What Blood Teaches
As “the mediator of a new covenant,” Jesus’s blood pleads not for justice but for mercy and grace. Justice says, “Level the scales!” Mercy says, “Don’t give me what I deserve.” And grace says, “You’re giving me all of this?” Jesus’s blood says what Abel’s couldn’t. It doesn’t speak retribution; it speaks redemption.
I never thought of blood as a teacher, as having a voice. Blood is just stuff, isn’t it? It’s sacred stuff—I know. “The life is in the blood” (Lev. 17), and blood has the mysterious power to redeem, to atone, to cleanse. The blood of Jesus Christ secured for us “an eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12). Red blood can make a heart turn white. You can’t explain it; you can only put it to poetry.
Blood beckons to us in the dark,
And carries movement through our veins.
The red turns white the hearts God marks,
Sends souls to heaven dropping chains.
But does blood teach? Does it have a voice? “Only in a metaphorical sense, in a poetic sense.” Well, then God is a poet.
For you have not come to what may be touched, a blazing fire and darkness and gloom and a tempest and the sound of a trumpet and a voice whose words made the hearers beg that no further messages be spoken to them. For they could not endure the order that was given, “If even a beast touches the mountain, it shall be stoned.” Indeed, so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, “I tremble with fear.” But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. See that you do not refuse him who is speaking. (Heb. 12:18-25)
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
Romans 1 and Atheism
Atheists do not spend all their time and energy hating on and railing against flying spaghetti monsters for the simple reason that they know there are no such things. But they DO know that God exists, and they hate him for it. If God exists, then they cannot be god.
Yes they actually do hate God:
Having just penned another piece on the war against God, I of course got the usual angry atheists writing in with their fists flying. They hate it when you dare challenge their derelict worldview. And they always go on about how they do not really hate God. Yeah right.
Of course they hate God. Their entire life screams out this hatred. And it is no wonder: when they are told that they are NOT the centre of the universe, but only the one real and living God is, that incenses them. That outrages them. Atheists hate it when you point out the truth that there can be only one true God. And the reasons are obvious:
They want to be king, not subject.They want to rule, not be ruled.They want to give orders, not take orders.They want to call the shots, not be told what to do.They want to determine what is true and false, not God.They want to determine what is right and wrong, not God.They want to be independent, not dependent.They want to do their own will, not God’s will.They want to live like the devil, not God.They want to rule in hell, not serve in heaven.
Scripture of course often speaks about atheists. Twice in the Psalter for example they are called “fools” because they refuse to recognise God (Ps. 14:1 and 53:1). Rejecting their creator—and judge—is the height of foolishness. And this is a deliberate, defiant rejection of God. D. A. Carson, commenting on Psalm 14:1, puts it this way:
The word rendered ‘fool’ is in Hebrew a term of moral opprobrium suggesting perversity, churlish and aggressive perversity…The Bible’s view is that in the last analysis atheism is less the product of misguided searching, a kind of intellectual mistake, than a defiant and stubborn rebellion…The fact that atheism is not widely seen that way is itself an index of our depravity. In fact, the best-informed atheists commonly acknowledge the connection between morality and belief, between immorality and unbelief. There is a famous passage in Huxley that acknowledges that one of the driving forces behind atheistic naturalism is the desire to tear away any sort of moral condemnation of otherwise condemned behavior. In a passage scarcely less famous, Michael Foucault, one of the theoreticians behind postmodernism, frankly acknowledges that it became important for him to destroy traditional notions of truth and morality, because he wished to justify his own sexual conduct. A few years ago, Foucault died of AIDS.
But the classic text on the atheist mindset and value system is found in Romans 1:18-32. It reads:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Read MoreRelated Posts:
-
On Nehemiah and Living for God Through Christ
Until or unless God makes people able to live for him by causing them to be born again by the Spirit, faithful leaders work in vain to modify external behavior to mimic it. Yet Nehemiah does not teach us that all leadership is pointless; instead, Nehemiah helps us to set our sights more on faithfulness to God than on control over what happens with those whom we are tasked to lead.
