Go Fish! Having a Heart Like Jesus for Evangelism

"While walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon (who is called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. And he said to them, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” Immediately they left their nets and followed him. And going on from there he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets, and he called them. 22 Immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him." (Matthew 4:18–22)

One day as Jesus walked by the lakeshore He thought about the symbolism of the Sea of Galilee. It was a large, lovely lake, ringed by villages, nestled in the hollow of the hills, but Jesus saw more than blue water and bobbing boats. To His perceptive mind that lake represented the world. Watching the boats floating in the water, he thought of the local churches He would establish in the world. As He saw fisherman, He thought of His followers. The nets represented His evangelistic appeal, claiming souls for eternal life. Coming upon some fishermen that day, Jesus issued the first invitation in the New Testament: “Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.”

One of the questions I’d like to ask the Great Physician, were it possible, is why we are not winning more of our friends, relatives, and associates to Christ? Why are we not better witnesses? According to (now-dated) surveys by George Barna, only about half (53 percent) of born again Christians feel a sense of responsibility to tell others about their faith. In other words, nearly half of us don’t think it’s our personal responsibility to share our beliefs with those who don’t know Christ. But this couldn't be farther from the truth! In reality...

1. We’re To Be Followers of Christ. Jesus spoke much about our following Him. The word “follow” occurs 92 times in the Gospels (NKJV).

• “He who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me” (Matt. 10:38).
• He told the rich young ruler, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” (Matt. 19:21)
• He evangelized Levi the tax-collector with just two words: “Follow Me” (Luke 5:27).
• “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life” (John 8:12).
• “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me” (John 10:27).
• His last words to Peter were similar to His first words: “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me” (John 21:22).

Following Christ means we make Him Lord of our daily lives, seek out His promises and claim them, seek out His commands and obey them, and offer ourselves as living sacrifices for Him (Rom. 12:1–2).

2. We’re To Be Fashioned By Christ. “... and I will make you.” The parallel account (Mark 1:17) says: “I will make you to become....” As we follow Christ, He makes us to become. He begins to carve us into His type of people.

A school teacher who was bypassed for a promotion went to her administrator and complained, “I have twenty years of experience, and you promoted someone who had only been teaching five years.” The administrator replied, “No, you don’t have twenty years of experience. You have one year of experience twenty times. You’re still teaching the same things and in the same way you did your first year. You haven’t grown in your profession.”

Christ wants us to grow, to develop, to become effective representatives of Himself.

3. We’re to be Fisherman for Christ. “...I will make you fishers of men.”

Some years ago the New York Fire Department had a great parade. Included were buses loaded with people from all walks of life. The sign said: “All of these were saved by our Fire Department from burning buildings.”

In Paul’s letters, he said that those he had won to Christ were his crown and joy, his trophies of grace.

How can we be better witnesses for Christ?

• Ask God to give you a burden for a handful of people who need to be saved, and begin praying for them.
• Live a consistent Christian life, letting others see the hope within you.
• Be ready when asked to give a reason for that hope (1 Peter 3:15).
• Seize opportunities for inviting others to church. If you invite enough people, some will come. And if enough come, some will be saved.

Jesus Christ, Melchizedek, and Hebrews 7:1-10

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he abides a priest perpetually. Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils. And those indeed of the sons of Levi who receive the priest’s office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham. But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham, and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater. And in this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on. And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him." (Hebrews 7:1–10)

In biblical study, a “type” refers to an Old Testament person, practice, or ceremony that has a counterpart, an antitype, in the New Testament. In that sense types are predictive. The type pictures, or prefigures, the antitype. The type, though it is historical, real, and of God, is nonetheless imperfect and temporary. The antitype, on the other hand, is perfect and eternal. The study of types and antitypes is called, as one might expect, typology.

The bronze serpent that God commanded Moses to set on a standard (Num. 21:8), for example, was a type of Christ’s being lifted up on the cross (John 3:14). The sacrificial lamb was a type of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, who was sacrificed for the sins of the world (John 1:29; Rev. 5:6, 8; etc.).

Melchizedek is also a type of Christ. The Bible gives very little historical information about Melchizedek. All that we know is located in Genesis 14, Psalm 110, and Hebrews 5–7. The most detailed information is in Hebrews 7:1–3.

Types are frail illustrations at best. They are analogies, and, like all analogies, they correspond to the person or thing to which they are compared only in certain ways—perhaps only in one way. The bronze serpent typified Christ in that it was lifted up for all the people to see and in that looking upon it brought them deliverance. The sacrificial lamb typifies Christ in that it is very meek (innocent) and that it was sacrificed on behalf of the sins of another. Similarly, though Melchizedek is in no way the equal of Christ, his unique priesthood, and even his name, typify Jesus Christ and His work in a number of significant ways.

Hebrews chapter 7 is the focal point of Hebrews. It concerns the central, the most important, part of Judaism—the priesthood. No sacrifices could be made except by the priest and no forgiveness of sins could be had apart from the sacrifices. Obedience to the law was exceedingly important, but the offering of sacrifices was even more important. And the priesthood was essential for offering them. Consequently, the priesthood was exalted in Judaism.

The law God gave Israel was holy and good, but because the Israelites, as all men, were sinful by nature, they could not keep the law perfectly. When they broke the law, fellowship with God was also broken. The only way of restoring fellowship was to remove the sin that was committed, and the only way to do that was through a blood sacrifice. When a person repented and made a proper offering through the priest, his sacrifice was meant to show the genuineness of his penitence by obedience to God’s requirement. God accepted that faithful act and granted forgiveness.

Understanding Melchizedek Is for the Mature

The writer first introduced Melchizedek in Hebrews chapter 5, but before he could explain the significance of this ancient priest-king, he gave the warning to the immature Jews who could not bring themselves to accept Christ as their Savior (Heb. 5:11–6:20). At the end of the beautiful encouragement to believers about the security of their salvation which follows that warning, Jesus again is said to be “a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek” (Heb. 6:20). The subject thus returns to that very unique priest.

There is much conjecture about Melchizedek. Some insist he is an angel who took human form for a while during the time of Abraham. But the priesthood was a human, not angelic, function (Heb. 5:1). Others suggest that He is actually, not just typically, Jesus Christ Himself, who took a preincarnate form during Abraham’s time. But Melchizedek is described as made like the Son of God (7:3), not as being the Son of God. I believe that Melchizedek was a historical human being, whose priestly ministry typifies that of Christ, a man whom God designed to use as a picture of Jesus Christ. But we cannot be sure of the details of his identity. Those remain among the secret things that belong only to the Lord.

The accounts of Melchizedek in sacred history are one of the most remarkable proofs of the divine inspiration and unity of Scripture. The whole concept of Melchizedek is an amazing insight into the fact that God wrote the Bible. In Genesis we have only three verses about Melchizedek. Some thousand years later David makes a briefer mention of him in Psalm 110:4, declaring for the first time that the Messiah’s priesthood would be like Melchizedek’s. After another thousand years, the writer of Hebrews tells us even more of Melchizedek’s significance. He reveals things about Melchizedek that even Melchizedek, or his contemporary, Abraham, did not know—and of which David had only a glimpse. So we reason that the God who wrote the book of Hebrews wrote the book of Genesis and Psalm 110—and all the rest of Scripture.

Hebrews 7:1–10 first presents, then proves, the superiorities of Melchizedek’s priesthood over that of the Levitical-Aaronic. Let's look at the text:

"For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he abides a priest perpetually." (Hebrews 7:1–3)

Verses 1–2 are essentially a summary of the Genesis 14 account. They remind us that Melchizedek was the king of Salem (an ancient name for Jerusalem), that he was a priest of the Most High God, that he blessed Abraham after the patriarch had defeated the oppressive King Chedorlaomer and his three allies, and that Abraham, in turn, offered Melchizedek a tithe of the spoils. The writer also points out that the literal meaning of Melchizedek’s title is king of peace (‘Salem” is from the same Hebrew root as shālom, “peace”). Before we look into Melchizedek’s priesthood, we should review the Levitical, with which his is compared.

The Levitical Priesthood

First, as mentioned above, the entire tribe of Levi was dedicated by God for religious service. Although all priests were Levites, not all Levites were priests. All priests, in fact, not only had to be descended from Levi but also from Aaron, Moses’ brother. The nonpriestly Levites served as helpers to the priests, and probably as singers, instrumentalists, and the like. The priesthood was strictly national, strictly Jewish. Second, the Levites were subject to the king just as much as were the other tribes. Their priestly functions were not under the control of the king, but in all other matters they were ordinary subjects. They were in no way a ruling class. A Levite, in fact, could not be king. They were set aside as a first fruit to God for special priestly service (Num. 8:14–16). Third, the priestly sacrifices, including the one by the high priest on the Day of Atonement, were not permanent. They had to be repeated and repeated and repeated—continually. They had no permanence. They provided no permanent forgiveness, no permanent righteousness, no permanent peace. Fourth, the Levitical priesthood was hereditary. A man who served as a priest did so because he was born into the right family, not because he lived a right life. Fifth, just as the effects of the sacrifices were temporary, so was the time of priestly service. A priest served from the age of 25 until the age of 50, after which his ministry was over (Num. 8:24–25).

Melchizedek’s Superior Priesthood

Melchizedek’s priesthood was superior to the Levitical in every way, but five specific ones are given in Hebrews 7:1–3.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood Was Universal, Not National

In relation to Israel, God took the name of Jehovah, or Yahweh. But no Jew would utter this name of God. It was too holy to pronounce. And because ancient Hebrew had no vowels, even the oldest of manuscripts do not help us to know exactly how the name would have been pronounced (although probably it was Yahweh, rather than Jehovah). When the Scriptures were read aloud, the title Lord (Hebrew, ˒ădōnāy) was substituted for this name of God. In most English translations of the Bible, the name is given as Lord (capital and small capitals), and occasionally as Jehovah. This name was uniquely related to God’s covenant with Israel. It was His covenant name.

The Levitical priests, therefore, were priests of Jehovah. The Israelites were Jehovah’s people and the Levites were Jehovah’s priests. The Levitical priests could minister only to Israel and only for Jehovah.

Melchizedek, however, was priest of the Most High God (˓Ēl ˓Elyôn, a more universal name for God). It represents God as possessor of heaven and earth, God above all national or dispensational distinctions. The Most High God is over both Jew and Gentile, and is first mentioned in Scripture in relation to Melchizedek (Gen. 14:18).

The significance is this: Jesus is not just the Messiah of Israel, but of the world. His priesthood is universal, just as Melchizedek’s. This was an extremely important truth for Jews who had come to Christ, as well as those who were considering putting their trust in Christ. To them, there was no other priesthood established by the true God but the Levitical, which was restricted to Israel. Here they are reminded that their father Abraham, the first Jew, offered tithes to another type of priest. This priest served the one true God, but he lived hundreds of years before the Levitical priesthood came into existence. It is significant that, immediately after his encounter with Melchizedek, Abraham spoke to the king of Sodom about “the Lord God Most High” (Gen. 14:22), a combination of the covenant and universal names.

The indecisive Jews were told, in effect, “Even your own Scriptures recognize a priesthood not only that is completely apart from that of Aaron, but that existed long before Aaron’s.” This was a powerful argument.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood Was Royal

Melchizedek was himself a king. Four times in two verses (Heb. 7:1–2) he is referred to as a king. As already mentioned, rulership of any sort was totally foreign to the Levitical priesthood. Melchizedek’s universal priesthood and his royal office beautifully typify Jesus’ saviorhood and lordship, as perfect Priest and perfect King. Though never known in Israel, the dual role of priest-king was predicted by her prophets. Speaking of the Messiah, Zechariah writes, “Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the Lord, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices” (Zech. 6:13). In his psalm that mentions Melchizedek, David also looks forward to the Messiah who will be both Priest and King (Psalm 110:1, 4).

Because Salem was an ancient name for Jerusalem, Melchizedek ruled over God’s special city, His holy city that was always close to His heart. “For the Lord has chosen Zion [Jerusalem]; He has desired it for His habitation. This is My resting place forever; here I will dwell, for I have desired it” (Ps. 132:13–14). We are not told when God first considered Jerusalem to be His holy city, but He had a faithful king who was a faithful priest there even in the time of Abraham—many centuries before Israel’s priests ministered there or Israel’s kings ruled there.

No truth of Scripture is more definite than that God chose the Jews as His special people, His very unique and cherished people. But Scripture is equally clear that Israel continually misunderstood and presumed upon her unique relation to God. They, for example, recognized Him as absolute Creator of heaven and earth and as sovereign over His world. But they had a very difficult time understanding Him as Redeemer of the world. As Creator and Sustainer, He was the world’s; but as Savior and Lord, He was theirs alone. (Jonah’s reluctance to preach to Gentiles illustrates this.) They could hardly conceive of another divine covenant and another divine priesthood, especially one that was royal and superior to their own. Yet they are told that the covenant in Christ, though called new, not only has superseded theirs but, in type, actually preceded theirs.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood Was Righteous and Peaceful

There was no permanent righteousness or peace related to Aaron’s priesthood. Melchizedek, however, was king both of righteousness and of peace. His very name means “king of righteousness.” Although we have no historical record of his monarchy, we are told that he ruled righteously and peacefully.

The purpose of the Aaronic priesthood was to obtain righteousness for the people. The sacrifices were made to restore the people to a right relationship to God. But they never succeeded, in any deep and lasting way. God honored the sacrifice that was properly made. He had, after all, prescribed them. But they were never meant to remove sin. They were only a prefigurement, a type, of the one perfect sacrifice that could and did remove sin. They symbolized the sacrifice that makes men righteous—and thereby brings men peace—but they themselves could not make men righteous or give men peace. As a temporary ritual they accomplished their God-ordained purpose. But they could not bring men to God. They were never meant to.

Melchizedek, though king of righteousness and of peace, could not make men righteous or give them peace. His priesthood was a better type of Christ’s than was the Levitical, but it was still a type. Only the Divine Priest could give righteousness and peace. “Therefore having been justified [counted righteous] by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1). That is the necessary order: righteousness and then peace. Christ gives us peace by giving us righteousness. “The work of righteousness will be peace, and the service of righteousness, quietness and confidence forever” (Isa. 32:17).

What the blood of bulls and goats could not do, the blood of Jesus Christ did. The Levitical sacrifices lasted only until a person sinned again. Jesus’ sacrifice lasts through all eternity. Once reconciled to God through Christ, we will never be counted as sinful again, but always as righteous. Christ is the true King of Righteousness.

As the psalmist says so beautifully, in the Lord “righteousness and peace have kissed each other” (Ps. 85:10). The two things that men have longed for are a sense of righteousness before God and of being at peace with Him. These blessings have “kissed” each other and become a reality in the Messiah. Christ came to give us His righteousness that we might be at peace with God. Melchizedek pictured that.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood Was Personal, Not Hereditary

The Levitical priesthood was entirely hereditary, through Aaron. Melchizedek’s was personal. From the beginning of the Aaronic priesthood, genealogy determined everything, personal qualification nothing. If you descended from Aaron, you could serve; if you did not, you could not. Consequently, the priests often were more concerned about their pedigrees than their holiness.

That Melchizedek is said to have been without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life does not mean that he came from nowhere. It simply means that in the Old Testament record nothing is said of his parents or origin.

It is interesting that the single Greek word (agenealogētos) translated without genealogy is found nowhere else in Scripture—in fact nowhere else in Greek literature. The reason, no doubt, is that it would have had no use because it would have made no sense. Everyone has a genealogy, whether he can trace it or not.

The point in Hebrews is that Melchizedek’s parentage and origin are irrelevant to his priesthood. Whereas to the Aaronic priesthood genealogy was everything, to the Melchizedek priesthood it was nothing.

In this, Melchizedek was a type of Christ, not because Jesus had no genealogy but because Jesus’s genealogy was not significant in regard to His priesthood. To be sure, Jesus’ royal genealogy is important. It is given in some detail by both Matthew (1:1–17) and Luke (3:23–38). Matthew’s gospel, in fact, begins as “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ” (1:1). But His lineage is not traced to Aaron or Levi, but to Judah. Jesus Christ, though God’s own Son, was not qualified for the Levitical priesthood. Like Melchizedek, as far as his priesthood was concerned, He had no priestly genealogy and He needed none.

Jesus Christ was chosen as a priest because of His personal worth, His quality. He was chosen because of who He was, not because of where He came from genealogically. Jesus “has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life” (Heb. 7:16). Like Melchizedek’s, Jesus’ qualifications were personal, not hereditary.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood is Eternal, Not Temporary

Individually, a priest served only from the time he was 25 until he was 50. No priest, no matter how faithful, could serve more than 25 years. Collectively, the priesthood was also temporary. It began in the wilderness, when the covenant with Moses was made and the law was given. It ended when the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in a.d. 70. The Levitical priesthood was for the Old Covenant and only for the Old Covenant, the covenant of law.

Melchizedek’s priesthood, however, had no such time or dispensational bounds. He abides a priest perpetually. It is not that he lived forever, but that the order of priesthood in which he ministered was forever. If he had lived forever, he would not be a type but a part of the reality. The picture of a landscape is not the landscape, but only a suggestion, a representation, of it. The fact that we have no biblical or other record of the beginning or end of Melchizedek’s personal priesthood simply symbolizes the eternality of his priestly order. It is a type of Christ’s truly eternal priesthood. Christ, “because He abides forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:24–25).

Jesus is a priest like Melchizedek. His priesthood is universal, royal, righteous and peaceful, personal, and eternal.

Melchizedeck’s Superiorities Proved

Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils. And those indeed of the sons of Levi who receive the priest’s office have commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brethren, although these are descended from Abraham. But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them collected a tenth from Abraham, and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater. And in this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on. And, so to speak, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, paid tithes, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him. (Hebrews 7:4–10)

In these verses we are given three reasons, or proofs, as to how and why Melchizedek’s priesthood is superior to the Levitical.

Abraham Gave a Tithe to Melchizedek

Abraham, father of the Jewish people, gave tithes (a tenth) of his war spoils—his choicest spoils—to Melchizedek. Though Melchizedek was a king, he had not fought with Abraham against Chedorlaomer. Nor do we have any record, or reason to believe, that Melchizedek had ever performed any priestly service for Abraham. Abraham simply recognized Melchizedek as a deserving and faithful priest of God Most High and consequently gave him a tithe from the best of the spoils. It was a voluntary act revealing thanks to God.

