Matthew 6:25-34

 ““Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink, or about your body, what you will wear. Isn’t there more to life than food and more to the body than clothing? Look at the birds in the sky: They do not sow, or reap, or gather into barns, yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Aren’t you more valuable than they are? And which of you by worrying can add even one hour to his life? Why do you worry about clothing? Think about how the flowers of the field grow; they do not work or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these! And if this is how God clothes the wild grass, which is here today and tomorrow is tossed into the fire to heat the oven, won’t he clothe you even more, you people of little faith? So then, don’t worry saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear?’ For the unconverted pursue these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But above all pursue his kingdom and righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. So then, do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Today has enough trouble of its own.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6‬:‭25‬-‭34‬‬

So much more difficult to apply than understand what Jesus was saying. Could do background study on socio-economic status of those in northern Galilee. They did not have much. 

These verses fit into wisdom/rabbi tradition. Again, Jesus emphasizes the goodness of the Father. He loves His children and longs to provide for them. He will not forget their needs. 

Are there ever followers of Jesus that suffer from hunger or lack of shelter? Probably, and it would be interesting to have a conversation with them. Their perspective would be enlightening. But that’s still not the point here. God provides for His children, generally, universally. Yes, I would still make this a promise, because it’s emphasized in other places of the Bible, too, but I also allow for experience to inform theology. 

Cognitive dissonance is my phrase of the decade I think. Two things can both be true even though they seem contradictory. I can hold things in tension pretty well. The world is an awful place sometimes, but I can have confidence in God’s power and provision and love.

My responsibility is not to worry. An unbelieving mind/heart is concerned about my needs. My desires. What gets me through the day. 

Jesus says to focus on the kingdom. This is a realm. A real realm where Jesus reigns. This is worth a book, but others have done it. Can’t go extensive now. Probably a theology blog later about the already /not yet nature of the kingdom. It’s invisible now but visible later. It’s growing like a mustard seed (not in a post millennial kingdom sense). 

We pray for the kingdom to come and advance on earth.  The church is not the kingdom, but we are inhabitants of the kingdom. Israel is not the kingdom but believing Israel is also part of the church. Jesus reigns over all and we will see that reign completely enforced one day. 

How do we seek it? How do we focus on it? How do we pursue it? And righteousness…a classic Matthew term. The sermon on the mount will tell us. The law of love, both for neighbors/enemies. A higher morality. Matthew will discuss a commitment to discipleship. But all of this assumes a lack of commitment to me and my needs. Can’t have both.

For more reflection on a personal story of struggles with worry, see Chapter 6 in Too Small to Understand Why.

Acts 1:1-11

“I wrote the former account, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach until the day he was taken up to heaven, after he had given orders by the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen. To the same apostles also, after his suffering, he presented himself alive with many convincing proofs. He was seen by them over a forty-day period and spoke about matters concerning the kingdom of God. While he was with them, he declared, “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait there for what my Father promised, which you heard about from me. For John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” He told them, “You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.” After he had said this, while they were watching, he was lifted up and a cloud hid him from their sight. As they were still staring into the sky while he was going, suddenly two men in white clothing stood near them and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand here looking up into the sky? This same Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will come back in the same way you saw him go into heaven.””

— ‭‭Acts‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬-‭11‬‬

 I’m sure there are arguments against Luke’s writing of both Luke-Acts, but the same style of writing, recipient, continuation of themes and narrative—and tradition—are enough for me. We don’t know much about Theophilus. 

Connections between Acts and Luke: “former account,” Theophilus, Acts 1:4-5 references John the Baptist, ascension in both Luke 24 and Acts 1; Acts 1:2 recounts Jesus’ instruction about the Spirit.

Luke confirms his research efforts to Theophilus. This does not mean Luke acted independently—or that the other gospel writers didn’t do research or acted solely as eyewitnesses. If anything Luke gives insight into how authors did their work. Everyone used sources. Everyone copied from each other and edited as needed to get their point across. This does not affect their veracity or honesty. This is how all gospels in that day were written.

“Former” could mean “first” but this would possibly imply a third volume. Probably too much to put onto a word, so “former” is more appropriate.

“Through the Spirit” in v. 2 probably modifies Jesus’ instruction, not the choosing. There is no mention of the Spirit when Jesus chooses the disciples, but the Spirit is repeatedly part of their mission in Acts. He is the means of their enablement.

Jesus spoke about the kingdom of God for 40 days. NET makes important point that Jesus was not seen throughout the 40 days, just at various locations and situations. Not a continuation of His ministry. He was most likely explaining (again) why things happened the way they did, and showing them how it was “foretold” throughout their history/scriptures. After all, this is the content of their sermons throughout Acts.

They have to wait in Jerusalem for the Spirit, because without Him they can do nothing. But mentioning the Spirit makes them think of the kingdom. Spirit is part of the kingdom according to OT texts: Jer 31:27-34; Ezekiel 34-37; Isa 2; Amos 9: 11-15. One important point for any millennial debate is that Jesus does not deny their request. He simply postpones the answer. He changes the conversation.

