Category: <span>Blog</span>

This morning I read Ps 136 (135 LXX) in the ScriptureStoryline reading. I noticed the paucity of indicative verbs and the abundance of substantival participles. This screenshot from a Logos bar chart shows that Ps 136 (135 LXX) has the fewest indicatives per 1,000 words of any Psalm.

So what carries the action of the Psalm? Substantival participles. The author of the Psalm explicates that God’s activities in the redemption of Israel are rooted in God’s character. The Psalm has the rhetorical effect of casting God’s redemption of Israel as an expression of His timeless character. What He did, He can do, will do.

I reflect here on some of the books I read in 2019. My Book of the Year? Well, read and find out!

Biography/Memoir

https://www.amazon.com/Robert-Murray-MCheyne-Andrew-Bonar/dp/085151085X

This summer for the @themcckc Pastoral Internship, I read biographies with interns. This was one they chose. Amazed by M’Cheyne’s love for the Scriptures and people of his congregation and city.

https://www.amazon.com/Theology-My-Life-John-Frame/dp/1532613784
I love memoir and biography, and this is a good one. Frame is so candid and I could sympathize in many places. I appreciated his concluding section on lessons learned and his emphasis on love and relationships as well as orthodoxy and fighting for truth.

@JGDuesing suggested this at an @mbts faculty meeting. I enjoyed reading Chesterton’s reflections. Chesterton’s wit is remarkable. He shows how Aquinas made Aristotle palatable for theology even though Aquinas was rejected for what many considered was a foray into philosophy. Chesterton argues powerfully that deductive reasoning eclipses inductive (Not sure I am fully persuaded). There are places where I had to put the book down; “hard to state the idea better than that,” I would say.

https://www.amazon.com/John-Stott-Ministry-Dudley-Smith-2001-11-02/dp/B01K17X5V2
I read this with @themcckc Pastoral Interns. Just a delight. How did Stott do all that?! Stott, like M’Cheyne noted above, had such a heart for God’s word and the people of his church—but saw the global Anglican and Evangelical community as his parish.

Church Leadership

@RobertJMatz and @jmyeats have written what should be one of the most important books of 2019 for SBC leaders. They use narrative to argue for the validity and priority of the Cooperative Program.

Greek Grammar

https://www.amazon.com/Articular-Infinitives-Greek-New-Testament/dp/1905048416
I adopted this book for my Advanced Greek Grammar Ph.D. course @mbts. Burk provides a helpful analysis of articular infinitives and sets our principles of linguistics that students might apply to their particular areas of research. Excellent tables in the Appendices.

https://www.amazon.com/Cohesion-English-Language-No/dp/0582550416
Another book I adopted for my @mbts Advanced Greek Grammar Ph.D. seminar. This volume exhibits principles of Halliday’s linguistic grid but does so in an accessible way. The charts in the final chapter are worth the price of the book.

https://www.amazon.com/Grammar-Discourse-Topics-Language-Linguistics/dp/0306452359

I want students to appreciate linguistics and see how this line of study can help them to better understand Scripture. Longacre does that here. Charts are remarkable. This is a top-tier book for my @mbts Advanced Greek Grammar Ph.D. Seminar.

https://www.amazon.com/Structural-Lexicology-Greek-New-Testament/dp/1463205341
@toddlprice, a translator with Pioneers, is one of my best friends and has been for almost 20 years. We prayed each other through Ph.D. studies so it is a personal joy to use his book in my @mbts Advanced Greek Grammar Ph.D. seminar. Word-sense-possibility-disambiguation? We are more likely to know what a word means if we identify words it is most often associated with and forms it most often occurs in. Price argues that structural lexicography can help us better understand what words mean in the New Testament (as with other languages).

