“She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus because he will save his people from their sins.” – Matt. 1:21
Reading the story of Israel is one of endless frustration with the people of Israel. You have this amazing God who time and time again displays his faithfulness to Israel and yet they time and time again stumble and eventually spiral out of control into full blown idolatry. The announcement of Jesus then at the beginning of Matthew’s gospel as the one who will save these Jews from that endless cycle of sin is phenomenal statement by the angel. Jesus is viewed as the ultimate rescuer who will do what no judge, king or prophet could previously do: provide a solution to the sin of ‘his people’. As a gentile being ‘ingrafted’ into ‘his people’ makes that verse a phenomenal verse for me too because if I’m left to my own devices I too will spiral out of control into full blown idolatry. But Jesus has come to rescue! If I get to understand and experience one thing better this year then I hope its that rescue.
Hi Stephen.
Ya, that is true. I suppose in this verse we need to be careful of taking “his people” to mean the Jews alone as many do, because it is clear that not all the Jews where saved. I think it is better to understand “his people” as God’s elect, for it is certain that even though many Jews and Gentiles will NOT be saved, all of God’s elect will be saved. I don’t believe this to be reading into the text for even in the Old Testament when God promises to save his people from their sins it is referring not to every single Jew, but only the remnant that He chose before the foundation of the world to be saved. And like you said, we as gentiles have been grafted into that covenant and now have the great joy of the salvation of God! This verse then strengthens the support we have for limited atonement.
I think contemporary evangelicalism has the opposite problem – we read ourselves (Christians) into the place of the Jews. I prefer to let proper biblical theology take its place rather than let my systematic theology read back into texts. So yes God does ultimately save us (all elect Christians) from our sins and we know that because Paul makes it clear to us in Romans. But this verse was written first and foremost for the Jewish nation as a fulfillment of the OT promises – Joseph would have understood it that way when the angel announced it to him. However in the biblical theological course of the gospels we see the Jews reject Jesus and we see him establishing a new Israel which Paul further extrapolates for us – this Israel contains all repentent Jews and Gentiles.
Israel is often pictured as a ‘type’ of the elect, but it is also pictured as a ‘type’ of other things too and we need to be sensitive to each individual reference to determine how it applies, through the cross, to us on the otherside.
Hi Stephen.
Could you say that for that time it specifically applied to the elect of the Jewish nation and then later on to the Gentile elect?
At the time of the angel making that proclamation the promise was made for all Jews, just as the same promise had been made in Isaiah and some of the other minor prophets. They rejected God’s rescue in the person of Jesus Christ and so God ingrafts the gentiles into the promise. However a careful reading of the OT will show that God had always intended to bring in the gentiles. So on looking back with a developed theology we can say yes ultimately that verse applies to all the elect, Jew or Gentile, but in its promise form back there it was simply made to the Jewish nation as a whole.
Steve, Looking at the story of the Jews through the OT, It seems all the more startling to me to see the spiral of sin/rebellion and it’s consequences when you consider that they were told from birth (and this was affirmed throughout their lives, the prophets etc) that they were God’s chosen people, chosen to be set apart and both bless and also be a blessing.
Because of their awareness of Identity it makes sense they were held accountable for their choices, and i guess it will be similar for us who know Christ.
My question though is this, is it right for us, today, to preach a message of individual sin and rebellion to groups of people who did not know that they were created to be sons and daughters (or chosen people) of God. Should we not be first preaching Genesis one before Genesis three? and in doing so tell people that sin is the disruption, not the starting point? That Jesus preached primarily ‘Return to’ and not ‘turn away from’?
It seems to me that His ultimate message was one of painting a picture of how things were always meant to be, and how to get back there – but by contrast these days we seem to overemphasise (or perhaps ‘first’ emphasise is a better phrase) the individuals sin, which to me is the 2nd part of the picture…
I think we should do both. Remember that Genesis 3 is not written about the Jews but about has a far more universal scope – God gets personal with the Jews from Gen 12 and Abraham. I find it interesting though that Paul in Acts 17 in Athens still calls up the gentiles on their rebellion – these gentiles never had the law or the prophets yet Paul still calls them up on sin. The rebellion he calls up is idolatry which is the same sin that ultimately that sends the Jews into exile. So in answer to your question I would say that we do still need to preach about individual sin – but I think you’re also right in pointing out that its not just repentance from original sin but also a return to how things should – God is in the business of re-creation. I think we should always try and preach with a creation-fall-re-creation paradigm, a gospel paradigm that is more in keeping with flow of redemptive history in the bible text.
Yeah i meant genesis three in the universal sense – that whoever we’re speaking to we need to make sure genesis one and two comes before 3.
I love in Acts how Paul uses culturally relevant Stuff to be a witness to the Stoics – he goes into their context, quotes their poets and brings it all back to Christ… i think it’s a wonderful picture of how to be culturally relevant and remain doctrinally sound.
also interesting though that when Paul confronts them, he begins with ‘we are his offspring…’
not quite the same as a lifetime belief, but a good starting point
I loved what you said about the paradigm…