Thus I cleansed them from everything foreign, and I established the duties of the priests and Levites, each in his work; and I provided for the wood offering at appointed times, and for the firstfruits. Remember me, O my God, for good. – Nehemiah 13:30–31 (ESV)
The Book of Nehemiah is set in the time of the return of Judah from exile in Babylon. It recounts the trials, travails, and triumphs of Nehemiah, the Persian king’s cupbearer-turned-governor of Judah who does his best to put things in order in Jerusalem. The special emphasis is on the repair and rebuilding of the wall of Jerusalem.
The Big Idea of Nehemiah
The Big Idea of Nehemiah can be expressed this way: God is faithful even when his people are not (cf. 2 Tim. 2:13). Over and over again in Nehemiah, the people’s faithfulness wanes and corruption and/or complacency takes root. Nehemiah’s faithfulness is a clear demonstration of God’s preservation of his people, not only in returning them to the land from their exile but also in providing Moses-like leadership to establish them in it.
An Outline of Nehemiah
1-6: Restoration of the Wall
The Book of Nehemiah begins in Persia. It is a story told in the first person, making it one of the very few autobiographical books of the Bible. It begins with bad news. Nehemiah learns that the wall of Jerusalem is broken down and its gates are destroyed. In response, Nehemiah weeps, mourns, and confesses sins to God in prayer.
We learn that Nehemiah was a cupbearer to the king of Persia. Seeing his downcast countenance, the king asks Nehemiah what the matter is. Nehemiah tells him, and in response, the king grants all of Nehemiah’s requests and more.
So far, so good. But very quickly we meet Sanballat and Tobiah, two men highly opposed to the Jews’ welfare and well-positioned to hinder progress.
After inspecting the wall by night, Nehemiah rallies the people to rebuild the wall. Chapter three describes the work. In chapter four Sanballat and Tobiah do what they can to discourage the work. When words fail, they plan an attack. But the people arm themselves and make good progress.
In chapter five, Nehemiah becomes aware of complaints from some Jews that they are being forced into servitude for debts to their fellow Jews. Nehemiah becomes angry and formally rebukes the nobles and officials for charging interest and taking the people’s inheritance from them, which is prohibited by the Law of Moses (Ex. 22:25; Lev. 25:36-37; Deut. 23:19-20).
We learn that Nehemiah serves as governor during this time. During a twelve-year span, Nehemiah claims that he leads with integrity and fairness. More than that, he relinquishes some of his claims on the people to lighten their burden. Nehemiah concludes this note, and chapter five with it, with a plea to God to remember the good that he has done for the people.
In chapter six, Tobiah and Sanballat make another concerted effort to stop the rebuilding project. They gradually escalate their misinformation campaign from lures to open threats and lies. Nehemiah does not give in, but even his own countrymen seek to lead him astray with false prophecies. Nehemiah is beset by enemies from without and within who want to discredit him and make him afraid. Nevertheless, Nehemiah perseveres and the wall is finished. As a result, it is the enemies who fear. Yet still, all the time Tobiah continues to send letters and send his cronies to wheedle at Nehemiah and cajole him into approving of Tobiah. This is in many ways a study in how a godly person may engage in the political process and what he or she might expect in it.
7-13: Restoration of Worship
In chapter seven, Nehemiah transfers the power of governorship to other men and records a genealogy at God’s prompting. Following this, in chapter eight Ezra the scribe reads and teaches the Law to all the people. The people recognize their disobedience and are grieved. Many leaders come on the second day for Ezra to teach them more from the Law.
Read More
Related Posts: -
A Theology of Friendship
Until the return of our Lord, wisdom is necessary to discern what genuine friendship with others truly means. Friendship is not based on riches, befriending one another for benefit in return (Prov 14:20; 19:4, 6, 7). Friendship falters from dishonesty and disloyalty (Prov 16:28; Ps 7:4; 15:3; 38:11; 41:9; 55:13), especially if the offense occurs again and again (Prov 17:9). One friend does not mock, scorn, forget, or forsake the other, especially in trial (Job 12:4; 16:20; 19:14, 19). Rather, friendship is marked by pure motives and gracious speech (Prov 22:11). True friendship sticks close in adversity (Prov 17:17; 18:24; 27:10), finds strength in mutual admonition (Prov 27:6, 9), and enjoys fellowship when worshiping God together (Ps 55:13–14).