The Holy Spirit demonstrates that Melchizedek is greater than Levi and Aaron, progenitors of the Levitical priesthood, by showing that this priest-king is better than Abraham, the progenitor of both Levi and Aaron.

Abraham was under no obligation, no law or commandment, to give Melchizedek anything. He gave freely and generously, and he gave the best that he had, not his leftovers. He gave the choicest spoils to the Lord, through His servant Melchizedek.

Under grace we are free of the demands of the law. The New Testament specifies no definite amount or proportion of our money that we are to give to God. But this does not mean that our giving is optional, or that it should depend on our whim or personal feeling. It means that the basis of our giving should be our love and devotion to God, in gratitude for His inestimable gift to us. Just as Melchizedek’s priesthood is a type of the priesthood of our Lord Jesus Christ, so Abraham’s giving to Melchizedek is a type of what our giving to the Lord should be. It is not a type in its being a tenth, but in its being from his choicest possessions and being given freely, not because of legal requirement.

The Levites, as the priestly tribe, received no inheritance of land, as did all the other tribes. They were to be supported by a tithe from their brother Israelites. All the tribes, of course, were descendants of Abraham through Jacob. Under the Old Covenant, therefore, one group of Abraham’s descendants tithed to another. The point of Hebrews 7:4–10 is that because Abraham, their common and supreme ancestor, had paid tithes to Melchizedek, even the Levites, “in advance,” so to speak, also paid tithes to Melchizedek. Even before they existed, those to whom tithes were paid had themselves paid a tithe to another priesthood, proving that this priesthood was superior to theirs.

Melchizedek Blessed Abraham

One of the first things we learn in Scripture about Abraham, and that Abraham learned about himself from God, is that through him and his descendants all the world was to be blessed. It was a staggering, awesome, and marvelous promise, especially because it was made before Abraham had any descendants and when it seemed impossible that he ever would.

Just as we have no idea how much Abraham knew about Melchizedek, we have no idea how much Melchizedek knew about Abraham. We are told only of the brief encounter described in three verses of Genesis 14. Yet, just as Abraham knew he should tithe to Melchizedek, Melchizedek knew he should bless Abraham. In so doing, without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater. As the blesser, Melchizedek indisputably was superior to Abraham. If Melchizedek was superior to Abraham, then he must also be superior to the Levites, Abraham’s descendants. Consequently, his priesthood is superior to theirs.

Directly or indirectly from Genesis 12 through Malachi, all of the Old Testament is the story of Abraham’s descendants, God’s chosen people. Yet this priest-king that both testaments together mention in only a handful of verses, was greater than Abraham, because he blessed Abraham. God operated in Melchizedek’s life on the basis of personal qualification, and he was higher than Abraham in those qualifications. Therefore, he was chosen to bless Abraham. And if he was greater than Abraham, he was greater than anything that came from Abraham.

In the church God also works on the basis of personal qualifications. The standards for teaching shepherds, for ruling elders, for evangelists, and for all other offices are based on personal spiritual qualifications, not on heredity or class (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1–13; Titus 1:5–9). God calls certain people in this economy of grace on the basis of special personal qualifications. If a person is faithful over a little, he will be made lord over much. If we meet the qualifications, God will lift us to the ministry. He worked with Melchizedek in the same way. He was personally qualified to be what he was. His lineage had nothing to do with God’s choosing him and sending him to bless Abraham. He was superior, and therefore he blessed Abraham.

Melchizedek’s Priesthood is Eternal

The writer again points up the permanence of Melchizedek’s priesthood.

And in this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on. (Hebrews 7:8)

Even if the Levitical priests had not been required to quit ministering when they reached 50 years of age, they would have ceased ministering when they died. That priesthood was temporary and those priests were temporary. The Jews paid tithes to priests who all died. Abraham paid tithes to a priest who, in type, lives on. Since no death is recorded of Melchizedek, his priesthood typically is eternal. In this his priesthood is clearly superior to that of Aaron.

Jesus Christ, of course, is the reality, the true Priest who is eternal, of whom Melchizedek is but a picture. Jesus Christ is a priest, the only Priest, who is alive forevermore. He is a greater priest because He is a living priest, not a dying one. Christ is Priest of a better priesthood than Aaron’s. He is Priest of a better priesthood even than Melchizedek’s. He is the only Priest of the only priesthood that can bring God to men and men to God. This was a great word of assurance to those Jews who had come to Jesus Christ.

WCF Ch. IX - On Free Will

I had a study this morning with a church member and we had a far-ranging discussion of human will and God's sovereignty - a nice chat. Of particular help to us was the WCF and the discussion of free will with scripture proofs:

CHAPTER IX—Of Free-Will

1. God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that it is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined to good, or evil. (Matt. 17:12, James 1:14, Deut. 30:19)

2. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; (Eccl. 7:29, Gen. 1:26) but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it. (Gen. 2:16–17, Gen. 3:6)

3. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: (Rom. 5:6, Rom. 8:7, John 15:5) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, (Rom. 3:10, 12) and dead in sin, (Eph. 2:1, 5, Col. 2:13) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto. (John 6:44, 65, Eph. 2:2–5, 1 Cor. 2:14, Tit. 3:3–5)

4. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He freeth him from his natural bondage under sin; (Col. 1:13, John 8:34, 36) and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; (Phil. 2:13, Rom. 6:18, 22) yet so, that by reason of his remaining corruption, he doth not perfectly, nor only, will that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil. (Gal. 5:17, Rom. 7:15, 18–19, 21, 23)

5. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only. (Eph. 4:13, Heb. 12:23, 1 John 3:2, Jude 24)

Here is a link to Dr. John Gerstner lecturing on this section of the WCF. (Relevant section begins at 13:30)

Jonah the Reluctant Preacher

For many of us, the only time we will have a meaningful encounter with Jonah, is in Sunday children’s bible class or vacation bible school. Which is why I am glad to speak about Jonah this morning in our Sunday sermon. You see, Jonah is often thought of as a children's story complete with a big fish (or a whale), but the real message of Jonah is an adult one with an opportunity to stretch our understanding of God and salvation.

