Republishing my book on the Covenant of God

I am reworking my book on the Covenant of God and hope to republish it in the near future. Here is the forward to it:


FORWARD

In the pages which follow, I offer to Orthodox Christians material which I hope will be helpful in your evangelization effort if you should find yourself someday in conversation with person who holds deeply to Calvinism and Covenant Theology. Most likely, this will be a member of a conservative Presbyterian organization such as the PCA or OPC.

There are many as different methods of evangelization as there are people. What might well be used of the Holy Spirit to bring the Gospel home to the heart of one individual might well turn another one off. Indeed, conversion stories I have read are filled with different experiences of how people came to Christ in different manners, through different approaches, and using different means. I hope this book will provide for my Orthodox brothers and sisters another tool in their efforts to evangelize and share the fullness of the Christian faith, which is the Orthodox faith, the faith of the Early Church.

I have found that for most Christians, bringing the Covenant of God into a theological conversation results in raised eyebrows and a look of confusion. Only in the Presbyterian Church in America did I encounter people such as Scott Hahn, for whom the covenant and its principles eventually led to his conversion to the Roman Catholic faith. A few years later, my study of these principles, explained in Ray Sutton’s book, THAT YOU MAY PROSPER - Dominion by Covenant, led me to enter the Byzantine Catholic Church in April of 2001.

Unfortunately, at that time I misapplied one of the five working principles of a covenant relationship, one which Scott Hahn also missed. I think this came from my familiarity with the Western churches of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and the manner in which they approach Christianity. Over the last several decades, a growing number of Evangelicals and Protestants have discovered the beauty and fullness of the ancient Orthodox faith.

In the Orthodox faith, a theologian is one who prays, and one who prays is a theologian. Theology is not approached in the same manner as it is in the West, as an exercise of mental acuity, clever dissertations on God, and intellectual exercises done in regard to Bible passages, often clouded by the prejudice and judgment of the one reading the text. It is instead, coming to know Christ/God through prayer, ascetic exercise, and the silence of the heart before God, or heyschasm. It is to experience God, not just to talk about the ideas your own mind or your own understanding of the Bible have formulated about Him.

I am newly chrismated into the Orthodox faith, and while Eastern Catholicism tries to be Orthodox, it is not at all the same. In entering the Orthodox Church, I made up my mind to sit down, shut up, listen, and learn. As such, I shouldn’t even be writing this book, but there is a problem I need to address. After my conversion from Protestantism, I wrote and published the initial draft of this book, with the goal of sharing with friends and others the covenant principles which had led me to enter into communion with the Roman Catholic Church through Eastern Catholicism. This book is available on the open market; therefore, it needs to be revised and republished in order correct the error I made in the discussing Sutton’s second principle of covenant – hierarchy.

Hierarchy is the principle of covenant headship. As you will see discussed later on, Christ is the New Adam, who is the human covenant head over the Church – not the Patriarch of Rome.

MATTHEW 16, THE KEYS,
AND THE CHURCH


There is a distressing and somewhat annoying habit of Roman Catholics to immediately jump to Matthew 16: 18-19 when involved in discussions which question the legitimacy of the papacy or the Roman Catholic church as being the Church. For them, these two verses establish both the papacy, and the Roman Catholic Church as the true church. I will post these verses and then tender my objections to them. I think they are misread, misunderstood, and those who lean on them are presuppositionally blinded by their desire for these verses to mean what they want to them to mean.

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

The gates of hell named in verse 18 are the assurance that for Roman Catholics that their church will not be overcome by evil. But they are seeing this all wrong. What are gates? Do gates attack and overcome the defenses of those they are attacking? Of course not! Gates are a defensive weapon to keep out something that is not wanted within a certain boundary:

Deuteronomy 28:52 And he shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and fenced walls come down, wherein thou trustedst, throughout all thy land: and he shall besiege thee in all thy gates throughout all thy land, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.

Deuteronomy 28 is a chapter in which both blessing and curse are spoken of to the people of Israel. Blessing if they keep covenant with God, but curse if they break their covenant vows. Notice what happens in verse 52. The gates cannot keep out the nation which comes to besiege Israel as part of the curse. Gates are defensive, not offensive. The promise of Christ in Matthew 16:18 is that when the Gospel goes forth into the world, beginning with Israel, the gates of hell which will try to keep the Gospel away from the people, will not prevail. The Church will move forward with the Gospel message and hell’s gates will be unable to stop it.

Roman Catholics insist that this verse means that their church cannot teach error, but that is not at all the meaning. The Gospel will succeed in bringing people to God, no matter where it goes or what defenses against it are found.

“But what about Peter being given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven? Surely that shows that he is the one who is in charge of the Church, since he alone is given the keys.”

That sounds very plausible on the face of it, but there is a small detail that these folks have overlooked. The detail is this: what is the Kingdom of Heaven?

You see, this phrase is only found in Matthew’s Gospel. This fact should immediately make you stop and question why. Why do we not find this in the Gospel of Luke or Mark? It is because it has a special meaning that only a Jew would understand. Remember, in studying the Bible, you must take into account not only the words at face value, but the context, the location, the intent, and the people who are being addressed. Jesus was addressing Jews in the Gospel of the Jews. That is what the Matthean Gospel is – the Gospel to, about, and for the Jews. Therefore, let’s see how I, as a first-century Jew, would have understood this. What is the Kingdom of Heaven?

It appears that early Christians, much like those of today, did not think like first-century Jews when reading the Scriptures. For instance, when Jesus speaks of “heaven and earth,” he is not speaking of this physical planet, nor the sky above us. Heaven and earth are a reference to the Temple.

“Jews did not always mean “the physical universe” when they spoke of heaven and earth together. In Jewish literature, the Temple was a portal connecting heaven and earth. They called it the “navel of the earth” and the “gateway to heaven” (Jub 8:19; 1 Enoch 26:1). Just like the Mesopotamian Tower in Genesis 11, the Temple connected God’s realm to where humans lived.

To reflect this belief, the Jerusalem Temple had been built to look like a microcosm of the universe. We typically overlook how literally true the Temple hymn preserved in Psalm 78:69 is: “He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded forever.” The actual holy place and most holy place inside the Temple building were constructed like earth and heaven. The courts outside represented the sea. I am not making this stuff up.

According to Josephus, two parts of the tabernacle were “approachable and open to all” but one was not. He explains that in so doing Moses “signifies the earth and the sea, since these two are accessible to all; but the third portion he reserved for God alone because heaven is inaccessible to men” (Ant. 3:181, cf. 3:123). The veil between the accessible and inaccessible parts of the Temple was designed to represent the entire material world during Jesus’ day. Josephus and Philo agree that the veil was composed of four materials representing the four elements–earth, water, air, and fire (War 5:212-213; Ant. 3:138-144; Quaestiones in Exodum 2:85, cf. Mos 2:88). Heaven was beyond this material world. It was behind the curtain.

Outside the Temple’s microcosm of “heaven and earth,” the courts looked like the sea. Numbers Rabbah 13:19 records, “The court surrounds the temple just as the sea surrounds the world.” In Talmudic tradition, Rabbis described how the inner walls of the Temple looked like waves of the sea (b. Sukk. 51b, b.B.Bat. 4a). From heaven and earth inside the temple, you looked out at the sea surrounding the world. Why? Ancients believed the earth had one giant land mass surrounded by sea. The temple reflected that cosmology. The accessible section of the Temple and the surrounding courts embodied both the land mass and sea believed to comprise the earth. The Most Holy Place was heaven where God's presence resided.

If we listen to Jesus in First-Century Israel, his prediction of “heaven and earth” passing away sounds like the destruction of Jerusalem and her Temple. The contemporary songs, writers, and architecture all make the connection between Jerusalem’s Temple and “heaven and earth.” Isaiah used the same language of “heaven and earth” to depict Jerusalem and her citizens in Isaiah 65:17-18.

“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth and the former things will not be remembered or come to mind. But be glad and rejoice forever in what I create; For behold, I create Jerusalem for rejoicing and her people for gladness.”

Isaiah is predicting the eventual reconstruction of Jerusalem after its destruction at the hands of invaders. He uses Hebrew parallelism to equate the creation of “new heavens and a new earth” with the restoration of Jerusalem. So Jesus isn't the first prophet to describe Jerusalem and her temple with grand language describing its theological significance. Jerusalem was the place where people encountered the presence of God on earth. The Temple is where heaven met earth.” 1

The Kingdom of Heaven is the Church! And what was the Church at the time of Jesus’ministry on earth. National Israel! We see this when St. Paul directly quotes Psalm 22:22 in Hebrews:

Hebrews 2:12 “Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.”