Who does the Bible identify as a friend? What is friendship?
Words like friend, friendship, or friendly in our English Bible stem from multiple words in the Hebrew and Greek. Below is a survey of these words, leading to a definition of friendship. Though this survey does not include every angle from which to view friendship (e.g., the “one another” passages), this survey does provide a fairly good idea of the Bible’s theology of friendship.1
Old Testamentrēaʿ, used 185x, most often translated as “one another,” “each other,” or “neighbor” ; also translated as “comrade” (Judg 7:13, 14, 22), “companion” (Exod 2:13; 30:29; Ps 122:8), “opponent” (2 Sam 2:16), “fellow” (1 Kings 20:35; Isa 34:14), and “lover,” “husband,” “man” (Jer 3:1, 20; Hos 3:1); often translated “friend” (Gen 38:12, 20; Exod 33:11; Deut 13:6; 1 Sam 30:26; 2 Sam 13:3; 16:17; 1 Kings 16:11; 1 Chron 27:33; Job 2:11; 6:27; 12:4; 16:20; 17:5; 19:21; 32:3; 35:4; 42:7, 10; Ps 35:14; Prov 17:17; 19:4, 6; 22:11; 27:9, 10; SoS 5:1, 16; Jer 6:21; Lam 1:2; Zech 3:8).
mat, used 22x, with 1x as “intimate friend” (Job 19:19).
sôd, used 21x, sometimes as “intimate friend” (Job 19:19) or “friendship” (Job 29:4; Ps 25:14), but also “council,” “counsel,” “plans,” “gatherings,” and “company.”
nkr, used 53x, 1x as “friend” (Job 24:17).
Variants of the common root šlm, “close friends” (Jer 20:10); “trusted friends” (Jer 38:22), “friend” (Ps 7:4); “friendly” (Gen 34:21); and “friendship” (1 Chron 12:17).
ʾallûp, used 9x, sometimes “companion” (Ps 55:13; Prov 2:17) or “friend” (Prov 16:28; 17:9; Jer 3:4; 13:21; Mic 7:5).New Testament
philos, 29x, always “friend.”
idios, 114x, only 2x referring to “friend”; a reflexive pronoun, literally, “one’s own,” referring to people (Acts 4:23; 24:23).
sos, 25x, 1x as “friend”; a second-person pronoun, literally, “yours,” referring to people (Mark 5:19).
eirēnē, “friendly” (Heb 11:31).
hetairos, “friend” (Matt 20:13; 22:12; 26:50); “a person who has someth. in common with others and enjoys association, but not necessarily at the level of a φίλος [philos] or φίλη [philē], comrade, companion.”2.After his own word survey, Lee notes that the chief Old Testament characteristics of friendship are loyalty (e.g., David and Jonathan) and sharing, sometimes both expressed in a covenant (e.g., Ps 25:14; 55:20; Prov 2:17; Mal 2:14). Keener likewise identifies loyalty and sharing characteristics in the New Testament era. He explains sharing in terms of confidence and all resources, that is, sharing information and secrets with trusted friends and freely giving of one’s resources, even one’s life, for one’s friends.3 Christ is the best of friends who discloses (or promises to disclose) all things to his disciples, sharing with them all things, including himself and his very life (John 15:13–15; 16:12–15).
Gathering this data together, our initial survey of friendship includes notions of…Loyalty to one another
Sharing with one another, even one’s own life for the sake of the other
Confidence in mutual commitment (covenant)
Love for one another
Peace with one anotherSo, here’s a rough definition for friendship: a loving relationship between two people in which they selflessly share with one another, remaining loyal to one another in the midst of conflict or suffering, striving for peace in all circumstances.
With this definition in hand, let’s consider friendship within the framework of the redemptive story.
Read More
Related Posts: