0:03
we ask in Jesus name. Amen. Just a reminder, we don't have class next week, but Lord willing, we'll res return in two weeks um to the study. So, we're
0:15
So, we're we're going to look tonight at um the exesus of Leviticus 18 and 20. And I've already
0:25
put up on the board the um the way 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21. If you look at the opening verses, you see that
0:36
that that those chapters form uh an outline of sorts that all kind of center and hinge on Leviticus 19. Uh and we'll be looking at that, Lord willing, in a
0:47
few weeks. 18 and 20 are uh they are a pair. um they frame 19 not just by the chapter numbers which are not original um but by the um uh the greeting or you
1:02
know the Lord spoke to Moses saying um they're the same in both chapters and then the topics are are both the same. Chapter 20 tends to deal with the
1:12
penalties for the offenses that are mentioned in chapter 18. And then there are some others and and just like we we talked about how uh Torah often reads
1:25
very much like wisdom literature or like the proverbs. In other words, it's not systematic. And uh modern western scholars really struggle with that. They they want to
1:37
know why a particular statute is mentioned in a particular setting. It it doesn't seem to be in place with what went before it and what goes after it and and therefore liberal scholars say
1:49
well obviously it it was in a different place in the original uh or it was added later. Okay. um why they would add it in a in a place that doesn't make sense
1:59
doesn't make sense, but they they have to come up with something to explain. And I think we're just approaching it the wrong way. That that's not how Proverbs is. Proverbs when you read it,
2:10
it it does kind of for the most part it kind of bounces all over the place and to some extent the law does. However, I do think that there are markers that
2:20
appear in the text of 18 and 20 that are there to guide our thinking as we read the various prohibitions that are listed
2:30
there. The prohibitions themselves do not need much elucidation. And it is somewhat amazing how much elucidation they're given in commentaries. They're fairly
2:44
self-explanatory. um they're they're definitely you don't do this and the description of what is not to be done leaves very little doubt of your the prohibition. So there must be something else. It also seems uh like
2:57
some other stories narratives in the Bible um to be rather disturbing. I mentioned last week the the last couple chapters of the book of Judges where we
3:09
read of the Levite and his concubine and and the civil war and that that's not a fun read. And reading about David and Ba Sheeba and Uriah again that's that I
3:20
mentioned last week that's not a bedtime story and these things are in there and and yet compared to those I I wonder if Leviticus 18 and 20 are not worse. Um
3:30
because the stuff that's mentioned there, as I I said early on, we just kind of take it for granted that these things are an abomination to the
3:41
Lord. We take it for granted that these things are an abomination to any right society. And I say right society because we don't live in one right now. And some of these things are no longer
3:52
abominations, but they ought to be. and and so but we're we're standing at a far remove from the actual writing of Leviticus and and Israel camped at Mount
4:05
Si after the crossing of the Red Sea. We're we're three 2500 years 3,000 years, no more than that. 3,200 years removed from
4:15
that. And we also uh benefit very much from the impact of what's called the Judeo-Christian ethic, Judeo-Christian ethic, which is somewhat of a misnomer. It's
4:26
it's fairly popular among politicians to use that phrase Judeo-Christian. Um it's actually a biblical ethic
4:38
rooted in Judaism, rooted in the Old Testament, and fully adopted by the church. So it's it's not really a
4:48
Judeo-Christian um as much as it is a Judeo and and it is very much a an impact on Western society. I mentioned Tom Holland's book uh Dominion and I do still recommend if
5:01
you're looking for uh something to read, I do recommend it. It's well written and I think it's very encouraging to realize that in spite of what we see in our time
5:12
and in fact what all Christians have seen in all times uh Christianity has made a massive impact on the world in which we live uh even among even uh
5:23
among people who have thoroughly rejected Christianity or have embraced it and then later rejected it. Um, so there's encouragement in that, but I
5:34
want to try to lay out uh tonight not an outline of Leviticus 18 and 20. I don't think they're susceptible to that any more than what I already did in terms of
5:44
the opening verses of 17- 21. I think that's fairly obvious because the opening verses of 17 and 21 are essentially the same. And of 18 and 20
5:55
are, I believe, identical. And then 19 is an intensification of of that. So this is being addressed to all the congregation of Israel um and and not just to the priests. So that framework
6:08
is fairly self-evident. But I think when you get to Leviticus 18 and 20, there's um you know there's there's kind of two directions that are
6:19
often taken exeetically. The one is to to try to somewhat get in the weeds and and discuss the actual sins that are being
6:31
prohibited. The other is to jump to a New Testament and modern application um of of the principles, you know, and and um I I don't think that's ever a
6:42
good hermeneutic to immediately jump to application without understanding. And I think both approaches fail to see the markers um that are available to us both in the
6:56
context of Israel at the foot of Mount Si and also the um the the the broader context of the world
7:07
in which Israel was created. And we talked about that in biblical theology, the terms used in Isaiah referring to God's formation of Israel. He uses the
7:18
verb barah, which is the same verb to create that only ever has God as its subject. And of course is in Genesis 1, and then immediately uses the verb
7:29
yater, which is to form, which is the verb that is used in Genesis 2. So I think it's fairly clear that we're to look at Israel as a creation of God, not
7:52
Exodus 19 makes that clear. So it's not just choosing Israel or electing Israel. is actually creating Israel, but he's creating it's almost like in the beginning when we read that the world was formless and void
8:03
in a sense h the human world at the time of the Exodus was also formless and void some worse than others. we'll see that particularly the Canaanites who had been
8:15
somewhat marked out early on with a curse were in those ancient years the worst of the bad. Um, and and it's into
8:27
this unregenerate, rebellious pagan world that God, and I hope this doesn't sound wrong, but it's it's as if he says, "Let there be
8:38
Israel." And in a sense, it is the light of his revelation that is supposed to shine through Israel, through Torah, through the worship, and through the scriptures
8:49
that will come from Israel. So I'm not being facitious and hopefully not sacrilegious in saying that that God called Israel into being. I think that's
9:00
a fair summary of what the Bible says about God's work in creating Israel. So the the things that we look at whenever we're doing exesus is first of all
9:26
discussed a week or so ago. I can't remember which class it was, but the reminder that this is the only narrative in the Pentatuk for which we
9:39
have a start date and an end date. one month from Exodus 40 to Numbers chapter 1, we actually have dates um that place
9:49
us place us in the camp at the foot of Mount Si and then taking up the camp and moving off toward the promised land. Now, of course, there'll be another 38 years before they enter that. But here,
10:02
for some reason, we're given for the book of Leviticus a very specific window of time in which these events take place. So we have
10:18
we have time and place given to us and whenever that's done that that's rather significant because it's not often done and I think the significance is in a broader picture that we will
10:29
hopefully dig into in our next session of biblical theology. But that is the comparison and the contrast between two very significant mountains in the Old Testament. Si and
10:42
Zion. So we're at Si, but the law is orienting us toward Zion. Si will not become a pilgrimage for the
10:56
Israelites. They are never encouraged to go back there and they don't they they don't do any of their festivals there. So, as important as it was, it was never meant to be what Zion was
11:08
to be. It was never meant to represent what Zion was to represent. And I think that's that's a um a contrast in the scriptures that plays very uh heavily in
11:20
the whole concept of the kingdom of God, which is going to be our focus in the next session of biblical theology. So we're at Sinai
11:38
Sinai is associated with Torah, the giving of the law, but I think Sinai is also to some to some some degree we might call it boot camp.
