Live at The Gospel Coalition Conference – 5

This is a brief overview of the final two sessions on day 3 of The Gospel Coalition Conference.

Session 8: Mike Bullmore – God’s Great Heart of Love Toward His Own (Zephaniah)
–Download audio–

Bullmore explained that Zephaniah, like many books in the OT and the OT as a whole, actually contains the gospel. “The Old Testament is pregnant with the message of the Gospel,” he said. “As salvation history progresses it is increasingly easy to detect the specific shapes and contours of the Gospel… The Gospel is here [in the OT] in utero.” Zephaniah begins with the sober condition of man, it appears that there is no hope because the righteous judgment of God is just and deserved. But then in chapter 2:1-3, there appears a glimmer of hope. God will remember mercy in the midst of his judgment. By the end of the book, particularly in verses 14-17, that glimmer bursts forth into a great and glorious rejoicing at the consummation of God’s salvation of his people. God does not look upon us, his people (including Gentiles too, per Gal. 3:29, he pointed out), with some disappointment, as if that’s the best God could do with us. No, He rejoices in love over us with singing. We will be and are joyful over our salvation, but God’s joy is even greater than our joy.

Bullmore also pointed out that our Gospel message should include this aspect from Zephaniah. The aim or end of everything that God is doing for us, is too often left out of our Gospel presentations. Our people need to be reminded of the great point of it all. “This vision of the consummation is the great contribution of Zephaniah”. We can’t forget to state this, it must be spoken. It doesn’t work if it is unspoken. When spoken, it will serve to awaken eagerness and anticipation for this in our hearts.

Session 9: D.A. Carson – Getting Excited about Melchizedek (Psalm 110)
–Download audio–

Don Carson’s message on Melchizedek was perhaps the best message on the theme of this conference. He took pains to explain the text in Psalm 110, Gen. 14, and Hebrews 7. Carson first explained that Psalm 110 is the OT chapter most quoted in the NT. He then went on to say, “Melchizadek is one of the most instructive figures in the Bible for helping us put our Bibles together and for seeing clearly who Jesus is.” He went on to argue persuasively that Melchizadek was not a preincarnate manifestation of Christ (a Christophany). Hebrews 7 says Melchizadek was like Christ. He was an actual priest-king whose life and the way he was included in Scripture, foreshadowed Jesus Christ the ultimate Priest-King.

Carson explained that paying attention to how the NT uses the OT is very instructive. They are almost always carefully reading the OT. The NT use of the OT should shape how we see the relationship between the testaments and how we preach Christ from the OT. His lecture was quite academic but designed to instruct. It wasn’t just on the academic level, though. He plainly rejoiced in and exulted over Jesus as our Priest-King. He exampled how all the functions and purposes of the priesthood is fulfilled in Jesus Christ, only it is a much better priesthood. Jesus Christ is our approachable and perfect High Priest.

Appropriately, the service ended with the Getty’s leading us in the song, “Before the Throne of God Above”.

I hope to give some final reflections on the conference, tomorrow.

Live at The Gospel Coalition Conference – 4

Here is a brief overview of each of the plenary sessions from day 2 of the 2011 Gospel Coalition conference.

Session 5: James MacDonald – Not According to Our Sins (Psalm 25)
–Download audio–

I had never heard James MacDonald preach, except for maybe a clip here or there from the radio or something. He was an engaging speaker and very passionate. He said before you can preach Christ from the OT, you have to know how to preach. There’s a need for people today to preach, “Thus says the Lord.” Then you need to preach Christ from the Word and He is in the Word both in the Old and New Testaments. He then preached through Psalm 25 detailing his own personal experience of being crushed by life’s problems lately and really having to trust in God like the Psalmist did. He used visual elements in the preaching, but it was definitely a word-based proclamation. The visual elements helped, but it’s hard to describe if you can’t see the video. At the end he explained how Jesus is in this Psalm. He embodies our trust, He exemplifies our trust, and He enables our trust.

Workshops

I am not sure if the workshops will be recorded or not. But I’m glad I attended the ones I did.

Workshop 1: Colin Smith – Preaching a Christ to Whom We Can Come

Colin Smith originally hails from Scotland so his accent was on full display. What he said about preaching a Christ to whom our people can come, rather than one they are to follow and obey (only), was very grace-filled and refreshing. I’d say more, but you can download and read his presentation (in PDF) here, from his website and ministry UnlockingtheBible.com.

