The Psalms are the word of Christ

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

... there's an open invitation in the NT usage to explore the OT text for revelation of Jesus. (Of course there are limits - our revelation should be tempered by reason, precedence, and fellowship).

... there was One Man who overcame. We'd do well to heed this Man, and live. And He's revealed for us in the words of scripture.

I think Psalm 22 is a classic example. Repeatedly this psalm is cited in the NT text, showing not only the suffering and death of Jesus, but the glories to come. Yet not all of the chapter is cited. Yet it is hard to read the chapter, even the non-cited parts, and not see experiences of the coming Christ.

I don't think it's too much to say that we may cautiously peruse the non-cited parts of the book of Psalms and see pictures of our Jesus. I think the NT usage was an invitation to do just that. The frail, human, suffering Person whose faith in God sustained Him in adversity. In the midst of death He lifted up His voice and blessed the Father. How could we lose hope, with such a One in our midst?

"In the midst of the assembly I will sing praises to You, O Father" (Psa 22:22) If such a suffering, crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended One is by His Holy Spirit praising the Father among us, how can we but be encouraged, and carry on? And why shouldn't we be interested in finding details of His relations with the Father in heaven, detailed in the prophetic word? I think if done carefully, patiently, with respect, among the oversight of the leaders of the flock, it might be profitable.

"Moreover, the rules of the Church require that Scripture should be understood as the holy Fathers explain it, and not at all arbitrarily. By being guided in our understanding of the Gospel by the explanation of the holy Fathers, we keep the tradition of the Holy Church." Russian Bishop Ignaty Brianchaninov

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

"In the midst of the assembly I will sing praises to You, O Father" (Psa 22:22) If such a suffering, crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended One is by His Holy Spirit praising the Father among us, how can we not but be encouraged, and carry on likewise? And why shouldn't we be interested in finding details of His relations with the Father in heaven, detailed in the prophetic word?

"Finding details of His relations with the Father in heaven"... that sums up my current Bible reading. To me, everything worthwhile, today, hinges on this. As I wrote earlier, WL typically gave three options from the text. First, that the psalm-writer was natural and fallen and wrote from that perspective, trying vainly to keep the law and please God. Something like "My hands are clean, and You've saved me because You delighted in me" in Psalm 18 was supposedly natural. Or, the writing typifies the Christian believer and his relations with the ascended Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit operating within. Today, therefore, it's not dead letter to strain after, but an indwelling, living and life-giving Spirit. And lastly, there's the option of a "revelation of Christ" which the psalmist had, while writing under the influence of the Holy Spirit: e.g. "Not one of His bones shall be broken." Obviously this interpretation was typically driven by NT usage.

But I believe that another interpretive option shows us the Man, Jesus Christ, of Nazareth town, a Galilean in occupied Judea, a descendant of David who hungered and thirsted and struggled and wept, who was mocked by His own younger brothers: "If you are the Christ, go and show yourself at the feast. Don't hide." This very frail, mortal Man can be seen, again and again, in intimate relation with His Father, who is God enthroned in heaven. In this, the psalmist typified Him excellently. Those declarations of fealty and obedience were kept to the "jot and tittle". Jesus overturned nothing, sidestepped nothing, fulfilled all - "It is finished". It is entirely complete in Him. "The things which were written concerning Me must be fulfilled" (Luke 18:31, 22:37, 24:44).

And the weak, frail, mortal human race can now see in Scriptures this One, while yet on earth, in full dependence upon the Father's will and speaking. He was completely dependent and utterly obedient. "He trusted in Him, let Him come down and save Him now" (Psa 22:8; Matt 27:43). The vulnerability of the mortal Christ on earth, which He overcome with faith and trust and hope and obedience, is now a vision beckoning to all those vulnerable creatures who follow.

Let me shift gears for a moment. I try to be "up" on what's current, and recently was viewing a website of one of the "Mega-churches". Essentially they have their own streaming tv station: all the meetings are video-taped and available for viewing. I clicked on one of their recent services, and I couldn't even make it through the first song. It was the typical "Praise and Worship" affair, with a large, plain stage and a half-dozen fresh, smiling musicians. What got me at first was the metronomic banging of the drummer. It was like they were 'thump-thump-thump' agitating the crowd into an elevated, trance-like state. (Maybe that's just my post-Pentacostal allergy kicking in).