11:49
um that um that Israel is being introduced to a concept unknown in the ancient near east and that is a holy nation.
12:02
A nation that is called into being by a holy God and will sustain its being only through active practical obedience.
12:15
The pagan world really doesn't have a concept like holiness. If you've read any Greek or Roman mythology or ancient neareastern mythology, you realize that
12:27
holiness is not a classification of Olympus. Okay? The pantheon is is anything but holy. So, not only is it that they're here, they're here for a
12:38
particular point in time, but even the entire wilderness journeys, which of course are according to the will of God, even though they're initiated um and and they are predicated on the disobedience
12:50
of Israel, that wasn't a surprise to God. There was a practical element in that those years in the wilderness would form a cohesive nation that would include a a
13:03
fairly powerful fighting force. It would also serve the purpose of judgment so that the rebellious generation that left Egypt would not enter the land. They
13:13
would die in the wilderness. But I think ultimately it was a generation in which the principles of Torah, both the
13:23
priestly Torah and that's the sacrifice centered around the tabernacle and the holiness code, how they were to live as a community when they finally went into
13:45
this was their isolated training ground. They were in the wilderness. They were not having to drive out anybody before them. They were not occupying the land, building cities, planting vineyards, or
13:55
any of those things. They were wandering in the wilderness. But I don't imagine that time was simply aimless wandering. I think there was a great deal of
14:06
reciting of Torah, remembering of Torah. But I wouldn't be surprised if there was also um militia drills and the selection of officers and all
14:18
those things that they would need when Joshua would lead them in the conquest. We don't read that. Um and we can just assume that when they went across the Jordan, they became miraculously a
14:30
tremendous fighting force. Uh certainly God was with them. Absolutely. But I I think they were also prepared um during that time. So there's a purpose for this
14:41
and and I think but primarily though it's a time
14:56
for learning what holiness means. And I don't think we and I I mentioned last week that the benefits that we do gain from archaeology. Um what we do what we do learn from the ancient world and and it is a rather small amount of all that
15:09
happened back then. But what we do learn is that the nature of pagan religion does not have a component called holiness. the the laws that we're reading in Torah
15:21
and especially in the holiness code were quite radical. As I mentioned last week, the concept of monotheism,
15:31
it was tried under one pharaoh was that Ammon Hotep Ammon Hotep the Pharaoh who tried monotheism. Anybody remember
15:42
Anybody remember Aen? Yeah, I think I have not memorized. They never did give it a diddy and they had the kings and queens of England, but they never they've never sung the pharaohs of Egypt.
15:52
Um, it didn't last and it it wasn't really the monotheism of of Judaism. Uh, the idea that uh that monotheism somehow
16:03
evolved out of paganism is is really ludicrous because there's there's you can't get something from nothing. and and even even the theory of evolution
16:14
begins with something, right? And and and you're not beginning with anything that would in in in a million years naturally evolve into monotheism.
16:24
So it's it's this is a period of intense revelation. God is revealing himself as the one true God. And we've talked about the the
16:35
concept uh this was again in biblical theology um but we're going to touch upon it a little bit tonight. The discovery of the Hittite Suzaranti
16:46
treaties and the fairly rigid format of those treaties and how the um the law in Exodus and in Deuteronomy and here in
16:57
Leviticus as well follows that pattern. God as the susarin as the great king. And so we're seeing this time in the
17:28
When God says to Samuel that they are not rejecting you but me as king over them, that statement already has centuries of history behind it.
17:38
It's not that that was the point at which they would have said, "No, no, no. Uh we'll have God as our king." God had been their king from the moment he delivered them from Egypt. That was the
17:49
that was the thing that that justified his relationship as the great king to this people. I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt. I am the Lord
18:01
your God who redeemed you to myself. That prologue which is standard in the Suzaranti treaties is is throughout the Old Testament especially the Pentatuk.
18:12
And we'll see that in Leviticus 18 and 20. That becomes actually somewhat of an exogetical marker exogetical marker that we notice. Now, when we read in
18:23
modern literature and we see a lot of repetition, we tend to get annoyed by it. That that's that's not good writing. They shouldn't keep saying the same thing. Um
18:35
and we have to understand that when we turn to the scripture and we we see repetition, it's not we can say yes, it's so that we get the point. Okay, we get the point.
18:46
But we can also say well I've got the point. It it's actually a literary form. It's marking off the different sections and also it's a theological device by
18:59
which the people are constantly reminded after each statute or block of statutes the authority and the basis for this law. And we're going to talk briefly about that tonight. There's three of
19:11
these markers that we'll see in in um Leviticus 18 and 20 that I think help us. I I I guess what I'm saying is I think with Leviticus 18 and 20,
19:24
like many other chapters, but but certainly these two, it's better to stand back and look at the forest the forest then go in and get lost among the trees.
19:36
Now, that's not to say don't read it. You can't You can't not read it and and understand what why why it's there. But I don't think we should get We
19:48
should miss the very distinctive markers that are in there and then look at the meaning of those because it is against the the the framework of these three
19:59
markers that these prohibitions are given. And each prohibition then can represent a class of behavior
20:11
that we can understand because we understand the principles that are setting out these little these not little these big sins that we read about in these chapters and and we and it also
20:24
helps us keep from the temptation to think well I don't really need this because I don't do those things or the this is not really pertinent to our
20:34
generation because you know we've already decided that these things are are abomination to God. Well, yes, that's good. But the pro the scripture is still profitable for instruction.
20:45
It's it's not just for that time and that it's all passed away because Christ has come and the church has come and has condemned all these things. And now we actually have civil laws that condemn
20:57
many of these behaviors. although sadly some of those are getting overturned but that that's also important to recognize the world in which we live.
