hebrew word eduth, which is translated here as covenant deed, has a special meaning and is found in a similar way in other languages of the ancient Near East. When it came to such documents, the tablet and an exact copy were made. If it was a treaty between two peoples, a copy of each was placed in the temple of their own god so that he could watch over its observance. In this case, however, the covenant was between Yahweh and Israel. Both tablets were therefore placed in the sanctuary.

    Let’s come to the third common misunderstanding: the 10 ‚commandments‘ can be clearly divided into two groups of laws. One that concerns God and one that concerns people. However, this is not an adequate view of these instructions. Even when Israelites violated a ‚commandment‘ from the second group, they spoke of sinning against God (see 2 Samuel 12:13, Psalm 51:4)

    In the covenant community, every part of life is an expression of worship and loyalty to the God who has committed himself to these people. How they treat others reveals their heart toward God.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    Do the ’10 Commandments‘ now apply forever because they are even literally ‚carved in stone‘? Right before that, Yahweh speaks of who they are addressed to: „“I am Yahweh your God! I have freed you from the house of slavery in Egypt. You may …““ (Exodus 20:2 NT). They often use a specific ancient context and vocabulary. And they were never communicated to other nations.

    The commands in this ancient context are for the Israelites alone. The torah was a gift to Israel, the people of Yahweh.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    Therefore, it makes the most sense to read the first three sentences together as the first ‚word‘. This is shown by the chiasm used (Exodus 20:2-6, Deuteronomy 5:6-10):

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    The point of images is worship.
    The means of worship are images.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    This brings us to the second commandment, from which the title of Carmen Imes‘ book is derived.

    Invisible tattoo: The Second Command

    You must not bear (or carry) the name of Yahweh, your God, in vain, for Yahweh will not hold guiltless one who bears (or carries) his name in vain. (Exodus 20:7, author’s translation)

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    (S.49). InterVarsity Press. Kindle-Version.

    Many translations render this differently because the translators and theologians thought that this would otherwise make no sense. But what does it look like if you try to let the Bible explain itself exegetically? The next context is Exodus 28: „So Aaron shall have the names of the sons of Israel on his breastplate for the arbitration, as a constant reminder before Yahweh when he enters the sanctuary.“ (Exodus 28:29). And the high priest also has a name on his forehead: qodesh layahweh. „holy, belonging to Yahweh“. The letter lamed before Yahweh is used here, as it was also used elsewhere in ancient seals to indicate ownership.

    The twelve gemstones indicate that the high priest represents the entire nation before Yahweh. The medallion on his forehead indicates that he is Yahweh’s authorized representative to the nation. Now think back to the dramatic declaration of Exodus 19, when Israel first arrived at Mount Sinai. There God bestowed titles on his people like treasured possession, kingdom of priests, holy nation. As his treasured possession, Israel’s vocation—the thing they were born to do—is to represent their God to the rest of humanity. They function in priestly ways, mediating between Yahweh and everyone else. They are set apart for his service.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    By looking at Aaron, every Israelite is reminded of their calling as a nation. Just as he is set apart for service (“holy”), so are they (“a holy nation”). At Sinai, Yahweh claims this nation as his very own and releases them to live out their calling. That calling is to bear Yahweh’s name among the nations, that is, to represent him well.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    In short, the first two commandments say: 1. worship only Yahweh. 2. represent him well.

    This now makes it clear why the term ‚law‘ as a translation for the Hebrew Torah is inadequate and even misleading: it is not a collection of regulations and laws in our modern sense, but character formation.

  • Bearing God’s Name – Part 1

    Bearing God’s Name – Part 1

    By Christian / Carmen Joy Imes

    In this series, we will be looking at thoughts from the book Bearing God’s Name – Why Sinai still matters by Carmen Joy Imes. The book is a presentation of Professor Imes‘ doctoral thesis that is also easy to read for laypeople. As there is unfortunately no German translation, we will at least deal with excerpts from her presentation.

    But why is this of any interest to us today? In the foreword to her book, Imes describes the usual reservations very well: „The Old Testament has been given a bad rap for lots of reasons. Too violent. Too confusing. Too remote. Too legalistic. Too outdated.“ What many lack in the Old Testament is the grace that seems so essential in the New Testament. We will see that this is not the case at all and that Christians in particular need the Old Testament more than ever. And especially the Mosaic Law. Excuse me? The Mosaic Law of all things?

