“The biblical offices of prophet, priest, and king are time-tested categories

to make sense of Christ’s person and work. I am therefore grateful for this
new volume by Richard Belcher that walks the reader through each of these
three anointed offices in the Old Testament, and provides some ways that
they illumine the work of Christ as the One who was anointed with the
Holy Spirit beyond measure. This is a fine introduction not only to prophet,
priest, and king in the Old Testament, but also to the person and work of
Christ in the New.”
—Brandon D. Crowe, Associate Professor of New Testament,
Westminster Theological Seminary

“Although Reformed theologians have long recognized the importance of

the three offices of Christ, there have been few sustained works on this
essential topic in the last few generations. Thankfully, Dick Belcher has
stepped forward to fill this gap in biblical scholarship. With wisdom, clarity,
and grace, Belcher guides the reader to a richer and fuller vision of Christ as
Prophet, Priest, and King.”
—Michael J. Kruger, President and Samuel C. Patterson Professor of
New Testament, Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte, North
Carolina

“It is common today for Christians to speak of Christ as the fulfillment of

all that the Scriptures teach. Richard Belcher has shown how this is true by
focusing on the developments of prophetic, priestly, and royal themes in the
Bible. As delightful as this is, he has gone further. Rather than simply
speaking of Christ as the fulfillment of these themes, he has also drawn out
the practical implications of prophetic, priestly, and royal service for all
who follow Christ. Belcher’s work points us all toward the importance of
keeping the centrality of Christ in view as we address the manifold
challenges that Christians face as we long for his return in glory.”
—Richard L. Pratt Jr., President, Third Millennium Ministries

“The Reformation viewed the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king
(munus triplex) as fundamentally important to the understanding of Christ’s
work in redemption, and Dr. Belcher’s impressive treatment of these offices
in their biblical-theological setting is essential reading in understanding
their comprehensive nature. This book deftly combines biblical and pastoral
insight that is most welcome in furthering our understanding of Scripture
and the person and work of Christ. Enthusiastically recommended.”
—Derek W. H. Thomas, Senior Minister, First Presbyterian Church,
Columbia, South Carolina; Robert Strong Professor of Systematic
and Pastoral Theology, Reformed Theological Seminary, Atlanta,
Georgia
 PROPHET, PRIEST, AND KING

THE ROLES OF CHRIST IN THE BIBLE AND

OUR ROLES TODAY

RICHARD P. BELCHER JR.

© 2016 by Richard P. Belcher Jr.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise
—except for brief quotations for the purpose of review or comment, without the prior permission of
the publisher, P&R Publishing Company, P.O. Box 817, Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865–0817.

Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible,
English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News
Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. All quotations are from the 2011 text edition of
the ESV.

Printed in the United States of America

ISBN: 978-1-59638-502-3 (pbk)

ISBN: 978-1-62995-192-8 (ePub)
ISBN: 978-1-62995-193-5 (Mobi)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Belcher, Richard P., Jr., author.

Title: Prophet, priest, and king : the roles of Christ in the Bible and our roles today / Richard P.
Belcher Jr.
Description: Phillipsburg : P&R Publishing, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016017047| ISBN 9781596385023 (pbk.) | ISBN 9781629951928 (epub) | ISBN
9781629951935 (mobi)
Subjects: LCSH: Jesus Christ--Person and offices. | Typology (Theology)
Classification: LCC BT203 .B4467 2016 | DDC 232--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016017047
To Michael Dixon and Chris Sewell
Sons-in-law
Brothers in Christ
Fellow Participants in Ministry
 CONTENTS

Analytical Outline
Foreword by O. Palmer Robertson
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations

1. The Importance of Prophet, Priest, and King

2. The Role of the Prophet in the Old Testament
3. Christ as Prophet: Mighty in Word and Deed
4. The Role of the Priest in the Old Testament
5. Christ as Priest: Consecrated as Mediator for God’s People
6. The Role of the King in the Old Testament
7. Christ as King in His Humiliation and Exaltation
8. Prophet, Priest, and King: Implications for the Church

Selected Bibliography
Index of Scripture
Index of Subjects and Names
 ANALYT ICAL OUTLINE

1. The Importance of Prophet, Priest, and King

A. Prophet, Priest, and King before Israel
B. The Origins of Prophet, Priest, and King in Genesis 1–3
(1) The Role of a King
(2) The Role of a Priest
(3) The Role of a Prophet
C. The Impact of God’s Judgment on Prophet, Priest, and King
D. The Mission of Israel and Prophet, Priest, and King

2. The Role of the Prophet in the Old Testament

A. The Key Text: Deuteronomy 18:15–22
(1) Divination: Abominable Practices
(2) The Definition of a Prophet
(3) False Prophets
(4) One Prophet or Many Prophets?
B. Moses and the Prophets
C. The Important Role of the Prophet in Israel
(1) Called by God
(2) Anointed with Oil
D. The Emergence of the Prophets in the History of Israel
(1) The Prophet and the King
(2) The School of the Prophets
(3) The Ministries of Elijah and Elisha
(4) The Writing Prophets
E. Opposition to the Prophets
F. The Prophet and Prayer
G. The Coming of a Future Prophet
3. Christ as Prophet: Mighty in Word and Deed
A. The Ministry of John the Baptist
B. A Prophet like Moses
C. A Prophet Mighty in Word
D. A Prophet Mighty in Prayer
E. A Prophet Mighty in Suffering
F. A Prophet Mighty in Deed

4. The Role of the Priest in the Old Testament

A. Holy Mediators
(1) The Priestly Line
(2) Garments
(3) Consecrated for Service: Anointed with Oil
B. The Ministry of the Levites
(1) The Relationship to the Firstborn
(2) Guarding the Tabernacle
(3) Assistants in Worship
C. The Ministry of the Priests
(1) Proper Handling of the Sacrifices
(2) The Importance of Obedience
(3) Teaching the Law
(4) Blessing the People of God
D. Stricter Regulations for the High Priest
E. The Nazirite Vow
F. The Ministry of the High Priest

5. Christ as Priest: Consecrated as Mediator for God’s People

A. The Earthly Ministry of Jesus and the Old Testament Priesthood
(1) Consecrated to God’s Service
(2) The Anointed One
(3) Guarding and Keeping God’s People
a. Clearing the Temple
b. Zeal for God
c. Teaching the People of God
d. Praying for God’s People
B. Jesus Is Superior to the Old Testament Priests
 (1) A Priest “according to the Order of Melchizedek”
(2) The Benefits of Christ’s Priesthood
(3) Blessing the People of God

6. The Role of the King in the Old Testament

A. The Seed of the Woman
(1) A Son of Abraham
(2) A Ruler from Judah
(3) A Star out of Jacob
B. The Role of the King in Israel (Deuteronomy 17:14–20)
(1) Kings in the Ancient Near East
(2) Kings in Israel Rule under God’s Authority
(3) Limits on the Power of the King
C. The Need for a King: The Book of Judges
D. Israel’s Request for a King: The People’s Choice
E. David: God’s Choice for King
F. God’s Covenant with David
(1) The Terms of the Covenant
(2) The Outworking of the Covenant in History
G. The Promise of a Coming King
H. Excursus: Was There a Royal Priesthood in Israel?
(1) The Argument for a Royal Priesthood in Israel
(2) Royal Priesthood: Strictly Messianic

7. Christ as King in His Humiliation and Exaltation

A. Jesus as King during His Earthly Ministry
(1) Dominion over Creation
(2) Dominion over the Demons
(3) The Kingdom of God
a. Jewish Expectations of the Kingdom
b. The Present Reality of the Kingdom
c. The Spiritual Nature of the Kingdom
d. The Future Glory of the Kingdom
(4) The Suffering of the King
B. Jesus as King in Ruling at the Right Hand of the Father
8. Prophet, Priest, and King: Implications for the Church
A. The Prophetic Ministry of the Church
(1) Joel’s Prophecy and the Day of Pentecost
(2) Word and Worship
(3) The Prophetic Role of Elders
(4) Implications of Prophet, Priest, and King for Preaching
(5) The Prophetic Role of Individual Believers
B. The Priestly Ministry of the Church
(1) The “Service” of the Levites
(2) The Priestly Ministry of Elders in Worship
(3) The Priestly Role of Individual Believers
C. The Kingly Ministry of the Church
(1) The Rule of Elders
(2) The Dominion of Individual Believers
D. Conclusion
 FOREWORD

IN PROPHET, PRIEST, AND KING: A Biblical Theology of the Offices of

Christ, Richard “Dick” Belcher takes his readers on a super-elevated rail
through a well-worn track. The theme of prophet, priest, and king has been
treated in numerous systematic theologies. But now all the freshness of new
insights from a biblical-theological approach stimulates the reader’s mind
and soul. Rather than rehearsing the all-important work of systematic
theologians on these significant topics, Belcher begins at the beginning of
scriptural testimony regarding the three offices, traces their development
through various old covenant phases, and climaxes with new covenant
consummations.
As you travel the track of ever-enriching developments of prophet,
priest, and king from biblical beginnings through prophets and psalms into
new covenant climaxes, expect to learn deepening truths all along the way.
Belcher focuses on the correct texts, illuminates them with insightful
analyses, and draws out correct conclusions. The three offices are united in
Adam and Abraham. But sin disrupts, and the offices remain divided in
Israel, though their functions are sometimes shared.
The prediction of a coming Prophet like Moses (Deut. 18:15, 18)
anticipates both the plurality of prophets and the singularity of One who is
uniquely like Moses. The role of these prophets in occasionally anointing
kings indicates that the ruler must govern according to God’s Word. The
ministry of prayer must not be overlooked. Jesus Christ proved himself to
be the Prophet like Moses by his display of might in word, prayer,
suffering, and deed. The ongoing role of the prophet’s function in the
church today comes to expression principally in the elder who preaches the
Word.
Be prepared to learn many things about the old covenant priest, his
anointing, his clothing, and his often-overlooked role as teacher of the
Word. Jesus was not identified as Priest while on earth, since he was of the
order of Melchizedek. Yet his purifying action of cleansing the temple
disclosed his identity as High Priest over God’s house.
In treating the topic of kingship, Belcher displays full awareness of the
latest research in the structure of the Psalter. The phrases concluding Book
4 in Psalm 106 find their corresponding response in the opening phrases of
Book 5 in Psalm 107. The question of a “royal priesthood” leads Belcher to
a sane evaluation of the question whether David himself functions as priest
as well as king in the line of Melchizedek (Ps. 110:4). The Christology of
Colossians 1:15 that describes Jesus Christ as the “firstborn” of all creation
finds its proper framework for interpretation in Psalm 89:27, which
designates David as the “firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.”
In a day in which narrow specialization torments biblical research,
Belcher proves himself capable of dealing with both the technical subtleties
and the broader sweeps of biblical theology. Widely read in both old
covenant and new covenant literature, Belcher never loses his reader in the
morass of unending interactions among contemporary scholars. Instead, he
stays close to the heart of the subject, enlightening his reader all along the
way. As a consequence, he has made a significant contribution to the
church’s understanding of the breadth and length and depth and height of
Scripture’s teaching on the important subjects of prophet, priest, and king.

O. Palmer Robertson
Director, African Bible University of Uganda
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I BECAME INTERESTED in the topic Prophet, Priest, and King when I

began to think through how the Psalms relate to Christ. Considering his
various roles opened up avenues for reflecting on the many ways in which
the Psalms and other Old Testament passages could connect to Christ. It
became apparent that no one book covered all three roles in their Old
Testament context and in their relationship to Christ. This book will have a
chapter on each role in the Old Testament and a chapter on how Christ
fulfills each role in the New Testament. There is also a chapter on the
implications of these roles for the church. Study questions at the end of
each chapter facilitate discussion for the use of this book in Bible studies.
Many people have assisted and encouraged me in this book’s
completion. I would like to thank Dr. Robert Peterson for his interest in this
topic and his help in talking through the project. I am grateful to P&R
Publishing for its assistance in publishing. I am very thankful to Dr. Ligon
Duncan, the Chancellor of Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS), and to
the board of RTS for their commitment to scholarship and for the sabbatical
granted to me to finish this book. I am blessed to teach at the Charlotte
campus, and I thank Dr. Michael J. Kruger for his continuing
encouragement to pursue this topic and to complete this book.
Many others have given essential help without which this book would
not have been written. I would like to thank my teaching assistant, Zachary
Keuthan, who tracked down many sources that I needed and helped in
editing the manuscript. I would also like to thank his wife, Elly, who works
in the library at RTS Charlotte, for her prompt help in requesting books and
articles that were needed. I would like to thank Kim Macurda, the registrar
at RTS Charlotte, for her competent work that allows me to be Academic
Dean and to teach and write as much as I do. I would also like to thank my
family for making life so enjoyable, and for my wife, Lu, who faithfully
does so many things.
This book is dedicated to Michael Dixon and Chris Sewell. It is a
blessing to have two sons-in-law who love the Lord, but it is also a great
joy that both of them are ordained ministers of the gospel.

Richard P. Belcher Jr.

August 2015
 ABBREVIATIONS

ANE Ancient Near East

BSac Bibliotheca Sacra
ESV English Standard Version
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
NASB New American Standard Bible
NIDOTTE Willem A. VanGemeren, ed., New International Dictionary
of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1997)
NIV New International Version
NKJV New King James Version
NT New Testament
OT Old Testament
TWOT R. Laird Harris, et al., Theological Wordbook of the Old
Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980)
TynBul Tyndale Bulletin
UT Urim and Thummim
WCF Westminster Confession of Faith
WLC Westminster Larger Catechism
WSC Westminster Shorter Catechism
WTJ Westminster Theological Journal
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
 1
THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPHET, PRIEST,
AND KING

MANY CHRISTIANS TEND to think of Christ’s work as one-dimensional.

Sometimes only the priestly role is emphasized, or the kingship of Christ in
his exaltation. Many times Christ’s prophetic role is neglected, or his role as
King in his humiliation. This can lead to a one-sided view of Christ and his
work. A well-rounded view not only understands his work in light of being
Prophet, Priest, and King, but also recognizes that these offices need to be
seen in light of both his humiliation and his exaltation. Christians also tend
to recognize the priestly role of believers, but lack teaching on the
significance of the prophet and king roles for the corporate church, her
leaders, and individual believers. This book will address the work of Christ
in light of the roles of Prophet, Priest, and King and will then draw out
implications for the church.
Historically, the Reformed faith has emphasized the roles of Prophet,
Priest, and King to discuss the work of Christ. Louis Berkhof notes that
although the early church fathers speak of the different offices of Christ,
Calvin first recognized the importance of distinguishing them and called
attention to them in separate sections of the Institutes of the Christian
Religion (book 2, chapter 15).1 Others have done the same.2 The
Heidelberg Catechism also uses these roles to speak of the life of the
Christian (Questions 31–32). A redemptive-historical approach—
emphasizing Christ’s fulfillment of the Old Testament—naturally lends
itself to connecting with the roles, not just for Christ but also for his body,
the church. This approach also has implications for preaching Christ from
the Old Testament.
The roles of prophet, priest, and king are defined and developed as
offices within the nation of Israel. But these roles are mentioned before
Israel’s establishment. In fact, Abraham himself is presented as fulfilling
them. A brief review of the evidence will show the importance of these
roles before Sinai, will lead to a partial understanding of their meaning, and
will raise the question of their origin.
Prophet, Priest, and King before Israel
Abraham is called a prophet in Genesis 20, which is the first time that
the word for prophet (navi, ) is used in Scripture. Abraham and Sarah
have gone down to Gerar, and for the second time Abraham lies about his
relationship to Sarah to protect his own life (see also ch. 12). King
Abimelech takes Sarah into his own household, but before he can touch her,
God appears to him in a dream. God warns him to return Sarah to Abraham
or else face death for himself and his household, specifically telling him:
“Now then, return the man’s wife, for he is a prophet, so that he will pray
for you, and you shall live” (20:7).
Several things in Abraham’s life support this designation of prophet. In
Genesis 12 he received a call from God, promising blessing to his family
and all the families of the earth. In chapter 15 the word of the Lord came to
Abraham in a vision. The phrase “the word of the Lord came to” is standard
for describing prophetic revelation (Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1; Jonah 1:1; Mic. 1:1),
and God spoke to prophets regularly in visions (Num. 12:6; Obad. 1; Nah.
1:1; and Hab. 1:1; Amos 1:1 uses the verb “to see”). God’s interaction with
Abraham in Genesis 18 portrays Abraham as an intercessory prophet as he
pleads for God to withhold judgment because of the number of righteous
within the city. God’s deliberation concerning whether to include Abraham
reminds one of the divine council (Job 1:6; Ps. 89:7) and being brought into
the prophetic circle (1 Kings 22:14–28; Amos 3:7).3 The aspect of prayer in
connection with being a prophet is specifically mentioned in Genesis 20. In
fact, Abraham’s intercession can save Abimelech because Abraham is a
prophet, which assumes a close relationship with God (as demonstrated in
ch. 18). Prayer will become a part of the prophet’s role later in Scripture
through Moses (Ex. 8; Num. 12; Deut. 32), Samuel (1 Sam. 12:23), and
Jeremiah (Jer. 7:16; 11:14; 14:11–12; 18:18–20). The role of the prophet is
closely connected with the word of God and prayer.
Abraham also acts as a priest in building altars when he travels
throughout the land of Canaan (Gen. 12). The first altar is built at Shechem
in response to God’s appearance and the affirmation of God’s promise of
descendants who will possess the land. Abraham builds another altar near
Bethel, where he worships by calling on the name of the Lord. These altars
are connected with the presence of God and could be how Abraham
claimed the land as his response of faith in God’s promise: one day the
whole land will be the place of God’s presence. Altars are also connected to
worship and sacrifice, which highlights the priestly role.4
Other examples of the priestly role before Sinai are Noah and Job. After
the flood, Noah builds an altar to the Lord and sacrifices burnt offerings.
God responds to this act of worship by establishing his covenant with Noah.
The story of Job reflects the patriarchal period and occurs outside the
boundaries of Israel.5 Job functioned as a priest to his family by offering
burnt offerings on behalf of each of his children in case they had sinned
against God (Job 1:5). Job performed this function in his role as their father
and head of the family, with the goal to “consecrate” them. The burnt
offerings would restore their relationship with God and bring them into a
state of holiness fit for service to God.6 Part of the role of the priests will be
to offer sacrifices on behalf of the Israelites to bring them into a state of
holiness, ensuring that God’s presence will remain in their midst.
Abraham also fulfills the role of a king in defeating a coalition of armies
and rescuing Lot in Genesis 14. It becomes clear that he not only is very
wealthy, but also has a powerful household. Lot and Abraham separate
because their possessions are so great that the land could not support them
both (ch. 13). Lot chooses to move to the Jordan Valley, which was well
watered but near Sodom. In chapter 14 Lot gets caught up in the battles of
the day. A coalition of four kings from the area of Mesopotamia—led by
Chedorlaomer—seek to reassert their control over five cities of the Dead
Sea rebelling after twelve years of servitude. Lot and his family, who have
moved into Sodom by this time (14:12), are captured and taken as spoils of
war. When Abraham hears of Lot’s capture, he leads 318 men from his
household to rescue Lot (v. 14). He defeats this coalition of four kings and
brings back all the possessions that they had taken. Genesis 14 reads like
the account of a military campaign. Abraham’s force of 318 men are
“trained,” a word with military connotations in second-millennium texts.7
Defeating the coalition of kings involves military strategy, and Abraham
negotiates with the king of Sodom when he returns with the spoils.
Abraham acts like a king defending the land by defeating a powerful group
of kings and rescuing a member of his household.
The Origins of Prophet, Priest, and King in
Genesis 1–3
The appearance of the roles of prophet, priest, and king before they are
developed and defined as offices within Israel raises the question of their
origin and the possibility that they are part of the original function that God
gave to human beings in Genesis 1–3. An examination of these early
chapters shows that the role of ruling (kingship) is explicitly conferred on
humanity and that at a minimum, the roles of priest and prophet are
implicitly assumed to be part of Adam and Eve’s life.

The Role of a King

The role of ruling and exercising dominion (kingship) is explicitly
stated in Genesis 1:26–28. It is clear in Genesis 1 that the creation of
mankind8 is an act by God that sets human beings apart and gives them a
special place. When God creates mankind, he uses terminology that was not
used in reference to any other creation. The phrase “let us make” (v. 26) is
unique and refers to God’s self-deliberation before creating humanity.9 The
ongoing march of creation in the pattern of “God said” and then “God
created” or “God made” is interrupted with “let us make” to highlight the
importance of the creation of human beings. It is also significant that only
human beings are created in the image of God. Although there is a lot of
discussion concerning what “the image of God” means,10 it clearly sets
human beings apart from the animals. Genesis 1 presents humanity as the
crown of creation, set apart in significant ways.
The special place of human beings gives them a special role.
Immediately after the statement that they are created in God’s image is the
assertion of their function: “And let them have dominion over the fish of the
sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the
earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth” (Gen. 1:26).
Then, after the statement that God made mankind male and female, God
blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth
and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds
of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (v. 28).
 The function of human beings within God’s creation is a royal one that
is patterned after the God who created them. They are to reflect the image
of God. He created the world and all that is in it by his power, and human
beings—being male and female—are to procreate by being fruitful,
multiplying, and filling the earth. Marriage is later instituted for humans to
carry out this mandate from God (Gen. 2:24), who sets marriage apart as the
appropriate place for becoming one flesh and raising children. God also
gives human beings the function of ruling over creation. This rule includes
dominion, which entails a governing aspect, such as in Genesis 2 when
Adam names the animals, demonstrating his authority over them. This rule
includes subduing creation, which has the idea of asserting control over or
making something subservient to someone else’s purposes. Even before the
fall, subduing creation would have been appropriate in the work that God
gave Adam and Eve. Dominion would have included taking the
“domesticated” life in the garden, represented by plants that need human
cultivation to grow (v. 5), and the world outside the garden, represented by
the plants that grow on their own.11
The teaching of humanity’s dominion is a debated issue, but dominion
does not mean that human beings can exploit God’s creation.12 They can
appropriately use creation for their own benefit and the benefit of others,
but they carry out this role under the authority of God. Dominion is not an
autonomous function letting humans do whatever they please.13 Rather,
humans pattern this activity after God’s activity in Genesis 1–2. In chapter 1
God is presented as the sovereign Creator of the universe who rules over his
creation by forming and fashioning it. Mankind’s dominion imitates God’s
rule, so that humans carry out this function under his authority. It is
interesting that in chapter 2 God is presented as personally caring for his
creation when he provides for all of Adam and Eve’s needs. The role of
human beings in chapter 2 imitates God’s role as they care for and keep the
garden. Genesis 1 and 2 together present a complete picture and a proper
balance of humanity’s role.14 Clearly, human beings have a royal calling of
rule and dominion (kingship) within God’s creation.

The Role of a Priest

 The role of priest is not as explicit in Genesis 2 as the role of king is in
Genesis 1, but the work that God gave Adam to do in the garden has
priestly connotations.15 The garden of Eden is a special place of God’s
presence that foreshadows the later tabernacle and temple. It is an enclosed,
protected area associated with the presence and blessings of God. A river
flows out of the garden, representing the abundant blessings flowing from
the place of God’s presence, a picture later found in Psalm 46, Ezekiel 47,
and Revelation 22. Cherubim also guard the garden when Adam and Eve
are expelled.16
The garden is not only a sanctuary for fellowship with God. The two
verbs used to describe Adam’s work in the garden (Gen. 2:15) are also used
of the priest’s work in the tabernacle (Num. 3:7–8; 8:26; 18:5–6). The verbs
are to guard (shamar, ) and to serve/work (avad, ). Adam was
placed in the garden “to work it and to keep it,” and the Levites were given
to the priests to assist by keeping “guard over him [Aaron] and over the
whole congregation before the tent of meeting, as they minister [serve] at
the tabernacle” (3:7). The Levites were also to “guard all the furnishings of
the tent of meeting” (v. 8) and assist the priests in the Tent of Meeting “by
keeping guard” (8:26). Although there were certain things the Levites could
not do in the tabernacle (v. 26), they had oversight to ensure that it was
transported correctly and that its holiness was maintained, especially in
relationship to the people (chs. 2–4). In this way they served the priests and
kept guard over the tabernacle.
The work of Adam in the garden would not have been exactly the same
as the work of the Levites in the tabernacle. The work, or service, of the
Levites was on behalf of the priests, to assist them in the details related to
the tabernacle. The work of Adam would have included cultivating the
garden to grow plants. Yet both are works of service. Significantly, the only
two places where these verbs occur together are in reference to Adam’s
work in the garden and the Levites’ work at the tabernacle.17 The Levites
specifically served the priests, and Adam specifically served God. The work
of the Levites also served the people, and the work of Adam served his wife
and eventually his family and others. Here is the basis of work as a calling
or vocation. The guarding of the garden refers to preserving and protecting
it. If the garden is a special place of God’s presence, guarding it would
include protecting the sacred space of the garden just as the Levites
protected the sacred space of the tabernacle. The need for this is
demonstrated when the serpent approaches Eve with the temptation to
disobey God. Adam and Eve should have protected the holiness of the
garden by rejecting his offer and putting him out of the garden.

The Role of a Prophet

The prophetic role of Adam and Eve can be shown in how they handle
the word of God. Before Eve’s creation, God gave Adam a command: “You
may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge
of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall
surely die” (Gen. 2:16–17). Clearly, this command was passed on to Eve,
because when the serpent approaches her, questioning what God had said
about eating from the fruit of the trees, she responds with the command that
God had given to Adam: “You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in
the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die” (3:3). Eve’s
response to the serpent mishandles God’s command by adding the phrase
“neither shall you touch it.” The serpent has raised doubts concerning
whether God has their best interests in mind. Eve makes God’s command
stricter by adding to it. She believes Satan’s lie that she can be like God,
asserts moral autonomy to choose what is right for herself, eats the fruit,
and then gives some to Adam, who also eats. Instead of trusting in God and
using his command against Satan’s lie, ambiguity concerning what God said
results in disobedience. Adam and Eve reject God’s word and are
disobedient to God’s command, which leads to God’s judgment.
The Impact of God’s Judgment on Prophet,
Priest, and King
The judgment of God has a profound effect on creation, on the first
couple, and on the mandate that God gave them to fulfill (Gen. 3:8–19).
Severe consequences follow when the Word of God is rejected (the
prophetic role). Instead of receiving the blessings of God, Adam and Eve
experience the judgment of God, which includes being cast out of the
garden. They are now separated from him and will be ignorant of his
purposes unless he reveals himself. Rejecting the Word of God leaves
human beings on their own to establish meaning for their lives (Rom. 2).
God will reveal himself to his people, but the pattern of curses following
disobedience is built into the Mosaic covenant (Deut. 27–28) and lived out
by God’s people throughout Israel’s history. The clear implication, which is
also integral to the Mosaic covenant, is that blessings will accompany
obedience to God’s Word.
Disobedience also leads to a disruption of fellowship with God, which
affects the priestly role. In Genesis 3:8 God came to the garden judging
Adam and Eve’s sin, but certainly he would have also regularly come to
have fellowship with them.18 Their broken relationship with God is seen
when they hide themselves from his presence. Although we are not given
any information about the worship of God before the fall, their broken
relationship would no doubt affect it. Adam and Eve’s feeble attempt to
cover themselves with fig leaves is inadequate to cover their guilt and
shame.19 They need God to cover them with animal skins, which implies
that blood must be shed for guilt and shame to be covered. Also, instead of
the privilege of guarding the garden on God’s behalf, Adam and Eve are
cast out. The garden is now guarded by the cherubim to keep them from
reentering. Work also becomes difficult because the ground is cursed,
making it hard to cultivate and produce food. The service aspect of work is
disrupted because sin produces selfishness and shifting of blame when
Adam and Eve are confronted by God (vv. 11–13). Work also becomes
associated with pain and sweat until human beings return to the dust from
which they are made. Death is part of the curse.
 Adam and Eve also specifically failed in exercising dominion in the
garden (the kingly role). They did not protect the garden from opposition,
and they did not exercise rule over the serpent by disputing what he said
and casting him out. The exercise of dominion becomes difficult because of
how sin’s curse affects the bearing of children (Gen. 3:16). The mandate to
multiply and fill the earth will be attended with sorrow and pain. Enmity
between the two seeds, which begins in Genesis 4, includes hostile warfare
between the seeds’ descendants. Cain murders his brother Abel, and part of
his punishment is to be a fugitive and a wanderer, separated from God and
other family members who represent the godly line. It is important that
worship is mentioned when referring to the godly community (v. 26b). They
hope that through this chosen line One will come to battle the enemy and be
victorious (3:15).20
God’s judgment against sin greatly disrupted every aspect of life in the
garden, including the mandate and roles that he had given to mankind
within creation. The effect of sin on these roles necessitates defining them
in a specific and clear way as part of the restoration that God begins after
expelling Adam and Eve from the garden. The roles of prophet, priest, and
king are formally defined in the establishment of these offices within the
nation of Israel. The functions of these roles within Israel are kept separate
from each other. There may be minor overlap when the priests teach the
people the Word of God or the king takes on a limited role in worship and
sacrifice (2 Sam. 6), but for the most part the offices are not mixed. The
king is not allowed to go into the tabernacle to offer sacrifices, and when
King Uzziah tries to, he is struck with leprosy (2 Chron. 26:16–21). But
because the original work given to Adam and Eve included prophetic,
priestly, and kingly functions and the roles of prophet, priest, and king are
seen in Abraham, they cannot be separated from each other in an absolute
sense.21 This is demonstrated in how the nation of Israel is supposed to
fulfill these roles and in how these roles will be united in a coming ruler.
The Mission of Israel and Prophet, Priest, and
King
Israel was called by God to fulfill a particular mission to the nations,
which can be described with the categories of prophet, priest, and king.
Exodus 19:5–6 states that mission just before the establishment of the
Mosaic covenant, when Israel will become a nation based on the law God
gives to her. Three terms are used to describe Israel’s unique covenant
relationship: treasured possession, kingdom of priests, and holy nation. The
first term stresses the close relationship that Israel will have to the LORD
(Yahweh). Treasured possession, which emphasizes that Israel will become
Yahweh’s unique, prized possession, is also used for a king’s personal
treasure.22 The other two terms describe the mediatorial role that Israel will
have toward the nations.23 As a kingdom of priests, Israel will seek to
extend the worship and presence of Yahweh. As a holy people, Israel will
display what it means to be in a relationship with Yahweh.24 Israel will
fulfill this role by taking the land of Canaan and living for Yahweh in the
midst of the nations. God promises to pour out abundant blessing on his
people as they trust him and live in obedience to the covenant (Deut. 7:8–
16). This will set Israel high above the nations (28:1–14), where she can
influence them. They will see the blessing of God upon his people and be
drawn to Israel to find out the source. In the process the prophetic aspect
will be fulfilled as the nations are taught the benefits of the law of God
(4:5–8). The kingly aspect will be fulfilled when Israel becomes a light and
extends the rule of God to the nations (Isa. 49:6). All three aspects of
prophet, priest, and king are bound together as part of Israel’s mission.
That mission did not primarily consist of being sent to the nations;
rather, the nations would come to Israel.25 This was fulfilled to some extent
in the early reign of Solomon as the nations, including the queen of Sheba,
come to see the great things taking place in Solomon’s kingdom (1 Kings
10). But Solomon fell away from the Lord (ch. 11), and the kingdom
divided. Israel failed in carrying out this mission, being influenced by the
nations rather than inf luencing the nations (Isa. 2:6–7). Part of Isaiah’s
teaching states that in light of the failure of God’s servant, Israel, to carry
out the mission (42:18–19), God must raise up another Servant (49:5). An
Anointed One will come to enable Israel to fulfill her mission of being a
kingdom of priests (61:5–7), but until this One comes, the mission is kept
alive throughout the Old Testament. It is the ideal expressed in Isaiah 2:1–5,
and it is the hope of what God can still do after the exile (Zech. 8:20–23).
This mission also helps explain how Zechariah 14 and (to some extent)
Isaiah 65–66 describe the new heavens and the new earth, where future
glories are depicted through Israel’s fulfilling this mission. With the coming
of Christ, the true Servant of God, the mission of God’s people is no longer
bound to one geographical area; the disciples are sent to the nations to
proclaim the good news of salvation (Matt. 28:19–20; Rom. 4:13).
In the nation of Israel the roles of prophet, priest, and king are basically
kept separate to define their meanings. But it is significant that these roles
come together in both the description of Adam and Eve and the description
of Israel’s mission. Thus it makes sense that the Old Testament would begin
to describe the coming future ruler as carrying out the combined roles (Ps.
110; Zech. 6:11–13).26 These are fulfilled in Christ, who is Prophet, Priest,
and King during his earthly ministry. He fulfills them in his work of
salvation and continues in these roles on behalf of his people in his
ascension. The work of Christ lays the basis for restoring these roles to
human beings in their service to God, to the church, and to the world.
Study Questions
1. Do you think it is true that Christians tend to think of Christ’s work as
one-dimensional? What role do you tend to emphasize?
2. How does Abraham exemplify the roles of prophet, priest, and king?
3. How does the role of a king manifest itself in the place that God gave
to human beings at creation? What does it mean that human beings
have a kingly role?
4. How does the role of a priest relate to the work that God gave Adam to
do in the garden? Since the garden is a special place, what are the
implications for the priestly role?
5. How do Adam and Eve exemplify the role of a prophet?
6. How did Adam and Eve fail in the exercise of these roles? What were
the implications of this failure?
7. How do the roles of prophet, priest, and king relate to the mission of
Israel?

_______________
1. Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941), 356–57. One early
church father who made use of these categories is Eusebius. “The Church History,” in Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1991), 1:86. The threefold office was important for Calvin as a way for faith to find a firm
basis for salvation and thus to rest in Christ. David J. Englesma, The Reformed Faith of John Calvin
(Jenison, MI: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 2009), 169–70. Berkhof comments that modern
theology is averse to the offices because it is so in love with Christ as the ideal man, the loving
helper, and the elder brother. Modern theology seems to fear that an emphasis on Christ as Mediator
would dehumanize him.
2. Systematic theologies that use Prophet, Priest, and King to discuss the work of Christ include
Robert Dabney, Charles Hodge, Herman Hoeksema, James Boice, Wayne Grudem, John Frame, and
Michael Horton. Significant Puritans who use Prophet, Priest, and King include John Owen, John
Flavel, Thomas Boston, and Thomas Goodwin. See also Robert Letham, The Work of Christ
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993); Robert Sherman, King, Priest, and Prophet: A
Trinitarian Theology of Atonement (New York: T&T Clark, 2004). Geoffrey Wainwright shows that
Lutherans did not continue to use Prophet, Priest, and King, but that Roman Catholics and
Methodists have used the terms to explain the work of Christ. For Our Salvation: Two Approaches to
the Work of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 103–8.
3. Kenneth A. Mathews, Genesis 11:27–50:26 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 216, 222.
4. Although some deny the connection between altars and sacrifice because sacrifices are not
specifically mentioned in the text (Cassuto, Westermann), Gordon J. Wenham points out that altars
and offering sacrifices on them are integral to the worship of God. Genesis 1–15 (Waco, TX: Word
Books, 1987), 322.
 5. John E. Hartley, The Book of Job (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 66.
6. Gerald H. Wilson, Job (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007), 20.
7. Mathews, Genesis 11:27–50:26, 147.
8. The Hebrew word (adam, ) is used in a generic sense for humanity (Gen. 1:26).
9. This section is a summary of the discussion in Richard P. Belcher Jr., Genesis: The Beginning
of God’s Plan of Salvation (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2012), 54–57. Discussions of the
options for the meaning of “let us make” are found there.
10. See the discussion in ibid., 55.
11. For a discussion of the relationship between Genesis 1–2 and the view that Genesis 2:5 looks
forward to the cultivated plants of the garden in distinction from the plants that grow on their own in
Genesis 1, see ibid., 32–33.
12. Blaming the Christian’s view of dominion for the ecological crisis goes back to a seminal
article by Lynn White Jr., “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” in an appendix to Francis
Schaeffer, Pollution and the Death of Man (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1970), 97–116 (originally
published in Science 155 [1967]: 1203–7). Other works that agree with this view include Norman C.
Habel, ed., The Earth Bible, 4 vols. (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), and Norman C.
Habel and Peter Trudinger, eds., Exploring Ecological Hermeneutics (Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2008). The approach in these works denies that humans are at the center of the universe
and argues that (1) the universe/earth and all its components have intrinsic worth; (2) the earth is a
subject capable of raising its voice in celebration and against injustice; and (3) the earth is a balanced
and diverse domain where responsible custodians can function as partners—rather than rulers—to
sustain a balanced and diverse community.
13. James Barr, who is not an evangelical, pointed out that the great modern exploitation of
nature has taken place under the reign of liberal humanism, in which human beings no longer see
themselves as under the authority of a Creator. This easily leads to the dominance of nature with an
unlimited right to dispose of it as one sees fit. James Barr, “Man and Nature,” in Ecology and
Religion in History, ed. David Spring and Eileen Spring (New York: Harper & Row, 1974), quoted in
Joseph Blenkinsopp, Treasures Old and New: Essays in the Theology of the Pentateuch (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 38. Recent works that take a mediating position between the dominion
model and the stewardship model include Richard Bauckham, The Bible and Ecology: Rediscovering
the Community of Creation (Waco, TX: Baylor, 2010), and Richard Bauckham, Living with Other
Creatures: Green Exegesis and Theology (Waco, TX: Baylor, 2011).
14. For a perspective that seeks to treat the environment properly but also rejects global alarmist
views and views focused on major government intervention, see “The Cornwall Declaration,” in
Environmental Stewardship in the Judeo-Christian Tradition: Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant
Wisdom on the Environment, ed. Michael B. Barkey (Grand Rapids: Acton Institute, 2000).
15. Dan Lioy, Axis of Glory: A Biblical and Theological Analysis of the Temple Motif in
Scripture (New York: Lang, 2010), 122. He points out that before the fall, God and human beings did
not need a mediator. Adam and Eve lived in the presence of God and served in the garden. This may
explain why the priestly role is implicit in Genesis 1–2. John Owen denies that there was a priestly
role in the garden because the role of priests must include the offering of sacrifices. The Priesthood
of Christ: Its Necessity and Nature (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2010), 40–46. Although there
was no need to offer sacrifices in the garden of Eden before sin, the role of priests is broader than
offering sacrifices.
16. Much more could be said concerning the relationship between the garden and the later
temple. See G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling
Place of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 66–80; Lioy, Axis of Glory, 5–16. For
an approach that raises questions concerning whether the garden should be understood as a temple or
a place of God’s presence, see Daniel I. Block, “Eden: A Temple? A Reassessment of the Biblical
Evidence,” in From Creation to New Creation: Biblical Theology and Exegesis, ed. Daniel M.
Gurtner and Benjamin L. Gladd (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2013), 3–30. Block recognizes that he
is arguing against a scholarly consensus. The many possible connections between the garden and the
later tabernacle/temple, which Block must seek to answer, leave the impression that there is some
association between the garden and the temple. One does not have to argue that the garden is a
temple, just that there are aspects of the later temple that are an essential part of the garden (in terms
of God’s presence and the general role of Adam). Block himself recognizes that the garden is a
special place, different from the good world God created outside the garden. He also recognizes that
the Eden narrative provides much of the conceptual vocabulary for Israel’s sanctuary tradition.
17. Peter J. Gentry and Stephen J. Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant (Wheaton, IL: Crossway,
2012), 211–12.
18. That God would come regularly into the garden to have fellowship with Adam and Eve is a
natural implication from (1) God’s creating human beings with the capacity for fellowship, and (2)
the form of the verb used in Genesis 3:8 (hitpael of the verb to walk), which can imply a regular
occurrence. For more discussion on the judgment aspect of Genesis 3:8, see Meredith Kline, Images
of the Spirit (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 1980), 102–9.
19. For a discussion of the full effect of sin and how it affects creation and Adam and Eve, see
Belcher, Genesis, 73–76.
20. For the argument that Genesis 3:15 includes a single individual, see ibid., 77–78.
21. Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 3, Sin and Salvation in Christ (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 2006), 364–68. He shows that the offices of Christ cannot be completely separated from each
other, but it is appropriate to make distinctions between them (see also Letham, The Work of Christ,
24).
22. John I. Durham, Exodus (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 263.
23. Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1991), 212.
24. Durham, Exodus, 263.
25. That Israel is not primarily sent to the nations does not deny the OT witness speaking of the
Servant’s bringing justice to the nations and the psalmist’s desire to sing praise among the nations
(Pss. 57:9; 108:3). But Israel’s main witness was to draw the nations to the God she worshiped. For a
discussion of the terms centripetal (moving toward the center) and centrifugal (moving away from
the center) to describe Israel’s mission, see Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Mission in the Old Testament (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 2000); Christopher J. H. Wright, The Mission of God (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2006). For a discussion of how Israel was to attract the nations, see Christopher J.
H. Wright, The Mission of God’s People (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 128–47.
26. Not everyone agrees that Zechariah 6:11–13 is setting forth the king and the priest as one
individual. For the view that they are two separate individuals, see Mark J. Boda, Haggai, Zechariah
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 336–42. For the view that the king and priest are the same
individual, see Eugene H. Merrill, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (Chicago: Moody Press, 1994), 193–
202.
 2
THE ROLE OF THE PROPHET IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT

PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS about the role of a prophet can be drawn

from the events before Israel became a nation at Mount Sinai (see chapter
1). The work of the prophet centers on the word of God and prayer. Both of
these are evident in Abraham as he receives revelation from God (Gen.
15:1) and prays for Abimelech and his household (ch. 20). Adam and Eve
receive revelation from God when he gives them a specific command, but
Eve mishandles the word of God when she adds to it. Then the word of God
is rejected in favor of the serpent’s lie, which is not just a rejection of his
word but also a rejection of his authority as Adam and Eve pursue what
they think is right for themselves regardless of what God says. This implies
that the word of God, which is to be gladly received and obeyed, will lead
to great blessings, but the effects of sin make carrying out the prophetic role
difficult for human beings. Sin separates humanity from the presence of
God and makes it difficult to hear his voice. Although human beings are
dependent on God to reveal himself, sin makes it hard to listen to him
because of their desire to make their own decisions of right and wrong. But
God does not leave humanity in a state of confusion and sets out to restore
what was lost at the fall. This restoration includes clearly defining the role
of a prophet within the nation of Israel. A clear definition is needed to see
how Christ fulfills this role and then how God’s people after Christ
participate in the prophetic aspect of handling his Word.
The Key Text: Deuteronomy 18:15–22
The roles of prophet, priest, and king have three things in common:
texts that define the role, the setting that is in some way a part of the role,
and an anointing that is associated with the role. The key text to define the
role of the prophet is Deuteronomy 18:15–22. The book of Deuteronomy
prepares the people for life in the land of promise. This section lays out
covenantal leadership in Canaan.1 The function of various leaders is
presented (judges in 16:18–20, a central tribunal of priests and judges to
handle difficult cases in 17:8–13, the king in 17:14–20, and the prophet in
18:15–22).

Divination: Abominable Practices

Just before the role of the prophet is defined, Israel is warned of the
abominable practices of the nations who inhabit the land (Deut. 18:9–14).
The broad term to describe these methods is divination (v. 10, “anyone who
practices divination”). This word refers to different ways the nations sought
to obtain information from the gods. Sometimes a diviner would use an
object to seek information about the future, a method that is called inductive
divination. These practices are described in verse 10 as telling fortunes,
interpreting omens, and being a sorcerer (the NIV [1984] has “engages in
witchcraft”). An example of how this might work is given in Ezekiel 21:21–
22. The king of Babylon is on the march when he comes to a fork in the
road and has to decide whether he should go toward Ammon or toward
Jerusalem. To make the decision he uses inductive divination: “He shakes
the arrows; he consults the teraphim; he looks at the liver” (v. 21). Each of
these practices uses an object to seek the desired information. The shaking
of the arrows may refer to reading some sort of configuration of arrows that
are thrown to the ground; reading the liver refers to examining the liver of a
sacrificial animal; and consulting the teraphim refers to seeking to please a
god through an idol in order to then ask that idol questions. This kind of
information would be useful to a king, so those able to obtain it would have
a position of power.2 Yet God calls these practices abominations. They are
not appropriate for Israel.
 Deuteronomy 18:11 also describes the practice of intuitive divination
when a diviner becomes a medium to give a message from the gods. These
practices refer to consulting the world of the spirits to obtain information.
An example is when Saul approached the witch at Endor before a battle
with the Philistines, seeking information about the future. It is significant
that Saul had already inquired of the LORD (Yahweh), but he had been
abandoned by God after rejecting his word. First Samuel 28:6 specifically
says that “the LORD did not answer him, either by dreams, or by Urim, or by
prophets.” These were typical ways that God would communicate with his
people. Intuitive divination dealt with the world of the spirits and the dead
and is also called an abomination.
Two other abominable practices are mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:9–
14. One is child sacrifice. The esv translates verse 10 as “anyone who burns
his son or his daughter as an offering,” but it can also be translated as
“anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire.” One
purpose of child sacrifice was seeking the gods’ intervention in life-
threatening situations.3 An example of how the sacrifice of the firstborn son
had a dramatic effect on a battle can be seen in 2 Kings 3:27, where the
king of Moab offered his oldest son as a burnt offering when the battle was
going against him. The other abominable practice is casting spells. The
person who casts the spell is called a “charmer” (v. 11). This practice
involves trying to gain advantage over someone through prescribed rituals
to control the person through a spell. They emphasize manipulating events
or people to obtain a favorable outcome. The magicians in Egypt were
schooled in such practices.4
Because of these abominable practices, God is driving out the nations
from the land of Canaan. Israel is not to receive her information from God
in these ways. She does not have to manipulate God or situations to seek to
control what happens to her; her life is in the hand of a sovereign God who
is working out his purposes for the nation. In fact, certain information is
off-limits, such as the secret things that belong to the Lord. God will reveal
to his people what he wants them to know, and the things revealed “belong
to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law”
(Deut. 29:29). This verse speaks of the sufficiency of God’s revelation and
affirms that he will reveal to his people whatever they need to know. This
understanding should give them rest in knowing that he is at work and
should help them trust in his sovereign ways. Their focus should be
obedience to the word that God reveals. How he will reveal what he wants
them to know is presented in Deuteronomy 18:15–22.

The Definition of a Prophet

Simply, a prophet is someone who speaks the words that God gives him
to speak (Deut. 18:18). This definition is basic to the Old Testament view
and is confirmed in many places. For example, in Exodus 4:16 Moses
makes the excuse that he cannot deliver the people from Egypt because he
is not eloquent. God gives him Aaron, whose role is described as speaking
to the people the words that Moses gives him. God tells Moses to put the
words in Aaron’s mouth and Moses will be as God to Aaron. This scenario
uses the definition of a prophet to describe Moses’ relationship to Aaron
and the people (see also Jer. 1:6).
The origin of the prophet’s role for Israel goes back to Mount Sinai,
where the people saw smoke and fire on the mountain, were afraid that they
might die, and sent Moses to talk to God for them. God himself confirmed
this arrangement as good (Deut. 18:16–17). Thus a prophet is someone who
is a mediator between two sides. On one side is God, and on the other side
is the people. God is the superior party in the relationship, and he gives his
word—in the form of a message or commands—to the prophet, who then
gives that word to the people. This role takes on added significance in the
context of the covenant that God establishes with his people. The prophet is
God’s authorized spokesman.
The main word for prophet is navi ( ). It is used in Deuteronomy 18,
defining someone who speaks words given to him by God. Two other words
used of prophets in the Old Testament put more stress on the subjective
aspect of receiving a revelation. The term roeh ( ) comes from the
Hebrew verb to see, and the term khozeh ( ) comes from the Hebrew
verb to look. Both terms are translated as seer. The emphasis with these
terms is that the prophets saw things, either in visions (Amos 1:1) or
because they were given access to the divine throne room with the heavenly
host standing around the throne (2 Chron. 18:18). Although the latter two
terms are not as common as navi,5 all three have the common meaning of
“one who speaks the word God gives them,” and they can be used
interchangeably (1 Chron. 29:29; 2 Chron. 29:25).
 False Prophets
The prophet receives the word from God and then speaks that word to
the people. This scenario can go wrong in two ways. One way is when the
people do not listen to the prophet. But because he speaks the words that
God gives to him, it is serious if they do not listen. In Deuteronomy 18:19
God says, “I myself will require it of him.” He will hold anyone who does
not listen responsible for rejecting his word. The consequences of not
listening are further developed in the curses of the covenant (chs. 27–28).
Another way in which this scenario can go wrong is when the prophet
might not accurately speak the word that God has given to him.
Deuteronomy 18 identifies two ways in which this could happen. First, a
prophet might presume to speak a word in God’s name when God has not
commanded him to speak (v. 20). In this situation the prophet claims to
speak for God, but it is a false claim because God has not really spoken to
the prophet (for examples, see 1 Kings 22 and Jer. 28). Second, a prophet
also might speak in the name of a god other than Yahweh (Deut. 18:20). In
this case the authority of the prophet is found in a false god (see 1 Kings
18).
There are two responses to false prophets in Deuteronomy 18. First, a
false prophet deserves to die. Although this may sound like a harsh
punishment, the nation of Israel was to take Canaan and live for God, so
that the land was set apart for him. No wickedness or uncleanness was
tolerated because it could jeopardize Israel’s special relationship with God.6
A false prophet would lead God’s people astray from the Word of God and
from the sole worship of God. Such disobedience could not be tolerated
because the community of God’s people needed to be pure and set apart.
The second response to the false prophet is formulated as a question. It
would be easy to identify a false prophet who spoke in the name of another
god or who spoke a message that contradicted what God had already
revealed to his people. But it would not be as easy to identify a prophet who
claimed to speak for God but did not. The people asked how they would
know that Yahweh had not spoken through the false prophet. The answer
given: if the word that the prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh does not
come true, then the prophet has spoken presumptuously. Requiring the
prophetic word to come true covers prophecies that can be verified within a
period of time. For example, Micaiah prophesied in 1 Kings 22:17 that
Ahab would be killed in the upcoming battle with Syria. He even shouted
that if Ahab returned in peace, then the Lord had not spoken by him.
Whether God spoke by Micaiah would be known shortly. In Jeremiah 28
the prophet Hananiah took yoke bars and spoke in the presence of the
people: “Thus says the LORD: Even so I will break the yoke of
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the neck of all nations within two
years” (v. 11). This was a false prophecy because the yoke of the king of
Babylon was not broken in two years; Jerusalem was destroyed by the
Babylonians in about ten years. In summary, there are several ways by
which the people could identify a false prophet. A prophet does not speak
the word of Yahweh if he speaks in the name of another god, if the word
that he speaks contradicts previous revelation, or—assuming that it can be
verified—if the word he speaks does not come true.7

One Prophet or Many Prophets?

It is clear in the history of Israel that God raised up many prophets for
his people. Yet Moses states in Deuteronomy 18:15 that “the LORD your
God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your
brothers.” The word prophet is singular, which raises the question whether
this statement includes the prophets who will arise in Israel’s history, or
only the one Prophet who will arise in the future. It seems clear from
Deuteronomy 18 and other texts that this verse cannot be limited to just one
prophet.8 The regulations concerning the identification of a false prophet
(vv. 19–22) assume that prophets will arise in the future who will need to be
evaluated. Other statements in the Pentateuch compare Moses to the
prophets. These statements also use the singular term prophet but clearly
have in mind other prophets. Numbers 12:6 uses the wording “if there is a
prophet among you.” This statement cannot be limited to one Prophet who
will arise in the future; it refers to any situation when a prophet is raised up
by God.
If God’s purposes for his people included many prophets, why does
Deuteronomy 18:15 use the singular term prophet instead of the plural
prophets? First, the singular term prophet can grammatically include a
plurality of prophets.9 Second, the singular term holds open the possibility
that in the future one Prophet will arise who will be like Moses. Moses has
a special place within the Old Testament. God speaks to him face-to-face
(Num. 12:8; Deut. 34:10), and the signs and wonders he did in the land of
Egypt stand far above any work of any other prophet in the Old Testament
(Deut. 34:10–12). Deuteronomy 18:15 and the statement that there has not
risen a prophet in Israel like Moses give hope that one day a Prophet will
arise like Moses. God will speak face-to-face with this Prophet and will use
him to accomplish great signs and wonders.
Moses and the Prophets
Moses’ special place within the Old Testament economy can also be
seen in the foundational role that the Mosaic covenant plays in relationship
to the prophets of Israel’s history. The history of Israel is laid out in several
places in Deuteronomy: the disobedience of God’s people will lead to exile,
but then God will bring his people back to the land to restore them (see
Deut. 29–30, 32). This general history is also set forth in the curses of the
Mosaic covenant (27:11–26; 28:15–68), which describe what will happen in
the future if God’s people disobey, including being exiled from their land.
The covenant also laid out all the wondrous ways that God would bless his
people for their faithfulness (28:1–14). When Israel breaks the covenant,
God sends the prophets as covenant mediators to call his people back to him
and warn them of the judgment that they would experience if they
continued to disobey. The prophets became covenant prosecutors sent by
God to bring a complaint against the people for their disobedience and to
hold out blessings if they repented.10
Although the prophets received direct revelation from God, they also
preached the stipulations of the Mosaic covenant to the people.11 Jeremiah
is specifically told to proclaim the words of the covenant in the cities of
Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem (Jer. 11:6). Covenant blessings can be
broken down into two broad categories. Blessings in nature include
agricultural plenty, livestock fertility, health, prosperity, and population
increase. Blessings in warfare include the defeat of enemies, the end of
warfare, relief from destruction, and return from exile.12 Covenant
judgment can also be broken down into two categories. Judgment in nature
includes drought, pestilence, famine, disease, wild animals, and population
loss. Judgment in warfare includes defeat, siege, occupation, death,
destruction, and exile.13 Specific stipulations of the curses are used by the
prophet to warn the people of coming judgment. Deuteronomy 28:30 states,
“You shall build a house, but you shall not dwell in it,” and Zephaniah 1:13
reflects this: “Though they build houses, they shall not inhabit them.”14 In
this way the prophets preached the Mosaic covenant to the people of God.
The Important Role of the Prophet in Israel
The prophets are not the only way that God communicated with his
people. First Samuel 28:6 mentions the legitimate ways that God might
have spoken to King Saul, including dreams, Urim, and prophets. God used
dreams to communicate with both Israelites (Jacob in Gen. 28:10–17;
Solomon in 1 Kings 3:5, 15; and Joseph in Matt. 1:20) and non-Israelites
(Abimelech in Gen. 20; two Midianite soldiers in Judg. 7; and the Magi in
Matt. 2). Numbers 12:6 identifies dreams, along with visions, as the ways in
which God would speak to a prophet. Sometimes dreams had to be
interpreted, with the source of the interpretation coming from God (Gen.
41; Dan. 2). Downsides to dreams included that they can be fleeting (Job
20:8), they might be caused by the cares of this world (Eccl. 5:3), and they
can be deceptively used by false prophets who claim to have revelation
from God (Jer. 29:8–9).
God also used the Urim and Thummim (UT) to communicate with his
people. Although there is a lot about the UT that we do not know, they were
associated with the ephod of the priests and were used to make decisions
concerning the nation.15 They were used by Joshua to know when to go out
to battle (Num. 27:21), and David used them to inquire of the Lord
concerning various decisions early in his reign. For example, he used them
to find out whether the city of Keilah would deliver him into the hands of
Saul (1 Sam. 23:6) and whether he should pursue the Amalekites, who had
raided the city of Ziklag and carried off the families of David and his men.
The UT are also mentioned in Ezra 2 as a way to determine the ancestry of
the priests who returned from exile (v. 63).
Although dreams, UT, and prophets were the legitimate ways that God
would communicate with his people, the role of the prophet emerged as the
main way that God revealed his purposes. Although he communicated with
individuals, primarily kings, through dreams, dreams were also a way in
which God would speak to a prophet (Num. 12:6). In this way dreams and
prophets were bound together. The UT are mentioned in connection with
Joshua and David, but their use disappears with the rise of prophets in
Israel. Prophets became the primary way that God revealed himself to his
people.16 Amos affirms this when he writes, “For the Lord GOD does
nothing without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets” (3:7).
 Called by God
The Old Testament prophet’s major role as the primary way that God
would speak to his people is supported by several other factors. The
prophets were set apart through a call from God. Some prophets specifically
mention their call, including Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Several
components are common to the call. First, it is clear when the prophet is
called. Jeremiah is told by God that he was appointed as a prophet before he
was born (Jer. 1:5). All three prophets are told that they were being sent to a
rebellious people who would not necessarily receive their message from
God. The prophets were not, however, to be afraid of the people’s rejection,
words, or even looks in reaction to the prophets’ message (vv. 16–19; Ezek.
2:4–7). Second, the prophets emphasized their inadequacy to fulfill their
prophetic role, often accompanied by excuses. When Isaiah saw the glory of
God’s holiness, he exclaimed, “Woe is me” (Isa. 6:5). Jeremiah protested
that he did not know how to speak because he was only a youth (Jer. 1:6).
In Ezekiel there is tension as to whether he will accept the call (Ezek. 3:14–
15).17 He is told not to be rebellious like the people of God, he is made to
eat the scroll (v. 1), and he is told the seriousness of the responsibility of a
prophet to be a watchman (vv. 16–21). Finally, once a prophet is called, he
feels constrained by the call to speak the word of God. This is seen most
clearly in Jeremiah, who faced a difficult situation because of the way he
was treated by the people who rejected his message (Jer. 11:21; 20:1–6).
Even in hardship God’s words were a joy and delight (15:16), and he was
unable to refrain from speaking them (20:9). The call of the prophet
emphasized his important role within God’s redemptive program.

Anointed with Oil

Evidence shows that at least some of the prophets were anointed with
oil. Although the evidence is not as extensive as it is with the priests and
kings, there is one clear instance in which a prophet is anointed for service.
Elijah is told to anoint Elisha so that he would be a prophet to take Elijah’s
place (1 Kings 19:16). The other passage18 in the Old Testament that might
indicate prophets’ being anointed is Psalm 105:15, which states, “Touch not
my anointed ones, do my prophets no harm!” The parallelism in this verse
seems to identify the anointed ones with the prophets. Psalm 105 is a
review of the history of Israel, and verse 15 occurs in the review of the
patriarchal period, making this a reference to the patriarchs. The plural
forms indicate that not just Abraham is in view. He is called a prophet in
Genesis 20:7, and this designation can also be applied to Isaac and Jacob.
No evidence shows that the patriarchs were anointed with oil, so this may
be a metaphorical use of anointing, showing that Yahweh had claimed them
as his own and that they were under his protection.19 Calvin argues that
these terms in verse 15 refer to the people of God, who were few in number
and wandered from nation to nation (vv. 12–13).20 If this passage is
referring more broadly to the people of God and not just to the patriarchs, it
foreshadows (1) the prophetic role that the nation of Israel will fulfill and
(2) the later use of anointed to refer to the people of God after the coming
of Christ. Clearly, anointing with oil is closely associated with being a
prophet, even if that anointing does not happen to every prophet. The
anointing emphasizes that prophets are set apart for God. One can see here,
at least in a general sense, the internal call confirmed by some kind of
external recognition.
The Emergence of the Prophets in the History of
Israel
Early in Israel’s history, in the book of Judges, the prophets were raised
up by God to warn Israel of the consequences of disobedience. During the
days of Joshua, the Lord gave instructions directly (Josh. 3:7; 4:15; 5:2; 6:2;
8:1, 18; 13:1); both the identification of Achan as the one who took the
devoted things from the spoils of Jericho and the distribution of the land
among the tribes were done by lot.21 At the beginning of the book of Judges
the people inquire of the Lord which tribe should go up first to fight against
the Canaanites. Their method of inquiring of the Lord is not specified, but it
could have been the UT. When Israel failed to drive out the Canaanites, the
angel of Yahweh was sent to warn the people of the consequences of their
disobedience (Judg. 2:1–5). Then in Judges 6:7–10 the Lord sent a prophet
to warn the people when they cried out to him. The prophet’s message is
similar to the earlier message of the angel of Yahweh: God has delivered his
people from Egypt and has given them the land, but they have not obeyed
him. The role of the prophet to speak God’s warning to his people goes
back to Moses and becomes prominent in the work of future prophets.
Samuel is a transitional figure standing between the period of the judges
and the period of the monarchy. He functions as a priest, a judge, and a
prophet. He was raised up by God at a time when the people needed
leadership at the national level (Judg. 17:6) and at the priestly level,
because the sons of Eli were wicked (1 Sam. 2:12–17). The Lord even sent
a prophet, called “a man of God,” to rebuke Eli for his sons’ wickedness
and to proclaim the coming disaster upon them. Even though a prophet is
sent to Eli with this message of condemnation, 1 Samuel 3:1 says that the
word of Yahweh was rare in those days. As a boy, Samuel was ministering
to Yahweh in the presence of Eli, and when the Lord called to Samuel, he
did not recognize it as the Lord but thought Eli was calling him. Eli
concluded that it was the Lord speaking with Samuel, and so Samuel
responded with: “Speak, for your servant hears” (v. 10). God then declared
to Samuel how he was going to punish the house of Eli. This began the
prophetic ministry of Samuel, who had the presence of the Lord, and the
Lord gave success to his words (v. 19).22 Thus everyone from Dan to
Beersheba knew that Samuel was established as a prophet. Samuel’s
prophetic ministry was demonstrated early when he received the word of
God (7:9), spoke the word of God to the people (vv. 3–4), and prayed for
the people (v. 5).

