News

Reflection Essay BI301 A Biblical Theology of the Kingdom of God Glenn Martinez In tracing the unfolding of the Kingdom of God throughout Scripture, Prof Perrin makes a substantive case for the connection of the OT covenants and the NT Kingdom. These connections are described in forward looking fashion as the meaning of the OT writings are viewed in light of NT revelation and in backward looking fashion as the NT writings point back and establish parallels with OT writings. Prof Perrin establishes this second method through the interpretation of various NT texts in the Gospels, in the writings of Paul and in Peter, Hebrews, and Revelation. One passage in the NT that uniquely connects Jesus’ ministry of the Kingdom of God with God’s faithfulness in delivering Israel from the house of bondage in Egypt is to be found in the narratives that describe Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness. Prof Perrin’s interpretation is focused primarily on Matthew’s narrative. In this brief reflection, I will summarize Perrin’s interpretation of the Matthean narrative and compare it with the Marcan account underlying key differences in perspective and showing how both narratives contribute uniquely to the biblical theology of the Kingdom of God. The temptation narrative in Matthew is connected to the deliverance of Israel from Egypt on multiple levels. First, the temptation occurs immediately after Jesus’ baptism. This sequence parallels the sequence of the Israelites as they brought through the parted Red Sea and immediately entered the wilderness for 40 years. In the same way, Jesus came out of the waters of baptism and spent 40 days in the wilderness. The Matthean narrative contains a significant amount of detail including an extended dialogue between Jesus and Satan. In this dialogue, Jesus further extends the parallel between Israel’s temptation and his own. Jesus responds to Satan three times, and each time he uses Scriptures from Deuteronomy 6 and 8 in response to Satan’s tempting words. Perrin demonstrates how these three Scriptures further extend the parallelism. Jesus is tempted through hunger yet he responds by quoting Deuteronomy 6, “man shall not live by bread alone.” Jesus is tempted through power yet he responds “you shall not put the Lord your God to the test.” Jesus is tempted through idolatry yet he responds by quoting “you shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.” These three temptations were all temptations to which the Israelites succumbed. Where the Israelites failed, however, Jesus succeeded. The Marcan narrative is quite different from the Matthean. We find it in Mark 1:12-13: “The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. And he was with the wild animals, and the angels were ministering to him.”[1] In a sense, the full parallels that are drawn out between the Matthean narrative and Israel’s deliverance seem to disappear, or at least become severely truncated, in the Marcan narrative. The parallelism between Israel’s 40 years in the wilderness and Christ’s 40 days in the wilderness is preserved. The connection between Jesus’ baptism and his temptation is also preserved in the Marcan account – indeed, this may be strengthened especially by the use of Mark’s favorite adjective “immediately.” The connections through Scripture quotations, however, is missing. I think that the Marcan narrative complements the Matthean one in several ways though. Even though the full picture of the backward looking link in the Matthean account is absent, there is a unique forward looking aspect in the Marcan account that is not present in the former. I am particularly struck by two elements of the Marcan narrative. First, the Marcan account stresses that Jesus was “with the wild animals” during his time in the desert. This detail clearly links Jesus’ temptation to Isaiah’s vision of the lion and the lamb in Isaiah 11:6 and 65:25 and also prefigures the victorious lamb in Revelation 17:7. Second, the Marcan account stresses the service of angels in the wilderness. This detail is present in the Matthean narrative, but as Perrin rightly observes, it seems to be much more closely connected to the food service and thus parallels God’s provision of manna for the Israelites in the desert. In the Marcan narrative, on the other hand, the service of angels seems to permeate the entire narrative. Mark’s purpose in making the service of angels refer to more than food service points forward to the author of Hebrews’ teaching that Christ is superior to the angels (Hebrews 1:4-14). This comparison of the Matthean and Marcan accounts of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness thus demonstrates how each of the Gospel writers used the account in order to point backwards to Christ’s victory where Israel failed and also to point forward to the fullness of Christ’s victory on behalf of his people. [1] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Mk 1:12–13.

Hello: Just saw in Faithlife today video Dr. Perrin talking about Jesus related to the temple. I have not started the BI301 yet, but maybe the following can be of help: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/569543b4bfe87360795306d6/t/577e8347e3df288b49756f05/1467908938996/02_pitre_912.pdf My understanding is that we are living stones part of the body of Christ (New Temple), where the Holy Spirit will dwell as new location. Now just because we are part of the New Temple, that to me does not mean we will eventually have self-existence like God. Any theological construct (deification, theosis, etc. ) that affirms that eventually we will have self-existence, seems wrong to me. The only self-existent Being in the Universe is God, we are dependent (as created beings) on Him for existence even if granted eternal life through Christ. Peace and grace.