And our story begins with a command: Go and proclaim! 

That’s the order that came down from God to the prophet Jonah.

Go and proclaim! 

And Jonah is a very interesting kind of missionary. A very interesting man to have received the command, go and proclaim. He’s reluctant, withdrawn, and he’s stubborn. Never quite ready to go to Nineveh. All over the Bible, people are getting up and going. Abraham and Sarah move out on a promise and a prayer. Even Moses, after some initial reluctance, heads for Egypt with nothing but a shepherd's crook and Aaron to write his sermons. Elijah stands defiant, facing four hundred and fifty Baal prophets. But not Jonah. Jonah stands on the dock with tickets for Tarshish. He doesn't want to go and proclaim.

All over the New Testament people are getting up and following Jesus. Fishermen are dropping their nets, tax collectors are forgetting about credit and debit, and others are leaving their parents behind. A little man called Paul travels the Mediterranean spreading the Word. But not Jonah. Jonah stands on the dock with tickets for Tarshish. He doesn’t want to go and proclaim to Nineveh.

“Why so reluctant, Jonah?” Why not just go and proclaim? Well, that’s a good question. What is the problem with Nineveh? Is it just that it is another foreign land? Certainly going to a foreign land is never easy. Maybe that’s it - Jonah just doesn’t want to do foreign missions. He doesn’t want to go to a foreign land and do the Lord’s work.

Perhaps that is the problem? Isn’t it? Well, NO, not exactly.

Jonah's problem is with Nineveh itself — a city on the east bank of the Tigris River in Assyria. The Assyrians, you see, were not too popular in Israel because in the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., they thoroughly plundered Palestine, looting and burning its cities and deporting its inhabitants. 

In fact, in 722-721 B.C., the Northern Kingdom of Israel passed out of existence as a result of Assyrian conquest. So for Jonah, Nineveh was anathema, it was an object of intense hostility. For perspective, imagine an African-American being asked to go preach to the Ku Klux Klan. "Go to Nineveh," says God.

To an Israelite like Jonah, this would be equivalent to announcing today, "Go to Osama Bin Laden's compound” and preach a message of repentance. Nineveh was the capital of Assyria, the nation that destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel and held the southern kingdom of Judah as a vassal for almost one hundred years. Assyria was more than an enemy; it was a brutal occupying force that forever changed Israel's fortunes. Jonah is being called out by God to go and prophesy to the enemy. Nineveh was to Jonah what Babylon and Rome would be to later generations.

It was a city that any Israelite would love to hate. So Jonah says, "Anywhere, Lord; anywhere but Nineveh." And Jonah stands on the dock with tickets for Tarshish. He doesn’t want to go to Nineveh.

Nonetheless, here comes God with his command: Go and proclaim! Now, by the time we get to our scripture text this morning, note that it’s round 2 between Yahweh and Jonah. Jonah has already tried to flee to Tarshish. And the call to preach gets re-issued, after all the events like the fleeing to Tarshish and the big fish and the 3 nights and the being spit up on a beach. And if in Round 1 Jonah walked the opposite direction from Nineveh, this time he heads straight for it. He knows he cannot resist God.

God has by now made it crystal clear: Jonah will find no escape from this preaching gig! Maybe some version of the words of Psalm 139 were even rattling around inside Jonah’s head: “If I go to the highest mountain, you are there. If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there. If I go to Joppa, you are there. If I set out to sea, you are there. Where can I go to escape my God!?” (Except in Jonah’s case the psalm was no doubt being recited through gritted teeth.) SO our text represents Round Two between God and Jonah and the Ninevites. This then is the Word of the Lord:

Then the word of the Lord came to Jonah the second time, saying, “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it the message that I tell you.” So Jonah arose and went to Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, three days' journey in breadth. Jonah began to go into the city, going a day's journey. And he called out, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” And the people of Nineveh believed God. They called for a fast and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them to the least of them.

The word reached the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, removed his robe, covered himself with sackcloth, and sat in ashes. And he issued a proclamation and published through Nineveh, “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything. Let them not feed or drink water, but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and let them call out mightily to God. Let everyone turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. Who knows? God may turn and relent and turn from his fierce anger, so that we may not perish.”

When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it. (Jonah 3:1-10)

So Jonah went and proclaimed, for what other choice did he have? He went, he preached the standard Prophets 101 sermon of doom and gloom and repentance and though the locals perhaps did not notice it, there was a tinge in Jonah’s voice that bespoke of the ancient equivalent of “Yada, yada, yada.” His heart just was not in his work. But if ever a preacher needed a reminder that it’s not finally about you, Jonah got it. 

Half-hearted and boilerplate though his message to Nineveh was, it took hold, it took off, it went viral throughout the city and clear up to the king himself. 

And this is important to note: whatever Jonah said or did could not possibly account for the level of sincere repentance the Ninevites mustered. This was clearly, as some now put it in our day, “a God thing” and a “Holy Spirit thing” and it worked. And God relented. 

Foreign though these non-Israelites were and though they lived well outside the boundaries of the covenant as Israel understood it at that time, their loving respect for Yahweh was more than enough for God to take their destruction off of his “To Do” list. And it angered Jonah something awful. 

In chapter 4 he’ll even move east of the city and set up a little lean-to shelter for himself, hoping against hope that just maybe there’d be some fireworks after all. There were none, of course, and Jonah’s anger soon curdled into boiling rage and a dyspepsia for which there were few if any earthly cures. 

And retrospectively, of course, this fills in the gaps in the narrative up to that point. Now we know why Jonah fled in the first place: he wasn’t afraid of failure. He was afraid of success. In his perception, salvation was a little Members Only Club of which he was a member but which no greasy foreigner could ever join. In our scripture today, he had gone and become an agent of expanding the Club’s membership and it made him both angry and uneasy. How would he explain this to his loyal compatriots back home? Talk about providing comfort and aid to the enemy. This felt like treason!

So, what does the story of Jonah have to do with us? 

