Pillars are Just Crutches

Ray Boltz, a Christian music artist who has written some of the most iconic songs about the Christian faith,  recently told the world that he is gay (shortly after seperating from his wife).

Now a lot of people are thinking of disregarding his entire career because they think his entire career is an act of hypocricy, I think this is a mistake (both disregarding his career and his ‘hypocricy’).

Read the rest of this entry »

Last time we discussed that churches were for Christians, and we also discussed why breaking away from that (biblical) ideal was a dangerous move for any church.  It produces something that the world has lots of, shallow Christians, the church should be working on digging deeper Christians.

I think Acts 2:42-47 gives us a good idea of what church is for:

They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers … all who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need.  Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having the goodwill of all the people.  And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.

Read the rest of this entry »

The paper I just finished … enjoy

Introduction

Righteousness is, understandably, a major topic throughout the whole course of Scripture as it has to do with proper relationship between God to man and vise versa. But how one obtains righteousness and what obtaining that righteousness actually means has often been skewed by singular readings of distinct passages ripped out of their appropriate context. It is with in this unfortunate situation that we look at three Biblical authors. Matthew, Paul and James seemingly expressed three quite different views of righteousness through their writings. But these views were by no means meant to be a comprehensive or exclusive view of righteousness, if they are understood together, within their proper contexts than they form a full view of what it means for God and us to be righteous.

Because of the audience that this paper is directed to and because of space limitations, treatment of Old Testament sources for righteousness will be limited and done within the space of the individual authors that will be studied.

Matthew: Introduction

There is much debate to when Matthew was written. The reason it appears as the first book in the New Testament Scriptures is because it was originally believed to be the first book written. Tradition has it that the gospel (or the sources for the Gospel) was originally written in Hebrew and then translated into the Greek version that we have today (McKnight, 1992 p.527; Shelton, p.121, 1999). Holdcroft adds that although a few years had past between Jesus crucifixion and the writing of Matthew it was still written before 70 A.D. because Matthew gives no hint that the destruction of the Temple had already taken place. As well the church father Irenaeus identifies Matthew as the earliest gospel stating that he wrote it while Paul and Peter were ministering in Rome (p.6, 1988). Numerous other church fathers confirm this tradition throughout the first and second century (McKnight, 1992, p.157). However, it has been suggested that it was originally composed in Greek and not Hebrew as previously stated. A further look at the expression by Papia, Hebraidi dialekto, with in its Asia Minor context, finds that it does not necessarily mean written in Hebrew, but written in the Jewish style (McKnight, 1992, p.157).

Others view Mark’s gospel as the first, however, which was written first is relatively unimportant (for this paper), what is important is the author’s deliberate choice of audience for this book, That is, Jews.

Matthew 3:13-17 – Fulfilling All Righteousness

The word ‘righteousness’ (δικαιοσύνη) appears in Matthew seven times and yet is not found in any other gospel except for one poetry passage in Luke 1:75 (Hagner, p.367, 1998). It is hard to chalk it up to coincidence or chance. Indeed, Matthew deliberately uses this word within his gospel. As argued above, one would expect that the Jewish style of Matthew would give the meaning of the word, ‘righteousness’ as ‘ethical righteousness’, or in other words, conforming to the Law. This, although it plays a role in its meaning in some verses, is by no means the entire meaning that Matthew intends his readers to have of this word in his Gospel and the first verses that will be examined make this evident:

Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented … and a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” (Matthew 3:13-15, 17 NRSV)

Matthew 3:14-15 does not have any parallels in the other Gospels and seems to come straight from Matthew himself (Gundry, 1994, p.50). This scripture is important to discovering what righteousness meant to Matthew because without this verse ‘righteousness’ could be misunderstood to mean ‘conforming to the Law’. There are a number of reasons why these verses put that definition of righteousness (as consistent throughout Matthew) into serious question.

First, baptism was not a Jewish requirement under the Law, there was no obligation, in that sense, for Jesus to get baptized. Second, John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance, something that Jesus never had to do because He was sinless (Shelton, 1999, p.143). Therefore ‘righteousness’ in Matthew means more than just following the Law. For Jesus it meant being obedient to God through relationship with Him. As well, it set an example to His followers for what they were to do (Gundry, 1994, p.50; Shelton, 1999, p.143).

Then, in verse 17, Matthew alludes to Isaiah 42:1, which connects the Servant, Jesus and ‘righteous(ness)’ together (Gundry, 1994, p.50). Isaiah says:

Here is my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my spirit upon him;
he will bring forth justice to the nations.
(italics added)

The Servant here with in the immediate context of Isaiah 41:8 is most likely Israel (Watts, p.119, 1987), however some commentators feel that Israel is pictured too ideally within these verses for the picture to fit (Webb, 1996, p.170). Nonetheless, what is clear is that Matthew saw the Servant of these verses and the justice he would bring as a reference to the work of Christ.

