Saturday, January 29, 2022

Why Alpha and Omega?

 Text: Rev. 1:8, 11; 22:13 

…and not the “Aleph” and the “Tau” (first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet—see Psalm 119) or the “A and the Z”? Aren’t all of these titles saying the same thing, as defined for us in the Authorized Version, namely, “the beginning and the ending” (1:8, 22:13) or “the first and the last” (1:11, 22:13)? They are, but I believe there’s a reason that God insisted on “Alpha and Omega,” a transliteration rather than a translation from the underlying Greek text, as opposed to something else or merely using “the first and the last.”

 ·         “The first and the last” doesn’t mean that God himself has a beginning and ending, but that he begins whatever has a beginning (Gen. 1:1, John 1:1-3, Col. 1:18, Rev. 3:14) and ends whatever has an ending. God precedes everything created, including angelic beings, and when anything temporal passes away and eternity continues to roll, God will be there and already have been there, since time is not linear for God like it is us, and no one can get ahead of him as “Omega.” Following is an excellent explanation of this truth from A. Berkley Michelson’s Daniel & Revelation: Riddles or Realities (1984, p. 39)?

 

“God is called the Alpha and the Omega (Rev. 1:8; 21:6), which are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. We usually think of “beginning” and “end” as the chronological points of an event, but in the Book of Revelation “the beginning and the end” are God himself. God completes life just as the opening and closing letters complete the alphabet. As Christians, we must reverse our pattern of thinking about life in terms of physical beginnings and endings and consider the beginning and the ending as God, not as events. Overcoming the tendency to be event centered is difficult. Even nations and empires begin and end with certain events. But God must be central in our larger relationship with him. We must subordinate events to God; He is the originator and planner of the events of our lives.”

 

·          ·       Now let’s consider God’s use of the Greek alphabet:

 

a.      At the time of the new testament’s composition, Latin was the political language of the known world, but Greek was the common tongue, much like English is today (Eccl. 1:9-10). Note how Paul, a Hebrew, and the Roman captain communicate with one another in Greek in Acts 21:37-39. Paul chooses to address captain in Greek, rather than Latin, even though the latter is a Roman soldier, since the chances of him speaking Greek, the common tongue, were even better than him knowing Latin, which Paul, as a Roman citizen (21:39, 22:25-27) knew as well. The captain is surprised that Paul speaks Greek, which marks Paul as a man of the world, since Greek was spoken throughout the Roman world.

b.      By choosing the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, God is showing his identification with the Gentiles, from the beginning to the end of time. The nations have always been part of God’s plan, as revealed to the prophets regarding the kingdom (Mt. 25:34, Acts 3:21) and as hid in God until Paul regarding the one-body mystery in Christ (Eph. 3:9). God called out Abraham from the nations and separated Israel, but he wasn’t dispensing with the nations, just giving Israel primacy over them (Gen. 12:3). His plan was to use one nation to bring the others home, so to speak, but as we know, Israel for the most part failed in that mission.

c.       The title, then, is an affirmation that God not only identifies with Israel but with the other nations as well…forever. The Revelation describes the consummation of the kingdom program revealed in prophecy, not the mystery program revealed to Paul (its consummation is described in Eph. 1-3), and the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel and to the nations. Note how “nations” is used in Revelation 19 times, all the way into chapters 21-22, the eternal state, and “nation” twice, for a total of 21 references (3x7 for numerology students—the nations are perfected in Revelation!).


So “Alpha and Omega,” which strikingly appears only in the first and final (21-22) chapters of Revelation (!), is as full of meaning to the nations as “JEHOVAH” (Ex. 6:3, Ps. 83:18, Is. 26:4) is to Israel. The next time you see the Alpha and Omega reference or image, remember God’s claim on the Gentiles. Praise the Lord!

Sunday, January 16, 2022

Hearts that Were Changed at Calvary

While some Bible readers understand that one of the two thieves crucified with Jesus had a change of heart about him at Calvary, they may not realize that many others had a change of heart too. Let’s look at three sets of people and see how hearts were changed in each.      

                                              

1.      Thieves. When the thieves were first crucified with Christ, both joined in the people’s mockery of Christ (Mt. 27:39-44). However, after “the lights go out” and darkness falls at midday, one of the thieves repents of his mockery and comes to see that Christ is who he claimed to be. His repentance is confirmed by his rebuke to the impenitent thief and humble petition to Jesus, whom he refers to as Lord and king (Luke 23:39-42). For this, he is assured of salvation, despite his crimes and his helplessness. 


2.      Soldiers. The soldiers mock Jesus before his crucifixion (Mt. 27:27-31) and during it (Luke 23:36), but not afterward. When Jesus breathes his last and signs follow, the centurion comes to see that Christ was righteous (Luke 23:47) and, in succession, “the Son of God” (Mt. 27:54). But note carefully that not only he ascribes Deity to Christ, but also “they that were with him.” Perhaps the centurion is enlightened first (Luke 23), then through his testimony and the accompanying signs, the soldiers are enlightened too. 