History

https://www.amazon.com/Fate-Rome-Climate-Disease-Princeton/dp/0691166838
Harper demonstrates his creativity here. His prose is bright, making what could seem a boring book (ancient climatology) readable because he connects climate with politics, economic trends, and religion. Harper notes that climate change contributed to the downfall of the Empire. Harper noted that Christianity grew because Christians united to care for one another during catastrophe and hardship that resulted from climate instability. I have a full review here (https://www.mbts.edu/downloads/journal/fa19_mjt_final_web.pdf).

https://www.amazon.com/Avenue-Spies-Espionage-Resistance-Nazi-Occupied-ebook/dp/B00PEPR6QW
Remarkable evil was the Nazi regime and though France and Paris fell quickly, some fought under Hitler’s nose—for a time. Kershaw is a great writer. This is a page-turner.

https://www.amazon.com/Pioneers-Heroic-Settlers-Brought-American/dp/1501168681
A fun evening read but not my favorite McCullough book (Truman and Adams are hard to beat). The Pioneers were a courageous lot and exemplify perseverance. I read this with my wife, so that made it more enjoyable.

New Testament Studies

Really enjoyed Blomberg’s emphasis on theology and mission. He prioritizes Biblical Theology but does not exclude Systematics. Blomberg’s arrangement of how to do theology distinguishes it from its contemporaries. I have a full review here (https://www.mbts.edu/downloads/journal/fa19_mjt_final_web.pdf).

For a few years now I have been intrigued by the questions of the Greek New Testament so when I heard of Estes’ book, I got right to it. I enjoyed reading it with a couple of colleagues @mbts. Estes takes the questions of the New Testament and categorizes them into an external, logical framework. At times exegetical analysis proves fruitful but too often I had to wade through Estes’ categorizations first. I would like to see something like G.D. Fee’s Analysis/Synthesis grid in his books on Paul and the Spirit or Jesus and Christology be applied to questions in the Greek New Testament. (Any Ph.D. students reading?)

Hays’ volume is a must-have for students and teachers and pastors. I had hoped to get to it last year but was delayed until 2019. I read it with a colleague @mbts, making it all the more fun. Hay’s grid would require ancient readers to be very familiar with the Jewish Scriptures. I appreciate his thorough analysis of echoes but I am not persuaded that the average reader in the ancient world could hear all that he (and we) hear in the New Testament use of the Old Testament. I like Hays’ view that the Old Testament prefigures the New but advocate for a sharper line marking Jesus as a post-figural Being. Once Jesus arrives, the figuring is done.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Its-World-Introduction/dp/0310499305
Because it was released just last month, I have not yet read every page of this 900-plus page tome, but I have read enough to get the general scope of the book. It is my 2019 choice for Book of the Year. This volume combines some of Wright’s work in the Christian Origins and the Question of God Series with what might be expected in a New Testament introduction. Kudos to Michael Bird for pulling this off! Chapters 2-4, begin by setting out the History-Literature-Theology grid the authors adopt throughout the book. In other words, they start with hermeneutics. Then come three chapters on backgrounds. Wright’s Jesus and the Victory of God is reworked into Part III (chs. 8-11), The Resurrection of the Son of God into Part IV (chs 12-14), and Paul and the Faithfulness of God into ch. 15 in Part V. Analysis of the Pauline corpus follows in Part V (chs. 16-23). The authors then turn to the Gospels in Part VI (chs. 24-28). The authors present their analysis of the Catholic Epistles and Revelation in Part VII (chs. 29-34), Early Christians and the Mission of God. Part VIII (chs. 35-36), The Making of the New Testament, provides an introduction to NT textual criticism and the New Testament Canon. Part IX, Living the Story of the New Testament, contains just chapter 37 titled, “Bringing It All Together: Making the New Testament matter for today.”

            A few specifics: Argues that ideas of resurrection, as presented in the New Testament, would make sense in a Jewish worldview but not in a Roman one (314-15). Galatians was written to churches in South Galatia and was written prior to the Jerusalem Council (Gal 2:1-10 corresponds to Acts 11:27-30) (406). Romans 7:7-25 is Israel and not a Christian (519).

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Testament-Produced-Tyndale-Cambridge/dp/1433564092
Provides an under-the-hood perspective on principles that guided Jongkind and Peter Williams as they edited the THGNT. The book serves as a primer on New Testament textual criticism. I appreciate the discipline the editors followed in using older Greek manuscripts. External evidence is foundational but the THGNT incorporates readings that accord internal evidence as well—and this introduction explains some of the readings that are based upon internal evidence. A commentary on the THGNT is in the works and Jongkind’s introduction whets the appetite for that volume.