But what killed it for me was the "We love You and praise You, our exalted Jesus" theme. Now, nothing's wrong with that of itself. But what I missed was any trace of the relationship of Jesus with the Father. I needed evidence of Jesus, on earth, praising the Father, obeying the Father, and yes even being perfected by the Father. That's why these texts rescue me today. Jesus is now enthroned on high, King of kings and Lord of lords, but before exaltation He walked the proverbial mile or three, with us. The "Man in the glory" was first a man living among the sheep. The P&W guys just bypassed that, and created their own Cargo Cult, staring up at a shiny "Jesus in the Sky" that's far above our toils and cares of humanity below.

But He was here with us.

Now back to my point, and why I think this textual imagery has such powerful potency. Instead of saying, "This is the natural psalmist trying to trust in God", or instead of, "This is the Christian trusting in his own version of 'Jesus in the Sky'", what we might see in the text is the very human Jesus, on earth, trusting in His Heavenly Father. Through fealty and obedience Jesus and the Father were one. Man and God were joined again, and the curse was broken, and estrangement and alienation were gone. When the writer of Hebrews quoted the Psalms and said, "We see Jesus" (2:9) this is Jesus that I recognize. This is He of whom Peter said, "God has raised this Jesus to life, and we're all witnesses of it." (Acts 2:32).

To sum, it's not my trust in God that counts, nor even my trust in Jesus, even (though I do). The vision that burning before me in the text is the frail, mortal, vulnerable Human Being who trusted in His Father God to save Him. This is the brass serpent who was lifted up before our eyes. And this is the One now enthroned. This is the Lamb of God, slain for all. This is the One we can see, and hear, and follow. Because we're here, and He was here, among us. The disciples were with him for several years, and their testimonies are clear; His Holy Spirit is here, declaring Him through the Holy Word.

To me, the Spirit expressly declares that "My hands are clean/I have kept Your word/You rescued Me because You delighted in Me" in Psalm 18 is not merely King David trying to rescue himself, but it importantly typifies the coming Son of David, who is Jesus Christ. God got Jesus out of the 'jam' of incarnation in the flesh of sin, and did it in a way that gives life to all who believe. This was the unique grain that fell and brought forth many grains. God even said, "This is My Son in whom I delight". God delights in Jesus, His Son.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

And the weak, frail, mortal human race can now see in Scriptures this One, while yet on earth, in full dependence upon the Father's will and speaking. He was completely dependent and utterly obedient. "He trusted in Him, let Him come down and save Him now" (Psa 22:8; Matt 27:43). The vulnerability of the mortal Christ on earth, which He overcome with faith and trust and hope and obedience, is now a vision beckoning to all those vulnerable creatures who follow.

We are weak, and mortal, because of our venality. The weight of our crimes, both individual and collective, hang heavy. Yet it pleased God that the weight of our sins would be placed on a frail, mortal human body such as our own. One of our own rescued us. And this One was none other than the Lord Jesus Christ, exalted now forevermore.

It seems that the "Processed Triune God" metric of WL somehow sidestepped this. The Incarnated Jehovah superseded the clear and repeated image of a frail, mortal Man. So when the frail mortal man cried out in trouble, in type, in the poetry of psalms, WL dismissed that as vanity.

Psalm 31:1
In You, O Jehovah, do I take refuge;

Never let me be put to shame.

Rescue me in Your righteousness.

The RecV footnote says, "In this psalm David speaks of God's saving him from distress. However, God's salvation for the New Testament believers is not mainly from their distress. In His salvation God sustains and strengthens His believers in their distresses that they may live and magnify Christ (Phil. 1:19-21a)."

Yet where is the Father rescuing Jesus Christ from death? This is the one, singular narrative, in which all others find their home. This is the "one ring to rule them all", a la JRR Tolkien. Apart from this, WL's "New Testament believers" have nothing. Yet it is ignored.

Psalm 31:9-17

9 Be gracious to me, O Jehovah, for I am in distress. My eye is wasted away with grief, Indeed my soul and body.

10 For my life has been consumed in sorrow, And my years, in sighing. My strength fails because of my iniquity, And my bones have wasted away.

11 Because of all my adversaries, I have become a reproach, And especially so to my neighbors, And something dreaded to my acquaintances; Those who see me on the street flee from me.

12 I am forgotten, like a dead man out of mind; I am like a destroyed vessel.

13 For I hear the slander of many; Terror is on every side. When they take counsel together against me, They scheme to take my life.

14 But I trust in You, O Jehovah; I say, You are my God.

15 My times are in Your hand; Deliver me from the hand of my enemies and from those who pursue me.

16 Cause Your face to shine upon Your servant; Save me in Your lovingkindness.

17 O Jehovah, do not let me be put to shame when I call out to You; Let the wicked be put to shame; let them be silent in Sheol.

