Month: May 2025

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 134

Psalm 134

Dead Sea MSS: 11QPsa (vv. 1-3)

This brief Psalm (cp. the prior Ps 133 [study]) is the last Song of the third group of “Songs of Ascents”, and, indeed, is the final Song of the collection. As with all of the Songs in this third group (Pss 130-134), the thematic emphasis in on blessing—the blessing that YHWH will provide to His people (the faithful ones). Moreover, there is a blessing-emphasis in the closing Song of each group; indeed, each of these prior Songs ends (124:6, 8; 129:8) with a blessing-formula comparable to what we find here in Ps 134. The final line of v. 3(b) echoes the wording in 124:8, while the first line (v. 3a) is identical to 128:5a. These points of connection suggest that Psalm may have been composed around the time that the collection was assembled; as noted, the blessing-emphasis in Psalm 134 simply continues (and concludes) a theme that runs throughout the entire group of Songs, and the collection as a whole.

This blessing is closely connected with the holy city of Jerusalem (Zion), a sacred location which functions in the Songs as a multivalent symbol. There is certainly a ritual-liturgical component to the Zion-symbol, as this concluding Psalm itself makes clear (cf. below), but Zion also has several other aspects of meaning. It represents the post-exilic restoration of Israel—the land and its people—along with the hope and expectation for a restoration of the Kingdom (and the Davidic monarchy, cf. the focus on David in Ps 132 [study]). An associated theme (and ideal) is the unity of the people—viz., the Community—in the New Age of Israel’s restoration; this thematic motif is buttressed by the festal setting of the Songs—i.e., the people celebrating in Jerusalem together during the pilgrimage festivals, demonstrating a unity of will and purpose. Finally, Zion serves as a symbol for faithfulness and loyalty to the covenant—both by YHWH and the people. YHWH will remain present with the people, from His manifest (and ritual) dwelling-place in the Temple sanctuary, from where He provides blessing to the faithful ones—viz., those are devout and loyal to the covenant, a devotion which includes (and is marked by) attending the pilgrimage festivals with a spirit of devout worship.

There is quite clearly a ritual and liturgical focus to this Song, but the precise nature of the intended scenario remains somewhat unclear. In particular, there is some debate as to whether the “servants of YHWH” being addressed in vv. 1-2 are the Temple officiants and personnel (i.e., priests and Levites), or the worshiping congregation (of all the faithful). This question will be discussed in the notes below, but it has a bearing on the orientation of vv. 1-2.
For a good discussion of many of the key points, along with a summary of the views expressed by earlier scholars, cf. Crow, pp. 122-5, and Hossffeld-Zenger, pp. 484-7.

If the “servants” are the priests, then the Psalm presents a two-stage depiction of the priestly service in the Temple: (a) serving in the Temple court and sanctuary (inward), followed by (b) the blessing given to the people (outward). If, on the other hand, the “servants” are the faithful/devout congregation of worshipers, as a whole, then the entire Psalm may be understood as an address by the priest(s) to the people. In any case, verse 3 reflects the priestly blessing, such as we find prescribed in the Torah (Num 6:22-27). At the opening of these studies on the Songs (cf. the study on Psalm 120), I discussed the critical theory regarding the influential role that Num 6:24-26 may have played in shaping the collection.

It has been suggested that Psalm 134 is specifically meant to reflect the pilgrims’ departure from Jerusalem, at the end of the festal celebration. This would certainly be appropriate to the Song’s concluding place in the collection, in light of the assumed purpose and use of the collection—viz., the ritual and worship context of the pilgrimage festivals.

For a discussion of the meaning and significance of the heading “Song of the Ascents” (tolu&M^h^ ryv!), see the earlier study on Ps 120.

Call to Worship: Verses 1-2

Verse 1

“See—(it is for you to) bless YHWH,
all you servants of YHWH,
standing in (the) house of YHWH in the night!”

The beginning of the call to worship is an irregular 3+2+3 tricolon. The initial interjection (hN@h!, “See—!”) echoes the opening of Psalm 133, but its use here is a bit peculiar (and difficult to translate). It has been explained as an intensive, used to strengthen the imperative (“bless…!”), and rendered correspondingly as “Come…!” (i.e., “Come, [and] bless YHWH…!”). I prefer to regard it as drawing attention to the need for worship at this moment: “See—(it is time/right for you to) bless YHWH (now)…!”

As noted in the introduction above, there is some debate as to the identity of the “servants of YHWH” (hwhy yd@b=u^). The parallel wording at the beginning of Psalm 135 (v. 1, cf. also 113:1), in the overall context of that Psalm (see esp. vv. 19-21), suggests that the entire congregation of worshippers—i.e., all the faithful/devout ones (including the priests)—is in view. As Allen (p. 283) points out, the plural <yd!b*u& (“servants”) is nowhere else used as a designation for the priests and Levites, though the root verb (db^u*, “perform work/service”) is used in relation to them. And yet, there is some precedence for a priestly/cultic point of reference, since the expression “servant of YHWH” (with the noun db#u# in the singular) is regularly used for persons (such as Moses, Joshua, David) who have a special position of religious leadership, i.e., representing YHWH in relation to the people (Deut 34:5, et al; cf. Crow, p. 122).

The final line, with the phrase/expression “the (one)s standing in (the) house of YHWH” would seem to tip the reference in favor of identifying the “servants of YHWH” with the priests and Levites who officiate and serve in the Temple precincts. The usage in Deut 10:8; 18:7; 1 Kings 8:11; 1 Chron 23:30; Ezek 44:15, etc, would tend to confirm this. However, the entire congregation (or the people generally) can also be depicted as “standing” before YHWH, in the sacred space of the Temple (or Tent-shrine), see, e.g., Lev 9:5; Jer 7:10; cf. Allen, p. 283.

The qualifying expression “in the nights” should be taken as an instance of an intensive/comprehensive plural (i.e., all through the night), though Dahood (III, p. 255) prefers rendering it in terms of night-watches (“watches of the night”, as also in 16:7; 92:3[2]). This has been interpreted as a reference to the Temple guards (cf. 1 Chron 9:23ff), in connection with the image of the night-guard (watchman) in Isa 21:8 (cf. Crow, p. 124f). However, elsewhere in the Psalms, the idea of keeping watch, or a vigil, all through the night applies to the ordinary faithful/devout worshiper (as represented by the Psalmist-protagonist)—see 63:7[6]; 92:3[2]; 119:55, 148; also 16:7; 42:9[8]; 77:7[6].

Thus, the evidence is rather evenly divided, between interpreting the “servants of YHWH” in v. 1 as a specific reference to the Temple personnel (priests and Levites) or to the congregation of the devout/faithful ones (including the priests) as a whole. I am inclined toward the latter view, particularly in light of the parallels in Psalm 135. According to this view, the people are called to worship YHWH in the Temple precincts (“house of YHWH”), presumably on the occasion of one of the pilgrimage festivals. On that particular point, it is worth noting the possibility of a reference to the Sukkot (Booths/Tabernacles) festival, since, at least according to subsequent Jewish tradition (cf. m. Sukkah 5:4), there were night-time ceremonies involved.

Verse 2

“Lift up your hands (toward the) holy (place),
and bless YHWH (there)!”

This second couplet (3+2) confirms the Temple location (and ritual context) of the Song established in v. 1. The noun vd#q) fundamentally means “holiness”, but it can also denote a “holy place (or thing)”. Here, the principal reference is to the Temple sanctuary, where YHWH dwells (symbolically and ritually), and which is thus “(the) holy place”. However, the terminology can also be used for the Temple (building) as a whole. In any case, the call to worship (from v. 1) has been narrowed to the context of the Temple (and its sanctuary). The “servants of YHWH” are called to “lift up” (vb ac*n`) their hands in the direction of the Temple sanctuary. The lifting up of one’s hands is a basic gesture of worship and adoration, which is here explained specifically in terms of blessing YHWH (vb Er^B*, as in v. 1). The gesture can also indicate prayer and supplication (to YHWH), as in Psalm 28:2, etc, but the reference in Lev 9:22 suggests an allusion to the Priestly blessing (see verse 3, below).

Dahood (III, p. 255) views the noun vd#q) (“holy [place]”) here as referring to the true sanctuary-dwelling of YHWH in heaven; and thus, it is from heaven that YHWH sends blessings to His people. Theologically, this may be considered a valid line of interpretation, such as we see expressed, for example, in the famous Prayer of Solomon (at the inauguration of the Temple) in 1 Kings 8. In that passage, it is repeatedly emphasized that YHWH truly dwells in heaven, rather than in the Temple sanctuary (where His name resides). And yet, in the same passage, it is also stated repeatedly that the people are to pray in the direction of Jerusalem (and the Temple).
The Qumran manuscript 11QPsa has an expanded reading of the second line (creating a 3+3 couplet), with the addition of the word <v@ (“name”): “…and bless (the) name of YHWH!”. This reading may be influenced by the (Deuteronomic) name-theology evidenced throughout 1 Kings 8, etc (cf. above). 

There is no actual preposition or locative-directional indicator in the text, and so the noun vd#q) (“holy [place]”) could conceivably refer to the place where (i.e., in which) the people (and/or priests) lift up their hands in worship. However, the various parallels, most notably in Psalm 28:2, make a directional reference (i.e., toward) much more likely. The LXX understands the reference directionally as well, translating with the preposition ei)$ (“[un]to”).

With regard to verses 1-2, taken together, it is worth noting that the LXX includes an additional line and, as a result, divides these verses somewhat differently. Utilizing the translation above, and including the corresponding additional line from the LXX (in italics) we have:

“See—(it is for you to) bless YHWH,
all you servants of YHWH,
standing in (the) house of YHWH,
in the courts of (the) house of our Mighty (One)!
In the night, lift up your hands (to the) holy (place)
and bless YHWH (there)!”

As this line is absent from the Hebrew of the Qumran manuscript 11QPsa, it is likely that the LXX has added it as a harmonizing inclusion from Ps 135:2.

Benediction: Verse 3

As noted above, the overall interpretation of the liturgical framework of the Psalm depends on whether the “servants of YHWH” in vv. 1-2 are to be limited to the priests (and Levites), i.e., the Temple officiants and personnel, or whether the expression refers to the entire congregation that is worshiping in Jerusalem (in the Temple precincts). If the former, then in vv. 1-2 the priests are enjoined to fulfill their ritual duties in the Temple, as an expression of their devotion and worship of YHWH. The shift between vv. 1-2 and 3 might also then entail a shift in speaker. However, if the congregation as a whole is being addressed in vv. 1-2, then this increases the likelihood that there is a single speaker for the Psalm, and that the speaker-protagonist is a priest, who both calls the people to worship (vv. 1-2) and then subsequently delivers the priestly blessing (cf. Num 6:24-26 and the discussion above). Based (primarily) on the parallels in Psalm 135 (esp. the closing vv. 19-21), I am inclined to the view that all of the people—the entire congregation of devout worshipers—is being addressed in vv. 1-2.

Verse 3

“May YHWH (indeed) bless you from Ṣiyyôn,
(the One) making (the) heavens and (the) earth!”

As noted in the introduction above, the first line of this closing blessing is identical to the first line of 128:5, while the second line echoes the final verse (v. 8) of Psalm 124 (cf. also Ps 115:15 and 121:2). In vv. 1-2, it is the worshipers (and/or the priests) who are to bless YHWH; now, in the final verse, a blessing coming from YHWH is invoked. As I have discussed, it is likely that this is specifically intended to reflect a priestly blessing—that is, a blessing from YHWH which is mediated ritually through the consecrated priest officiating at the Temple (cf. Luke 1:21-23). This priestly role goes back to the tradition prescribed by the Torah in Numbers 6:22-27 (vv. 24-26 record the blessing). The importance of this blessing coming “from Zion”, in the context of the Songs of Ascents, is discussed in the introduction (above). The Temple sanctuary in Jerusalem (Zion) is the place where YHWH has His manifest dwelling (ritually and symbolically) among His people, and it is here that His people encounter Him (on the occasion of the pilgrimage festivals, etc). Zion also functions as a symbol of the unity of the people—i.e., the faithful and devoted ones—in their faithfulness and devotion. Their assembling together in Jerusalem (at the Temple) to worship YHWH during the festivals is a clear and profound indication of their devotion to the covenant.

The addressee in verse 3 is singular (suffix ;-, “you” [sg.]), in contrast to the plural throughout vv. 1-2. This sort of alternation is hardly unusual in the Psalms, as there frequently occurs an interchange between an individual (righteous protagonist) and communal (all the righteous [one]s) point of reference. Here, the singular could also be understood in collective sense, for the community (of the righteous) as a whole.

The descriptive title of YHWH as the One “(hav)ing made (the) heavens and (the) earth” is an ancient epithet rooted in Canaanite religious tradition (regarding the high God ’Ēl as Creator), and an early Israelite version of this tradition is preserved in Genesis 14:19-20. Note the clear context of the poetic quotation in Gen 14:19-20 as a blessing formula, suggesting that a very old line of tradition is being preserved here in the Psalm (as also in Ps 115:15; 121:2; 124:8). As the Creator (and King of the universe), El-YHWH has the power and authority to give all blessings to humankind. For more on the subject, see the article by Norman C. Habel, “‘Yahweh, Maker of Heaven and Earth’: A Study in Tradition Criticism”, Journal of Biblical Literature [JBL] 91 (1972), pp. 321-37.

    • References marked “Dahood, I”, “Dahood, II” and “Dahood, III” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968), and Psalms III: 101-150, vol. 17A (1970).
    • Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150 (Revised edition), Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 21 (Zondervan: 2002/2014).
    • Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, translated by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2011).
    • Those marked “Crow” are to Loren D. Crow, The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120-134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion. SBL Dissertation Series 148 (Society of Biblical Literature: 1996).

Studies on the Spirit: The Spirit and the Death/Resurrection of Jesus (Study 10)

Study 10: The Spirit and the Resurrection of Jesus—the sending of the Spirit

As part of our discussion of the resurrection-chapter of 1 Corinthians (chap. 15) in the previous study (Study 9), it was mentioned how Paul’s exposition was fundamentally rooted in the early exaltation-Christology. An important and vital component of this Christology involves the sending of the Spirit to believers in Christ. The basic outline of this feature may be summarized as follows:

As the result of his resurrection, Jesus was exalted to a Divine/heavenly position at the “right hand” of God the Father. From this position, where, as God’s Son, the exalted Christ rules with Divine authority (at God’s right hand), he has access to the Spirit of God, with the ability to communicate (and send) this Spirit to others (i.e., believers).

It is interesting that, despite the prominence of this Christological belief, it is only rarely referenced in the New Testament; yet the references which exist certainly testify to its importance. In this study, we will examine the evidence from four standpoints:

    1. The Spirit-baptism tradition (in Mark 1:8 par.)
    2. The early Gospel preaching (kerygma) [prim. Acts 2:33]
    3. The Lukan Theology (Luke-Acts)
    4. The Johannine Narrative (esp. the Paraclete-sayings)

In conclusion, we will consider again, further, Paul’s explication of the Tradition in 1 Corinthians 15 (esp. verses  44-46).

1. The Spirit-baptism tradition (Mk 1:8 par)

All of the Gospels record (with some slight variation) the prophetic saying by John the Baptist:

“I dunked [i.e., baptized] you in water, but he will dunk you in (the) holy Spirit.” (Mk 1:8)

The Matthean and Lukan version(s) [“Q” material] present this saying somewhat differently, in relation to the earlier saying in v. 7, but it is substantially the same:

“(On the one hand,) I dunk you in water unto a change-of-mind…but (on the other,) he will dunk you in (the) holy Spirit and fire!” (Matt 3:11 / Lk 3:16)

The main differences (additions) are indicated in gray. The Johannine Gospel breaks apart the two components of the saying (1:26 [and 31], 33), a narrative method which serves to reinforce the contrast between the Baptist (baptizing in water) and Jesus (baptizing in/with the Spirit).