Theology

@ostrachan writes an uncluttered doctrinal book that is accessible to readers. With chapters on work, technology, sexuality, and race, Reenchanting Humanity is a contemporary theology. This book benefits students and church leaders, marshaling Scripture to address the questions in the minds of church-goers young and old.

In preparation for the second Sunday of Advent, I decided to take a look at Matthew 1 in Vaticanus. I had read it a few times over the years and it stuck out to me because, at Matt 1:23, the copyist placed διπλῆ (>) (see Charles E. Hill, “‘In These Very Words’: Methods and Standards of Literary Borrowing in the Second Century,” in The Early Text of the New Testament [eds. Charles E. Hill and Michael J. Kruger], Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012) marks next to the lines where Isa 7:14 is cited. These διπλῆ are visible in the left margin of the left column below (images of Vaticanus taken from https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209). In the middle column, the copyist placed διπλῆ marks to note the citation of Mic 5:1, 3 in Matt 2:6.

When I turned to Matthew 1, I was struck again by the beauty of Vaticanus. The ornate first letter, the color combinations. And when I began to scan through the genealogy, I was struck by the beauty of the copyists’ literary discipline. When the name of the individual was the object of the verb ⲉⲅⲉⲛⲛⲏⲥⲉ(ⲛ) (“begat”), he placed it on its own line and then began the next line with that individual as the subject of the verb. This took foresight. The copyist’s arrangement of Jesus’ genealogy is visually striking. It is as if each name were a building block in the historical line that led to Jesus’ birth.

For comparison, I scanned Sinaiticus to see if the copyist of Matthew 1 had done the same. Though the text below is faded, it is clear that he did not (images of Sinaiticus taken from (http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/).

The differences in the copyists’ portrayals of Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew 1 in Vaticanus and Sinaiticus made me curious as to how the copyists of these manuscripts portrayed Jesus’ genealogy in Luke 3. There, the copyist of Sinaiticus took great care to list the family line of Jesus in a linear fashion. The names are arranged in a way that would immediately attract the reader’s attention. The names seem to be stacked upon one another like bricks of a building.

Intrigued, I turned attention back to Vaticanus to see if the copyist of Luke 3 set the genealogy off in some way. He followed the same pattern used by the copyist of Sinaiticus. On the second to the last line of the right column of the first image below, the copyist began the genealogy in Luke 3:23; Luke 3:24 (τοῦ Μαθθὰτ) begins on the final line.

As can be seen below, in the first and second columns of the next page of the manuscript, the copyist of Vaticanus shows the same methodology as the copyist of Sinaiticus.

And the copyist of Alexandrinus likewise stacked the names in Jesus’ genealogy in Luke 3 (Alexandrinus is vacant of Matt 1:1-25:6). That copyist listed two names per line, as can be seen below (images of Alexandrinus taken from http://www.csntm.org/).

A comparison of the way that the copyists of Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus presented genealogies is beyond the scope of a simple blog. This would in fact not be possible since Sinaiticus is vacant in many of the genealogies listed in Numbers and Chronicles, and as noted, Alexandrinus is vacant of Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus.

One basis of comparison is the genealogies of 1 Chronicles in Vaticanus. There the copyist occasionally separates names with a raised dot, observable in the right column below in the image of 1 Chronicles 1.

I located only one place where the copyist of Vaticanus set off names in the genealogies of 1 Chronicles in a way that would visually attract the reader’s attention. The middle column of the image below is 1 Chron 1:51-54, the list of Edom’s chiefs.

I return again here to thoughts of Christmas and the genealogies of Jesus in Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus. In The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006) et. al., the late Larry W. Hurtado argued that the nature and features of early Christian texts help us to understand the words written on those texts. The architectural arrangement of the names in Jesus’ genealogies inclines me to think that the copyists gave attention to presenting Jesus’ lineage in such a way that would create an image on the page. To me, the image looks like a building, a building of salvation history in reference to Jesus.

Isaiah’s prophecy of a child that would be born to a virgin and named Immanuel (Isa 7:14) and his statement that a child would be born to rule on David’s throne (Isa 9:6-7) are cited of Jesus at Christmas. These descriptions of the life and ministry of Jesus were first spoken as the solution to a political crisis in the days of Isaiah. During the reign of King Ahaz, the Arameans and Israel sought to bring Judah into an alliance that would strengthen the region of Palestine against the marauding Assyrians. To Judah’s crisis, Isaiah spoke of God’s eternal solution. Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6-7 are just two places in Isaiah 7-12 where the prophet detailed the progression of Messiah’s ministry, from His birth to His dominion.