The only RecV footnote here was for verse 9. "David's distress included his grief, sorrow, and the reproach of his opposers. The believers today who follow the Lord also suffer much distress, including persecution. In the NT, however, the apostle Paul did not complain about his distress. Rather, he said that all things worked together for his good that he, as one of God's many sons, could be conformed to the image of the firstborn Son of God."

I find this assessment to be rather subjective. In the Gospel of John, Jesus said, "Now my soul is troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save Me out of this hour. But for this reason I have come to this hour." (v.27)

What? Jesus was troubled?

And, Jesus wept? (11:35)

Jesus groaned? "He was deeply moved in spirit and troubled"? (11:32, NIV)

"Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb." (11:38, NIV).

These few gospel fragments show the inner life being revealed. In actuality, the inner life was continually poured out before the Father in heaven. But it was done typically in secret, behind the proverbial "closed door" (e.g. Matt 6:6; see also Mark 1:35, Luke 5:16). Occasionally the disciples got witness of that - "And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground." (Luke 22:44 NIV)

Yet what was He praying? Was He praying Paul's epistles? Here is the RecV footnote on Psalm 29: "David's prayer and praise in this psalm is too much in the material and physical realm and cannot compare with the prayer and praise in the New Testament"

Oh, really? So if Paul, in the New Testament, encouraged the "word of Christ to dwell in you richly, in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs," then that should be rather the NT prayers and blessings that now compose the body of the "word of Christ"? Do you think Paul actually wanted us to take the Psalms out of the repertoire and simply replace them with his own writings? WL seems hopeful that this is the case. I disagree. This seems to be some kind of sleight-of-hand trick: the NT writer recommends the OT writings to dwell in you richly, but the NT expositor WL says, "Don't bother. Stick with the NT. It's much better." But did the actual NT writings in any way promote or suggest that idea? I say, quite the contrary.

Romans 8:3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh,

When WL read the Psalms he certainly saw the "weak flesh" and the "troubled soul" but he missed its typification of the Seed of David, the Son of Man, the coming prophesied Messiah. Even though the NT constantly alludes to this, WL conceded it only when absolutely necessary. It apparently wasn't helpful to his "Processed Triune God" and "New Testament Economy" metrics.

I repeat that WL isn't entirely to blame for this exegetical mess. I grew up in Protestantism, where the viability of the NT was taken for granted, and its constant appeals to the OT were supposedly safe to ignore. The NT was scripture, and portrayed Christ. The OT, on the other hand, seemed to talk about the Jews, history, the law (which was now rendered moot by the age of grace), etc. It was useful for some background, if you really wanted to pursue it. But it could be safely and profitably ignored. Like WL put it, "Stick to he high peak revelations of the NT". But the NT was clearly building its revelations out of the OT material. The foretold coming Messiah, being fulfilled by the Man Jesus of Nazareth, was its nearly constant theme. And that included His being ground down to nothing, suffering and being lowered to the shameful death of a slave. All the "high peaks" of the NT are built on this one foundation. When Philip told Nathaniel in John 1:45, "We have found Him", that clearly presupposed common understanding of the typified Messiah alluded to in scriptures. But the gospel narrative repeatedly stressed that the disciples' ideas of this typified Messiah had missed the suffering and dying part. They can be forgiven a little quicker than today's Bible expositors, who have less excuse for ignorance.

So when David says, "You will rescue me" and "You will save me" and "I trust in You" and even, "I obey You. My hands are clean and You delight in Me" I don't think we should be so quick as WL was, to dismiss it out of hand as merely the vanity of David's fallen human imagination. There was One Man who redeemed these declarations; in fact He was even known in NT parlance as the incarnated Word Himself. He lived out this word because He was the Word. And now His sent Spirit makes this Word come alive in our hearts, as we exercise our mouths. This is why the apostle also says that we will be "filled in Spirit" by enjoying this word (Eph 5:18,19). Gee, it sounds something like God's New Testament Economy to me!

[aron]

Psalm 31:5 says, "Into your hands I commit my spirit; deliver me, LORD, my faithful God." We know from Luke 23:46 that Jesus quoted this: "Jesus called out with a loud voice, 'Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.' When he had said this, he breathed his last."