Justice is a major theme in this Servant passage as the word comes up again in verses three and four. Webb comments on this important theme:
Viewed against [the background of Isaiah], the mission of the Servant is a gigantic one. It is nothing less than to put God’s plans for his people into full effect, and to make the truth about the Lord, Israel’s God, known everywhere, especially the fact that he alone is the sovereign creator and Lord of history. (Webb, 1996, p.171)

Jesus role in fulfilling all righteousness, as we will discover in Paul as well, God’s covenant faithfulness. What we are seeing here is the righteousness of God.

Sermon on the Mount: Part 1
Hunger and Thirst for Righteousness

Two chapters later, in the Beatitudes, Matthew again adds a statement that is not found in the other Gospels: “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled” (Matthew 5:6, NRSV). Luke presents a different version saying: “Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied” (Luke 6:21a NRSV). From this it is easy to see that Matthew is presenting a view of righteousness to his readers and also making more connections to Isaiah (this time chapters 49 and 61) (Gundry, p.70 1994).

In the Greek text ‘hunger’ and ‘thirst’ are present participles which means that it is addressed to those who continually hunger and thirst after righteousness in the same way that a starving person would hunger and thirst after food continually (Shelton, 1999, p.153).

So what does Matthew mean here by righteousness? Is he referring to a right relationship with God, moral obedience, or something else? Holdcroft believes that those who hunger and thirst here are “those who desire God’s kingdoms standards” (p.80, 1999).

However, judging by the context of the verse, Matthew is not looking at righteousness from the human perspective, yet. In view of the rest of the Beatitudes (especially 5:10ff) and the chapters that Matthew alludes to in Isaiah, it is unlikely that personal righteousness is in view within the verse, what is more likely, and fitting within the context, is that the righteousness here is God’s righteousness, that is, his eschatological justice (Shelton, 1999, p.153; Gundry, 1994, p.70; Hagner, p.367, 1998).

What we have seen so far from Matthew is righteousness from God’s perspective; his justice and covenantal faithfulness. However, the next (and last) verse in Matthew that we will consider will focus on what it means for people to be righteous.

The Sermon on the Mount: Part 2
Righteousness that Exceeds the Scribes and Pharisees

Matthew 5:20 is the first instance we come upon where righteousness is meant within the context of keeping God’s commandments. Except here, Jesus adds a twist. In verses 17 – 19 Jesus tells the crowd that the Law is still completely valid and that he did not come to abolish it but to fulfill it. This does not simply mean that Jesus kept the whole law, but he came to transcend it and in the verses following Jesus great revelation does just that (Shelton, p.158, 1999). This is not rules for the sake of rules however, Matthew is stressing that the Kingdom of God has been inaugurated in the person of Jesus Christ who is giving them these ‘laws’ for which is required keeping in order to enter the Kingdom. The Kingdom of God is the larger framework within which Matthew poses Jesus’ view on what it means to be righteous (Hagner, p.368, 1998).

Which leads into the verse in question and the chapters that follow it, Matthew 5:20 says: “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (NRSV). Jesus tells the people that they need to have a righteousness that exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees. “The implication is that a wholly different conception of righteousness is needed” (Guthrie, p.496, 1981). The way the Pharisees lived out the Law only lead to hypocrisy because they lived it out according to their own interpretation. Now Jesus is giving his authoritative interpretation of the Law so that it can be lived out apart from their hypocrisy (Rhoads, p.458).

Jesus then proceeds to interpret the Law using examples such as murder, adultery, divorce, oaths, and retaliation. From the negative aspect He moves on to address the positive acts of a righteous person, one who gives alms, prays and fasts, but not so men will see and take notice but so as to lay up treasures in heaven rather than treasures on earth because the one who seeks God’s kingdom and His righteousness hashis needs taken care of by God (Wilson, p.47).

Unfortunately space does not allow us to view these passages any further except to note in passing that Jesus once again moves away from the righteousness of His disciples in 5:20 to God’s righteousness in 6:33. I would suggest that, despite the popular view, 6:33 is again not talking about obedience to Jesus teaching but God’s covenant faithfulness to His people. For this we can conclude that Matthew’s view of righteousness is not something that can be worked for but must be given by God.

Paul: Introduction

In recent years there has been a lot of discussion on Paul and how Paul should be interpreted. Most of which centers around the first century context in which Paul lived and the theology of his contemporary Jewish peers. Entire books have been written on the subject and they effect this current discussion on righteousness and what Paul meant by it. Unfortunately, dipping into this subject would mean never coming out with enough time to do anything meaningful with our current subject. So, we will head straight into Romans and hopefully deal with these issues as they appear.

We had mentioned earlier that Matthew’s Gospel is undeniably Jewish, therefore his use of ‘Righteousness’ will have been a Jewish use of the term. And the term here is found in Paul as well. What we will find is that ‘Righteousness’ in Matthew is amazingly similar to that in Paul.

No one works in a vacuum and that is especially true of Paul. Paul did not invent the word righteousness or the term righteousness of God. He borrows these terms from his Jewish roots (just like Matthew did). In Hebrew thought the term righteous is a relational concept. It is an impossibility to be righteous independently of everything else. “People are righteous when they meet the claims which others have on them by virtue of their relationship” (Dunn, p.41, 1988). So, when the righteousness of God is in sight it must refer to God’s covenantal faithfulness and “God’s act to restore his own and to sustain them within the covenant” (Dunn, p.41, 1988). And as we look through Romans we’ll discover where Paul differs from his Jewish heritage.

Romans 1:17: God’s Saving Activity

For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, “The one who is righteous will live by faith.” (Romans 1:17, NRSV)

The gospel – the announcement of the lordship of Jesus the Messiah – reveals God’s righteousness, his covenant faithfulness, his dealing with the sin of the world through the fulfillment of his covenant in this Lord Jesus Christ. He has done all this righteously, that is, impartially. He has dealt with sin, and rescued the helpless. He has thereby fulfilled his promises. (Wright, p.126, 1997)

It is clear through Paul, both in Romans 1:17 and 3:21ff that the righteousness of God has been made evident through the gospel. N.T. Wright, in his paraphrase/explanation of Romans 1:17 (above), tell us what the righteousness of God, in Paul’s mind, is: His covenant faithfulness (Wright p.126, 1997). The righteousness of God then is God’s activity to bring people into covenantal relationship with Him and to sustain it by grace (Johnson, p.707, 1999). It is, in other words, the “saving action of God” (Moo, p.71, 1996). This however is not the only view, there are two other popular views on what could be meant by the righteousness of God.

The first view is to make it an attribute of God. In this case the phrase would mean “God’s distributive justice”, however, in this verse this meaning is unlikely because the context demands a positive meaning for the phrase. (Moo, p.70, 1996)

The second view is to make it a status given by God. This is the realization that Luther came to: That God imparts righteousness to the believer. The concept here is completely forensic. Thus, the gospel reveals “the righteous status that is from God” (Moo, p.71, 1996).

This writer will favor the first view (God’s activity) because it seems to better explain righteousness with in the Old Testament context of covenant as well as its use throughout the Old Testament (Psalm 31:1, 35:24; Isaiah 46:13, 50:5-8) (Dunn, p.41, 1988; Moo, p.73, 1996, Wright, p.100-103, 1997).

What separates Paul from his Jewish heritage is that the saving activity of God comes though faith, something that his Jewish contemporaries and ancestors had forgotten. However, not too much can be extracted from just verse 17 because it is an introductory passage. In order to really get into Paul’s view of the righteousness of God and what it means to us we need to skip ahead to chapter 3, especially verses 21 following.

Romans 3:21-26: The Righteousness of God

But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.

Paul has just explained, through a law-court metaphor, that Jews and Gentiles are now under judgment. The Gentile world is not in touch with their Creator and the Jews as a whole have not been faithful to their God. But they have been welcomed into a new covenant with God, and now with in the context of God’s faithfulness (v.5) (as righteousness and faithfulness are closely connected) he continues on to the heart of the message (Wright, p.106, 1997). Luther called this portion of scripture, “the chief point, and the very central place of the Epistle, and of the whole Bible” (Moo, p.218, 1996).

In this passage alone the term “righteousness of God” occurs four times while the verb ‘justify’ is found twice and ‘just’ found once (Moo, p.219, 1996). It is important to note at this stage that all these words have their roots in ‘righteousness’ (Wright, p.106, 1997). Here, Paul explains how the ‘Righteousness of God’ “empower the gospel to mediate salvation to sinful human beings” (Moo, p.218, 1996).

First, Paul relates the ‘Righteousness of God’ to the Old Testament (v.21). Secondly, he points out that everyone (whether Jew or Gentile – being equal in sin) has access to the righteousness of God through faith (v.22-23). Thirdly, Paul reveals God’s provision in Jesus Christ as an atoning sacrifice (24-25a). And lastly, the atonement does not only provide ‘justification’ but also demonstrates God’s “just-ness” (Moo, p.219, 1996).

N.T. Wright summarizes these passages this way:

In Romans 3, he [Paul] shows how God has been righteous … He has been true to the covenant, which always aimed to deal with the sin of the world; he has kept his promises; he has dealt with sin on the cross; he has done so impartially, making a way of salvation for Jew and Gentile alike; and he now, as the righteous judge, helps and saves the helpless who cast themselves on his mercy (Wright, p.107, 1997)

It is safe to say that if another meaning is given to ‘righteousness of God’ other than ‘covenant faithfulness’ or ‘acts of covenant faithfulness’ the message of Paul quickly becomes unclear and muddled (Wright, p.107, 1997).

Paul then goes on to Romans 4 to talk about Genesis 15 and Abram’s covenant with God. This is where we will split off from our look at the righteousness of God and look at the apparent incompatibility of James and Romans 4.

James and Paul: Introduction

For what does the scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” Now to one who works, wages are not reckoned as a gift but as something due. But to one who without works trusts him who justifies the ungodly, such faith is reckoned as righteousness. (Romans 4:3-5)

Was not our ancestor Abraham justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was brought to completion by the works. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone … For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is also dead. (James 2:21-24, 26)

Upon an initial reading these passages, a person with a high view of scripture may think that the ‘contradictions’ seem almost insurmountable! Both Paul and James use the same phrases, words and even Old Testament examples to come to, what seem like, polar opposite opinions. Some of the greatest minds with in Christianity have struggled over interpreting these two Scriptures. Luther, for instance said:
[James] does violence to Scripture, and so contradicts Paul and all Scripture…. I therefore refuse him a place among the writers of the true canon of my Bible; but I would not prevent anyone placing him or raising him where he likes, for the epistle contains many excellent passages.

There are a number of factors that must be looked at here to properly exegete these scriptures. The first thing that must be remembered, of course, is that words and language are not wooden and dead but fluid and living. A word to one person with in a certain context may mean something completely different to another person in another context. The three words that need to be looked at closer are ‘faith’, ‘works’ and most importantly ‘justify’

Faith

For James faith is equal to intellectual assent, particularly to belief about God and vocal agreement to right doctrine (Jenkins, p.65, 2002). This is evident by James use of terms such as ‘such faith’, ‘faith by itself’, and ‘faith alone’ as well, instead of writing ‘you believe in’ he writes ‘you believe that’, all of which are signs that the ‘faith’ James is referring to is quite radically different to the living and active faith that Paul is referring to (Rakestraw, p.36 1986). Paul makes clear elsewhere in scripture what James says here, in 1 Thessalonians 1:2-3 Paul writes, “We always give thanks … constantly remembering before our God and Father your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” (NRSV). Moo clarifies James position: “It is absolutely vital to understand that the main point of this argument, expressed three times (in w 17, 20 and 26), is not that works must be added to faith but that genuine faith includes works. That is its very nature” (Rakeshaw, p.36, 1986). And this position, Paul would have no problems with.

Works

Rakeshaw here agrees with Moo that the ‘works’ that both Paul and James mention are the same, ‘obedience to God’, not necessarily (in Paul’s case) to works of the Law (i.e. circumcision or dietary law) as there is a distinction between the two in Romans chapter three and four. The difference that is made however is within context. Paul’s context is that pre-conversion works have no bearing on ones salvation while James is referring to post-conversion works as essential for the Christian (Rakeshaw, p.38-39, 1986).

So there is no big difference in the term ‘works’ between Paul and James. For James ‘work’ are always good while Paul uses the formula, ‘works of law’ while developing his argument for justification by faith apart from works (Rakeshaw, p.38-39, 1986).

Justified

The difficulty with this word as used by James in verse 24 is that there are two established uses of the word with in scripture. Paul’s use of the word generally has been as a technical theological word for God’s declaration that a believer is righteous. There is, however, another meaning to the word and that is, “to prove or demonstrate something to be true or just” (Jenkins, p.67, 2002). Seeing as both meanings are prevalent in Scripture a look at the context is needed to establish which way James intends the word ‘justified’ to work.

The context here demands a demonstrative use of the word justified. In 2:14-20 we see James contrasting the faith void of works with the faith filled with works in 2:21-23. The legitimacy of the faith is dependant on the works. So in verse 24 when James says, “You see that a man is justified by works…” it could also be translated, “You see that a person is shown to be righteous on the basis of deeds and not on the basis of faith only” (Jenkins, p.67, 2002).

There is a lot more that could be discussed in relation to these few verses, but because of length restrictions all that can be displayed is James view of how one is made righteous (justified) and his use of the word ‘justified’ that, while it is not unseen in the Bible, can cause confusion with students as to what James really meant.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is evident that there is a rich use of ‘righteousness’ language with in the pages of Scripture. Not one definition can leave an exact meaning for the range of Scripture and to do this will not only leave you confused with some portions of Scripture but can also be damaging to ones doctrine – which was made evident by our look at James. What we come away with from this study is a unified Scripture that glorifies God and makes even clearer His amazing plan for our lives.

Introduction

The problem that is faced with the term ‘Day of the LORD’ is that the range of texts in which it is used can imply a range of meanings, from a theological understanding of an historical event, to an imminent consequence through to a prophetic eschatology of a distant future. Each is expressed through out the writing prophets in near uniformity (Everson, 1974, p.331). This causes problems while trying to establish the exact meaning of the term and the theological implications of it. Many scholars view it at the very heart of the prophetic eschatology of the Old Testament that would cumulate into the allusion of YHWH coming in person (von Rad, 1965, p.119). However, the term is not eschatological per se (van Rad, 1965, 224), for example, Sweeney argues that Zephaniah’s use of ‘Day of YHWH’ is most likely non-eschatological because it lacks any reference to the events taking place in the ‘end of days’ and has none of the cosmic references that the apocalyptic writing would present (Sweeney, 1991, p.390) and Lamentations deals strictly with the theological interpretations of the sacking of Jerusalem.

So what is the Day of YHWH? It is the day that YHWH intervenes (Walvoord & Zuck, 1985, p.1412) in history to bring first his covenant people, and secondly, the world, back into divine redemption (Payne, 1973, p.132). This is not just one day in the past or (distant) future, this is a continuing act that is seen throughout the pages of the prophets and will continue until the ultimate day of YHWH.

Origins and Progression

The term the ‘Day of YHWH’ specifically is used 18 times in the Old Testament, although other forms have been commonly accepted like, ‘the day’, or ‘that day’ (such as Zephaniah 3:11).

Much talk has gone on about the exact origins of the Day of YHWH. Most agree that at its origin is an Ancient Near East idea that a mighty warrior king could consummate an entire military campaign in a single day. In the Israelite context it was most likely a description of the swiftness of the Lord’s victory over His enemies (Walvoord & Zuck, 1985, p.1412). More specifically, some Israelites may have made a connection in the book of Judges with the ‘Day of Midean’ and Gideon’s overwhelming victory with so few people (Isaiah 9:4; Judges 7:25), after all, Israel’s God was a God that fought for her, that saved her (Szeles, 1987, p.66).

Israel saw the day of YHWH as a holy war that their God would enter into with them with the same signs that he showed their forefathers, like thunder (1 Samuel 7:10), stones falling from the sky (Joshua 10:11), darkness (Joshua 24:7) and clouds dripping water (Judges 5:4ff) (von Rad, 1965, 120-24).

Von Rad’s interpretation of a holy war concept for day of YHWH has found nearly universal acceptance. However, Weiss contends that the idea was a cultic practice because God uses cultic imagery and tells the people to consecrate themselves, something that is never done during the wars of Israel. However, these times can still included theophonies and disasters (Weiss, 1966, p.30). The weight of the phrase and its consistent implication with war (Isaiah 13:6-8, 34; Ezekiel 30:1ff, 7:7-17; Jeremiah 46:3-12; Joel 2: 1-2; Zephaniah 1:7-18) whether to Israel’s destruction or victory, put this theory into doubt however. The rhetoric of war is heavy.

Although Israel’s view of God’s support during war may have been true in the past in term of Israel’s forefathers it was about to take on a dramatic twist for Israel. God was about to use other nations to judge Israel. This would give good reason to why, in the earliest Biblical use of the phrase, Amos tells the people,
Alas, you who are longing for the day of the Lord, for what purpose will the day of the LORD be to you? It will be darkness and not light; as a man flees from a lion and a bear meets him, or goes home, leans his hand against the wall and a snake bites him. Will not the day of the Lord be darkness instead of light, even gloom with no brightness in it? (Amos 5:18-20, NASB).

The NASB translates the first word here ‘Alas’ however most translations (NIV, KJV, NKJV, ASV) translate the word to ‘Woe,’ which would better suite the genre. This is a woe oracle (Stuart, 1987, p.353) that was made in order to “criticize particular actions or attitudes of people, and … announce punishment upon them” (Sandy & Giese, 1995, p.163). This announcement of the day of YWHW is the first half, announcing the dismay of God. Amos has, in now uncertain terms, declared that God’s people and God’s enemy are the same group of people. This would have been an utter shock to the Israelites (Stuart, 1987, p.353). They would have expected that they were doing all right. Smelik says:
The ambiguity of the concept lies in the fact that on this day Israel can be delivered from her enemies, but it can also be punished by the Lord who will send a foreign army to destroy his people. By noting this ambiguity Amos v 18-20 becomes clear to us. People longing for the Day of YHWH because they hope to be delivered on that day make a fatal mistake; it will be they who are crushed by the hand of the Lord, not their enemies (Smelik, 1986, 247).

Soon after Amos’ contemporary Isaiah would make similar proclamations (2:12-21; 13:6-13; 34:1-8). Isaiah will make the astrological signs more clear and evident. Instead of relatively vague image that Amos gives: “Will not the day of the Lord be darkness” (Amos 5:20, NASB) Isaiah uses more vivid imagery to say the same thing, “For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not flash forth their light; the sun will be dark when it rises and the moon will not shed its light” (Isaiah 13:10). As well, Isaiah will be one of the first within Biblical prophecy to proclaim the day of YHWH against the foreign nations. This is the intent of Isaiah 13:6-13. In these verses the oracle of judgment is pronounced against Babylon. YHWH calls his “consecrated ones” to fight and the imagery of YHWH himself showing up for the battle is vivid (von Rad, 1965, p.120)! At the end of the judgment the image of total desolation of the empire is clear, “It will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation” (Isaiah 13:20).

Jeremiah, over a hundred years later would then use the term in order to describe an historical event, the siege of Jerusalem. In the first two chapters of Lamentations Jeremiah looks back on the fallen state of Judah and Jerusalem and contrasts its wealthy state with its current fallen one. Zion was once great and now has it has become a widow. She was a princess, and now it is a vassal, her precious things are gone and now she only knows affliction and bitterness. She interrupts the funeral dirge in 1:9 and turns to the nations that are unresponsive to her plight (1:12) (Everson, 1974, 331-332). It is clear, she is suffering because of her sins, Lam 1:5 says, “For the Lord has caused her grief because of the multitude of her transgressions; her little ones have gone away.” (NASB)

In the second chapter of Lamentations the day of YHWH is used both in the opening and closing sections of the acrostic. The suffering that is being endured in connection with the people’s sins is now directly connected with the day of the Lord. Lam 2:22 say, “You called as in the day of an appointed feast my terrors on every side; and there was no one who escaped or survived in the day of the Lord’s anger. Those whom I bore and reared, my enemies annihilated them” (NASB). There is no comfort for Jerusalem, there is an emphasis on despair.

Of course this is only one aspect of the day of YHWH. It was not always spoken of in a tone of judgment and wrath. It had positive connotations as well. Amos 9:11-15 tells about a time when “in that day” God will intervene in the history of His people (Smith, 1989, p.280) and restore the fortunes of His people and they would rebuild their ruins, plant vineyards and drink wine. Plant them on their land, and they shall not be rooted up again.

Joel also makes the day of YHWH into a positive event in very similar language. With direct parallels to the references earlier in the book Joel says, “For behold, in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem…” (Joel 3:1a).

Amos 5:18 has always been considered the key passage on the Day of YHWH. Unfortunately, Amos 5:18 says very little about the subject at hand while the other popular verse that is looked at, Isaiah 2:9, says more about what the results of the day will be than anything else (von Rad, 1965 p.119). The most rounded out and complete look at the Day of YHWH comes from the often overlooked book of Zephaniah.

Why Zephaniah?

King probably states this most clearly while quoting von Rad, “Zephaniah’s prophecy concerning the day of Yahweh is certainly one of the most important sources of material at our disposal for the various concepts connected with this subject [the day of YHWH]” (King, 1995, p.17, parenthesis added)

Although Zephaniah was neither the first nor the last person to use the phrase Day of YHWH it is generally agreed that he gives the most rounded picture of the phrase, almost like a two-sided coin. The other prophets tended to stress one aspect of the day over another; Zephaniah is the most balanced prophet in this regard since both judgment and blessing are given their space (Baker, 1988, p.84). He is also the first to portray Israel as a sacrifice. Isaiah would declare that Edom would be a sacrifice to God (Isaiah 34:6) and Jeremiah would say the same thing about Egypt (Jeremiah 46:27-28) however, Zephaniah, with it’s cultic coloring of Israel’s judgment portrays her in just such a manner (Zephaniah 1:7-13) (Szeles, 1987, p.67).