(1) The Messiah would be born of a virgin. To King Ahaz, the prophet said, “the Lord Himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive, have a son, and name him Immanuel” (Isa 7:14)—a prediction that was fulfilled in the birth of Christ (Matt 1:23; Luke 1:31).

(2) The Messiah would have divine character and righteousness would characterize His rule.  Isaiah announced not only the destruction of Judah—with the salvation of only a remnant, but also a time when the Lord’s favor would be extended directly to the Gentiles (Isa 9:1-3), which Matthew said was fulfilled in Jesus’ early Galilean ministry (Matt 4:15-16) during which time He preached, “Repent, because the kingdom of heaven has come near!” (Matt 4:17). Isaiah predicted that the virgin’s child would grow to become a great ruler, saying, “The government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. The dominion will be vast and its prosperity will never end.  He will reign on the throne of David and over his kingdom” (Isa 9:6-7a)—a prophecy that the angel Gabriel quoted to comfort Mary in her role as the one who would give birth to Messiah (Luke 1:32-33). Luke notes that as an adolescent, Jesus’ “grew up and became strong, filled with wisdom, and God’s grace was on Him” (Luke 2:40), resembling Isaiah’s prophecy of Messiah: “The Spirit of the LORD will rest on Him—a Spirit of wisdom and understanding, a Spirit of counsel and strength, a Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD” (Isa 11:2). Isaiah announced that Jesus’ latter ministry would be characterized by righteous judgment. “He will judge the poor righteously and execute justice for the oppressed of the land. He will strike the land with discipline from His mouth, and He will kill the wicked with a command from His lips” (Isa 11:4), Isaiah said. This schema is reflected in John’s description of the return of Christ in Rev 19:15, “From His mouth came a sharp sword, so that with it He might strike the nations. He will shepherd them with an iron scepter. He will also trample the winepress of the fierce anger of God, the Almighty.”

(3) The Messiah would identify fully with His people—a group that would include Gentiles. While Ahaz and many of the nobility in Judah aligned themselves with Assyria, Isaiah and his companions, who together compose a faithful remnant, resolved to trust only in the Lord. The prophet confessed, “I will wait for the LORD, who is hiding His face from the house of Jacob. I will wait for Him. Here I am with the children the LORD has given me to be signs and wonders in Israel from the LORD of Hosts who dwells on Mount Zion” (Isa 8:16-18). The author to the Hebrews saw in Isaiah’s companionship with his children (the prophets under his care) an illustration of Christ’s identification with humanity; together they formed a faithful remnant that endured suffering and rejection and victory (Heb 2:1-13). Isaiah’s prophecy, “No one will harm or destroy on My entire holy mountain, for the land will be as full of the knowledge of the LORD as the sea is filled with water,” was followed by the announcement that, “On that day the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples. The nations will seek Him, and His resting place will be glorious” (Isa 11:9-10). The apostle Paul saw in Isaiah’s words justification for Jews to accept the Gentile believers among them (Rom 15:12).

In a time of political turbulence, Isaiah announced a deliverer who would come. The New Testament authors cited Isaiah 7-12 to teach their audiences about Jesus. They understood that the Lord’s jealousy for His people to enjoy His presence would be realized through the one born in Bethlehem. In Jesus, they said, God would work out His plan to be glorified among them and bring direct blessing even to the Gentiles.

I suggest that in Luke 15-16, Jesus weaves teachings related to money with ideas of salvation history. Luke 15-16 is divided into seven labeled units in the ESV. These units are composed of twelve paragraph divisions. The NA28 Greek text breaks Luke 15-16 into eleven paragraph units. The flow of Luke 15 differs radically from that of Luke 16. Luke begins chapter 15 by establishing the setting for the parables of the lost sheep (Luke 15:3-7), lost coin (Luke 15:8-10), and lost son (Luke 15:11-32) that follow. Jesus’ parables, Luke notes, are Jesus’ response to the Pharisees and scribes who are complaining that Jesus welcomes tax collectors and sinners (Luke 15:1-2).