So even though Jesus, in agony, quoted Psalm 31 on the cross, when the same psalm was found saying, "Do not let me be put to shame" and "rescue me O God" then its author David was complaining in his distress, according to the RecV footnote, and desiring to avoid suffering, instead of following the NT principle of "living and gaining Christ". Hmmm.... seems to be a lot of effort here, expended to avoid seeing the Christ plainly coming into view. And similarly we've seen the RecV footnote panning Psalm 1, which speaks of the blessing to the righteous man. Sorry, folks, no righteous men allowed. Salvation in the NT is rather "unmerited grace to sinners". So the "assembly of the righteous" in Psalm 1:5 is naturally ignored - by definition it can't exist. Because there aren't any righteous, see?

But when Christ is found praising the Father in the midst of the assembly, (Psa 22:22; Heb 2:12), suddenly the interpreter forgets that there wasn't supposed to be an assembly of the righteous! Poof - on cue an assembly appears... likewise Psalm 26:12; 35:18; 40:9,10; 68:26; 107:32; 109:30 and so on. When the argument didn't want an assembly, there wasn't one; but when the argument needed to allow one it magically appeared on cue. How convenient; just like when the psalmist groans or cries in distress he's just complaining, unless of course it's Jesus Christ who's pictured groaning and crying out to the Father, which is of course okay. Disconnect, much?

And so I ask, why can't the LC flock include these words of scripture in their NT economy? Why can't they say, "Thy words were found and I did eat them" to these passages, as with those in Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy? I can think of two reasons: first off, WL discouraged it. So there it is, everyone: the oracle has spoken. Doesn't matter if Paul repeatedly encouraged it. "Nope", goes the reply, "We may profitably 'eat' Paul's recommendations, but we don't have to follow them! We're indeed hearers of his word, even eaters, but certainly not doers! Likewise, when Peter quotes the psalms we can dismiss Peter as being 'low' and lacking vision. Got that? Our 'apostle' WL had the high peak NT vision, like today's Paul (though we'll ignore Paul when necessary) but Peter the ignorant Galilean fisherman who composed it unfortunately didn't have sufficient revelation."

So the LC are willing to ignore Paul and dismiss Peter, if it means to closely follow their own apostle. If WL dismissed the word, then so does the LC. And if he subjectively picked through it, ignoring obvious contradictions arising in his exegeses, then his acolytes also choose that path. Because their oracle has spoken.

Second, suppose that somehow the Blendeds managed to side-step WL's ministry and figured out how to allow the LC flock to profitably exercise their spirits in this text. What then? What if they quietly ignored WL's discouraging words and - surprise, surprise - found the Spirit of God's Christ, there in those scriptures (e.g. Eph 5:18,19)? Well, another threat would soon arise. Then, unfortunately, the gates to dreaded Christianity might open! They might see others, not meeting on the precious ground of locality, who're currently enjoying Christ in the Psalms. What then? The whole foundation for being 'God's particular people' might be undermined. The whole reason for being the LC is to separate from fallen Christianity, right? No bridges allowed to Babylon - none! So if someone is seen profitably enjoying, and ministering to others from their enjoyment in the text of God's word, then the "One Trumpet" edict is in question and the whole edifice totters and shakes. "And the crash of the house was great"... who knows, there might be another Keith Green out there today, singing something like, "Create in me a clean heart, O God" from the Psalms. Then what? What if God was found moving outside of the demarcated "central lane of God's economy"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv16...ature=youtu.be

No, better to ignore Paul, dismiss Peter as ignorant, and just hold tightly to the letter of Lee. Ministry uber alles.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

So even though Jesus, in agony, quoted Psalm 31 on the cross, when the same psalm was found saying, "Do not let me be put to shame" and "rescue me O God" then its author David was complaining in his distress, according to the RecV footnote, and desiring to avoid suffering, instead of following the NT principle of "living and gaining Christ".

For Lee to be truly consistent about all of this, then he should have panned Jesus' own prayer in the garden where he asked that he be spared of the agony to come. Seems awfully whiney and natural.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

For Lee to be truly consistent about all of this, then he should have panned Jesus' own prayer in the garden where he asked that he be spared of the agony to come. Seems awfully whiney and natural.

Psalm 42 For the director of music. A maskil of the Sons of Korah.

1 As the deer pants for streams of water,
so my soul pants for you, my God.
2 My soul thirsts for God, for the living God.
When can I go and meet with God?
3 My tears have been my food
day and night,
while people say to me all day long,
“Where is your God?”
4 These things I remember
as I pour out my soul:
how I used to go to the house of God
under the protection of the Mighty One
with shouts of joy and praise
among the festive throng.
5 Why, my soul, are you downcast?
Why so disturbed within me?
Put your hope in God,
for I will yet praise him,
my Savior and my God.
6 My soul is downcast within me;
therefore I will remember you
from the land of the Jordan,
the heights of Hermon—from Mount Mizar.
7 Deep calls to deep
in the roar of your waterfalls;
all your waves and breakers
have swept over me.
8 By day the LORD directs his love,
at night his song is with me—
a prayer to the God of my life.
9 I say to God my Rock,
“Why have you forgotten me?
Why must I go about mourning,
oppressed by the enemy?”
10 My bones suffer mortal agony
as my foes taunt me,
saying to me all day long,
“Where is your God?”
11 Why, my soul, are you downcast?
Why so disturbed within me?
Put your hope in God,
for I will yet praise him,
my Savior and my God.