21:08
Okay. So we're going to talk more about how to interpret than than we are what we're interpreting. Um and and then the second aspect of context is the
21:22
what I've referred to is often referred to using the German sitsim leban the situation in life um basically where is Israel
21:35
Exodus 19 3-6 very key passage right before the giving of the ten commandments where God says I have I have brought brought you as on eagle's
21:46
wings out of Egypt. I have delivered you. I have redeemed you. And if you will obey my commandments, you will be to me a treasured possession and a holy nation. For all the nations of the world
21:59
are mine. Again, that that's incredibly important. Israel has understood that at times. Sometimes Israel has acted as if she
22:12
were the only possession of the Lord in the world. No, he is the Lord of the entire earth. All the nations belong to me. I have chosen you. And he makes that
22:24
even clear in Deuteronomy 7 um when he said he gives the reason why he does it. But what is their situation in life? Well, it we call it it's it's referred to in articles and in
22:37
books about archaeology as the ancient near east, the ane. And so when I use that abbreviation, that's what that means.
22:58
The near east is essentially what is known as the levant. So, it goes roughly from Egypt along the narrow eastern shore of the Mediterranean and then spreads out into
23:10
modern day Turkey and and up into Iraq and and Persia, Babylonia, Assyria. Um, and not really it doesn't really go as
23:20
far as India. So it's it's it's the it encompasses the cultures that we encounter in the Old Testament and it really encompasses much of the
23:30
land that we read of in Genesis 10 with the table of nations. So this is the ancient near east and it's a it's a particular focus within archaeology
23:42
um both in in uh physical material archaeology but also in literary archaeology and law. Things like Hammurabi's code or the Amarna tablets
23:53
or the Dead Sea Scrolls are all shedding light on A&E history ancient Neareastern history. So this is the situation and we
24:03
are still this I think is is an important point important point we still must be oriented
24:15
to gen to the to the past to the chapters after the flood Genesis 9 through 11. through 11. Now, we haven't talked about those, but those three chapters very briefly,
24:28
but actually quite comprehensively lay out the the human world after the flood. And they cover hundreds and hundreds of
24:40
years, may maybe even a thousand years before chapter 12 where Abram is called out of the Caldes.
24:50
By that time, the world had regained its population, its imperial um cities, its hegemony. So, it's it's kind of gone
25:02
back to the way it was before the flood. And in fact, Joshua in chapter 24 of of that book, he refers to our forefathers,
25:15
Terara and Abram, worshiped false gods beyond the river. So the idea that Abram was called because he was a worshipper of Yahweh is
25:26
not biblical. He was called while yet a pagan. So the world around them, it's it's still oriented
25:45
to chapters that we often read and then forget about forget about because Genesis 12, that's Abraham, right? That's where it all starts. Yes, but it starts in the midst of
25:56
Genesis 9, 10, and 11. And in fact, Leviticus 18 and 20 have a direct literary connection to Genesis 9.
26:06
And the world in which or the the area, the region in which Israel is being brought, the promised land belongs to the Canaanites
26:17
who were uniquely singled out among these tribes these tribes for a curse, an abiding curse. We talked briefly about that last week, but th
26:28
this is this is all an important geographical or I should say geopolitical setting. Even the war of the kings and and we have the king of Sodom and Abram, you know, king of Sodom
26:40
offering Abraham to give a tenth of of all he has. And Abraham says, "No way, buddy. I will not let the king of Sodom say that he made Abraham rich." And then immediately we meet Melkisedc. See, he's
26:53
he's in that whole he's in this narrative. So, nothing that we read in Genesis is expendable. It's all very very important to the
27:05
redemptive historical flow, but also the impact of that redemptive history on the rest of human history. And that continues to be the case even though we
27:16
don't still have divine revelation coming to us. the patterns that were set down, the purposes for which Israel or Abraham was called,
27:27
the reasons why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, the sins of the Canaanites that had reached their fulfillment in the time by the time of the conquest.
27:39
That's what we're getting into in Leviticus 18 and 20. It's a whole lot more than just a list of dos and don'ts, mostly don'ts. mostly don'ts. 19 has the dues. Okay. Any questions?
28:07
That that very well could be. Um that's often the case. Sinai may be the region. Um and Horeb is is actually the mountain. Um that's not uncommon at all to even in today's vernacular to refer
28:19
to um to the Rockies or or to refer to Pikes Peak. You're still in the Rockies. So that's how I've always understood it is is something like Anybody else have a
28:38
Yes. Not si. Well, but Sinai the the text actually say said said they had come to Sinai. So I mean they're both used then they're used sometimes interchangeably.
28:48
I I don't think we should make a to find a distinction between the two because Sinai is certainly referenced as as the law. And the writer of Hebrew says he doesn't say we have not come to Mount
28:58
Horeb. He says we have not come to Mount Si but rather to Mount Zion. So between the two and I don't know why they use it that way, why they have Horeb and Sinai,
29:10
but it's very common. But between the two, I think Sinai actually has a greater biblical significance than Horeb in terms of reference and meaning.
29:31
Right. And sometimes also Edom, right? Yeah, it's a cir um I was going to say circumlocution. I'm reading Dickens to uh to Isabella. Um what is
29:41
the word where where you speak of a place but you mean something other um there's a word for that and it's escaped me but seir is often used to refer
29:54
especially poetically to Edam the the the descendants of
30:04
Yeah. So you get yeah there there are a lot of names and that's not unusual. We do that in our own language. It doesn't mean it's a different source. Um but I think of all the names the one most associated with law is Sinai. Um but I I
30:15
I do I personally think that the mountain Moses went up was Horeb. Okay. Um but I don't want to make too fine a point of that. I I think that we we get
30:25
into words and this is a rabbit trail. I'll try to make it brief. Um but I but I mentioned this very briefly in a sermon in Romans that some people have gone have waxed eloquent about the
30:37
difference between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven. Especially within a certain type of teaching. The kingdom of God is is that which God the father is going to
30:48
establish with the nation of Israel. And the kingdom of of heaven is the the one which when I say God heaven I think God is Israel, heaven is Jesus. Um, and that's just not that's trying to read
31:01
the Bible in a way that we don't read anything. It it's very clear, especially in the parables between Matthew and Luke and Matthew and Mark, that kingdom of God
31:11
and kingdom of heaven are synonymous. And I I hope we'll get into more of that in the next se session of biblical theology. But we can we can really do a lot of um interpretive damage if we
31:24
focus too much on words. especially if the scripture doesn't give us a good reason to make distinctions between the two. Um, and I'm not I'm I'm never been
31:35
able to make much of a distinction between Sinai and Horeb, you know, but I I I would agree with you. I think Horeb is the mountain and Sinai is the region. Um, but when we come to Leviticus, we're
31:47
we're at Sinai. He doesn't mention Horeb. Um, Horeb. Um, okay. So, okay. So, two things that stand out
32:18
noteworthy aspects? The first noteworthy aspect of this context of time and place and situation in the surrounding world and and I've often mentioned the fact that if you
32:29
wanted to isolate a people in the ancient near east, this land that was given to Israel is the last place you would put them because it is sandwiched
32:39
between a desert and an ocean. which means every army that is moving north and south along the Levant is going to go through this land. So this
32:51
is not a good place to establish a national monastery national monastery or a cloister. Okay. So I don't I think God on purpose he put them there because
33:02
of what had happened before their arrival when the Canaanites had established themselves in the land without God and without grace.
33:15
Israel is now something new and and that is that they are a light in the darkness.
33:30
Their responsibility we we tend to think I think mistakenly that somehow their responsibility was to obey the law so that they could be saved. That is the cart in front of the horse.
33:41
They already were redeemed. Now they were to live as witnesses of God's glory and his grace. Deuteronomy 4, which again is right before the
33:52
second giving of the law of the ten commandments is that that this will be your wisdom and understanding in the sight of the nations who will look on and say what what a basically what a
34:02
blessed people to have a God that lives so near to them as our God does to us. But these commandments, these statutes that Moses was giving them, that would be their wisdom in the sight of the
34:14
nations. And I think that principle of being in the sight of the nations is vital to understanding at least one aspect of God's purpose, if not the
34:25
fundamental aspect of God's purpose in redeeming a people for himself, and that is that the glory of his grace might be manifested to all creation. That's in
34:36
Colossians chapter 1, I think. Okay. And he doesn't do it off in a corner. There there really is no biblical basis, either old or new testament for the
34:46
concept of monasticism. No matter what, whether it's Catholic or Protestant or Eastern Orthodox, it doesn't matter. The idea of isolating oneself from the world in order to keep
34:58
oneself defiled by the world is unbiblical. We are to keep ourselves undefiled by the world while remaining in it as a
35:09
witness of God's grace and the power of the Holy Spirit. It's really no different for Israel. That was their that was their purpose for being um or being created. And then
35:21
and that was unusual. U in pagan religion it's um it's a form of theology known as henotheism.
35:39
It is similar to monotheism in that there is one god but the emphasis is not is that there is only one god but that we as a particular nation have one god. It's a national
35:52
god. So Molech is the god I think of the Babylonians. Um, so the the the different nations would have, you know, the Greeks would have their their uh
36:02
Zeus, the Romans very similar, Jupiter, you know, they have their main god. Okay? Now, that's of course polytheism, but henotheism allows for polytheism.
36:13
It's just that those gods, they're gods, but they're not our god. They're gods of the other nations. You read about it. I can't remember it's in kings um when they're they're fighting and their enemies say, "Well, the the god of
36:24
Israel is a god of the mountains. we will fight them in the valleys. You know the idea that gods are gods of regions, gods are gods of particular peoples, their god, our god, that's henotheism.
36:46
so into this the creation of Israel and the giving of Torah and and really this does become a characteristic of Israel at least in the remnant throughout its entire history
36:58
and that is it never succumbs fully to the idea that Yahweh is one of many or that Yahweh Yahweh is the strongest of many. No. Here, O Israel, the Lord
37:10
our God, the Lord is one. That's it. There are no others. Okay? And and that's why idol idolatry was such a
37:23
horrible offense against Yahweh because it it it posits the idea that there are others and there are no others. So again, this
37:34
is radical in the ancient near east. We take this for granted and we're told, you know, there are three monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, and we're all kind of sister
37:44
religions and and all this bunk that is going on. We we take for granted the idea of monotheism. But 2,000 years ago, 3,000 years ago,
37:55
99.9% of the world was either polytheistic or henotheistic, but not monotheistic in an exclusive way that that um Israel presents when it shows up
38:08
on the scene. Again, I I likened it to the idea of of evolution. It's like a Cambrian explosion. It's like um it it just shows up really out of nowhere.
38:18
There's really not much biblical basis for thinking that Israel maintained anything like a pure religion while it
38:29
was in Egypt. That when they came out of Egypt, there was much so in in in much that they needed to leave behind. Which is why we begin Leviticus 18 with
38:40
with the Lord saying, "Do not do as they did in Egypt where you are coming from." and do not do as they do in Canaan where
38:51
you are going. So Israel is pointed out right away. I have redeemed you. You are a a treasured possession, a holy nation, which of course means set apart. But it
39:03
also means holy in conduct, which is what we're getting into in Leviticus, especially the second half. Not just individual conduct, but social communal
39:14
conduct. This is addressed to the to the camp as a plurality, not so much as individual Israelites. So they are supposed to live in such a way
39:25
that bears witness to what God has done for them and now wishes to do through them. But it goes beyond that and more
39:36
particularly Leviticus 18 and 20 is the centrality of marriage and the family
40:00
and we'll have opportunity to talk some about this but um the the sanctity of The family and its stability is going to be the foundation the practical foundation of the community
40:14
and the behavior within the families is going to be a gauge as to the health of the overall community. Again, Tom Tom
40:25
Holland comments on this. I want to uh read a quote from his book and he's talking about how again he's not talking about the Old Testament. He's talking about the modern
40:37
western world and its heritage. And again for him who for many years believed that Western civilization derives from the Greco Roman world.
40:49
He came to an awareness that that wasn't actually true. that the western civilization that we do enjoy comes much more from Christianity than from the
41:00
Greeks and the Romans. And so he says, but but what he's saying in this particular passage is that the church didn't come up with a new ethic.
41:11
It fully adopted the ethic of Judaism from which it derived. So it fully adopted the principles and the statutes and the prohibitions that
41:22
we're reading in Leviticus. There was never any debate. There was never any council where they met and said, "Well, let's we'll do this one but not that one." It was taken as scripture
41:35
and therefore it was fully authoritative and it moved right in seamlessly into the church. So when Holland is mentioning the church, he's this is in
41:45
the context in his book of the much broader development of Christianity out of Judaism but not really modifying it at all. Okay. So he says this, of all
41:58
the measures taken by the church to shape and mold the Christian people, few were to prove more enduring in their consequences other the the um the idea
42:10
of um family families and marriage. He goes on, goes on, "The church in its determination to place married couples
42:20
and not ambitious patriarchs at the heart of a properly Christian society had tamed the inst instinct of grasping dynasts to pair all cousins with
42:34
cousins. Only relationships sanctioned by canons were classed as legitimate." Again, that's where we get the idea of an in-law. an in-law. It was canon law that established the
42:46
validity of a of a married relationship. Or I should say it was canon law that established the the degrees of consanguinity within which you could not
42:58
marry. You had to be at least a certain number of degrees apart either horizontally or vertically in order for the marriage to be legal. So if you marry into a family legally they become
43:11
your in-laws. That's where it comes from. I didn't know that. Um, no families were permitted to be to join to be joined in marriage except for those
43:22
licensed by the church as in-laws. All right. So, what Holland is saying there is this was totally radical and new.
