Thoughts on Psalm 69

You know how I am scorned, disgraced and shamed; all my enemies are before you. Scorn has broken my heart and has left me helpless; I looked for sympathy, but there was none, for comforters, but I found none. They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst. (Psalm 69:19-21)

Psalm 69 is a messianic psalm. It prophesies of Israel's King who was to come and rescue them. It is both a prophecy and prayer of Jesus, the true savior-king of which David was a foreshadowing. This Psalm of David is rivaled only by Psalm 22 in terms of its messianic character.

In the Psalm, the Messiah cries out to God that He is stuck in the miry depths. He laments that the deep waters are engulfing Him. The imagery of mire, mud, and deep waters is used elsewhere in scripture to describe the bond of sin. (Brug, Psalms 1, 1992) It is like quicksand. It is a peril from which the man in it cannot extract himself. The more one struggles to release himself, the deeper he sinks into it until he is finally destroyed. He needs someone to pull him out.

This is just what the Messiah was supposed to do. He was supposed to come and rescue God's people. Only He didn't do it the way everybody thought He should. He did it by taking our place in the mud. But why was that necessary? When one man rescues another from drowning in quicksand he doesn't have to crawl into it and die in his place. Quite right. But when you remember that sin is like debt, a better picture of our circumstance emerges. It isn't something we can be plucked out of. It requires something of the one who would save us. When you spend too much on your credit cards so that you can't pay it back, the friend or family member who bails you out must pay the debt for you. And doesn't owing all that money that you know you can't pay back cause you to have a constant anxious feeling? A feeling like you are drowning? That is the feeling the psalmist is trying to evoke in these verses. That is the feeling of Jesus under the weight of our sin.

If you continue on through verse 5 this becomes even more true:

“You know my folly, O, God; my guilt is not hidden from you.”

This talk of the psalmist being caught up in sin, and God knowing His folly and His guilt does not seem to fit into the messianic character of this Psalm. Isn't Christ sinless? How can He be foolish? Even more, how can He say that He is drowning, being deluged by sin?

Though some theologians see these verses as evidence that this Psalm primarily refers to David, they can rightly be applied to Jesus, who is their fulfillment, as well. (Brug, Psalms 1, 1992) St. Paul wrote that the message of the cross is foolishness (folly) to those who are perishing (1 Corinthians 1:18). Jesus' folly is indeed known to God the Father. It was His will that Jesus engage in it; it is Jesus will to obey the Father. It is the folly He who Himself is sinless, being made to become sin for us on the cross so that we might become the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21). He was cursed, for as it is written, “cursed is every man who is hung on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21:23; Galatians 3:13-14). It is, therefore, quite appropriate that these words be applied to Jesus. You see, where we could not overcome sin and death, He could because He is God.

Theologians also point to verse 21 as further evidence that Psalm 69 is foremost a messianic prophecy. There is no direct parallel in David's life for, “They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst.” These specific things do, however, happen to Jesus and are recorded in the accounts of His crucifixion – when He was hung on the tree.

Some people also have a problem with the imprecatory prayer found in verses 22-28. An imprecatory prayer is a prayer to God against one's enemies. It is asking God to punish them, to literally call evil on them. There are entire psalms which we call imprecatory psalms. Most of the time we just ignore them because they make us feel uncomfortable. I suspect it is why they were left out of our Lutheran hymnals. The reason for the difficulty is understandable. It is hard to think that Jesus would pray for His enemies to be blotted out of the book of life (v. 28).

Jesus is indeed the one who lamented over the faithlessness of Jerusalem. He wants to gather us all like a hen gathers her chicks. He wants all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. Most, like the religious leaders of Jesus' day, would not (Matthew 23:37). Those who will reject Jesus will be damned. They will be cast into hell, which was prepared for the devil and his angels, since it is their wish to push away God and flee from His presence. This is on them, not Jesus.

The last section of the Psalm (vv. 29ff.) is a prayer of deliverance and thanksgiving. Here Christ talks about how God will save Zion, His people. He prays also that God's salvation would protect Him in His pain and distress. God the Father does this by delivering Him from the grave and raising Him from the dead on the third day. By this work, Jesus saved His people, personified in the Psalm as Zion.

Zion will be saved. Her cities will be rebuilt. The land will be inhabited by the faithful, those who love the name of Jesus. The ultimate fulfillment of this prophecy will come on the Day of Judgment when Christ returns. On that day, every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Daniel 7:13-14; Matthew 26:62-66; Philippians 2:10-11). ###

Works Cited

Brug, John C. People’s Bible Commentary: Psalms 1. St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1992.

Open for Business, Closed for the Gospel

If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:8-9 NIV).

