Copies and shadows: "equally related to celestial realities"

"If the painter first draws a sketch from the work of art that lives in his inner vision, and then projects the picture from its spiritual form of existence into the form of canvas and color, the sketch will be a prophecy of the finished painting, precisely because it was a shadow of the picture in concept. In a somewhat similar sense the author of Hebrews means by shadow (Heb. 10:1; crb) the sketch which God drew on the ceremonial canvas of the law of the eternal things that form the object of His vision in the world above.

In another passage (8:5) this is said in so many words. Here we read that the Old Testament priests serve that which is a copy and a shadow of the heavenly things. The term “copy” explains the term “shadow” and both are equally related to a celestial reality. But perhaps even more strikingly the author’s way of thinking in this respect re­veals itself in the peculiar use he makes of the ideas of type and antitype. He follows in this matter a terminology which is apt to be confusing to the ordinary reader, because it apparently is the opposite of that usually com­bined with these words.

We say, as a rule, that the Old Covenant has the type, the New Covenant the antitype...(but) the author of Hebrews distinctly tells us (9:24) that the Old Testament tabernacle was the antitype, not the type. The explanation is very simple. It lies in this, that antitype means copy, that which is fashioned after the type, and the Old Testament tabernacle was copied, fashioned after the tabernacle in heaven. Likewise the author also finds it significant that Moses was shown a type, a model of the sanctuary on the Mount (8:5, cf. Ex. 25:40). And all the Old Testament things in general are in this sense called copies of the things in the heavens (9:23). -- Geerhardus Vos, "Hebrews, Epistle of the Diatheke", The Shorter Writings, pp. 200, 201

The ultimate context for any given passage: the canon

“Uppermost among the presuppositions to be aware of is the concern for broad historical patterns or significant individuals (prophets, priests, kings, etc.), institutions and events which integrally formed a part of such patterns. Such a perspective should steer us away from illegitimately focusing on minutiae as typological foreshadowings (like the scarlet thread which Rahab hung out of her window in Joshua 2 being a type of Christ’s blood, or the trees which Israel cut down in the promised land as a type of Satan whom Christ would slay)...

“…typology by nature does not necessitate a non-contextual approach (although like any method it can be misused in that way), but it is an attempted identification of Old Testament contextual features with similar escalated New Testament correspondences (many evangel­ical scholars would want to restrict the identification of what Old Tes­tament texts are typological only to those so referred to by New Testa­ment writers, yet, on the other hand, they would not be willing to acknowledge these as non-contextual uses of the Old Testament)...

“One may not reply that this is an inappropriate method on the basis that the authorial intention of Old Testament writers, especially of historical narratives, would never have included such New Testament identifications. This is because we are also concerned with divine intention discernible from a retrospective viewpoint, which is fuller than the original human intention but does not contradict its contextual meaning. The larger context of canonical, redemptive history reveals how such narrow human intentions are le­gitimately and consistently developed by other biblical writers (and ul­timately the divine author) to include wider meaning, so that the whole canon of Scripture becomes the ultimate context for interpreting any particular passage.” -- G. K. Beale, The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts: Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New, p. 400

Confession: Christ, the eternal God, is the endpoint of all meaning and faith

A Confession of Faith

There had been a request to post the Confession of Faith that I drafted for my ordination. Steve Camp and AudienceOne were kind enough to offer space on their site for the paper.

For those curious about sources for my "plagiarism", the foundation for the CoF is the Clearcreek Chapel "Truths We Teach". The second layer is the Westminster Confession of Faith, adjusted for some of my personal exceptions. The third layer is the London Baptist Confession of 1646 (not 1644). A fourth document that I drew from, although not extensively, is the Bethlehem Baptist Elder Affirmation of Faith (now known as the Desiring God Affirmation of Faith). Once the general form had taken shape, various statements and clarifications were added from other sources. Among those I found very helpful: Turretin's "Elenctic Theology", Grudem's "Systematic Theology", Scobie's "Ways of our God", VanGemeren's "Progress of Redemption" (which at times, reads like a statement of faith), Vanhoozer's "Drama of Doctrine", Horton's "Covenant and Eschatology", and of course, Vos's "Pauline Eschatology".