Workshop 2: C.J. Mahaney – Pastoring with Discernment: Applying the Gospel to the Hearts of Those You Serve

As always, C.J. Mahaney did not disappoint. His lecture was less a workshop, and more a sermon. It just was a sermon, no bones about it. About 800 or more it seemed were in the room for his session. He preached through the book of Jude with particular emphasis on “keeping in the love of God”, as people who were “loved, called and kept (vs. 1) by building ourselves up in faith (through rehearsing the Gospel to ourselves daily), by praying, and through waiting for God’s mercy. He also emphasized that Jude was very eager to declare the common salvation or the Gospel, but he had to contend. Mahaney stressed that contending isn’t optional, but we must be wise in what threats to the Gospel really apply to our church and need to be contended with in that context. The contending is important but Jude’s passion was the Gospel. He stressed that Jude wasn’t eager for secondary things or practice or church structure or social issues. We may be tempted to be passionate. What pastors are very eager about matters and is obvious to their people.

Workshop 3: Randy Newman – Questioning Evangelism

Randy Newman who is a converted Jew who ministers to college professors and the like with Faculty Commons, Campus Crusade, is also the author of a couple books on evangelism. Questioning Evangelism is his first book and what his lecture covered. Bringing the Gospel Home: Witnessing to Family Members, Close Friends, and Others Who Know You Well is a new book just published by Crossway. This session was excellent as he worked through the role of questions in evangelism. Answer people’s questions about the gospel with a question rather than an answer. He explained that you should look at people on a grid from A to Z with A being extreme atheist, and Z being almost a believer. Rather than aiming to convert people with a one-shot prospect, we should look for ongoing process. Try to bump them up a few rungs, by causing them to think and overcoming an obstacle. Let our Sovereign God do his work. Today people don’t share the many common beliefs that most Gospel pamphlets and tracts assume. So an incremental approach is better. I’m going to have to seek out his book, since this seems such a good approach.

Session 6: Conrad Mbewe – The Righteous Branch (Jeremiah 23)
–Download audio–

With my parents being missionaries in Zambia, I was particularly interested in hearing Conrad Mbewe. I had heard of him only recently, and my parents don’t know him at all. Some apparently, call him the African Spurgeon. He’s a pastor in Lusaka and helps direct two colleges for pastors. Not sure if he’s quite Spurgeon’s equal, but he is passionate and articulate. His message on Jesus, the Branch was powerful. He explained the role of leaders and how their sins affect the people, and their judgment is the people’s judgment. God’s solution has been to give new leaders who are faithful to his people, but ultimately it is Jesus the Good Shepherd and the Branch who will arise. The restoration prophesied here is described as surpassing that of the Exodus. He said, “Let’s face it, this wasn’t fulfilled in the 1940s with Israel.” He finds the ultimate fulfillment in the eternal state. The message didn’t focus on particulars about the land promise or anything, it was a wider lens view of Jesus Christ and his Greatness and Glory.

Session 7: Matt Chandler – Youth (Ecclesiastes 11-12)
–Download audio–

Chandler was the best message of the day, by far. He went so fast it was very hard to keep up. His own story of having been diagnosed with brain cancer a year or so ago, is compelling in its own right. His message on remembering the Creator in the days of your youth, was especially poignant given his own story. He connected the command to rejoice in 11:9-10, with the command to remember. We need to remember rightly (the Gospel and what God has done for us), in order to rejoice rightly. Our problem isn’t rejoicing, it’s rejoicing in the wrong things. Chandler also drove home the need for the Gospel in all of life, not just the entry to the Christian life. He displayed an amazing knowledge of the Bible and had a humorous yet insightful way of putting things. I’ve heard him compared to Mark Driscoll as far as the style of his church, and he is friends with Driscoll. I wasn’t sure what to expect. He didn’t wear a tie or anything close to that. But he didn’t come across as inappropriate or even close to it. His preaching could be put right up there with John Piper’s in a sense, or C.J. Mahaney’s. I was blessed and will want to download this to listen to it again.

This was day two, and I have to leave now to start day three. The conference will be over soon, unfortunately. But I’ve enjoyed my time here immensely.

Live at The Gospel Coalition Conference – 2

Here is a brief overview of each of the plenary sessions from yesterday’s conference. I’ll have more to say about books and the Band of Bloggers event I went to later.

The music was led by Keith and Kristyn Getty. It was more upbeat and lively than I expected, which was actually nice. The Irish flair was there with even a bagpipe solo. They are introducing a fairly new song of theirs, “By Faith” and also did an even newer one. Prior to session 2, the music at one point dropped out and the congregation was heard more clearly singing “O Church Arise”. The 5,000 or so voices singing that song together was powerful. Praise to Jesus for bringing together his people in places like this conference center (the massive McCormick Place in Chicago) and all around the world…

Session 1: Al Mohler – Studying the Scriptures and Finding Jesus (John 5)
–Download audio–

Mohler explains the problem of a Christless Old Testament, and explains how studying the Scriptures is supposed to result in finding Jesus. He shows how so many people are practical Marcionites, claiming the New Testament is the Christian book, the OT is Hebrew Scriptures. Basically, some would have us do synagogue lectures when we teach from the OT. Don’t get me wrong, his tone wasn’t combative at all. It was a very helpful and hope filled lecture on the importance of seeing Christ in the OT.

Session 2: Tim Keller – Getting Out (Exodus 14)
–Download audio–

Keller showed multiple links from the Exodus account to the New Testament. He explained that the story of the Israelites could be described as this: They were slaves in bondage with no hope and a sentence of death, finding redemption by hiding under the blood atonement, crossing over from death to life, then having a promise of going to a new country. They’re not there yet, but they’re on the way and God has given them his law and a worship system so they treasure and remember His work for them. Keller then says, that’s exactly how you would describe the people of God today, too. He goes on to discuss the layers of bondage and the redemption and how it was accomplished (all by Grace).

Session 3: Alistair Begg – From a Foreigner to King Jesus (Ruth)
–Download audio–

Begg gave us sketches of the beautiful story of Ruth. He showed how Boaz, particularly, was the goel, kinsman redeemer and foreshadows Christ. He also drew parallels from the locale of Ruth’s story and then David’s childhood tending sheep there in Bethlehem, to Christ and the Bethlehem shepherds coming at his birth in Bethlehem. Much to see Christ from in this book.

Session 4: Round-table discussion – Tim Keller, John Piper, Crawford Loritts, Don Carson, Bryan Chapell
–Download audio–

Highlights from that are really anything Keller or Carson said. Loritts emphasized the role of the preacher’s walk with Christ too, in preaching. Piper emphasized not ignoring the context of the OT text itself when preaching from it.

Keller explained his preaching as a fourfold trajectory often: 1) What you should do (as evidenced by this OT text); 2) You can’t do this (due to your sinfulness); 3) Christ has done it for you (i.e. the Gospel applied); 4) Until you rest in what He’s done, you can’t do it (living the gospel life).

Piper mentioned Graeme Goldsworthy’s book on Preaching the Whole Bible As Christian Scripture as containing a line that really got Piper thinking and has changed how he preaches. Goldsworthy said “If a Muslim liked your sermon, you didn’t preach a Christian sermon. If a Jewish person liked your sermon, you didn’t preach a Christian sermon.”

Carson brought out the Temple theme as one of many trajectories that are traced through Scripture and which really do point to Christ. He stressed everything doesn’t point to Christ the same way, but when you are in a text that addresses one of these types or trajectories that aligns to Christ, you have a warrant for going to Christ. Carson was also asked by Chapell, “Can you preach Proverbs without going to the New Testament?” Carson immediately responded, “Why would I want to? It wouldn’t even occur to me to do so.” He also pointed out that it’s the same with texts like Isaiah, too. Carson then went on to stress that the NT relates to the OT yes in terms of not only prophecy (OT) and fulfillment (NT), but also message hidden (OT) and message revealed (NT). Personally I find that very helpful, yes some things are plainly clear, but other things were hidden until Christ clearly revealed them.

At the end of the discussion, Chapell fired off a list of helpful resources for preaching Christ from the OT. I thought that list (plus Bryan Chapell’s own book, Christ-Centered Preaching) was excellent. You’ll have to listen to the audio though since he gave it out so quickly.