St. Luke’s United Methodist Church is open for business. The Indianapolis church has launched an advertising campaign proclaiming that they are an “open community of Christians” (view their video message here). They want everyone to know that all people, especially the “beautiful-as-you-are LGBTQ community”, are loved, have a place to go, and will be embraced just as they are. Is this really love? Such an attitude is popular in American Christianity today. It feels good. It isn’t confrontational. It doesn’t make people angry, or hurt their feelings. It may also cause membership in your congregation to swell. This mind-set, however, is not one of loving acceptance, but rather a lawless catering to the sinful desires of the sinful human nature.

In his first letter, St. John talks about Love. He proclaims the message preached from the beginning: We should love one another.[1] He writes that we know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers, and that anyone who does not love remains in death.[2] But is ignoring people’s sin the type of love St. John is talking about? No. This, according to St. John, is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue, but with actions and in truth.[3] Jesus wants us to use our lives so that our brothers might be blessed and saved; He wants us to use our earthly wealth to help our neighbors in need.[4]

Jesus ate with tax collectors and sinners.[5] Didn’t He embrace people as they were? Wasn’t He being inclusive and loving people who had been hurt by the religious establishment? Does not Jesus’ willingness to associate with these people, deemed sinners beyond salvation and marginalized by the religious leaders, demonstrate His love and acceptance of them just as they are? No. Jesus acknowledges that these sinners are in desperate need of what he has to offer, which is the forgiveness of sins. On hearing the protests of the Pharisees who saw Him eating dinner at Matthew’s house, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”[6] Jesus calls what he is doing merciful. He wants sinners to be included in His kingdom. It is the entire reason He has come into the flesh - to bear our sin and be our savior. This is His chance to call them to repentance and faith.

On another occasion, Jesus interacts with a rich young man.[7] Scripture tells us that Jesus loved the man, yet Jesus did not accept him as “beautiful”, just as he was. To the contrary, Jesus preached the Law to this man, and he was convicted of his sin. The rich young man was an idolater, guilty of fearing, loving, and trusting in his wealth, rather than God, above all things. He was filled with pride, believing that he had kept all of God’s commands. Jesus’ love for the man isn’t based in acceptance, but rather in repentance. He uses the Law to show the man his sin, and tells him, “Follow Me.”

Jesus did indeed come to earth to save all people. His blood, shed on the cross, is the atonement for all sin. In this way only does Jesus accept us just as we are. When He looked down on mankind, He saw wretched and filthy sinners; debtors to God, beyond all capacity to repay the debt. He accepted mankind just as we were and, while we were still His enemies, He died to atone for our sin, the just for the unjust.[8] To accept a person into your midst as the church while embracing and celebrating their sin may seem like the loving thing to do because it makes everyone feel good. It is not. It is the opposite of love. It is to withhold the means by which God creates faith in the hearts of men, and by which they receive the forgiveness Christ won for them by his death and resurrection, the efficacious Word of God. Without hearing the Law, they will not know their sin; without hearing the Gospel they will not know what Christ has done for them. What’s left is a lawlessness that delights in the sinfulness of the flesh masquerading as God’s love. This is blasphemy of the highest magnitude.

---

[1] 1 John 3:11

[2] 1 John 3:14

[3] 1 John 3:16-18

[4] Luke 10:36-37

[5] Matthew 9:1-13

[6] Matthew 9:12-13

[7] Mark 10:17-31

[8] Romans 5:6-11; 1 Peter 3:18-19

Judas Hangs Himself

When morning came, all the chief priests and elders of the people plotted against Jesus to put Him to death. And when they had bound Him, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor. Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” And they said, “What is that to us? You see to it!” Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself (Matthew 27:1-5).

Judas must have been following the events of Jesus’ trial from afar, as did Peter. As he watched what was happening, the full weight of his sin sunk in. He had betrayed innocent blood. For the price of 30 pieces of silver, Judas sold Jesus into death. We don’t really know why Judas did what he did, except for St. Luke’s explanation that Satan entered into him.[1] When he turns to the Chief Priests in his remorse over his sin, he does not receive absolution. They tell him that he must deal with his sin on his own. What is that to us? You see to it!