It seems quite clear that early Christians understood the prophecy as a reference to the coming of the Spirit upon believers; certainly, this is how the  saying is presented as being fulfilled in the book of Acts (1:5, in the context of vv. 8ff and 2:1-4ff). And yet, there is some thought that originally, in terms of the historical tradition and the earliest Gospel Tradition, the saying may have referred to the earthly ministry of Jesus. At the historical level, the Baptist himself would surely have understood the matter generally in terms of a Messianic fulfillment of the symbolic type-pattern present in his own baptizing activity. The “he” (au)to/$) who will “dunk you in/with (the) holy Spirit” is a Messianic Prophet-figure (“one coming”) who is depicted as ushering in the eschatological New Age promised by God for His people. The Messianic (and eschatological) character of this expected figure is quite clear, both from the context of the core tradition (esp. Mk 1:7-8 par, cf. my earlier article on “The One Coming” in the series Yeshua the Anointed), along with the “Q” saying in Matt 3:12 par, as well as the narrative setting established in the Lukan (3:15) and Johannine (1:19-25ff) Gospels.

The background for such a belief comes principally from the Scriptures—especially a number of key passages in the Prophets of the Exilic period which promise that, in the New Age of Israel’s restoration, God will “pour out” His Spirit upon His people (Isa 32:15; 44:3; Ezek 39:29; Joel 2:28-29). The use of Joel 2:28-29 in the Pentecost sermon-speech by Peter in Acts 2 (vv. 16-21ff) demonstrates that early Christians understood the coming of the Spirit (upon believers) as the fulfillment of these prophecies, and that it is the exalted Jesus who will bring this about— effectively “pouring out” the Spirit upon them (cf. on verse 33, below). This language of “pouring out” is certainly applicable to the idea of baptism, and is particularly appropriate if the ritual act involved a partial immersion—that is, the person is standing (or kneeling) in the water, and water is then scooped up and poured upon his/her head.

Interestingly, where the Spirit-baptism saying occurs in the book of Acts (1:5; 11:16, cp. with Lk 3:16), Jesus is not specified as the one who does the ‘baptizing’; rather, the verb is given in the passive (baptisqh/sesqe, “you will be dunked”), suggesting that these are instances of the so-called “Divine passive” (passivum divinum) in which God (the Father) is the implied actor. The fact that it is Jesus who elsewhere (in 2:33, etc, cf. below) is clearly indicated as the one who ‘baptizes’ with the Spirit further suggests that he (i.e., the exalted Christ) is fulfilling a role which properly belongs to God (YHWH).

2. The early Gospel preaching (kerygma)

The early exaltation-Christology (cf. the summary above) is well-established within the Gospel proclamation (kerygma) of early (first-century) believers. We can glimpse this, for example, from the various references (often formulaic in nature) to Jesus’ place in heaven at the “right hand” of God the Father—Mk 12:36; 14:62 pars; Acts 2:33f; 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; Col 3:1; Eph 1:20; 1 Pet 3:22; Heb 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2. I have already addressed Romans 1:4, and the likelihood that vv. 3-4 represent an early (pre/non-Pauline) confessional formula, in recent articles. Numerous other references (e.g., 1 Thess 1:10) could be cited as evidence for the widespread establishment of this basic exaltation-Christology within early Christian thought.

In spite of this, as noted above, there are few references to the specific idea of the exalted Christ’s access to the Spirit, and his ability to communicate (and send) it to believers. In at least one instance, however, the idea features prominently in the apostolic kerygma—namely, in Acts 2:33, which comes at a key (and climactic) point in the Pentecost sermon-speech by Peter (2:14-36), following the narrative of the initial coming of the Spirit upon the first believers in Jerusalem (vv. 1-4ff, cf. on the citation of Joel 2:28-29 [vv. 16-21ff] above). A kerygmatic presentation of the early exaltation-Christology is clearly indicated from the context in vv. 24ff, 31-32. The statement that God raised Jesus from the dead (v. 32) is followed by the declaration in verse 33:

“therefore, (hav)ing been lifted high [i.e., exalted] to the right (hand) of God, and (hav)ing received the e)paggeli/a of the holy Spirit (from) alongside the Father, he poured out this, which you [indeed] (now) see and hear (of).”

Jesus’ role in the fulfillment of the Joel 2:28-29 prophecy (cf. above) is shown by the use of the verb e)kxe/w (“pour out”); this also establishes the fulfillment of the Baptism-prophecy (Mk 1:8 par), with the idea of Jesus ‘baptizing’ people in/with the Spirit (cf. the discussion above). The key statement is the central clause: “(hav)ing received the e)paggeli/a of the holy Spirit (from) alongside the Father”. The sequence is clear: resurrection (v. 32)—exaltation (v. 33a)—receiving the Spirit from the Father [at His right hand] (v. 33b)— “pouring out” the Spirit (vv. 33c). The noun e)paggeli/a denotes a message a person gives forth, regarding a specific issue, often indicating (in a legal sense) an official announcement as to what he/she intends to do; there is often a strong promisory connotation to the term, and the noun is regularly translated as “promise”. Here the “promise” refers to the Prophetic passages, cited above, to which certain other Scriptures may be added, as well as the Baptism-prophecy (Mk 1:8 par). The noun e)paggeli/a is similarly used in Lk 24:49 and Acts 1:4 (cf. 2:39); and note also the Pauline usage in Gal 3:14-22ff.

3. The Lukan Theology (Luke-Acts)

As can be seen from the discussion above (in sections 1. and 2.), this emphasis on the Spirit within the exaltation-Christology is particularly prominent in Luke-Acts. It thus reflects a distinctive Lukan theological emphasis. The traditional nature of the Christology can be seen from the importance of the “right hand” exaltation-motif. The Lukan author adopts this motif (from the Tradition) at the end of the Gospel (20:42; 22:69) and continues it through the Gospel-preaching in the early chapters of Acts (2:33-34; 5:31; 7:55-56). The implication would seem to be that, being present at the “right hand” of God, the exalted Christ (the Son) now rules alongside God the Father. It is from this Divine and exalted position that Christ receives the Spirit “from alongside” (para/) the Father (Acts 2:33, cf. above). If he rules alongside God, then it follows that Christ also possesses the ruling authority of the Father—that is, he can act as God the Father does, acting as His royal representative, with the same authority. This means, specifically, that the exalted Christ can fulfill what God Himself promised—namely, that He would “pour out” His Spirit upon His people in the New Age of restoration. As Acts 2:33 makes clear, Jesus Christ is the one who “pours out” the Spirit, acting on the Father’s behalf.

There are several other Lukan references where this role of Jesus, in relation to the Spirit, is indicated. The most obvious occurs at the close of the Gospel (24:49), where, before his departure to heaven, Jesus tells his disciples:

“And [see—] I will send forth the e)paggeli/a of my Father upon you”

The noun e)paggeli/a (usually translated as “promise”) is unquestionably a reference to the Spirit, as the usage in Acts 1:4 and 2:33 makes clear (cf. above); but the identification is also confirmed by the wording that follows:

“but you must sit (here) in the city [i.e., Jerusalem] until the (moment) when you are clothed in power out of (the) height(s).”

The essential identification of “power” (du/nami$) with the Spirit is confirmed by the parallel in 1:35, as well as by the overall Lukan usage (4:14; Acts 1:8, etc). What is most important to note here in 24:49 is that Jesus is the one who “sends forth” (vb a)poste/llw) the Spirit, in a role that would normally be reserved for God the Father (cf. Gal 4:6, etc).

While the Spirit is upon Jesus during his Messianic ministry (on earth) and filling him (3:22; 4:1, 18), guiding and empowering him (4:14; 10:21; 11:20 [cf. par Matt 12:28]), it is only after his resurrection and exaltation that he, in turn, acts to send the Spirit upon believers. This post-resurrection role of the exalted Jesus is indicated by the saying in 12:12, in comparison with the corresponding (Synoptic) reference in the Eschatological Discourse (21:15 par). In that reference, Jesus indicates that he will give the disciples the words to speak (“I will give to you a mouth and wisdom…”), while earlier in 12:12 (cf. Matt 10:19-20) it is the Holy Spirit that fulfills this role (as also in the Markan version of the Eschatological Discourse, 13:11). The exalted Jesus and the Spirit are thus described as fulfilling the same role, and thus are performing the same basic action. This identification of the exalted Christ with the Spirit is similarly indicated by the parallel wording in Acts 16:6 (“holy Spirit”) and 7 (“Spirit of Yeshua”), suggesting that the expressions are interchangeable; the expression “Spirit of the Lord” (in 8:39) is ambiguous, but may also be a reference to the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Christ (since the “the Lord” could refer to God the Father or to the exalted Christ [the Son]).

4. The Johannine Narrative

The Christological points and features noted in the previous sections are attested in the Gospel of John as well, but presented within the context of the distinctive Johannine theology.

The Johannine Gospel does preserve the contours of the early exaltation-Christology. In particular, we find the idea that the exalted Jesus will fulfill the Messianic (and eschatological) role prophesied by the Baptist (1:33). The fulfillment is narrated at the close of the Gospel, in 20:22, a brief notice that corresponds generally to the Pentecost-event in Luke-Acts (Acts 2:1-4ff). Before this giving of the Spirit, following his resurrection Jesus ascends (in an exalted manner) to heaven to be in the Father’s presence (20:17), where, it may be inferred, he receives the Spirit (cf. Acts 2:33). As to the specific motif of ‘baptizing’ in/with the Spirit, one may note the important association of the Spirit with water in 3:5-8 and 4:10-15 (based on the context of vv. 23-24 and 7:37-39); in 7:39, the author explicitly interprets the motif of “living water” (given by Jesus) in terms of the giving of the Spirit to the disciples/believers.

At the same time, the Johannine theology, with its emphasis on the Divine pre-existence of the Son, has altered the traditional pattern of the exaltation-Christology. What previously was posited regarding the exalted Christ can now be stated in more general terms of the Son’s relation to the Father. The key passage is 3:31-36, which marks the close of the thematic contrast between Jesus and John the Baptist (and of the two kinds of baptism—Spirit / water) that encompasses chapters 1-3. God the Father gives “all things” to the Son (v. 35), and this includes, first and foremost, the Spirit (v. 34). Elsewhere, this relationship is expressed according to a clear sequence: the Father gives to the Son, and the Son, in turn, gives to believers. An important expression of this paradigm occurs in 6:57, at the close of the Bread of Life Discourse; the “life” referenced there unquestionably serves as an allusive reference to the Spirit (see v. 63, and note the “living bread” / “living water” parallel [4:10-15ff; 7:37-39]).

When we turn to the Paraclete-sayings of Jesus in the Last (or Farewell) Discourse (13:31-16:33), the paradigm is filled out with specific reference to the Spirit—viz., the Father gives the Spirit to the Son, and the Son, in turn, gives the Spirit to believers. This sequence provides the theological backdrop for the sayings (note the Father-Son relational interchange throughout the Discourse). At first glance, the actual wording in the sayings (14:16-17, 25-26; 15:26-27; 16:7-15) can be confusing, as Jesus refers to the sending of the Spirit in varying ways:

    • The Father will send the Spirit (at the Son’s request), 14:16
    • The Father will send the Spirit (in Jesus’ name), 14:26
    • The Son will send the Spirit (from the Father), 15:26
    • The Son will send the Spirit (just as the Father sent the Son), 16:7

A range of Johannine theological concepts and thematic emphases are covered by these formulations. The two central formulations (14:26; 15:26) perhaps best capture the relational paradigm presented above: the Father gives the Spirit to the Son, and the Son, in turn, gives it to believers.

And yet, another key Johannine theological emphasis is that Spirit also represents the Son (Jesus), and it is through the Spirit that Jesus continues his ministry in and among believers. The Paraclete-sayings make this quite clear. Moreover, it is through the presence of the Spirit that believers are united with the Son, and (in turn), through the Son, also with the Father. For the Johannine author(s), as well as for Paul, to be “in Christ” is to be “in the Spirit” (and vice versa). The language of union/unity that pervades chapter 17 (the Discourse-Prayer) of the Gospel also runs through much of First John, where the unifying role (and effect) of the Spirit’s abiding presence is more keenly emphasized (see esp. 3:24; 4:2ff, 13; 5:6ff).

The Pauline Explication of the Tradition in 1 Corinthians 15

In light of the above discussion, we may return briefly to Paul’s development and exposition of the exaltation-Christology in the resurrection-chapter (1 Cor 15). Focusing, in particular, on the climactic verses 44-46ff, we may note (again) Paul’s very distinctive contribution to this Christology. One might be inclined to ask how or in what way the exalted Christ received the Spirit from alongside the Father (Acts 2:33, cf. above). Paul seems to describe this in terms of the nature of the exaltation itself, by stating that the resurrected (i.e., exalted) Jesus became (vb gi/nomai) a “life-making Spirit” (v. 45). The verbal adjective (participle) would more comfortably be rendered “life-giving” in English, but the verb (zwopoie/w) properly means “make (a)live”. This is a fundamental characteristic and ability of God—to “make (persons/things) alive” —whether in the original creation, or in the resurrection (and new creation). For this use of zwopoie/w, see Jn 5:21, and also 6:63 where it is the Spirit that “makes alive”. So also, in Romans 4:17 Paul states that God “makes alive”, while in 8:11 this role is effectively performed by the Spirit. The Spirit is also the subject of the verb in 2 Cor 3:6 (on the contrast between the Spirit and the Law, cf. Gal 3:21) and, elsewhere, in 1 Peter 3:18.

Paul alone, among New Testament authors, goes so far as to declare that the exalted Jesus became this “life-making” (i.e., life-giving) Spirit. It would probably be off the mark to envision a transformation of Jesus into the Spirit. Rather, a better indication of what Paul has in mind would seem to be found in the maxim given earlier in 6:17: “Now, the (one) being joined [lit. glued] to the Lord is one Spirit (with him)”. In the immediate context of 6:17, this statement refers to the union of the believer with Christ (“the Lord”); however, it would also seem to apply to the relationship between the exalted Christ and God the Father (“the Lord”). If this line of interpretation is correct, then the phrase in 15:45 can be explained in terms of the union of the exalted Christ with God the Father. It is a spiritual union, a union in the Spirit, which involves a sharing of the same Spirit. This way of understanding the matter would help to explain and unite together several different Christological concepts, discussed above:

    • The exalted Christ possesses the Spirit, having ‘received’ it from his place “alongside” the Father (Acts 2:33, cp. Jn 1:14; 6:46; 8:38, 40, etc)
    • The exalted Christ is able personally to communicate the Spirit to believers
    • The “Spirit of Christ” and the “Spirit of God” can essentially be identified with each other, with both referring to the same Holy Spirit, the expressions themselves being interchangeable (cf. Rom 8:9; Acts 16:6-7)
    • The exalted Christ and God the Father can perform the same essential action; similarly, Christ and the Spirit can perform the same role.

In our next study (Study 11), we will turn again to the role of the Spirit in relation of the death of Jesus, considering the subject from the standpoint of the union of believers with Christ. In particular, we will focus on the idea that the power and effect of Christ’s death is communicated to believers through the Spirit. This is a thematic emphasis that is found in both the Pauline letters and the Johannine writings; we will begin with the letters of Paul.

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 133

Psalm 133

Dead Sea MSS: 11QPsa (vv. 1-3); 11QPsb (vv. 1-3)

Psalm 133 is among the shortest of the “Songs of Ascents”, standing as the fourth Song the final group of five (Pss 130-134). It has certain thematic points in common with the fourth Song (Ps 128 [study]) of the second group (125-129), most notably the proverbial opening with an emphasis on family bonds (cp. vv. 1-3 with verse 1 of our Psalm), and the concluding focus on blessing from YHWH in the cultic-religious context of worship in Jerusalem (Zion)—compare vv. 4-6 with verse 3 of Ps 133. In all likelihood the two Songs were composed in a similar fashion, involving the expository and poetic development of core proverbial material. Indeed, the same author may have composed both Songs (the attribution to David in the heading of Ps 133 notwithstanding), with composition probably occurring around the same time that the collection was assembled. This would likely date Psalm 133 to the early post-exilic period, though the Song itself could conceivably contain earlier material (in addition to the proverb of v. 1). If we consider the logic and purpose of this development, three key thematic emphases come into view:

    • The unifying restoration of the Israel—the land and its people (v. 1)
    • The setting of communal worship, with its ritual and beatific aspects, embodied in the priestly figure of Aaron (v. 2)
    • Jerusalem (Zion) as the location and focal point of the Divine blessing (v. 3)

This Psalm is particularly interesting in that there are two entirely viable ways of dividing it and parsing its structure. The first approach is to divide it into two stanzas, corresponding to verses 2 and 3, respectively (following the initial proverb-couplet of v. 1 [3+3]):

    • 2a: Image of oil (used for anointing, etc) [“Like the good oil…”] [3+2]
      • 2b: Focus of blessing (Aaron, i.e., the priestly blessing) [3+2]
    • 3a: Image of dew (i.e., fructifying moisture) [“Like the dew of Hermon…”] [3+2]
      • 3b: Focus of blessing (from YHWH, in Zion) [2+2+2]

A second option, is to treat vv. 2-3a as a single stanza-unit, comprised of three 3+2 couplets, bracketed by the opening proverb (v. 1) and the announcement of blessing from YHWH in v. 3a. According to this structural approach, the priestly reference to Aaron in v. 2b holds central place, between two comparative illustrations:

    • “Like the good oil on the head, going down upon the beard—
      • the beard of Aaron…
    • “Like the dew of Hermon which goes down upon the hills of Zion”

In my view, this second approach is preferable, and I have adopted it for the exegesis below.

Psalm 133, in spite of its brevity, is preserved more or less complete in two different manuscripts from Qumran (11QPsa and 11QPsb). The textual variants found in these are slight, but significant, and will be mentioned below. Of particular interest is the fact that the 11QPsa manuscript does not include Ps 133 with the other “Songs of Ascents”, but instead places it between Pss 141 and 144, following the so-called “Apostrophe to Zion” (and also Ps 93).

As noted above, the superscription of Ps 133 adds the regular attribution of Davidic authorship (“[belonging] to David”); this is absent from some MSS (and of the LXX), but is present in 11QPsa [dywdl]. For a discussion of the meaning and significance of the heading “Song of the Ascents” (tolu&M^h^ ryv!), see the earlier study on Ps 120.

Introduction (Proverb): Verse 1

Verse 1

“See—how good and how delightful
(is the) sitting of brothers truly as one!”

Nearly all commentators recognize the proverbial character of this opening couplet (3+3 meter); as noted above, it is to be compared with the proverbial material in the first section (vv. 1-3) of Psalm 128 (cf. the earlier study). In all likelihood, the Psalmist has made use of an already existing maxim or aphorism, which, like most proverbs, has a generic (or generalized) significance. Given the parallels in wording with Deuteronomy 25:5 (noted by a number of commentators), possibility the original meaning involved the importance of one’s extended family living and remaining in close contact (within a common/connected patrimonial territory); cf. also Gen 13:6; 36:7. Indeed, Deut 25:5 begins with the phrase “If/when brothers sit [i.e., dwell] as one [i.e. together]…” (yD*j=y~ <yj!a^ Wbv=y@ yK!), which is quite close to the phrase here in the second line (1b). The use of the particle <G~ (usually translated “also, even”) in the expression dj^y`-<G~ is probably emphatic, i.e., “truly as one”.

In Job 36:11 the conceptually related adjectives bof (“good”) and <yu!n` (“good, pleasant, delightful”) are paired together, as they are here, in a beatific context (entailing the promise of prosperity and long life). For other uses of <yu!n` in a proverbial setting, cf. Prov 22:18; 23:8; 24:4; closer to the blessing-context of Ps 133 are the occurrences in Ps 16:6, 11; note also the worship-context in Ps 135:3 and 147:1.

Whatever the original significance of the proverb, the Psalmist has effectively reinterpreted it within the setting of the Songs-collection; thus, in this context, the general theme of fraternal/familial unity takes on new dimension, involving at least two thematic emphases: (1) the post-exilic restoration of Israel, and (2) the communal worship of the people (esp. on the occasion of the pilgrimage-festivals, in Jerusalem). With regard to the first theme, this restoration entails the cities of Judah (including Jerusalem), and the return of the people to the land, where they will now live and dwell together; note, in particular, the wording of Jer 31:24, which has the phrase “And they shall dwell…together [wD*j=y~…Wbv=y`w+] (cf. Berlin, pp. 141-3; Crow, p. 111f). As for the focus on communal worship (in Zion), cf. below on vv. 2-3.

Central Stanza: Verses 2-3a

Verse 2a

“(It is) like the oil th(at is) good upon the head,
that is going down upon the beard—”

As noted above, this central stanza is comprised of three 3+2 couplets. The first and third couplets are parallel, involving a similar motif—moisture (oil/dew), signifying blessing (in different aspects), which is ‘poured’ out upon (lu^) the top (head/mountain-top), and then which travels down (vb dr^y`) to cover all that is below. Each of these two couplets begins with the same comparative wording: “Like [K=] {the moisture} upon [lu^]…”.

The illustrative imagery in this first couplet is straightforward, assuming a situation where oil (/m#v#) has been poured out upon a person’s head (var)), after which the liquid runs down upon his beard (/q*z`). The connection with Aaron (v. 2b, cf. below) naturally suggests the sacred anointing of a priest (or king); however, such a specific application is not required by the imagery itself. The designation of the oil as “good” (bof) simply means that it is sweet-smelling, and also beneficial; cf. the proverbial reference in Eccl 7:1. Presumably the general adjective bof (“good”) was chosen so as to echo its earlier use in verse 1 (cf. above).

The apparent absence of the relative particle (v=) on the participle dr@y) (“going down”) is noteworthy, considering it is present on the same participle in the other two couplets (vv. 2b-3a). It should be read here as well, though it is not necessary to restore it to the text (as Crow does, p. 107). As Dahood notes (III, p. 251), the final v on the prior word (var)) can serve this purpose (i.e., indicating the relative particle), performing ‘double-duty’.

Verse 2b

“(the) beard of Aharôn—that is going down
upon (the) mouth of his full measure.”

In spite of the central position of this second couplet (cf. the introduction above), it represents a continuation of the image in the first couplet (2a)—effectively identifying the pouring of oil (upon the head) with the sacred anointing of the priests. For this anointing a “holy oil” (vd#Q)h^ /m#v#, lit. “oil of the holiness”, Num 35:25) was used (cp. “good oil”, v. 2a), mixed according to a specially designed recipe (Exod 30:22-38). The anointing and consecration of Aaron (and his sons) is described in Leviticus 8 (cf. also Exodus 29).

Syntactically, it would seem that here the beard of Aaron is the subject of the verb dr^y` (“go down”); and yet, the principal image is still that of the oil going down, from the beard to the rest of the body below. I have indicated this continuation by the m-dash (—) in the translation above (cf. the end of v. 2a, above). While the general idea of the oil continuing down to the rest of Aaron’s body is clear enough, there are difficulties regarding the specific wording used to express this in line 2. The main problem lies with the final word, which in the MT is a plural form of the feminine noun hD*m! (toDm!); the Qumran manuscript 11QPsa reads instead a (masculine) plural form of the related noun dm^ (wydm). Both nouns derive from a verbal root (ddm) meaning “measure”, and thus essentially denote something that is “measured (out)”. However, the noun dm^ tends to carry the specific meaning of a measured-out garment, and so the terminology has been understood here—viz., as a reference to the priestly robe(s) of Aaron. It is also possible to understand and render the line according to principal denotation of “measure”, in which case the plural form is best taken as an intensive (or comprehensive) plural, i.e., “full measure”. The preceding noun in construct (yP!, “mouth of”) is also used as a common idiom for measure and proportion. For a cogent argument in favor of this line of interpretation (and translation), cf. Keel, pp. 71-72.

Overall, the specific image in v. 2b is that of the oil (of the anointing) running down from Aaron’s beard to all that is beneath it—i.e., covering the “full measure” of his stature (and which includes the measure of his garments). This imagery is symbolic of the consecrated nature of the priesthood, and of the Divine blessing that comes to the people through the ritual mediation of the priests.

Verse 3a

“(It is) like (the) dew of Ḥermôn that is going down
upon (all) the mountains of Ṣiyyôn!”

The second illustrative comparison derives from the natural world: the dew (lf^) that comes down from heaven. For this comparison, the specific mountain of Ḥermôn (/omr=j#) is used. Reluctantly, I have transliterated this name here (rather than translating it) to avoid cluttering up the poetic line in my translation above. However, in all likelihood, the Psalmist is drawing upon the meaning of the name—which, probably, derives from the root <rj (I), thus denoting a sacred (“dedicated, consecrated”) place. Such a meaning naturally relates to the idea of the sacred anointing (consecration) of Aaron as priest, and helps to tie both illustrations together, from a conceptual and thematic standpoint.

The parallel motif of oil / dew also produces a natural poetic pairing; it is not particularly attested elsewhere in Biblical poetry (cf. the loose parallel in 2 Sam 1:21), however, there is a noteworthy occurrence in the Canaanite Baal Epic (Tablet III, Column 4, lines 42-43), where it is said of the goddess Anat, as she bathes herself: “She draws water and washes / with (the) dew [ṭl] of (the) heavens (and the) oil [šmn] of earth”. 

There are a number of other reasons why Hermon might have been chosen for the peak (“top, head”) which receives the dew of YHWH’s blessing (from heaven). It has been noted that Hermon tends to receive a particular abundance of dew and other precipitation (cf. the works cited by Dahood [III, p. 252], Crow [p. 114], and others); thus, a simple observance from nature may be involved. More significant is the role of the great mountains of Canaan from the standpoint of cosmological myth. That there were sacred shrines (esp. to Baal-Haddu) on (or in the vicinity) of Hermon is indicated by the references to “Baal-Hermon” (cf. Judg 3:3; 1 Chron 5:23) and the site of “Baal-gad” (Josh 11:17, etc). For the ancient Israelites who took over this territory, Hermon would have been associated with YHWH, rather than Baal-Haddu. Like the Canaanite Baal, YHWH had control over the waters, and thus was able to bring down rain (and dew) from the heavens. Cf. Keel, p. 76.

A third explanation has to do with the northern location of Hermon, with its high and majestic peak. The “dew” first reaches this great northern peak, and then runs down to the south—to mount Zion (i.e., Jerusalem). This geographic north-south juxtaposition may well be intentional, in terms of the idea of the restoration of the kingdom, which would (eventually) re-unite the north with the south. The expression “the mountains of Zion” can be understood two ways: (i) as a reference to the various hills and slopes of Jerusalem, or (ii) as an intensive/comprehensive plural, referring to “mount Zion” —that is, the elevated hill-top location, the ancient Canaanite citadel, which was taken over as the “city of David” and the location for the Temple sanctuary (i.e., the Temple ‘mount’).
The Qumran manuscript 11QPsa avoids the potential confusion involved with the plural “mountains” by reading the singular (“the mountain of Zion”); the same reading occurs in some manuscripts of the MT. 

Conclusion: Verse 3b

Verse 3b

“For there has ordered
YHWH (the) blessing—
life unto the distant (future)!”

This concluding verse (a 2-beat [2+2+2] tricolon) functions as a counterpart to the proverb in verse 1, framing the stanza. It also relates conceptually to the central Aaron-couplet in v. 2b, since the priestly blessing is clearly connected to the religious-ritual aspect of the blessing that YHWH provides for His people in Jerusalem (Zion). On this emphasis, cf. the second part of Psalm 128 (vv. 4-6), noted above (and see the earlier study on Ps 128).

The locative particle <v* (“there”) certainly connects back to the reference to Zion at the end of v. 3a. YHWH has ordered (vb hw`x*) that the blessing will come to His people there (i.e., in Jerusalem/Zion); note the alliterative wordplay between hW`x! (ṣiwwâ, “He ordered”) and /oYx! (ṣiyyôn, Zion). However, Zion serves as a multivalent symbol in the Songs, even as it does in other Psalms and poetic texts. There is, certainly, a reference to the ritual aspect of the Temple, and to the pilgrimage festivals, where people, upon traveling to Jerusalem and participating in the festal celebrations, will specifically receive a blessing from YHWH (and receive the priestly blessing). At the same time, Jerusalem/Zion also represents the entire land (and its people), especially in its restoration—a dynamic that begins in the post-exilic period and is reflected by the re-establishment of the pilgrimage festivals. Jerusalem will be the capital of the restored kingdom, and will once again function as the religious center, and the focus of communal worship for the people.

This latter aspect quite naturally relates the close of the Psalm to the initial proverb of verse 1, expressing the ideal of a united community (“brothers sitting/dwelling as one”), able to receive the blessing from YHWH in the midst of a restored land and kingdom, centered on the holy city of Jerusalem. For similar thought, describing the ideal of unity and brotherhood in connection with Jerusalem (and the Temple), see Psalm 55:14-15[13-14], and note also 42:5[4]; cf. Keel, pp. 77-8; Hossfeld-Zenger, pp. 475-6.

The blessing itself involves the promise of “life unto the distant (future)”; here the customary temporal expression (with the noun <l*ou) is utilized, but in the form <l*ouh* du^, using the preposition du^ (“unto/until”) rather that l= (“[in/un]to”). This phrase can be understood in two different ways. On the one hand, it can simply indicate a long life; however, it can also be taken as a reference (or allusion) to a blessed afterlife (i.e., with God in heaven). In both respects, this “life” would truly represent a great blessing from God.
It is worth noting that that Qumran manuscript 11QPsa omits the noun <yY]j^ (“life”), stating instead simply that the blessing lasts “unto the distant (future)” without specifying the blessing as involving long and/or eternal life.

The Qumran manuscripts 11QPsa,b each include an additional closing line “Peace [<olv] (be) upon Yisrael!” (cf. Psalm 125:5; 128:6).

    • References marked “Dahood, I”, “Dahood, II” and “Dahood, III” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968), and Psalms III: 101-150, vol. 17A (1970).
    • Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, translated by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2011).
    • Those marked “Crow” are to Loren D. Crow, The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120-134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion. SBL Dissertation Series 148 (Society of Biblical Literature: 1996).
    • Those marked “Keel” are to Othmar Keel, “Kultische Brüderlichkeit—Psalm 133”, Freiburger Zeitschrift 23 (1976), pp. 68-80.
    • Those marked “Berlin” are to Adele Berlin, “On the Interpretation of Ps 133” in Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry, ed. Elaine R. Follis, JSOT Supplement series 40 (JSOT Press: 1987), pp.  141-8.

Studies on the Spirit: The Spirit and the Death/Resurrection of Jesus (Study 9)

Study 9: The Spirit and the Resurrection of Jesus—1 Corinthians 15

In our previous study (Study 8), we examined the first of two key passages in Paul’s letters which relate the Spirit to the resurrection of Jesus (and to the resurrection [of believers] generally)—Romans 8. The second passage is the famous resurrection-chapter of 1 Corinthians (chap. 15), which we will be discussing in the current study.

