Jesus comes to the Pharisees. Who are the Pharisees? They are us. Pharisees are the evangelicals. They are the faithful in Israel.
The Sadducees were the liberals, the zealots were the political activists and the Essenes were the dropouts, and Jesus doesn’t fool with them at all.
More Thoughts on Prophetic Cauldrons
“Out of the frying pan into the fire.”
The structure of Ezekiel follows the “soundwaves” pattern found in a great deal of the Bible, particularly the prophets. The Lord speaks His word as liturgy from the Most Holy Place, it is pre-enacted by the prophet in a new “Holy Place” (from outside the city – see Rags to Robes) in some terrifying judgments as object lessons (see Liturgy as Prophecy), and then the same judgments are played out in greater detail in the “Outer Court.” All three sections are heptamerous, and in these three areas we have Word, Sacrament (the prophet as a kind of new “acting” High Priestly mediator – see How to Read the Prophets), and Government.
The book of Ezekiel begins with this pattern, so we have the prophetic cauldron turn up three times. Each cycle takes us through the Tabernacle speeches (Exodus 25-31) which follow the Creation Week, so this is a process of new Creation for the anointing of Ezekiel and of de-Creation for the old Tabernacle of Solomon’s Temple. It was decayed and ready to vanish away.
The Lord “called” Adam as Day 1, giving him one law (light). He divided him as Day 2 and built Eve as a Holy Place, a firmament to be filled with stars (godly offspring). As Day 3 He made a new covenant and married them, the first nearbringing. Adam as the Bronze Altar (dust elevated from the Land) then became the first High Priest, the Table. In his obedience, together they prefigured totus Christus.
Day 4 follows. As Adam represented singular light, Eve was plural light. She was the holy fire on the altar, the glory of Adam. [1] Day 4 is the Lampstand. Day 4 is also the wilderness. If Eve was seduced, it was because Adam’s priesthood was corrupt. There was strange fire on the altar, the biblical theme of harlotry. In the garden, the strange fire was the false lightbearer who filled the “firmament” with darkness.
With that background, look at how this plays out in Daniel 7. It also supports James Jordan’s assertion that the fact that the beast’s body is “feminine” carries some importance. [2] The false church is the body of totus diabolus, the locust swarm gathered as a tabernacle by the fallen head. Daniel seven is the history of the first century church as the Woman in the wilderness. But the faithfulness of the new Adam brought an end to the priesthood of the sons of Aaron.
Roman Catholics like to remind us Protestants that the Reformation’s sola scriptura has caused unmitigated doctrinal division. Interpretation must be done in community by people who know what they are talking about.
In his talk this week (see previous post Heliocentric Preaching), Doug Wilson humourously described the “just me and my Bible” people who fail to realise that the Bible itself calls us to theology in community. We all need teachers, and the Bible is written the way it is so we are forced into some sort of discipleship. Left alone with our Bibles, we are all Ethiopian eunuchs.
So regarding sola scriptura and interpretive authority, I kind of agree with the Catholics! It has always been something done by the church community.[1]
I’m not opposed to apparently weird and wonderful ideas from the Bible (anyone who visits this blog knows that), as long as they can be backed up repeatedly from Scripture. This is inevitably typological, and this is why I take issue with infant baptism. As I have written elsewhere here, the entire Old Testament typological freight train is against it, but I just want to hammer one point here, and I have a silver hammer.
“According to I Chronicles chapter 15, 16:4-6, 37-43, David rearranged the Levitical priesthood into 24 courses (orders); he assigned 16 courses to Eleazer, and 8 courses to Ithamar. This rearrangement was chartered because of a population explosion in David’s reign.” [1]
More evidence for a human government installed in heaven in AD70 (the firstfruits church). If the rebuilt Tabernacle (the Tabernacle of David [2]) prefigured both the restoration of the Jews after the captivity (which is what Amos is actually referring to) and the Jew-Gentile church, what could David’s rearranged priesthood mean typologically?
The New Covenant is not about salvation. It is about dominion. Before you call in the inquisitors, have a look at this diagram from my book:
“For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.” Matthew 24:21-22
The context of Matthew 23-25 is very clearly first century. Many interpreters are forced to put gaps and parentheses and qualifiers into Jesus’ warnings because they won’t recognise what happened in the last years of the Old Covenant.[1]
Revelation is laced with the Dominion pattern like brandy through a Christmas pudding. As a literary structure, its identification highlights some interesting things.
“…the Egyptians are men, and not God; And their horses are flesh, and not spirit.” Isaiah 31:3
One of the three laws for Israelite kings was a command against multiplying horses and chariots—especially Egyptian ones. Solomon’s horse trading was, for a nation with a miraculous escape ON FOOT, in the eyes of the Lord, just like the faithless behaviour of the Hebrews in the wilderness. It’s always better to dwell in a tent with God than in a palace with the devil. Solomon’s kingdom of chariots and oppression became a new Egypt. By the end of the era, the pigs ruled the farm.
Bible Matrix blog
