Baptism is a work.

[rturner76]

Consult seems like an inappropriate term, since it implies they were planning how Jesus should act. What I imagine is that Jesus summoned Moses and Elijah so that they could rejoice together over what was to come, to celebrate the nearness of His victory and share in the excitement to prepare Him for the trials He would endure. At least, something along those lines rather than Jesus consulting them to figure out how to proceed.

We can all imagine what we like about their conversation but the fact is he called up Moses and Elijah. If he did not want their input, why summon them?

 

[Fervent]

We can all imagine what we like about their conversation but the fact is he called up Moses and Elijah. If he did not want their input, why summon them?

So they could testify on His behalf

 

[Guojing]

Righteousness is a gift from God. We aren't righteous, but out of God's compassion toward us sinners He sent His Son, born of the Virgin Mary, who lived, suffered, died, and rose again. Jesus is righteous, we are unrighteous. By grace God gives us, as pure gift, the righteousness of His own Son, imputing to us Christ's righteousness. We are, therefore, declared righteous on Christ's account, as an act of Divine Mercy, because God loves us and wishes, desires, and wills that all have redemption.

Can a Christian, therefore, having fallen into total apostasy and made shipwreck of their faith later be reconciled again back to Christ? Yes, of course, the Scriptures declare the Good News of Jesus toward sinners. That the God who made earth and sea and stars, who lovingly crafted human beings in His own Divine Image and likeness wills our salvation, that's why He sent His Son, that is the biblical story: God wants to heal, restore, save, redeem His good creation. Since we are the ones who messed up and broke the world, the fixing of the world means fixing us. And so lost and estranged sinners are called and given faith through the Gospel, in Word and Sacrament God comes down and meets us with His grace and love, to give us faith, to declare us just on Christ's account, to forgive us all our sins, cleanse us, heal us, to heal us. To restore in us that which was broken. We are being conformed to the image of Christ in order that the image and likeness of God be restored to us--and the day will come when, even in our bodies we shall be made whole--the dead shall rise. And that is true not only of the sinner who has heard the Gospel for the first time and, by the grace and power of the Holy Spirit, believes; it is just as true for us who now believe when we hear the Gospel. And should we, like prodigal sons or a wayward lost lamb, curse our Father or abandon the Shepherd, we have One who not only rushes out to meet us when we show up over the horizon and clothes us again with the finest robes and embraces us, but who searches over high mountains, searches low valleys, to pick us up over His shoulders and carry us back to the safety of the sheepfold.

It is written,

"For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 8:38-39

The love of God does not fail.

We may throw our inheritance at God's face, like the prodigal did to his father, and we may end up dwelling in mud and filth with pigs, eating what they eat. And truly, if we remain in that we have forfeited our inheritance. But our Heavenly Father has a house, and there is a room there for us if only we return. He will rush out to meet us, rush out to clean us, rush out to clothe us. The Banquet Feast has tables, with chairs and seating, room for all who would come and be dressed for the Feast. The Lord shall clothe us with Himself (Galatians 3:27), that we abide in Him, He is the Vine, we are the branches. Remaining in Him we live, cutting ourselves off we wither and die. By grace alone He calls us, by grace alone He secures us, by grace alone He keeps us, and by grace alone we shall pass through judgment to eternal life.

There is no sinner on earth for whom the Gospel is not for.
There is no sinner who is outside God's loving compassion in Christ.
In all things it is the will and desire of God that we sinners believe, repent, and have eternal life.
From Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 that is the declaration of the entire Bible: Jesus Christ has come to save sinners and to rescue the world.

-CryptoLutheran

I see, that is would you consider yourself a covenant theologian?

 

[Guojing]

But Israel isn't saved, and millions of Gentiles have heard the Gospel.

You have to distinguish between prophecy and mystery

That is why Paul revealed the mystery to us in Romans 11:11 and Romans 11:25

 

[Guojing]

I'm not sure of your discussion, but I wanted to ask of what translation you use, as mine doesn't even mention Israel in Isaiah 60:1-5. The focus, however is the Light of God, who is Christ, and that God extends His Grace to them just as the Blessed Jews.

As far as Israel being saved before or after the Gentiles, here is one passage that offers an idea:

Paul, speaking to Gentiles:
Romans 11:25 NLT - "I want you to understand this mystery, dear brothers and sisters, so that you will not feel proud about yourselves. Some of the people of Israel have hard hearts, but this will last only until the full number of Gentiles comes to Christ."

In scripture the term, my people, his people, refers only to the nation of Israel.

Otherwise, it will be just people.

Zechariah 8 shows that contrast clearly

 

[Oneofhope]

In scripture the term, my people, his people, refers only to the nation of Israel.

Otherwise, it will be just people.

Zechariah 8 shows that contrast clearly

For the life of me, I cannot figure out what you might be referring to.

 

[Guojing]

For the life of me, I cannot figure out what you might be referring to.

Isaiah 60:1-2 could not be referring to anyone not from Israel.

They even put gentiles in the next verse as a contrast

 

[Strong in Him]

Why would he summon Moses and Elijah?

The NT says that Moses and Elijah appeared - none of the Gospels say that Jesus summoned them.

 

[Strong in Him]

We can all imagine what we like about their conversation but the fact is he called up Moses and Elijah. If he did not want their input, why summon them?

Which verse says that Jesus summoned them/called them up?

 

[Oneofhope]

Isaiah 60:1-2 could not be referring to anyone not from Israel.

They even put gentiles in the next verse as a contrast

Oh, ok. But I still have no idea of what you're going on about.

 

[rturner76]

So they could testify on His behalf

Testify to whom and what would be the testimony? Since we have no idea what they spoke about other than his passion, it's all speculation.

 

[Fervent]

Testify to whom and what would be the testimony? Since we have no idea what they spoke about other than his passion, it's all speculation.

They testify to this day, to everyone who picks up a Bible and reads of the event. As well as to those who witnessed it and recorded it. So while we have no idea what they spoke about, the testimony remains. We don't need to know the specifics to understand the import of the event.

 

[Oneofhope]

We can all imagine what we like about their conversation but the fact is he called up Moses and Elijah. If he did not want their input, why summon them?

Scripture doesn't disclose the reason for the appearance of Elijah and Moses. All that we can do is speculate. Here are the notes that I have compiled over the years.

Have we ever wondered why, during the Transfiguration of Christ, Jesus met with Moses and Elijah? What was it about Moses and Elijah that would bring the three of them together? One possibility is that all three had control over water, and of course, physical water is symbolic of the Holy Spirit (this isn't to suggest that Jesus and the Father control the Spirit). Therefore, it is fair to suggest that Moses, Elijah, and Jesus all had a very special relationship with the Holy Spirit.

Though Moses is not known for raising a person from the dead, both Jesus and Elijah did (as did Elishah, who was given a double portion of the spirit of Elijah). All three men were capable of remarkable miracles, unlike others in the Bible.

Parting of the Jordan River: This is the second instance of parting of water (the first was Moses with the Red Sea). On Elijah's final day of life, he rolls up his cloak, strikes the waters of the Jordan River and they are parted for he and Elisha to walk . . . on dry ground.

As mentioned, Elisha also parts the water for the third Biblical instance in this same chapter, verse 14.

 

[Fervent]

Scripture doesn't disclose the reason for the appearance of Elijah and Moses. All that we can do is speculate. Here are the notes that I have compiled over the years.

I don't think we need explicit statements to come to reasonable certain conclusions, especially since narrative(especially good narrative) gets its point across by showing rather than telling. All of the elements of the narrative center on Jesus being glorified by Moses and Elijah, meaning the purpose of their presence was to give witness to who Jesus was.

 

[Strong in Him]

The traditional explanation is that Moses and Elijah represented the law and the prophets - which spoke of Jesus and which he came to fulfil.

 

[rturner76]

They testify to this day, to everyone who picks up a Bible and reads of the event. As well as to those who witnessed it and recorded it. So while we have no idea what they spoke about, the testimony remains. We don't need to know the specifics to understand the import of the event.

So then we don't know exactly what happened at the event word for word but would Jesus have called them to the present to NOT consult with them the night before his passion?

 

[Fervent]

So then we don't know exactly what happened at the event word for word but would Jesus have called them to the present to NOT consult with them the night before his passion?

This seems like an attempt to go into speculation about the content of their discussion. The central focus of the event is Jesus' transfiguration and the revelation of His glory, so it seems far too speculative to add that He sought their counsel when it is sufficient to conclude that they were there as a testimony to His person. In other words, it is far more likely they were there to offer Him worship than anything else. So to go from "they were called for a consultation" to "we can't show that they weren't there to offer a consultation," is simply an attempt to develop an eisegatical reading of the text. Now, I am not personally opposed to some degree of eisegesis because it is something we all do and pretending otherwise is simply being dishonest with ourselves but if we are discussing what is present in the text what you are reading into it isn't something that we can really discuss. So be persuaded, but you're not offering anything compelling.

 

[rturner76]

This seems like an attempt to go into speculation about the content of their discussion. The central focus of the event is Jesus' transfiguration and the revelation of His glory, so it seems far too speculative to add that He sought their counsel when it is sufficient to conclude that they were there as a testimony to His person. In other words, it is far more likely they were there to offer Him worship than anything else. So to go from "they were called for a consultation" to "we can't show that they weren't there to offer a consultation," is simply an attempt to develop an eisegatical reading of the text. Now, I am not personally opposed to some degree of eisegesis because it is something we all do and pretending otherwise is simply being dishonest with ourselves but if we are discussing what is present in the text what you are reading into it isn't something that we can really discuss. So be persuaded, but you're not offering anything compelling.

I understand what you are saying here and it DOES make sense. Also, I was never taught that this was a consultation. That thought came from my personal interpretation of the situation as a whole.

Jesus was in such anguish and turmoil that he was sweating blood. That lead me to believe that he called upon the most important Old Testament writers to either encourage him or advise him on a strategy that he could employ to get him through what was about to happen..I considered it this way because though it makes no mathematical sense, Jesus Christ was (is) 100% God AND 100% man. This has led me to believe that though Jesus is omniscient as God, he also experienced human emotions like fear. I put myself in his place as a 100% human and thought, if I were to be faced with the knowledge that I would be beaten, flogged, humiliated, and hung on a cross to die, I would need support from my learned friends and loved ones.

After unpacking this over the last few posts, I can see that Jesus "consulting" Moses and Elijah is not specifically spelled out in scripture. I do acknowledge that is a conclusion that I lean toward based on my own interpretation of the text. I am not claiming that my opinion of what happened that night is fact. It just seems to me to be the most logical conclusion I could glean, like I said based on what a human being would seek in that situation likely being support and/or advice.

All of this is meant to convey that I do understand and respect your opinion, I still can't get around the human part of our Christ seeking if nothing else coping skills so as to not break under the punishment he was about to endure.

Does that make any sense or am I just leaning on my own understanding? I know that doing so is a no-no.

 

[Oneofhope]

I don't think we need explicit statements to come to reasonable certain conclusions, especially since narrative(especially good narrative) gets its point across by showing rather than telling. All of the elements of the narrative center on Jesus being glorified by Moses and Elijah, meaning the purpose of their presence was to give witness to who Jesus was.

Well said. The question was asked . . . why those two? In other words, what was it about Moses and Elijah that qualified them to experience the Transfiguration of Christ?

 

[Fervent]

I understand what you are saying here and it DOES make sense. Also, I was never taught that this was a consultation. That thought came from my personal interpretation of the situation as a whole.

That's what I mean by "eisegesis." Which isn't a bad thing, necessarily, as it's a natural part of reading and engaging with the text as a whole. We couldn't apply the Bible to our lives without doing so to some degree.

Jesus was in such anguish and turmoil that he was sweating blood. That lead me to believe that he called upon the most important Old Testament writers to either encourage him or advise him on a strategy that he could employ to get him through what was about to happen..I considered it this way because though it makes no mathematical sense, Jesus Christ was (is) 100% God AND 100% man. This has led me to believe that though Jesus is omniscient as God, he also experienced human emotions like fear. I put myself in his place as a 100% human and thought, if I were to be faced with the knowledge that I would be beaten, flogged, humiliated, and hung on a cross to die, I would need support from my learned friends and loved ones.

This is some good insight, and I can see why you find it compelling. It's not hard to understand it this way if we put ourselves in Jesus' shoes, though as Jesus is both 100% man and 100% God we can only understand so much of His experience. So we can relate, but I'm not sure we can project how we would react in any given situation into the picture.

After unpacking this over the last few posts, I can see that Jesus "consulting" Moses and Elijah is not specifically spelled out in scripture. I do acknowledge that is a conclusion that I lean toward based on my own interpretation of the text. I am not claiming that my opinion of what happened that night is fact. It just seems to me to be the most logical conclusion I could glean, like I said based on what a human being would seek in that situation likely being support and/or advice.

Which is certainly a possiblity, and the support aspect is one of the purposes I see in it as well. Though I see the support being a reminder of the purpose of the upcoming events and the glory that lies beyond the cross. To tie in another verse, I suspect what they were there to talk about was the joy that was set before Him rather than the shame that the immediate trial would bring(referencing Hebrews 12:2)

All of this is meant to convey that I do understand and respect your opinion, I still can't get around the human part of our Christ seeking if nothing else coping skills so as to not break under the punishment he was about to endure.

I think there's some wisdom in that. A lot of times in popular Christianity there's a distinct docetic vision of the incarnation that only pays lip service to the fact that He was 100% man. Especially among evangelicals.

Does that make any sense or am I just leaning on my own understanding? I know that doing so is a no-no.

I think too much is made of "not leaning on our own understanding." Or rather, that statement is used far too often for someone to put their personal view of a verse or verses into the primary meaning of the text. We struggle to understand, and that's a community effort not something we are doing on our own. So we must always remember to humble ourselves in viewing how we understand the text as the true meaning of it but that doesn't mean we can't appreciate our own personal insights as legitimate possibilities.