Judas wasn’t the only one of Jesus’ disciples to betray Him. When the Shepherd was struck, all of the sheep were scattered, most notably Peter. Jesus told His disciples that they would all fall away. Peter tells Jesus he will not fall away, even if it means death. The other disciples agree. Jesus assures Peter that he will deny Jesus before the cock crows twice. This he does, with oaths, calling down curses on himself. And, when the cock crowed the second time, and Jesus turned to look at Peter, Peter remembered Jesus’ words. He went away and wept bitterly.[2] Peter realized what he had done; the full weight of his sin sunk in. Later, the risen Christ would absolve and restore him.[3]

Why the different outcomes for Judas and Peter? They both committed the same sin. They denied Christ. They both betrayed Him. Why did Judas end up dead by his own hand, burst open in a field with his guts spilling out,[4] and Peter end up in his usual place as leader of the disciples? Did Jesus not, by His holy, precious blood, and His innocent suffering and death, purchase and win all mankind from sin, death, and the devil? Both men felt sorry for their sin; Judas turned to the Chief Priests for a remedy for his sin. The Law however, whom these men represent, doesn’t fix sin; the purpose of the Law is to show us our sin.[5] The Law always accuses. It crushes the sinner under it’s weight. Judas, despairing under the weight of his sin, took the advice of the Chief Priests: He saw to it himself. Peter did not see to his sin himself. Christ dealt with it. Peter came to Christ, and heard authentic absolution. Only Christ is able to give us that. To seek remedy for our sin from any other source than Christ is to betray and reject Him. It is to reject the gift of forgiveness He gives to us, as Judas did. Such rejection and denial can only end, as it did for Judas, in despair and death.

---

[1] Luke 22:3; John 13:27

[2] Luke 22:54-62

[3] John 21:15-19

[4] Acts 1:18

[5] Romans 3:20

For God so loved...The Elect? A Confessional Lutheran on Limited Atonement

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16).

The Limited Atonement is the notion, in a nutshell, that Jesus did not die for everyone, but only for those whom the Father chose from his sovereign will. This teaching is intimately tied together with the Calvinistic teaching on predestination, sometimes called “double” predestination – that God chose some people to be saved, and others to be damned. I mean, it only follows logically that if God the Father predestined you to Hell, Jesus certainly didn’t die for you. One of the problems with the idea that Jesus did not die for all people, however, is the biblical evidence that, well…Jesus died for all people.

I suppose I should, in good Lutheran fashion, write, “For God so loved the world” on a table with a piece of chalk and simply point to it whenever anyone suggested that Jesus didn’t die for all mankind, and call it a day. Since, however, I am a Confessional Lutheran, and I have always found it difficult to keep my trap shut, you shall, therefore, not be spared a wordy explanation of what I believe, teach and confess, and what I reject and condemn. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise…

It seems an exercise in futility to argue with any Calvinist regarding what their theology calls the “limited” atonement. Calvinists would have us understand that the word “world” in John 3:16 means “elect”, just as they insist that the word “is” in the Matthew account of the institution of the Lord’s Supper means “represents”[1]. In both of these instances, the plain reading of the text is rejected because it just doesn’t make sense to human reason. If God picked some to be saved, logic dictates that he picked others to be damned. If Jesus’ body is in heaven at God’s right hand, logic dictates that it can’t be in the bread and wine of communion, last will and testament of the Christ notwithstanding[2][3].

This issue comes up now because I recently heard a wonderful lecture given by a Calvinist lecturer, and his “limited atonement seed” got stuck in my proverbial craw. During the lecture it became apparent that this man giving the talk was as happy and theologically satisfied to be a Calvinist as I am to be a Lutheran. Consequently, as background material for his topic (which, for the purpose of this little diatribe, is immaterial) he discussed several doctrinal issues: “double” predestination, the total depravity of the human nature, his disdain for the concept of baptismal regeneration (which shall receive its own treatment in due course, I can assure you), and, of course, the limited atonement.

As a member of a confessional Lutheran church body I find it frustrating that the Lutheran voice is so seldom heard in this theological debate in America. Luther preferred the designation Evangelical because of their focus on the Gospel, to the term “Lutheran”, which was used by his adversaries derisively (Lutheranism). To call one’s self an “Evangelical” today, however, doesn’t even bring to mind Luther, Lutheran theology, or even the “Solas” of the Reformation[4]. Instead, you get images of fire-and-brimstone tent revival meetings (Arminianism), some variety of the Reformed churches (Calvinism), or some sort of big-box mega-church. 

Both Calvinism and Lutheranism claim to hold to the sola scriptura principle of the Reformation – scripture alone is the only rule and norm by which all teachings and teachers are to be evaluated. Calvinism, however, seems at least in practice, to change the maxim to read “sola scriptura…plus human reason”. Lutheranism excludes human reason from the formulation of doctrine. On first reading that might seem to be a knock against Luther and the rest of the boys, particularly in light of our modern culture which exalts the human reason and science to the point of idolatry. It is, however, one of the greatest characteristics of Lutheran theology, particularly when one understands that Christian doctrine is not human teaching, but God’s teaching given to man in the written word of Holy Scripture.