1 Corinthians 15

There are many significant theological and historical-critical issues relating to this chapter, but, due to limitations of space, and the particular focus of our study, I will essentially be limiting the discussion to the role of the Spirit in the resurrection—and, specifically, Paul’s references to the Spirit, which occur in verses 44-46.

First, however, a word must be said about the place of these verses within the structure and context of the chapter. Paul begins (in vv. 1-11) by establishing the resurrection of Jesus (and, by extension and implication, the resurrection of believers) as a core component of the Gospel. Any attempt to deny or disregard, or to downplay the importance of, the resurrection effectively represents a degrading attack on the Gospel itself. We can see this, initially, by the way that Paul positions the historical tradition of Jesus’ resurrection within the framing statements (regarding the apostolic ministry of Gospel preaching) in vv. 1-2 and 11. His discussion of the historical tradition is presented in verses 3-7, along with its application to the situation of his own ministry (vv. 8-10)—and thus also his ministry and mission-work among the Corinthians. The implication is that proclamation of Jesus’ resurrection is central to Paul’s apostolic ministry (as would also be clear from many other passages and references in his letters).

In the section that follows (vv. 12-19), Paul argues for the importance (and necessity) of a belief in the resurrection—that is, the belief that there is a resurrection for human beings (esp. believers) who have died. If there is no resurrection, then Christ cannot have been raised from the dead, and human beings (believers) are without hope for the future (i.e., life after death). Most readers today are likely to find Paul’s line of argument here, taken at face value, rather unconvincing. For example, he does not recognize or deal at all with the possibility of a life after death (for believers) which does not involve a bodily/physical resurrection (cf. Lk 23:43). Such an objection, however, would miss the main focus of Paul’s thought in these verses, which involves the corporate identity (and unity) of Jesus Christ with humankind. This helps to explain the logic of his argument—viz., if human beings are not raised from the dead (bodily/physically), then Jesus himself was not raised.

The importance (and centrality) of this principle becomes clear in the following section (vv. 20-28), as Paul positions the resurrection of Jesus within an historical framework—both in terms of salvation history, and of human history in general—extending from the original creation (v. 21f) to the end of the Age (vv. 25-28). The resurrection, indeed, was a primary eschatological event, and could not, practically speaking, be discussed outside of an eschatological context.

Key to this passage is the Adam-Christ typological paradigm which Paul introduces in verse 22 (cp. his use of the same typology in Romans 5-8 [esp. 5:12-21]; and cf. my current article on Romans 8 in the series “God Sent Forth His Son…”). There are two main aspects to this typology, based on Paul’s understanding of the figure of “Adam”: (i) as a historical individual, the first human being of the old creation; and (ii) as a corporate person, who represents (collectively) all of humankind, the nature and condition of humanity (within the old order of things).

The first aspect is already indicated by Paul by his introductory statement in verse 20: “But now (the) Anointed has (indeed) been raised out of (the) dead, (the) beginning of (the harvest) of the (one)s having gone to sleep”. The ‘harvest’ implied by the use of the term a)parxh/ (“[the] beginning from”, i.e., beginning of the harvest) is the ‘harvest’ of souls (human beings) that occurs at the end of the current Age—on this agricultural imagery used as an eschatological motif, see e.g., Mk 4:29; Matt 3:12 par; 13:30, 39ff; Rev 14:15ff. The noun a)parxh/ was used by early Christians in this same eschatological context, applied to believers who represent the beginning of the end-time harvest—James 1:18; Rev 14:4, and elsewhere by Paul, 2 Thess 2:13; 1 Cor 16:15; Rom 16:5, and (especially) 8:23 which is closely related in thought and emphasis to the usage here in 1 Cor 15. And yet, the true beginning of the eschatological harvest begins with Jesus Christ and his resurrection; the resurrection of believers, which corresponds to the pattern of Jesus’ own resurrection, then follows. Paul makes the point especially clear in verse 23:

“but each (person) in his own order: (the) Anointed (as the) beginning of (the harvest) [a)parxh/], (and) then after (this), the (one)s (who are) of the Anointed, in his (com)ing to be along [parousi/a].”

The second aspect of the Adam-Christ type-pattern is the corporate or collective aspect. Adam represents and embodies all humankind (in the first/old creation), while Christ, correspondingly, represents all humankind (i.e., believers) in the new creation. Human beings are “in Adam”, just as those who belong to the new humanity (believers) are “in Christ”. This collective aspect and emphasis is expressed by Paul’s statements in verses 21-22. In particular, Paul’s declaration in verse 22 should be noted since it relates to the important theological (and Christological) principle of believers’ union with Christ (“in Christ”), by which they/we are able to participate in the death and resurrection of Jesus. For a clearer expression (and exposition) of this principle, see Romans 6:3-11 and 8:3ff, 9-11ff (cf. also Gal 2:20). This idea of our sharing in the death and resurrection of Jesus, as a result of our union with him, is important for understanding Paul’s discussion of the role of the Spirit (in relation to the resurrection).

This brings us to the penultimate section of the chapter (vv. 35-49), in which Paul expounds and develops a number of the points made earlier (esp. in vv. 20-28). It is here that Paul makes the important contribution of describing, in an initial and preliminary way, the nature of the resurrection—and, in particular, of what was involved in the resurrection of Jesus. In this regard, Paul is the first (and only) New Testament author who attempts to offer such a description and explanation of the resurrection. He does this, primarily, through an expository development of the Adam-Christ typology (cf. above), and by expanding upon the eschatological harvest-imagery implied by the term a)parxh/ (vv. 20, 23). The harvest-imagery is applied specifically in relation to the death-resurrection pattern which believers share with Jesus Christ. There are thus two distinct motivic type-patterns which Paul utilizes:

    • The old/first creation (Adam-earth-body) vs. the new/last creation (Christ-heaven-Spirit)
    • The “seed” which dies (old creation / earth-body), and which then is raised (new creation / heaven-Spirit)

Believers participate in both type-patterns—first, by being “in Adam” and then “in Christ” (see v. 22); and, second, by sharing in the death and resurrection of Jesus. In particular, the seed-motif (vv. 36-38ff) is applied to the theme of the participatory death/resurrection of believers in verses 42-44; Paul does this by way of a series of contrasting pairs:

    • “decay” (fqora/) | “without decay” (a)fqarsi/a) [v. 42]
    • “without honor” (a)timi/a) | “honor/splendor” (do/ca) [v. 43]
    • “without strength” (a)sqe/neia) | “power” (du/nami$)

The first item in each pair is characteristic of humanity in the old creation—viz., the weakness and mortality of the human condition—while the second is reflective of the exalted state of humanity in the new creation. Indeed, in this exalted state, human beings (believers) share in attributes that are otherwise characteristic of God (and the Divine/heavenly realm). The final and climactic pairing comes in verse 44:

“it is sown (as) a body of soul [yuxiko/$], it is raised (as) a body of (the) Spirit [pneumatiko/$]”

The contrast involves the adjectives yuxiko/$ and pneumatiko/$, which can be quite tricky to translate, especially as Paul uses them here. The adjective yuxiko/$ is derived from the noun yuxh/, which is usually translated “soul”; the adjective denotes “of (the) soul”, i.e., relating to the soul, characterized by a soul. Here, it is being used as a general characteristic of human beings—beginning with Adam, every individual human being is a living soul, possessing a soul (in which is the breath/spirit of life). Similarly, the adjective pneumatiko/$ means “of the spirit [pneu=ma]” —but here this refers not to the ordinary life-breath or “spirit” that is intrinsic to every living human soul, but to the Spirit of God (i.e., “of the Spirit”) as it is received and experienced especially by believers in Christ. For more on Paul’s use of the adjective pneumatiko/$, see my recent note on 1 Cor 2:13-14.

The contrast, between the old and new humanity, the old and new creation, is stated in verse 45:

“…the first man Adam came to be (made) into a living soul, the last Adam into a life-making Spirit.”

Christ is referred to as the “last Adam”, which has two points of significance: (i) Jesus Christ represents the end (“last”, e&sxato$) of the old human condition, yet (ii) he also fulfills the type-pattern of Adam since he represents the first (exalted) human being of the new creation. This new humanity is characterized, not by the living soul of Adam, but by the Spirit of God. The implication is that, through his resurrection (and exaltation), Jesus Christ was transformed (“became [made] into” [vb ginomai + ei)$]) into Divine Spirit—not simply a life-giving spirit, but the Spirit (of God) which gave/gives life to all things.

This is a striking and unprecedented statement. We have already discussed the basic idea that it was through His Spirit that God raised Jesus from the dead (cf. the discussion in Study 7). Here, however, Paul seems to indicate something further—viz., that Jesus was transformed into the very Spirit of God. Presumably, this involved a union with God’s Spirit, such that the exalted Christ and God (the Father) came to share the same Spirit, according to the principle stated by Paul in 6:17:

“the (one) being joined [lit. glued] to the Lord is one Spirit”

The immediate point of reference is to the union of believers with Christ (“the Lord”), but the principle would also seem to apply to the union of the exalted Christ with God the Father (“the Lord”); as such, 6:17 can reasonably be used to elucidate how Paul understands the Christological idea expressed here in v. 45. In several passages, Paul essentially identifies the Spirit (of God) with the Spirit of Christ; note, in particular, the interchangeability of the expressions (“Spirit of God”, “Spirit of Christ”) in Rom 8:9, and the reference to the Spirit as “the Spirit of His [i.e. God’s] Son” in Gal 4:6.

In terms of this understanding of the relation of Jesus to the Spirit, Paul is simply following (and developing) the well-established exaltation-Christology held by early Christians. According to this Christological viewpoint, the Divine status/position of Christ, and his identity as the Son of God, is understood primarily (if not exclusively) through the resurrection. Through his resurrection, Jesus was exalted to a Divine status and position (as God’s Son), at the “right hand” of the Father in heaven (cf. Mk 14:62; Acts 2:33-34; 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; Col 3:1; 1 Pet 3:22; Heb 1:3, 13, etc). The situation becomes rather more complicated when the matter is considered from the standpoint of a pre-existence Christology. However, it is possible to explain (and retain) the exaltation-perspective of Jesus’ relationship to the Spirit even within the framework of the later pre-existence Christology that came to dominate orthodox Christian thought. For example, one may adopt a variation of the kenosis-Christology that is suggested (by Paul) in the ‘Christ-hymn’ of Philippians 2:6-11. The Christology of the Johannine Writings offers the possibility of other approaches. We will be discussing these in some of the upcoming studies, as well as in the articles (on the Incarnation) in the series “God Sent Forth His Son…” (the next article of which will deal with Phil 2:6-11).

In our next study (Study 10), we will continue this examination of the Spirit-references in 1 Cor 15 (vv. 44-46), by focusing specifically on several important aspects of the exaltation-Christology—most notably, the idea that the exalted Christ, from his position at God’s right hand (in heaven), has access to the Divine Spirit, with the ability to communicate (and send) it to believers.

 

“God Sent Forth His Son…”: Romans 8:3ff, 14-17ff, 29-30

Romans 8:3ff, 14-17ff, 29-30

Chapter 8 is the fourth, and final, major section of the probatio of Romans (Rom 1:18-8:39). The first three sections were:

    • Rom 1:18-3:20: Announcement of God’s (impending) judgment, according to the Law (of God)
    • Rom 3:21-5:21: Announcement of God’s justice/righteousness (in Christ), apart from the Law (Torah)
    • Rom 6:1-7:25: Announcement of Freedom from the Law and Sin

This last section (chapter 8) I would divide as follows:

    • Rom 8:1-30: Announcement of Life in the Spirit (Exhortation)
      —8:1-11: The conflict (for believers) between the Spirit and the Flesh
      —8:12-17: Believers are sons (of God) and heirs (with Christ) through the Spirit
      —8:18-25: Believers have the hope of future glory (new creation) through the Spirit
      —8:26-30: Believers experience the work of salvation through the Spirit
    • Rom 8:31-39: Doxology: The Love of God (in Christ)

The important Christological statement in verse 3 (discussed in the previous article) serves as the basis for Paul’s exposition of the declaration in vv. 1-2:

“(So) then, now (there is) not any judgment against the (one)s (who are) in (the) Anointed Yeshua—for the law of the Spirit of life in (the) Anointed Yeshua (has) freed you from the law of sin and of death!”

Believers (“the [one]s in Christ Jesus”) have been saved from the Judgment, in that they/we were “set free” (vb e)leuqero/w) from the binding power (or “law”, no/mo$) of sin (and death). Judgment was brought down on sin itself, as it exercised power “in the flesh”, condemning it and stripping it of its enslaving power. In terms of Paul’s personalization of sin, depicting it as a tyrannical ruler, one is reminded of the Judgment-scene in the vision of Daniel 7 (vv. 11-12, 26-27).

Two aspects of Paul’s description go hand-in-hand:

    • Sin is judged by God, with its ruling/enslaving power removed, and thus
    • Humankind is set free from the power of sin

Freedom from the binding power of sin also means freedom from the binding power of the law (i.e., the Torah regulations and requirements). On this sensitive and controversial subject, cf. the articles in my earlier series “Paul’s View of the Law” (note especially the discussion on the preceding sections of Romans [7:7-25]).

An important point of emphasis for Paul here is that both aspects of this salvation which God worked for believers—judgment against sin, and the loosing from bondage—took place “in the flesh”. This was the very human “flesh” —i.e., the human nature—that had been created (by God), but came to be corrupted and enslaved to the power of sin (cf. Paul’s extended discussion in chaps. 5-7). The means by which God accomplished the salvation of humankind, freeing it from bondage, was the death of His own Son.

We have already discussed the likely incarnational orientation of the paradigm in verse 3 (cf. also Gal 4:4): God sent forth His Son, presumably from heaven to earth, in order to be born as a human being (i.e., in human “flesh”). In this regard, and in the context of the probatio of Romans (esp. chapters 5-8), the significance of the expression “flesh of sin” (sa\rc a(marti/a$) lies in the idea that the human nature (“flesh”) was corrupted and enslaved to the power of sin. The Son of God came to participate in this human condition, having been born under the curse of the law (Gal 3:13; 4:4), and “in the likeness” (e)n o(moiw/mati) of this “flesh of sin”. Through the death of the incarnate Son, sin was condemned and its power broken— “(God) brought down judgment against sin in the flesh”.

At the same time, sin—that is, the sins of human beings—was dealt with; the language that Paul uses (“about/concerning sin” [peri\ a(marti/a$]) contains an allusion to the sacrificial offerings for sin (cf. the discussion in the previous article). Within the ancient cultic apparatus, the impurity, guilt, and damaging effects of human sin were removed through the various sin/guilt offerings, a process that is symbolized (in ritual terms) by the animal sacrifices and their accompanied offerings. The death of Jesus fulfilled this sacrificial type-pattern.

Thus, in Christ humanity is doubly freed from sin: the guilt and harmful effect of our sins is removed, and we are given the ability to live free from sin henceforth.

Verses 1-11 make clear that this freedom is in effect only for believers in Christ (“th[ose] in Christ Jesus”) and is fulfilled only insofar as they/we walk [i.e., live/act] “according to the Spirit” (kata\ pneu=ma, v. 4). Here, Paul utilizes his familiar and distinctive contrast between “flesh” and the Spirit. The contrast is established in verse 4, and then stated clearly in v. 5, juxtaposing those who think (and act) “according to the flesh” with those who do so “according to the Spirit”; the ultimate consequences for each mindset and lifestyle are given in verse 6 (cf. also the following clarifying statements in vv. 7-8).

In the remainder of the section (vv. 9-11), Paul connects the presence of the Spirit with the believer’s union with Jesus Christ. The believer is in Christ (v. 1, etc), but Christ is also in the believer (v. 10); similarly, the believer is in the Spirit (v. 9a), and the Spirit is also in the believer (vv. 9b, 11). This reflects the reality that the Spirit of God is also the Spirit of His Son (cf. Gal 4:6). When we are united with the Spirit, we are united with the Son.

A cornerstone tenet of the Pauline theology is that believers, through union with Christ (in the Spirit), participate in both his death and resurrection. Paul refers to this guiding principle on a number of occasions, but most clearly and extensively in Romans 6:1-11, where it is expressed through the symbolism of the baptism ritual (vv. 3-4). Through our union with Christ’s death, we died to the power of sin, so that it no longer has rule over us (vv. 6-7). Similarly, through our union with his life (i.e., resurrection), we are able to experience the eternal life of God (vv. 8-10). The latter entails the promise of fulfillment with the end-time resurrection of the body, an aspect of the theological paradigm which Paul particularly emphasizes in chapter 8, beginning with verse 11:

“And, if the Spirit of the (One hav)ing raised Yeshua out of (the) dead houses [i.e., dwells] in you, (then) the (One hav)ing raised (the) Anointed out of (the) dead will make live your dying bodies, through His Spirit housing [i.e., dwelling] in you.”

Incarnation and the Divine Sonship in 8:12-30

Having dealt with the present conflict for believers, between the Spirit and the flesh (vv. 1-11, cf. above), the central theme of the sonship of believers is introduced in the next section (vv. 12-17), to be further expounded in the remainder of the chapter (vv. 18-25 and 26-30). Insofar as believers live and “walk about” in the Spirit, being guided by the presence and power of the Spirit, they/we truly are the sons (i.e., children) of God. This is the message of the chapter, summarized in verse 14 (which entails the exhortation from vv. 1-11 [and vv. 12-13]):

“For, as (many) as are led by/in (the) Spirit of God, these are (the) sons of God.”

As noted above (and cf. the discussion in the previous article), Paul’s wording in verse 3 (cp. Gal 4:4), suggests at least a rudimentary belief in the incarnation of the (pre-existent) Son of God, and thus represents early evidence for a seminal pre-existence Christology. And, if we are to ask what this Christology, as expressed here in Romans 8, tells us about Paul’s understanding of the nature and purpose of the incarnation, it is best summarized by his exposition of the Sonship theme. Paul’s thought in this regard follows closely upon his exposition in Gal 3:26-4:7; indeed, the wording in vv. 14-17 is quite similar to that of the earlier passage. Based on the ideas expressed therein, we may epitomize Paul’s message regarding the purpose of the incarnation in terms of the relation of the Son (Christ Jesus) to believers, and involving a mirrored reciprocity:

God’s Son became a human being
so that
human beings (believers) might become the sons of God. 

And, as the context of both passages makes quite clear, this dynamic is dependent entirely upon the presence and activity of the Spirit. For Paul, to be “in the Spirit” is the same as being “in Christ”; indeed, the Spirit of God is also the Spirit of Christ. This is quite clear from the wording in Gal 4:6, but also from the way that, here earlier in v. 9, Paul uses the expressions “Spirit of God” (pneu=ma qeou=) and “Spirit of (the) Anointed” (i.e., “Spirit of Christ”, pneu=ma Xristou=) interchangeably. 

Believers obtain this Divine sonship, through the Spirit, by sharing in the Sonship of Jesus Christ. The spiritual participation of believers in the death and resurrection of Jesus was noted above (in the discussion on vv. 1-11), but this also means participation in his Sonship—in two key respects: (1) the new humanity represented by the person of Christ, and (2) experience of the resurrection, which follows the pattern of Jesus own resurrection (and exaltation). These two aspects are closely related, and Paul deals with both of them in the remainder of chapter 8, as he also does in 1 Corinthians 15 (beginning with v. 20). Both passages also utilize an Adam-Christ typology, which, while made quite explicit in 1 Cor 15 (vv. 21-23, 45ff), is also present in Romans 8, in light of the context of the prior chapters (5-7, cf. especially 5:12-21).

However, the idea of the incarnation is not particularly in view in 1 Cor 15—there the focus is entirely on the resurrection: the new humanity inaugurated by Jesus Christ essentially begins with his resurrection, rather than his birth as a human being. Indeed, throughout his letters Paul specifically indicates that Jesus was born into the old human condition, in which humankind was in bondage to the power of sin (and death), and also bound under the Law (Torah) of the old covenant—cf. Gal 3:13; 4:4; 2 Cor 5:21; Rom 8:3; 15:8, and note also Rom 1:3. It is through Jesus’ death and resurrection that it became possible for human beings (believers) to die to the old condition and be ‘raised’ into the new—viz., a new humanity, and a “new creation” (cf. Gal 6:15; 2 Cor 5:17). 

The two aspects of Sonship, mentioned above, are thus combined: believers participate in a new humanity, a new creation, by being “in Christ”, even as we had previously been “in Adam” (1 Cor 15:22); but this new human condition involves the experience of new life through the resurrection. There is a dual-nature to this experience of the resurrection by believers, with both present and future aspects. Paul indicates this here a number of ways, including by his use of the term ui(oqesi/a (“placement as a son”). Earlier in Gal 4:5-6, Paul seems to use this noun as part of a two-stage process: believers obtain the legal status as God’s children (“sons”) through faith, but then truly become His offspring upon receiving the Spirit (and thus sharing in the very Sonship of Jesus). However, here in Romans 8, Paul seems to use ui(oqesi/a in a more comprehensive sense, encompassing the present-future aspects of believers’ sonship. First, we have the statement in verse 15, indicating the present aspect:

“…you have received (the) Spirit of placement as (His) son [ui(oqesi/a], in which we cry ‘Abba, Father!'” (cf. Gal 4:5-6)

This clearly refers to the receipt of the Spirit by believers, in the present. And there is also a future aspect, as Paul states in verse 23:

“…looking to receive from (Him the) placement as (His) son [ui(oqesi/a]”

As believers, in the present we experience this Divine Sonship, this new humanity and the new life of the resurrection, inwardly through the presence of the Spirit. In this regard, here in verse 23, Paul refers to believers as “holding the a)parxh/ of the Spirit”.  The noun a)parxh/, which simply means “(the) beginning from”, often refers or alludes specifically to the beginning of the harvest; this motivic use is applied to believers throughout the New Testament, both in Paul’s letters (2 Thess 2:13; Rom 16:15, etc) and elsewhere (James 1:18; Rev 14:4). In 2 Cor 1:22 (also 5:5, and cf. Eph 1:14), Paul uses a different image: that of a deposit (i.e., down-payment) or pledge (a)rrabw/n). Believers have received the Spirit as promisory deposit and pledge (in the present) of what they/we will receive in full in the future. As indicated clearly in verse 23 (and elsewhere), the full experience will occur with the end-time resurrection.

The Divine sonship of believers will culminate (and be fully realized) with the resurrection of our bodies, which Paul describes as the “loosing from (bondage) [a)polutrw/si$] of our body”. Believers have been set free (in the Spirit) from bondage to the power of sin (and death), but we remain subject to impulses toward sin in the flesh, and our bodies are still mortal and subject to death. Only with the final resurrection, will we be completely transformed by the Spirit (even as Jesus himself was), so as to experience the new life of the new humanity in full. Paul expounded this belief more precisely in 1 Corinthians 15, where he also makes use of the term a)parxh/ in the eschatological context of the resurrection; but there it is applied to Jesus Christ, as the a)parxh/ of the new creation:

“But now (the) Anointed has been raised out of (the) dead, (as the) a)parxh/ of th(ose) having slept” (v. 20)

The resurrection of Jesus marks the beginning of the end-time ‘harvest’; the resurrection of believers comprises the remainder of this harvest:

“…each (person) in his own order: (the) Anointed (as the) a)parxh/, (and) then after (this), the (one)s (who are) of the Anointed, in his (com)ing to be along [parousi/a] [i.e., at his return]” (v. 23) [cf. Mk 13:26-27 par; 1 Thess 4:16-17]

An important component to Paul’s understanding of the incarnation, and his use of the Adam-Christ typology, is the dual-nature of the typological pattern. For Paul, “Adam” is a real historical person (the first human being of the original creation), but he is also a corporate person who collectively represents humankind as a whole. Thus, all human beings follow the first human (Adam), coming after him (in time) and following his pattern; but human beings also share (collectively) in the human nature and human condition of “Adam” —that is, they are “in Adam” (1 Cor 15:22). Jesus Christ embodies a similar duality: (i) he is the first human being of the new creation, and (ii) he collectively represents the new human condition for those who are “in Christ”. Paul deals with both parts of this duality in 1 Cor 15, and also in Romans 8, in the final sections of vv. 18-25 and 26-30. As far as the collective aspect is concerned, this is established from the beginning of the chapter, with the idea of believers being “in Christ”, and sharing (spiritually, through union with him) in his death and resurrection and the Divine Sonship (vv. 2-17, cf. above). It continues throughout vv. 18-25, whereby believers (collectively), as the sons of God, represent the a)parxh/ of the new creation; this is only possible because they/we are “in Christ”. 

The idea of Jesus Christ as the first human being of the new creation—an idea that is so prominent in 1 Cor 15—finally comes clearly into view at the close of the fourth section, in vv. 28-30. The plan and process of salvation for believers is here outlined and summarized, being presented in a definite expository sequence: (a) “knew beforehand” [vb proe/gnw], (b) “marked out beforehand” [vb proori/zw], (c) “called” [vb kale/w], (d) “made right” [vb dikaio/w], (e) “honored/glorified” [vb doca/zw]. At the heart of this sequence is the central explanatory and qualifying clause in verse 29, indicating that this all took place so that believers might be—

“…formed together with the image of His Son, unto his [i.e., Jesus’] being (the) first-produced Son among many brothers”

Here, as in 1 Cor 15, the Divine Sonship is defined primarily in terms of the resurrection—i.e., it is through the resurrection that Jesus comes to be the first representative of the new creation, the new glorified humanity. But he is not the only such “son” —his death and resurrection also allows for the ‘birth’ of many more such “sons”, who thus are his “brothers” (or, inclusively, “brothers and sisters”). 

Though the role of the incarnation, per se, is limited here in Paul’s exposition, there can be no doubt of its being rooted in the Adam-Christ typology. Jesus Christ could only fulfill the typological pattern of “Adam” by being born and living (and dying) as a true human being. Moreover, as noted above, it was necessary for God’s Son (Jesus) to be born into the old human condition, under the old covenant, and in bondage to the power of sin and death. Only then could humankind be set free from its bondage, able to enter into the new life of the new human condition (i.e., the new creation and the new covenant). 

In our next article, we will turn our attention to the ‘Christ-hymn’ of Philippians 2:6-11, where the rudimentary pre-existence and incarnational Christology, evinced rather allusively in Paul’s earlier letters, comes more clearly into view.

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 132 (Part 3)

Psalm 132, continued

See Parts 1 and 2 of this study for the Introduction to the Psalm and exegesis of the first division (vv. 1-10).

Part 2: Verses 11-18

The second part, or division, of Psalm 132 has a thematic and formal (though not poetic) structure that is parallel to the first part, as I have outlined:

    • Part 1 (vv. 1-10): David’s role in establishing the royal dwelling for YHWH in Jerusalem (framed as a prayer to YHWH, on David’s behalf)
      • David’s vow to provide a dwelling for YHWH (vv. 1-5)
      • The procession of YHWH (manifest through the ‘ark’) to His dwelling in Jerusalem (vv. 6-10)
    • Part 2 (vv. 11-18): The covenant bond between YHWH and the royal city and the royal line [of David] (framed as an answer to prayer by YHWH)
      • YHWH’s vow/oath to David (vv. 11-12)
      • YHWH’s choice of Jerusalem as the royal city (vv. 13-18)
Section 1: YHWH’s vow to David (vv. 11-12)

As is clear from the outline above, YHWH’s vow/oath to David (vv. 11-12) matches that of David’s vow to YHWH in vv. 2-5.

Verse 11a

“YHWH has made affirmation seven-fold to David,
a firm (promise)—He will not turn away from it:”

As noted above, this vow/oath made by YHWH (to David) corresponds to the vow/oath made by David (to YHWH) in vv. 2ff; the same verb ub^v* (Niphal) is used, which is the common/regular verb for swearing an oath—its denotation in this regard presumably reflects its derivation from the number seven (ubv), and thus indicating a seven-fold affirmation, viz., a binding oath-declaration that creates a strong and unbreakable bond between two parties. YHWH will be faithful to His side of the binding agreement, as is made clear by the statement in the second line (“He will not turn away [vb bWv] from it”).

The noun tm#a#, occurring at the beginning of the second line, is often translated flatly as “truth”, but properly denotes “firmness”, or something that is firm and sure. It is understood adverbially here by some commentators, but it seems more likely that it functions as a substantive (noun), referring to the oath made by YHWH, and characterizing it as a firm and sure promise.

Dahood (III, p. 246) regards the particle l=, prefixed to the name dw]D* (David), as vocative (“O David!”), rather than as a preposition; he reads the prefixed particle the same way in v. 17, and also earlier in v. 1. However, most commentators understand l= here as a preposition, in its regular directional-relational sense (“to[ward], for, on behalf of”).

Verse 11b

“(One) from (the) fruit of your belly
I will set upon (the) throne for you!”

The oath mentioned in v. 11a properly begins here, continuing through v. 12. The metrical parsing of this couplet is usually reckoned as 2+3, which being an irregular departure from the prevailing 3+3 meter, suggests that a word may have fallen out from the first line. Cross (p. 233) suggests restoring the verb form <yqa (“I will make stand [i.e., raise up]”), while other commentators (e.g., Kraus, p. 473; Fretheim, p. 289) prefer adding the noun <yn]B* (“sons”) or <yk!l*m= (“kings”). However, it seems better to me to parse the verse as a 2-beat (2+2) couplet; thus, in this regard, I am inclined to follow Dahood (III, p. 246), who also notes the balanced 6:6 syllable count in the MT. And yet, it should be pointed out that the Qumran manuscript 11QPsa does include an additional word at the beginning of the first line: the particle yK!, presumably used as an asseverative (introducing the oath), i.e., “Indeed…!” or “Surely…!”

The expression “fruit of the belly” usually applies to the pregnant woman (i.e., “fruit of the womb”), rather than the father. To avoid the awkwardness of applying this predominately feminine idiom to a male subject, the phrase may be translated “from the fruit of your body”. It is also possible to work around the difficulty by effectively re-positioning the suffix in translation—i.e., “from your fruit of the womb” (cf. Allen, p. 264). In any case, the main point is that YHWH is promising David that he will inaugurate a royal dynasty, beginning with an initial male descendant (son) to be fathered by him.

Verse 12a

“If your sons will guard (the) binding agreement with me,
and (the thing)s witnessed to by me which I teach them,”

The remainder of the oath consists of a conditional promise, the two-fold conditional clause (protasis) occurring here in v. 12a, introduced by the conditional particle <a! (“if…”) which is regularly used in oath-formulae. The establishment of a royal dynasty is promised in v. 11b, but the continuation of this dynasty is contingent upon David’s descendants fulfilling the condition presented here in v. 12. The condition is that David’s descendants (“sons”) will carefully follow and “guard” the terms of the binding agreement (tyr!B=) made between YHWH and His people (Israel). The terms of this agreement (or ‘covenant’) are represented by the precepts, regulations, and requirements of the Torah, as recorded in the Pentateuch, beginning with the “Ten Words”.

The noun used here to express the idea of the terms (i.e., requirements) of the covenant is hd*u@, which has the basic meaning of “witness”; it properly refers to the terms of the covenant as things having been solemnly witnessed to by both parties (YHWH and the people). Since it was YHWH who established these terms (requirements), they primarily belong to Him—thus the wording “my witness(es)”, which I translate here instrumentally, “(thing)s witnessed [and testified] to by me”. Similarly, YHWH is the principal (superior/sovereign) party to the binding agreement (tyr!B=), and it is thus referred to as “my binding agreement” (which I translated here as “binding agreement with me”).