At the end of the roundtable discussion Tim Keller, John Piper, Dr. John Woodhouse and Lane Dennis (president of Crossway), presented a book written in Carson’s honor, commemorating his long service to the church and his 65th birthday.

The Old Testament: All about Christ, or Not?

Fascinating debate recently about how to read the OT. The first two statements below are from Professor Mark Snoeberger of Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary.

First:

But since I’ve spent almost all my study time in the OT during the last two months, it’s almost as though I’ve left the Gospel Carnival behind. Kind of like going for a drive in the country, but better. It’s been very refreshing, but the funny thing is that, despite the fact that I have been spending considerably more time than normal in my Bible for the past two months, I’ve read virtually nothing about Christ, the Cross, or the Gospel.

Now some of you are probably shaking your heads right now and saying, “This guy doesn’t know how to read his Bible–it’s ALL about Christ if you know how to successfully navigate between the lines!” And I’m not blind to the redemptive thread that winds through the Bible. But the thing is, when I stop reading between the lines and just start reading the lines, Christ and the Gospel do not emerge as major OT themes. In fact, they’re not themes at all.

and then in the first comment under this post:

Revelation concerning the common or civic sphere, on the other hand, begins with the dominion mandate, takes peculiar shape with the Noahic Covenant and the second table of the Law, and dominates the theocratic period.

Dispensationalism, I think, can be demonstrated to be a variation of this latter model (some would say a perversion) that offers multiple adminstrations–not just two. The various purposes of God are inter-connected, but what is key is that they are not limited to redemptive concerns. What binds them together is not so much the Gospel as it is the manifold glory of God. It’s BIGGER than the Gospel.

Let’s take one example: the OT sacrificial system. There are diverse understandings within dispensationalism on the OT sacrifices, but one that I have felt comfortable embracing is John Whitcomb’s theocratic understanding of the sacrifices, viz., that the sacrifices were only incidentally connected with being redemptively right with God; instead they were concerned with being theocratically right with the (K)ing and with the covenant community. That these sacrifices became a pattern for the redemptive arrangement in the death of Christ is not accidental, of course. And God certainly arranged history so that there is a continuity of form. However, it seems to me that rather than seeing the OT sacrifices as anticipating Christ, it is better to say that God modeled Christ’s sacrifice retrospectively after the theocratic system.

If this is the case, then the the Mosaic system has its own meaning, known plainly by the OT saint, without reference to Christ. It was not intrinsically anticipatory.

Over and against this, Brian McCrorie in the comments here shared my basic view on this matter:

Ben I don’t think I fundamentally disagree with you. However, I would only add that we should not only interpret the OT on it’s own terms, but also interpret it canonically (ie, the Bible as one book)

If we simply isolate the OT from the NT, and interpret it “on it’s own terms”, and not canonically, would we ever come to the conclusion that Jonah could be a picture of Christ? Furthermore, I don’t need an OT text to explicitly tell me the rock in the wilderness was Christ when Paul tells me as much in 1 Cor.

If we isolate the testaments we may not even (like some comments above) see how Adam prefigured Christ. But it blows my mind that someone who has the NT would even question the correlation of the first Adam to the second, or King David to his greater Son whom he calls “Lord”.

The bigger question in all of this I think is how or if we can do what the NT writers do. For instance, we don’t have explicitly or implicity (that I know of)in the NT that Joseph was a type of Christ. But the correlations are almost as clear as day. I agree with James that Keller’s references to Esther and others are much more of a stretch. However, that doesn’t make his hermeneutic “special”, he’s just trying to follow the pattern of intertextual canonical interpretation. How confidently we do that today without divine inspiration is the sticking point (at least for me).

Lastly, I wanted to comment on something Keith said:
“How could God, ‘retrospectively’ do anything when he decreed it all outside of time?”