Other "trivia":

The two sections that took up an inordinate amount of time were "The Covenants" and "The Law". I saved those two sections for last precisely for that reason. :-)

The section on "decrees" was intentionally developed as an apologetic against open theism. And the paragraphs on "justification" were developed as a primitive apologetic against The New Perspective on Paul and its de-emphasis on forensic justification.

Because systematic theology has a tendency to proof-text one's belief system, I consciously attempted to meld the thoughts together in a way that is more reflective of the redemptive historical hermeneutic and canonical-biblical theology. I'm not necessarily satisfied with that result, but it had to suffice. :-)

The heart of the confession is this:

"The Lord Jesus Christ, of whom Moses and the Prophets wrote (Gen. 3:15, 22:18, 49:10; Dan. 7:13, 9:24, etc.; Prov. 8:23), and the Apostles preached, He is the Son of God, the second person in the Trinity. Jesus Christ, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, is the brightness of His glory, etc. by whom He made the world (John 1:1,2,3), and who upholds and governs all things that He has made (Hebrews 1:3,8)... Jesus Christ is the mighty God (Isa. 9:6), The Word that was God (John 1:1), God over all (Rom 9:5), God manifested in the flesh (1 Tim. 3:16), the true God and eternal life 1 John 5:20, the first (Rev. 1:8), gives being to all things, and without Him was nothing made (John 1:2). He forgives sins (Matt. 9:6), is before Abraham (John 8:58), was and is, and ever will be the same (Heb. 13:8), is always with His people to the end of the world (Matt. 28:20), which could not be said of Jesus Christ, if He were not God (John 1:18). And of the Son He says, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever (Heb. 1:8).

"...Jesus Christ is made the mediator of the new and everlasting covenant between God and man, ever to be perfectly and fully the prophet, priest, and king of the Church of God for evermore (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 9:15; John 14:6; Isa. 9:6.7)...

"...The entire deposit of revelation in the Scriptures is Christological, so that all meaning and faith find their end in Christ, the source and subject of announcement, accomplishment and interpretation. Because the Scriptures are Christocentric, Christ is the primary organizing hermeneutical principle of the canon (John 5:39,40, Luke 24:25-27, 44-48). Christ and His gospel expounded in the New Testament is the definitive interpretation of the entire Old Testament."

Pastor Chad Richard Bresson

Another Calvinism quiz

Not satisfied with my score at Jeremy's site, I set about to find another quiz that more accurately reveals basic Calvinism instincts.

How good of a Calvinist are you? Click here: Calvinism quiz

Enjoy!

The triumph of a festival over THE Festival

"...the leadership of a supposed Christian congregation, a very large one, is saying that there is NO duty to worship God the Father in the Name of the Lord Jesus on the weekly celebration of the resurrection in late December. What may be called the secular understanding of Christmas – family get together for a holiday celebration – has triumphed and the assembly of Christians is closed down on that day which is this year, nothing less than the Lord’s Day. (And the same is happening in many similar churches of the Willow Creek type across the USA.)

"The practice of being user-friendly, relevant and “with it” has here clearly triumphed over the clear teaching of the New Testament... (these churches) are so committed to Christmas as a public holiday and general family get-to-together that they are ready to close down their church on the festival day, even if that day is the day of days, the festival of the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead." Peter Toon, When Christmas triumphs over the Lord’s Day.

"It's just a cultural construct"

O come, all ye (well-heeled) faithful

Postmodernity's infection is not exclusive to evangelicals. The justification for selling church pews to the highest bidder (which itself is not a new practice) from the Rev. Thomas Margevicius, instructor of sacramental theology and liturgy at the St. Paul Seminary School of Divinity, is right out of the "emerging" textbook in undermining propositional truth: "How certain are we of how God believes we should act?" he said. "God comes in unexpected ways and continues to do so."

God may come in unexpected ways but that does not mean that we are uncertain about what God expects from us in worship. "What God believes" is not an unknown. He has revealed himself in His Son and His text so that we can be certain, not only about what we believe, but about what God believes. For starters: didn't James warn us about the temptation to give the rich a prime spot in the assembly?

I'm surprised that the Star Tribune was able to find an evangelical who would question the practice. After all, the only thing missing from this mass is a multi-million dollar Chevy sponsorship.