00:00
00:00
00:01
Transcript
1/0
of the covenant promises in the
coming of Jesus Christ. And the main point that I want
to make is indicated by the main headings of the outline here.
Christ is the Lord of the covenant. He is the Lord of the Psalms,
and he is also the servant of the covenant. He comes as the
servant of the Lord. So that What we are forced to
recognize from the New Testament is that the Lord Jesus Christ,
worshipped and adored in the New Testament, is the Lord of
the Old Testament. And I noted here the kurios of
the Psalms, the septuagint use of kurios to translate mainly
to translate Yahweh, that designation of the Lord in the New Testament
is taken in the sense in which the New Testament uses Lord,
that is chiefly for Jesus Christ. And just one example that I would
call your attention to before we look at this outline more
closely is a very remarkable instance of this that I was bringing
out to the First Peter class last semester. In the third chapter
of First Peter, Peter writes in verse fourteen, even if you
suffer for righteousness sake, blessed are you, and fear not
their fear, neither be troubled, but sanctify in your heart Christ
as Lord. Now there he's quoting from the
eighth chapter of Isaiah, and in the eighth chapter of Isaiah,
Isaiah tells us not to fear what the people fear. Verse 12 of
Isaiah 8, say not a conspiracy concerning all were of this people
say a conspiracy, neither fear you their fear nor be in dread."
And you see, Peter quotes that. He says, Don't fear their fear,
nor be troubled. He's quoting from Isaiah. And then Isaiah goes on to say
in the thirteenth verse, The Lord of hosts, him shall you
sanctify, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. don't fear what the nations fear,
but fear the Lord. And Peter quotes that, but he
makes an interesting change. In the Septuagint, it says, fear
the Lord himself, and it uses altan, fear him. And Peter, when
he quotes it, he says that too, fear him, And then he adds an
explanation, the Christ. Fear the Lord, the Christ. So the Old Testament, fear the
Lord, Peter, fear the Lord, the Christ. But it's not just fear,
it's the word sanctify, set apart, sanctify the Lord. And we were
talking about that yesterday, what it means to sanctify God. See, to sanctify God is to acknowledge
His holiness, to acknowledge His Deity. You don't sanctify
God by making Him holy, you sanctify God by praising Him that He is
holy. And so, what does it mean then
to sanctify the Lord? It means to recognize His Deity,
right? That's exactly what it means.
don't fear what men fear, but recognize the deity of the living
God." And Peter takes that, and he says it, he quotes it, but
then, so you'll know exactly what he's talking about, he adds,
uh, the Christ. Sanctify the Lord, the Christ. So, that's a very explicit reference
in the New Testament that shows how the New Testament authors
understand and interpret the old. They freely and regularly
think of Christ as the Lord of the Old Testament, the kurios,
the one who reveals himself to us. Now this doesn't of course
deny their recognition of the Father. They recognize the Father
and address their prayers to the Father, but they also recognize
the Son as being true God, as being the one who is the Lord.
I don't think that 1 Peter verse has received anything like the
amount of attention that it deserves. It's one of the most overwhelming
passages in the New Testament showing the deity of Christ. And the more so in the fact that
even the critics often tend to recognize the authenticity of
1 Peter. Well, if Peter wrote this, Peter,
who had been in the fishing boat with Jesus, Peter, who had had
him have Sunday lunch at his house, and all that, and yet
he identifies him with the covenant Lord of the Old Testament. You
know, it's just absolutely astonishing, and of course it can be only
because of not only what Jesus had done in the sight of Peter,
that he could still the storms with a word, he could bring all
the fish of the lake to one spot if it was a word, he could say
to Lazarus, come forth, and he came forth. Not only the power
that Jesus showed, but the revelation that Peter had received from
the Father. Flesh and blood is not revealed
this unto you, but my Father which is in heaven. Only by the
grace of God could Peter come to such a conclusion. So, Christ
is the Lord of the Old Testament. So then, yes? What's your answer
to the fact that the text of the Testament includes Christ?
In that passage? Oh, that the reading is well
attested. Yes. And again, it's much easier to
understand how it would be dropped out than how it would be put
in. But the manuscript evidence for
it is good also. No, you don't get anywhere trying
to separate out different names. It's a conceptual thing. not nominalistic. It's not that
where you find Abinai, it's Jesus, and where you find Yahweh, it's
the Father. It's nothing like that. It's
just that because Jesus is seen to be God, because he is the
Lord, therefore, references in the Old Testament to the Lord,
from a New Testament perspective, are references to the Triune
God. So they apply to Jesus as the Son of God as well as to
the Father. I confess my transgressions to
the Lord." Are we to, from David's perspective, is he thinking,
or can we ask the question, is he thinking of God the Father
there, or is he thinking of the Son to come, or is it just the
fact that the Lord will provide that based on his sacrifice? Certainly in the, you know, in
the mind and thought of the Old Testament saints, they're not
thinking in a Trinitarian way. The amazing thing is that it's
revealed that David, well as Christ himself argued, that David
sees his son as Lord, you know, in a remarkable way. That's as
far as David understood it, no doubt. David didn't have an explicit
doctrine of the Trinity, but nevertheless, when one thinks of the Lord,
the New Testament writers recognize that it's not exclusively the
Father who's being thought of, but the Triune God. So if we're
preaching like Psalm 32 did, we couldn't say that he foresaw
Jesus as the Messiah, but that he recognized that God would
provide forgiveness through Jesus. Yes, but my point is, the New
Testament writers, because they do identify curious in the Septuagint
with Jesus quite freely and fluidly, that we need to recognize that
Christ the Son is revealing himself in the Old Testament. See, the
mistake that's often made is to suppose that the God of the
Old Testament is the Father. And that the Son doesn't put
in an appearance until the incarnation. And that's not the New Testament
perspective. The New Testament perspective
is that the Son is from all eternity. And that when you say Lord, you're
thinking of really the triune God. And therefore you can make
it explicit with reference to the Father, or to the Son, or
to the Spirit. And the way in which you make
it explicit is often in terms of the appropriateness of the
divine economy. That we learn from the language
of the Bible that certain aspects of the work of salvation are
customarily referred to the Father and others to the Son and others
to the Spirit. Not, of course, with a rigid
exclusivity, but with a generalized application. So you do think
of the Father in certain situations, obviously. When you think of
the account of Mount Moriah, God commanding Abraham and all
that, you naturally think more readily of the Father. When you
think of the theophany to Joshua, where the captain of the Lord's
host comes with a drawn sword, you think more readily of the
Son. But it's the triune God who's
in view. And you see that in Hebrews,
for example, in Hebrews 1, 10 to 12, there's a reference to Psalm
102, 25 and following. Now, there's nothing in Psalm
102, 25 and following that would make you think of that as a messianic
passage. It's just a celebration of God's
work as creator. But the author of Hebrews doesn't
hesitate to pick that passage up and to quote it. Thou, Lord, in the beginning
didst lay the foundation of the earth, the heavens of the work
of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou continuous. They shall all wax old as does
a garment, and as a mantle shalt thou roll them up as a garment.
And they shall be changed, but thou art the same, and thy years
shall not fail. Oh, come on, here's a description
of deity in the strongest terms, that as over against all of creation,
as over against all of time and space, that it can all be rolled
up, but God's years never fail. And yet the author of Hebrews,
without batting an eye, applies that to Jesus. And does so in a string of quotations
which include explicitly messianic passages. Thou art my son, this
day have I begotten thee. Now, you know, how can he do
that? How would he not expect to be challenged at once? You
know, here are people being tempted to go back to Old Testament ordinances,
and he's showing how much, being tempted to go back and worship
angels, for example, and he's showing how much greater Christ
is than the angels. And he just, right, with no shifting
of gears, he quotes not only Messianic passages, but passages
about the eternity of God the Creator, and applies it to Christ. Well, how does he do that? Well,
because Christ is the Curios of the Old Testament. He's accustomed
to thinking of Christ as the Lord. And what's said about the
Lord applies to Christ, because Christ is divine. Now, you know, quite apart from
the theological truth of that, just the just the observation
of what the author's doing is instructive, you know? It shows
how Christ was thought of in the apostolic age. I know that you see the force
of that because it's not only that he thinks that way, it's
that he expects other people to think that way. Otherwise,
he never would have used that passage if he knew right away
they'd blow the whistle and say, of course, that's about the father,
that's not about the son, and so on. But that problem doesn't
even occur to him because he's so accustomed to thinking of
Christ as the Lord in the psalms. Now, all right, this gives you
a lot of problems in preaching. because it opens up too much
richness for you to handle. Because you get Christ in the
Psalms not just once, but twice most of the time. See? The Lord is my shepherd, I shall
not want. Well, who is the Lord who's your
shepherd? Well, of course, Christ. John
10 teaches that. Jesus claims that one. He says,
I am the good shepherd. He's the true Shepherd. He's
the Divine Shepherd. And He and His Father are one.
How does He get to be the Shepherd when God's the Shepherd, the
Father's the Shepherd? Well, because He and the Father
are one. So, of course, He's the Shepherd.