Marriage from the perspective of Eph 5 is a perfect example of this. We know now, this side of the cross and through later revelation, that marriage was instituted to be a picture of Christ and the church. In other words, the cross and the church preexisted (in the purpose of God, not strictly in time) the marriage of man and woman. Why then would we be surprised to find the events and words of the OT orchestrated and inspired to point to Christ? We’re not necessarilty reading Christ and the NT back into the OT. It’s almost as if we’re going back before the OT, now with the knowledge of God’s ultimate plan climaxing in Christ. We have now what angels and prophets once only dreamed of seeing. Please don’t make me go back to that day.

and then:

Here [is an] illustration supporting canonical reading (or reading the NT back into the OT):

Black box: Imagine a FAA flight inspection team reviewing data and clues from the site of a plane crash. All their information is leading them down a path of understanding the cause of the crash. But when they find the black box they have the pilot’s definitive word on how and why the plane went down. Wouldn’t they then go back and look at all the collected data and see how all along it pointed to that particular failure. But without the black box it wasn’t clear. The recording didn’t change the data (NT revelation doesn’t alter the OT), but shed new light on its proper and full interpretation. Furthermore, without the box, the collected data could never have been fully understood. Why would any inspector then go back and disregard the recording, or separate it from the data, and try to interpret the two separately? Instead, he would interpret the (less clear) clues with the definitive recording….

By isolating the OT and having a hermeneutic based on original authorial intent instead of a wider canonical interpretation based on divine Authorial intent, we are severely limiting our understanding of the text. We can better locate, appreciate, and interpret the signs and symbols pointing to Christ in the OT only as we see them through the lens of the NT. Lastly, we must be very careful to isolate the OT from the NT because, in my opinion, the function of OT revelation (as well as parables, for example) is not simply to reveal, but also to conceal. We weren’t meant to get all the information on God’s redemptive plan from the OT. Throughout the OT God gives us clues which only later can be identified for what they were. My guess is that originally God intentionally concealed the whole story (like any good writer) from all people, but particularly from rulers and authorities, and ultimately Satan himself. How else can we explain Satan killing the King of the Jews only to realize the salvation of the world and his own defeat?

I encourage you to read the comments where Brian made these statements above. There is an in-depth discussion of this question and all participants are quite irenic and charitable. Makes for great reading. The comments at Snoeberger’s blog will just puzzle you more than anything. If that is the result of dispensationalist thinking, I say beware.

Makes me excited that I’ll be going to the Gospel Coalition Conference this year where the theme is preaching Christ from the Old Testament. Maybe that’s why the Conservative Evangelicals have such an appeal to young fundamentalists, they get what the message of the Bible is all about.

John Sailhamer’s Messianic Interpretation of the Song of Solomon

I came across the NIV Compact Bible Commentary and was delighted to find that John Sailhamer was its author. I’ve so enjoyed his The Meaning of the Pentateuch, that I picked up his commentary on the Pentateuch. I’m going to have to pick up this compact Bible commentary of his as well.

I was able to read the section on the Song of Solomon and was fascinated by Sailhamer’s insights, which I plan to share here. The following quotes are from his treatment of the book on pages 359-361 in the NIV Compact Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1994), emphasis added.

Sailhamer begins by briefly recounting the traditional figurative interpretations of the book and the quite literal modern interpretations.

Although it is, on the face of it, just that–an ode to human love–one must ask whether it was originally intended to be read as such by its first audience. There are some indications within the book itself that suggest it was not…. There is no question that the book is a poetic drama of a lover’s longing for his beloved and of her willing complicity. To suggest, however, that this drama of two lovers is, in fact, the intent of the book is to confuse the poetic imagery with the purpose of the poem.

He is careful to say that this does not “justify the wholesale allegorizations of the poem that have characterized much of its history.” He admits the picture of the relationship of God/Christ with Israel/the Church, is a wonderful picture, but avers “there are no clues within the book itself to support such a reading. In the last analysis, one’s interpretation should come from within the book itself, and preferably from the clues given by the author himself.”

Sailhamer goes on to uncover several clues which do confirm that there is more to the Song than may meet the natural eye, however. He first points out from the overall structure of the book, that “the ‘reflections of love’ of the lover and the beloved do not progress and build in intensity in the course of the poem itself.” This is no average love story. He also argues that “though the poetic imagery comes close at times to suggesting the lover and his beloved have in fact come together and joined themselves in that union that they so longingly describe, the structure of the book itself suggests that has not yet happened.” Rather, the “lovers’ quest is an ideal, a longed-for desire that lies beyond their own grasp.”