YHWH further teaches His people these required duties and precepts, which surely relates to the basic connotative meaning of the noun hr*oT (Torah) as “instruction”. The noun hd*u@ (along with the related tWdu@) is used repeatedly as a designation for the Torah regulations, etc, in Psalm 119 (on which see the recent study and notes); the verb rm^v* (“guard”) is also used regularly in this same context, and likewise occurs throughout Psalm 119.

Verse 12b

“(then) also their sons, until and unto (the end),
shall sit upon the throne belonging to you!”

As noted above, the condition in v. 12a relates to the continuation of a dynastic line for David—it will continue only if his descendants remain faithful to the covenant with YHWH. This is emphatically stated here by the use of the doubled temporal expression du^-yd@u&, which I translate here as “until and unto (the end)”; a more elegant idiomatic rendering in English would be “forever and ever”. This royal dynasty is expressed, as in v. 11b (cf. above) by the idea of David’s descendants “sitting upon the throne” that belongs to him, and on his behalf. For the expression “upon the throne”, the locative preposition l= is used rather than the regular lu^, but the meaning is the same (“upon”). As Dahood (III, p. 246) notes, this sense of the preposition l= likely reflects older/archaic usage, which the MT preserves; the Qumran manuscript 11QPsa reads lu^ instead of l= in v. 11b, while here in 12b the same manuscript instead has the phrase “will come up [i.e., ascend, vb hlu] to the throne”.

Section 2: YHWH’s choice of Jerusalem as the royal city (vv. 13-18)

The thematic orientation of this second section matches the second section of Part 1 (vv. 6-10). The procession of YHWH to Jerusalem corresponds here to YHWH’s choice of Jerusalem as the city for His royal dwelling. In both instances, YHWH is manifestly present—ritually and symbolically—in connection with the portable Ark-shrine (and its kerub-throne); cf. the discussion on vv. 6-10.

Verse 13

“Indeed, YHWH has made (His) choice on Ṣiyyôn—
He has desired her for (the) sitting-place for Him.”

At first glance, it is not immediately clear how this opening couplet relates to vv. 11-12; it is possible that vv. 13-18 represent a separate poem which was joined contextually to vv. 11-12 in the composition of the overall Song. However, at verse 17 (cf. below), the connection is certainly established. Beyond this, we may say that there is a strong dualism within the ancient Israelite/Judean royal theology, which is expressed here (and throughout the Psalm). Just as David (and his descendants) rule the kingdom from the royal city of Jerusalem (Zion), so YHWH Himself dwells as King there as well, ruling from the sanctuary of the holy shrine upon the seat of His royal kerub-throne (cf. again the discussion [with illustration of an ancient Near Eastern kerub-throne] on vv. 6-10). The establishment of the Davidic royal line thus runs parallel to the establishment of YHWH’s royal dwelling (in Jerusalem). The name /oYx! (Ṣiyyôn, Zion), while used as a designation for Jerusalem as a whole, properly refers to the elevated hilltop location (viz., the former Canaanite citadel) where the Temple would stand (i.e., the Temple mount).

The locative noun bv*om, “sitting place” (i.e., place where one sits) is largely synonymous with the more general /K*v=m! (“dwelling place”), and also <oqm* (“standing place”), used earlier in v. 5 (and 7); cf. also “resting place” (v. 8 and below in v. 14). However, the noun bv*om, derived from the verbal root bv^y` (“sit”), obviously alludes to the place where the king sits—i.e., his ruling seat or throne.

Verse 14

“This (is) my resting-place until and unto (the end)—
(and) here I will sit, for (so) I have desired her!”

In the remainder of the section (vv. 14-18), it is YHWH who speaks, as in the oath of vv. 11b-12 (cf. above). Jerusalem (Zion) is the place where YHWH will “sit” (i.e., have His ruling seat). The locative noun bv*om (“sitting place”) in v. 13 is followed here by the verb bv^y` (“sit”), in line 2. The noun hj*Wnm= (“resting place”, used earlier in v. 8) is largely synonymous with bv*om, but with the added connotation of an abiding dwelling and royal seat for YHWH—i.e., the place where He dwells and rules as King, into the far distance future, even unto the very end. The same temporal expression du^-yd@u& occurs here as was used in v. 12b (cf. above). This confirms the parallelism of the two sections—the ruling of the Davidic kings in Jerusalem, and YHWH’s rule as King in the same holy/royal city.

The particles which begin each line—the demonstrative taz) (“this”) and locative-adverbial hP) (“here”)—are both emphatic (as indicated by their position). The declaration emphatically identifies Zion (Jerusalem) as the dwelling place for YHWH and the location of His royal throne.

The feminine suffixes, in vv. 13-14, and throughout the remainder of the section, are in accordance with the customary reference to cities (such as Jerusalem) as female, or otherwise described in feminine terms. This was typical usage, not only in Israel and the Near East, but throughout much of the ancient world.

Verse 15

“Her hunting (with) blessing I will (greatly) bless,
(and) her needy (one)s I will fill up (with) bread;”

The initial word of this couplet is problematic. The MT reads Hd*yx@, literally “her hunting”; however, since the noun dy]x^ can also have the more general meaning “food, provision”, this is often assumed here (the related hd*yx@ can refer specifically to food for a journey). Admittedly, this meaning fits the context of the second line, however it ignores (or at least distorts) the poetic pattern of vv. 15-16, whereby, in each of the following lines (15b and 16ab), a group of persons (representing segments or aspects of God’s people) is in view:

    • “her needy (one)s” (15b)
    • “her priests” (16a)
    • “her devoted (one)s” (16b)

This suggests that the MT in v. 15a may be corrupt (however slightly), and that originally a similar characteristic group (of persons) was referenced. Driver, in his “Notes on the Psalms” (II, Journal of Theological Studies [JTS] 44 [1943], pp. 12-23 [p. 21]), suggested emending the text to h*yd#x= (or h*yY#d!x!), which would mean something like “her desolate (one)s” or “her empty/abandoned (one)s”, which certainly would provide an apt parallel to “her needy (one)s” in line 2. Dahood (III, p. 247) suggests a different substantive verbal noun (participle), derived from the root dox (“hunt”), but in the sense of “travel, roam” (cp. Akkadian ṣâdu [I], “chase/prowl around”; cf. HALOT, p. 1010). He understands this in the sense of pilgrims (i.e., travelers to Jerusalem for the festival[s]), but one might just as well explain such a participle in terms of hungry/needy people searching (i.e., “hunting”) for food. Unfortunately, the Qumran manuscript 11QPsa is broken at this point, with a gap in the text at the critical point, so it can offer no help toward resolving the textual question.

In any case, the overall message in v. 15 is that YHWH’s presence in Jerusalem (and His rule over the land/kingdom from His royal seat) will bring manifest blessings to the people—specifically to the faithful/devout ones, those who are faithful to the covenant. The blessings will come particularly in the time of His people’s need. The adjective /oyb=a# (“needy”), is regularly used (along with yn]u*, “pressed/bent down [low]”) as a characteristic of the righteous; especially in the Psalms, these terms refer (or allude) to the suffering of the righteous, often as the result of oppression/affliction from the wicked. The blessings for the righteous include (and here focus on) the physical/material needs, such as food and sustenance.

Verse 16

“and her priests I will clothe with salvation,
and her devout (one)s with ringing shall ring out!”

The thought and wording here resembles that of verse 9 (cf. Part 2 of this study, on vv. 6-10). The idiom of clothing (vb vb^l*) the priests alludes to both ethical and ritual aspects of the worship (of YHWH) in Jerusalem. In v. 9, the priests are said to be clothed with “right(eous)ness” (qd#x#), while here it is “salvation” (uv^y#). This salvation is particularly to be understood (as in v. 15) as part of the covenant blessing that YHWH provides for the faithful/loyal ones among His people (including the priests). In the second line, it is the devoted ones of the people as a whole (but distinct from the priests) who receive the blessing; it is such that they are inspired to “ring out” (vb /n~r*) with ringing (/nr) shouts of joy, etc (cf. the same idiom in v. 9).

As this Psalm came to be utilized in the festal worship celebrations of Israel/Judah, the implication of these verses is that faithful participation in the pilgrimage festivals will result in blessings for the people. Indeed, this would be so, since participation in the festivals is an important aspect of the fulfillment of the required duties and obligations of the covenant.

Verse 17

“There I will make spring up (the) horn for David,
(even as) I have arranged a lamp for my anointed.”

In the final two couplets, YHWH’s choice of Zion as His royal dwelling-place is connected back to the promise of a royal dynasty for David (vv. 11-12). As was clearly inferred in the first part of the Psalm (vv. 1-10), the establishment of this Davidic dynasty was the result of David’s own faithfulness and loyal zeal in establishing Jerusalem as the dwelling-place for YHWH (viz., a tent-shrine for the Ark [and its kerub-throne]). The continuation of this dynasty, though dependent on the loyalty of David’s descendants to the covenant with YHWH (see vv. 11b-12 above), is assured by God Himself. Here the promise is expressed by two distinct, but traditional, motifs. The first is that of a sprouting/growing horn (like that of a bull, or other powerful animal). This is a symbol of strength and vitality, which is often applied specifically to the ruler, and in a royal context; for other occurrences in the Psalms, see 18:3[2]; 75:5-6[4-5], 11[10]; 89:18[17], 25[24]; 92:11[10]; 112:9; 148:14. For the specific application to the Davidic dynasty, and, subsequently, to the promise of a royal/Davidic Messiah (“Anointed”) among Jews and early Christians, cf. Ezekiel 29:21; Luke 1:69. It is understandable how this verse would have been interpreted in a Messianic sense; such a development may well have occurred at a relatively early point in the post-exilic (or even in the exilic) period.

The second image is that of a lamp (rn@), that is continually burning and shining light. As long as this “lamp” remains burning, the dynastic line will not be extinguished. On the use of this idiom, in a royal context, cf. 2 Sam 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19.

Verse 18

“(All) his hostile (opponent)s I will clothe with shame,
while upon him shall blossom his consecrated (head)!”

The binding agreement between YHWH and the Davidic kings, like the blessings promised to the royal city of Jerusalem itself, includes special protection provided by YHWH. All hostile opponents and wicked adversaries will meet with defeat (and shame), since it is YHWH Himself who fights on behalf of His loyal servants (king and people both), protecting them and bringing them victory.

In the final line, the two motifs from verse 17—i.e., sprouting horn and shining lamp—are combined together, by way of the verb JWx, which fundamentally means “blossom, bloom”, usually in the sense of the sprouting growth (of vegetation), but also with the specific aspect of the “gleaming” (i.e., glistening, shining) appearance of the plant’s blossom/bloom. Here what blossoms and shines is the consecrated (rzn) head of the king, and the mark of this consecration—namely, his royal crown. There can also be a reference here to the anointing of the king’s head, so that it shines/glistens with oil. Possibly there is also a bit of implicit wordplay, between the noun rz#n# and rx#n@, which means “sprout” (i.e., a sprouting growth); this word is famously used in a passage (Isaiah 11:1ff) which came to be interpreted as a key Messianic prophecy (cf. also Isa 60:21). On this subsequent Messianic application, compare the related “branch” motif (using the noun jm^x#, cf. the verb jm^x* here in v. 17) in the prophecies of Jer 23:5; 33:15, and Zech 3:8 (also 6:12).

    • References marked “Dahood, I”, “Dahood, II” and “Dahood, III” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968), and Psalms III: 101-150, vol. 17A (1970).
    • Those marked “Kraus” are to Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalmen, 2. Teilband, Psalmen 60-150, 5th ed., Biblischer Kommentar series (Neukirchener Verlag: 1978); English translation in Psalms 60-150, A Continental Commentary (Fortress Press: 1993).
    • Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150 (Revised edition), Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 21 (Zondervan: 2002/2014).
    • Those marked “Crow” are to Loren D. Crow, The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120-134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion. SBL Dissertation Series 148 (Society of Biblical Literature: 1996).
    • Those marked “Cross” are to Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Harvard University Press: 1973). Psalm 132 is discussed on pages 94-97, 232-238, 244-248.
    • Those marked “Fretheim” are to T. E. Fretheim, “Psalm 132: A Form-critical Study”, Journal of Biblical Literature [JBL] 86 (1967), pp. 289-300.

Studies on the Spirit: The Spirit and the Death/Resurrection of Jesus (Study 8)

Study 8: The Spirit and the Resurrection of Jesus—Romans 8

In the previous study (Study 7), we examined the core tenet of early Christian belief—viz., that God raised Jesus from the dead—in terms of the Spirit. That is to say, it was specifically God’s Spirit that raised Jesus; or, to put it another way, it was through the Spirit that God raised him from the dead. As we discussed, this way of framing the tenet is traditional, drawn from an understanding of the Spirit’s role in the original creation of humankind—giving life (and breath) to human beings—so that a similar role is to be inferred (or assumed) for the resurrection (viz., giving new life [from the dead]). And yet, among New Testament authors, it was only Paul who makes the association with the Spirit clear—whether by direct reference or strong allusion. We examined a number of the key references in the previous study; but there are two passages which are especially important in relating the Spirit to the resurrection of Jesus (and to the resurrection [of believers] generally)—Romans 8 and 1 Corinthians 15. These deserve special consideration, and so I have devoted these next two studies to Paul’s treatment in them of the Spirit/resurrection theme. We begin with the first of these passages (Romans 8)

Romans 8

The key statement in Romans 8 occurs in verse 11:

“And, if the Spirit of the (One hav)ing raised Yeshua out of (the) dead houses [i.e., dwells] in you, (then) the (One hav)ing raised (the) Anointed out of (the) dead shall make alive even your dying bodies through His Spirit housing [i.e., dwelling] in you.”

Paul’s focus on the role of the Spirit here is part of his overall thematic emphasis in chapter 8, which I have outlined as follows:

    • Rom 8:1-30: Announcement of Life in the Spirit (Exhortation)
      —8:1-11: The conflict (for believers) between the Spirit and the Flesh
      —8:12-17: Believers are sons (of God) and heirs (with Christ) through the Spirit
      —8:18-25: Believers have the hope of future glory (new creation) through the Spirit
      —8:26-30: Believers experience the work of salvation through the Spirit
    • Rom 8:31-39: Doxology: The Love of God (in Christ)

As can be seen from the outline, verse 11 marks the end of the first (ethical) section, dealing with the Spirit/Flesh conflict that exists within believers. It is also transitional, leading into the Sonship theme that is introduced in the second section (vv. 12-17) and then developed in the following sections. The association with the resurrection runs throughout the entire passage.

In many ways, chapter 8 summarizes and integrates essential points made by Paul in the prior chapters (esp. 5-7). Particularly notable is the union/participation theme that is emphasized in chapter 6 (vv. 3-11), and which is now developed in greater depth here in chapter 8. Since believers are united with Jesus Christ (“in Christ”), having received the Spirit, they/we share in both his death and his resurrection. The participation in his death is symbolized by the ritual of baptism, which is traditionally (and typically) understood as the moment when the believer receives the Spirit—even as Jesus himself received the Spirit following his own baptism (Mk 1:10 par, etc).