He was also not the first to stress the urgency and nearness of the Day of YHWH. But we see in Zephaniah a difference in time when the judgments and blessings are compared. Where Judah’s judgment is portrayed as imminent (1:7,14) the blessings that come at the end of the book (3:9-20) are located somewhere in the future (Baker, 1988, p.84).

Lastly, Zephaniah would pronounce more strenuously the universality of his message. The world will see judgment but the world will also see salvation (Zephaniah 3:9-20) (Szeles, 1987, p.67; Kaiser, 1978, p.223). This is drastically different to some books! For example, in Joel 3 the restoration of Israel is portrayed along side the desolation and destruction of other nations.

Zephaniah 1:7-2:3 (A Day of Judgement)

There are two views on the timing of Zephaniah; the one consistent factor is that it came down during the reign of king Josiah (Zeph 1:1). It is whether the prophecy was either given before Josiah made the reforms to turn Israel around (in which case Zephaniah may have been a catalyst in the change) or the prophecy was given after the changes had taken place and ultimately failed (Smith, 1984, p.121-122; Baker, 1988, p.81-82). Either way the message left little hope.

Israel had become rebellious, seditious, and uncooperative towards God. She did not want to perform God’s will even though she was His covenant people. The cultic practices had become all about the show and the priests had profaned their office! In fact, all of Israel had become faithless (Szeles, 1987, p.68-69).

This portion of the book is believed to be made up of smaller judgment oracles, although it is generally agreed upon that Zephaniah probably gave them all at one time. There is also a lack of a call for repentance, which could be meant to show a lack of hope for the people (Smith, 1984, 123). God had made up his mind, he was going to act!

The Day of YHWH is a dominating theme throughout the whole book. Even though the actual term is only used three times in the entire book the word ‘day’ appears 20 times (1:8-10, 18, 3:11 etc…) and is always closely related to the Day of YHWH. Every unit of the book has some connection to the day of YHWH (King, 1995, p.17)!

“Be silent before the Lord God” (Zephaniah 1:7, NASB)

There is first an appeal for silence followed by an announcement that the Day of YHWH is near. The call for silence is strongly linked to Amos’ announcement because of a relatively rare word that is used in both announcements, “hush” (Amos 6:10) (Smith, 1984, p.130-131). YHWH is near and he has prepared a sacrifice. Those who are called to the feast are the very ones to be sacrificed by God (Baker, 1988, 94-95). Certain groups in Jerusalem will make up the LORD’s sacrifice: princes, those who had adopted foreign customs and religions, the indifferent men and those who are filled with violence and deceit (1:8-9, 12).

Zephaniah is trying to get it through their heads that this is really going to happen, the phrase “I will punish” occurs 3 times (1: 8, 9, 12) in the beginning of the oracle (Szeles, 1987, p.68) along with the repeated statements that refer this back to the Day of YHWH. These are sure signs that YHWH is about to intervene within human history because He is about to punish the Israelites who had come to think that God was no longer interested in them. They had developed a phrase that said, “The Lord will not do good or evil!” (1:12, NASB). These people were basically practical atheists that were going to discover first hand that their Creator, Deliverer and Judge was actively involved in their world, whether they saw it or not. This would be a time of divine intervention (King, 1995, p.17, 20)!!

In verse 14 we come across a new description of the day of YHWH. The day is near and coming very fast. Although he is not the first to pronounce the nearness of the day of YHWH (Isaiah was probably the first) it is only after Zephaniah that other prophets start proclaiming it. It is likely that Zephaniah was aware of Amos’ writing because more links to Amos are found in this section (1:15-20) such as, darkness, gloom, and bitter (Smith, 1984, p.132).

Zephaniah 2:1-3 are included into this section because they contain outright statement about the day of YHWH’s wrath and give instructions to the people on what they are to do because of this approaching day. There might be something that they can do. If they get together, seek the Lord, carry out His ordinances, seek righteousness and humility perhaps they “will be hidden in the day of the Lord’s anger” (2:3) (Szeles, 1987, p.90).

It is evident through these verses that this is not just the blind wrath of God there is a purpose to the Lord’s discipline and anger and that purpose can be seen in 2:3, that his people would, “seek the Lord” and carry out the things that He has called them to. This is a divine intervention in order to bring Israel (and the world) back into His will.

Zephaniah 3:9-20 (A Day of Salvation)

Verse 9 is connected directly to verse 8 because God’s last words are never that of judgment. He doesn’t come to bring death, but life. He is not a God of wrath but a God of love (Achtemier, 1986, p.82). The first section here God addresses the promises salvation of both the peoples and the people of God.