The Lutheran reformers took great pains to make sure that they were not theological innovators, but rather codifiers of Biblical doctrine. They meticulously documented in the 1580 Book of Concord how the doctrines contained therein were drawn from Holy Scripture, and were the same teachings that had always been taught in the church, going back to the ancient fathers[5]. They put down for the record in the Book of Concord that they were simply reforming what had been corrupted in the church during the Middle Ages, and they make a well-documented and compelling case. This was done in reaction to Rome’s attempt to classify them along with Calvin and Zwingli, as well as with the so-called “radical” reformers such as Muenzer, Karlstadt, Schwenkfeld, Franck, and others (McCain, Baker and Veith).

The Lutheran reformers did not advocate the abandonment of reason and thought, but rather that human reason and intellect was useful only if it was employed within its proper sphere. We have a brain with which to decipher Holy Scripture, which was handed down to us by God through men in human language, and in a real historical context. Doctrine (which is just a fancy word for “Teaching”) is to be drawn from scripture alone, using human reason and intellect to apply the rules of grammar and logic, subservient to the text, with the Holy Spirit as guide (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation). By contrast, Christian Doctrine is not to be reasoned out according to what makes sense or feels good to us. In short, Lutherans are ok with taking God at his word, even if that word, in places, does not seem to jive with human logic. Lutherans affirm the words of Holy Scripture, even when they seem to us paradoxical. Good Lutheran theology simply says what God’s word says and, where God stops explaining, Lutheran theology stops explaining and gives glory to Him.

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people — for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles… Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves (1 Timothy 2:1-7; Ephesians 1:3-6).

The apparent contradiction that God wants all men to be saved, and that God has elected a definite number of people to salvation from eternity simply cannot be rectified by human reason. It is an apparent paradox. I say “apparent”, because all of these things we cannot now grasp will be made clear in eternity, as St. Paul wrote:

For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known (1 Corinthians 13:12).

Luther and the reformers understood the doctrine of election (predestination) as St. Paul described it – through Christ[6] ^{(McCain, Baker and Veith)}. Holy Scripture teaches that God, from eternity, elected (or predestined) believers in Christ his Son to be his own, without regard to any merit on their part, but simply by God’s grace. There is no mention of any election to damnation. The election is to be understood only through Christ. The key words there are “in Him” and “through Jesus Christ”. The elect are elect, not because God picked his favorites and wrote them down on a “saved” list, and decided to damn all the rest. He chose his elect “in Him” – those who believe/did believe/would believe in Christ would constitute the elect. This is also what St. Paul writes about in Romans:

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified (Romans 8:28-30).

To Calvin, for God to elect some to eternal life and others to “reprobation” reveals God’s glory by showing his justice, as well as by impressing upon the elect God’s infinite mercy to them (Craig). The problem is that Scripture does not say that. This is philosophy. This idea is a product of the rational human mind which is, along with mankind’s nature, (to borrow a Calvinist-ism) “totally depraved”.

There is nothing in the surrounding context of John 3:16 which would suggest that “the world” about which Jesus speaks refers only to a group of The Elect, rather than to the plain meaning of the phrase “the world” – the whole of humanity. The Greek word used for “world” in John 3:16 is the same Greek word used for “world” in John 1:10:

He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God – children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husbands will, but born of God (John 1:10-13).

To whom did Jesus come? He came to the whole of humanity but, because of their depravity, the “world” did not recognize him. By whom was he subsequently rejected? By a smaller group out of the whole of humanity, the Jews, called in this passage, “his own”. To whom did he give the right to become children of God? To those of “the world” who believed in his name. By what means are these Children of God born? They are born by the will of God. How does that work, and by what criterion does God make Children? Through faith in Jesus. That’s as far as we can go, because that’s as far as Scripture goes.

In spite of the rejection of Christ by “the world”, Jesus came into the world to save us from our sin by his death and resurrection. St. Paul seems to echo John when he writes:

For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all (Romans 11:32).

It is not surprising that, following this very passage and ending his longer discussion of God’s sovereignty and eternal election through the three previous chapters in the book of Romans, St. Paul concludes with this doxology:

Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?” “Who has ever given to God, that God should repay them?” For from him and through him and for him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen (Romans 11:33-36).

Thanks be to God that he has given us all that we need to have faith, and to understand that which he wants us to know in Holy Scripture, by the power of His Holy Spirit – that Jesus Christ, the God-man, died on the cross and rose from the dead to reconcile mankind with God by bearing the guilt of our sin.

Works Cited

Craig, Edward, ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Questions to Sociobiology. Vol. 8. New York: Routledge, 1998. 10 vols. 1 May 2014. <Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Questions to Sociobiology>.