The Prophet and the King

The establishment of a king in Israel elevated the role of the prophet.
The relationship between the prophet and the king is highlighted in
Samuel’s farewell address to Israel (1 Sam. 12). Samuel asserts his integrity
before the people; warns them, based on their history, of the dangers of
disobedience; and exhorts them to fear the Lord, obey his voice, and not
rebel against his commandment. If they do these things, it will be well with
them, but if they do not, the Lord will be against them and their king. Both
the people and the king are to obey the Lord. The importance of this is
played out in the kingship of Saul. When Saul disobeyed the word of the
Lord by Samuel in 1 Samuel 13, he lost the prospect of an eternal kingdom
(v. 13). When he disobeyed the Lord a second time by not destroying the
Amalekites and their king (ch. 15), God rejected him as king. The king
must submit himself to the word of God, or the king will be judged by God.
This means that the king must submit to the prophet who speaks the word
of God.
Not many prophets are mentioned during the kingship of David, perhaps
because David was, for the most part, a godly king. David used the UT for
decisions related to warfare (1 Sam. 23:1–2) and the kingship (2 Sam. 2:1–
2). The prophet Nathan assumed a role related to the Davidic covenant and
to David’s sin with Bathsheba. Regarding the Davidic covenant, he revealed
from God why David will not build the temple. He also told David that God
wanted to build him a house/dynasty, with the promise of a descendant who
would sit on the throne forever. Regarding David’s sin, Nathan confronted
him, pronounced God’s forgiveness, told him that the child will die, and
affirmed God’s love for Solomon—another son whom Bathsheba bore to
David. The prophet Gad is also mentioned in connection to David. He
helped when David was fleeing Saul (1 Sam. 22:5), he presented the word
of the Lord to David concerning the punishments he could choose from
after the census (2 Sam. 24:11–14), and he encouraged David to build an
altar to the Lord on the threshing floor of Araunah to halt the punishment
(vv. 18–19). There is little evidence that Nathan or Gad spoke to the people.
Their ministry was mainly to the king; in fact, Gad is called David’s seer (v.
11). These prophets function like court advisers, but it is clear that they
speak the word of God to the king.
Not many prophets were involved in the reign of Solomon. Nathan was
involved in the establishment of his kingship, but many times the Lord
spoke directly to him. Later in his reign, after Solomon turned away from
the Lord, God raised up the prophet Ahijah to tell Jeroboam that he would
reign over ten tribes of Israel. Once the kingdom was divided, the prophets
became outsiders to the royal court because many times they brought a
message of God’s judgment to the king and people. Many faithful prophets
were raised up by God to serve in the early days of the divided kingdom.
Several of them were anonymous (1 Kings 20:13; 2 Kings 9:1–4).23
Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom, set that kingdom’s path
on the road to apostasy when he set up his own centers of worship in Dan
and Bethel (1 Kings 12:25–33). The height of apostasy was reached in the
days of Ahab and Jezebel with their commitment to Baal worship. This
false commitment to Baal spilled over into the southern kingdom (2 Kings
8:16–19; 11:1–3), and many kings in the southern kingdom were also
disobedient to God and encouraged false worship (Ahaz, Manasseh,
Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Zedekiah). God responded to this covenant
disobedience by raising up the prophets, who spoke his message in difficult
situations.

The School of the Prophets

The prophets’ significant role becomes clear in the emergence of the
school of the prophets, the ministries of Elijah and Elisha, and the legacy of
the writing prophets. Little is known about the school of the prophets. The
first mention of a group of prophets is in the anointing of Saul as king (1
Sam. 10:10–13). A group of prophets met Saul, and the Spirit of God
rushed on him and he prophesied with them. No information is given for the
origin of this group, but in a similar incident later in Saul’s life (19:20–24),
a company of prophets led by Samuel is mentioned. It is likely that Samuel
had something to do with organizing this company. The word of the Lord
was rare at the beginning of Samuel’s life (3:1), and these prophets may
have been raised up by God and organized by Samuel to meet the situations
that would develop in the early days of the kingship of Saul and later in the
divided kingdom. They were certainly prominent during the crises faced by
Elijah and Elisha.
The function of the school of the prophets can only be surmised from
the little that is said in the Scriptures.24 The first activity mentioned is
“prophesying” (1 Sam. 10:10–13). It is unclear exactly what this activity
involves,25 but the Spirit of God rushed on Saul and he prophesied among
the prophets. One implication of this incident at the beginning of the
kingship of Saul is that the newly appointed king was to be subordinate to
the Spirit and the prophetic word.26 The connection of prophesy with the
use of musical instruments (1 Chron. 25:1–5) implies that prophesying
includes praising God. Praising God has a prophetic aspect because praise
includes God’s exaltation, but prophesying also includes warning and
admonition. During the famine and the emergence of Baal worship under
Ahab, the prophets found comfort, help, and fellowship in living together (2
Kings 6:1–7).27 Possibly training took place; at least they would learn
together as they watched the ministries of Elijah and Elisha. Elisha uses one
of the sons of the prophets to anoint Jehu as king of Israel (9:1–5).

The Ministries of Elijah and Elisha

The back-to-back ministries of Elijah and Elisha are significant for the
history of Israel, but they also have implications for redemptive history.
Elijah specifically confronted the worship of Baal that was supported by
King Ahab and Jezebel. The three-year famine was a direct attack on Baal,
who was the storm god. The confrontation of Elijah with the prophets of
Baal on Mount Carmel showed that Yahweh was God, not Baal. The
ministry of Elijah demonstrated what a true prophet should be as he stood
faithfully for Yahweh and against the worship of false gods. He called the
king and God’s people to faithful obedience to the covenant. Just as Moses
became identified with the Torah, Elijah embodied the prophets as one who
would appear before the great and terrible day of the Lord (Mal. 4:4–6).
Elisha was Elijah’s successor, and he received a double portion of
Elijah’s spirit. His ministry was noted for its many miracles, which
established him as an authentic prophet and the true successor to Elijah (2
Kings 2:13–15). His miracles included helping the band of the prophets
(6:1–7), thwarting the plans of the enemy in divine warfare (vv. 8–23),
multiplying bread for the sons of the prophets (4:42–44), and raising the
dead (vv. 8–37). Elisha’s ministry paralleled Elijah’s, but there were
differences. Elijah was mainly used by God to confront his people in their
worship of Baal. Elisha’s ministry emphasized encouraging the faithful
remnant and reminding people that God is the One who delivers. Both show
that God has power over death (1 Kings 17:17–24; 2 Kings 4:18–37). The
ministries of Elijah and Elisha set up an interesting parallel between John
the Baptist and Jesus (see chapter 3).

The Writing Prophets

It is hard to overestimate the importance of the writing prophets’ legacy
in their passion for God, their boldness in proclamation, and their literary
compositions’ complexity. Nothing compares to them in the ancient Near
East. The purpose here is to highlight their work related to the role of the
prophet. In Amos the close relationship between Yahweh and the prophet is
brought out in the pronouncement of covenant curses. Amos presents
Yahweh like a lion who roars from Zion (Amos 1:2) as he comes to
pronounce judgment. Instead of God’s sending wild beasts against his
people (Lev. 26:22), Yahweh himself shows up as the “wild beast.” The role
of the prophet is to proclaim the roar of the lion. When the lion roars, there
is fear; when God has spoken, the prophets must prophesy (Amos 3:8)
because God reveals his secrets to them (v. 7). In Isaiah 6 the impact of the
prophetic message is given after Isaiah sees the holiness of God and is
commissioned as a prophet. He is told that the prophetic word will lead to a
judicial hardening of God’s people (vv. 9–10). In this way the word of God
accomplishes the purposes for which God has ordained it (55:10–11). Those
purposes include both salvation (vv. 12–13) and judgment (6:9–10). In
Ezekiel the responsibility of the prophet is emphasized when the prophet is
identified as a watchman (3:16–21; 33:1–9). The important role of the
watchman was to warn a city of a coming enemy. The watchman had the
responsibility to warn the people of God so that they might turn from their
wickedness. If a prophet failed to warn God’s people of their sin, then not
only would the people die but the prophet would be held responsible for
their blood. To fulfill such a ministry, the prophets were dependent on the
Holy Spirit, who had given them the power to proclaim to “Jacob his
transgression and to Israel his sin” (Mic. 3:8).
Opposition to the Prophets
The calling of prophets was difficult because of the opposition they
faced. They had to be committed to God above everything else, because the
prophets put their lives on the line for the sake of the truth of God’s word.
They identified with the cause of God so closely because his word became
part of their lives. Ezekiel was told to eat the scroll (3:1), and Jeremiah
declared that the word of God was shut up in his bones (20:9). Both Ezekiel
and Jeremiah were told not to be afraid when they faced opposition, not
even to be afraid of their faces (Jer. 1:8; Ezek. 2:4),28 as they proclaimed
the truth of God’s word. Prophets had to develop a tough skin, because
many would fight against them and their message (Jer. 1:16–19). Ezekiel
lost his wife, the desire of his eyes (Ezek. 24:15–24), which became a
lesson to the people of God that they too would lose what they loved when
Jerusalem was destroyed.
Jeremiah also suffered greatly as a prophet. Although he had the support
of some people at various times in his ministry (Jer. 26:16–19), it seemed
that everyone was against him. Not only was he opposed by priests, false
prophets, and the kings of Judah (20:1–4; 28:5–16; 32:1–5), but even
Jeremiah’s family and the men of his hometown of Anathoth were against
him (11:21–23). He described himself as “a gentle lamb led to the
slaughter” (v. 19). He was considered a traitor, because as the fall of
Jerusalem drew near he proclaimed that the people should surrender to the
Babylonians (21:1–10). The sufferings of Jeremiah led to several laments in
which he expressed the depths of his pain. He had been ostracized by
everyone so that he sat alone, separated from the rest of society (15:17). He
even wished that he had not been born (20:14–18). Jeremiah struggled with
the word God gave to him. On the one hand, the word had become a
reproach to him—so much so that he decided not to speak anymore in
God’s name. But he could not refrain because the word of God was a
burning fire within him that could not be contained (v. 9). On the other
hand, it was the joy and delight of his heart (15:16). Jeremiah also struggled
with his relationship with God; at times he felt abandoned. He even
expressed that he could not count on God, who was like a deceitful brook
with no water (v. 18). Jeremiah did not fully comprehend what being a
prophet would entail because God called him when he was young (20:7). Of
course, he also knew the goodness and grace of God. Although God spared
his life, other prophets were put to death (26:20–23). The prophets suffered
greatly for the sake of the truth of God’s word.
The Prophet and Prayer
The prophet was also to intercede for others. Abraham was called a
prophet (Gen. 20:7) specifically regarding his role of intercession. He
interceded for Sodom and Gomorrah that God’s judgment would not
destroy the righteous with the wicked (18:22–33). He prayed for the
household of Abimelech that God would take away the barrenness that God
had sent to protect Sarah (20:11–17). Pharaoh asked Moses to pray to
Yahweh because he recognized Moses’ mediatorial role in relationship to
the plagues (Ex. 8:8–15; 9:27–35; 10:17–20). Moses interceded for Miriam
when she was struck with leprosy for opposing him (Num. 12:13–15). Even
though Samuel did not agree with the people’s request for a king, he
committed himself to pray for them; in fact, he notes that it would be a sin
against the Lord if he did not pray for them.
The prophet was to have a ministry of prayer. He should pray for God’s
people, even when they have rejected the word of God or acted in
disobedience. Intercession was often a role of pleading with God to show
mercy to people instead of showing them the judgment they deserve. Thus
it is rather shocking to hear God tell Jeremiah several times not to pray for
the people (Jer. 7:16; 11:14; 14:11–12). This assumes that Jeremiah would
be carrying out the regular role of intercession. It also gives insight into the
times in which Jeremiah lived. During the closing days of the southern
kingdom it became inevitable that judgment was going to fall on Judah, and
at that point, prayer was no longer necessary because there was no
possibility that God’s judgment could be averted. Clearly, the ministry of
the prophets consisted of the word of God and prayer.
The Coming of a Future Prophet
A view developed in the Old Testament that God would send his people
a Prophet who will usher in a coming day of restoration. Deuteronomy
18:15 states that God will send a Prophet like Moses to the people, and
Deuteronomy 34:10–12 asserts that such a Prophet has not yet arisen in
Israel. The figure in Isaiah 61 can be associated with the role of the prophet
because he proclaims the good news of God’s salvation. Joel speaks of a
coming day when the Spirit of God will be poured out upon God’s people
so that sons and daughters, young and old, and male and female servants
will prophesy. This wider ability to prophesy goes back to an incident in
Numbers 11 when Moses complains about the burden of meeting the
people’s expectations. God helps by setting apart seventy elders and by
sending the Spirit upon them so that they prophesied. When someone
complained that two men remained in the camp prophesying, Moses
responded, “Would that all the Lord’s people were prophets, that the Lord
would put his Spirit on them!” This is the hope expressed in Joel 2, which
awaits the coming of the awesome day of the Lord when everyone who
calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (vv. 31–32). Malachi 4:5 speaks
of this same day, which will be preceded by the coming of Elijah the
prophet who will begin the process of reconciliation “before the great and
awesome day of the LORD.”
Study Questions
1. Define divination and list some of its practices. Why does God call
such practices abominations?
2. How would you define prophet? What do the different words used for
prophet emphasize?
3. How can a false prophet be identified? How did God’s people respond
to false prophets?
4. Discuss the implications of the singular use of prophet in
Deuteronomy 18:15.
5. How do the prophets preach the Mosaic covenant to the nation of
Israel?
6. Discuss the role of the UT.
7. How were the prophets set apart for their ministry?
8. Discuss the role of the prophet in relationship to the king.
9. Why were the ministries of Elijah and Elisha important?
10. How do the opposition to the prophets and the importance of prayer
relate to pastoral ministry?

_______________
1. Eugene Merrill, Deuteronomy (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 39. He entitles
Deuteronomy 16:18–18:22 “Kingdom Officials” and sees this section as an exposition of the fifth
commandment. See also John D. Currid, A Study Commentary on Deuteronomy (Darlington, UK:
Evangelical Press, 2006).
2. Bruce K. Waltke, Finding the Will of God: A Pagan Notion? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995),
29–40.
3. Currid, Deuteronomy, 321. See John Day, Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old
Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 82–85.
4. Willem A. VanGemeren, Interpreting the Prophetic Word (Grand Rapids: Academie Books,
1990), 19–23. He gives extensive bibliographical references to these practices.
5. The term navi is used more than four hundred times in the OT, the term roeh is used twelve
times, and the term khozeh is used sixteen times. Although the terms are interchangeable, navi puts
more stress on the active work of the prophet in proclaiming the message, and the other two terms
put more stress on the subjective aspect of receiving the divine revelation (William White, ,
TWOT, 2:823).
6. In the new covenant community a false prophet would not be removed by death but by
excommunication.
7. For the nature of prophetic proclamation in the context of historical contingencies, which
includes how people respond to a prophecy, see Richard Pratt, “Historical Contingencies and Biblical
Predictions,” in The Way of Wisdom, ed. J. I. Packer and Sven K. Sonderlund (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2000), 180–203. This article can also be accessed at thirdmill.org.
8. For a robust defense that Deuteronomy 18:15 refers only to the coming Prophet and not to the
prophets that arise in Israel’s history, see Michael Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew
Bible Really Messianic? (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 56–64.
9. The singular noun can be a collective form indicating a succession of prophets, which would
parallel the use of the word king in Deuteronomy 17:14–20. Peter C. Craigie, The Book of
Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 262n18.
10. For general issues related to the covenant lawsuit, see Herbert B. Huffmon, “The Covenant
Lawsuit in the Prophets,” JBL 78 (1959): 286–95. For discussion of the definition of the word riv (
) and its use in international relationships and in the Prophets, see James Limburg, “The Root
and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,” JBL 88 (1969): 291–304.
11. For a discussion of the relationship of Deuteronomy to the structure of the Hittite
international treaties of the second millennium, see Meredith Kline, Treaty of the Great King (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963); K. A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2003).
12. These categories come from Richard Pratt, He Gave Us Prophets videos, Third Millennium
Ministries, 1999. See also Douglas Stuart, who lists ten covenant blessings. Hosea–Jonah (Dallas:
Word Books, 1987), xli–lii.
13. Pratt, He Gave Us Prophets. See also Stuart, who lists twenty-seven types of covenant
judgment (Hosea–Jonah, xxxi–xl).
14. For more examples from Zephaniah 1, see O. Palmer Robertson, The Books of Nahum,
Habakkuk, and Zephaniah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 254–55. If Zephaniah is specifically
quoting from the curses of the book of the covenant, this would support a date for Zephaniah after the
discovery of the book of the law in 621 b.c. Another example of a prophet’s preaching the curses of
the covenant to the people is Ezekiel 5:10–17, which uses terminology from Leviticus 26:22–33.
15. The UT appear to be two stone pieces connected to the breastplate of the high priest (called
the breastpiece of judgment) that was attached to the ephod. How the two stones were used to make
decisions is not known. For a review of how they are understood to function, see Cornelius Van Dam,
The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns,
1997), 9–38. The UT were a divinely ordained method of inductive divination used when the leader
or king needed to make a decision that related to the nation. The UT were probably in view if a king
was said to inquire of the Lord.
16. For the evidence of professional prophets who speak in the name of a deity and how they
functioned in the ANE, see J. Stokl, “Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy,” in Dictionary of the Old
Testament Prophets, ed. Mark J. Boda and J. Gordon McConville (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2013), 16–24. The function of the prophets in Israel had several unique features: they emerged
as the main way in which God spoke to his people, their function extended over a long period of
time, they had a more antagonistic relationship to the king, and they left a written legacy unmatched
in the ANE. See also Abraham Malamat, “Prophecy at Mari,” in The Place Is Too Small for Us, ed.
Robert P. Gordon (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1995), 50–73.
17. For the view that Ezekiel is resisting the call in Ezekiel 3:14–15, see Daniel I. Block, The
Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 1–24 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 135–38.
18. There are too many questions surrounding Zechariah 4:14 to use it as a text that confirms the
anointing of the prophets. Even if the two olive trees that supply oil for the lampstand are prophets
(see Mark Boda, Haggai, Zechariah [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004], 274–75), “sons of oil” (literal
translation) in verse 14 may not signify anointing (a different term for oil is used for the anointing
oil). It may refer to oil supplied by the prophets for the lampstand.
19. John Goldingay, Psalms 1–41 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 209.
20. John Calvin, Psalms 93–150 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 182–83.
 21. For a good discussion of the difference between the lot and the UT, see Van Dam, Urim and
Thummim, 215–18.
22. Both the words of the “man of God” and the word that God gave to Samuel about the house
of Eli came to pass (1 Sam. 4:10–22).
23. For a list of the prophets who served during the days of the divided kingdom, see
VanGemeren, Interpreting the Prophetic Word, 49.
24. For a perceptive discussion of the sons of the prophets, see the older work by Hobart E.
Freeman, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets (Chicago: Moody Press, 1968), 28–34; see
also P. A. Verhoef, “Prophecy,” in NIDOTTE, 4:1073.
25. Many argue that the prophets of Israel engaged in ecstatic activity based on ANE parallels
(Moshe Weinfeld, "Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature," in The Place Is Too Small
for Us, 35–37). For the view that the prophets were not engaging in ecstatic behavior and that the use
of musical instruments was a way to praise God, see Leon J. Wood, The Holy Spirit in the Old
Testament (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 1998), 101–12. Wood acknowledges that a strong
emotional involvement is related to this activity. Others are more willing to allow for some kind of
divinely induced revelatory experience that would be different from that of the pagan prophets.
Ronald F. Youngblood, “1–2 Samuel,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 3:624–25; Edward J. Young, My Servants the Prophets (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 86.
26. A similar incident occurs later in Saul’s reign as he is pursuing David. By this time Saul had
rejected the word of God and thus had been rejected by God as king. In 1 Samuel 19 Saul sent
messengers after David; they were overcome by the Spirit of God and prophesied with the prophets.
Finally, Saul himself came and he too prophesied after the Spirit of God came on him. Unlike the
first time that Saul prophesied (ch. 10), this was not a positive experience. Saul stripped off his
clothes and lay naked all day and night. Such an experience was not mentioned concerning the other
messengers whom Saul had sent. This shows Saul resisting God’s will concerning the rejection of his
kingship and the elevation of David. In despair and melancholy, Saul realized that there was little
hope for his kingship, but he continued to fight the will of God. Wood, Holy Spirit in the Old
Testament, 106.
27. Freeman, Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets, 30–34. He notes that the sons of the
prophets were supported by the gifts of the people, lived in common dwellings, and primarily
performed a religious service.
28. Jeremiah 1:8 literally reads “their faces.”
 3
CHRIST AS PROPHET: MIGHTY IN WORD
AND DEED