There is debate over whether the terms “Israel” and “kingdom” change definitions as Acts progresses, but at least we can say that Acts extends the kingdom to the nations. Israel was supposed to the the means of representing God to the world. The focus is missional/ecclesiological/not eschatological.

Bock’s commentary makes a good point for v. 8 that the disciples probably heard “go to Jews in these regions.” Church wrestled with the Jew/Gentile relationship far beyond ch 10-11 of Acts.

Side note: Another reason Acts is a natural supplement to Luke is the geographical arrangement of the two together. Luke opens with the “whole word.” Jesus’ ministry has other regions (Galilee) then the last half of the book (9:59) he sets his face to Jerusalem. Acts 1 branches back out from Jerusalem to Judea to ends of the world.

Speeches in Luke-Acts always show continuity between OT and NT fulfillments. God’s plan is coming to completion. Luke uses phrase “must be” more than anyone else.

Back to v. 8: “power” —please, do all things holy, stop saying this is “dynamite.” Etymological fallacy. Last thing we need is more chaos from the gospel. Dunamis is the Greek word from where we get our English word dynamite, but we can’t read the meaning of modern English words back into Ancient Greek. That’s silly. Word studies are much more involved than that, but for my purposes here, the basic meaning is ability. We already said, the disciples could not do anything until the Spirit came.

Be witnesses: interesting distinction between noun and verb. Never really told to “witness.” But be “witnesses.” Disciples told of what they had seen and heard.

Ends of earth—of course, there are always more individuals and people groups that need to hear the gospel. But the purpose of Acts, both missionally and literarily, was fulfilled. The gospel went to Rome, and by the end of Paul’s life, he intended to get to Spain. Now apostles’ descendants have gone much much further. It did reach ends of earth.

Ascension is a weird topic still. Obviously, it’s essential to the gospel, because Jesus must be exalted to the Father’s side. This is further proof of His vindication. That’s the most important part—and clouds triggers a reference to Daniel 7 and the son of man. Riding on clouds and approaching the Ancient of Days. I think that’s the key, not Jesus playing hide and seek or floating into space.

Matthew 20:20-28

“Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to him with her sons, and kneeling down she asked him for a favor. He said to her, “What do you want?” She replied, “Permit these two sons of mine to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom.” Jesus answered, “You don’t know what you are asking! Are you able to drink the cup I am about to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” He told them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right and at my left is not mine to give. Rather, it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” Now when the other ten heard this, they were angry with the two brothers. But Jesus called them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles Lord it over them, and those in high positions use their authority over them. It must not be this way among you! Instead whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave – just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.””

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭20‬:‭20‬-‭28‬‬

 Parallel passage in Mark has James and John coming directly to Jesus, but we can ascribe the difference to gospel genre. The plural pronoun “you” in Jesus’ response shows that He knows this question originates with them. Having a mediator doesn’t change that. This is not the same thing as inserting their mother into Mark’s account. Still need to accept the difference and see how each gospel is using their details. Need to research either the shame or honor or desperation that’s demonstrated here by having mother do the asking. 

What’s more important is that in both Matthew and Mark, this question comes after an announcement of Jesus’ death. The disciples simply don’t understand Jesus’ mission. They are hyper-focused on the affairs, systems, and methods of the world. They may slowly be learning from Jesus, but three years in—still seeking power, glory, and honor. We can find comfort in this—discipleship is a journey, and even they had failures. At the same time, we can learn from this, like every day. And the applications never end.

Drinking the cup—share in Christ’s sufferings. They would die for the mission of Jesus. James was one of the first martyrs in Acts. John (tradition) attempted to be killed, then exiled. Only the Father could give places of honor. Paul will say we are all co-heirs with Jesus. Unsure what other “seats” there actually are. Good place to search would be extra-biblical Jewish literature to see what they believed about places of honor in the future kingdom.

Of course, the rest of the disciples are angry with them. (Probably because they wanted the places of honor for themselves. “Why didn’t I think of asking Jesus that first?”) It’s not like they haven’t argued about who’s the greatest, shunned children from Jesus, sent away other disciples.

Jesus makes it plain as day. The rulers of Gentiles (ouch) use authority, might, power to take advantage of people, work up the ladder, abuse, harm, etc. And sometimes it’s masked as leadership. It cannot be this way among followers of Jesus. Obviously, it has happened millions of times throughout history, and it occurs every day. God, help us.

The way of Jesus is humility. The way of “victory” is surrender and service. The greatest person is a servant. Probably has no followers on social or likes or 500 members in church. Just faithful, humble servant who enjoys helping others. 

Jesus did not come to be served—insane, if we understood Him as God in flesh. He has the highest claim to honor and worship. 