Hesselink, I. John. Calvin's First Catechism: A Commentary. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997.

"Lutheranism." n.d. Wikipedia. 1 May 2014. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheranism>.

Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1986.

McCain, Paul Timothy, et al., Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions. Trans. William Hermann Theodore Dau and Gerhard Friedrich Bente. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005.

---

[1] Matthew 26:26

[2] Christ’s words in the Sacrament must be taken at face value especially because these words are the words of a testament, and even and ordinary person’s last will and testament may not be changed once that person has died (1 Cor. 11:25; Gal. 3:15) (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation).

[3] Calvin: Accordingly, body and blood are represented under bread and wine, so that we may learn not only that they are ours, but that they are life and food for us…The sharing in the Lord’s body, which, I maintain, is offered to us in the Supper, demands neither a local presence, nor the descent of Christ, nor an infinite extension of his body, nor anything of that sort; for, in view of the fact that the Supper is a heavenly act, there is nothing absurd about saying that Christ remains in heaven and is yet received by us. For the way in which he imparts himself to us is by the secret power of the Holy Spirit, a power which is able not only to bring together, but also to join together, things which are separated by distance and by a great distance at that (Hesselink).

[4] Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura (Grace alone, Faith alone, Scripture alone).

[5] The Catalog of Testimonies was appended to several early editions of the Book of Concord to show that Lutheran teaching about the two natures of Christ is thoroughly in line with the historic and universal faith of the Christian Church…Christology makes justification what it is: a powerful present joyful reality through Word and Sacrament by means of which the God-man, Jesus Christ, is present with us, and for us according to both His divine and human nature, giving us forgiveness, life and salvation. Reformed theologians…accused Lutherans of making up new understanding about the two natures of Christ. Therefore, it was necessary for Lutherans to refute these claims and show that their doctrine is, in fact, thoroughly in keeping with Scripture and the Ancient Church Fathers, who taught the same things (McCain, Baker and Veith).

[6] FC Ep. XI. 4; FC SD XI. 

The Kingdom of God - Part 3

Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot - they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all - so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed (Luke 17: 26-30).

As previously discussed, Jesus had told his hearers that the Kingdom of God was in their midst, referring to his rule as Messiah. Here Jesus explains how the physical manifestation of the Kingdom of God will come about at the end, on Judgment Day. On that day this present, corrupt world will pass away and Jesus will make everything new, bringing into existence a new heaven and a new earth[1]. The character of the kingdom's physical manifestation will not be gradual, and it will not involve rehabilitation of the kingdoms of this present world. Things are not going to get better, and better, and better in this world until, at some point, the Christian religion reigns over all the earth and we enter the golden age of the Millennium, as some Christian theologians teach[2]. The physical arrival of Christ and God's Kingdom will bring with it utter destruction as evidenced by the examples Jesus gives. The great flood at the time of Noah destroyed all life on earth, except that which was preserved by God in the Ark. The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was absolute, with no trace of the cities or survivors remaining - again, with the exception of those whom God preserved out of his grace. God's kingdom will come quickly, but with plenty of warning, just as the flood came upon the world of Noah, just as the fire rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah in the time of Lot. Kretzmann writes about how the people during the time of Noah and Lot were stubborn and, despite being given plenty of time and warning about the impending judgment, refused to repent:

The distinguishing characteristic of the time just preceding the final advent of Christ, the Son of Man, will be an indifferent carelessness. The days of Noah are an example. The warning had gone out through the mouth of this preacher of righteousness that the people should repent of their foolish ways. But they gave so little heed to the warning that they continued in all the manner of complete abandon in the desires of the flesh up to the very hour of the cataclysm: they ate, they drank, they married, they were married; men and women, the entire generation, past all hope of redemption. And then, with the sudden frightfulness that has characterized the judgments of God in similar situations, came the day on which Noah entered into the ark; then came the Flood and destroyed them all. And the days of Lot are another example of the utter, blind heedlessness of the people. In Sodom and Gomorrah the inhabitants continued in the delights of the flesh as well as in all their lines of business, work, and endeavor: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built, up to the very hour of the catastrophe that overwhelmed the cities, when it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed them all. The people of the last times will not have learned their lesson from the previous calamities; when the Son of Man will be revealed before their astonished, horrified eyes on the last day, He will find them as unprepared for His coming, as deeply steeped in the foolishness of the Noachites and of the Sodomites as any generation ever was (Kretzmann, 1921).

On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. Remember Lot's wife. Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it. I tell you, in that night there will be two in one bed. One will be taken and the other left. There will be two women grinding together. One will be taken and the other left.” And they said to him, “Where, Lord?” He said to them, “Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather” (Luke 17:31-37).