On the surface, it is more difficult to identify cohesive elements in Luke 16. The chapter begins with Jesus’ Parable of the Dishonest Manager (Luke 16:1-13). The fact that Jesus would commend deception proves difficult enough for some interpreters. Couple this with the interpretive difficulty of trying to follow the flow of thought Luke wishes for his readers to trace between the parables in chapter 15 and the teachings to come in the remainder of Luke 16. Following the Parable of the Dishonest Manager, Luke notes that Jesus turns again to the Pharisees and chastises them for their love of money (Luke 16:14-15). Jesus’ statements regarding the Law and the Prophets being valid until John (Luke 16:16-17) and prohibition of divorce in Luke 16:18 seem like random sayings. The ESV labels Luke 16:14-17, “The Law and the Kingdom of God” and Luke 16:18, “Divorce and Remarriage.” The fact that the ESV gives a heading to one verse of Scripture underscores what seems a collection of haphazard Jesus-sayings in Luke 16:14-18. Luke 16 concludes with the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (16:9-31).

In the table below, references to money are italicized and terms of salvation history presented in a standard font. Together, these two themes serve as cohesive elements for understanding not only Luke 16 but how it is an extension of the parables of the lost sheep, lost coin, and lost son in Luke 15. Luke 15-16 is a cohesive unit of Jesus’ teachings against the Pharisees–who love their wealth and status in salvation history more than the kingdom of God inaugurated in Jesus’ presence among them.

At ETS this year, I enjoyed a paper titled “The Lukan Major Textual Variants included in the THGNT.” The presenter argued that the longer readings in Luke 22:43-44 and 23:34 accepted in the THGNT are justified in light of internal evidence. Though the external evidence for these readings is not as strong as for their omission, the presenter argued that the high degree of coherence between these longer readings and macro themes in Luke justify their inclusion in the THGNT.

The early witnesses for Luke 22:43-44, ὤφθη δὲ αὐτῷ ἄγγελος ἀπʼ οὐρανοῦ ἐνισχύων αὐτόν. καὶ γενόμενος ἐν ἀγωνίᾳ ἐκτενέστερον προσηύχετο· καὶ ἐγένετο ὁ ἱδρὼς αὐτοῦ ὡσεὶ θρόμβοι αἵματος καταβαίνοντες ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν (Then an angel from heaven appeared to him, strengthening him. Being in anguish, he prayed more fervently, and his sweat became like drops of blood falling to the ground, CSB) are Sinaiticus and Bezea. In Siniaticus, the phrase was originally present, then removed by the second corrector, only to be replaced later so that the latter second corrector reading includes the phrase. likewise has the phrase. The early witness that do not have Luke 22:43-44 include Papyri 75, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus. The presenter argued that the quantity of internal evidence favors including these verses as original to Luke’s Gospel. The reference to angels and messianic suffering in Luke 22:43-44 cohere with the emphasis on angels in infancy narratives of Luke. The reference to sweat turning to blood underscores Jesus’ suffering as He approaches the cross.

The presenter then turned to Luke 23:34 which begins with the sentence, ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἔλεγεν· Πάτερ, ἄφες αὐτοῖς, οὐ γὰρ οἴδασιν τί ποιοῦσιν (Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, because they do not know what they are doing,” CSB). Sinaiticus plays a major role in external evidence with this variant as well. In Sinaiticus, the phrase beginning Luke 23:34 was originally present, then removed by the second corrector only to later be restored by the same. Among the other early witnesses, this sentence is represented in Alexandrinus, with the alteration that ειπεν is replaced by ελεγεν πατερ. Among the early witnesses, Papyri 75 and Vaticanus do not include this introductory sentence in Luke 23:34. Despite the stronger external evidence in favor of omitting the sentence, the presenter argued that it should be included in light of the internal coherence with the theme of forgiveness of sins emphasized throughout Luke.

For the presenter, the fact that these longer readings cohere with macro themes in Luke justifies including them—despite external evidence to the contrary. If internal evidence were the only basis of textual evaluation, the presenter’s argument would win the day. But in a text as long as a New Testament Gospel, interpreters can nearly always find points of contact between macro themes of said Gospel and a longer reading. In Luke, if there were a longer reading about Jerusalem, for instance, it would enjoy a high degree of coherence since Jerusalem is a macro theme in Luke. But external evidence would yet need to be considered, and, I suggest, given priority.