If the Father's the Shepherd, He's the Shepherd. So, He is
the Shepherd. The Lord is our Shepherd. All
right. But, He leads me through the valley
of the shadow of death. I will fear no evil. Thou preparest
a table before me in the presence of mine enemies, anointest my
head with oil." Well, who is the Lord's anointed? Well, of
course, Christ as the servant, right? So, when you look at Psalm
23, you can see Christ as the Lord of the psalm, the shepherd,
but you can also see Christ as the servant of the psalm, the
greater David. The psalm is written by David,
and Jesus is David's greater son. And so it is Jesus who uses
this psalm too, you see. It's Jesus who can not only say,
I am the shepherd, but Jesus who can say in his incarnate
nature, the Lord is my shepherd. It's Jesus who can say that he
will be led through the valley of the shadow of death and yet
fear no evil, that God is with him. It's Jesus who can say,
Thou preparest the table before me in the presence of my enemies.
And the Gospels sort of call attention to that when they talk
about the dinner that's prepared for Jesus in Bethany when he's
wanted in Jerusalem, ready to kill him in Jerusalem. But in
the presence of his enemies, God prepares a table before him,
and Mary anoints his feet. Thou preparest a table before
me, thou anointest my head with oil. So Mary anoints him, and
he is God's anointed. You see, now, all right, I said
it gives you a lot of problems. You want to have unity in a sermon.
You certainly don't want a formula where you say every good Christocentric
sermon has two parts. One, Christ is the Lord. Two,
Christ is the servant. But you do want to think that
through when you look at a psalm, don't you? Psalm 24. Who shall ascend into the hill
of the Lord? Who shall stand in His holy place?
He that has clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up
his soul to vanity, nor sworn deceitfully. Who is the righteous
one who can ascend into the hill of the Lord? Who comes up to
worship in God's holy hill? Why, the righteous one. Well,
who is the righteous one? Jesus Christ. So you want to
answer that question. Who is it that will ascend into
the hill of the Lord? The answer is Jesus. And we can
ascend only because He ascends. But then you read some more and
you find out another question. Who is the King of Glory? Who
is it that comes triumphant after the battle? Lift up your heads,
O ye gates, even lift them up, ye everlasting doors, and the
King of Glory shall come in. Who is this King of Glory? Well,
you can answer that question too, can't you? Who is the King
of Glory? Jesus is, of course. Where has
he been that he's returning? Well, he's returning triumphant
from the great deliverance, from the great battle of deliverance.
Lift up your heads, O you gates. Lift up the eternal gates of
heaven. The King of Glory is returning
triumphant after he's overcome sin and death for us. So, see, in Psalm 24, it's very
neat, you might say. The first half of the psalm presents
Christ as the servant, the second half of the psalm presents Christ
as the Lord, God himself, the victor. Now, well, Of course, just a
point. When you go through the Old Testament,
the great problem is the sin of Israel, right? And they have
broken the covenant, and they deserve only the curse of the
covenant. So how is the salvation of the covenant ever going to
come? The answer always is, God's going to come. God will come. He will judge. He will deliver.
The shepherds of Israel aren't taking care of the sheep. So,
in Ezekiel, we're told that God himself will come and be the
shepherd, in Ezekiel 33. And the warriors of Israel aren't
overcoming the enemy and defending the people of God. And so, Isaiah
59, God says, I will put on my helmet of salvation, my breastplate
of righteousness, I will come, I will deliver the people. Well,
then in that connection, close in that connection, in the Ezekiel
passage and also in Isaiah, you see, it's the Lord who comes,
but it's also the servant who comes. In Ezekiel, it says explicitly
that not only will God be the shepherd, but David will be prince
among them. David will be the shepherd, see?
So there's a kind of identification, the coming of God, the coming
of the Messiah. And these two are more and more
drawn together in the Old Testament. God comes, the Messiah comes.
Drawn together so closely that Isaiah can write unto us, a child
is born unto us, the son is given, the government shall be upon
his shoulders, his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor,
the Mighty God, El Gabor, the Everlasting Father, the Prince
of Peace. So you see, God comes, the servant
comes, but then the servant is more and more identified with
the coming of God, as you look in the Old Testament. And then
in the New Testament, that's what's asserted to be the case,
that the servant who comes is God the Son. There's the praise of the Creator,
declarative praise that we saw yesterday. That declarative praise
is given to Jesus in Hebrews 1, 10 to 12. And so too, God
is praised as the Redeemer. Psalm 23 that I've just been
talking about in John 10. Psalm 68, the reproaches of them
that reproach thee are fallen on me. Well, David is the Messiah,
the anointed one of God, but he is the Redeemer who delivers
us. Ephesians 4. You know, in the
New Testament, this is so thoroughgoing that there are not only many
explicit references to Old Testament passages, there are also implicit
references in many places. For example, in Ephesians 1,
where Paul writes in verse 20, the strength of God's might which
he brought in Christ when he raised him from the dead and
made him to sit at his right hand in the heavenly places.
far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every
name that's named, not only in this world but also in that which
is to come, and put all things in subjection under his feet.