The RecV footnote for verse 4 says, “On the one hand, the psalmist was panting after God (v.1). On the other hand, he was recalling the glorious and pleasant past in his leading of the festal multitude to enjoy God in His house with His people. Actually, this recalling was a departure from his panting after God… We should not allow our considerations and our remembering of our past to distract us from our present enjoyment of god (cf Phil 3:13-14).”

So when it says that “Jesus, knowing that he had come from God, and that He was to return to God” (John 13:3), was Jesus mistakenly looking back to the house of God? Or rather was He looking ahead?

When Paul wrote to Timothy that he remembered the tears of his confession, was he mistakenly looking back? (2 Tim 1:4).

When the Jews put up a rock as a memorial for God's salvation, was that a mistake, as well? (Josh 24:27).

Psalm 137:5,6 says, "If I forget you, O Jerusalem, May my right hand forget her skill. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you, If I do not exalt Jerusalem above my chief joy". Was this also vanity?

Now, we do know that the Lord Jesus taught that once someone put their hand to the plow, not to look back (Luke 9:62). We do remember what happened to Lot's wife, and what happened to the children of Israel who pined for the food of Egypt with their selective memory.

But the psalmist in chapter 42 wasn't daydreaming away from his "present enjoyment of God", as per the footnote. The Psalm's context has placed him outside of the land of promise (see v. 6) and thus he is rightly orienting himself back toward his true home.

What about the boy in Luke 15 who suddenly "came to himself" and lifted his eyes up above the pig trough as he remembered his father's house? Was that a mistake? Should he just have "enjoyed God" there with the carob pods? Or was God calling him back home?

I find WL's assessment of these verses to be quite arbitrarily subjective. Now, the Psalms are indeed poetry, and some interpretive leeway is understood. But I can make a better argument that Jesus was the unique One who remembered His Father's house. The rest of us became pigs. We were lost; we were dead to God. Only when we heard His voice calling us home did we lift up our eyes and turn homeward, again. Only then did we re-orient ourselves back to the Father who waited there for his lost sons, who were dead and now lived again. (Luke 15:23,24).

So if I am looking at the "festive throng" of Psalm 42:4 and make a connection with Hebrews 12:22-24 --

But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.…

then I also am making a subjective assessment. But what if my admittedly subjective interpretation is made after "being filled in spirit by singing psalms", per Paul's encouragement in Ephesians 5:18,19? And similarly, what was the basis of WL's subjective assessment of Psalm 42? Enjoyment of any type or stripe? I see no evidence at all. A sort of hurried, disdainful glance is all I can tell from the footnotes. He didn't linger there, like Mary at the grave, waiting for life to return. He just hurried on. He had a ministry to tend to: messages to give and meetings to preside over.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

So when it says that “Jesus, knowing that he had come from God, and that He was to return to God” (John 13:3), was Jesus mistakenly looking back to the house of God? Or rather was He looking ahead?

Jesus was the only One who knew where He came from, and where He was going. The rest of us were lost. He never lost His orientation to the Father. He said, "The Father is always with Me, for I see Him and do His will." (John 8:29)

The others scorned this. No, they insisted, This is a fallen man like us. How can He say that God is His Father? (John 10:33) "Give glory to God - this man is a sinner" (John 9:24). They had lost way of the Father's house, and insisted that this Man was similarly lost. He was a Galilean - didn't they know His mother Mary, and His brothers and sisters? (Matt. 13:56).

To me, it's been similarly discouraging and frustrating to see WL's ministry continually use the text to point to, or orient toward, other things: the church, the 'natural' psalmist, the New Testament believer, and so on, all without seeing Jesus Christ. It is only by seeing Jesus' unyielding orientation to the Father in heaven, that my own orientation gets restored. He is the only way back to the Father's house. But WL put so many other things there, distracting us. We should come to the text, I argue, and "see Him, and live".

Numbers 21:8 The LORD said to Moses, "Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live."

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God's glory displayed in the face of Christ.

Hebrews 2:9a But we see Jesus...