WHEN JOHN THE BAPTIST came preaching that people must repent,
“for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” many wondered who he was. The
priests and Levites from Jerusalem even asked him, “Who are you?” (John
1:19). In their conversation they also asked him, “Are you the Prophet?” (v.
21). It is clear that people were looking for the coming Prophet. This hope
goes back to the promise of Deuteronomy 18:15 and the desire for this
Prophet in Deuteronomy 34:10–12. Clear statements later in Israel’s history
show that prophetic revelation had ceased. During the Maccabean period,
the cessation of prophecy is acknowledged (1 Macc. 4:46; 9:27; 14:41); in
fact, the period of prophetic activity had long ceased by that time.1 People
in the first century were looking for the Prophet who would end God’s
silence, speak God’s word, and restore God’s people.
The Ministry of John the Baptist
John the Baptist was not the Prophet, but he had a significant role to
play in preparing the way for and witnessing to the Prophet. John
understood his role as preparing the way of the Lord (Isa. 40:3; Matt. 3:1–
3). He accomplished this in the Judean wilderness by proclaiming the
coming of the kingdom and by baptizing those who confessed their sin.
John even reluctantly baptized Jesus, not because Jesus had sin to confess
but “to fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15). Jesus had to be baptized to
fulfill the law and to identify with sinners.2 His baptism also launched his
public ministry, with a declaration from heaven confirming that he was the
Son of God. This can be considered Jesus’ call to ministry in line with the
prophets of old.3 Confirmation of this call comes in a number of ways, but
at the Mount of Transfiguration the prophetic role of Jesus is confirmed.
Two Old Testament figures, Moses and Elijah, appear with Jesus on the
mount. They represent the Law and the Prophets that give witness to him,
but both figures are also prophets. Moses is the foundational prophet of the
old covenant. He is the type of prophet that the people hoped God would
send to them (Deut. 18:15). Elijah stood firm for the truth of God in the face
of apostasy. When Peter suggests that he build three tents, one for each of
them, a voice from the cloud exclaims, “This is my beloved Son, with
whom I am well pleased; listen to him” (Matt. 17:5). Someone greater than
Moses and Elijah is here. Someone greater than the great prophets of old is
here. The directive “listen to him” means that he is the One through whom
God would speak. He is the One who will reveal the purposes and
revelation of God. He is the Prophet to whom God’s people must listen.
The ministry of John the Baptist prepares the way for the coming of the
Lord. Although John denies that he is Elijah (John 1:21), Jesus affirms that
John is fulfilling the role of Elijah in his ministry of preparation for the
coming One.4 This ministry is in accordance with Malachi 4:5–6, which
states that God would send Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible
day of the Lord. His ministry will be a ministry of reconciliation to turn the
hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers.
This is not just a restoration of the social order but the restoration of the
covenant itself.5 John preaches a message of repentance and confession so
that people can be right with God in preparation for the coming One. He is
much like Elijah in his ministry of confrontation, especially toward the
leaders of the Jewish people (Matt. 3:7–10).
John also speaks of the ministry of the coming One in prophetic terms.
While John baptizes only with water for repentance, the One who comes
will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit
is associated with the prophets and prophetic activity in the Old Testament
(Num. 11:26–30; Joel 2:28–29). The One who comes will baptize with the
Holy Spirit, and there will be an increase of prophetic activity among God’s
people. John also proclaims that the One who comes will come in
judgment. He will clear the threshing floor with his winnowing hook, will
baptize with fire—a figure of judgment—and will burn the chaff (Matt.
3:11–12). He will also come to gather the wheat into the barn, a picture of
the salvation of his people. John, like the prophets of old, saw the two
aspects of the day of the Lord as happening in one great event that would
bring an end to history. As John languishes in prison and hears of the deeds
of Christ, he sends his disciples to Jesus to ask whether he is really the One
or whether they should look for another. Perhaps John did not see judgment
in the ministry of Jesus. But Jesus’ response emphasizes the deeds of
salvation that are being accomplished. He ends with the words, “And
blessed is the one who is not offended by me” (11:6). The offense may have
to do with the grace of salvation that comes to sinners through Jesus. The
great day of judgment will be delayed so that his kingdom can spread over
all the earth.6 The ministry of John the Baptist is a prophetic ministry like
that of Elijah the prophet, and his testimony is that the One who comes will
also carry out the ministry of a prophet.
A Prophet like Moses
Jesus is identified by the two men on the road to Emmaus as a Prophet
mighty in word and deed (Luke 24:19). Many parallels between Moses and
Jesus confirm that he is the Prophet “like me” (Deut. 18:15) sent from God.
Unlike the other prophets, Moses experienced God speaking to him clearly
and directly, even face-to-face (34:10). Jesus had an even closer relationship
to the God of Moses, his own Father. Before the world began he was in his
presence and shared his glory (John 17:5). Moses performed mighty deeds
in the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, and Jesus performed miracles in the
deliverance of his people from the power of sin and death. Moses’ face
shone after speaking with God on Mount Sinai, and in Jesus’ transfiguration
his clothes became white and “his face shone like the sun” (Matt. 17:2).
These parallels show that Jesus is the Prophet “like Moses,” but (1) he is
even greater than Moses because he brings a greater deliverance and (2) he
has more glory because he is the Son (Heb. 3:1–6).
In light of the parallels between Moses and Jesus, it is not surprising to
find references and allusions to Deuteronomy 18:15–22 in the New
Testament. It is interesting that when John the Baptist denies that he is the
Christ (the Messiah), he is asked whether he is the Prophet (John 1:20–21).
Some people in Jesus’ day may have distinguished the Messiah from the
Prophet (7:40–41), but others may have identified the two together.7 The
woman at the well connects the Messiah’s coming with the prophetic
ministry of the disclosure of all things (4:25).8 The New Testament
confirms the identification of the Prophet with Jesus the Christ.
Jesus clearly states that the Scriptures bear witness of him (John 5:39),
and specifically that Moses wrote of him (v. 46). Although no specific
passage by Moses is identified in this text,9 it is not surprising that
Deuteronomy 18:15–22 would be part of this witness in light of how Jesus
fits the role of the Prophet. Concepts in Deuteronomy 18:19 are alluded to
in John 5. God warns the people that he will require it of them if they do not
listen to the prophet who speaks in his name (Deut. 18:19). Jesus comes in
the name of the Father, and the people do not receive him (John 5:43). Jesus
defines his ministry as that of a prophet when he talks of being sent by the
authority of the Father and speaking what the Father has given him to speak
(12:49–50).
The key text of Deuteronomy 18:15 is cited twice in Acts. In the speech
of Stephen in Acts 7, he gives a review of the history of Israel to answer the
charge that he spoke against the temple and the law. Part of his argument is
that the Jewish people’s refusal to acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah lines
up with their treatment of God’s messengers in the Old Testament. Moses
was rejected by the people of Israel, the same Moses who spoke the words
of Deuteronomy 18:15. Since the point of his sermon is that the current
generation has betrayed and murdered Jesus (Acts 7:52), it seems clear that
the citation of Deuteronomy is meant to speak of Jesus.10
In Acts 3:22 Peter cites Deuteronomy in a sermon to explain the
significance of his healing of the lame beggar. The man was healed by the
power of Jesus, whom God glorified after his death (vv. 11–16). Although
the people acted in ignorance, the death of Jesus was foretold by the
prophets. The people must now repent so that their sins would be blotted
out and times of refreshing would be poured on them by God. Such blessing
would include the consummation of all things by the coming of Christ,
which the prophets also foretold (vv. 17–21).11 Peter demonstrates that the
prophets spoke of these events in two ways. He confirms that Moses spoke
of the day of Christ when he cites Deuteronomy 18. Not only is the singular
for prophet used, but a single individual is highlighted with the use of that
prophet to whom the people must listen (Acts 3:22–23).12 The prophets
who came after Moses also proclaimed the days of Christ (v. 24).
A Prophet Mighty in Word
During his earthly ministry Jesus was mighty in his use of the Word of
God. Just after his baptism he was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be
tempted by the devil. He met each temptation with a reference to the Word
of God. After Jesus fasted for forty days the tempter challenged him that if
he was the Son of God, he should command stones to become bread (Matt.
4:3). In other words, Jesus should prove his identity by using his power to
meet his need for food. Jesus cites Deuteronomy 8:3 to show that physical
bread is not the only thing that matters in life; there is more important
spiritual food by which human beings must live. The Word of God is the
true source of life.
In the second temptation the devil takes Jesus to the pinnacle of the
temple and challenges him to prove his identity by jumping so that the
angels would catch him (Matt. 4:5–6). The tempter even quotes from Psalm
91:11–12 to give support for this suggestion. Jesus’ response is to quote
from Deuteronomy 6:16 because he realizes that such an act would be
putting God to the test. He would be trying to force God to act in a certain
way to prove something that did not need proving. In the third temptation
Jesus is taken to a high mountain and is shown all the kingdoms of the
world and their glory. The devil promises to give these to Jesus if he will
worship him (Matt. 4:9). Here the temptation is for Jesus to receive in the
wrong way what he has already been promised by his Father. Satan is
offering these things to Jesus apart from his suffering and death on the
cross. Jesus cites Deuteronomy 6:13 to show that God is the only One to be
worshiped, even if that means suffering and death. Instead of entertaining
the possibilities that the temptations offered, as Eve did in the garden, Jesus
rejects the offers by citing Scripture.13 Whereas Adam and Eve failed to
fulfill their prophetic role of correctly handling the word of God, Jesus
succeeds in using the Word of God to defeat the devil.
Jesus was also mighty in word in the authority of his teaching (Matt.
7:28–29). People were astonished because he did not teach them as their
scribes taught. The teaching of the scribes was based on the authority of
what their ancestors said, so they were constantly referencing the views of
the rabbis.14 Jesus did not base his teaching on the authority of anyone else
but taught on the basis of his own authority. He had this authority because
he was the Son of God. The prophets regularly used the messenger formula
(“Thus saith the LORD”) to demonstrate that the word they proclaimed was
the word of God. Jesus does not use the messenger formula when he speaks
because he is the Lord. He also prefaces statements with “Truly, truly, I say
to you.”15 This statement occurs in John 1:51, where significant assertions
are made concerning his identity. Nathanael calls him the Son of God and
the King of Israel (v. 49). In response Jesus affirms his deity by identifying
himself as the glorious Son of Man. He prefaces this statement with “Truly,
truly, I say to you.” The word truly is the word for amen and is often used to
give one’s consent to a prayer. Jesus’ use of this formula to preface what he
says is unique to him and grants certainty to his words.16 He can be certain
because he is the very truth of God and gives life to those who acknowledge
him as the way to God.17
Jesus was also not afraid to speak the truth, both to the people and to the
leaders. In fact, he spoke difficult things before large crowds. In Luke
11:29, when the crowds are increasing, Jesus states, “This generation is an
evil generation. It seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the
sign of Jonah.” Great crowds accompany him, and he says, “If anyone
comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and
children and brothers and sisters, yes, even his own life, he cannot be my
disciple” (14:25). He also says that if someone wants to be his disciple, he
must count the cost and take up the cross. Jesus tells the parable of the self-
righteous Pharisee because some in the crowd trusted in their own
righteousness and treated others with contempt (18:9–14). Jesus also speaks
words of judgment concerning the scribes and Pharisees because they fail to
practice what they preach, and they pile heavy burdens on the people (Matt.
23:1–36). He also weeps over the hard-hearted rebellion of the people of
Jerusalem, who killed the prophets and refused to come under Jesus’
authority (vv. 37–39). They will also kill him, leading to Jerusalem’s
destruction.
Jesus offers salvation to those who will receive the truth and covenant
judgment to those who reject it. He stands in the line of Isaiah the prophet,
whose message was rejected by many, leading to hardened hearts. The
words of Isaiah 6:9–10 are used by Jesus as an explanation for why he
speaks to the people in parables (Matt. 13:14–15; Mark 4:11–12). Through
his ministry, Isaiah’s prophecy is being fulfilled. Jesus speaks the truth
because words of truth will sift the people, separating out those who are not
serious about being his disciples. He is also the covenant Mediator who
prosecutes the covenant against those who reject the Word of God. But
Jesus is greater than any of the prophets who have gone before, because he
not only prosecutes the covenant but has the authority to establish a new
covenant (Luke 22:20).
A Prophet Mighty in Prayer
In his earthly ministry Jesus fulfills the work of a prophet in speaking
the word of God, but he also fulfills it through the ministry of prayer.18
Luke 3:21–22 mentions that Jesus was praying at his baptism when the
Holy Spirit descended on him and a voice from heaven declared that he was
the beloved Son.19 Jesus prayed all night before he chose the twelve
apostles (6:12–13). It is somewhat speculative to ask what Jesus would be
praying about, but he was probably praying for those whom he would
choose to be his apostles. The importance of this decision is seen in the
amount of time he spent praying beforehand. In another instance, after a
busy day of healing people with various ailments, he arose early the next
morning and went to a desolate place to pray (Mark 1:35). Luke 5:16
mentions that as the report about Jesus spread and great crowds gathered to
hear him and to be healed, he would withdraw to desolate places to pray.
Times of prayer must have been a normal part of Jesus’ life and ministry,
including times of prolonged prayer.20 Jesus was praying when he asked the
disciples about who the crowds thought he was (9:18). After Jesus fed the
five thousand and before he walked on the Sea of Galilee, he went up on the
mountain to pray (Matt. 14:23; Mark 6:46). Jesus also took Peter, James,
and John up the mountain to pray, and while he was praying he was
transfigured before them (Luke 9:28–29).
Jesus also prayed fervently in the garden of Gethsemane concerning the
cup that he was about to drink. The agony of his troubled soul is seen in
these ways: (1) he said that his soul was sorrowful even to death (Mark
14:34), (2) he fell to the ground to pray (Matt. 26:39), (3) he had three
sessions of prayer (vv. 38–45), and (4) his sweat became like great drops of
blood (Luke 22:44).21 This fits the picture of Jesus in Hebrews 5:7: “In the
days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries
and tears, to him who was able to save him from death.” That Jesus
wrestled with his Father in prayer is a testimony to his true humanity and
stands him in a long line of saints (lament psalms) and prophets (Habakkuk,
Jeremiah) who also wrestled with God.22 Jesus’ ministry of prayer included
praying for his disciples (Luke 22:31–32; John 17:9, 20), praying for the
people (Luke 23:34),23 and teaching others how to pray (Matt. 6:5–15;
Luke 11:1). Thus prayer becomes one of the means by which Jesus fulfills
his messianic ministry.24 The Word of God and prayer were at the heart of
Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet and will be important for defining the work of
the apostles and elders of the church.
A Prophet Mighty in Suffering
That Jesus must depend on his Father in heaven and wrestle with him in
prayer is a reminder of the suffering of the prophets in the Old Testament.
Like the prophets of old, Jesus is willing to suffer for the truth that he
speaks. In many ways Jeremiah represents a foreshadowing of the suffering
that Jesus would experience. Both preached a message of destruction (Jer.
1:10; Matt. 11:20–24) and salvation (Jer. 1:10; Matt. 9:1–8). Both preached
judgment against the people and their false expectations (Jer. 7:1–4; John
6:52–71), and both confronted the leaders of the people (Jer. 37; Matt. 23).
Both were rejected by close friends and family. Jeremiah was denounced by
friends (Jer. 20:10) and the people of his hometown (11:21). At one point in
Jesus’ ministry his family thought he was out of his mind (Mark 3:21).
They mistook his zeal for God and God’s work as madness.25 Jesus was
rejected by the people of his hometown of Nazareth when he taught in their
synagogue. Although they were astonished at his wisdom and mighty
works, Jesus was too familiar for them to acknowledge who he was, so they
took offense at him (Matt. 13:53–58). Their unbelief was the reason he
could not do many mighty works there. Jesus offers his perspective on the
situation with a proverb: “A prophet is not without honor except in his
hometown and in his own household” (v. 57). He affirms that he is a
Prophet in explaining why he did not do many miracles in his hometown
when he had done many miracles elsewhere.
Jeremiah was opposed by the people (Jer. 26:7), the priests (20:1), the
prophets (28:1–16), and the kings (22:1–30). Jesus’ message was opposed
by the throngs of Jerusalem (Luke 23:18–25), the Pharisees (Matt. 22:15–
22), the scribes (Mark 11:18), the Sadducees (Matt. 22:23–33), and the high
priest (26:57–68). Jeremiah and Jesus’ message was a threat to the leaders
of God’s people. Jesus was also betrayed by one of his own disciples (v.
14). Like Jeremiah, Jesus also wrestled with God’s will for his life (vv. 36–
46). Jeremiah could even write that he was like a lamb led to the slaughter
(Jer. 11:19). But Jesus’ ministry is different from Jeremiah’s and from the
ministry of every other prophet. Although Jeremiah did not give his life in
fulfilling the role of a prophet, there were Old Testament prophets who did
die (Jer. 26:19–23). Jesus also died, but his death was unlike the death of
any other prophet. Jesus’ suffering culminated in the cross, where he
continued to speak the word of God’s judgment (Luke 23:28–31) and
salvation (v. 43), which were accomplished through his death.
A Prophet Mighty in Deed
The two men on the road to Emmaus also declared that Jesus of
Nazareth was a Prophet mighty in deed before God and all the people (Luke
24:19). When Jesus raised a widow’s son from the dead, fear seized the
people; they glorified God and proclaimed that a great Prophet had arisen
among them (7:16). The connection of mighty deeds with a great prophet is
not unusual in light of the ministry of several prophets of old who
performed great wonders. Moses was used by God to deliver his people
from slavery in Egypt through the plagues. This deliverance was more than
just a sociological deliverance of Israel from slavery. It was a spiritual battle
that resulted in a spiritual victory of Yahweh over Pharaoh and the gods of
Egypt (Ex. 7:4–5; 12:12). A serpent on Pharaoh’s crown was believed to
give Pharaoh power from the gods.26 He represented the power of the
serpent so that slavery was not just a physical bondage but a spiritual
bondage. God displayed his power over the spiritual forces of darkness by
the plagues, which led to the deliverance of God’s people. On the Mount of
Transfiguration Jesus spoke with two great prophets of his own “exodus,”
which he would accomplish in Jerusalem (Luke 9:31). Although Moses
may have represented the Law and Elijah the Prophets, both of which Jesus
had come to fulfill,27 the mention of Jesus’ departure with the use of the
word exodus would remind readers of that great redemptive event of the
Old Testament.
Jesus also came to do battle with the spiritual forces of evil. He
demonstrated his power over the kingdom of darkness by casting out
demons. When he is accused of casting out demons by the power of Satan
(Luke 11:15), he responds that if Satan is so divided against himself, his
kingdom would not stand. Instead, someone stronger than Satan is here,
One who has power over the demons. Jesus alludes to the plagues when he
states that if he casts out demons by the finger of God, the kingdom of God
is among them (v. 20). The phrase finger of God was used by the Egyptian
magicians when they could not replicate the third plague (Ex. 8:19). Jesus
has come to do battle with the serpent to deliver his people from the power
of evil. He casts out many demons, and even the demons recognize who he
is. In Luke 4:34 an unclean demon cries out, “What have you to do with us,
Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the
Holy One of God.” This is an exclamation of terror and dismay; the demon
knows that destruction is awaiting him from One more powerful than he
is.28 Jesus will bring a greater deliverance than Moses in the complete
destruction of the forces of evil when the kingdom of God triumphs (Col.
2:15).
Although Elijah’s ministry is associated with John the Baptist, general
associations can be made between Elijah and Jesus concerning the great
deeds that a prophet is able to accomplish. Just as Elijah demonstrated
power over the natural element of rain (1 Kings 17:1), raised the widow’s
son from the dead (vv. 17–24), and defeated the prophets of Baal on Mount
Carmel (ch. 18), so Jesus demonstrated power over the storm on the sea
(Luke 8:22–25), defeated the power of darkness by setting free a man
possessed by many demons (vv. 26–39), and raised Jairus’s daughter from
the dead (vv. 40–43, 49–56). But Elisha, who followed Elijah and received
a double portion of his spirit, performed more miracles than Elijah did.
Many of those miracles foreshadowed the miracles of Jesus. In fact, when
John the Baptist hears from prison about the deeds of Christ, he sends his
disciples to ask Jesus whether he is really the One who is to come or
whether they should look for another. Jesus responds by highlighting the
good news of his ministry and its deeds of salvation that parallel Elisha’s
ministry: the blind receive their sight (2 Kings 6:18–20); lepers are cleansed
(5:1–14); the dead are raised up (4:32–37); and the poor have good news
preached to them—the widow’s oil (vv. 1–7), the good news that the
Shunammite woman would have a child (vv. 9–17), and works of mercy
toward the sons of the prophets (vv. 38–44; 6:1–7). In addition to these
parallels with Elisha’s ministry, it is clear that Jesus is greater than Elisha.
Elisha received a double portion of Elijah’s spirit, but Jesus receives the
Holy Spirit without measure (John 3:34). Elisha’s miracles were used by
God to encourage his people and reestablish his rule in the kingdom of
Israel. Jesus’ miracles demonstrate God’s power to save, but the kingdom
that he established is greater than the Old Testament rule of God in Israel.
Jesus is a Prophet mighty in word and deed. His ministry is effective
because he is not just a human prophet. He does not just proclaim the word
of God; he is the Word of God who was with God from the beginning (John
1:1). He is the Creator and the giver of life (vv. 3–4). He is the Anointed
One sent from God to proclaim the good news of the day of salvation (Isa.
61:1–2a; Luke 4:16–21). He is the Christ, the Messiah sent from God to
proclaim the good news of the kingdom (Mark 1:1, 15). He is the light that
shines in darkness, showing people the way to live: “a light for revelation to
the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel” (Luke 2:32). Even in his
humanity Jesus is full of wisdom (v. 52). As the Word become flesh (John
1:14), he is the fullness of the wisdom of God (1 Cor. 1:24; Col. 2:3). This
is the source of the authority of his teaching and the power of his Word over
creation, human life, and salvation itself. The wisdom of the Old Testament
found in the work of the scribes and the writing of Proverbs finds its
fulfillment in Jesus. He can declare, “I am the way, the truth, and the life”
(John 14:6), and therefore is the only One who can reconcile a person to
God the Father. Jesus accomplishes all that the Word of God has the power
to accomplish. As the Word of God, Jesus has the power to revive the soul
(Mark 2:1–12), make wise the simple (Matt. 13:51–52; Luke 21:15), and
enlighten the eyes (John 9:39).29
Jesus continues his prophetic ministry following his ascension into
heaven, where he gives the apostles further revelation of his Word through
the Spirit.30 Jesus continues to work in the book of Acts as the proclamation
of the Word causes the church to grow and be edified. In the six summary
statements in Acts, the Word of God is at the heart of the growth of the
church either explicitly (6:7; 12:24; 19:20) or implicitly (9:31; 16:5; 28:31).
The apostolic and prophetic Word becomes the foundation of the church
(Eph. 2:20). Peter acknowledges that the prophetic Word is more sure than
the voice that the disciples heard from heaven, so it is important for the
church to give great attention to it (2 Peter 1:16–21). The source of the
Word is God himself. The author of Hebrews recognizes the finality of the
Word spoken by Jesus the Son, not only over the many times and ways in
which God spoke through the prophets, but also because of Jesus’ character
and work (Heb. 1:1–13). When he comes again he will conquer through his
Word, since he will bear the name “The Word of God,” and a sharp sword
will come out of his mouth to strike down the nations (Rev. 19:13–15). The
Word of God will triumph because Christ is the great Prophet, but even
more because he is the Son of God.
Study Questions
1. Discuss John the Baptist’s role in preparing the way for Jesus.
2. How is Jesus a Prophet like Moses in fulfillment of Deuteronomy
18:15?
3. Discuss the various ways that Jesus demonstrates his authority in his
use of the Word of God. What are the implications of his message
compared to those of other religions?
4. What role did prayer play in Jesus’ earthly ministry?
5. How did Jesus’ suffering reflect the life of a prophet?
6. How does Jesus’ ministry relate to the ministries of Elijah and Elisha?