43:34
And he points out the dynasties which did continue well through the Christian era where cousins married cousins married cousins and you would have hemophilia and you'd have um madness. I
43:44
mean you you the idea that you were somehow improving and strengthening the family blood by marrying within the degrees of consanguinity
43:54
was not only unbiblical. It was it turned out to be quite genetically stupid. Actually they turned out to be genetically stupid. That's kind of what happened. Um,
44:05
happened. Um, I don't I don't personally think that's why God did establish the law, but certainly we can see the wisdom of it now through our our medical discoveries. But, um, so the situation that Israel's
44:17
in as we look at Leviticus 18 and 20 in the beginning of the holiness code is a situation of of complete radical identity shift.
44:28
identity shift. They are standing in a position in their world, the ancient near east that was thoroughly unlike any other people around them.
44:42
I think that's a principle that the New Testament writers try to inculcate into us, into our thinking. When Paul says, "If any man be in Christ, behold, all things are new. All
44:52
things are passed away." In fact, he doesn't even use uh he doesn't even use proper grammar. He just says new creation. You know the idea that uh that when Jesus says you are salt, you are
45:03
light, you are leaven, what the New Testament is trying to inculcate in our understanding is really the same thing that the Old Testament was trying to inculcate in the understanding of of Israel. You're not just another nation.
45:17
You've been created bar. You've been formed yater. You are mine and you are holy. Okay, these these are concepts that were
45:27
not even conceived of in the ancient neareastern pagan religions. We can't find anything that comes close in any of
45:38
the ancient writings to what we have in the scriptures. The nature of God is so radically different in the revelation of scripture than it is in all the other religions as to demand either that it is
45:52
an incredibly impressive hoax or it is revelation. It it's it's one or the other. It's not some mutation or evolution of of the
46:05
religions that were there. they didn't blend um somehow molecularly to form this particular religion. Even not just the monotheism but even the statutes
46:16
are completely different. And if you if you have your scriptures, open up to Genesis 18 because that word statutes
46:31
is also a very significant marker. not not one of the major ones that I'm going to be pointing out this evening, but an introductory statement introductory statement that establishes the contrast between
46:42
what Israel is called to be and what the world at that time was. Gen, I'm sorry. Leviticus 18, forgive. Yeah,
46:53
sorry about that. sometimes, you know, the the brain is either behind or ahead. So he starts out, then the Lord spoke to Moses,
47:04
saying, "Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, I am the Lord your God." By the way, that's marker number one. I am the Lord your God. You shall not do what
47:15
is done in the land of Egypt where you lived. nor are you to do what is done in the land of Canaan where I am bringing you. You shall not walk in their statutes.
47:35
Now, from a literary point of view, I think it's reasonable to then read what follows as at least a summary of their statutes.
47:46
He says, "You will not do what they did in Egypt, and you will not do what they do in the land of Canaan that you're entering. You will not walk according to their statutes." So,
47:57
um I don't know whether this is out of context, but this idea of statutes, this is a legal term. It's one of the words and
48:10
there are quite a number of them but they're the words statutes, commandments, laws, ordinances or just words. These these five are the the most
48:20
frequent in the pentetuk in referring to the commandments of God. In other words, the word represents a religious act, an act that is done in
48:34
the context and orientation of a deity. So it's not just you you you don't follow their example. You don't walk in their statutes. Now a
48:46
statute is a positive legislative act. It's an act that says thou shalt when God says thou shalt not. So it I think
48:58
first of very important this is this is a term a term of divine
49:08
worship. or we could say law. It's not mild. So in Genesis 18:3, oh gee, I keep saying that. Leviticus,
49:20
I'm sorry. In Leviticus 18:3, they are told, "You will not walk in their statutes. do not
49:35
walk in their Now, I think there's a subtle shift here, but I can't I can't prove it. I
49:47
think the shift is forwardlooking. They are clearly forbidden from continuing in whatever manner of life they saw the Egyptians live.
49:58
But their emphasis is on the land in which they are entering. And while it is it has been well documented that there are cases of for example obviously incest within Egypt.
50:12
The pharaoh the brother and sister would marry. They wasn't even cousins. So, I mean, that's fairly well known. Uh, I
50:23
think most of the offenses that we read in Genesis 18 and 20 were occurring in the land in which the Israelites were going,
50:35
not necessarily the land from which they had come. had come. And I think that represents Canaan again as uniquely emblematic
50:49
of the table of nations. And I'll go ahead and and elaborate that a little bit. Maybe maybe it'll help. When we get to the table of nations, we're about to be introduced to Abram in
51:01
chapter 12. chapter 12. over the ensuing generations and there are many there are many years between Abram and or between um Genesis 9 and 11
51:14
and then 12 and onward. We have two basic narratives basic narratives that are that parallel what we've
51:24
already seen between the sons of man and the sons of God ultimately ending with the flood. Okay. Well, here we now have another division
51:37
of the human race. They've been scattered, but for the most part, the nations, as Paul says in Acts 14, are suffered to go their own way.
51:47
But there are two nations that are being that are that are developing from the same point that are going to diverge with relationship to Yahweh
51:58
and then converge in a geopolitical sense. And those two nations are Canaan and Israel.
52:26
they're going to be as far apart as any two nations, any two tribes in the human race at that time. I think Canaan represents in this
52:39
narrative what the entire human race represented prior to the flood. And I mentioned last week that that is epitomized in a in a prefillment
52:51
of the prophecy of the completion of the sins of the Amorites with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why? because of the depths of their
53:04
depravity. Much of which is probably reiterated in Leviticus 18 and 20. In fact, the word Sodom gives us in our own
53:15
language, right? The the word for that horrible sexual sin.
53:37
the exile is part of all of this. Can that be extended to the exile? Um I would I would say no and yes. Um this is all still a continuation of the development of the human race. So even
53:50
though the flood wiped out the vast majority of the human race, sin persisted, right? And then we see the same division developing as we did in Adam's family between Cain and Seth. Now
54:02
we see between Shem and Ham. Okay? So, we see that and that's going to move down until we have uh almost like Genesis 6 where the um the sons of God
54:15
went in to the daughters of men, which I do not think has anything to do with angels, by the way, but you can see me after. Um after. Um I I don't think it does at all. I think
54:25
what what what which what we're seeing and that's going to happen again as the Israelites in the land disobey these prohibitions and begin to adopt the
54:36
statutes of the pagans. And so what does the land do? It vomits them out just as it did the Canaanites before. Now they of course
54:47
remain God's people because his um his gifts and his callings are are without repentance. But that so they separate
55:00
I'm not saying that Israel was a good nation and deserved God's grace. No, not at all. I'm just saying that that by the time of the conquest, there were two tribes among the human race that were as
55:11
far apart as could be in terms of moral rectitude or even moral foundation. And that was Israel and Canaan. And so what
55:22
will happen then is that politically there will be another deluge. There was intended to be another deluge
55:33
and that deluge was the conquest where Canaan would be destroyed.