    We will also see what the text from Exodus 20:7 „You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God“ (NRSV) actually means. The significance of the actual meaning is still the same today as it was then, as can be seen from the first words of the foreword by Christopher J. H. Wright: „“And you call yourself a Christian!” That was about the worst thing we feared hearing as young Christians in my Northern Ireland childhood. … whatever it was, the most stinging rebuke from other kids (or worst of all from a teacher) would be, “And you call yourself a Christian!”“

    Therefore, we will now not only look at Exodus 20:7 but also at the Mosaic Law and the events at Sinai at that time. I know what you’re thinking: that’s as dry as the desert at Sinai! But you’ll be surprised. With a good guide through these events, it will be very interesting.

    Just imagine what the Israelites had experienced until they reached Sinai. What do you need to live when you are on your way through the desert after all that? And what does Moses get from God? The law with all its rules. But how does Moses see it?

    ‘{Look} I’ve shown you all the rules and decisions, just as Yahweh gave them to me… So you must follow them in the land that you’re traveling to and which you’ll inherit. Obey them, and do them… Because this is what will brand you as a wise and understanding people to the nations! ‘For when they hear all these rules they’ll say:‘Look! They’re a great nation of wise and understanding people!’ ‘What other nation is there that’s so great that they have a God as close to them as our God Yahweh is [to us], and to whom we may call about anything? ‘And what other nation has rules and decisions that are as righteous as all these laws that I’m setting before you today?

    Deuteronomy 4:5-8 2001 Translation

    In other words, the Israelites have received something precious with the law that the other nations will be jealous of!

    But we will not be so much concerned with the 10 commandments or the many individual regulations, but with the overall picture. We will recognize that the five of the Pentateuch contain an interesting framework that we may never have consciously noticed when reading them because we have only seen the details. We will talk about the actual purpose of the law and the task of the Israelites. And how this is taken up again in the New Testament. Because God has not abandoned his plan, but gives all people the opportunity to fulfill the original mission.

    Becoming the people who bear God’s name

    Leaving Egypt

    Context is everything

    In the series The new perspective on Paul, which is based on the book „The New Perspective on Paul – An Introduction“ by Prof. Kent L. Yinger, we have already seen that many Christians have the following idea:

    • In Old Testament times, Israel was concerned with earning salvation by keeping the Sinai covenant.
    • Jesus did away with this idea and made salvation available without any personal action.

    In that series, however, we also saw that both statements are not based on the Holy Scriptures but on the reflections of later scholars and the Reformation. Carmen Imes also addresses this in her book and shows why the first statement cannot be true:

    Consider the context: Israel arrives at Sinai in Exodus 19 and receives the law from Yahweh. However, we find Israel’s rescue from Egypt both chronologically and in the text earlier in Exodus 3-14. The Law from Sinai cannot therefore have been the prerequisite for Israel’s rescue from Egypt.

    Hence we also read this in Exodus 6:6

    ‘So, go and tell the children of IsraEl that I am Jehovah and that I will lead them out of the tyranny of the Egyptians and free them from slavery. ‘I’ll pay their ransom with a hard pitch and a great judgment, …

    Exodus 6:6 2001 Translation

    God did not first check whether they perhaps still had idols at home or whether they complied with the law in terms of morality. Their salvation had nothing to do with their righteousness or their actions, but with his promise to their forefather Abraham.

    The following aspect of Exodus 12:13 is also interesting:

    The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you live; and when I see the blood I will pass over you, and no plague will come upon you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt.

    Exodus 12:13 NASB

    The Hebrew word pasakh, from which our Passover is derived, can be translated as ‚to pass over‘. In this context, however, another meaning makes more sense, as can also be found in Isaiah 31:5, for example.

    ‘Now, this blood will be the sign that you’re inside of each house; for when I see the blood, I’ll protect you, and you won’t be a part of the plague of destruction when I strike the land of Egypt.

    Exodus 12:13 2001 Translation

    In Exodus 12:13,23,27 Yahweh does not pass over Israel, but ‚protects‘ it.