Now where in the Psalms, what in the Psalms is Paul alluding
to quite directly there, when he says, he sits in his right
hand, puts all things in subjection under his feet? Well, Psalm 2,
he's the son, but 110, that's right. Sit down on my right hand
until I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet, you see.
So, psalm 110 is being directly alluded to. and gave him to be
head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness
of him that fills all in all." Now, it's very interesting that
in the latter part of that passage, Paul is using the vocabulary
of Psalm 110 still. He's using it in quite a different
way, to be sure, but he's just been directly using the language
of the psalm, and he continues to use it more indirectly as
he finishes out the passage, because Psalm 110 speaks about the exaltation of Christ. He rules in the midst of his
enemies, in the day of his power, and he's talking about the power
of Christ, and then he says, he will drink of the He will
strike through the head in many countries. He will drink of the
brook in the way. Therefore, will he lift up the
head? So in the psalm, it's just an
expression for being raised up to victory after apparent defeat. Somebody's head lifted up, you
see. But Paul takes that language of the lifting up of the head,
and he says it's really true of Christ. He's made head over
all things. to the church, which is his body. And in the, in Psalm 110, verse
6, he will judge among the nations he will fill with bodies. He
will fill with bodies, literally. Now, that's translated with dead
bodies, but the word doesn't necessarily mean dead bodies
in the psalm. In Psalm 110, it just means bodies. So, he will fill with bodies,
and Paul takes that, he will fill with bodies, and he uses
that language he will fill everything for the sake of his body, which
is the fullness of him that fills all in all. So you have again,
filling, body, head shift, lifting up, same vocabulary. You see
how Paul thinks in these categories. Well, declarative praise, descriptive
praise. The name of God is is praised in the Psalms, and
the name of Jesus Christ is lifted up in praise to the Father. And
our singing is singing in our hearts, making a melody to the
Lord, who is the image of the invisible God. So there is not
only the declarative praise of God in the Psalms, there's also
the descriptive praise in terms of the name. But you see how
the New Testament takes the concept of the name. The name which is
to be praised, the name which is to be worshipped. The phrase
for worship in the Old Testament is to lift up the name, to call
upon the name. And in the New Testament, the
name that is called upon in worship is the name of Jesus Christ. The Christian Church is described
in terms of those who call upon the name of Jesus Christ. The... 1 Corinthians chapter 1. Verse
2, unto the church of God, which is at Corinth, even them that
are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all
that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place. In Genesis, when the line of
Seth is established, then men began to call upon the name of
the Lord. What are the Psalms doing? Calling
upon the name of the Lord. What are the New Testament saints
doing? Calling upon the name of the
Lord. Only the name of the Lord can now be specified. It's the
name of the Lord Jesus, the name that's above every name. Now, the only name that can be
above every name is the name of God. So, it's divine honor that's
given to the name, it's worship that is exercised in the name. So Christ, who is the image of
the invisible God, is therefore to be worshipped and adored.
You know, God is very jealous on this matter of images. God
won't allow any images to be made by his people, and they're
not to worship any image. And is it because no image is
possible? Is it because it would be blasphemy
for there to be an image? No, that's not it, because God
made man in his image. Adam and Eve are made in the
image of God. and in the likeness of God. So
we are made in His image. And then, if we're made in His
image, why can't we make images? Or, more explicitly, why can't
we make human images? Since we know we're made in the
image of God, why can't we duplicate other images made like us and
worship them? Adam's son was in his own image,
wasn't he? So can't we, if we can procreate
images, why can't we create images? Why can't we make something in
the image of God and worship it? God says no. The lid of the Ark of the Covenant
was the throne of God. It was the mercy seat. It was
where God was enthroned in light, in the midst of the darkness.
The only light there was the light of the divine presence.
