Nielsen’s Nook

Commentary

[1] σκληρύνητε (σκληρύνω) in the LXX this is used to describe the disposition of indifferent self-absorption that results in further alienation from the Lord. 1 Clement 51:3a alluding to Psalm 95:7-11 reads, “For it is good for a man to make confession of his trespasses rather than to harden (σκληρῦναι) his heart, as the heart of those was hardened (ἐσκληρύνθη) who made sedition against Moses the servant of God” (Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers). In light of the Love that the Lord had shown to Israel’s fathers, God’s people were commanded: καὶ περιτεμεῖσθε τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν καὶ τὸν τράχηλον ὑμῶν οὐ σκληρυνεῖτε ἔτι (Deuteronomy 10:16 LXX). Circumcise your hardheartedness and do not let your necks remain stiff (author’s translation).

[2] πειρασμοῦ the testing of God by people (BAGD, 641).

[3] ἐπείρασαν … ἐν δοκιμασίᾳ tested me with trials. BAGD suggests “put to the test” and follows the NRSV and ESV. The NIV renders “tested and tried me”. The KJV is significantly different because it follows the Byzantine Text at which has variations from the NA27.

Hebrews 3:9 in the Byzantine Text reads, οὗ ἐπείρασαν με  οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν, ἐδοκιμασάν με, καὶ εἶδον τὰ ἔργα μου τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη. The variations between the two texts are as follows:

1. The word με is supplied where in the NA27 it is assumed.
2. ἐδοκιμασάν με (Byz) “they tested me” instead of ἐν δοκιμασίᾳ “with testing” (NA27).
3. Verse 9 ends with καὶ εἶδον τὰ ἔργα μου in the NA27; however, in the Byzantine Text it continues through the first two words (τεσσεράκοντα ἔτη) of NA27 verse 10.
4. Lastly, the last two words of Byzantine verse 9 are τεσσαράκοντα ἔτη where the corresponding first two words of verse 10 in the NA27 read τεσσεράκοντα ἔτη. Both are rendered “forty.”

[4] τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ “with this generation” in the NA27 meets τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ “with that generation” in the Byzantine Text. We chose to render the text as “with that generation” because conceptually the generation reading these words in Psalm 95 was altogether different than the one about which the Psalm speaks.

[5] Technically there is no negative particle in this sentence. It is a conditional ellipses which begins with the ὡς at the beginning of verse 11 (BAGD, 897). Literally, the Greek renders “As I swore in my wrath, if they will enter into my rest…” Parents speak to their disobedient children like this, “Son I’ve already told you a thousand times and if you do that one more time …” The force of the ellipses is that in abrupt ending, the silence of the incomplete thought looms ominously. Conceptually, the result of that generation coming into the Lord’s rest would be catastrophic because of the oath that God swore in his wrath. Thus, the verse is rendered “They will never enter into my rest.”

[6] κατάπαυσίν (κατάπαυσις) rest. 2 Maccabees 15:1 uses this word to refer to Sabbath rest.

Commentary

[a] οικουμενην the inhabited earth, the world (BAGD, 561).

[b] Paraphrased from Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX, καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες υἱοὶ θεοῦ. And let all God’s sons prostrate themselves before him (author’s translation). υἱοὶ refers conceptually in this context to angels. The NA27, Textus Receptus 1550, and the Byzantine Text all reflect this paraphrastic explanation of υἱοὶ.

[c] λειτουργοὺς (λειτουργός) in this literature, λειτουργός is always used with sacral connotations (BAGD, 471). Hebrews 8:2 in speaking of Jesus’ high priestly office describes him as τῶν ἁγίων λειτουργὸς a minister of holy things/places (ESV) or as the KJV and NRSV put it a minister of the sanctuary.

[d] πυρὸς φλόγα is another parallelism conflating two aspects (flame and fire) into one idea (flame of fire, fiery flame). It is a parallelism that is not merely the preference of the writer of Hebrews but that looks back to significant events in Redemptive History; namely, the burning bush in which the angel of the Lord spoke to Moses. αὐτῷ ἄγγελος κυρίου ἐν φλογὶ πυρὸς ἐκ τοῦ βάτου (Exodus 3:2 LXX).

This is not a particularly fun part of Romans.  St. Paul’s argument against any who might think they have standing before the Lord in and of themselves comes as great and overwhelming volleys of the most explosive ordinance.  I came across an ambiguity in the text that I was hoping perusers of this blog might comment on, giving me their thoughts.  Romans 1:26-27 read as follows in the NA27:

²⁶ Διὰ τοῦτο παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς εἰς πάθη ἀτιμίας, αἵ τε γὰρ θήλειαι αὐτῶν μετήλλαξαν τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν εἰς τὴν παρὰ φύσιν, ²⁷ ὁμοίως τε καὶ οἱ ἄρσενες ἀφέντες τὴν φυσικὴν χρῆσιν τῆς θηλείας ἐξεκαύθησαν ἐν τῇ ὀρέξει αὐτῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους, ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην κατεργαζόμενοι καὶ τὴν ἀντιμισθίαν ἣν ἔδει τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἀπολαμβάνοντες.

²⁶ For this reason God gave them over to shameful passions. For their females exchange the natural relation for what is beside nature. ²⁷  In the same way also the males gave up natural relations with the female, inflamed in their desire for each other, male with male, committing the shameful deed and receiving the required recompense for their self-delusion.[a]

So my question is mainly about the idea of self-delusion (the way I translated τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς here.  What are your thoughts regarding footnote [a] below and whether my translation here is viable or not?

_________

[a] τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς has been taken as follows. τῆς πλάνης αὐτῶνspeaks to a wandering or delusion that is possessed by those committing the lewd acts being addressed. There is ambiguity in the text. If ἐν ἑαυτοῖς is taken as a dative of sphere then it speaks of where the required recompense is received (ESV, NIV, NRSV). If it is taken to modify the nature of the delusion, then we find that they receive the due recompense for the delusion that is in themselves, i.e., self-delusion.

Clowney, Edmund Prosper. How Jesus Transforms the Ten Commandments, ed. Rebecca Clowney Jones. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2007. xiv, 154. $12.99.

This posthumous work is everything you would expect from Ed Clowney, who this writer suspects is presently finding new and more wonderful Christological connections now with the Lord. The book is pastoral, theological and of course very concerned with redemptive history.

The purpose of the book, expressed in the preface, fits clearly under the rubric of redemptive history: “What role does the law play in the history of redemption?”[1] In answering this question, Clowney opens up to the reader his interpretive approach to the Bible: “Christ not only obeyed the law, but also displayed its true meaning and depth.”
[2]

In the initial chapter, the case is made generally as to how Jesus, the covenant Lord, fulfills the law, which was “given to be a reflection of the divine character.”[3] The Ten Commandments come to us in the context of a common ancient Near Eastern literary form in which the vassal king must be exclusively committed to the supreme suzerain ruler, who promised curse for disobedience and blessing for obedience. [4] In light of the repeated failure of God’s people, the Lord brought exile and judgment. Yet, out of this slough of despond, the old things are made new in Christ. [5] In insisting on the persistence of the Old Testament covenant, [6] Jesus “fulfills the law by obeying it, but also by revealing its promise.”[7]

In chapters two through eleven, the focus is on Jesus’ fulfillment of each of the Ten Commandments specifically. Following Deuteronomy 6, Clowney makes the case that all subsequent commandments are predicated upon the first commandment, in which God establishes his identity and right to speak commandments for us to obey.[8] In placing the Ten Commandments in the paradigm of the Exodus, Clowney underscores that the law Giver is also the Redeemer, whose “redemption is not done by proxy.” [9] In becoming our Savior, God demonstrates himself to be our Bridegroom and King in the person of Jesus Christ. Indeed, “incarnation is insufficient to redeem” and so in Jesus, our Redeemer is also the Suffering Servant and Conquering Savior. Consequently, the first commandment stresses that there shall be no other name than that of Jesus. [10]

Chapter three presents an array of issues revolving around the prohibition of idol worship. After establishing a person as one created in the image of God, Clowney briefly chases perspectives which have sought to either overstate or understate the dignity of humanity. Resolving this tension is Jesus Christ, who is “God’s gracious gift of an anointed image, which we are not only permitted but commanded to worship.”[11] The only way to avoid idolatry, spiritual or otherwise, is union with Christ.

The name of the Lord is not to be used in vain because “God himself is present in his name, and all his works reveal that name.” [12] In fact the manifold names of God point us forward to fulfillment in Christ, [13] who gives us that triune family name that we receive at baptism, our name-giving ceremony[14] that we might honor that name.