_______________
1. Roger Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background
in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 372. He shows that awareness of prophecy’s
cessation was acknowledged by almost all the Jewish schools of thought (383–85, 399). For a brief
discussion of the rise of Jewish apocalyptic literature and its relationship to written prophecy, see
Ronald E. Clements, Old Testament Prophecy (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996),
177–88.
2. Herman N. Ridderbos, Matthew (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 58–59.
3. The call of Christ also included his anointing, not by literal oil but by the Holy Spirit, who
descended like a dove and rested on him at his baptism.
4. For a discussion of John’s denial and Jesus’ affirmation that John is Elijah, see Leon Morris,
The Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 134–35.
5. Pieter A. Verhof, The Books of Haggai and Malachi (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 342.
6. This delay of judgment is confirmed when Jesus reads from the prophet Isaiah in the
synagogue and he stops reading after the phrase “to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke
4:19, quoting Isa. 61:2). The very next phrase, which Jesus does not read, is “and the day of
vengeance of our God” (Isa. 61:2). Jesus comes for salvation, and the great day of judgment will be
delayed until he comes again.
7. Edward J. Young, My Servants the Prophets (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 32–33. Herman
N. Ridderbos shows that the prophet and the Messiah are clearly distinguished at Qumran. The
Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 64–65.
8. D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 226. He notes
that the Samaritans did not use the term Messiah but preferred the term Taheb, which may mean “the
Restorer.” This One would reveal the truth in line with his role as the ultimate Prophet.
9. Ibid. Carson notes that this is referring to a certain way of reading the Scriptures rather than to
specific passages.
10. I. Howard Marshall, “Acts,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old
Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 563.
11. F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 89–92.
12. E. W. Hengstenberg, Christology of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1970), 39.
 13. For a comparison of the temptation of Adam and Eve with the temptation of Jesus, see R. C.
Sproul, Following Christ (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1983), 70–75.
14. Ridderbos, Matthew, 157. William Hendriksen lists six ways that Jesus’ teaching differed
from the scribes’. Exposition of the Gospel according to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 382–
83.
15. The double formula truly, truly occurs only in John’s Gospel, and it occurs often.
16. Morris, John, 169–70.
17. Carson, John, 491. He points out that Jesus is the Savior (4:42) and the Lamb of God (1:29).
He is the One who, as the way to God, mediates God’s truth and life so that no one comes to the
Father except through him.
18. For a summary of the Lord’s practice of prayer, see James Thomson, The Praying Christ
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 34–55.
19. David Crump, Jesus the Intercessor: Prayer and Christology in Luke–Acts (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1992), 24–25. He shows that Jesus’ intercessory role is rooted in his filial relationship with the
Father; in other words, his role as Son of God—not his subsequent role as risen Lord—is the basis of
his intercessory role, which begins in his earthly ministry and continues in his exaltation to the right
hand of the Father.
20. For a discussion of how Jesus’ prayer life conformed to the Jewish practice of praying three
times a day (sunrise, afternoon, and sunset) and how his prolonged times of prayer at night differed
from the Jewish practice, see Joachin Jeremias, The Prayers of Jesus (London: SCM Press, 1967),
66–77.
21. Sweating drops of blood is associated with a physical condition called hematidrosis, in which
the strain from extreme anguish results in the dilating of subcutaneous capillaries until they burst.
William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 983.
22. Although Jesus was fully God, he was also a human being dependent on the Father, which is
demonstrated in his life of prayer. Thomson, The Praying Christ, 34, 53.
23. Ibid., 50–51. Thomson argues that while on the cross Jesus prays for forgiveness for both the
Roman soldiers and the Jewish people (Luke 23:34).
24. Crump, Jesus the Intercessor, 142–44. He also comments that Luke presents Jesus as the final
Prophet, the Son of God and Messiah, who pursues the ministry of teaching and healing through
God’s power available through prayer (136).
25. There is debate whether Mark 3:21 is referring to Jesus’ family or his friends. Although
William L. Lane translates the Greek phrase as friends, he discusses this text under the broader
heading of “The Character of Jesus’ Family.” The Gospel according to Mark (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1974), 138.
26. John D. Currid, Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), 91.
27. Hendriksen, Luke, 505.
28. Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977),
173.
29. For a discussion of how Psalm 19:7–11 relates to Christ, see Richard P. Belcher Jr., The
Messiah and the Psalms (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2006), 50–55.
30. Jesus promised his disciples that the Holy Spirit would lead them into further truth (John
14:26). With the establishment of a new covenant, the expectation would have been for further
written documents. Michael J. Kruger, Canon Revisited (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 160–70;
Michael J. Kruger, The Question of Canon: Challenging the Status Quo in the New Testament Debate
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2013), 79–118.
 4
THE ROLE OF THE PRIEST IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT

BEFORE PRIESTLY DUTIES are described in the Mosaic law, not much is
known about the priests’ specific functions. Adam’s priestly role is
indirectly seen through the garden of Eden’s being a special place of God’s
presence, through the general parallels between the garden and the later
tabernacle and temple, and through the two verbs used in Genesis 2:15 to
describe Adam’s work (see chapter 1). A mediator was not needed between
God and the human beings he had created. But the entrance of sin into the
world changed the relationship between God and humanity. That God must
clothe Adam and Eve with animal skins alludes to the need for the shedding
of blood to cover sin and shame. Altars must be built and sacrifices offered.
Noah offered burnt offerings to the Lord after the flood, and Abraham built
altars in Canaan as he traveled throughout the land. Job acted as a priest for
his family by offering sacrifices to consecrate his children. The need for an
official priesthood arose when the family of Israel grew to the size of a
nation and altars became a part of sanctuaries.1 Members of the priesthood
were set apart so that they could fulfill the role of mediators between God
and the people.
The role of the prophet in Israel is defined by one major text (Deut.
18:15–22), but that is not the case with the role of the priests. No one text
defines their function. Their role can be ascertained from texts that (1)
speak about the priestly garments (Ex. 28–29; Lev. 8–9), (2) describe the
sacrifices that are brought to the Lord (chs. 1–7), (3) show the disobedience
of two sons of Aaron (ch. 10), (4) give an account of the Levites’ role in the
movement of the tabernacle (Num. 2–4), and (5) describe the priestly
benediction (6:22–27). It is also significant that Hebrews 5:1–5 gives a
general description of priestly duties when comparing the works of the Old
Testament high priest and Christ.
Holy Mediators
The priests fulfilled the important role of mediator between God and the
people. This role included representing God to the people, but it also
included bringing the needs of the people to God. The general work of the
priests can be described as “ministering before the LORD” (1 Sam. 2:18). To
accomplish the role of mediator, they had to be set apart as holy to the Lord.
Holiness means to be set apart in a special way to fulfill a special function
for God and his people. The priests were set apart by the garments they
wore, the oil with which they were anointed, and the hereditary priestly
line. It becomes apparent that even among the priests there are levels of
holiness, so it is helpful to distinguish between the high priest, the priests,
and the Levites.

The Priestly Line

In Exodus 28:1 Moses is told to set apart his brother Aaron and Aaron’s
sons to serve as priests. The priesthood is hereditary and will thus come
from the descendants of Aaron. No reason is given for the choice of Aaron,
but he had held a prominent role since Moses was called to deliver the
people from Egypt (4:14–16). Aaron was Moses’ constant companion
during the plagues (11:10), the exodus (12:43), the journey to Mount Sinai
(16:2), the stay at Mount Sinai when Aaron was with Moses on the mount
(19:24), and the confirmation of the covenant (24:1). Sadly, he also helped
the people fashion the golden calf while Moses was on the mountain
receiving the law of God (ch. 32). The first mention of Aaron after this
event is a passing reference that he and all the people saw the shining face
of Moses when he came down with the tablets of the law after the covenant
renewal with God (34:30). It is assumed that Aaron is the priest when the
tabernacle and the garments for the priests are made in Exodus 35–40.
Because of his role in crafting the golden calf (32:1–8) and his weak excuse
when confronted by Moses (vv. 21–25), it is surprising that Aaron does not
receive more condemnation or suffer more consequences for his actions.
Some have tried to explain his actions as motivated by fear, which is
reflected in the Peshitta,2 and argue that he took the blame for what
happened.3 In fact, Aaron blamed the people (v. 22) instead of taking
responsibility for letting them “break loose” (v. 25).
God’s quick reaction of judgment to the disobedience of Aaron’s sons
Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10) is different from his reaction to Aaron’s
disobedience in Exodus 32. This difference can be explained by the fact that
Aaron and his sons had just been ordained to the priesthood in Leviticus 8–
9 and that the disobedience occurred in the tabernacle. Aaron had not yet
been ordained in Exodus 32. His disobedience to God did not take away his
future role as priest because of God’s grace. Aaron is included with the
people for whom Moses interceded in Exodus 32:11–14, and he is
specifically named with all the people who saw the shining face of Moses in
Exodus 34:29–34 after the renewal of the covenant. They are allowed to
come near to Moses, who had been in the presence of God, which is
evidence that God’s presence would continue to be with the people. Almost
immediately instructions are given for the construction of the tabernacle
and the making of the priestly garments.

Garments
The garments that the priests wore were special and distinct. Just by
wearing them the priests would have stood out among the people of Israel,
much as a uniform causes a police officer to stand out in a crowd. In
Exodus 25–31 instructions are given to Moses concerning the building of
the tabernacle, the garments of the priests, and the setting apart of the
priests for service at the tabernacle. The instructions for making the priestly
garments are given in chapter 28, and the making of the garments is
described in chapter 39. Aaron as the high priest and his sons as priests
have several things in common. They are presented together to serve the
Lord (28:1). Their garments are called holy garments (v. 4), setting them
apart from other Israelites so that they could fulfill their special role.4 All
the priests are to wear linen undergarments to cover their naked flesh. These
undergarments reach from the hips to the thighs and are to be worn when
the priests go into the Tent of Meeting or when they come near the altar to
minister in the Holy Place. If they do not wear these garments, they will
bear guilt and die (vv. 42–43). These instructions correspond to what God
tells the Israelites concerning building the altars. If they build an altar, they
will not make the altar with steps because they expose their nakedness
when they step up to it (20:26). Covering their nakedness may be a
reminder of the shame that comes with sin. When Adam and Eve sinned,
they understood that they were naked and that they needed to be covered by
God to hide their shame. The priests recognize this fact by properly
covering themselves so as not to be exposed. If they ignore God’s
instructions, they are disobeying God, and they are also rejecting their need
to be covered by God, which is a denial of their sin and its resulting shame.
They become guilty and bear the punishment of death.
The garments for Aaron and his sons are also said to be “for glory and
for beauty” (Ex. 28:2, 40). This description refers to the dignity and honor
given to the priests.5 It is significant that the words kavod ( ) and tiferet
( ) are also used to refer to the glory of God. The word kavod is the
common word for God’s glory, and it is used of the cloud cover at Mount
Sinai, where the appearance of his glory was like a devouring fire (24:16–
17). In Isaiah 63:15 heaven is the habitation of God’s holiness and glory
(tiferet), which is also manifested to his people (vv. 12–14).6 The garments
of the priests allow them to reflect the honor and glory of God to the people
as they represent his presence.
The outer garments for the sons of Aaron are coats, sashes, and caps
(Ex. 28:40). These are the clothing of the ordinary priests7 and are not as
elaborate as the garments of the high priest described in chapter 28. The
ordinary priest will wear a coat over the linen undergarments. The word for
coat seems to refer to an outer garment that can be seen by others. This is
the word used for the covering of animal skins that God made for Adam
and Eve (Gen. 3:21), for the special garment that Jacob gave to Joseph as
his favored son (37:3), and for the garment with sleeves that the virgin
daughters of the king wore (2 Sam. 13:18). The word is translated “robe” in
Genesis 37:3 and 2 Samuel 13:18. A sash or belt would be useful if the
garment was long and flowing. The cap would be another way in which the
priests were set apart from other Israelites.
The garments that Aaron will wear as the high priest are also described
in Exodus 28.8 The list of garments is given in verse 4: a breastpiece, an
ephod, a robe, a coat of checker work, a turban, and a sash. The garments
are to be made of gold, blue and purple and scarlet yarns, and fine twined
linen (v. 5). These are the same colors and materials that are used to make
the curtains (26:1), showing how closely the work of the high priest is
associated with the tabernacle. If the tabernacle represents the presence of
God with his people, the high priest also represents the presence of God by
the garments he wore and the work that he did.9
The garments of the high priest also highlight his role in representing
the people to God. The first item described is the ephod (Ex. 28:6–14) that
was worn over the robe.10 The ephod was like an apron hung from the
shoulders with two shoulder straps, which had two onyx stones attached to
them. These stones contained the names of the sons of Israel, with six
names engraved on each. The setting of each stone was made of delicate
patterns of gold (gold filigree) attached by two golden chains.11 The
purpose of these stones was for Aaron to bear the names of Israel before the
Lord for “remembrance.” God did not need to be reminded of his people
because he had forgotten them, but the idea was that the high priest
presented them to the God who was able to meet all their needs in light of
his covenant promises. The high priest represented all Israel by presenting
the people before the Lord.12
The breastpiece of judgment is described in Exodus 28:15–30. This
garment is made in the style of the ephod with gold, blue and purple and
scarlet yarns, and fine twined linen (v. 15). It is smaller than the ephod, is
square, and fits over the breast of the high priest. It is folded over to form a
pouch into which the UT are placed13 and attached to the ephod by blue
lace, which binds the breastpiece to the ephod through rings (vv. 22–28).
On the breastpiece are twelve stones arranged in four rows of three, with
the names of the sons of Israel on the stones. These represent the twelve
tribes (vv. 17–21). The purpose of the twelve stones on the breastpiece is
virtually identical to the purpose of the two onyx stones on the ephod: to
bear the names of the sons of Israel before the Lord for remembrance (vv.
12, 29). The differences between the two, however, are significant. The
ephod has two onyx stones with six names on each. The breastpiece has
twelve stones, with the name of one tribe on each stone. The two onyx
stones are on Aaron’s shoulders (v. 12), and the twelve stones are on his
heart (v. 30). The high priest is to keep the concerns of the people of God
close to his heart as he enters into God’s presence. His concern is not just
for the nation as a whole, but for each tribe represented. Aaron brings the
concerns of the people before the Lord in order for judgment or decisions to
be made on their behalf. This is the role of the UT, which is also on the
heart of Aaron so that he regularly bears the judgment of the people of
Israel before the Lord.14 This demonstrates that God also cares about the
concerns and decisions faced by his people and that he is ready to render
decisions and act on their behalf.
The next item described is the robe that the high priest will wear (Ex.
28:31–35). It is called the “robe of the ephod” because it is worn under the
ephod. The robe is a blue, whole garment that slips over the head. The hem
contains pomegranates of blue, purple, and scarlet yarns interspaced with
golden bells. Aaron must wear the robe so that the bells will be heard when
he goes in and out of the presence of the Lord in the Holy Place; otherwise,
he will die. The pomegranate is one of the fruits that the spies brought back
from Canaan. The priest’s wearing a garment with fruit attached may
signify fruitfulness.15 The work of the high priest will be fruitful as he
ministers in obedience to the God who is the source of the people’s
fruitfulness. The bells that the high priest wears on the hem of the robe may
highlight his dangerous work and the possibility of his death when coming
before the Lord. Although the text does not specifically state the purpose of
the bells, it is dangerous to enter the presence of the king unannounced, so
perhaps the sound of the bells announces the approach of the high priest.16
From the perspective of those outside the Holy Place, the sound of the bells
lets people know that the priest is alive and is ministering on their behalf.17
The people are also reminded that God must be approached on his terms,
not theirs.18
The turban that the high priest wore is described in Exodus 28:36–38. A
plate of pure gold engraved with the words “Holy to the LORD” is attached
to it. Wearing the turban is associated with the high priest’s role as mediator
between the holiness of the Lord and the sinfulness of the people. Aaron
presents the people before the Lord by bearing “any guilt from the holy
things that the people of Israel consecrate as their holy gifts” (v. 38). When
the people consecrate their sacrifices, the priest can carry away their guilt in
the name of God.19 The bearing of guilt in Leviticus 10:17 is related to
making atonement for the people. The sacrifices that the priests offer for the
people will take away their sin. In this way the people are “accepted before
the LORD” (Ex. 28:38).

Consecrated for Service: Anointed with Oil

 Aaron and his sons are set apart as priests, and all future priests must
come from Aaron’s line. Making the priesthood hereditary set it apart,
because not just any Israelite could become a priest. Aaron is from the tribe
of Levi; he and his sons Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar (Ex. 6:16, 23)
are all consecrated as priests in a special ceremony. The instructions for this
ceremony (28:41) are expanded in chapter 29 and implemented in Leviticus
8.
The instructions in Exodus 28:41 specify that Moses is to put the
garments on Aaron and his sons, anoint (mashakh, ) them, ordain them
(literally, “fill their hand”), and consecrate (qadash, ) them to serve
God as priests (Ex. 28; Lev. 8). First, Aaron and his sons are brought to the
entrance of the Tent of Meeting and washed with water (Lev. 8:6). This
shows their need for purification before they put on the priestly garments.
Then the garments of the priesthood are placed on them, with the high
priestly garments placed on Aaron (Ex. 28:6–39) and the regular priestly
garments placed on his sons (v. 41). The anointing oil is used to set apart
the tabernacle, specifically the altar, its utensils, the basin, and its stand
(Lev. 8:10–13). Then anointing oil is poured on Aaron’s head. The focus on
Aaron highlights his special duties as high priest and signifies the positive
inauguration and dedication of someone for special service. Anointing with
oil conveyed a special status of holiness for that person, empowering him to
carry out his role. This empowerment comes through spiritual endowment
as anointing with oil becomes associated with the Holy Spirit (Isa. 61:1;
Zech. 4:1–14).20
Several sacrifices are offered on behalf of Aaron and his sons (Lev.
8:14–21). The bull of the sin offering is slaughtered as they place their
hands on its head. Placing one’s hands on the head of the sacrificial animal
identified a person with the animal’s death, recognizing that the animal
must die in the person’s place (substitutionary atonement). Aaron and his
sons need the blood of a sacrifice to cover their sins. But the altar also
needs to be set apart for its special use, so Moses takes blood to purify the
altar and to make atonement for it. When the verb to make atonement is
used with an inanimate object, the idea is to wipe clean or purge
(expiation).21 The blood of the bull of the sin offering sets the altar apart for
its special use in the tabernacle. Next the ram of the burnt offering is
sacrificed. Aaron and his sons again lay their hands on the head of the
sacrificial animal. This offering is wholly consumed on the altar as a
pleasing aroma to God. It is accepted by him, and this means that the one
bringing the offering is accepted by him. The priests need the sacrifices for
their own sin before they can offer sacrifices for the sin of others.
The next sacrifice is unique to the ordination service (Lev. 8:22–29).
The ram of ordination is sacrificed as Aaron and his sons lay their hands on
its head. The blood of the sacrifice is not put on the horns of the altar or
thrown against its sides; it is put on the right earlobes, the right thumbs, and
the right big toes of Aaron and his sons. The right side denotes strength, and
this action signifies that they are totally committed in every part of their life
to do the work of priests. They are ready to listen to God, to do God’s work,
and to walk in God’s ways.22 The word ordination literally means “filling”
and is short for “to fill the hand” (in verse 33 the full phrase is used). This
refers to taking some of the sacrificial animal, along with unleavened bread
and oil, and putting them into the hands of Aaron and his sons. These items
are then waved before the Lord as a wave offering23 before being burned on
the altar. This signifies that Aaron and his sons are empowered to do the
work of priests and have a right to receive priests’ benefits for their work,
namely, a portion of certain offerings.24 In the ordination service the portion
of the animal normally given to the priest is given back to God as a wave
offering. Everything about the life and work of the priest is done in honor of
God.
The ceremony ends with a covenant meal, which Aaron and his sons eat
together at the entrance of the tabernacle (Lev. 8:31–36). The meal
celebrates the bond established between God and the priesthood. The priests
are to remain at the entrance of the tabernacle for seven days to repeat the
sacrifices each day. This means that the consecration is complete and that
full atonement is made for Aaron and his sons. They are not to enter the
tabernacle before the service is complete, and they are not to abandon their
calling by leaving the tabernacle area. The account ends with a statement of
the obedience of Aaron and his sons to all that the Lord commanded them.
The Ministry of the Levites
The significant role of the Levites is important in light of their history.
Simeon and Levi, sons of Jacob, were cursed by their father for deceit,
anger, and revenge over the defilement of their sister Dinah (Gen. 49:5–7).
The curse was that they would be divided and scattered in Israel.
Historically, Simeon was the smallest tribe in the census of Numbers 26.
This tribe received land in the desert region in the vicinity of Judah and
became integrated into the tribe of Judah (Josh. 19:1, 9). The descendants of
Levi did not receive an inheritance of land and were scattered among the
other tribes. But the curse of being scattered was turned into a blessing
because the sons of Levi supported Moses in the golden-calf incident (Ex.
32:28–29). They went throughout the camp of Israel and put to death those
who were participating in idolatry. Moses blessed them by setting them
apart for the service of the Lord to assist the priests in their work. When
Moses blessed the Levites, he used the same terminology that had been
used in the ceremony to set apart Aaron and his sons. The Levites were
“ordained for the service of the Lord.” The word ordained is a translation of
the phrase “fill their hand.” Although the duties of the Levites were
different from the duties of the priests, they enjoyed benefits from the
sacrificial offerings (Deut. 18:1) and were supported by tithes (Num.
18:21). Although they did not receive land as an inheritance, they did
receive forty-eight towns scattered throughout the tribes. The faithful
actions of the sons of Levi turned a curse into a blessing.