So there's the presence of God between the church. It's not
that there's no image which may be worshipped. It's that God's
very jealous about being the one who provides and presents
the image. which personally I think that's
a good argument. It's certainly an argument against
pictures of Christ in centers of worship because everything
that Christ did was revelatory and every look on his face was
revelatory and therefore if we fictionalize appearances of Jesus,
it's like making up words that Jesus never said. So I don't
think we're free to do that. I admit there's a difference
between generalized pictures, Rembrandt's painting of Peter's
denial is a good case in point in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam,
There, Rembrandt shows Jesus looking at Peter. Well, it's
not any portrait of Jesus. Jesus is in the background of
the picture, but it's just a pictorial statement of what happened. I
find no problem with that. But when we set up pictures of
Christ for worship, so that you look at that face and worship
Allah Solomon, I have a lot of trouble with that. is that reference of the image
when he criticizes the modern psychology technique of visualizing
Jesus and Jesus' eyes and expressions and what Jesus is now saying
to me in my painful situation. And on good grounds, in my judgment,
yes. In fact, the Puritans worked
hard on that, to keep people from doing that sort of thing.
And now we have kind of reverse Puritanism, trying to build up
what the Puritans wanted to avoid. Well, okay. Christ is the Lord
of the Covenant. The declarative praise of the
Psalms can be applied to Him. The descriptive praise of the
Psalms, praising God for His attributes, that also can be
applied to Jesus Christ because it's in Jesus Christ that the
attributes of God are revealed to us. He that hath seen me hath
seen the Father. Why ask, show us the Father?
You've seen the Father. To see the righteousness of God,
the justice of God, the love, the mercy of God. We see it in
Jesus Christ. So when these attributes of God
are celebrated in the Psalms, we don't want to avoid their
manifestation in Jesus Christ. We want to be thinking about
that. And then Christ is also the servant
of the covenant. Yes? Before you go to the next
category, in your example of Paul and Ephesians being apparently
saturated with the language of Psalm 110, one of the objectives
is meditation on the Psalms, and maybe I'm anticipating a
full lecture, but have you given thought to what Paul may have
done to get to that point, or, in your own experience, what
you do. We're looking at it in a rather
academic, content way, but then there's the reflection, How do
you begin to think like that? What steps do you take to begin
to think up the Old Testament? You touched on it when you said
that the problem is created for each servant of the Lord. What about the solution? What
about how you invent that way so that you can do it? Well, maybe there are two questions
there. One, something that I think I
probably left hanging. I presented a kind of problem
that Christ is almost too much richness. Christ is present as
servant. He's present as Lord. How do you organize that material? And you certainly can't preach
both every time. I think it becomes more a matter
of doing what one must always do in preaching, ask what is
the thrust of the psalm? What is the focus of the psalm?
But what is the thrust and focus of the psalm in terms of the
New Testament fulfillment? If it's an attribute of God,
how is that attribute revealed in Jesus Christ? And what is the thrust of the
psalm itself? Does the psalm itself put more
emphasis on the Lordship? So, I think exegetically there's
work that can be done. It's also true, of course, that,
you see, I don't believe that one can maintain that all preaching
must be directly expository. that you only directly explain
a text of scripture. If one were to suppose that,
it becomes a bit awkward because every single sermon recorded
in the book of Acts is topical, not textual. There are Old Testament
passages referred to, but the theme of the message of Peter
at Pentecost is not an exposition of Psalm 16, for example. It's a declaration of what Pentecost
means. Now, of course, one could say,
well, the apostles were free to preach topically, but we are
not. But I don't think that can be
maintained either, because we're dealing with people in their
needs, in their situations, and explaining how the whole counsel
of God applies to them. Now, it's dangerous to preach
more topically because you want to keep it close to the Bible,
and topical preaching can go sadly astray. But my point is
that as you preach on, say, Psalm 23, Now you might think that normally
you would preach on that psalm about Christ as the shepherd
because of the New Testament application of it. But you might
find in terms of the needs of your people that you wanted to
show them that as they walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
Christ has gone before them. And in that particular setting,
you see, you might want to deal with an aspect of the text, rather
than the whole message of the text. And I'm just saying that's
legitimate. That text, Christ is the servant. Psalm 23 was a psalm he used
in his human nature, in his incarnation. It was a psalm he sang, just
as he sang the other psalms. So it's right, it's a fair exegesis
to say, what did this psalm mean in the incarnate life of our
Lord, as he would have used it. He's the true servant, he's the
true David, etc. And I hope I haven't made this
too long-winded and complicated, but what I'm defending is a proper
right to take a valid aspect of a text and to make that the
theme of the sermon. Now that's not a textual sermon.
A textual sermon preserves the balance of the text. It doesn't
take one aspect of it. It takes the whole picture. But
it's all right to preach an aspect if the aspect is valid. And of
course, you also ought to give some clue on what you're doing. If you preach Christ going through
the darkness ahead of you, then you mustn't forget to say he's
also the shepherd. But you're not preaching about
that. You're preaching about Christ as a servant. Yes, if you want to show an overview
of the whole richness of the psalm and do justice to it as
a textual unit, you really should bring out both, in my opinion.
