In his first epistle, Peter quotes Hosea 1.9-10 suggesting that the fulfilment of the Children of Israel being as the sand of the sea is found in the Gentile inclusion. Hosea hints at this and the New Testament confirms it in uncertain terms.
1 Peter 2 speaks of the disobedient who stumble - an indication of apostasy. The Holy Nation is now comprised of people who formerly were not a people but are now the people of God (echoing Hosea).
Hosea in keeping with Old Testament prophetic patterns utilizes idiom - he speaks in terms his audience could understand. The idea that national Israel would be no more and that the concept itself would be redefined, fulfilled, and expanded in terms of a future Jew/Gentile composite people would have made the Jews rend their clothes and dump ashes on their heads. It would not have sounded like a blessing but a curse. However in the context of the New Testament and Pentecost - it all takes on a very different character and Peter helps us to understand Hosea and the entire Old Testament. In fact we cannot understand the Old without viewing it through the Christocentric lens of the New. The failure to understand this has led to repeated episodes of theological error which continues to afflict the Church today.
Peter's language is striking. In 2.10 he declares (by invoking Hosea) the Church to be Israel. And if this wasn't clear enough, in v.12 he refers to those outside the now pilgrim/stranger Church as 'gentiles' - a label that only has meaning in contrast to 'Jews' or 'Israel'. The Church is the Holy Nation. The Old Testament promisees find their fulfilment in the Sons of Abraham - the Church, not the Zionist state in the Levant. It is an expression of continued apostasy.
He warns them against fleshly lusts that war against the soul. Now that could mean a lot of things as there are many types of lusts. But his application makes this clear. He's talking about the lust for power and status. Therefore, he states - Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king as supreme; or unto governors as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men.
He goes on to speak of suffering and enduring grief even in the face of abusive masters.
He condemns the notion of using liberty for malicious purposes which he seems to equate with rebellion - which the Old Testament equates with witchcraft. We are exhorted to suffer patiently. Note, it is our calling, following the example of Christ.
In one fell swoop Peter condemns both Dispensational and Dominionist theology - two of the dominant paradigms in our day. The Jews and the Zionist state of Israel have nothing to do with the fulfilment of prophecy and Christians are explicitly called to reject the pretensions and hopes of Dominionism. This of course is not the only place. Over and over again, Christians are called to suffer, warned of the dangers surrounding wealth, and told to lay up our treasures in heaven. One could say that in a broader sense, Peter condemns modern Evangelicalism at what drives it.
By way of contrast the false teachers think godliness is gain, they focus on their bellies - either a reference to Mosaic Law or more likely a gluttonous disposition regarding what we might call the good life. They mind earthly things - refusing to die to self but rather seeking to affirm the things of the past life. Their conversation is not in heaven as Paul indicates in Philippians 3.
And what of the argument that says if the Christians fall back (as the Dominionists see it) then the world will just be handed over to the evil people? Therefore (it is argued) we must engage and seek to shape society.
Peter addresses this as well. In chapter 3 of his first epistle he states:
For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?
But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;
The problem with the adherents of Dominionism is actually quite simple. For all their bluster they lack faith. Their argument is bogus and they forget the context of the New Testament. There was no godly government in sight or on the horizon and this did not trouble the apostles in the least. They exhorted the Church to submit, obey the laws, and pay taxes knowing full well the state was wasteful, idolatrous, and evil. There was no call to politics and in fact I would argue on the basis of 2 Peter and Jude, this attitude which was present among the Judaizers and perhaps some of the Hellenistic Judaizers was categorically rejected.
Today's Dominionists cannot abide the gospel call to take up the cross. They cannot stand that New Testament ethics do not lead to wealth and power, status and respect, but to humility, mortification, marginalisation, poverty, and martyrdom. They cannot understand God is glorified in weakness and in being slaughtered like sheep - we are more than conquerors. It is no wonder they largely despise the testimony of the Early Church. In fact the New Testament might as well be a closed book. They will not hear it. It is quite literally foolishness to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment