Friday, June 01, 2007

The Promise


I’ve been around the church a long time. I’ve been a Christian for over 30 years. So it’s amazing to me how many basic things I’ve come to grasp only in recent years.

Like the promise to Abraham. I knew Abraham was important. I mean, three major religions count him as one of theirs. But I tended to lump Abraham in with Isaac, Jacob, Joseph & Co. And I certainly didn’t put him on the same plain with Moses.

What I just didn’t see was that the promises made to Abraham are the basis for just about all of the promises that follow. In fact, our salvation stems from the fact that we’ve been made spiritual heirs of Abraham. Read Romans 4. Galatians 3. For Paul, the promise to Abraham wasn’t part of the “Patriarchal Era.” It’s our promise, too. We have been made heirs of Abraham, heirs to the promise.

When Paul talks about us sharing in “the promise” (Romans 4:16; Galatians 3:29, Ephesians 3:6, etc.), he means that we now receive the benefits of the promise that God made to Abraham. God chose Abraham and his descendants to be His people. The only way we could become the people of God was to somehow share in that promise. It never went away, it was just amplified. Jesus gave us access to the promise, the promise made to Abraham.

I know, I know, you’re all saying “Duh! I’ve always known that.” It just takes longer for some of us to figure things out.

Puts singing “Father Abraham” in a whole new light.

5 comments:

Don said...

It is good when some things start to come together isn't it?

Don said...

tim-
If you don't mind a suggestion. This Adam - Patriarical - Mosaic - Christian era stuff isn't all that bad.

Now with this Promise understanding go to Romans 5 and see what the different "eras" mean.

Just a suggestion :)

Tim Archer said...

Don,

Missing you here in Piedras Negras this week.

Thanks for the suggestion. As much as anything, I have problems with the terminology. The old "if it ain't in the Bible, it ain't biblical" problem.

I have a serious problem those who misuse the idea of different biblical eras and thereby reject everything in the Bible before Acts 2.

Grace and peace,
Tim

AncientWanderer said...

tim-
Oh Yeah, not those bozos.

I have never been able to get across to one of those people the concept that Luke could not have sat down and written an Old & New Testament book at the same time.

AncientWanderer said...

We wanted to go but things went south. We have three cars in the family.
'91 [have to check oil when you gas it up]
'93 [no A/C & iffy transmission]
'03
Guess which one's engine just cracked,has a $7,500 estimate to repair, and still owe money on?

Aaarrrgghh!!