In Greek, the word is eclessia (ἐκκλησ ας ), translated “church.” It means “congregation or gathering,” same word as קָהֵל (qahal) in Hebrew. The Church is the earthly gathering of God’s people in a distinct place, with distinct rites of worship, in a distinct building. There is no such thing as this nebulous idea of an invisible church, created by Protestants who wanted to soothe their consciences regarding their rebellion from Rome, who claimed to be the Church based on misinterpretation of Matthew 16. The keys are, I believe, to the gates of hell, which are holding the Jews in bondage to the Law and against the Gospel. The gates of hell will not be able to withstand the coming of the Gospel to the Jews at the hand of Peter.

Remember, Peter is the Apostle to the Jews, while Paul was sent to the Gentiles. Jesus is commissioning Peter, giving him the authority to open the gates of hell and release those imprisoned in their unbelief in the Messiah. Keys are a sign of authority. In Matthew 16, this commission is a special one for Peter only. But two chapters later, we see the same authority being given to all the disciples:

Matthew 18:18 “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

This is why context is so very important when studying the Sacred Scriptures. At this moment, Jesus is addressing the faith of the one who is to be the Apostle to the Jews. It is in the specifically Jewish Gospel of Matthew. When the covenant relationship with national Israel ended (Hebrews 8:13) in AD 70 upon the destruction of Jerusalem, Peter’s work was over and the keys were returned to Christ.

Unfortunately, this is what I missed when I left Protestantism for the Byzantine Catholic Church, a church in communion with the errors of Rome. Had I put more thought into it, I would have realized that only the Last Adam could replace the first Adam. Adam, a man, was covenant head to all mankind and over all creation. Only the man, Christ Jesus, fills that position perfectly. To say that the pope is the head of the Church is to usurp that position which rightly belongs to Christ. Furthermore, there is no document anywhere in which the Bishop of Rome is given the important covenant title The Last Adam.

1 Penley, “When Heaven and Earth Passed Away: Everything Changed.” Para. 5–11.

ArmyMatt said:

sorry (just curious), but what is this for?

Click to expand...

When I left Calvinism for the BCC, I wrote a book in which I used the Covenant of God to explain to my covenant thinking Calvinist friends how the Sacraments of the Church and the honor we give to the Theotokos are very much in line with the biblical covenant.

Unfortunately, this book, which is in publication and for sale, defends Roman Catholic understanding of the papacy. Now I am correcting that with this update.

Furthermore, it is my hope that perhaps it could be a valuable tool to use to speak to covenant oriented Calvinists to show them that Orthodoxy fulfills the principles of God's covenant relationship with mankind. Most Calvinists and Evangelicals have either bad thinking or misunderstandings about sacramental issues. The covenant of God addresses them nicely. That is what got me started on my journey out of Protestantism and eventually home to the Orthodox Church.

I would gladly send you a copy of the manuscript if you would care to read and critique it. I gave this to Fr. Deacon Nicholas tonight and he made some excellent suggestions for change in the paragraphs I posted above, especially in regard to what the Early Fathers said about the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven.

I think I am going to run this by my priest, Fr. David, to be sure that it meets Orthodoxy properly. I may ask him if I could send a copy to Archbishop Nathaniel for his approval. Look, I came into Orthodoxy to BE ORTHODOX, not to bring in new ideas or heresies, even if unintended. I just want to be very sure that what I have written passes the Orthodox smell test.

Yes, my hope is that this would be a helpful book to explain the covenantal nature of the priesthood and the other Sacraments of the Church, and most especially, the honor we give to the Queen of the New Covenant, our Lady Theotokos. I think that sometimes it is helpful to talk to people in a language that they understand and relate it to Orthodoxy, rather than put out a lot of things and language that we as Orthodox understand well, but that would get a deer-in-the-headlights look from them.

J Michael said:

Dear Light of the East,

Does your book have a title? I can't seem to see one in this thread.

Click to expand...

The Dance of Isaiah

ArmyMatt said:

interesting, what makes that the title?

Click to expand...

The title is based on the premise of the book, which is that covenant is relationship and family, not legal contract, as the Calvinists describe it. The Dance of Isaiah, as you know, Father Matt (having, I assume, performed many Crowning Ceremonies, is part of the marriage covenant in the East.