Well, here, right in the middle of the Book of Jonah, is the spectacle of an unfaithful insider, one of God’s reluctant people, being used sincerely by God. And here in the middle of the book of Jonah is one of the Bible’s finest examples of how God can (and often does) hit a straight shot using a crooked stick. It’s a vignette of how God’s Spirit can (and often does) get life-giving messages across to people even if and when we are imperfect, half-hearted, and distracted for whatever reason. 

Let me ask you this morning: who in your life would you like to withhold the Kingdom of God from? What person or kinds of persons would you feel better if they always stayed outside of God’s plan of salvation? Maybe another way of asking this is: in what relationship in your life do you wrestle with hate? Perhaps it’s a co-worker? Or a former friend? A faithless spouse? A child who has turned away from you? Perhaps more introspectively, it’s an ethnic group? Or a nation? Who, if God asked you to minister to them, would you run away from to Tarshish?

If there is something in Jonah’s counter-example to make those of us who preach feel a bit queasy (insofar as we may see ourselves in this picture now and then), there is also something here to give us hope. It’s not about us. God can and will use us even in our flawed weakness.

If Jonah’s story tell us anything, it’s that God’s economy of love is much larger than our economy of love. 

And at the heart of Jonah is something else worth pondering, too: namely, how sincerely do we in the church today really want to bring all kinds of people into the church? Yes, we always say we want to reach all people and sometimes in the unfortunate language of the “culture wars” we act as though we’d love nothing more than to have all those who oppose the church for whatever the reason to come and join us. 

But what if they really did? 

What if the young people with the torn jeans and the multiple body piercings did want to join us at the communion table? What about all those ethnic groups with habits are so very different from the warp and woof of our congregation? We say we want to grow our congregation these days, but what if our growth meant the need to change and accommodate people who were different than us?

What about those struggling with sexual identity, or gender identity, or those with wildly different political views than what may characterize the majority of a given congregation? 

If we preach repentance to these people and then if one day it actually takes hold and they show up in the worship sanctuary here . . . well, then what? 

You see, maybe we are not actively awaiting and licking our lips over the potential destruction of this or that group, but if certain types of people did come to us (as they are), would we generate the kind of joy over this, the joy one might wish for? 

The uncomfortable question with which Jonah confronts us yet today is whether the story these verses do tell is also our story. And if so, what can we do about that unhappy fact? 

You know, it’s interesting, Jonah does not crop up much in the rest of the Bible. But the most important part of the Bible where Jonah is very much present is a passage where he is not named. It comes in Acts 10 when Peter receives the famous roof-top vision through which he was taught not only that just maybe the Kosher food laws were being overturned in the New Covenant but so was the “Jews-only” nature of salvation. And Peter had to go to all people and not wait for them to become Jews before he tried to turn them into Christians. Not long after that, of course, some Italians from the household of Cornelius showed up at Peter’s door to take him straight into the heart of Gentileville. And Peter ended up preaching, they ended up repenting and receiving the Spirit (somewhat to Peter’s astonishment), and Peter ended up staying with them and enjoying pizza with ham, pepperoni, and a few other unclean toppings. That much we all know. 

But don’t fail to notice where Peter was when he received his vision of God’s new picnic: he was staying in Joppa. In Joppa and so the very city to which Jonah had once fled God’s call and from which he set sail to get away from God to go to Tarshish. 

Joppa is the turning point for God’s people. Jonah failed. Peter succeeded. Which direction will we go when we get to Joppa, whatever our “Joppa” may be?

"Is our faith narrow like that of Jonah or can we see others through God's eyes?”

The Feast of Weeks (Pentecost/Shavuot), the Christian Church, and the Holy Spirit

Leviticus 23:9–22

9 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 10 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘When you come into the land which I give to you, and reap its harvest, then you shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest to the priest. 11 He shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted on your behalf; on the day after the Sabbath the priest shall wave it. 12 And you shall offer on that day, when you wave the sheaf, a male lamb of the first year, without blemish, as a burnt offering to the Lord. 13 Its grain offering shall be two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil, an offering made by fire to the Lord, for a sweet aroma; and its drink offering shall be of wine, one-fourth of a hin. 14 You shall eat neither bread nor parched grain nor fresh grain until the same day that you have brought an offering to your God; it shall be a statute forever throughout your generations in all your dwellings. 

15 “You shall count seven full weeks from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering. 16 You shall count fifty days to the day after the seventh Sabbath. Then you shall present a grain offering of new grain to the Lord. 17 You shall bring from your dwelling places two loaves of bread to be waved, made of two tenths of an ephah. They shall be of fine flour, and they shall be baked with leaven, as firstfruits to the Lord. 18 And you shall present with the bread seven lambs a year old without blemish, and one bull from the herd and two rams. They shall be a burnt offering to the Lord, with their grain offering and their drink offerings, a food offering with a pleasing aroma to the Lord. 19 And you shall offer one male goat for a sin offering, and two male lambs a year old as a sacrifice of peace offerings. 20 And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits as a wave offering before the Lord, with the two lambs. They shall be holy to the Lord for the priest. 21 And you shall make a proclamation on the same day. You shall hold a holy convocation. You shall not do any ordinary work. It is a statute forever in all your dwelling places throughout your generations. 22 “And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the Lord your God.”

A study of Leviticus 23:9-22 will yield us much fruit (pun intended)! This lesson demonstrates how God provided an occasion for his people to meet together as a family of Israelites for the giving of thanks, fellowship, forgiveness, and spiritual dedication. This study is about the Feast of Weeks, which is an unusual term for a one-day celebration. Some of its features made it the preferred event for those who lived at great distances from Jerusalem.

Background to Leviticus 23:9-22

The first Passover in Egypt demonstrated to the Israelites that God was on their side. Next, Moses led the Israelites in an unusual direction—into the wilderness of the Red Sea area. The Lord used a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night to guide, protect, and assure the people that they were going where he wanted them to be (Exod. 13:21, 22).

The Israelites experienced at the Red Sea yet another mighty deliverance after Pharaoh changed his mind about the departure of his labor force and went after the Israelites. Pharaoh’s army was destroyed by God in the Red Sea and they were in hot pursuit. As the journey continued, God met the needs of his people. 