In this passage some see evidence of the rapture, the spiriting away to heaven of all Christians from the earth either before, during, or after a period known to millennialist Christians as the Tribulation. Images of the Left Behind book series by Tim LeHaye are called to mind; images of driverless cars abandoned in the roadway and pilotless airplanes auguring into mountainsides, their Christian drivers and pilots gone on to heavenly glory without any hint or warning. This is not, however, the thing to which Jesus is referring. Dispensationalism and the doctrine of the rapture are not borne out by scripture. It is of relatively new invention, in fact, being only developed over the last 200 years or so[3]. Instead, Jesus is describing the suddenness of his coming on the Day of Judgment, and the futility of all things temporal when it comes to redemption. Just as it was too late for anyone in Noah's time to escape God's judgment by the waters of the flood after he had shut Noah, his family, and the animals inside the ark, so too will it be too late to repent when Christ appears. Likewise, Lot's wife is turned to a pillar of salt when she hesitates to trust in God's redemption and turns back to see the fate of her former home (Engelbrecht, 2009). Regarding this passage, Kretzmann writes the following:

The suddenness of the breaking of Judgment Day will take every person where he just happens to be at that time. A man will be up on the flat roof of the house. He will neither have, nor should he attempt to take, time to go down and get any instruments or possessions. A man will be out in the field. He also should not turn back behind him for anything of this world's goods that he may have valued. As when an army of the enemy makes a sudden successful assault and only precipitate flight will save the inhabitants, he that turns back for money, clothes, or other goods is lost, so the person whose mind is still attached to the things of this world on the last day is beyond hope of salvation. The example of Lot's wife should be before the minds of the believers at all times. Had she not turned behind her to satisfy her curiosity, she might have saved her soul with the rest. Her hesitation proved her destruction. Cp. Matt. 16, 25; Mark 8, 35; Luke 9, 24. He that in the last emergency will have nothing in mind but the saving of this earthly life and the goods that are necessary for its preservation, will lose forever the true life in and with God; but he whose desires are free from all love for this world and what it has to offer, that has denied himself and all that this life might have given him, he will save his life, the life in God, his soul and its eternal salvation (Kretzmann, 1921).

The Disciples, needless to say, are stunned at Jesus' teaching. As discussed earlier, they still seem to expect the same type of political Messiah as the Pharisees. They ask the question, "Where, Lord?" Jesus, as he was wont to do, answers them in enigmatic fashion. His answer is unmistakably ominous: "Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather." This may seem like a sarcastic non-answer to the disciples' question but it does give us an idea what the world will be like by the time of the end - worthless and unclean, like a dead and rotting corpse. Kretzmann explains Jesus' words this way:

In awe and fear, they [the disciples] barely breathe the question: Where, Lord? Where will all this happen? And He told them: Where the dead body is, there will the eagles gather themselves together. The world, especially in the last days, will be, and to-day is, like a decaying carcass, whose stench rises up into the heavens. And judgment and destruction will come upon the entire spiritually dead and morally rotten human race. It is a strong, but fitting figure, revealing the world as it is, in its true condition, without a redeeming feature to recommend it in the sight of God (Kretzmann, 1921).

God is purposely ambiguous when describing for us the signs of Christ's second coming and the signs of the end of this present age. He leaves no doubt, however, that Christ will come a second time to establish the eternal kingdom. If we human beings could calculate the time of Christ's return, we would live as reprobates until the last possible moment before repenting of our sin, such is the depravity of our sinful human nature (Engelbrecht, 2009). St. Paul, in fact, warns us against living in such a way. He tells us that we should put on the new self and live as the new creation of Christ that we are, not in order to earn God’s favor, but as a response to receiving God’s undeserved mercy through Christ Jesus. St. Paul writes:

I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect…If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming. In these you too once walked when you were living in them. But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth (Romans 12:1-2; Colossians 3:1-8).

To delay repentance, to turn away from God and live according to the desires of our sinful flesh, to disregard the law's revelation of our sinful state and the call of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel is to run the risk of ending up as those who ignored God in the days of Noah and Lot.

The message of Christ's teaching here is unmistakable: today is the day of salvation and repentance must not be delayed[4]. Through the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ, sin, death, and Satan have been defeated (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). Christ died as the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world[5]; those who repent of their sin and trust in Christ have the forgiveness and eternal life he won for mankind by Christ on the cross. Furthermore, we who trust in Christ must not live as if his return is far off and we are secure among our earthly possessions, because we are not. Our wealth, possessions, our status among men and our good works will be of no avail to us when Christ returns on the Day of the Lord to judge mankind and establish his kingdom physically. The only way we can hope to stand before God on that Day of Judgment is if we have been clothed with the robe of Christ's righteousness won for us by his death and resurrection, given to us freely, by his grace[6].