Paul never really mentions this traditional detail (i.e., regarding Jesus’ baptism), but it functions well within his typological paradigm, emphasizing how the experience of believers follows the type-pattern set by Jesus—baptism, life/ministry, death, resurrection. In the earlier chapters (5-7), as also in 1 Corinthians 15 (to be discussed in our next study), and elsewhere in his letters, Paul draws upon a distinctive Adam-Christ typology. There is no mention of “Adam” in chapter 8, but the typological paradigm (established in chaps. 5-7 [see esp. 5:12-21]) still would seem to be clearly in view. For Paul, “Adam” was both an historical person (i.e., the first human being of the old order) and a representation of humanity in its collective sense. Jesus Christ fulfills the Adam type-pattern—as the first human being (of the new order), and as representative of the new humanity (believers). These two aspects—individual and collective—come together with the concept of union. Believers are united with Christ, being “in Christ” (vv. 1-2, “in [the] Anointed Yeshua” [e)n Xristw=| Ihsou=]); similarly, one can speak of humankind having been “in Adam” (e)n tw=| Ada\m, 1 Cor 15:22). By being “in Adam”, one shares in the old human condition; for believers “in Christ”, they/we share in the new humanity (the “new creation”, Gal 6:15; 2 Cor 5:17).

It is clear from vv. 9-11 (as also from the orientation of chapter 8 as a whole) that believers experience and share in the new humanity of Jesus Christ through the Spirit. It is a spiritual union which we have “in Christ”, realized through the presence and power of the Spirit. This involves all aspects of believers’ union with Christ—two of which are particularly emphasized by Paul here in chapter 8: (1) participation in the resurrection of Jesus, and (2) sharing in the Divine Sonship of Jesus. The first of these thematic emphases was introduced by Paul at the close of section 1 (vv. 9-11), while the second features in the section following (vv. 12-17). The implication is that the two are closely related—viz., because we (as believers) participate in the new life of Jesus’ resurrection (from the dead), we also (as a result) share in his identity as God’s Son. It is again through the Spirit that we share in the Sonship of Jesus, as Paul makes clear in verse 15, stating that when believers received the Spirit, they/we received “(the) Spirit of placement as sons”. The nature of this “placement as a son” (ui(oqesi/a) was clarified by Paul earlier in Galatians 4:5-6:

“…God sent forth from (Him) the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying ‘Abba, Father!'” (v. 6)

A two-stage process seems to be in view: (1) the placement as God’s son, in which the believer is established (in a legal sense) as God’s (adopted) son, and (2) the union with the Spirit, in which believers truly become the sons of God, by sharing in the Divine Sonship of Jesus. The basic line of argument from Gal 4:4-6 is restated (and developed) by Paul in Rom 8:15-16ff. The Sonship shared by believers is spiritual, even as their/our union with Christ is spiritual, realized and experienced through the Spirit. Paul even goes so far as to identify Christ Jesus with the Spirit of God, referring to the Spirit as “the Spirit of His Son” (Gal 4:6); cf. also earlier here in v. 9 where the expressions “Spirit of God” and “Spirit of Christ” are essentially interchangeable. This important Christological principle will be discussed further (on 1 Corinthians 15) in the next study.

In the remainder of the chapter, the two key thematic points of emphasis noted above—(1) participation of believers in the resurrection of Jesus, and (2) sharing in the Divine Sonship of Jesus—which were established in the first two sections (vv. 1-11, 12-17), are developed. This is done by way of the typological paradigm (mentioned above), whereby the experience of believers follows the pattern established by Jesus himself. It is the pattern of Jesus’ resurrection (and its consequences) that is particularly in view. According to well-established early Christian tradition, the resurrection of Jesus led to his exaltation. From the standpoint of the exaltation-Christology, this entailed the following:

All three of these Christological points are dealt with by Paul in Romans 8, being developed in the final two sections (vv. 18-25, 26-30). For this study, I will focus specifically on the role of the Spirit in the resurrection and exaltation of Jesus, and how it applies to the resurrection and exaltation of believers. The main points were established in vv. 1-11 and 12-17 (as discussed above): believers participate in the resurrection of Jesus through the Spirit, and also share in his identity as God’s Son through the Spirit. Now let us briefly consider the development of these themes in the final two sections.

In verses 18-25, the focus is fundamentally eschatological, whereby Paul distinguishes believers’ present experience of the new life (of the resurrection) with what it will ultimately be in the future. Though believers represent the new creation—the new humanity brought about in the person of Jesus Christ—they/we are still living (on earth) in the midst of the old creation. Thus, there remains the conflict, discussed by Paul in vv. 1-11 (cf. also vv. 12-13), for believers between the Spirit (new creation) and the “flesh” (old humanity). This same conflict is described here in vv. 18ff, but in an expanded form that involves a cosmological dimension—all of creation is in conflict, struggling between the new life and the old way (of sin and death). Currently, the new life is limited to the experience of believers, in/through the Spirit, but eventually (as Paul indicates) all of creation will be set free (as believers have been) from bondage to the power of sin and death (v. 21).

Two key points are made by Paul at the close of this section, in light of the fact (reiterated in v. 22) that believers remain (for the present) in the midst of the old creation, and thus continue to find ourselves in a struggle, “groaning” throughout this continuing conflict. The first point is that the new life possessed by believers (in/through the Spirit) is only the beginning. Paul expresses this by the use of harvest-imagery, functioning as a traditional eschatological motif—viz., the harvest representing the end of the agricultural life-cycle, and thus symbolizing the end of the current Age (cf. Mark 4:29; Matt 3:12 par; 13:30, 39ff; Rev 14:15, 19, etc). The noun a)parxh/, meaning the “beginning from”, is typically used in an agricultural context, i.e., the “beginning of” the harvest; in this regard, a)parxh/ is often translated as “firstfruit(s)”. The application of this terminology to believers is also traditional, and is not limited to Paul (cf. James 1:18; Rev 14:4), but it occurs most often in Paul’s letters—cf. 1 Cor 16:15; Rom 16:5; 2 Thess 2:13; note also Rom 11:16. The usage in 1 Cor 15:20, 23 is quite similar to the eschatological thought here in Rom 8:23, and will be discussed in the next study.

The second point is that the new life for believers will only be realized in full when the type-pattern of Christ’s own experience is fulfilled—that is, when our bodies have been raised from the dead, even as Jesus’ own body was (cf. again on v. 11, above). Moreover, this will represent the culmination of our “placement as (God’s) sons” (ui(oqesi/a, as in v. 15), and our sharing in the Divine Sonship of Jesus. For early Christians, the concept of salvation was fundamentally eschatological in nature. The specific terminology Paul uses here is “loosing from (bondage)” (a)polu/twsi$, cf. Col 1:14), in keeping with his thematic emphasis throughout Romans. Though we, as believers, have been set free from bondage to the power of sin and death (v. 2), our bodies remain in bondage to the death and decay that characterizes the old order of creation. Our freedom (and salvation) will not be complete until the resurrection of our bodies at the end-time.

In the final section (vv. 26-30), Paul emphasizes further a special role of the Spirit for believers, in the midst of the conflict and struggle that remains (in the present) within the old order of creation. The Spirit aids and helps believers, particularly in the realm of our prayer to God (vv. 26-27); cf. my earlier study on these verses. This role taken by the Spirit is part of the wider providential care shown by God for his children (i.e., believers, vv. 14-17, 19-21), as Paul indicates in verse 28, as he prepares to bring the chapter (and the probatio of Romans) to a close. In verses 29-30, the typological paradigm, between believers and Christ, which governs the entire passage (cf. above) is reinforced with powerful emphasis. God “marked out” believers beforehand, as his children, according to the pattern established with his own Son, Jesus (cf. the similar use of the verb o(ri/zw, “mark out”, in Rom 1:4); they/we were “marked out” to be

“…formed together with the image of His Son, toward his [i.e., Jesus’] being the first-produced (Son) among many brothers” (v. 29)

By sharing in the resurrection of Jesus, and in his own Divine Sonship, we (as believers) become fellow sons of God (i.e., brothers) together with him. The adjective summorfo/$ (“formed together with”) is one of many sun– (“[together] with”) prefixed terms used by Paul throughout Romans, as a way of repeatedly reinforcing the important idea of believers’ union (and participation with) Christ.

In the final verse of the section, the “marking out” of believers by God (as his children) ultimately leads to their/our being exalted (even as Jesus was), so as to share in the Divine honor and splendor (do/ca, vb doca/zw). The final climactic word of verse 30 captures this promise: “those whom He marked out beforehand…He honored/glorified [e)do/casen]”.

In our next study (Study 9), we will turn our attention to 1 Corinthians 15, the famous resurrection-chapter, which contains many of the same ideas and theological points expressed by Paul in Romans 8. However, in that earlier passage, he deals with them in a distinctive way, given the focused emphasis on the resurrection itself—both the resurrection of Jesus, and the future resurrection of believers. The role of the Spirit also is emphasized, though to a lesser degree than it is in Romans 8. Yet, it is only here in 1 Cor 15 that Paul offers us some hint as to what actually took place at Jesus’ resurrection, in terms of the Spirit’s role in his resurrection (and exaltation). The relevant verses, which we will examine in detail, are particularly instructive, and are necessary for a proper understanding of both Paul’s Christology and his Pneumatology.

 

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 132 (Part 2)

Psalm 132, continued

See Part 1 of this study for the Introduction to the Psalm and exegesis of the first section (vv. 1-5).

Part 1: Verses 1-10 (cont.)

As noted in the outline to the Psalm, the first Division (vv. 1-10) emphasizes David’s role in establishing the royal dwelling-place for YHWH in Jerusalem. It consists of two poetic sections, the first of which was discussed in the first part of this study:

    • David’s vow to provide a dwelling for YHWH (vv. 1-5)
    • The procession of YHWH (manifest through the ‘ark’) to His dwelling in Jerusalem (vv. 6-10)
Section 2: The Procession of YHWH to Jerusalem (vv. 6-10)

By all accounts, this section presents a dramatic rendering (perhaps with different speakers assumed) of the historical tradition, recorded in 2 Samuel 6, of the transport of the ancient Ark-shrine to Jerusalem; cf. also the more expanded narrative in 1 Chronicles 13, 15-16.

Verse 6

“See—we heard of it (there) in °E¸r¹¾â,
we found it in (the) fields of (the) Thicket!”

Two interpretive difficulties have long beset this opening couplet: (1) identifying the referent for the feminine object suffixes (h-*) on the two verbs, and (2) identifying the place names ht*r*p=a# (°E¸r¹¾â) and ru^y` (Y¹±ar).

As to the first question, if the suffixes are meant to refer back to the first section of the Psalm (vv. 1-5), then they could conceivably be a reference to the oath made by David (vv. 2ff), since the typical noun meaning “oath”, hu*Wbv=, is feminine. This is the solution proposed by Dahood (III, p. 244) and others (e.g., Huwiler, p. 206); however, since it is the verb (ub^v*), and not the noun (hu*Wbv=), that occurs in v. 2, the solution is problematic. Alternatively, the suffixes could be looking ahead in the Psalm, anticipating the mention of the sacred “chest” (or “box”, i.e., ‘ark’, /ora&) in verse 8. This is the explanation that is preferred, for example, by Hossfeld-Zenger (p. 455, cf. also Cross, p. 94f), on the basis that the noun /ora& can be treated as either masculine or feminine (cf. 1 Sam 4:17; 2 Chron 8:11).

Another possibility is to treat the suffixes more abstractly, as a general reference—i.e., to news regarding the Ark, the matter of the Ark (and its transport)—or in terms of David’s decision to have the Ark transported to Jerusalem, and his efforts to bring this about (cf. Kruse, p. 293). The scene described in 1 Chron 13:1-4 may be particularly in view.

I am inclined to treat the first suffix (line 1) on the verb um^v* (“we heard [of] it”) in the sense of news about the Ark (including David’s decision to have it transported), and the second suffix (line 2) on the verb ax*m* (“we found it”) to the location of the Ark itself.

With regard to the place names, I have chosen to transliterate the first name, ht*r*p=a# (°E¸r¹¾â), since its exact meaning remains uncertain (possibly something like “pasture-land”, cp. Akkadian appāru, Aramaic arpa; cf. HALOT, p. 80). The noun, and the shorted form tr*p=a# (°E¸r¹¾), is used to designate a region of northern Judah (and extending into southern Benjamin) which, according to historical tradition, is associated with the descendants (clans) of Caleb. It can refer specifically to the area around Bethlehem.

The second place name, ru^y^ (Ya±ar), presumably means “thicket”, referring to a wooded/forest area. It is usually assumed to function here as a shorthand for <yr!u*y+ ty~r=q! (Qirya¾ Y®±¹rîm, “town/village of [the] thickets”). This site, in the west of the Ephrat(ah) region, near the border of Benjamin, served as the location of the Ark, following its recovery from the Philistines (1 Sam 6:21-7:2); and it is from this location that David had the Ark transported to Jerusalem (1 Chron 13:5ff; 2 Sam 6:2ff). Finding/locating the Ark would certainly have been a momentous and joyous occasion, as indicated by the tone here in verse 6.

Verse 7

“Let us come to (the) place of His dwelling,
let us bow down to (the) stool of His feet!”

The historical context of the expedition to locate and transport the Ark (cf. on v. 6 above) is certainly in view here; but there is also doubtless a ritual and festal aspect, alluding to the idea of pilgrim-celebrants traveling to Jerusalem to worship in the presence of YHWH. The locative noun /K*v=m! (“dwelling-place”) is used again (v. 5) in the specific religious/ritual sense of YHWH’s dwelling place (i.e., on earth, among His people). Again, the noun occurs in the plural (cf. the note on v. 5 in Part 1).

Parallel with the noun /K*v=m! is the expression “stool of/for his feet” (wyl*g=r~ <d)h&). The noun <d)h&, which is apparently an Egyptian loan-word (hdmw, cf. Ugartic hdm), only occurs in the Scriptures five other times, and always in this particular expression (Ps 99:5; 110:1; Isa 66:1; Lam 2:1; 1 Chron 28:2; cp. Egyptian hdm rdwy), in a Divine royal context (i.e., YHWH as King). Cf. HALOT, p. 239. Here, as elsewhere (esp. 1 Chron 28:2), it refers or alludes to the Ark, as the ‘footstool’ of YHWH’s throne; see the discussion below on verse 8.

Verse 8

“Stand up, YHWH, (come) to your resting-place—
you and (the great) box of your strength!”

If verse 7 (and 6b) alludes to the discovery of the Ark at its site in Ya±ar (Qirya¾ Y®±¹rîm), verse 8 summarizes in a dramatic way (with ritual overtones) the transportation of the Ark to its new location in Jerusalem. The first line addresses YHWH Himself, calling upon Him to come to His “resting place” (hj*Wnm=, parallel with /K*v=m! [“dwelling place”, vv. 5, 7]). His new dwelling-place will be in the Tent-shrine in Jerusalem, which David will construct, foreshadowing the later ‘permanent’ dwelling of the Temple sanctuary. YHWH is manifestly present, in a symbolic and ritual sense, with the Ark; thus, the transport of the Ark means that YHWH Himself is being transported—or, at least, that He is making the journey (along with the Ark) to the new site. The call for YHWH to “stand up” (i.e., “rise”, vb <Wq) presumably reflects the ancient tradition mentioned in Numbers 10:35-36.

The noun /ora&, in this context, is customarily translated as “ark”; however, this obscures the actual meaning of the word, which is “box, chest” (cp. Babylonian arānu). It can specifically denote a funerary bier or coffin (or sarcophagus), as with Arabic ’irān. However, here the term should be understood in the general sense of a “box” or “chest” (signifying primarily its shape) that has a distinct religious and ritual-cultic significance. The design and construction of this special “box” is described in Exodus 25:10-32; 37:1-9.