Now, there was a question: the Israelites knew that the Lord was God, but what did he expect from them? God was ready to tell them, and that was the purpose of their stay at Mount Sinai, which lasted almost a year. When God gave the people manna on the way to Sinai, they learned that God expected them to rest on the seventh day, and that expectation was reinforced as part of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20).

This was followed by his giving laws (chaps. 21–23) that collectively are called “the Book of the Covenant” (24:7). It contained upwards of 70 rules that the people needed immediately for the governing of social relationships. It could be called their bill of rights, but perhaps bill of responsibilities for producing a just society is better.

These laws introduced for the first time the fact that the Israelites were to have three feasts during the year (Exodus 23:14–17). In past weeks we talked about the first one, the Passover Feast. Passover was a one-day observance that was to be followed by seven days during which the only bread that could be eaten was to be unleavened. These seven days constituted the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the two feasts were functionally considered the same event since they were right next to each other on the calendar.

This lesson is about the second of the three annual feasts: the Feast of Weeks or Shavuot. This feast is different from the others (Passover and Feast of Tabernacles or Sukkot) in that it is not associated with a historical event. There is a tradition that the Feast of Weeks commemorates the giving of the Ten Commandments to Moses at Sinai, but the first mention of that idea is postbiblical.

The Feast of Weeks received its name because it was to be celebrated seven weeks after Passover. Therefore the Feast of Weeks was to take place in late May or early June. It is not given a name in today’s text, but it has other names attached to it elsewhere: Feast of Weeks (Exodus 34:22a; Numbers 28:26b), Feast of Harvest (Exodus 23:16a), and sometimes the day of the firstfruits (Numbers 28:26a). In the New Testament it is called Pentecost (Acts 2:1; 20:16; 1 Corinthians 16:8), a Greek word that means “fiftieth.”

First off, note that there are two ritual events in the liturgical calendar which we just read about in the text. Each of them in a sense announce the beginning of the harvest season… The first was the ceremony of firstfruits (vv. 9–14), and the second was the Feast of Weeks (or Pentecost) (vv. 15–22).

The provision of firstfruits (Lev. 23:9–22). After the redemption of Israel from Egyptian servitude, the Lord led his people into the desert where he demonstrated his provision and care for them, even when they were rebellious. The most important provision was the land that he led them to possess—the land of Canaan, where he had chosen their fathers and promised to give them this land. Upon arriving in the land, the people were to recognize God’s grace by taking the first produce of the land’s harvests and offering a portion to the Lord as a symbolic gesture of worship to the God of their provision. The day of firstfruits was embedded in the week’s celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which stretched from the fifteenth to the twenty-second of the first month. It was offered up on the second day of that feast, that is, the sixteenth day of the first month. This would fall in the months of March/April. The ritual of firstfruits entailed presenting the first sheaf of the barley harvest to the priest at the sanctuary, who on behalf of the worshipper lifted it up before the Lord, indicating that the worshipper offered thanksgiving to God as the source of his livelihood. It was the first evidence of the coming months of spring harvest. The memorial included animal sacrifice and grain offerings. The people were not to indulge in the grain of the land until God had received his due first (v. 14). This was God’s harvest; he was the owner of the land, and its produce was his to do with as he pleased. He graciously shared the land and its harvests with the people to farm as tenants. By their offering of firstfruits the people acknowledged that theirs was a bounty that had come from the Lord. The benefit of the land remained theirs as long as they lived as good tenants, keeping the agreements made with the divine Landowner (Leviticus 26:3–13).

The second harvest celebration, known as the Feast of Weeks, followed seven weeks after the Feast of Unleavened Bread. This was the second pilgrim feast in the liturgical calendar. The date for the Feast of Weeks was determined by counting fifty days from the day after the Sabbath of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Although this celebration was in the third month of the year, our May/June months, we can tie it to the first month by virtue of its association with the Feast of Unleavened Bread (v. 15). It was the celebration of the harvest of grain. The celebration was an elaborate one, involving a full week of special activities. The people were forbidden to work at their ordinary duties, setting the week aside for special recognition of the Lord. This festival focused on the grain crops. Special loaves of bread were baked and waved before the Lord at the sanctuary. Unlike the Feast of Unleavened Bread, these loaves were made with leaven, indicating the season of joyful gladness at God’s provision. Additional animal offerings accompanied the bread, making a full meal, so to speak, in which the Lord partook.

That the ritual was not a superficial show for the bystanders to enjoy is shown by the instructions regarding the responsibility of the people in sharing their produce. The Lord compassionately shared the land with his people, and in turn they were to provide for the poor (v. 22). That the Lord instructed the Hebrews to share with others reflects again that ultimately the harvest belonged to God. The Hebrew landowners were prohibited from reaping every row of grain, taking it all for themselves and their workers. There were members of the community who could not benefit materially from God’s blessing since they had no land to work or were unable to work as day laborers. By leaving gleanings in the fields, the poor could make bread from the grain, which was the main staple for their daily diet. The succession of the gift was important theologically as well as practically. God gave the land to his people, and by enriching them the people could assist others. At the people’s faithful obedience to the Lord, he supplied more than enough for their needs, which meant that the landowner shared his wealth with others too. The Apostle Paul recognized this principle and instructed the church, “You will be enriched in every way to be generous in every way, which through us will produce thanksgiving to God” (2 Corinthians 9:11). God gives to us liberally so we can be generous to others.

Many peoples yesterday and today formally commemorate seasons of harvest. But there was an important difference in the practice of Israel compared to their neighbors. Whereas the nations focused on the earth as the source of their wealth, the Israelites remembered that the harvest season was tied to a great historical act of divine promise. It was not merely a celebration of the cycle of nature but a remembrance of the Lord’s gift of the land. By miraculous deeds, the Lord fought the battles of Israel and brought them safely into the land of plenty. There is a similarity in our celebration at Thanksgiving, or at least should be. Thanksgiving is not an annual celebration that is focused on the bounty of American life but has its roots in a gracious historical act on behalf of God toward the first pilgrims to this land. It was a historical event that we remember each Thanksgiving Day—the harvest of 1621 was a bountiful one that sustained the fledgling colonists who had arrived the year earlier on the Mayflower. The native Indians who were instrumental in the Plymouth colonists’ survival joined in the celebration.

So, let me ask you a couple of questions about these texts and then I want to look at a connection with the New Testament…

What Do You Think?