Yes, it could be confusing. It's not easy. It could be done. But what I'm saying, the other
approach is also legitimate. To preach Christ as Lord from
Psalm 23, He is the Shepherd. And then you say, perhaps just
almost as an aside, but you say, don't forget that He was the
Lord of this psalm. is also the one who, like David
in his human nature, could himself pray this song and does go through
the valley of the shadow of death for us. See, you don't need to
make that along, but I think it's always good to make it a
statement, just so people realize that you're dealing with an aspect
of the text and not everything that it says. Yes? Well, you've
got my curiosity up here. Christ is a greater David than
Saul. What do you do when you do come to David confessing his
sin? Or do you deal with that later
on? Yeah, we'll talk about that some. Of course, what we do there
is to recognize that Jesus himself had no sin, but yet he was made
sin for us. He bore the guilt of that sin,
so that he cannot confess his own sin, but he does bear the
burden of all that confession of David's sins and ours before
the Father. You see, don't forget that Christ
can be anticipated in a negative way as well as in a positive
way. Saul, the first king of Israel, is an antitype of Christ
in the negative way. He's the disobedient king in
comparison to David, the man after God's own heart. David
sinned too, but David's basic orientation was one of covenant
faithfulness, while Saul's was one of of personal pride. And so don't forget that Christ
can be anticipated, well, Samson. See, how does Samson anticipate
Jesus Christ? Well, he does so because he's
the savior of the people of God. He judged Israel. one of the
saviors sent by God, raised up by God, to be a redeemer of Israel. And he did save Israel. He saved
more in his death than in his life, interestingly. So even
in his death, he was the savior of Israel. Well, what's the main
point of Samson? The main point is, God can save
by one. See, God's showing that it's
He who saves. That's the whole point in the
Judges. God's the Saviour and He raises up human instruments
to show that He's the Saviour. And with Gideon, He shows He
can save with 300. But with Samson, and of course
300 is a small number, he got rid of quite a few to have only
300 to save with, and then with Samson he shows that he can save,
he doesn't take 300, he can save with one. And Samson is the solitary
deliverer. So that the main point is clear,
God can save with one. God can bring down all the temple
of Dagon, you know, with the strength that he gives to one
deliverer. But Samson's life which is one
of disobedience, of sexual sin, of... Well, he's a playboy. He's full
of wisecracks and one-liners and likes the girls and, you
know, he's... He's not a faithful steward of
what he's received. He's a very unfaithful steward,
so he becomes a type almost in spite of himself. But, in fact,
his deliverances are almost all in spite of himself. When he picks up the gates of
Gaza and carries them up to the heights of Hebron, he wasn't
in Gaza for any good purpose, you see, but the Philistines
catch him there. And yet his deliverance, that
no gate can hold them in, that he can take up the gates and
put them up on the top of the mountain. It's so clear to show
that God's saviour can't be kept in the gates of death, can't
prevail against him. He can pick him up and put him
in the height of heaven. You know, so God's showing you
all the time his power to save, but it's always in spite of Samson
rather than because of him. So Samson is a type of Christ,
but shows often in a negative way because you're struck by
the differences. Christ as the chaste and pure
and holy deliverer is over against Samson the impure and so on.
But still, many interesting analogies, you know, that Samson gives his
life at last that he might function as a judge. Of course, not only
that, even that is kind of mottled in Samson's Because even then
he has a one-liner at the end. Let me be avenged for one of
my two eyes, he said. Translators usually smooth that
over, but that's what he said. Let me be avenged for one of
my two eyes when I wipe out this whole assembly. Questioner 2 Can you see a sign
of Christ in Samson without form? You almost a lot of work to try to find it. I have never thought of the type
of crime in the way you did, and I don't know of any new testament
scripture that points to that. How can you, without using almost
an allegorical kind of method, say whether this is a type of
crime? We had a little string of homicides
everywhere, in churches, in homes. Mmm, mmm, right. That's the point, yes it does.
No, no, seriously now, seriously, what's the message of Judges?
What's Judges all about? Is it just a record of interesting
ancient history? Is it a treasure house of the
history of Israel? Is it an interesting account
of the military exploits in the early days of Israel as the land
was not yet properly settled? Of course not. What is Judges
about? Read the book and what do you
see? Again and again and again the same point being hammered
on. The people are disobedient. God judges them. You know, it's
all in the setting and the background of covenant judgment. It goes
back to the covenant that God made with Israel in the desert.