The Sabbath, a creation ordinance repeated in the law, expresses God’s covenant with his people and is a sign not only of creation but of redemption.[15] Thus when Jesus declares that he is Lord of the Sabbath, he proclaims himself as our Creator, Redeemer and Sabbath rest. [16] Consequently, “first-day worship is part of our calling to do more, not less”[17] and that finding our joy and rest in laboring for God must extend to every day of the week.[18]

Chapter six extends to the reader a practical handling of the fifth commandment, concerning Jesus’ family values,[19] imploring parents to nurture their children as those who have received the family name of God in baptism as they have.[20] Thus, together we honor our family name – ‘Christian’.[21]

The gospel approach to honoring human life avoids esteeming it more than the Creator and devaluing human life of its uniqueness in the created order.[22] It is alone Jesus who “provides the very Life that can rescue us from our murderous selves.”[23]

Marriage and its antithesis, adultery, are figures that describe God’s covenant love for his unfaithful people. The command not to commit adultery ultimately looks forward to the union believers have with Christ that “lasts longer than marriage.”[24] This chapter also examines, in cursory form, gender relations and Christian marriage and sexuality.

In directing our hearts to himself, the true treasure, Jesus fulfills the eighth commandment.[25] This wealth is in fact the inheritance believers have in Christ. It is more than getting stuff or honor. Jesus gives himself to us, that we may be one with him.[26] In abiding in Christ the believer learns not only to refrain from theft, but more importantly “to multiply our treasure by clinging to Christ alone.” [27]

God has sworn by himself and his word that this witness is true. He has sent his Son Jesus, “the faithful witness.” Jesus bore witness to the Father. The Spirit now bears witness through his people throughout history. Even to his people, Jesus continues to bear witness in inscripturating the apostolic witness of the New Testament and in giving to the Church the Eucharist and baptism in which he is spiritually present. Christ has sent his Church out, as individuals and corporately, to bear witness to himself – not by means of personal experience – but by joining “our own witness to that of the apostles and prophets.”[28]

Jesus stated the tenth commandment positively when he said, “Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness” (Matt 6:33). This commandment now compels believers away from anything “that would draw us away from contentedly serving God wherever in his good providence he has placed us.” [29] It proclaims a singularity of love to God alone[30] with all our heart, our soul and exceedingly all of us.

My criticisms of this book are two. First, Clowney seems to vacillate between the claim that “Jesus fulfills the law” and that “Jesus transforms the law”. The latter statement (also the title of the book) seems problematic since Clowney claims the law was “given to be a reflection of the divine character”[31] and divine character is immutable. Conceptually, Clowney clearly argues for the idea of fulfillment of the law; however, suggesting that Jesus transforms the law might introduce unnecessary confusion. Here perhaps Clowney would have done well to clarify that the idea of transformation is not “of the law” but of our understanding of the law in light of Christ. Second, while Dr. Clowney was able to address many weighty and controversial matters in the course of this book, the cursory handling of topics like submission, gender relations and sexuality may leave readers disappointed and wanting more substantial discussion.

Clowney’s book, including its study questions, comes highly recommended as a helpful introduction to the role of the law in the history of redemption.

William J. Nielsen is presently a PCA pastoral candidate preaching frequently as a licentiate of the North Texas Presbytery, PCA and reflecting at Nielsen’s Nook.

[3] Ibid., 2.

[4] Ibid., 3.

[5] Ibid., 7.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid., 8.

[8] Ibid., 12.

[9] Ibid., 14.

[10] Ibid., 20.

[11] Ibid., 27.

[12] Ibid., 40.

[13] Ibid., 45.

[14] Ibid., 44.

[15] Ibid., 55.

[16] Ibid., 59.

[17] Ibid., 62.

[18] Ibid., 151.

[19] Ibid., 67.

[20] Ibid., 72.

[21] Ibid., 77.

[22] Ibid., 80.

[23] Ibid., 84.

[24] Ibid., 96.

[25] Ibid., 107.

[26] Ibid., 114.

[27] Ibid., 120.

[28] Ibid., 136.

[29] Ibid., 145.

[30] Ibid., 149.

[31] Ibid., 2.

15. A prophet from among you, like me from among your brothers YHWH, your God, will raise up for you — to him you will listen.

16. As all things that you asked of YHWH your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when it was said, “Let me not hear again the voice of YHWH my God or see this great fire or else I will die.”

17. So YHWH said to me, “They are right in what they have spoken.

18. I will raise up a prophet for them from among their brothers like you. And I will give my words in his mouth and he will speak to them everything that I command him.

19. The man will be who does not listen to my words that this prophet will speak in my name I myself will require it from him.

20. Surely the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I did not command him to speak or which he said in the name of another god, this prophet will die.

21. And when you say in your heart, ‘How will we know the word that YHWH did not speak?’

22. — when the prophet would speak in the name of YHWH and the word does not come to pass or this word does not come true, then YHWH did not speak it. The prophet spoke it in presumption. Do not be afraid of him[1].”

__________________________

[1] The third person masculine pronominal suffix can be either referring to “he” the false prophet or “it” the word spoken by the false prophet.