What do you think of this idea of blessings the blessers (v. 20)? It’s interesting that the Lord’s directions for the Feast of Weeks include some offerings that were to be burnt to please him, while others were for his servants, the priests. That was commanded by God. We should not need a command today to bless in return those who have been a blessing to us as they serve the church, for example the elders, teachers, ministry leaders, volunteers, etc.

How can Christians offer “firstfruits” to the Lord? In finances, in time, in talents?

What do you think of this idea of not being stingy or greedy which is embodied in the text (v. 22)?At first glance, this verse may seem out of place. Its stipulations were given earlier (Leviticus 19:9, 10), so why is it repeated in conjunction with the Feast of Weeks? The answer may be that since this is a harvest celebration, it is appropriate to mention one of the laws of the harvest: God is concerned for the welfare of those in need. The harvesters are to reap so that there will be something left for them. It is noteworthy that the verse does not say that harvested grain is simply to be provided for the poor and for the sojourner. Rather, those in need are to go to the fields and do the work of harvesting themselves. An outstanding example of this practice is found in the book of Ruth, specifically chapter 2.

Cross-Canonical Connection (Acts 2:1-4)

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. (Acts 2:1-4)

Acts 2:1 tells us that “the day of Pentecost” had arrived. This was fifty days after Passover, and that is what Pentecost means—“the fiftieth.” Passover occurred in mid-April, so Pentecost was at the beginning of June. It was the best-attended of the great feasts because traveling conditions were at their best. There was never a more cosmopolitan gathering in Jerusalem than this one. It was the perfect time for the descent of the Holy Spirit of God.

And here is the beautiful connection between the OT and the NT in our study tonight. There’s a divinely arranged appropriateness in that the feast of Pentecost provides the background for the giving of the Holy Spirit. As the day of the firstfruits, Pentecost was eminently appropriate for the bestowal of the Holy Spirit and the conversion of 3,000 souls—because you see THEY were the firstfruits of an even greater harvest that God was ordaining in the world.

It was also fitting that the church began on Pentecost/Feast of Weeks because by the time of Christ, Pentecost was considered the anniversary of the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai, and thus it provided a perfect opportunity to contrast the giving of the Law with the giving of the Spirit. 

You see, the Spirit’s coming is in continuity of God’s purpose in giving the law and yet… the Spirit’s coming signals the essential difference between the Jewish faith and commitment to Jesus… the former is Torah-centered and Torah-directed, the latter is Christ-centered and Spirit-directed.” Pentecost occurred by GOd’s sovereignly designed arrangement.

So, what happened on that special day?

When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. (vv. 1–4)

As the apostles’ heads were bowed in prayer, a breeze began to move across them, and then it was more than a breeze. Literally, “an echoing sound as of a mighty wind borne violently”  roared through the house like the whirr of a tornado, so that their robes flapped wildly. The Spirit of God was coming upon them! A fiery presence was in their midst, and (as the Greek indicates) it suddenly divided into separate flame-like tongues that individually danced over the heads of those present. Fire had always meant the presence of God. Through John the Baptist, God had promised a baptism with fire (Matthew 3:11), and now it was here. They were “filled with the Holy Spirit” and in an electrifying instant began to speak in other languages—literally, “as the Spirit continued giving them to speak out in a clear, loud voice.”  They spoke as clearly and powerfully as the Old Testament prophets.

This event may seem esoteric and mysterious, with its “wind,” “fire,” and supernatural utterance. It has a primal ring like the Greeks’ earth, fire, wind, and water. But in the Jewish context the phenomenon was perfectly understandable. The Hebrew word for “wind,” ruach, and the Greek word pneuma are both used for the Holy Spirit. 

Ezekiel used ruach to describe the Spirit of God moving over a valley of dry bones (representing a spiritually dead Jewish nation), so that suddenly there was thunder and the clattering of bones as they came together “bone to bone.” Then came the wonderfully macabre spectacle of growing sinews and flesh, and finally skin, and then Ezekiel’s words at God’s command:

"Also He said to me, “Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.”’ 10 So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived, and stood upon their feet, an exceedingly great army." (Ezekiel 37:9–10)

In the end, it was during the Feast of Weeks, at Pentecost, that the reviving winds of the Spirit came upon the apostles with incredible spiritual life and power. In a future day this will achieve final fulfillment in the Messianic Age. The apostles now had God’s life-giving Spirit in a more intimate and powerful way than they had ever known—than anyone had ever known.

So, what does the study of the traditions of Leviticus 23 leave us with in summary? 

Well, we learn that the Lord is in the process of providing for his people by giving them a land that flows with milk and honey, a land where they can flourish (Deuteronomy 31:20, “When I have brought them into the land flowing with milk and honey, the land I promised on oath to their ancestors, and when they eat their fill and thrive, they will turn to other gods and worship them, rejecting me and breaking my covenant.”). 

But not only that, the Lord also is providing ways for his people to remember the source of their blessings: they are to have feasts that enable them to join with others in celebrations in the giving of thanks. Passover, Unleavened Bread, Weeks, and Booths—they are reminders of the blessings of harvest and/or famous events in the nation’s history. God is good, all the time!

Finally, as mentioned, the Day of Pentecost—the later designation for the Feast of Weeks—is the birthday of the church (Acts 2). The Bible does not say why God chose this occasion for the church to begin. But the way that it was celebrated made it the perfect tool to fulfill God’s plan to spread the gospel from Jerusalem into Judea, Samaria, and “to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Pentecost drew many Jews from distant parts of the Roman Empire (compare Acts 2:5–11). The rainy season was over, and the weather was warm and delightful for travel. Some who made a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Jerusalem for Passover perhaps remained “on vacation” through Pentecost.

In any case, it is fascinating that the death and resurrection of Jesus occurred during the time of Passover and Unleavened Bread and that seven weeks later the church began on Pentecost. The people who were in Jerusalem at these times had the privilege of being among the first to be introduced to the gospel, which they could take with them on their return home. About 3,000 people were convinced, and they responded to Peter’s instructions to repent and to be baptized for the remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38, 41). As they returned to all parts of the Roman Empire and elsewhere, they became the vanguard for the spreading message of redemption.