As indicated here (in v. 7, cf. 1 Chron 28:2), the “box” itself represents the royal “footstool” for YHWH, i.e., as He sits upon his ‘throne’. The throne itself is represented by the space above the box, between the flanking winged kerub figures; cf. 1 Sam 4:4; 2 Sam 6:2; 2 Kings 19:15; 1 Chron 13:6. This reflects ancient Near Eastern royal tradition (and iconography), whereby the royal throne is flanked by winged sphinxes or kerubs. Numerous examples could be given by way of illustration, but the famous Late Bronze Age (II) ivory from Megiddo will serve:

The drawing below (Keel & Uehlinger, Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel [Fortress Press: 1998], p. 63) includes a separate sculpted miniature (also from Megiddo) showing a different view of the kerub at the side of the throne:

My interpretation of the first line of v. 8 corresponds with the regular use of the preposition l= as indicating location/direction toward (“to”). This represents the majority view of commentators; however, the occurrence of the preposition here has been explained otherwise. For example, Hillers (p. 50) understands it in the sense of “from”, i.e., YHWH is called to come from His current resting-place (in Qirya¾ Y®±¹rîm), to his new location (in Jerusalem). Taking a different approach, Huwiler (p. 203f, followed by Crow, p. 100f) reads the preposition in the sense of “on behalf of”, that is, YHWH is called upon to act on behalf of (i.e., in defense of) His dwelling place (Jerusalem/Zion).

The Ark is specifically associated here with the power or “strength” (zu)) of YHWH. Since YHWH was manifestly present, among His people, upon the Ark (i.e., its kerub-throne, cf. above), this implies that His power was also present. The tradition from Numbers 10:35-36 (cited above), and the ‘holy war’ traditions connected with the presence of YHWH with (and upon) the Ark, are almost certainly being alluded to here. It is even possible that the word zu) (“strength, might, power”) could function as a designation for the Ark itself. This might help to explain the wording in Psalm 78:61, where it is stated that YHWH gave over “His strength” (oZu%) into captivity. Given the immediate context of v. 60 (i.e., YHWH forsaking the Tent-shrine at Shiloh), it makes sense to interpret this reference in terms of the capture of the Ark by the Philistines (as narrated in 1 Samuel 4:1-5:1). Davies, in his study (p. 52) definitely comes to this conclusion, and uses it as the basis for locating other possible references or allusions to the Ark in the Psalms (see pp. 53-61).

Verse 9

“Your priests, may they be clothed in rightness,
and your devoted (one)s, may they ring out!”

The transportation of the Ark to Jerusalem (v. 8) is accompanied by celebration, with the priests attending, and the people giving forth a ringing cry or shout (vb /n~r*) of joy. This certainly reflects a ritual context, which may function at three different levels: (1) the historical situation/tradition assumed in the dramatic narrative of vv. 6-10; (2) the original ritual/festal setting of the Psalm; and (3) the setting of the collection (Songs of Ascents) as a whole (i.e., pilgrimage festivals in the post-exilic period). Dahood (III, p. 241f) goes so far as to combine levels (1) and (2), positing that the original setting for the Psalm was the initial celebration on the occasion of David’s transport of the Ark to its new Tent-shrine in Jerusalem. More commonly, the setting for the Psalm is assumed to be a ritual celebration that commemorates the historical event, one which would have been performed (annually?) with the current king attending, along with his priests, members of the royal court, and segments of the population at large.

The noun qd#x# (“rightness”) and the adjective dys!j* (“good, kind”) are regular terms used to characterize both YHWH and the faithful/loyal ones among His people. Both terms can connote the ideas of faithfulness, loyalty, and devotion; the adjective dys!j*, in this context, more strongly captures this sense, and thus frequently (esp. in the Psalms) I translate it as “devoted, devout, loyal”. The ethical-religious and ceremonial aspects, particularly as related to the priests in attendance, are combined in the idiom of being “clothed” (vb vb^l*).

Verse 10

“In consideration of David your servant,
do not turn (away the) face of your anointed!”

As mentioned in Part 1 of this study, verse 10, along with verse 1, serves to frame the first division of the Psalm (vv. 1-10) as a prayer to YHWH, made on behalf of David. This is indicated here particularly by the initial word rWbu&B^. The noun rWbu& denotes “produce”, usually in an agricultural sense, along the lines of the root verb (rbu, “pass by/over”) with the specific meaning “carry along”. However, frequently in Biblical Hebrew, the noun is used in an abstract or generalized sense, to mean something like “because of, on account of, so that”, and thus functioning essentially as a preposition or conjunction. I have translated it (prefixed by the preposition B=) here as “in consideration of” (i.e., “on behalf of”).

This prayer—and the orientation of the Psalm itself—is not to be limited to the person of David, nor the historical circumstances of his life and reign. Rather, by extension it applies to the entire Davidic royal line, and to the Israelite/Judean kings that would follow him in the era of the monarchy (i.e., the pre-exilic Kingdom period). Even in an exilic (and post-exilic) context, the prayer for the preservation of the Davidic line applies to the idea of the restoration of the Kingdom—and to the Messianic hopes and expectations of the people in the generations to come. The designation of the king as the “anointed” (j^yv!m*, m¹šîaµ) naturally covers this entire range of interpretive meaning and significance.

The idiom “turn (away) the face” carries the meaning “reject”, and is used with some frequency in the Scriptures. It is parallel to the idea of “hiding” one’s face. The rejection (by YHWH) can be expressed in terms of God turning away His own face, or (as here) with His turning away the face of His people. The king represents the people as a whole, serving as a subordinate vassal of YHWH Himself (the great King of all). If YHWH “turns away” the face of His anointed representative (i.e., the king) among the people, this will have serious consequences for the people (and the nation/kingdom) as a whole.

This verse has a precise parallel in 1 Chron 6:42; indeed vv. 8-10 as a whole have a parallel in 1 Chron 6:41-42, where they occur as the conclusion of Solomon’s great prayer at the dedication of the Temple (chaps. 6-7; cp. 1 Kings 8). This could mean that the Psalm was in existence at the time Chronicles was written, and is being quoted. Or, alternatively, it is possible that vv. 8-10 are traditional, and might have been incorporated into any number of poems or hymns independently.

The remainder of the Psalm (vv. 11-18) will be discussed in Part 3 of this study.

    • References marked “Dahood, I”, “Dahood, II” and “Dahood, III” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968), and Psalms III: 101-150, vol. 17A (1970).
    • Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, translated by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2011).
    • Those marked “Crow” are to Loren D. Crow, The Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120-134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion. SBL Dissertation Series 148 (Society of Biblical Literature: 1996).
    • Those marked “Cross” are to Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Harvard University Press: 1973). Psalm 132 is discussed on pages 94-97, 232-238, 244-248.
    • Other works and studies cited:
      • “Davies” = G. H. Davies, “The Ark in the Psalms” in Promise and Fulfilment: Essays Presented to Professor S.H. Hooke, ed. F. F. Bruce (T&T Clark: 1963), pp. 51-61
      • “Hillers” = Delbert R. Hillers, “Ritual Procession of the Ark and Psalm 132”, Catholic Biblical Quarterly [CBQ] 30 (1968), pp. 48-55
      • “Huwiler” = Elizabeth F. Huwiler, “Patterns and Problems in Psalm 132” in The Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy, ed. Kenneth G. Hoglund (JSOT Press: 1987), pp. 199-215
      • “Kruse” = Heinz Kruse, “Psalm cxxxii and the Royal Zion Festival”, Vetus Testamentum [VT] 33 (1983), pp. 279-97

Studies on the Spirit: The Spirit and the Death/Resurrection of Jesus (Study 7)

Study 7: The Spirit and the Resurrection of Jesus

A key component of the earliest Gospel preaching (kerygma) is the declaration that God raised Jesus from the dead. This notice occurs repeatedly throughout the sermon-speeches in the book of Acts—2:24, 32; 3:15, 26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 34, 37. It is also found at many points in Paul’s letters; particularly notable are those instances which suggest an early (pre-Pauline) formulation—e.g., 1 Thess 1:10; Gal 1:1; 1 Cor 15:15ff; Rom 10:9; cf. also Eph 1:20. Also significant is 1 Peter 1:21, though there are numerous instances throughout the New Testament letters (both by Paul and others) which refer to the core belief generally—cf. 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:14; Rom 4:24; 6:4; 8:11; Col 2:12; Eph 2:6; Heb 11:19.

Moreover, the passive verbal references to Jesus being (or having been) raised may fairly be understood as examples of the so-called Divine passive (passivum divinum), in which God is the implied actor—cf. Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; Lk 9:22 (cp. the Markan versions of the Passion predictions); Mark 14:28 par; Jn 21:14; Rom 6:9; 7:4; 8:34; 1 Cor 5:4, 12ff; 2 Cor 5:15. A tenet of Jewish theology, shared by early Christians, was that only God (and His power) could raise the dead; on this basic assumption, cf. John 5:21; Acts 26:8; 2 Cor 1:9. If it is God (the Father, YHWH) who raises people from the dead, then naturally it was He who raised Jesus (His Son).

Another principle that informs early Christian thought regarding the resurrection is that it was God’s life-giving Spirit that gave life to Jesus, thus raising him from the dead. It is a tenet that is accepted implicitly, without necessarily being stated, functioning more or less as a working theological assumption. It was, after all, God’s own Spirit (i.e., “breath”) that gave life to the first human being (Adam), and thus (subsequently) to all of humankind—Gen 2:7; Job 27:3; 32:8; 33:4; cf. also the echo in Ezek 37:5ff, 14, and the obvious allusion in John 20:22. The Ezekiel references (cf. also 36:26-27; 39:29) are part of a wider Prophetic emphasis on the role of the Spirit in the New Age of Israel’s restoration (see esp. Isa 32:15; 44:3; Joel 2:28-29), and early Christians adopted this eschatological orientation and applied the prophecies to their own situation (as the holy ones of God under the New Covenant). The Community of the Qumran texts did something similar (cf. especially the references to the Spirit in the Community Rule text [1QS] and the Hodayot hymns).

If early Christians widely accepted the premise that it was the Divine Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead, among the New Testament authors it is only Paul who specifically highlights the point. He does this both by explicit reference and by allusion. Let us begin with the likely allusions, the earliest of which would seem to be his statement in 1 Corinthians 6:14:

“And God indeed raised the Lord, and He will also raise us through His power [dia\ th=$ duna/mew$ au)tou=].”

That the term “power” (du/nami$) here is a reference to God’s Spirit is confirmed by a number of factors. First, there is the close association between power and the Divine Spirit in the broader Scriptural (and Prophetic) tradition (see, e.g., Micah 3:8), but also throughout the New Testament, especially within Luke-Acts (Lk 1:17, 35; 4:14; Acts 1:8; 8:19; 10:38). Indeed, God’s power and the Spirit are virtually equated (or at least identified) in Lk 1:35, as also in 24:49 (combined with Acts 1:8).

Second, the same close association (and even identification) of power and Spirit is found at numerous points in Paul’s letters—e.g., 1 Thess 1:5; 1 Cor 2:4; Rom 15:13, 19; cf. also Eph 3:16, and the implicit reference in 2 Tim 1:7. A key reference is Romans 1:4, which, as I have previously discussed (cf. the most recent article), may be part of an early (non-Pauline) Christological confessional formula; as such, it would pre-date (perhaps by several years, or more) its use by Paul in Romans. In any case, Paul clearly affirms the confession and adopts (and adapts) it for his own purposes, becoming a core element of his theological (and Christological) exposition in Romans. In verse 4, the second half of the confessional statement (vv. 3-4), Jesus Christ is declared to be—

“the (one hav)ing been marked out (as the) Son of God in power [e)n duna/mei] according to (the) Spirit of holiness [kata\ pneu=ma a(giosu/nh$], out of a standing up [i.e., resurrection] of (the) dead”

The phrases “in power” and “according to (the) Spirit of holiness” are closely related in meaning, and, to some extent, may be taken as synonymous. They apply specifically to the resurrection of Jesus. It is through the resurrection that Jesus was “marked out” as the Son of God, and this took place through the power of God’s Spirit. The expression “Spirit of holiness” (pneu=ma a(giosu/nh$) reflects Semitic wording (i.e., Hebrew vd#q) j^Wr, cf. Psalm 51:11[9]), rather than the more common “holy Spirit” (Grk [to\] pneu=ma [to\] a%gion) which Paul otherwise uses (more often, simply [to\] pneu=ma [“the Spirit”]).

Finally, with regard to the statement in 1 Cor 6:14, there is the immediate context of the reference to the Spirit in v. 17, along with the emphasis on the Spirit in the prior chapters 1-4 (cf. the references to “power” esp. in 1:24; 2:4-5; 4:20). The reference-point of the resurrection, in 6:14, 17 is further expounded in the famous Resurrection-chapter 15.

Indeed, references and allusions to the role of the Spirit run throughout 1 Corinthians 15, as also in Romans 8; but, before we examine these (in the next study), let us consider other statements by Paul in Romans. In addition to the confessional formula in 1:3-4 (cf. above), we have the important declaration in Romans 6:4, which is rooted in the challenging rhetorical question of verse 3, containing a central tenet of Pauline theology:

“as many (of us) as were dunked [i.e., baptized] into (the) Anointed Yeshua were dunked into his death“

Believers in Christ, having been united with Jesus Christ, participate in his death and resurrection; the participation in his death, in particular, is symbolized by the baptism ritual. This is a central thematic motif of chapter 6 (vv. 3-11), which Paul develops further in chapter 8. It also occurs in his other letters, most notably in Galatians (cf. 3:26-4:7 in relation to the thought expressed in 2:20) and Colossians (2:11-15).

The principle expressed in Rom 6:3 is expounded in verse 4:

“So (then), we were buried together with him through the dunking [i.e., baptism] into his death, (so) that, just as (the) Anointed was raised out of (the) dead, through the splendor [do/ca] of the Father, so also we should walk about in newness of life.”

We, as believers, participate in the death (and burial) of Jesus, symbolized by the baptism rite. We die and are buried together with him (not the sun– prefix on the compound verb sunqa/ptw, “bury together with”). As a result, we also share in his resurrection—i.e., we are raised together with him. This point is made by Paul in verse 5, to be developed extensively in chapter 8. However, the full realization of our participation in Jesus’ resurrection will not occur until our own resurrection at the end time. For now, we possess and experience the resurrection life only through the abiding presence of the Spirit.
Because we have this “newness of life” in the Spirit, in union with Christ (vv. 5-11), we are exhorted to “walk about” (i.e., conduct ourselves on a daily basis) in this newness, and not any longer in the old paths by which we once walked “according to the flesh” (such as when we were still in bondage to sin), vv. 12-14ff; for we are no longer in bondage to the power of sin (vv. 15-23).

Instead of the term du/nami$ (“power”), here in verse 4, Paul states that Jesus was raised through the do/ca of God. The noun do/ca properly means something like “esteem, honor”; however, when applied to God, it frequently carries an added connotative reference to the Divine “splendor” or “glory” which God possesses. Here this Divine “splendor” certainly encompasses the life-giving power of God.

The comparable term in Hebrew (dobK*) can be used in reference to the source of YHWH’s supernatural and miracle-working power (e.g., Exod 15:7, 11; 16:7, 10), so it would not at all be out of keeping to speak of God’s do/ca as the source of Jesus’ resurrection. Cf. Fitzmyer, p. 434.

More significant is Paul’s application of the Divine do/ca to Jesus Christ (cf. 2 Cor 4:4-6, etc), which, to be sure, is closely tied to his resurrection (and exaltation) by God, as we see expounded in 1 Cor 15. The use of do/ca here in Rom 6:4 may also represent an instance of intentional foreshadowing by Paul, anticipating his important use of the term, in reference to the resurrection, later in chapter 8. The expositions of 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 8 will be discussed in our next two studies, beginning with the latter (Romans 8) in Study 8.

References above marked “Fitzmyer” are to Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., Romans, Anchor Bible [AB], vol. 33 (1993).