Deuteronomy 17:14-20, regarding Israel’s future king is one that falls in a constitutional section of Deuteronomy (16:18-18:22). This is a fresh translation of the passage.

Nielsen’s Translation and Notes

14 When you come to the land that YHWH your God is giving to you and you take possession of it and dwell in it and you say, “Let me put a king over me as all the nations that surround me.

15 You may indeed place a king over you whom the LORD your God will choose. You will place one from among your brothers over you as king, you will not empower to give over you a foriegn man who is not himself your brother.

16. Only he must not acquire many horses for himself nor cause the people the people to retun to Egypt in order to acquire many horses since YHWH said to you, “You will never[1] retun in this way again.

17. And he must not acquire many women for himself else his heart turn away and silver and gold he must not acquire for himself exceedingly.

18. And when he sits upon the throne and he will write for himself a copy of this Law in a missive[2] from before the face of the Levitical priests.

19. So the Law[3] will be with him and he will read in it all the days of his life so that he will be accustomed to fear YHWH his God in order to keep all the words of this Law and these statutes, in order to do them,

20. in order that his heart not be lifted up above his brothers, and in order that he not turn from the commandment - to the right or to the left - so that he might prolong the days of his kingdom, he and his sons in the midst of Israel.

—————————

[1] Lit “not again” is here used in context with ‘eod at the end of the phrase which brings out this emphatic coloring.

[2] see BDB ‘al II.1.f. The use of ‘al here denotes the norm or standard in conjunction with safer which is an instructional document or missive.

[3] vehaytah has a feminine singular ending. “it will be with him” referrs to the Torah. “So the Law will be with him” instructive as a king.

Preface

A poem I jotted down today during a break between sessions on a staff retreat. I have been studying Deuteronomy for a sermon series I am preaching at an area church and was overwhelmed at the manifold ways in which my own heart breaks the first commandment to have no other gods before the LORD. I was amazed at oft quoted verses in 2 Chronicles, “If my people, who are called by my name, will turn to me … I will heal their land…”. The problem with preaching that as a call to repentance is that it glosses over the fact that Israel, the original audience, never turned to God and yet salvation from God is bigger than they imagined. Often God takes us into desert places not to punish us but to reveal more of himself to us. Then we become complacent because of the great blessing of his presence and the process starts over again. Ezekiel 8 teaches us that God is one who goes into exile with his people, into Babylon. While Babylon has historically been the symbol of apostasy, it is not so here. It is the desert place of discipline where God reveals himself to his people even in the context of great suffering. If that is where Jesus is, then that is where I want to be. I don’t want to be like those Ezekiel rebukes who remain smug at home in Jerusalem, failing to recognize that the Glory of the LORD had left the temple and gone into Babylon with His people whom He disciplined.

Thank you for silence
a most rare and precious jewel
that fills the room with angst and awe.
A subtle gray light growing hot white.

As it illumines, my heart falls faint,
lunging, longing that the bulb would fuse
and in the darkness still and noisy
might I, in my sin, bemuse
its hiddenness and stealth.

But oh God! would you drag me out to Babylon,
for I, your son, am want to turn.
Burst these bonds of religion-steel cast
that bind my heart in pious farce.

At least in Babylon, hands now free to embrace
you, my Lord - to yourself exile me.
My many gods crushed and hubris rent
from these hands that formed countless idols,
hewn from the quarries of Old Man bent
deep in deviance and divorce.

But you, O Lord! have renewed.
You have become my last and lasting word
that redefines and reforms - even suffering.

Oh that Babylon would be mine
if more of you would be had there.
In humiliation might I find the Humble One.

In suffering the dross is dropped.
In the desert place the God of Abraham
would in my heart and soul and mind
be finally unstopped.

For the human heart trusts goods at hand but mistrusts those not at hand, as the saying goes: “Having gold makes men bold; being poor makes them sour.” But trust in wealth cannot rule in the heart at the same time with faith and love. And this he calls here “to forget the Lord God.” For you do not remember the Lord if you merely mouth His name, but if you cling to Him and love Him with constant faith in your heart.

Martin Luther. Luther’s Works, Vol. 9 : Lectures on Deuteronomy, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999, c1960), 71.

Shema Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu Adonai ehad (Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is alone God). This famous sentence from Deuteronomy 6:4 seems to give us a rubric for understanding the book of Deuteronomy, if not our entire lives as those created by the LORD.