Ransom: Word is a marketplace term for buying back something, specifically a slave. NT has a bunch of metaphors for how salvation works. They’re word pictures, and yet we still say they reflect reality as well. Still working through atonement and how Jesus’ death affected salvation for people. 

Ransom theory of atonement often says Jesus paid the price to Satan (see Lion, Witch, Wardrobe). Most consider this heresy, since Satan has no claim to souls and doesn’t make the rules. Paying the price to God would be buying back people from God for God???

NET simply says this speaks of Jesus paying the price we owed, acting as a substitute, etc. There’s got to be more to that, and these terms are only helpful in the larger narrative. No event is so simple, yet so complex and confusing as the atonement/crucifixion. 

Yet, it is the ultimate example of sacrifice. There’s more to it in this passage but that is a key takeaway considering the initial request.

Immigration: A Case Study in “Third Way” Approach

Obviously, I have no expertise on this topic. I am no lawyer, politician, or historian. I am not a big picture type thinker, or a grand scale problem solver. That’s not my goal.

I’m not going to give a survey of the history of U.S. immigration, because that gets into the debates of our origin, and those are for another time.

The phrase “third way” has developed from groups of believers that feel “politically homeless” or even “religiously homeless” in light of recent events. Due to increasing polarization between conservatives/progressives/liberals or Democrats/Republicans, many proposed solutions are seen as insufficient. Conclusions are not as simple as a platform or this or that policy. So a “third way” shows that we belong to Jesus’ kingdom, and we answer to His sense of morality/ethics, His law of love, not necessarily what works best for any other group or agenda.

(Note: Tim Keller has recently posted about how this is technically a “fourth way,” since “third options” are usually a compromise between left or right sides of the spectrum. A consistently Christian approach is no compromise. It exists, as Keller proposes, off the spectrum and answers to no one but Jesus.)

This kind of thinking is ripe with tension for the believer. It’s not easy. There are no simple solutions, but we have to be okay with this. It requires listening to those around us, thinking outside our own echo chambers (whether a favorite news channel, a group of friends, or the worst—just our own minds), and applying biblical ethics in an ever changing culture.

The topic of immigration allows us to see this tension. Again, I have no stats. I haven’t been to “the border.” And even if I had, I would only be one other eye witness. Hundreds of people have thousands of perspectives of the “immigration crisis,” based on their own biases. 

So let’s start easy. Do I want tons and tons of illegal drugs flooding through the nation? Absolutely not. I understand the opioid problem (though probably not to its fullest extent). Do I want to pay more taxes than “required,” because we have more people living in the country than registered? Not exactly. Yea, that’s pretty frustrating. Can we compare demographics regarding crime in cities and who commits them and debate the dangers of immigration? Sure. The presence of crime and dangers as a result of illegal immigration are a real threat. 

Do I have any answers? Absolutely not. I already conceded that. I get the benefit of being a living room quarterback and critiquing everyone else’s proposals. And this is where the “third” or “fourth” way comes into play.

What is my standard for finding solutions? What would be my primary goals anyway? And do my goals as a follower of Jesus always align with (or are they sometimes in tension with) the goals of the state?

Something to chew on.

The state has goals of protecting its citizens. I firmly support that goal, though I am still in a position to critique the chosen methods. Yes, I want drugs to be minimal, crime to be minimal, and safety/security/prosperity of the country to be maximized.

But my highest goal is not to honor the state. My priority is the kingdom. I’ve lost count of how many passages discuss loving the foreigner, the outcast, the poor. I will argue for keeping families together at any and all cost. It’s biblical and follows the law of love. 

How can I do both? Most of the time it’s easy. I can vote certain ways. I can have conversations that honor all people. But there may be a time when tension surfaces, and I have to speak up for those in need. Those who are made in God’s image. Even those who also belong to the kingdom. 

The state has its role. I believe in it, and I support it. But when it either dishonors its intended function or oversteps into the kingdom’s domain, I have higher priorities. Jesus is king. 

1 Corinthians 15:50-58

“Now this is what I am saying, brothers and sisters: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I will tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a moment, in the blinking of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. Now when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will happen, “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ! So then, dear brothers and sisters, be firm. Do not be moved! Always be outstanding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

— ‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15‬:‭50‬-‭58‬‬

Most of 1 Corinthians is responding to their blatant immaturity and ethical issues. This is one of the few passages where Paul discusses doctrine. However, it is important to notice that Paul only uses Jesus’ resurrection to support the bodily resurrection of believers in the end. The false teaching at Corinth (whoever was doing it) was not attacking or denying the resurrection of Jesus. They were denying the bodily resurrection of the believers.

Paul says, That’s ridiculous. If He was raised, and we are in Him, then we will be raised, too.

This last paragraph of the chapter finalizes the implications of that, discussing the new body. There’s so much speculation what that will look like. What age will we be, what will we look like? I have no idea. People are uncomfortable with certain aspects of their physical bodies now, so let’s just go with there will be perfect contentment with the glorified body. 