Setting aside these preliminary observations for the moment, we come to Sailhamer’s focus on the “larger structural movement given to the poem by the author.” The repeated refrain throughout the book reads, “Do not arouse or awaken love until she [NIV, it] so desires” (2:7b; 3:5b; 8:4b). The meaning of this refrain comes from its connection to 8:5b where the author links it with the last statements made by the beloved (the woman): “Under the apple tree I roused you; there your mother conceived you, there she who was in labor gave you birth.” In this connection, Sailhamer sees an allusion to two other key biblical texts: the prologue of Proverbs (chapters 1-9), and the account of the Fall in Genesis 3.

If an illusion [sic] is intended to these passages, it suggests that “the beloved” in the Song of Solomon is intended to be understood as a personification of “wisdom” and Solomon, or “the lover,” is intended as a picture of the “promised seed” of Ge 3:15, i.e., the Messiah.

He goes on:

What appears to have happened in the composition of the Song of Songs is that the author has seen in this love-song the possibility of a portrait of Israel’s long-awaited messianic king. Solomon, the son of David (cf. 2Sa 7:16), whose quest for wisdom characterizes the central core of the book of Proverbs, speaks in the prologue of that book of binding wisdom to himself and on his heart (Pr 3:3; 7:1-3) in the same way that in this book [Song of Solomon] the beloved says, “Place me like a seal over your heart, like a seal on your arm” (8:6). Moreover, in Proverbs Solomon says, “Say to wisdom, ‘You are my sister'” (Pr 7:4), just as here the beloved says, “If only you were to me like a brother” (8:1). An extended comparison of these two books suggests that these are not mere coincidental similarities of words and phrases, but rather a deliberate “inter-textuality,” or allusion of one text to another. Such verbal links and allusions between the personified Dame Wisdom in the book of Proverbs and the young beloved in the Song of Songs invite our attempts to see a larger purpose behind this love song. I have suggested that such a purpose is to be found in the growing messianic hope found in these sections [i.e. the Wisdom Literature] of the OT.

Thus far then, Sailhamer has shown “the Song of Songs is intended as a portrait of the promised Messiah’s love for divine wisdom.” He goes on:

The Messiah is here pictured by Solomon, and “wisdom” is personified by the young and beautiful beloved. Throughout the poem the notion of love is idealized by the fact that its obtainment lies in the future. The quest for wisdom was aroused “under the apple tree” (8:4a), probably an allusion to the time of the Garden of Eden when the first woman “saw that the fruit of the tree was…desirable for gaining wisdom [and] she took some and ate it” (Ge 3:6). The obtainment of wisdom, however, will come only when one like Solomon comes to claim his beloved.

Sailhamer also sees the reference to “there your mother conceived you, there she who was in labor gave you birth” (8:5b) as suggesting that the author of the Song of Solomon “also understood both the promised ‘seed’ in Ge 3:15 and the reference to Eve as ‘the mother of all living’ (Ge 3:20) messianically.”

The result of these inter-textual links, “if… intended by the author of this book” then,

would place this song on a quite different level than that of an ode to human love. It would, in fact, give credence to the traditional attempts to see more in this poem than meets the eye. It would also provide some guidelines along which the symbolism of the book is to be read.

One final argument supports Sailhamer’s conclusions:

Finally, such a reading of the book would also provide needed insight into the underlying justification for the book’s inclusion into the OT. There is general recognition today that the time of the formation of the OT canon coincided with a significant surge in the hope of the imminent return of the messianic king. This book was included in the canon, one might say, because it was intended as a picture of the Messiah.

I am not one to discount seeing the Divine Author’s hand behind the human book as intentionally foreshadowing future covenant realities. I would see no problem in taking Sailhamer’s lead and affirming that this authorial intent was expanded in the wisdom of God, to allow the book as we have it in our Bible to suggest analogies between Christ and the Church. Think of the many songs that have been written culling from the poetic imagery of this Song of Songs.

Still, I had never seen Sailhamer’s reasoning for seeing a human authorial intent behind the Song of Solomon including an explicit Messianic connection. I’d be interested to know, if any of my readers knows whether Sailhamer has written more explicitly of this connection. The section on the Song is only a few pages long in the NIV Compact Bible Commentary. Along these lines, I’d also love to know what you think of this. Does this ring true to you? Or do you think Sailhamer is off base?

You can pick up a copy of this little book at Amazon.com or direct from Zondervan.