The Relationship to the Firstborn

The Levites have a special relationship to the firstborn of Israel (Num.
3); they take their place (vv. 11–13). The firstborn belong to the Lord
because God consecrated them to himself when he struck down the
firstborn of Egypt. Thus the firstborn belonged to God, and now the Levites
also belong to God. They take the place of the firstborn and are given to
assist the priests (vv. 6–7).
The dedication of the Levites to serve in place of the firstborn of Israel
highlights the special role of the firstborn, who might otherwise have been
appointed to the task given to the Levites.25 Before Aaron and his sons were
set apart to the priesthood (Ex. 29), priests were mentioned when Israel was
at Mount Sinai. Moses warned the priests who came near to consecrate
themselves (19:22). Who were these priests? It is possible that the firstborn
of Israel served in some capacity in a priestly role before the construction of
the tabernacle.26 They are consecrated to the Lord after the institution of the
Passover and the tenth plague, which killed all the firstborn in Egypt (13:1–
2). The Levites take their place as they assist in the work of the newly
ordained priests.

Guarding the Tabernacle

The regulations of Numbers 1:1–10:10 help prepare Israel for military
occupation of the land. Israel as the army of God (Ex. 6:26; 13:18) will be
leaving Mount Sinai and moving toward Canaan. The Levites will assist the
priests in helping Israel move toward the Promised Land in a way that
ensures the purity of the camp (Num. 1–4). The census of chapter 1 covers
all males who are at least twenty years old and who are able to go to war.
The Levites are exempt from this census because of the special role that
God has given them. Instead of warriors going to battle, they are in charge
of moving the tabernacle. Their general duties are laid out in Numbers
1:47–54. The arrangement of the camp is laid out in chapter 2. The
tabernacle is at the center, and the Levites camp around it. As Israel moves
toward the land of Canaan, the Levites lead the way. The specific duties of
the clans of Gershon, Merari, and Kohath in moving the tabernacle are
given in chapters 3 and 4.
The tribe of Levi was presented to Aaron to assist him (Num. 3:5–10).
The terms used (bring and set them before) signified their consecration to
this work and their subservient ministry to the priests.27 The phrase used to
describe the work of the Levites is keep guard (1:53; 3:7). The tabernacle
represented the presence of God and was considered to be sacred space. An
Israelite could not wander into the tabernacle area without grave
consequences. If an outsider came near it, he would be put to death (v. 51).
An outsider was any unauthorized person, who in this case was any non-
Levite.28 The guarding of the tabernacle also meant that the Levites would
camp around it to perform “guard duty,” which might include putting
someone to death (Ex. 32:25–29).29 Thus they protected the purity of the
holy, sacred space of God’s presence in the tabernacle so that his wrath
would not fall on the camp (Num. 1:53).30
The Levites specifically have charge of taking down the tabernacle,
moving it, and then setting it up again (Num. 1:50). The duties of the
different clans are given in chapters 3–4. The three sons of Levi at the head
of the three branches of the Levites are Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.
Numbers 3:14–20 lists them with their clans, and the list is followed by a
census of the Levites according to their clans, along with a statement of
their specific responsibilities (vv. 21–39). Then chapter 4 gives more details
on how the tabernacle is to be dismantled and moved. How the tabernacle is
moved shows respect for the place of God’s presence and allows the ark of
the covenant to lead the people. Several important words are used for the
work of the Levites. Numbers 3:7 uses the two words that are used for
Adam’s work in the garden of Eden (shamar, ; avad, ). The
Levites “keep,” in the sense of guard, and “work” in relationship to the
tabernacle. The guarding aspect is emphasized in the word for guard duty
(mishmeret, ), which occurs twelve times in chapters 3 and 4. Three
other words are also used to describe their duties. Two of the words
emphasize work. The Levites’ work31 is their occupation (4:3), which
includes physical labor (avodah, ), such as carrying the articles,
utensils, and frames of the tabernacle with its bars, pillars, and bases (v. 31).
By faithfully working, they ministered to the priests (3:6). The principle
lived out by the Levites is that work is a way to serve both God and other
people.
Aaron and his sons are the only ones allowed to go into the Most Holy
Place to prepare it for travel (Num. 4:1–15). Eleazar, son of Aaron, has
oversight of the whole tabernacle (v. 16). The furniture and utensils must be
covered, and then the Kohathites will carry those articles. But if the sons of
Kohath look on the holy things even for a moment (v. 20) or touch them (v.
15), they will die. The work of the Kohathites is dangerous because one
wrong move or glance can bring death. The other two clans carry items of
the tabernacle that are not as dangerous. After the holy things have been
removed, the coverings for the tent and the screens are removed by the
Gershonites, leaving the framework of the tabernacle with its bars, pillars,
and bases for the Merarites to move.32
 The work of the Levites is important because it allows Israel, the army
of God, to move from Mount Sinai and journey toward the Promised Land
to engage in military battle (Num. 10:11–36). The ark of the covenant leads
the way because God, also represented by the pillar of cloud (vv. 11, 34), is
leading his people. When the ark sets out, Moses proclaims, “Arise, O
LORD, let your enemies be scattered” (v. 35). This has been called the
“Battle Cry of Moses”33 and expresses joyous excitement and the hope of
victory as God leads his people into battle.34 When the ark comes to rest,
Moses declares, “Return, O LORD, to the ten thousand thousands of Israel”
(v. 36). When the ark stops along the journey, the Lord is present again with
his people, the army of Israel.
The role of the Levites changed once the ark became housed in a
stationary temple and was not moved from place to place. David instituted
this change when the ark was brought to Jerusalem, before the temple was
built. The Levites participated in its transportation to Jerusalem (1 Chron.
15). Some carried the ark of God on their shoulders with poles (v. 15), some
played loudly on musical instruments to raise sounds of joy (v. 16), one
directed the music (v. 22), some were singers (v. 19), some blew the
trumpets before it (v. 24), and some were gatekeepers (v. 24).

Assistants in Worship
First Chronicles 16 describes the sacrifices that were offered when the
ark came to Jerusalem, and it also records some of the Levites’ permanent
appointments to minister before the ark “to invoke, to thank, and to praise
the LORD” (v. 4). Certain Levites had responsibilities for playing music to
assist worship. Their role was to sing thanksgiving (v. 6) and to minister
regularly before the Lord as each day required (v. 37). The music and songs
of praise offered by the Levites accompanied the priests as they offered the
required daily sacrifices to the Lord. The Levites used their gifts in the
work they were given, and they served the priests and the people of God.35
The Ministry of the Priests

Proper Handling of the Sacrifices

One of the major roles of the priests was to assist the people in offering
their sacrifices to the Lord. The five major sacrifices are described in
Leviticus 1–7, with a section devoted to instructions for the priests (6:8–
7:37). The priests must know the function of each sacrifice so that they will
know how to treat the animal and what to do with its blood. For example,
the animal brought for the burnt offering is totally consumed on the altar
(1:9), but the animal brought for the fellowship offering, also called the
peace offering, is divided up so that God receives a portion, the priests
receive a portion, and the one who brought the sacrifice receives a portion
(ch. 3). The blood of the animal is treated differently depending on the
sacrifice. The blood of the burnt offering and the fellowship offering are
thrown against the sides of the altar. The blood of the sin offering is treated
differently depending on the person who brought it. If an anointed priest
brings the sacrifice, the blood is taken into the Tent of Meeting and some of
it is sprinkled in front of the veil of the sanctuary (4:6). If a common person
brings a sin offering, the blood is put on the horns of the altar and the rest is
poured out at the base (v. 30). The role of the priest in properly handling the
animal and the blood is important because of the general purposes of the
sacrifices.36
The blood of the sacrifice, representing the life of the animal, is given to
make atonement for the people (Lev. 17:11). The sacrifices specifically said
to make atonement are the burnt offering, the sin offering, and the guilt
offering. In each of these offerings, the one who brings it puts his or her
hand on the head of the animal while it is slain. This signifies that the life of
the animal is given in exchange for the life of the one who brings the
sacrifice (substitutionary atonement). Both the covering of sin (expiation)
and the appeasement of the wrath of a holy God (propitiation) are seen.37
The priests are the ones who make this possible because they handle the
blood of the sacrifice. If the priests do not handle the blood properly,
Israel’s relationship with God is in jeopardy.
 The Importance of Obedience
The necessity of the obedience of the priests is highlighted in several
passages in the Old Testament (Ex. 28:43; Num. 16; Mal. 1:6–2:9). The
most dramatic is the death of Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10. Aaron and
his sons are set apart as priests in chapter 8, and they begin their ministry at
the tabernacle in chapter 9. God demonstrates his pleasure by causing his
glory to appear to the people and by sending fire to consume the sacrifice
on the altar. The people see the fire, shout, and fall on their faces (9:23–24).
Then Nadab and Abihu offer unauthorized fire before the Lord. Whatever
the unauthorized fire may be,38 it is clearly something that God “had not
commanded them” (10:1). They are acting on their own in disobedience to
God, whose actions are immediate and swift: fire comes down and
consumes them. This act of God’s judgment shows the importance of the
obedience of the priests. If they are not obedient, the salvation of God’s
people and his presence among them are in jeopardy.

Teaching the Law

After the death of Nadab and Abihu, God instructs Aaron concerning
the importance of making proper distinctions in the priests’ work. The
priests are to distinguish between the holy and the common and between the
clean and the unclean. These are important categories for the priests to
understand so that they can make proper decisions. If something is not holy,
it is common. Common things are either clean or unclean. Clean things can
become holy when they are set apart. Clean things can also be made
unclean if they are polluted.39 It is important that the priests make these
distinctions, but also that they teach the people to make them (Lev. 10:11).
In the food laws of chapter 11, these distinctions affect the people’s
everyday life in the food they eat.
An example of the importance of the priests’ teaching the people comes
from Malachi 2:1–9. This text occurs in a longer passage dealing with the
priests (1:6–2:9). They were dishonoring God by allowing blemished
animals to be brought as sacrifices (1:7–8). These sacrifices profaned the
altar of the Lord and were not acceptable to him (v. 12). If the priests did
not change their ways, they would experience the judgment of God (2:2–3).
He addressed the priests this way so that his covenant with Levi would
stand (v. 4). Scripture contains little information on the establishment of the
covenant with Levi, but it probably arose from the events in Exodus 32.40 It
is identified in Malachi 2:5 as a covenant of life and peace. The role of the
Levitical priests leads to life and well-being among God’s people. The
actions of the priests in Malachi’s day brought death and judgment. Levi
feared God and honored his name. Such a priest lived before God and the
people of God with integrity and was able to teach them. Such a priest
guarded knowledge and taught the truth. The result of this teaching was that
“he turned many from iniquity” (v. 6). Proper teaching by the priests kept
God’s people from living lives that were displeasing to him. Priests who
were disobedient and did not teach people the truth of the law caused
people to live in disobedience and jeopardize their relationship with God.
The teaching role of the priest is rooted in the fact that he is a messenger
of the Lord sent to mediate the message of God’s law to the people (Mal.
2:7). The term messenger is used for prophets and priests, and it shows
similarities between the proclamation of the prophet and the teaching of the
priest; yet there are differences. The prophets mediate the word (davar,
) of God and the priests teach the law (torah, ) of God.41 These two
overlap because they are both rooted in the revelation of God to his people
in the Mosaic covenant. The proclamation of the prophets, however, is
broader than the teaching of the priests. The prophets deal with the
covenant life of the nation before God, and they also receive direct
revelation. The priests focus on the sacrifices brought by the people and the
rituals that bring the people into a state of cleanness before God (Lev. 1–
15). The priest’s instruction occurs in the fulfillment of his priestly role.42

Blessing the People of God

The priest’s role as mediator between God and the people has two
aspects. The priest represents the people to God by presenting their
sacrifices and by interceding for them (see below). The priest also
represents God to the people. The priestly blessing, found in Numbers
6:22–27, pronounces God’s blessing on the people. His blessing is not
limited to one aspect of life but includes its fullness. The form of the
blessing shows this as the verses get progressively longer, giving the
impression of a stream of blessing.43 The word bless (barakh) in the
opening line, “The LORD bless you,” relates to the power to be fertile and
prosperous. The closing word peace (shalom) refers to wholeness in all
areas of life.44 Such material blessing comes only because of the presence
of the Lord. The middle lines of the blessing emphasize God’s presence in
the phrases “make his face to shine upon” (v. 25) and “lift up his
countenance” (v. 26). These expressions focus on God’s favor toward his
people. The explanation in verse 27 emphasizes that through the
pronouncement of blessing, the name of God is put on the people. This
action sets them apart not only to receive his blessing but also to be a
blessing to others as they live out what God has granted to them.
Stricter Regulations for the High Priest
The tabernacle and the priesthood have levels of holiness. The Israelites
can come to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and the priests can go into
the Holy Place, but only the high priest could go into the Most Holy Place
once a year. These levels of holiness are seen in the laws in the book of
Leviticus. Regulations of holiness for the people are given in Leviticus 17–
20. Regulations of stricter holiness in the areas of mourning and marriage
practices are given for the priests and the high priest (ch. 21). Touching a
dead body brought one into a state of uncleanness. The priests can touch the
dead bodies only of very close relatives: mother, father, son, daughter,
brother, and unmarried sister (v. 3). They are also forbidden to participate in
certain mourning rites that may have been associated with pagans (v. 5).45
The high priest is more restricted; he cannot make himself unclean for even
his father or his mother (v. 11). There are also stricter regulations
concerning marriage for the priests and the high priest. These regulations
are important because the priesthood is hereditary. A priest cannot marry a
prostitute, a woman who has been defiled, or a divorced woman (v. 7), but
he can marry the widow of a priest (Ezek. 44:22). The high priest can marry
only a virgin.46 The priests are to put their priestly duties above their family
ties and responsibilities.47
The broader family of the priests is also impacted by their position of
holiness. If the daughter of a priest profanes herself by becoming a
prostitute, she is to be put to death (Lev. 21:9). If a priest were to allow a
prostitute to live under his roof, he would be disqualified to render
decisions for the community.48 Priests with physical defects were
unqualified for priestly service (vv. 17–21),49 but they could partake of the
benefits of the offerings that were brought (v. 22). But priests in a state of
uncleanness could not partake of the offerings until they were restored
(22:1–9). Finally, only those within the priest’s family could eat from the
offerings presented on the altar (vv. 10–16). These regulations show that
there were clear distinctions between the people and the priests because the
priests had a greater status of holiness.
The Nazirite Vow
An ordinary Israelite could attain a greater level of holiness like that of
the priests50 by taking the vow of a Nazirite to separate himself or herself to
the Lord. The vow consisted of not eating or drinking anything produced by
the grapevine, not cutting the hair during the period of the vow,51 and not
touching a dead body—even for the sake of a close family member (Num.
6:1–8). These regulations clearly set the Nazirites apart from other
Israelites. They were not to participate in normal activities of life because
they were consecrated to the Lord alone.52 At the end of the period of the
vow, the appropriate sacrifices had to be offered, the hair had to be shaved
and presented to the Lord, and a wave offering had to be presented. These
actions brought an end to the period of the vow.
The Ministry of the High Priest
The high priest was set apart from the other priests by the garments he
wore (Ex. 28) and the actions he performed on the Day of Atonement (Lev.
16). He would go into the Most Holy Place once a year to present the blood
of the sacrifices to make atonement. No one else was in the tabernacle when
the high priest went into the Most Holy Place, because only one person
could act as mediator.53 He had to take precautions so that he would not die,
because the Most Holy Place was the place of God’s presence. God
appeared in the cloud above the mercy seat (v. 2). When the high priest
went inside, he was to put incense on the fire so that the cloud of incense
would cover the mercy seat and keep him from viewing the presence of
God (vv. 12–13). He also did not wear his normal high priestly garments;
after he had bathed his body with water (v. 4), he put on linen garments
with a linen turban. These garments signified the humility of the priest in
seeking forgiveness for the people.54 He also needed to offer a bull as a sin
offering for his own sins and the sins of his house (v. 6). The blood was
taken into the Most Holy Place and was sprinkled in front of the mercy seat.
Two goats were brought forward. One goat became a sin offering for the
people, and the other became the scapegoat.55 The blood of the sacrificed
goat was taken into the Most Holy Place and sprinkled before the mercy
seat to make atonement for the Holy Place because of the people’s
transgressions. Blood from the bull and the goat were then sprinkled on the
altar of burnt offering (vv. 18–19) to consecrate it for another year of
service to the Lord. The shedding of blood was necessary to make
atonement for the high priest, for the people, and for the tabernacle.
The live goat was then presented (Lev. 16:20–22). The high priest laid
both his hands on the head of the goat and confessed over it the sin of the
people of Israel. This was a comprehensive confession, for the word all was
used with three words for sin: iniquity, transgression, and sin. The live goat
was then sent out into the wilderness to bear the sin of the people.56 The
sins of the Israelites were completely removed. This goat pictured the
removal of guilt, which was a result of the atonement.57 An important
aspect of this ritual was the ministry of the high priest in confessing sin on
behalf of the people.
 The role of the priests in the Old Testament was very important, but it
was limited because they served at a sanctuary that was only an earthly
copy of the heavenly reality, a mere shadow of things to come. The reality
toward which the sacrifices pointed came in Jesus Christ. The role of the
priests and the sacrificial system is fulfilled in a much greater way in the
work of Christ.
Study Questions
1. Discuss the various ways in which the priests were set apart to
accomplish their ministry.
2. What is the origin of the role of the Levites in assisting the priests in
their work?
3. What functions are given to the Levites in Numbers 2–4? Why was
this work important?
4. Why was it necessary for the priests to be obedient in carrying out
their work in the tabernacle?
5. What did the teaching of the priests emphasize? What was the impact
of their teaching?
6. What was the purpose of the priests’ blessing the people?
7. Why would an Israelite take the Nazirite vow?
8. What important work did the high priest do every year?