Flesh and blood does not inherit the kingdom of God, meaning we will receive a new body. This does not mean it isn’t physical. Spiritual or glorified doesn’t mean it isn’t tangible or able to be touched or “real.” We won’t be ghosts or just in a spirit form. Jesus had a real body post-resurrection. He ate fish. He had scars. (He also walked through walls and teleported, which I don’t know if we’ll be able to do that, but it’d be pretty cool.)

This is the only other passage that discusses how currently living believers enter the after life without going through death (1 Thess 4:16-17). Both have trumpets. Both have the dead rising. These passages should be understood as parallels. Except there’s no flying through the air here. There’s different ways to reconcile these things, I suppose, but that’s for 1 Thessalonians, sorry.

Here it simply says, we change into our imperishable bodies. We become instantly glorified. This is similar to 2 Corinthians 5, when Paul says we live in tents, but then our mortality will be swallowed up by life. 

I would even say the point of this isn’t our “changing” so much as the dead being raised and the new bodies. Because those bodies won’t die. 

Death is defeated. And sin, which results in death, has been conquered. This is one of the most powerful verses, and it’s written as a poem, so perhaps an early creed or anthem. 

So endure. Stand firm. Always be abounding in the work of the Lord. It is not in vain. We are working for the kingdom. He will reign in perfect peace. And victory over our greatest enemies has been secured. So we can live in peace now. We could take time to flesh out what that work is. But throughout the book, Paul has mentioned a lot about unity, selflessness, love, spiritual gifts. May be a good starting point.

Matthew 19:16-30

“Now someone came up to him and said, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to gain eternal life?” He said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?” he asked. Jesus replied, “Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.” The young man said to him, “I have wholeheartedly obeyed all these laws. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be perfect, go sell your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” But when the young man heard this he went away sorrowful, for he was very rich. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven! Again I say, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter into the kingdom of God.” The disciples were greatly astonished when they heard this and said, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and replied, “This is impossible for mere humans, but for God all things are possible.” Then Peter said to him, “Look, we have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?” Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth: In the age when all things are renewed, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And whoever has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭19‬:‭16‬-‭30‬‬

This is a great passage to use as illustration of similarities/differences between gospels. Here Jesus is called teacher, and the man asks about “good things.” I think in Mark the man calls Jesus “good Teacher,” and Jesus questions the title “good.” The message is still the same, but it’s a key point about how gospel writing works. Paraphrasing is definitely acceptable, and gospel writers are making a point (conveying their personal perspective and message to their audience) through the gospel. 

We see this in Matthew here. Even from the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus ends with “be perfect.” And Jesus challenge the young man to sell everything to therefore show his “perfection.” Is that the standard? Moral perfection/sinlessness? Well, that’s systematic theology for another day. But from the Sermon, we learned that Jesus is not emphasizing moral perfection. He’s talking about keeping the law at its highest intent. At the heart of each command is a deep love for God and others, even those who are persecuting you for religious beliefs. If we can forgive them, serve them, pray for them, we have embodied God’s law (which may be how Jesus “fulfilled” it). So this is perhaps what Jesus means for the young man to be “perfect.” Sure, he hasn’t disobeyed commands (well, at least in his mind. But has he embodied the full intent of the law to the point of loving those around him? Can he give his possessions away? Can he not love two masters? Can he seek God’s kingdom?

This would be nearly impossible for him. 

And though Luke is the one who emphasizes the great reversal, we see it all throughout the NT. Those who are self sufficient, whether religiously, politically, socio-economically, or in any other measure of identity, they rarely turn to Jesus. There’s no need. Those who think they should naturally belong or that God would benefit from having them on His team, they can’t follow Jesus. That requires submission. That requires expressing dependence. But the outcast, the poor, the sick—they flock to Jesus because being dependent is all they’ve ever known.

Disciples don’t understand—surprise, surprise. Who can be saved? Good question, since most humans are self-sufficient. But they mean, “Wow, Jesus, he would be a great candidate for disciple. If he’s not coming along, then what hope do we have.” God changes people. God has to move in salvation. Otherwise, things are impossible, and that’s not really trickling into the free will debate. I hate that debate. I’m just quoting Jesus in this context. With humans, this would be impossible. God has to move.

I’m not sure if Peter is being brash or confused. He asks about their reward. Jesus confirms they would rule with Him in the coming kingdom. Not the time for an eschatology lesson, but it is fun to think about who will reign and how that will happen. I agree with others who think the eternal kingdom will be established on earth as heaven and earth intertwine. Jesus reigns finally and fully, and other passages confirm all believers assist in that rule. How? Not sure. What power? Not sure. But I envision life pretty much as we know it now but with perfect authority and perfect justice. 

The point of the whole passage is the final verse. First become last and last become first. This is the great reversal. The self-sufficient rich don’t gain the kingdom (so the humble rich could potentially), and the self-sacrificing followers of Jesus gain the kingdom. 

But on our own, everyone fails. Only with God is any of this possible.