    Framing Sinai: The wilderness journeys

    The account of Israel and Sinai contains another special feature that we may never have noticed before. In Exodus 33, the entire itinerary of Israel’s hike from Egypt to Canaan is described. There are forty-two camping spots on the itinerary. However, if we read the accounts in Exodus 12-18 and Numbers 11-32 carefully, we only come across six campsites before and after Sinai. And they all begin with the same Hebrew phrase: „and they set out.“ So we have found no contradiction in the books of Moses. Both accounts fulfill a different purpose. And the purpose of the accounts before and after Sinai is made clear in this illustration from Carmen Imes‘ book:

    [From Carmen Joy Imes, Bearing God’s Name]

    That this is no mere coincidence, but a common way of emphasizing something at that time and in that culture, becomes clear from the other symmetrical reports:

    Before SinaiAfter Sinai
    6 campsites, „and they set out“ (Exodus 12-18)6 campsites, „and they set out“ (Numbers 11-32)
    7 times „desert“ mentioned7 times „desert“ mentioned
    God’s provision of manna and quail (Exodus 16), as well as two requests for water satisfied by a gushing rock (Exodus 17:1-7).One story about manna and quail (Numbers 11) and two requests for water satisfied by a gushing rock (Numbers 20:1-16)
    God’s angelic messenger protects the Hebrews from a foreign king. (Exodus 14:19-20)God’s angelic messenger protects the Hebrews from a foreign king. (Numbers 22:21-35)
    Israel fights the Amalekites (Exodus 17:8-16)Israel fights the Amalekites (Numbers 14:39-45)
    Moses meets with a Midianite family member and receives guidance (Exodus 18)Moses meets with a Midianite family member and receives guidance (Numbers 10:29-32)
    Moses is weighed down with leadership responsibilities (Exodus 18:17-18)Moses is weighed down with leadership responsibilities (Numbers 11:10-15)
    Moses begins delegating responsibilities to others (Exodus 18:24-26)Moses begins delegating responsibilities to others (Numbers 11:16-17) Deliberate quotation from Exodus
    Israel laments why they left Egypt (Exodus 14:10-12)Israel laments due to the report of the scouts (Numbers 14)

    Why are the events at Sinai so emphasized by this framework? Because a great transformation had taken place there: the Israelites were in a state of liminality at Sinai. A phase of transition, of fundamental change in their status. They were no longer slaves of Egypt. But what would they become? What kind of God is Yahweh? What would he expect of them? What would their future look like?

    For Israel, the wilderness journey from Egypt to Canaan is liminal space. Far more than just a place to pass through, it is the workshop of Israel’s becoming. The wilderness is the temporary destination that makes them who they are. Liminal places always do this. They change us.

    God is not in a hurry to lead them out of liminal space and into the land he promised to give them. They’re not ready yet.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    When we fully imagine the magnitude of the change, the unanswered questions and the uncertainty about the future and the nature of the God who had saved them, we also better understand why they were seemingly so quick to forget God’s power to save them. Who wouldn’t worry about water and food in a desert? Surrounded by hostile peoples? „Yahweh knows this. Remarkably, he does not chide the Israelites when they complain or panic as they travel toward Sinai. He simply provides for their needs. He utilizes this trek to demonstrate to them his trustworthiness.“

    Well, after PharaOh had sent the people away, God didn’t lead them towards the land of the Philistines (even though it wasn’t far away), because God said:‘[I’m doing this to keep] the people from having a change of heart when they see war, and from thereafter returning to Egypt.’ So God led them around the desert towards the Red Sea.

    God led them there using a tall column of clouds during the day (to show them the way) and a tall column of fire during the night… The column of clouds was there all day long, every day, and the column of fire was always there in front of the people all night long.

    Exodus 13:17-18,21,22 2001 Translation

    Trust is not automatic, and God does not expect it to be. He patiently works on Israel’s behalf until they can see that he is worthy of their confidence.

    Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters (English Edition)

    The Israelites ‚go to school‘, so to speak. They learn that they must and can trust in God every day. That they depend on him daily. On the way to Sinai, the Israelites find out what kind of God Yahweh is and how they can live in trust in him.