Last night I attended the annual Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) dinner at ETS. This was my third year attending. I think they have been doing these dinners on the night before ETS begins for six years or so. I have only been three times. I already think it is one of the most important events at ETS.

At the core of Evangelicalism is God’s word, His revelation of Himself to humanity in sentences. How we understand these words, how we interpret them, defines us. The cultural pressure to redefine not only marriage but manhood and womanhood has prompted some Evangelicals to change their readings of scriptural texts.

Enter Tom Schreiner’s address at the CBMW dinner last night. He argued first, and forcefully, that all Evangelicals need to speak their convictions in a manner worthy of Christ. The harsh social media interactions of the last several months were obviously on Schreiner’s mind. Nearly half of his address concerned the manner in which we speak with other Evangelicals and the culture regarding our interpretation of biblical texts.

The key biblical text Schreiner discussed was 1 Tim 2:12, Paul’s prohibition for women to speak in the gathered church. Schreiner noted texts where women in both Old and New Testaments spoke, even to men, but maintained that Paul’s prohibition in 1 Tim 2:12 forbids women to functionally serve in ministries that are reserved for elders. Ministries like preaching and general church oversight are restricted to qualified males, as Paul details in 1 Timothy 3. Schreiner argued against the moderate position that would allow a woman to preach occasionally, under the guidance of the elders. Why, Schreiner asked, could a church not, under the authority of the elders, allow a woman to preach every week? Schreiner argued that a moderating position—while attractive on the surface—would be chastised by feminist interpreters as just one more attempt to keep women from fully taking up roles traditionally understood as limited to qualified males. To the feminist, Schreiner noted, moderate positions are more offensive than maintaining complementarian convictions.

As the schedule of ETS is about to begin, I don’t have time to flesh out more of Schreiner’s comments. I wanted to get these thoughts out even in brief because of the importance of CBMW in Evangelicalism and in our churches. As a professor and as a pastor, I see how fluid convictions can be surrounding issues of manhood, womanhood, and marriage. Any organization that helps believers investigate God’s word for answers and maintain convictions in those answers regardless of cultural pressure, is worth our support.

To inspire his downcast audience, the Chronicler listed the good days Judah enjoyed under men like King Asa (2 Chronicles 14-16). The Chronicler wasted no time in elevating Asa as an example for his audience. “Asa did what was good and right in the sight of the LORD his God,” the author noted, “He told the people of Judah to seek the LORD God of their ancestors and to carry out the instructions and the command” (2 Chron 14:4). King Asa, reigning over the settled land of Judah, said to the people, “Let’s build these cities and surround them with walls and towers, with doors and bars. The land is still ours because we sought the LORD our God. We sought Him and He gave us rest on every side” (2 Chron 14:7). While this rest was temporarily interrupted by the Ethiopian invasion, Asa prayed in faith and that Lord would not allow His devout ones to be routed by a foreign power (2 Chron 14:8-15). The point? The returned exiles and their descendants should make haste to seek the Lord in hopes that they too could regain control of their land.

While the Chronicler pointed up the fact that, “There was no war until the thirty-fifth year of Asa’s reign” (2 Chron 15:19), the next three years were dominated by strife, and the southern kingdom slipped further into unfaithfulness. The cumulative arrogance of Solomon, Jeroboam, and Rehobaom—together with the rampant idolatry Israel committed in the Promised Land—led to war after war before and after the reign of Asa. Besides the civil wars of the divided kingdom, Israel and Judah had to endure attacks from Syria, Assyria, Egypt, and the Babylonians. From the latter days of Solomon’s reign onward, Israel would never again dwell in Canaan in freedom and peace. While Joshua recognized in his day that the Lord had given His people rest from their enemies (Josh 21:43-44), the land did not remain at rest.

In the Old Testament, the concept of spiritual rest was inseparable from the absence of war. As the storyline of Scripture progresses into the New Testament, spiritual rest is inseparable from reliance upon Jesus Christ.

(1) In Matt 11:28-29, Jesus said “Come to Me, all of you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. All of you, take up My yoke and learn from Me, because I am gentle and humble in heart and you will find rest for yourselves.”