Daniel 7:1-28

“In the first year of King Belshazzar of Babylon, Daniel had a dream filled with visions while he was lying on his bed. Then he wrote down the dream in summary fashion. Daniel explained: “I was watching in my vision during the night as the four winds of the sky were stirring up the great sea. Then four large beasts came up from the sea; they were different from one another. “The first one was like a lion with eagles’ wings. As I watched, its wings were pulled off and it was lifted up from the ground. It was made to stand on two feet like a human being, and a human mind was given to it. “Then a second beast appeared, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and there were three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. It was told, ‘Get up and devour much flesh!’ “After these things, as I was watching, another beast like a leopard appeared, with four bird-like wings on its back. This beast had four heads, and ruling authority was given to it. “After these things, as I was watching in the night visions a fourth beast appeared – one dreadful, terrible, and very strong. It had two large rows of iron teeth. It devoured and crushed, and anything that was left it trampled with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that came before it, and it had ten horns. “As I was contemplating the horns, another horn – a small one – came up between them, and three of the former horns were torn out by the roots to make room for it. This horn had eyes resembling human eyes and a mouth speaking arrogant things. “While I was watching, thrones were set up, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His attire was white like snow; the hair of his head was like lamb’s wool. His throne was ablaze with fire and its wheels were all aflame. A river of fire was streaming forth and proceeding from his presence. Many thousands were ministering to him; Many tens of thousands stood ready to serve him. The court convened and the books were opened. “Then I kept on watching because of the arrogant words of the horn that was speaking. I was watching until the beast was killed and its body destroyed and thrown into the flaming fire. As for the rest of the beasts, their ruling authority had already been removed, though they were permitted to go on living for a time and a season. I was watching in the night visions, “And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him. To him was given ruling authority, honor, and sovereignty. All peoples, nations, and language groups were serving him. His authority is eternal and will not pass away. His kingdom will not be destroyed. “As for me, Daniel, my spirit was distressed, and the visions of my mind were alarming me. I approached one of those standing nearby and asked him about the meaning of all this. So he spoke with me and revealed to me the interpretation of the vision: ‘These large beasts, which are four in number, represent four kings who will arise from the earth. The holy ones of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will take possession of the kingdom forever and ever.’ “Then I wanted to know the meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others. It was very dreadful, with two rows of iron teeth and bronze claws, and it devoured, crushed, and trampled anything that was left with its feet. I also wanted to know the meaning of the ten horns on its head, and of that other horn which came up and before which three others fell. This was the horn that had eyes and a mouth speaking arrogant things, whose appearance was more formidable than the others. While I was watching, that horn began to wage war against the holy ones and was defeating them, until the Ancient of Days arrived and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Most High. Then the time came for the holy ones to take possession of the kingdom. “This is what he told me: ‘The fourth beast means that there will be a fourth kingdom on earth that will differ from all the other kingdoms. It will devour all the earth and will trample and crush it. The ten horns mean that ten kings will arise from that kingdom. Another king will arise after them, but he will be different from the earlier ones. He will humiliate three kings. He will speak words against the Most High. He will harass the holy ones of the Most High continually. His intention will be to change times established by law. They will be delivered into his hand For a time, times, and half a time. But the court will convene, and his ruling authority will be removed – destroyed and abolished forever! Then the kingdom, authority, and greatness of the kingdoms under all of heaven will be delivered to the people of the holy ones of the Most High. His kingdom is an eternal kingdom; all authorities will serve him and obey him.’ “This is the conclusion of the matter. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts troubled me greatly, and the color drained from my face. But I kept the matter to myself.””

— ‭‭Daniel‬ ‭7‬:‭1‬-‭28‬‬

A long passage, and I can add more notes later. This is an important text for NT interpretation as well as Old, particularly for the title Son of Man, and “riding on clouds.” Won’t do all details here but here are some key thoughts to lay as foundation.

Not sure of the full analogy, but I have heard from significant scholars (most notably NT Wright) that this vision’s placement is significant after chapter 6, where Daniel is rescued from the lion’s den. Could be that Daniel represents Israel in that case, and the beasts are obvious enough. Not sure if the king is really Jesus at that point, but Israel is vindicated after being under oppression for so long. The final kingdom will be established.

There’s minor debate over what the kingdoms are, but Daniel has multiple visions that seem to reinforce the 4 great kingdoms of ancient history.

Winged lion = Babylon

Bear = Persia (3 ribs could be the 3 main kings)

4 headed/winged Leopard = Greece (Alexander’s kingdom split for four generals)

Terrible beast = Rome (rows of 10 teeth-people debate which emperors)

Little horn saying arrogant things is also debatable. Only a few emperors claimed divinity for themselves (Nero, Caligula, Domitian). Of course, the dispensational view is to at least see final fulfillment in the singular Antichrist. I think it makes most sense to begin with a near fulfillment in Roman Empire. If there’s pattern fulfillment throughout history, then fine.