3.      People. The Jewish people mock Christ (Mt. 27:39-40; Mark 15:29-30; Luke 23:35), along with the rulers. While there’s no evidence that the latter repent (some do in Acts 6:7, 15:5), the people do have a change of heart, since their remorse at Christ’s death is recorded in Luke 23:48. While it’s true that “a great company” of Christ’s sympathizers are present (Luke 23:27), 23:48 affirms that “all the people that came together to that sight”…”smote their breasts” in remorse (cf. Luke 18:13). Perhaps these same people are the ones converted by the apostles in Acts 2-6 and afterward (15:5, 21:20)!

Saturday, January 15, 2022

The Two Natures of Christ in All Four Gospels

 All four gospel writers emphasize Christ's two natures, one perhaps more than the other (e.g., John Christ's divinity), but both nonetheless. Some examples are provided below:

1. Matthew. Matthew emphasizes Christ's human descent from Abraham and David in Mt. 1. But he also highlights Christ's deity in Mt. 14:33, 16:16, and 27:54 among other places.

2. Mark. Mark emphasizes Christ's servanthood by focusing on Christ's actions rather than his teachings and, more subtly, by not recounting Christ's lineage in Mark 1 (a servant's lineage is irrelevant). However, in the first verse of Mark's gospel, he refers to Christ's deity ("the Son of God") and records Jesus' affirmation of his own deity in Mk. 14:61-62 and Christ's ascension to the right hand of God, another proof of his deity (Mk. 16:19).

3. Luke. Luke has more to say about Jesus' birth and youth than any gospel writer, yet he refers to Jesus as "the Lord" 14 times in his gospel (e.g., 7:13, 10:1, 17:5, 22:61, 24:34).

4. John. John emphasizes Christ's deity in his gospel from start (1:1) to finish (21:25), but he also underscores the humanity of Jesus in the Samaritan interlude, where a weary and thirsty Jesus stops at Jacob's well (4:6-8). 

Our Saviour was fully God and fully man at the same time ("hypostatic union"), from birth to death and beyond. He maintains this union of natures at the right hand of God, and when he appears again to the body of Christ (Col. 3:4, 2 Tim. 4:1, Tit. 2:13) and later to the world (Rev. 1:7), he will still have those two natures and continue to forever. I'm not sure where the teaching that Christ will some day shed his manhood came from, but I don't think that it's supported by scripture (cf. Is. 9:6-7, Luke 1:32-33, Rev. 22:3-5...two natures!).  


Saturday, January 8, 2022

A Tale of Two Rich Men

 

Text: Luke 18:18-27, 19:1-10 


Most Bible readers are familiar with “the rich young ruler” and Zacchaeus, but I’ve never seen or heard them compared (kudos to those who have—the body of Christ is BIG...and so is the body of literature!). While reading through the gospel of Luke lately, I noticed some striking similarities and differences between these two men, as well as the juxtaposition of their encounters with Christ in Luke 18 and 19. Some of them are found in the table below.

 

 

Rich Young Ruler (RYR)

Zacchaeus

Name given?

No

Yes

Times the gospels mention him

3 (Mt. 19:16-24; Mk. 10:17-25; Lk. 18:18-27)

1 (Lk. 19:1-10)

Physical description

young man (Mt. 19:20, 22)

little of stature (Lk. 19:3)

Ruler?

Yes (Luke 18:18)

Chief among the publicans (Lk. 19:1)

Rich?

Very (Lk. 18:23)

Yes (Lk. 19:1)

Runs?

Yes—to meet Jesus (Mk. 10:17)

Yes—ahead of the crowd to see Jesus (Lk. 19:3-4)

Other physical actions

Knelt before Jesus (Mk. 10:17); showed visible sorrow (Lk. 19:23-24)

Climbed a tree (v. 4), came down (v. 6), stood before the Lord (v. 8)

Jesus shows him affection

Yes (Mk. 10:21)

Yes (Lk. 19:5)

Saved?

No (Lk. 18:26)

Yes (Lk. 19:9-10)

Describes his personal righteousness (level of obedience to the law) to Jesus

Yes (Lk. 18:21) [affirms Jesus’ description]

Yes (Lk. 19:8)

Willing to give possessions to the poor

No (Lk. 18:22)

Yes (Lk. 19:8)


I think that the last comparison is the most critical, since the RYR’s refusal to give to the poor excludes him from salvation under the law. The setting here is before the cross and the revelation of both the gospel of grace (Eph. 2:8-9) and the one-body mystery (Eph. 3:1-6), so works are required to prove the validity of a saint’s faith (James 2:22-24), which is NOT the case today (Eph. 2:8-9, 2 Tim. 1:9, Titus 3:5). 


But the Lord probes even deeper than outward obedience to show what both men loved and trusted in (Mk. 10:24). For the nameless RYR, who remains unknown to Christ, it was his great possessions (Mt. 19:22, Mk. 10:22), which he ultimately allows to possess him. But Zacchaeus, in describing his personal righteousness to Jesus, cuts right to the chase: Lord, I don’t love money (Lk. 19:8). Christ is satisfied with his explanation and asserts his salvation as a “son of (faithful) Abraham” (Lk. 19:9-10)! In giving up his riches, Zacchaeus could say, like the heroic Sydney Carton in Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities, “It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.”