Works Cited

Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod. (1989). The "End Times" - A Study on Eschatology and Millennialism. St. Louis: The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible: New Testament (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. (1986). Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House.

End Notes

[1] Revelation 21:1-8

[2] While there are numerous variations in millennialist teaching today, a fourfold categorization has been widely accepted: 1) dispensational premillennialism; (2) historic premillennialism; (3) postmillennialism, and (4) amillennialism. Of the first three categories, all of which hold to a millennium or utopian age on this earth, the most commonly held view is dispensational premillennialism…The less common postmillennial view places Christ’s second advent after (post) the millennium. Only then will the rapture, the general resurrection, the general judgment , and the eternal states occur. The millennium is not understood to involve a visible reign of Christ in the form of an earthly monarchy, nor is the millennial period to be taken literally as necessarily 1000 years long. In these respects postmillennialism corresponds closely to the amillennialist position (Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, 1989).

[3] Dispensational premillennialism, or simply dispensationalism, is a theological system having its origin among the Plymouth Brethren in Ireland and England in the early 19th century. This system’s originator was John Nelson Darby (1800-82), one of the chief founders of the Plymouth Brethren movement. Dispensationalism arose as a reaction against the Church of England and the widely held view of postmillennialism (Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, 1989).

[4] 2 Corinthians 6:2

[5] 2 Corinthians 5:15; 5:19; 5:21; Hebrews 2:17.

[6] Isaiah 61:9-11; Revelation 21:1-2

The Kingdom of God - Part 2

Luther Preaches Christ

And he said to the disciples, “The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, ‘Look, there!’ or ‘Look, here!’ Do not go out or follow them. For as lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation” (Luke 17:22-25).

Jesus, having answered the Pharisee’s question regarding the coming of God’s kingdom in a most remarkable way, he turns to his disciples. Jesus seems to be telling his disciples that one day soon they are going to want to hear the wonderful and enigmatic things he teaches them face to face as he is now doing, but this will not be possible because he will be gone. Right now he is in the midst of them, but soon he will be seated at the right hand of God the Father. He will go from the midst of them, to the cross, to the tomb, to the resurrection, to his position of power and glory at the Father's side. And, from his position at the Father’s side, he will one day return to judge the living and the dead. There is much that must happen, however, between that day and the one during which Jesus teaches his disciples. 

Jesus makes this point to the scribes and Pharisees when they ask him why his disciples did not fast, as those of John the Baptist did. "Can you make wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them" Jesus asked in reply[1]? When Jesus, the bridegroom, goes away, the disciples, who are the guests in his metaphor, will most certainly fast (Engelbrecht, 2009). Jesus explains to the disciples elsewhere, however, that he is not simply planning to abandon them when he rises from the grave and ascends to heaven. He promises to send the Comforter - the Holy Spirit - to be with them, and to clothe them with power, and to recall to their minds all that he has taught them[2]. This is so that they can, in turn, record it in the pages of what we today call the New Testament scriptures.

Jesus, in the previous verses, had been addressing the Pharisees, who were questioning him about the Kingdom of God. The Pharisees' questioning of Jesus does not seem to be legitimate, but designed to get Jesus to say something that they could use to get him in trouble, as on other occasions[3]. In keeping with his method, he spoke somewhat enigmatically to the masses, and explained those sayings and parables to his disciples[4]. The 'they' to whom Jesus seems to be referring is, in the narrow context of this conversation, the Pharisees and, more broadly, all false teachers who reject the Christ. 

What is Jesus warning the disciples about when he tells them not to go out or follow the people who say, “Look, there!” and “Look, here!”? Jesus is warning them not to abandon their faith, which he has built in them by his word. Lenski writes: 

They [false teachers] will imagine that they see plain indications and signs of Christ’s immediate coming. They will pose as prophets, even as manifestations and incarnations of Christ, and call the true disciples to flock to their standards “here” or “there”. Jesus warns, “Do not go away or pursue after,” leave not your faith in the words which Jesus has spoken, do not chase after these false leaders and the promises they make. This warning has often been disregarded, will often be so, but should not be so by us (Lenski, 1946).

For as lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day (v. 24).