Perhaps the most significant thing is the image here is nearly identical to the beast in Revelation 13. Beast with horns and speaking blasphemous words and making war on the saints. (If you do not study Daniel and Ezekiel in depth, Revelation cannot make sense. These books are the cheat code). 

Daniel does some interpretation of the vision. Horns means kings. “All the earth” may not mean our globe. Rome did conquer all the earth in that day. Now, in Revelation, the dragon and beasts influence the world and culture as well, so again pattern fulfillment may be best way to see this. 

This little horn harasses God’s people continually. Persecution—which was rampant under certain emperors. 

Time, times, and half a time. NET says “times” is a dual form, so this is 3 1/2 times. Most are going to see this as 3 1/2 years. When we go to Revelation, the really odd thing is that multiple scenes have events that last for this long, but the duration is described as 3 1/2 years, 42 months, or even 1260 days. 

Honestly, I don’t like these timelines. I’ve studied the eschatology ad nauseam and how everything has to happen. I know of tremendous scholars, who could reason me silly who could prove beyond a doubt that a pre-trib, pre-millennial model is 100% correct. But I have become queasy when we have to use a verse from 1 Thess, then jump back to Dan 7, then go grab the “son of perdition” from 2 Thess”, and debate over the literary style of Revelation to boot. Piecing a theory together from so many different authors with different intentions/audiences and everything has to line up perfectly or else it crumbles apart has become suspect. But it could happen. 

So why 3 1/2 times/years? Revelation mentions it to refer to Dan 7, obviously. Also in 11:1-2; 12:7, 11-12; 13:5. Jewish writings associated Daniel’s 3 1/2 years as a general time of trial for believers (Midr. Ps 10.1), time of Israel’s exile (b. Sanhedrin 97b), or as the amount of time before Israel is finally restored (b Sanhedrin 97b-98a). Taken from Beale’s Commentary on Revelation, 565. 

In Rev 11, the two prophets are linked with Elijah’s ministry, who’s most famous narrative was the 3ish year famine (then the battle with prophets of Baal on Carmel). Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, but Num 33:5-49 may list 42 encampments (and their 40 years may not have started until they had traveled for 2 years in Jewish thinking at least). 

Both Daniel and Revelation focus on the temple, though. The initial abomination of desolation was Antiochus Epiphanes in 167BC. His oppression lasted about 3 years. Then the Roman siege of Jerusalem lasted about 3 years. 

Throughout Revelation, in all these passages of 3 1/2 years, there is an emphasis on physical attack on God’s people, though spiritually they are safe/secure. (Not to mention Daniel experienced the same thing in the lion’s den.). They experience no spiritual harm from their enemies, whether human or demonic, regardless of the onslaught raging towards them. 

If some want to see a beginning 3 1/2 years and a more harsh 3 1/2 years based on Daniel 9, 12, and Jesus discourse in Mark 13, that’s fine. This would really only apply to those viewing a literal 7 year Tribulation. The point in any passage, though, is not on length of time but (1) severity of persecution and (2) there is no time ever where the world and the people of God have harmony. 

For those who do not see a literal 7 year Tribulation, Revelation 12:6 seems to make it clear that the 3 1/2 years began at the resurrection of Jesus. It will end at His final appearing. 

In between the vision and interpretation, Daniel sees court of Ancient of Days (God). One like son of man approaches. Approaches is “coming.” They translates as “approaches” to remove confusion. Coming may imply returning to earth. But when we see “coming” in NT, we need to remember this passage. Jesus is talking about Son of Man going before God and establishing His authority. (Yes, He is returning, but we must understand full context of a passage before we misapply something). Sanhedrin ripped clothes, not because Jesus said He was coming to earth. He said He was coming on clouds= going before Ancient of Days = nearly divinity. 

1 Enoch developed these ideas of “Son of Man.” Will probably have another post on what that title meant and how Jesus built on 1st century expectations. Daniel laid foundation, but this title had enough mystery for Jesus to fill with His own meaning.

His kingdom is eternal. His kingdom is beyond any human kingdom. Those who belong to His kingdom may suffer but are truly beyond any harm.

Isaiah 9:1-7

 “(8:23) The gloom will be dispelled for those who were anxious. In earlier times he humiliated the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali; but now he brings honor to the way of the sea, the region beyond the Jordan, and Galilee of the nations. (9:1) The people walking in darkness see a bright light; light shines on those who live in a land of deep darkness. You have enlarged the nation; you give them great joy. They rejoice in your presence as harvesters rejoice; as warriors celebrate when they divide up the plunder. For their oppressive yoke and the club that strikes their shoulders, the cudgel the oppressor uses on them, you have shattered, as in the day of Midian’s defeat. Indeed every boot that marches and shakes the earth and every garment dragged through blood is used as fuel for the fire. For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us. He shoulders responsibility and is called: Extraordinary Strategist, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. His dominion will be vast and he will bring immeasurable prosperity. He will rule on David’s throne and over David’s kingdom, establishing it and strengthening it by promoting justice and fairness, from this time forward and forevermore. The Lord’s intense devotion to his people will accomplish this.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭9‬:‭1‬-‭7‬‬

“A remnant will come back, a remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭10‬:‭21‬‬

NET has a million notes for this passage, all of which are worth reading and have a balanced approach on how to interpret this (past fulfillment, Jesus only, or both). Good cross references to other Isaiah passages to help with interpretation, including Isa 10:21 as an example. 