55:44
Now this also sheds light on why it was such a terrible crime for the Israelites to fail in that endeavor. First of all, it was a lack of faith. God had promised their deliverance. He had promised their
55:56
victory. They did not trust that promise and therefore they did not prevail. But secondly, it enabled Canaan to survive.
56:06
And that enabled the perversion, the the idea of bad company corrupts good morals. This is like in spades. Okay, this is the exponential version of it. So that the other we we we begin to
56:20
to look at the exuges Jesus of the passage. Okay. First of all, okay, do not walk in their statutes. But very quickly, Leviticus quickly, Leviticus 18 verse 5, same context, same greeting
56:33
as it were. Um we read verse four, you are to perform my judgments. Oh, I'm sorry. It's verse four, not verse five. It's immediate.
56:51
Perform my judgments and what? Hopefully your Bibles have the same word
57:09
statutes. And it is the exact same word. I I think this puts the whole passage in a different light. These are not just ethical rules. ethical rules. These are the means by which Israel
57:20
would witness to one God, Yahweh, and walk in his statutes. Again, that's a religious term. These are these are not just ethical. These are cultic.
57:32
This behavior was a part not simply of the private lives of the Canaanites. This is something archaeology has shed quite a bit of light on. It was not
57:42
something that was done in their in the privacy of their homes. It was done publicly in the proclamation of their worship. These were statutes.
57:55
I I'm sure you've heard of the concept of temple prostitutes in the ancient world. I mean, these are these are things that that ancient paganism did
58:05
and they did it publicly and they did it in the name of God.
58:36
So statues seems to be walk walking in something conotes like you say it conotes a
58:47
daytoday living. daytoday living. It's not like you just do them three times a year or you do them on the Sabbath. No, when you walk that that is
58:58
your conversation. That is your manner of life. And if there's anything that describes the holiness code, especially chapter 19, is exactly that. This is how
59:08
Israel was to walk. Not not as a separate part of their religion versus their regular life. That that's that concept is totally foreign
59:20
in the in the ancient world, including Israel. The idea that you can separate your religious life and your secular life is is unknown in the ancient world. That's that's a totally modern invention
59:33
really very modern um and so to walk in it I think that's a very good point Abe is is to um intensify the day-to-day
59:43
nature and what these so if if we compare the parallel that is here statute and statute how do I say this
59:58
these sins that he will enumerate in 18 and 20 were moral offenses against the holy
1:00:10
God, but they were also, and I mentioned this last week, they were also pollution. They defiled the land. So this concept right here 18 verses 3
1:00:23
and 4 is then elaborated at the end of chapter 18 and at the end of chapter 20.
1:00:34
Because of this because the Canaanites walked in these statutes the land is vomiting.
1:00:44
Does it have two T's? is is spewing out the Canaanites. The land is doing this.
1:00:55
And if And if the Israelites the Israelites follow in that pattern, the land chapter 20 starting in at toward the last verses
1:01:21
Testament. I'll give you three guesses where this is the only place this verb is used. And I so I think it's very clear that the these are bookends.
1:01:32
I mean they don't the one is at the beginning of 18 and the other at the end of 20 like good book ends. No, but it's it's very clear that 18 is a description
1:01:42
of the social religious life of the Canaanites. And because of this, the land is vomiting them out. And then chapter 20 lists all of the
1:01:54
punishments that Israel is to enact against any offender of these laws so that so that it would not only punish the evildoer
1:02:06
but by way of example prevent others from following in their steps so that the land does not also vomit you out.
1:02:16
So chapter 18 is really a description of Canaan. Does that make sense? And of course it's framed in in the
1:02:27
prohibition. Don't do this. Don't do this. Don't do this. But the the the whole context is this is what they've been doing. This is why their iniquity has finally reached the limit. Now you
1:02:39
are going to you are going to be the instrument by which that land is going to vomit them out. Chapter 20 deals a lot more. In fact, chapter 18 doesn't have any punishments.
1:02:49
Chapter 20 has all the punishments. The crimes are often the same. But 18 is somewhat of a retrospective. It's too late for them. Does that make
1:03:03
sense? But 20 is a prospective. I if you if anybody does this, you must deal with it. in fact offering up your
1:03:13
children to Molech. If if you don't deal with it, I will deal with it and I will set my face against that man and against his family. And the idea is this is not just moral evil. This is defilement.
1:03:26
This is polluting the land. And if Israel does not police this as a nation, as a community, then eventually the land will vomit you out.
1:03:38
So, we're looking at what a people have done and what the result is. And now we're looking at what a people might do and what the result will be.
1:03:48
My question is, is this a redemptive or is this ace? Yes, I think it's absolutely redemptive
1:04:01
except the land. Yes, he's cleansing the land. I do believe that. And we'll we'll we actually have a whole lesson we're going to focus on the the land and the family
1:04:12
and how important the land is to the whole concept of Israel as a people. But I do think that what what Joshua does in the land is parallel to what the water
1:04:24
of the flood did to the earth. It is cleansing. Is it
1:04:36
when inhabit a new heaven and a new earth. Is it playing the long game here trying to reverse the curse? Is that
1:04:48
No, I don't think so. Um I think that he is you mean God?
1:05:05
How do I I I agree with the idea of reversing the curse. Um I I've mentioned before how Christians have often fallen into the thinking that
1:05:17
we must accept the curse and not accept any technology that might reverse the curse, whether it's medical or even lightning rods. Okay. Um I we laugh but
1:05:29
that was very that was a very serious issue in the 18th century and people were would reject and today you know you you you do still have some Amish that very few now but you have some who who
1:05:41
don't have electricity um you know that's that's that's reversing the to darkness is part of the curse and and we must allow the seasons and the sun to no we are we are all the people of God
1:05:54
are people of redemption. And so we don't have the I don't think we are going to reverse the curse. And I don't think that's what you're saying. But I think that what we're about is a
1:06:05
reversal of the curse. It's like it's it's the new creation. And so while it's not going to redeem the old creation, that is being reserved for what? Fire which is going to purify it. And from
1:06:17
that one, see these are all microcosms of that. The flood, the conquest, these are all microcosms of that. And it is a purification of the land which is itself
1:06:27
a microcosm of the purification of the earth and of all creation. And and the result of that is going to be a land in which righteousness dwells. I think it's important to understand
1:06:56
similar steps in order to make their lives be productive or their land be
1:07:24
right ceremonies that are all Yes. They don't understand that it's a big picture and and they also don't understand the purpose and the uh the impact of the right? They really don't. I mean, these are these are uh this is typology.