J. G. McConville, in his commentary on Deuteronomy, sees Deuteronomy chapters five and six as a single literary unit.¹ I find this resonates with my own thinking more globally about the meta-narrative found in the scriptures and is not disharmonious with approaches like that found in the IVP Dictionary of Biblical Imagery in which Deuteronomy five is said to be “a miniature version of the book as a whole”.²

The thought that impresses me is how easily we drive a wedge between the content of the two chapters. In chapter five we find the reiteration and reapplication of the Ten Commandments to the Israelites at the end of their 40 years of wandering in the desert. In chapter six we find the concern to be the worldview of covenant keeping as a means of true life.

The Ten Commandments are unfortunately left in the realm of abstract moral principles for most of us. Certainly do not covet is a bit abstract. Do not covet Jim’s wife is more concrete, but we still do not have a handle on what exactly coveting looks like. Certainly we would recognize the results of coveting if Sam were to engage in an adulterous relationship with Jim’s wife; however, the adultery is an effect of a more intimate and sinful disposition.

The Ten Commandments find their concreteness in the person of the LORD, our God. They describe One who is perfectly content in Himself and thus never covets, for example. They implicate us because we are created in the image of this One LORD, to live in the likeness of Him described in the Ten Commandments, thus living in consequent fellowship with Him. Concretely, breaking the Law of God is a direct and personal affront to the most holy LORD, exercising a desire to distance ourselves from God.

In this way, we can find that some kinds of obedience serve actually to distance ourselves from the LORD. We go to church on Sundays, perhaps the exceptionally spiritual go Wednesday evenings. But do we go to get God off our backs or do we go because we can’t help but worship the one our soul loves? When I see a police officer on the highway, one of my immediate reactions is to press the brakes a bit to slow down. This is a sort of obedience, making sure I am under the speed limit. However, it is obedience for the sake of avoiding a relationship with the lawgiver, which is in this case the State.

God has not made a covenant with his people so that we can do enough to call ourselves his. He has made and fulfilled a covenant with us in the person of Jesus that we might live out the likeness of God in fellowship with him from the heart. We are not more justified when we obey the Lord as Christians, but we do grow in grace and the appropriation of the Spirit of the LORD at work in us to will and to act (Philippians 2:12-13). Consequently, if we find our dispositions to the LORD different on Monday than they are on Sunday, we should be alarmed and we must ask the LORD to dilate our hearts that we would love loving him all the more.

__________
¹ J. G. McConville, Deuteronomy, Apollos Old Testament Commentary; 5 (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 139.
² Leland Ryken, Jim Wilhoit, Tremper Longman et al., Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000, c1998), 205.

In preparation for the continuation of a series on Deuteronomy at Bethel PCA in Dallas, I continue to notice a rhetorical theme recurring throughout the opening chapters of Deuteronomy. As chapter 4 transitions into Deuteronomy 5, which some see as the key section of the entire book, and consequently the entire Deuteronomic History, we find that it begins and ends with this rhetoric on life:

¹“And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the rules that I am teaching you, and do them, that you may live, and go in and take possession of the land that the Lord, the God of your fathers, is giving you. (Deuteronomy 4:1, ESV)

³³Did any people ever hear the voice of a god speaking out of the midst of the fire, as you have heard, and still live? (Deuteronomy 4:33, ESV)

The reapplication of the Law to this new generation at the conclusion of the 40 years of wilderness wanderings, has everything to do with life (c.f., Deuteronomy 5:3). Chapter 5 continues to ask this question:

²⁴And you said, ‘Behold, the Lord our God has shown us his glory and greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire. This day we have seen God speak with man and man still live. ²⁵Now therefore why should we die? For this great fire will consume us. If we hear the voice of the Lord our God any more, we shall die. ²⁶For who is there of all flesh, that has heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of fire as we have, and has still lived? (Deuteronomy 5:24-26, ESV)

³³You shall walk in all the way that the Lord your God has commanded you, that you may live, and that it may go well with you, and that you may live long in the land that you shall possess. (Deuteronomy 5:33, ESV)

The holiness of God is perhaps shown to be analogous to combustion.� If left in raw contact with unbridled sinfulness it consumes it.� However, the purpose of holiness here and especially as it is fulfilled and demonstrated in the person of Christ and the sending of the Spirit of Holiness is to empower and cleanse God’s people, imparting life to them.

The sad thing is that until the return of Christ where the defeat of sin is completed, humanity lives in a sort of functional psychosis.� We want holiness and rightness and yet we hate it.� We want order and lawfulness and yet we covet and steal.� As I reflect on this contradiction in my own life, I am compelled to cry out, “Lord, have mercy upon me, a sinner!”� And I must believe that the one who said, “Come to me, all who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest”; that one who is unequivocally holy, will make good on his promise.