8:23 has those who are anxious but it’s really talking about land. Land is personified as needing healing and restoration. Reminds me of Romans 8 where all creation is groaning for redemption. (Not same concept or application, just same picture).

People walking in darkness here is not pagans here. It’s Israel in exile. This is quoted in NT, and I think it’s still applied to Israel, as those who do not recognize Jesus as Messiah. Use of OT in NT is great resource to see how and why authors used certain passages. Guessing this would be some type of heightened fulfillment for Israel.

Vv 2-5 is one big celebration that those who oppressed Israel have been conquered. (Or will be conquered.) Always difficult to find time perspective of author. Verbs don’t help because of tense flexibility. Point is that Israel is rejoicing and free.

V. 6 looking for ultimate Messiah king. Interesting that NET notes some debate whether some of these titles are directly for God and not all for the king. I would think they are all for the Messiah. The issue is how much Isaiah and the audience knew at time of writing (or whenever book was completed).

All are similar titles for ultimate mind and power and wisdom and ability to provide/protect the people. Often don’t hear of the three children described in opening chapters of Isaiah (here, 7:14, and then Isaiah’s son.) Debate over referents and if they are all the same person. Probably not all same but one or two could be same.

Don’t think Israel understood these titles as Jesus being God in flesh. Lots of ANE texts of their king representing God or fulfilling the presence of God among them. But this would be obvious way for NT authors to look back and say this prophecy was fulfilled “literally.” 

Father cannot be Trinity heresy. Another kingly title for protector/provider for very long reign. 

YHWH’s intense devotion to His people will accomplish this. Again, we see God’s faithfulness to His people. It never fails.

Hebrews 11:1

 “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, being convinced of what we do not see.”

— ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭11‬:‭1‬‬

“And these all were commended for their faith, yet they did not receive what was promised. For God had provided something better for us, so that they would be made perfect together with us.”

— ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭11‬:‭39‬-‭40‬‬

I’m not philosophical/theologically inclined enough to distinguish hope and faith right now. No pithy or tweetable definitions to astound. I’m sure there are biblical passages to help separate them, but I’m just as confident there are passages where the semantic range overlaps. This is why I stick to individual passages and branch out to books, or the author’s corpus (and if need be other portions of the Bible if a topic demands it).

It does appear here that faith is a more grounded hope, and it is grounded in something stable, i.e., the faithfulness of God. We can only be convinced of something we have not touched or seen because we are confident in the character of the One who has promised. And we can only be confident in His character because of past kept promises. 

Yet, even in this chapter, the context of the book of Hebrews is more important. After listing many OT individuals and what they gained or accomplished by faith, the author of Hebrews says these “did not receive what was promised.” So did God fail? No, the point is that Jesus and the New Covenant is superior. This has been the point throughout the whole book. 

Stick with Jesus and receive the promises, just as those saints will. Endure (12:1-2). Do not return to Judaism, even if it is safer and you escape imminent persecution. 

This book is amazing, but it must be read sequentially and fully. Chapters 10 and 12 surround this chapter as warning passages (the most harsh warnings to not turn back). We are going to inherit a kingdom that doesn’t fade away. We enter by faith. We see it now by faith.

Isaiah 60

 ““Arise! Shine! For your light arrives! The splendor of the Lord shines on you! For, look, darkness covers the earth and deep darkness covers the nations, but the Lord shines on you; his splendor appears over you. Nations come to your light, kings to your bright light. Look all around you! They all gather and come to you – your sons come from far away and your daughters are escorted by guardians. Then you will look and smile, you will be excited and your heart will swell with pride. For the riches of distant lands will belong to you and the wealth of nations will come to you.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭60‬:‭1‬-‭5‬‬

“Foreigners will rebuild your walls; their kings will serve you. Even though I struck you down in my anger, I will restore my favor and have compassion on you.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭60‬:‭10‬‬

“You were once abandoned and despised, with no one passing through, but I will make you a permanent source of pride and joy to coming generations.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭60‬:‭15‬‬

“The sun will no longer supply light for you by day, nor will the moon’s brightness shine on you; the Lord will be your permanent source of light – the splendor of your God will shine upon you. Your sun will no longer set; your moon will not disappear; the Lord will be your permanent source of light; your time of sorrow will be over.”

— ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭60‬:‭19‬-‭20‬‬

No idea why v. 3 would be a daily verse. Even out of context it makes no sense, and I’m confused how “you” would be taken and how “nations” would be taken. But anyway, even reading the whole chapter, it takes 10-11 verses to realize what the “you” is. (Probably why we don’t start reading in ch 60)

YHWH is talking to Israel (again, from the perspective of being in exile, whether this is long after or prophesies before, doesn’t matter to me right now). Present is bleak, but He will restore them to their land. He will bless them. Depending on theological base, reader will see this chapter as literal promises, or some hyperbole, or metaphorical fulfillments later on. Even at the height of their return later, this was not fulfilled, unless we are waiting for another Jewish kingdom (i.e., Messianic kingdom on earth). Debates occur.

Linked later verse in chapter about God’s presence bc that’s probably the key. Also points to vv in NT, like in Revelation 22 where God finally dwells with His people in new heavens/earth. The point of this is God will cause His people to return and He will protect/bless them. Notice that these actions are by default an invitation to the other nations to come experience the true God. This is a kernel (wouldn’t call it prophecy or even foreshadow) but it will be unpacked in NT times. These truths will expand so nations come to know YHWH through Jesus. 

We just still have to argue over if Jesus has to have a temporary kingdom before the eternal one. Fun.

Psalm 103:15-22

 “A person’s life is like grass. Like a flower in the field it flourishes, but when the hot wind blows by, it disappears, and one can no longer even spot the place where it once grew. But the Lord continually shows loyal love to his faithful followers, and is faithful to their descendants, to those who keep his covenant, who are careful to obey his commands. The Lord has established his throne in heaven; his kingdom extends over everything. Praise the Lord, you angels of his, you powerful warriors who carry out his decrees and obey his orders! Praise the Lord, all you warriors of his, you servants of his who carry out his desires! Praise the Lord, all that he has made, in all the regions of his kingdom! Praise the Lord, O my soul!”

— ‭‭Psalms‬ ‭103‬:‭15‬-‭22‬‬

Would need to look at Hebrew to see where stanza markings are. NET seems to break it here, but it seems long. Not sure how ideas of a fading life and God’s kingdom interact with one another. Makes sense that lives fade, but God is faithful to His followers. We like that thought of an Almighty God taking interest in what others find worthless. (There are still OT overtones throughout this passage, but they can easily be applied to all followers of YHWH)

Maybe it is a closing thought to the whole psalm that God reigns supreme over all thing. Kingdom of God needs to be understood in OT context, which Jesus will unpack in gospels, but this is where we understand what He will be unpacking. Idea that God reigns over all things, and where God reigns, that is His kingdom. This is what Jesus brings to earth later. But all those themes can’t be read back into OT.

Bc of God’s might and sovereignty, He deserves praise from all inhabitants of universe. Love reading about angels as mighty warriors. “Hosts” throughout Bible is army term. They fulfill His will.

Matthew 5:3-12 (Beatitudes)

 ““Blessed are the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied. “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God. “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them. “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you and say all kinds of evil things about you falsely on account of me. Rejoice and be glad because your reward is great in heaven, for they persecuted the prophets before you in the same way.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭3‬-‭12‬‬

Beatitudes are section of grace and prophetic promise/call.

Demands of sermon are not intelligible apart from the gracious offer of the kingdom and forgiveness that Jesus offers through His presence. Matthew emphasis spiritual aspect of these characteristics. Luke will use more tangible descriptions (poor, hungry, mourning), though OT passages will show the connection that those who are poor/outcast have a spiritual inclination/dependence on God. These are the pious poor.

Can fill in each beatitude as it comes. Would presume that “rewards” are somewhat parallel, not too different. “Seeing God” and “gaining life” are probably pretty similar.

Don’t think it’s a progression of time or spiritual maturity.

Poor In Spirit

Mourn

Meek

Hunger and Thirst for Righteousness

Merciful

Pure in Heart. Is anyone pure? Can anyone see God? Thought this brought death. Point is that all these “blessings” describe the same group of people. A people spiritually minded and humble, seeking God, attempting to obey, thinking properly, devoted to Him and no other. They will gain life and experience the presence of God. They enter God’s kingdom and know Him as King.

Peacemakers

Persecuted

Sermon on the Mount vs Sermon on Plain

 “When he saw the crowds, he went up the mountain. After he sat down his disciples came to him.”

— ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5‬:‭1‬‬

1st Discourse in Matthew (5-7): One of 5 books to parallel five books of Torah. Discourses provide the substance of Jesus’ teaching which is to be obeyed by disciples by expanding kingdom

5-7: Here’s how to respond to my presence and gift of the kingdom, by being radically selfless and truly righteous

Lots of views on how to interpret Sermon on Mount, too much for here. Most likely a summary of Jesus’ teaching on life and ethics of disciple, including explanation of the intent of OT law in a prophetic style. Sermon is not law. Primary intent of sermon is provoke disciples to live as light and show love to all. This type of love is motivation of kingdom relationships. Secondary point is for outsiders to pursue kingdom God’s way. (Luke’s version much shorter, eliminating Jewish emphasis).