1:07:36
All of this is typology. It's showing us what eventually Christ will do. But it also does show us in our purpose as Christians, as a church, we parallel the
1:07:47
purpose of Israel. But we do so now with the power of an indwelling Holy Spirit because Christ has paid the price. He has defeated death and Satan. We we can
1:07:58
look at these things and we can see the principles behind it. We still live in a world like Israel lived in. Our sits in Lebanon is not different. We live in a
1:08:09
in an age that is known as neopagan. Okay. So all of these things we we are seeing them become acceptable again. The solutions are not to go back to the
1:08:21
to the blood of to the red hepher. You know, we don't go back to the shadows to try to find light. Even though this is like showing us the world, showing us
1:08:31
humanity, showing us God and his holiness, and showing us what a holy people are like, but the actual principle or the the context and the
1:08:41
historical events, they're different. They're history. And I I've read what you some of the things that that you're alluding to. Um, theonomy is all about
1:08:52
that. The idea that we need to rewrite all our laws in line with biblical law and we need to to run our country and govern according to biblical law.
1:09:02
That's scary. and and just a cursory history of reading of history will tell you that when religion gets in charge of the government.
1:09:14
the government. It's not good. It's not even good for the religion that gets it. And I can I can guarantee you that if religion ever gets a hold of the this country, it's not going to be ours. Not going to be our religion. I mean,
1:09:26
you're not going to have non-denominational reformed Baptists running this country. There ain't enough of us. Okay. And and and just like every other nonconformist,
1:09:37
we we will have persecution in the name of God. We want that. No, we need to understand that we are of a new creation. That's what's happened. That has happened. So what was promised and
1:09:51
what was typified by Israel as a new creation has now happened in Christ and the church. And the culmination of that will be at his peruseia. And with the earth melting, the elements
1:10:02
melting in intense heat and a new heaven and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. This was said in front of them. It, you know, Mount Ebal, Mount Gerisim, if you will obey, it will be eaten to
1:10:14
you. Okay, everything your your crops will not fail. Your your cattle will not fail. Your your own wombs will not fail. It's like, okay, this is perfect.
1:10:25
Obviously, it didn't. It was setting the picture of a new creation. Even the even the furnishings and the artistry of the tabernacle were a reminder of Eden. But
1:10:36
it was always to look forward to what yet had to be done by God himself. So the it's it's unfortunate that we we read the right principles and then we do the wrong things with them. I think
1:10:48
that's what you're you're saying is yeah, we read it. There it is. It's still around. Let's do this. No, that's that's it's not it wasn't really the answer then. writer of Hebrews makes
1:10:58
that clear. Okay? Because none of these things were were effective in purifying the conscience, were they? So the writer of Hebrews should take away any such thought that we can go back to the
1:11:09
actual rituals and statutes and and procedures of the Old Testament and fix the problems of today. It didn't fix the problems then and it was never meant to
1:11:43
Yeah. And the problem is, as in Romans 7, the problem is the law of sin that dwells within us. So even though we might look at the law of God and say, "Yeah, that's a pretty good law," we're not going to
1:11:53
follow it. There must be something more. And that and that's where the modern Christian attempt at theonomy or or reconstruction or kingdom now, why it is
1:12:04
so terrible is that it completely emasculates the victory of Jesus Christ. And and the nature of the church is a new creation. I appreciate that point.
1:12:15
So we have these, I think, very clear bookends. One looking back, one retrospective, one prospective. This is what happened to the people who whose
1:12:26
iniquity finally reached its fullness. Now I'm going to vomit. The land's going to vomit them out. And now if you do these things, this is what you must do to deal with them. Cut off that person
1:12:38
from among the community. Put that person to death. Take that son outside the camp and stone him. Okay. Boom, boom, boom. Many of the same statues with a few more added. But what's what's
1:12:50
different between 20 and 18 is that 20 has the execution of judgment. The execution of judgment in 18 is the
1:13:01
conquest that Canaan is going to be vomited. But if you don't deal with these things within your own midst, God will and and to use an analogy from the Bible that I think is quite true. If you don't deal
1:13:13
with those things, I am going to come to you and remove your lampstand. That's essentially the same thing. You will no longer be my people. I will
1:13:23
remove my Holy Spirit, which is symbolized by the lampstand because you won't stop doing these things. So that's what 20 tells us. If if someone does it,
1:13:34
you deal with it. If you don't deal with it, I'm going to deal with it. If you keep not dealing with it, I'm going to the land is going to vomit you out. Okay? So there you have those um
1:13:45
those bookmarks but I or book ends. Now I want to jump ahead because of time because I think there's there are two very important markers. One of which we've talked about quite a bit. So this
1:14:08
there are three. Um, we're going to talk about very briefly one and then hopefully with a little bit more detail the second one. Um, but you have
1:14:19
oops this phrase I am the Lord or I am the Lord your God. And I mentioned last week this is
1:14:29
shorthand. For I am the Lord your go your God who brought you out of bondage and brought you to myself. So this is the this is the prologue of the
1:14:39
susaranti treaty. This is the great king saying I have established my relationship with you as my subordinates by doing these things for you. Yeah,
1:14:52
that's a standard formula in the souari treaty that the great king predicates his authority to establish the rest of the treaty on the basis of what he has
1:15:03
already done for these people, the vassal state. Now, as I mentioned in biblical theology, the major difference between the susaranti treaty and the and
1:15:14
the law is that Israel is not God's vassel. Israel is God's people. But the format of the two is still almost identical. Okay. Um so I am the Lord
1:15:26
your God. This this is this is the uh normally in ancient Neareastern legal codes the authority of the law is predicated
1:15:37
on the identity of the king. So if if the Israelite Torah truly followed ancient Neareastern code,
1:15:48
it would be in the name of Moses. It would be in the name of of the man who the people considered to be their
1:15:58
king, their leader. Okay, that is I was religiously avoided in the Pentatuk. There's not one single commandment that is predicated on the
1:16:10
authority of Moses. In fact, the one time Moses does something on his own authority, it did not end well for him. Okay? Water from the rock. So the the idea I am the
1:16:23
Lord is that law here is predicated on the person of Yahweh
1:16:42
the king. Now of course what this means is Yahweh is the king. This is this is where it all begins here at Sinai. That will culminate again as I said in in God saying to Samuel, they are not rejecting
1:16:54
you but me as king over them. He's not saying they are refusing to accept me as king. Never having had a king before. He
1:17:05
says they are rejecting me as king. He has been king since si delivered them from Egypt. And so the
1:17:15
language doesn't actually use the word, but in comparison with the legal codes of the nations around, you realize, well, this is completely different. This is not the law of Hammurabi.