When Jesus talks about the day of the Son of Man he is talking about his second coming to judge the world[5]. Lightning is a useful comparison, as Our Lord has repeatedly instructed us that his coming will be swift and sudden[6]. This is the contrast Jesus makes with the physical, political kingdom for which the Pharisees longed, and even the disciples expected the Messiah to establish. There will be no ambiguity when Christ returns. As lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. Kretzmann describes the second coming of Jesus in this way: 

In one moment He will shine, with all the glory of His splendor, from this quarter under heaven unto that; He will be visible to all people of the earth. But before this glorious consummation there will be a long time of waiting and watching for the believers, with a sore trial for their patience. First of all the great obligation rests upon the Lord to suffer in the great Passion, to be rejected by the present generation. Christ must bear His cross first, and His Church, the members of His kingdom, will become partakers of this suffering, before the great day of glory dawns (Kretzmann, 1921).

Lenski also writes: 

The Pharisees needed to be told that the kingdom is within, is spiritual; to this the Lord adds for the sake of his disciples that, after the spiritual work of this kingdom is done, it will come suddenly, like lightning, in judgment on the world…The visible glorious consummation of the kingdom must wait in toto until the spiritual work has been completed…his coming and the consummation of the kingdom will occur in such a manner that we need go nowhere – it will be instantaneously visible over the whole earth just as a lightning flash lightnings [sic] out of one part of heaven and shines to the other part and lights up the entire sky (Lenski, 1946).

But why did Jesus have to suffer and be rejected? This question must certainly have been going through the minds of the disciples who, at this point, still had a more Pharisaic understanding of God’s kingdom, and the work of the Messiah. 

For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich (2 Corinthians 8:9).

Jesus endured poverty, contempt, and persecution in his earthly life[7]. He was born in poverty[8]. The tyrant Herod tried to murder him in his infancy[9]. All throughout his earthly ministry people derided him, rejected him, tried to throw him from cliffs, and stone him[10]. Ultimately he suffered the greatest agony of body and soul under Pontius Pilate, dying on the cross[11] (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). 

Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people (Hebrews 2:14-17).

Jesus endured suffering, humiliation, and death voluntarily for one purpose – to redeem mankind. Luther, in his explanation of the second article of the Apostle’s Creed, sums up Jesus’ purpose, and man’s relationship to him, beautifully and succinctly: 

I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned person, purchased and won me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil; not with gold or silver, but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death, that I may be His own and live under Him in His kingdom and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, just as He is risen from the dead, lives and reigns to all eternity. This is most certainly true (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986).

Jesus, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world[12], laid down his life voluntarily[13], in obedience to God the Father’s will[14], so that man and God could be reconciled[15]. St. Paul writes that it was through the obedience of the one man, Christ, so that the many – mankind – were made righteous[16]. In fact, scripture tells us that Christ, the sinless one, became sin for us, so that we sinners might become the righteousness of God[17]. Christ was our substitute. He took our place under God’s judgment against sin. By paying the penalty of our guilt, Christ…made satisfaction, for our sins (Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation, 1986). 

He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed (1 Peter 2:24).

This is the message all mankind needs to hear, and upon which the Christian church must remain focused in this time between Christ's first and second coming. Many have gone off crying, “Look, there!” as Jesus predicted, seeking mystical experiences, secret truths, or special revelations. Jesus, the Word made flesh, directs the disciples and believers today, to the place where his promises are found – his word. Christians need to hear this word – Law and Gospel – regularly, and gather around those pledges of the forgiveness Christ has won for us – Holy Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is by Word and Sacrament that he works to grant us repentance[18], create faith in us, is among us, and to deliver to us the forgiveness he won for us by his death and resurrection[19].

Bibliography

Engelbrecht, R. E. (Ed.). (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House.

Kretzmann, P. E. (1921). Popular Commentary of the Bible (Vol. 1). St. Louis, MO, USA: Concordia Publishing House.

Lenski, R. C. (1946). The Interpretation of St. Luke's Gospel. Columbus, Ohio: The Wartburg Press.

Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation. (1986). Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House.

End Notes

[1] Luke 5:33-35

[2] John 16:4-15

[3] Mark 8:11-13

[4] Matthew 13:34-36

[5] Matthew 25:31-32; 2 Corinthians 5:10

[6] Matthew 24:27; Acts 1:11; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 1:7

[7] 2 Cor. 8:9; Matthew 8:20; Isaiah 53:3; John 8:40

[8] Luke 2:7

[9] Matthew 2:13

[10] Luke 4:29; John 8:59

[11] John 19:16-18; Mark 15:21-41

[12] John 1:29

[13] John 10:17-18

[14] Luke 22:42; John 5:19

[15] Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:8

[16] Romans 5:19

[17] 2 Corinthians 5:21

[18] 2 Timothy 2:5

[19] John 15:5; Romans 6:3-5; Titus 3:5-7; 1 Peter 3:21