There are two primary analogies in scripture which help us understand God and our relationship to Him. One of them is the family. The other is that which is seen in Ezekial 16:8 – that of marriage. The same language “I spread my skirt over thee” is used in the story of Ruth and Boaz. This is the language of marriage – the beauty of two people giving themselves completely and sacrificially to each other in love. They make vows to one another and enter into a union of love. We seldom hear marriage described as “the covenant of marriage” anymore. But that is exactly what the deeply personal union of marriage is – a covenant. And family naturally derives from marriage.

A few months after I entered St. Ann’s Byzantine Catholic Church I was invited to attend the marriage of two friends from my new parish. Since they were married in our Eastern Rite Catholic Church, this was an entirely new experience for me. I had never seen the beauty of the marital covenant expressed in such deeply symbolic acts. The entire experience was profoundly moving for me, but two events especially stood out for me in the way that they spoke to the covenant of God.

Jonathan and Mary were brought to stand before the tetrapod in front of the Iconostasis. 10 Upon their heads were placed crowns. Upon seeing this, the first thing which came to my mind was “King Adam and Queen Eve.” As you read further in this book, you will come to understand the significance of what is being shown here. God is establishing a new covenant family right before our eyes. He is crowning a new covenant head over the family in King Jonathan and his helpmeet, Queen Mary. But more than that, what I saw pictured was the first Garden marriage of Adam and Eve. Because of Christ’s work upon the Cross, not only has the whole human race been returned to relationship with God through Christ, but every marriage is a symbol of that redemptive work being accomplished in the two who are being married. Jonathan and Mary will now go forth to accomplish in their little family the same thing which Adam and Eve were to accomplish – to bring forth sons and daughters of God who will be raised as covenant children for the kingdom. They, in turn, are a picture of the greater and larger family of God, the Church, established by King Jesus, Who is the Last Adam, and Queen Mary, who is the New Eve.

With the crowns held in place, Father Mike led them around the tetrapod where the Holy Bible and symbols of marriage lay. Three times around this table he led them in the Dance of Isaiah. I could imagine myself suddenly back in Israel, seeing the couple dancing, perhaps a little more fervently than the crowns they were wearing would allow, round and round in joyous circles. Later, I asked our parish cantor for a description of the Dance of Isaiah

This is what he wrote to me: “In the Byzantine wedding service, after placing crowns on the heads of the bride and groom to seal their union with the gift of the Holy Spirit, the priest offers them a cup of wine to drink - a symbol of the one life they will now share. Then, the priest leads the couple three times around a table in the center of the church while special hymns are chanted - the same hymns that are sung at the ordination of a priest. This ritual dance is an icon of Christian marriage: led by Christ (represented by the priest), the couple enters ever deeper into the life of the Holy Trinity (signified by the triple procession), dancing with the Lord for all eternity (signified by the circle). The table around which they dance represents the table of their home – the symbolic altar of their shared daily life. The last hymn during this dance celebrates the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophesy: "Behold, a virgin is with child and shall bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel," a name that means "God is with us" (Isaiah 7:14). It is this Emmanuel, the Lord in our midst, who makes marriage become a sharing in the kingdom - in God's own life.”

When this ended, Father Michael pronounced blessings upon the couple. Over Jonathan he prayed the blessing of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Over Mary he prayed the blessing of Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachael. As he did, it occurred to me that this was in entirely in keeping with the Jewish roots of Christianity.

Click to expand...

ArmyMatt said:

funny I just remembered it’s also part of an ordination service as well.

Click to expand...

Father David received, with interest, my book to look over. He also gave me permission to contact Archbishop Nathaniel and see if he would look at the book. As I said, I am not interested in bringing anything into Orthodoxy which does not belong there.

Interesting side note: Archbishop Nathaniel was formerly BCC and converted. When he heard of my impending chrismation, he asked Fr. David about why I was leaving the BCC. Fr. David related this to me and I wrote an email to Archbishop Nathaniel. I think when I write to him I will let him know what a wonderful first year I have had in Orthodoxy. I continue to be blessed by my parish, the people, and my clergy.

ralliann said:

How long do you think it will take to have approval to publish? I hope your book is satisfactory in Orthodoxy. I for one would love to read it.

Click to expand...

I suppose it would depend on A.) how busy Fr. David is and B.) if Archbishop Nathaniel would critique it and how long that would take.