1:17:27
This is the law of Yahweh. Okay? Now the king of of the Babylonians or the Assyrians, he might and will reference the gods. The the Hittite Suzaranti
1:17:38
treaties would call the gods as witnesses. But the treaty and the statutes were firmly based on the authority of the human king over his human vassels. Once
1:17:51
again, a radical difference between Judaism, ancient Judaism, and the paganism of the ancient near east. So whenever we read this phrase, I am the
1:18:02
Lord or I am the Lord your God, we should hear the echo of the fullness of the prologue. I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt and brought
1:18:14
you to myself. Okay, this is just shorthand for that longer view or statement. In Deuteronomy, he calls on heaven and
1:18:24
right? Right. We we mentioned I mentioned that in the biblical theology class that even the the calling of witnesses which is one of the aspects of the susaranti treaty and in the Hebrews you know we
1:18:36
read that when God could not swear by any other greater than himself he swore by my own name you know so he he calls heaven and earth Moses does to witness so the idea of witness is still there
1:18:48
it's just that there are no other there are no gods higher than Yahweh or there are no other gods so you they couldn't follow the pagan pattern. Um, but there are definitely witnesses called and I
1:19:12
is the land. The land is set forward here as the adjudicator of Israel's behavior. And I don't think it's metaphorical.
1:19:24
I know that that's the common way of treating it now, but it's not it does not read as metaphor. I don't think we fully understand for example Romans 8 when we read that all
1:19:36
creation groans as if in uh you know childbirth in labor waiting for the revelation of the sons of God waiting for the redemption from the futility to
1:19:47
which it has been subjected. I think here's a place where both pagan and medieval literature and somy
1:20:00
had a better understanding of creation of the universe than our modern scientific viewpoint. The philosophy of materialism which is
1:20:11
inherent in the enlightenment and is the basis of evolution has effectively
1:20:22
silenced the voice of creation. I think when the earthquakes and the darkening of the sky and the torrent and
1:20:34
the thunder at Christ's death, I think that's a vivid picture of what I'm talking about. The creation has a voice. The land has a voice. I I think
1:20:48
even today to some extent the land has a voice. I don't think that it has a I don't think necessarily that plants have personalities or you know I'm I'm not I'm not really weird. Um or I should say
1:21:01
really I'm not weird. I'm I I think that we've lost something um epistemologically
1:21:11
um epistemologically through modern science and the enlightenment. Um, the music of the spheres was was actually in reference to the the stars of heaven and their dance
1:21:25
and it was considered to be analogous to the angelic hosts. Now, obviously some writers like Augustine went a little bit wacky with that notion, but we've gone the other
1:21:37
way. Okay, we we we have largely accepted that for the most part the universe is just a bunch of swirling atoms and we don't understand that the
1:21:48
universe came from the voice and the finger of God and and it has a voice and and it is offended
1:22:00
by the corruption of humanity. That's Romans 8. and it will be redeemed from that corruption through humanity. That's also Romans 8. So what man was
1:22:13
supposed to do when creation first came into being, he will do through the man Jesus Christ, but also through his brothers and sisters, sons and daughters
1:22:23
of God. of God. and and creation. I I guess you know maybe maybe CS Lewis had had something going here when he with his Chronicles of Narnia and the
1:22:35
talking trees and the talking animals. Uh I think there's a whole lot more to what's around us than than just swirling atoms. And and so when we read in
1:22:46
scripture that the land will spew you out as it spewed out those before you, I don't think that's metaphor. I think the weight of the sin of the Canaanites was
1:22:58
more than the land could continue to bear. I think the same thing is true of Sodom and Gomorrah. I think the land itself erupted and
1:23:08
destroyed that whole region and all the inhabitants therein. So the land is part of all this um even in in its adjudicating the behavior of its
1:23:20
inhabitants. I think we've seen that in human history. I think we see it today that there are parts of the world and parts of our own country that have been made uninhabitable by the actions of mankind.
1:23:32
And and I think that under this lies somewhat um what I would call the root of of a Christian
1:23:44
environmentalism. Okay? I'm not an environmentalist in the liberal sense and I'm not talking about mother earth or Gaia or anything like that. This is part of God's creation and the scripture you does not separate us.
1:23:57
It unites us because we are supposed to be God's co-regent over his creation. And so what we have done we know has already rendered creation corrupted and
1:24:09
frustrated and and dwelling and living in vain but also yearning for redemption and groaning until that redemption is revealed. Um, I think that might explain
1:24:20
a lot of plate tectonics. I frankly don't think that the Lord made the earth to crack apart at different places. You know, I think that in and of itself is an impact of the corruption introduced
1:24:33
by human sin. So the land here again, it's a microcosm. It's it's typological. It doesn't say that the land of Babylon or the land of Egypt or the land of of
1:24:43
Kush or any of the other lands are doing this. It's this land. This land. The land that is now Canaan's and will be
1:24:56
Israel's. This is I think gets to the heart of why God what God is doing in giving this particular land promised
1:25:07
to Abram right after this happened or very biblically right after. Okay, this is the land. But before I give it to your descendants,
1:25:20
these people, the ones who were cursed by Noah, by Noah, these people will dwell there. And when they have filled up the measure of their sin, then your people will come in and
1:25:32
wipe them out and dispel them. So it's it's not happening anywhere else. It's all in this little geographical area. But again, that's typological.
1:25:42
And the big picture is that creation is waiting for the revelation not just of Jesus Christ. This is
1:25:53
remarkable that Paul says this is waiting for and yearning for the revelation of the sons of God. We will actually somehow be the instruments of
1:26:06
that overall and final redemption. I have no idea how, but I think that's what Paul is saying. And and we're going to be looking at this, Lord willing, in a few weeks. This is this is one of the most remarkable
1:26:17
passages in Paul's remarkable letters. But at the end of Romans,
1:26:29
this is one little comment, verse 20, chapter 16. But I think this little comment that he Paul makes
1:26:39
Paul makes summarizes the purpose of the redemptive plan of God and God's people. He says, "And the God of peace will soon crush
1:26:50
Satan under your feet." Let's close in prayer. Father, we do pray that you would open your word to us more clearly and help us
1:27:01
to see our world through your word. Not that we would repeat the exact same things that you had your people do in the past, but we would understand better
1:27:12
why you had them do it and understand how their situation in life parallels ours. but most of all to understand the impact of the finished work of Jesus
1:27:24
Christ and the influence of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Father, we do pray that you would glorify your name in the church through Jesus Christ. For it is in his name we