(2) Jesus’ statement is why the author to the Hebrews could so boldly challenge his readers to seek spiritual rest in covenant faithfulness to Christ. After detailing the unfaithfulness of the wilderness generation, he said, “Let us then make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall into the same pattern of disobedience” (Heb 4:11).

In material unique to Matthew in chs. 8-10, Matthew describes the helpless, pitiable state of those receiving the benefits of Jesus’ ministry. In this same material, Jesus is concerned for Israel. The three texts noted below present a different emotional posture from Jesus’ anger with the Jewish leadership and the Pharisees in Matthew (e.g., ch. 23).

(1) In the healing report at Capernaum (Matt 8:16-17//Mark 1:32-34//Luke 4:40-41), Matthew includes in Matt 8:17 the citation of Isa 53:4 “He himself took our weaknesses and carried our diseases” (CSB). To cite the weakness and disease of those Jesus heals portrays them as worthy of compassion.

(2) In Jesus’ proclamation that the harvest is great (Matt 9:35-38//Mark 6:6b, 34//Luke 8:1; 10:2), Matthew includes the statement that the crowds were “distressed and dejected” (Matt 9:36). Mark notes, with Matthew, that the crowds were like sheep without a shepherd (Matt 9:36//Mark 6:34; see Num 27:17) but Matthew adds the qualifying adjectives “distressed and dejected.”

(3) In Jesus’ commission of the twelve (Matt 10:1-16//Mark 6:7; 3:13-19a; 6:8-11//Luke 9:1; 6:12-16; 9:2-5; 10:3), Matthew includes Jesus’ instruction that His disciples avoid the Gentiles and the region of Samaria so that they might go directly to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt 10:6). Israel was to receive the kingdom benefits of healing and liberation, Jesus said.

Within the material unique to Matthew in Matthew 8-10, taken together Matt 8:17; 9:36 and 10:6 portray the recipients of Jesus’ ministry as desperate and worthy of compassion. The collocation of sheep/shepherd imagery in Matt 9:36 and 10:6 places Israel as the special object of Jesus’ compassion.

In Scripture’s storyline, God uses famine to direct his people and advance His redemptive plans. Abraham went to Egypt because of a famine in Canaan (Gen 12:10-20) and Isaac was forced to go to the land of the Philistines because of a famine in Canaan (Gen 26:1-11). In Deut 28:48, Moses warned the people that if they were unfaithful to God in the Promised Land, God would bring famine upon the land. Ruth, the Moabite who would become the grandmother of King David, came into the line of Abraham’s descendants because Elimelech’s family came to Edom for food when there was a famine in Canaan (Ruth 1:1; 4:17). God used famine in the Promised Land during the ministries of Elijah (1 Kings 18:2) and Elisha (2 Kings 4:38) to display His power of provision through them, beckoning Israel to return and be faithful.

Early in the ministry of the apostle Paul—while he was ministering in Antioch—a prophet named Agabus came from Jerusalem “and predicted by the Spirit that there would be a severe famine throughout the Roman world” (Acts 11:28).  These (predominantly Gentile) believers took up a collection for the saints in Judea, “sending it to the elders (in Jerusalem) by the means of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30; see Acts 12:25; Gal 2:10). In Paul’s second and third missionary journeys, he employed the Gentiles in famine relief—especially for the Jewish Christians of Judea—as a means of bridging the gap between the two nations. Scripture’s storyline—in accord with the Abrahamic covenant in Gen 12:1-3—finds its fulfillment in all nations together worshipping Israel’s God through Jesus Christ. Paul’s travel plans and administration of famine relief are a fitting conclusion to the book of Romans, his most thorough reflection on the storyline of Scripture:

“I am traveling to Jerusalem to serve the saints; for Macedonia and Achaia were pleased to make a contribution to the poor among the saints in Jerusalem. Yes, they were pleased, and they are indebted to them. For if the Gentiles have shared in their spiritual benefits, then they are obligated to minister to Jews in material needs…

     Now I implore you, brothers, through the Lord Jesus Christ and through the love of the Spirit, to agonize together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf: that I may be rescued from the unbelievers in Judea, that my service for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints” (Rom 15:25-27, 30-31; see 1 Cor 16:1-4; 2 Cor 8-9).