There is the idea present in these first two verses of a reverse of the curse that was given in Genesis 11:1-9 as it seems parallel this. The world’s languages will be restored and the people of God will be able to worship God in unity (Szeles, 1987, 106). Ideas from Isaiah also seem prevalent as God is going to ‘purify’ the lips of the people (Smith, 1984, p.142).

Verse 11 starts out with a strong link to the day of YHWH. It was a day of judgment but now it will be a day of hope (Baker, 1988, p.116). Jerusalem will be purified and it’s pride will be gone, pure worship to God will be restored and as a result the people will live pure lives. There is a direct link to 2:3, in that verse the Lord tells Israel to be humble and seek humility in order to avoid the day of YHWH. Here in 3:11 we are told that there will not be any ‘proud’ and ‘exulting ones’ (NASB) because they have been removed and all that’s left are the ‘humble’ and ‘lowly’ (NASB). Smith in the Word Biblical Commentary takes the words humble and lowly and makes them ‘poor’ and ‘oppressed’. Showing that there was eschatological significance to the poor and oppressed towards the end of the Old Testament canonical period (Smith, 1984, p.142).

Zephaniah 3:14-17 has been compared to a number of scenes. One such scene is the picture of a festival with the people of God belting out their praise to God to each other and dancing with God in their midst rejoicing over them (Achtemier, 1986, p.86; Smith, 1988, p.144). In verse 16 Zephaniah once again focuses the reader back to “that day” or the day of YHWH. Once again, just as in verse 11, it is no longer a day of fear, but of salvation, there is no reason to fear God because he is in the midst of his people. Yes, God was going to wipe the sinners off the face of the earth but he was also going to restore his people! The day of the Lord is not only a time for judgment, it is also a time of restoration!

In some regards this war has yet to be won. Although the people of God are told to rejoice for the things that God has done (past) they are also to rejoice about the things that God has yet to do (future) because God would eventually restore their fortune (Baker, 1988, p.117).

Zephaniah then not only shows that the day of YHWH is for the wrath of God in order to bringing His people (and the world) back to His ways and purposes but also that His wrath ultimately comes out of His love. There is a purpose behind the day of YHWH and that there is ultimately salvation for those who follow God. Zephaniah ends with eschatological hope, “At that time I will bring you in, even at the time when I gather you together; indeed, I will give you renown and praise among all the people of the earth, What I restore your fortunes before your eyes.” Says the Lord (NASB, 3:20)

New Testament Implications

The New Testaments outlook on the Day of the Lord is set upon the backdrop of the Old Testament idea which, although traces of salvation can be found, was for the most part, a day of darkness and gloom. For the unbeliever it is a day of terror but to the believer it is a day of great joy (Bromiley, 1979).

The New Testament believers, of course, understood that Jesus Christ was the one who will judge at Parousia. Other terms were used for Day of the Lord such as day of Christ, day of judgment (Martin and Davids, 1997, p.265, 266), and like the Old Testament sometimes it is referred to only as ‘that day’ (Bromiley, 1979).

2 Peter is one of the only books in the New Testament to deal directly with the term. He saw it as coming quickly and without warning, like a thief (2 Peter 3:10) and because of this he encouraged his congregation to remain faithful to God so to avoid His judgment. In Acts 2:17-21 Peter talks directly about the day of YHWH by quoting the book of Joel in the Old Testament scriptures. Again, although the message is positive, “those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved” it hints to Christ as judge, because saving requires being saved from something.

In Revelations the day of the Lord’s judgment of the ungodly will directly result in the liberation and vindication of the righteous (Revelations 6:10; 11:18) (Martin and Davids, 1997, p.265, 266).

The New Testaments understanding of the day of the Lord then is that of judgment at the second coming of Jesus Christ.

Conclusion

Although cast upon the scene of suffering and pain the Day of YHWH would and will mean the liberation and salvation of all of God’s people! Not those who think they can do and say all the right things (Amos 5) but those who live out the ordinances of the Lord, who seek God, righteousness and humility (Zephaniah 2). Even for those whom God punishes on that day, the punishment is not for punishments sake but to bring all peoples back to God (Zephaniah 3)

The day of YHWH turns out not to be just one day in the life of the Old Testament or a single day that is looked forward to in the distant future, but the Day of YHWH, we find, is a continuing act. It’s a day that is seen throughout the pages of the writing prophets whether its fulfillment is past, present or future. It is a day that we see comes to fulfillment in the New Testament (Acts 2) and yet it is hoped for, until the ultimate day of YHWH.