You be faithful to me and I'll give you blessing. You be unfaithful
and I'll judge you. Well, they're unfaithful and
they get judged. And then again and again, what do they do? They
cry out to God for deliverance and He delivers them. And so
who are the judges? They're saviors. They're deliverers
of the people of God. What are they showing us? How
God delivers. That's the point. The point is,
God delivers, and the point is, God delivers in his own way,
and that his ways are not the ways of man. It's not by how
many, it's not by how mighty, it's by God's arrangement. And look at Samson, please. How about his birth? Here's an
angel to come to promise his birth. Such a fuss made about
Samson, see? Well, then why? Why, because
God's raising him up to be a deliverer. And how does Samson work his
deliverances? What's the point of all that?
By the power of the Holy Spirit, you see. Not by pressing iron. But by being filled with the
Spirit. I'm not saying he never pressed iron, but he probably
did. But the narrative doesn't talk
about that. It talks about the Spirit of
God coming on him, right? And when the Spirit of God comes
on him, nothing can hold him back. Well now, why does the
Lord want to tell us about a deliverer who can deliver the people of
God by the power of the Holy Spirit, and who has such strength
and power that nothing can stand before him, that he doesn't need
the armaments of men, he can go in the power of the Spirit.
Give him anything, give him a jawbone of an ass, and he can clean up
on a thousand of the enemy. It's a perfectly useless weapon,
anybody would think, but not in the hands of Samson. Why?
Because he's still with the Spirit, the power of the Spirit. So you
see, Samson is not different in terms of the structure of
redemptive history. Samson is not different from
David going against Goliath. David says to Goliath, you come
to me with all these armaments. Here's your spear like a weaver's
beam and all that type of thing. And David classifies the armaments
that Goliath has. And he says, you come to me with
all this, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts.
The God of the armies of Israel. And now the Lord of hosts, and
that phrase there, Jehovah Sabaoth, refers to the heavenly host,
you know, the host of the angels. So God, the Lord of the angels,
is the God of the armies of Israel. So Goliath, you're dead. Because,
not because I'm such an expert slingshot, you know, not because
I'm a dead aim with a sling, but because I come in the name
of the God of the armies of Israel. Don't you see, the theme is the
same. Samson with a jawbone, David
with a slingshot. What's the point of it? The point
of it is, it is a human skill, human might, human wisdom. It's
God's anointing, God's power, God's raising up deliverers.
And when God raises up a deliverer, then they're going to be delivered,
you know. Gideon, who's It's wonderful stuff, isn't it? I mean, these are not heroic
types. Read the Gideon story. He's no General Schwarzkopf. I mean, this guy needs help. You know, he's
just the youngest son and all that. Don't ask me to do anything
around here. Just let me beat out my little
wine press in secret. Let me alone, Lord, is his whole
approach. And, you know, the Lord has to
jack him up and give him a, you know, come near a tent and
listen and hear the story about the pancake falling and all that.
I mean, it takes all this to get him out there at all. And
then when the Lord tells him to send all these people home,
he just about passes out, you know. But what's he being shown? See, it isn't that he's a great
guy, it's that God will use him. But there's always that negative
side in there too, see, that God will give the deliverance
even through types like this. But it puts a question in your
mind all the time. How will God finally give the
deliverance, huh? Will God ever come up with something
better than Gideon? Will there ever come along somebody
better than Samson? Will there ever be And of course,
that's part of the narrative, isn't it? There is somebody better
coming. Who is it? David. He's a lot better. He's
a man after God's own heart. And all kinds of things happen
with David that never happened in the period of the judges.
David gets his kingdom consolidated, he defeats all the enemies, he
raises all the funds to build the temple so that God's name
can be in the midst of his people. David brings a wonderful transformation
in the history of Israel. And so these other judges, in
a way, are all kind of preparing for David. But then, you know,
is David going to be the best? Is this God's showcase saviour
now? Well, not really. Uriah the Hittite,
Bathsheba, shame, and David, the last part of David's life
under the cloud of his sin. So, then who's it going to be? Well, Solomon. David was a man
of war, Solomon's a man of peace. And what does Solomon want? He
wants the best thing a saviour or deliverer could want, wisdom.
He doesn't want riches or power or whatever. He wants wisdom.
He wants to know how to lead the people of God, and God gives
it to him. And so, surely Solomon's going
to be the great anointed one who will be the deliverer of
the people of God. But then, what do you see Solomon
doing? There he is, dedicating a shrine
to Chemosh, the god of the Moabites, on the Mount of Olives, of all
places, with his back to the temple that he built. So, God
in His mercy doesn't divide the kingdom in Solomon's day, He
doesn't do it for David's sake, not for Solomon's sake, but the
kingdom remains intact through the rule of Solomon, but then
that's over too. Now see, there are positive things
always. David, the victor, doing better than all the judges, pointing
to the fact that God's anointed is going to be a great victor.
Solomon, the man of peace, pointing to the fact that the royal reign
of the prince of peace is going to come. So both sides of Christ's
work are anticipated in David and in Solomon. But see, always
looking, always pointing forward, always saying it's coming. And
then the prophets are very explicit about it, you know, there's going
to come this prince, and sometimes it's just called David, but you
know it's not David resurrected, you know it's going to be David's
son. The line of the promise, the promise that God gave to
David in 1 Samuel. So this is going to come. And
then he comes. Please, what I'm trying to get
you to see is, this isn't an origin type exegesis. This is not making foolish connections
across the bottom of that diagram. This is going around the circuit.
This is saying, what did it mean that there was a deliverer like
Samson? Well, what it meant was, God
can save by one. Anointing one with his spirit,
he can be the deliverer. Well then, is there one through
whom God ultimately saves at last? Yes, that's all I'm saying.
I'm not saying that you look for every fanciful little detail. That's like trimming. You know,
I'm not insisting that you have to, I'm not coming at it by saying
Samson picks up a gate. Ah, gate. What's a gate? Oh,
New Testament, gates of hell. There you have it. Gates, gates,
gates. See, that would be an allegorical
approach. Now, I admit, I was pretty out
on the edges when I got that bit about the gate, and that's
probably what got you upset. And with some justification. I'm not going to try to push
that one. But I want you to get the main thought. I think the
Lord does put in little touches sometimes to remind us of things
like the gates of Gaza. Yeah. If I could amplify what
I believe your main point is, and you said a minute ago to
the other gentleman's question, learn to think this way, look
for these things in the Old Testament. So, if I understand you correctly,
you're saying that in every part of our reading, the broad picture
anyway, we should expect to find, in fact, definitely expect to
find some Manifestations of that fulfilled in the New Testament
in Christ. And even going further, every psalm individually, we
ought to also be able to see and find specific manifestations
in the New Testament fulfilled in Christ. Is that correct? Yes,
I think there are 150 messianic psalms in the book of Revelation. No, what I'm saying is they're
all in the context of redemption, aren't they? And if Christ is
the Lord and he's the servant and they're all covenantal psalms
and they're all talking about the Lord and the servant, then
Christ is probably there twice most of the time. So it isn't
a question of finding them at all, it's a question of which
aspect of the revelation ought to get the emphasis because of
that particular psalm. My question, and I think several
questions that came after it, are, I think, related to the
problem. We've collectively been trying
to think or to learn to think the way the Old Testament people
thought. And what did it mean to them? Then we come over to the New
Testimony, and we get our theology, and we're jumping from the event
to truth, and we are not accustomed to thinking in terms of history.
And so we end up with When I come to the twenty-third Psalm, I
want to learn what a shepherd does. What do the shepherds do?
And they say, how does the shepherd think? And I get all that, and
then I jump over to the New Testament. I don't think we've been trained
to think we've been, to think of redemptive history as a part
of the exegesis. You know, even in higher criticism,
there's some contribution that's been made these days in redaction
criticism, for all the problems that there are with redaction
criticism, at least redaction criticism. has is not well unfortunately
it often assumes source criticism behind it which is too bad but
redaction criticism is looking at the final product looking
at the what we now have in our Bibles and it's saying what was
the editor trying to say in this final putting together of materials
Well, when they ask the question that way, they often get into
material that's helpful to us. Because they're asking, what
does the whole narrative mean? Not just what did some Yahwistic
or Elohistic source, or what did the Deuteronomists mean,
etc. But it's the thrust of the whole thing. What's it saying
now? And that's just a way of saying,
really, what I'm really after in pushing this, is that we think
theologically. I mean, David does, doesn't he?
To Goliath? He doesn't say, I'm not afraid
of you, even though you're so big. He says, it's a theological
issue. You come in the name of the false
gods, I come in the name of the true gods. The whole Bible, not surprisingly,
is theological. I look at that and think, is
it possible to travel to space in a car with a sound? And one
of those questions, a friend of mine, we were in a group,
we were in a session long ago now, and part of the question
was, let's take, for example, sound 2. That's a little bit
different issue when you say Psalm 2, because it raises this
question, does David...
Preaching Christ from Psalms #4
Series Westminster Seminary CA
Series given at Westminster Seminary California
| Sermon ID | 12190724590 |
| Duration | 1:01:32 |
| Date | |
| Category | Teaching |
| Bible Text | Psalm |
| Language | English |
Documents
Add a Comment
Comments
No Comments
© Copyright
2026 SermonAudio.