_______________
1. Tremper Longman III, Immanuel in Our Place (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2001), 120.
2. The Peshitta is the Syriac translation of the Bible. The Pentateuch was probably translated in
the first century A.D.
3. Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “Exodus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Tremper Longman
III and David Garland (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 1:540.
4. Ibid., 1:525.
5. Ibid., 1:528.
6. C. John Collins, , in NIDOTTE, 3:573–74. The marginal reading for Isaiah 63:15 says
“your holy and glorious habitation.”
7. Kaiser, “Exodus,” 1:528.
8. For a discussion of how the high priestly garments of Aaron differ from the garments of the
priests in both the material used and the type of workmanship, see Menahem Haran, Temples
andTemple-Service in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1985), 171. The different types
of workmanship are described on page 160.
9. Vern S. Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian
and Reformed, 1991), 53. He comments that the high priest was a kind of vertical replica of the
tabernacle.
10. The Hebrew word for robe ( ) in Exodus 28:31 is different from the word for coat (
). The high priest’s coat is described in verse 39, and it is different from the priest’s coat (v. 40) in its
description as a “checker work of fine linen.” The high priest would wear linen undergarments (v.
42), a coat, a robe over the coat, and an ephod over the robe. For a visual picture of the garments of
the high priest, see the ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 208.
11. The gold thread was cut from hammered gold sheets, which gave the ephod a dazzling
appearance and a rigid construction, which may have allowed it to be stored in an upright position.
Cornelius Van Dam, “Priestly Clothing,” in Dictionary of the Old Testament Pentateuch, ed. T.
Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 643.
12. John D. Currid, A Study Commentary on Exodus, vol. 2, Chapters 19–40 (Darlington, UK:
Evangelical Press, 2001), 197.
13. Kaiser, “Exodus,” 1:527.
14. For a discussion of the role of the UT, see chapter 2.
15. Currid, Exodus, 205.
16. Ibid., 206.
17. Kaiser, “Exodus,” 1:528.
18. John N. Oswalt, “Exodus,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort
(Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2008), 1:509.
19. Ibid., 1:507, 1:509.
20. Ibid., 1:510–11; John N. Oswalt, , NIDOTTE, 2:1124–26. The concept Messiah or
Anointed One (mashiakh) comes from the verb to anoint (mashakh).
21. Richard E. Averbeck, , NIDOTTE, 2:696.
22. John D. Currid, A Study Commentary on Leviticus (Darlington, UK: Evangelical Press,
2004), 108.
23. Ibid., 98. It is unclear what action is signified by the wave offering. There may have been
some movement back and forth over the altar or the elevation of the offering over the altar.
24. Ibid., 108–9.
25. R. Dennis Cole, Numbers (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 94.
26. Kaiser, “Exodus,” 1:476.
27. Cole, Numbers, 93.
28. Timothy R. Ashley, The Book of Numbers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 68.
29. This tribe had a warlike character (Gen. 49:5–7), which was put to good use in some of their
duties. Ashley (ibid., 69) points out that the same term used of the military service of the rest of the
tribes ( ) was also used of the Levites (Num. 4:23).
30. Longman, Immanuel, 139. He calls them God’s bodyguards.
31. Stephen Hague comments that this word “can refer to specific work projects or to the routine
of a particular business endeavor of any class of labor from menial to royal” ( , NIDOTTE,
2:943).
32. Ashley, Numbers, 107.
33. Ronald B. Allen, “Numbers,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Tremper Longman
III and David E. Garland (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 2:183.
34. Cole, Numbers, 178.
35. The view in contemporary scholarship is that rival groups composed of the Levites, the
Aaronites, the Zadokites, and the Mushites (descended from Moses) contended for the right to
officiate at the altar. See Haran, Temples, 84–111; Joseph Blenkinsopp, Sage, Priest, Prophet:
Religious and Intellectual Leadership in Ancient Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox
Press, 1995). For a critique of this view, see D. A. Garrett, “Levi, Levites,” in Dictionary of the Old
Testament Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2003), 519–22; Ashley, Numbers, 86–92.
36. For a description of the different sacrifices, see Longman, Immanuel, 75–102.
37. For a biblical discussion of these ideas, see Jay Sklar, Sin, Impurity, Sacrifice, Atonement:
The Priestly Conceptions (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2005).
38. Suggestions include that (1) they did not take the coals in their censers from the altar of burnt
offering, (2) the incense they used was not properly mixed (Ex. 30:34–38), (3) they were doing
something that only the high priest was allowed to do, and (4) they were intoxicated (Lev. 10:9). The
most likely option is the first because fire is the main concern of the violation. Mark F. Rooker,
Leviticus (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 157.
 39. Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 19.
40. Pieter A. Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 245.
The connection of the covenant of Levi with Exodus 32 is that Moses uses the phrase “fill their
hands” to refer to Levites’ being “ordained” for the service of the Lord (v. 29). Numbers also
mentions the covenant of salt in connection with the offerings for priests and Levites (ch. 18) and the
covenant of peace established with Phinehas, son of Aaron (25:1–13). These two passages assume
the covenant of Levi and specify the role of the priests and Levites. Numbers 18:19 confirms the
work of the priests after Korah’s rebellion. Ashley (Numbers, 337) argues that this passage redefines
their role so that only they would suffer death if an Israelite trespassed against the sanctuary.
Phinehas is rewarded for his actions at Baal of Peor with the promise that his descendants would
have a covenant of perpetual priesthood (Num. 25:11–13). This promise establishes that the high
priest would come from the descendants of Phinehas (Ashley, Numbers, 523).
41. Verhoef, Haggai and Malachi, 250. He comments that this distinction is also found in
Jeremiah 18:18, Ezekiel 7:26, and Micah 3:11.
42. Ibid., 258.
43. Ashley, Numbers, 151.
44. Ibid., 151–53.
45. Rooker, Leviticus, 273. He comments that the prohibition of the priesthood to be involved in
funerary activities was to avoid sanctioning the cults of the dead. The high priest was also not able to
participate in normal mourning rites on the basis of Leviticus 21:10 (Wenham, Leviticus, 291). The
laws regarding contact with a corpse are covered in Numbers 19:10–22.
46. Rooker, Leviticus, 274. If a priest marries someone who has been sexually active before the
marriage, the male son’s legitimacy for priesthood is called into question.
47. Wenham, Leviticus, 292.
48. Rooker, Leviticus, 275.
49. Currid, Leviticus, 282. A priest who is physically flawless represents holiness.
50. The parallels between the priests and the Nazirites are seen in the general prohibitions against
wine and against polluting oneself by contact with a dead body. Neither the Nazirite nor the high
priest can touch a dead body. The Nazirite vow is more stringent in relationship to wine; the Nazirite
is forbidden wine at all times, but the priests are forbidden only when they are serving in the Tent of
Meeting (Ashley, Numbers, 141). Women could not serve as priests, but they could take a Nazirite
vow to attain this special status of holiness.
51. Ibid., 143. Neither the priests nor other Israelites had this special mark of consecration. Both
the high priest’s diadem (Ex. 29:6) and the Nazirite’s hair (Num. 6:9, 18) are called nezer.
52. A person would take this vow out of devotion to God or to be closer to him (Longman,
Immanuel, 148–49).
53. Rooker, Leviticus, 219.
54. Currid, Leviticus, 215.
55. Debate surrounds the meaning of the Hebrew word azazel ( ). The rendering scapegoat
is taken from the verb (azal), which means “go away” (supported by the Septuagint and the
Vulgate). Other options for azazel include the meaning “entire removal,” a reference to the place
where the goat departed or to a demon in the wilderness (Rooker, Leviticus, 216–17).
56. The verb that means “to bear” (nasa, ) is also used in Isaiah 53:4, 12.
57. Rooker, Leviticus, 221.
 5
CHRIST AS PRIEST: CONSECRATED AS
MEDIATOR FOR GOD’S PEOPLE

DURING JESUS’ EARTHLY ministry the terms Prophet and King are used
to describe Jesus. People thought that he might be the Prophet based on his
teaching and his miracles. Chapter 3 has shown that Jesus is the Prophet
about whom the Old Testament spoke. People were also looking for a
Davidic King to come and deliver the Jewish people from the Roman
government. Chapter 7 will show that Jesus is the Davidic King who has
come to establish a kingdom. It is significant that the term Priest is not used
during Jesus’ earthly ministry.1 His ministry after his ascension into heaven
is described by the book of Hebrews as a priestly ministry; in fact, he is our
Great High Priest (Heb. 4:14–16). There are several reasons why Jesus is
not identified as a Priest during his earthly life but is identified as our High
Priest after his ascension. First, Jesus is not from the tribe of Levi but from
the tribe of Judah. This lineage would have kept him from ministering as a
priest in the temple at Jerusalem. Second, his priestly lineage is of a higher
order than the earthly lineage of the Levitical priests because he will serve
as Priest in the heavenly temple. Third, Jesus does not just fulfill the Old
Testament offices of prophet and priest; rather, he transforms them.2 He is
not just another prophet proclaiming the word given him from God; he is
the Word itself, with the power to transform people. He is not just another
priest from the lineage of Levi; he has a heavenly lineage that will equip
him for serving in the heavenly tabernacle. Jesus’ deity transforms these
offices as he fulfills them.
The Earthly Ministry of Jesus and the Old
Testament Priesthood

Consecrated to God’s Service

Just because Jesus is not called a Priest during his earthly ministry does not
mean that he never ref lects the work of the Old Testament priests. It is
beneficial to think about the earthly ministry of Jesus in light of the work of
the priests. The Old Testament priests were set apart as holy to the Lord in a
number of ways (see chapter 4). They were set apart by their hereditary,
priestly lineage through Aaron. The priestly lineage of Jesus does not come
through Aaron, but he is still set apart in his priesthood “according to the
order of Melchizedek” (see below) and in his special birth. The Gospels
make it clear that Mary is pregnant by the power of the Holy Spirit even
though she is a virgin (Matt. 1:18–25; Luke 1:26–38). The virgin birth
safeguards both the deity and the humanity of Christ.3 His supernatural
birth indicates that he is God, that his origin is heaven (John 3:13), and that
he was with the Father from eternity (1:1; 8:58; 17:5). This birth is
necessary for the salvation that Jesus came to accomplish. If he had been
born by ordinary generation, he would have inherited Adam’s guilt and
would have been unable to save others.4 His birth also demonstrates his
humanity, for God takes to himself human nature by becoming the son of a
woman. This is important for his work as Priest, for as a human being he is
able to sympathize with people in their suffering (Heb. 4:15).

The Anointed One

The lives of the Old Testament priests were consecrated for service to
the Lord by the garments they wore, by the blood of the sacrifice being
applied—to their right earlobes, right thumbs, and right big toes—and by
being anointed with oil. The role of the Holy Spirit in the birth and the
earthly ministry of Jesus also consecrated him for service. Anointing with
oil became associated with the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament (Isa. 61:1;
Zech. 4:1–14). The oil meant that the individual was set apart for service,
and the Holy Spirit enabled that service to be carried out. The Holy Spirit
caused the Child conceived in Mary to be holy (Luke 1:35).5 The activity of
the Holy Spirit with respect to Christ’s human nature continued throughout
his life until his exaltation. Jesus is set apart through his supernatural birth,
and it becomes clear early in his life that there is something distinctive
about him. Luke comments that “the child grew and became strong, filled
with wisdom. And the favor of God was upon him” (2:40). This wisdom is
demonstrated when he is twelve years old and is found at the temple sitting
among the teachers, listening to them, and asking them questions. All who
heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers (vv. 46–47).
Jesus told his parents, who had been looking for him, that he must be about
his Father’s business. The Spirit descended on Jesus at his baptism (Matt.
3:16), filled him completely (Luke 4:1, 18), and led him into the wilderness
and then to Galilee (Matt. 4:1; Luke 4:14). The Holy Spirit gave him power
to cast out demons (Matt. 12:28) and to offer himself up to God without
blemish (Heb. 9:14). He was declared the Son of God by his resurrection
from the dead (Rom. 1:4), was made alive, ascended into heaven (1 Peter
3:18–22), and manifests himself as the life-giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45; 2
Cor. 3:17–18). He is filled with the Spirit without measure (John 3:34).6 His
whole life is empowered by the Spirit and lived in the fullness of the Spirit.
Jesus identified himself as the Anointed One who fulfills Isaiah 61:1
(Luke 4:16–21). He is recognized as the Messiah by Andrew, the brother of
Simon Peter (John 1:41). The term Messiah is from the verb to anoint, and
it means “Christ.”7 Jesus is the Messiah, the One anointed by God through
the power of the Holy Spirit to carry out his ministry. Jesus’ whole life is
dedicated to the service of his Father in heaven. Just as the blood was
placed on the right earlobe of the priests in the Old Testament, Jesus listens
to his Father in heaven to faithfully carry out his Father’s will. Jesus made
known the name of his Father to the disciples, and he gave them the words
that the Father had given him (17:6–8). He submitted to the truth of the
Word of God and consecrated his life to the service of God so that the
disciples would be sanctified in the truth (vv. 17–18).
Just as the right thumbs of the priests were set apart by the blood to
signify that they were ready to do the work of God, so Jesus does the work
that his Father gave him to do. John the Baptist had questions about “the
deeds of the Christ,” so he sent his disciples to ask Jesus whether he was the
One who is to come (Matt. 11:1–3). Jesus responds by pointing to the work
he is doing in line with Isaiah 61:1–4. In response to opposition he faced
from a healing he performed on the Sabbath, he answered, “My Father is
working until now, and I am working” (John 5:17). The working of God the
Father and the working of Jesus the Son are closely aligned. On the one
hand, Jesus does nothing on his own but only what he sees the Father doing,
because he does the work that the Father has given him to do (vv. 19–20).
On the other hand, Jesus’ power and works are on the same level as the
Father’s. He has life in himself, as the Father has life in himself (v. 26), and
he is able to grant the power of life both spiritually (vv. 24–25) and
physically (vv. 28–29).8
Just as the right big toes of the priests were set apart by blood,
signifying that they were ready to do the will of God, Jesus also goes where
he is led to accomplish his mission. He was led by the Spirit into the
wilderness to be tempted (Luke 4:1), and he returned in the power of the
Spirit to begin his public ministry in Galilee (v. 14). At the proper time
Jesus began his trip to Jerusalem with resolve, because he knew what
awaited him there (9:51). He wrestled with his approaching death in the
garden of Gethsemane, but he submitted to his Father’s will and went
boldly to the cross (22:39–46; John 18:6). Jesus’ whole life was consecrated
to do the will of his Father in heaven for the benefit of those whom the
Father had given to him.

Guarding and Keeping God’s People

Clearing the Temple. The various functions of the Levites can be
summarized under the two verbs to guard (shamar) and to serve/work
(avad), which occur in Numbers 3:7–8.9 Jesus fulfilled these functions in a
limited way when he cleared the temple in Jerusalem (Matt. 21:12–13;
Mark 11:15–19; Luke 19:45–48; John 2:13–22).10 The temple was meant to
be a house of prayer for quiet, spiritual devotion and fellowship.11 It had
turned into a noisy marketplace where animals were sold and money was
exchanged. This activity was meant to help those who had traveled long
distances for worship. They could buy animals for sacrifice with the money
required by the temple. The merchants, however, charged exorbitant prices
so that worship became a burden to the people. Jesus’ description of their
activity as a “den of robbers” is accurate.12 The priests failed the people by
not serving them (avad),13 and they failed God by not guarding (shamar)
the holiness of his house. Jesus acted as guardian of the holiness of the
temple by seeking to restore its proper use as a house of prayer for all
people. He cleared out the merchants by driving away those who bought
and sold in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the moneychangers.
An interesting comment in Mark reminds the reader of the role of the
Levites. Mark adds that Jesus “would not allow anyone to carry anything
through the temple” (Mark 11:16). The Levites guarded the tabernacle,
protecting it from anyone who should not be there, so that the wrath of God
would not fall on the people (Num. 1:53; 3:10). Jesus cleared out what was
improper and then guarded the temple so that it could function as a place of
prayer.
Jesus’ actions in the temple were strong and forceful. He used a whip of
cords to drive out the sellers and the animals (John 2:15). He poured out the
coins of the moneychangers and overturned their tables. These actions were
motivated by zeal for the proper use of the Lord’s house. The disciples
connected these actions to Psalm 69:9, which states, “Zeal for your house
has consumed me.” Psalm 69 is a psalm of David, who called upon God to
save him from those who hated him without cause (vv. 1–4). Those who
were against David included his own brothers (v. 8). David prayed that
others who hope in God would not be put to shame or dishonored because
of him. The reproach and dishonor that David experienced were for the sake
of God (vv. 6–7). The motivation was that zeal for God’s house had
consumed him (v. 9). David was passionate about the honor of God, and he
was willing to suffer for the sake of God’s purposes. In the same way, Jesus
was passionate that the honor of God be guarded in the house of God. The
sellers and moneychangers were dishonoring God because their activity in
the temple took away from its real purpose. Jesus was willing to suffer
reproach from his own people and his family for the sake of God’s
purposes.14
Zeal for God. Jesus also fulfilled the priestly, Levitical role by his zeal
for the house of God. Malachi 3:1–3 comments that when the Lord whom
they seek suddenly comes to his temple, he will purify the Levites and
refine them like gold so that they will bring offerings in righteousness to the
Lord. Jesus’ actions of clearing the temple were meant to purify it so that
proper worship could be offered by the people. The motivation for such
actions can also be seen in a previous priest, from the tribe of Levi, who
acted with zeal to protect the honor of God.
When the Israelites engaged in idolatry and sexual immorality with the
people of Moab, Phinehas pierced a man and a woman through with a spear.
This act turned back the wrath of God from the people of Israel. God states
that Phinehas “was jealous with my jealousy . . . , so that I did not consume
the people of Israel in my jealousy” (Num. 25:11). The Hebrew term
jealousy expresses a strong emotion whereby the subject desires some
quality or object. The basic meaning is “zeal,” and when the zeal is for what
belongs to someone else, it is “envy.” When the zeal is for what rightfully
belongs to a person, the meaning is “jealousy” in a positive sense. As
Israel’s husband, God is zealous that his people be faithful to the covenant.
Idolatry is spiritual adultery. He acts to maintain their relationship,
sometimes through judgment and sometimes through salvation.15
Phinehas’s zeal was the same zeal that God expressed for his people (“my
jealousy”). Such zeal is what motivates strong, forceful action for the sake
of God’s honor.
Phinehas can be seen as a type of Christ. Although his actions and
Jesus’ actions are not the same, they have the same motivation. There is a
pattern in the Old Testament of actions motivated by zeal for God’s honor
(Elijah in 1 Kings 19:10, Jehu in 2 Kings 10:16, and David in Psalm 69:9).
Phinehas fits this pattern in a broad way. Not only is he motivated by the
honor of God, but the results of his actions are similar to the results of
Jesus’ actions. In Numbers 25:11 his actions turn back the wrath of God
from the people of Israel. Jesus’ action of clearing the temple is a precursor
of what his work on the cross will accomplish. He will turn away the wrath
of God from his people and establish a new place where his presence will
dwell (see below). Psalm 106:30–31 also mentions Phinehas in a history of
the rebellion of God’s people. The psalm begins with a declaration of
thanksgiving for the steadfast love of the Lord demonstrated in his mighty
deeds (vv. 1–2). Those who observe justice and do righteousness at all
times receive a blessing (v. 3). In light of the psalm’s content, which
focuses on the sinfulness of the people, it is impossible for God’s people to
do righteousness at all times. At the end of the psalm is a cry for God to
gather his people from the nations.16 The act of Phinehas stopped the
plague, and it was “counted to him as righteousness from generation to
generation forever” (v. 31). There are parallels between the language of
Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 106:31, but it is clear in the context of Psalm 106
that this is not teaching salvation by works (the ideal of keeping
righteousness at all times is impossible). Rather, Phinehas does not act as an
individual Israelite but acts in his office as priest, in which his actions are
done on behalf of the people. This is not a personal righteousness but a
righteousness related to his priestly office, which was accepted by God as
an act of righteous mediation on behalf of the people. Thus he serves as a
type of Christ who fulfills righteousness at all times so that his actions can
be counted as righteousness for himself and for his people.
In John’s account of the clearing of the temple, the Jews asked Jesus for
a sign to demonstrate his authority to act in such a way. Jesus answered,
“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). Of
course, the Jews thought he was talking about the literal temple, but Jesus
was speaking about the temple of his body. He himself was the reality of
what the temple represented: the dwelling of God among his people.17 He
identified his own body with the temple and promised to raise it up in three
days. The literal temple will no longer be the focus of worship, but God will
seek worshipers who worship in spirit and truth (4:24).18 This new
community will be composed of followers of Jesus Christ, the people given
to him by the Father (17:6). Jesus confirmed that he had fulfilled his
responsibility of keeping them and guarding them (v. 12). This is an
allusion to the work of Adam in the garden, part of which was to guard it.
These two verbs are also used of the work of the Levites in the tabernacle.19
Jesus fulfilled this important work by establishing the new community of
God’s people, the new temple (1 Cor. 3:16–17; 6:19–20), and by keeping
them (1 John 5:18).
Teaching the People of God. Jesus guarded and kept his disciples in
specific ways during his earthly ministry. The accounts of the clearing of
the temple in Mark and Luke emphasize the teaching ministry of Jesus,
especially concerning how the temple should properly function as a house
of prayer (Mark 11:17). It was Jesus’ practice to teach daily in the temple
during his final days in Jerusalem (Luke 19:47). Although his work on the
cross would lead to a new temple community, he supported the temple work
by sending those cleansed from leprosy to the temple (17:11–14) and by
paying the temple tax (Matt. 17:24–27). He also taught the true
understanding of the law over the oral tradition that had grown up around it
(5:17–48). He taught the truth of God’s Word and turned many away from
iniquity (Mal. 2:6). His teaching ministry continues after his ascension
through the Holy Spirit, who guides the apostles to the truth (John 14:26;
15:26; 16:13).
Praying for God’s People. Another way that Jesus guarded and kept his
disciples during his earthly ministry was by praying for them. The regular
times of prayer in Jesus’ life (see chapter 3) must have included praying for
his disciples. One such prayer is recorded in Luke 22:31, where Jesus tells
Peter that Satan has demanded to have Peter, that he might sift him like
wheat. The goal of Satan is to destroy Peter’s faith, because Jesus’ specific
prayer for Peter is that his faith would not fail. It is likely that Peter is not
the only apostle for whom Jesus prayed in light of the plural you in verse
31.20 Jesus also prays for the ones given to him by the Father (John 17:9).
He keeps them and guards them through prayer so that not one of them is
lost, except the son of destruction (v. 12). The perseverance of the disciples’
faith was based on the intercession of the earthly Jesus.21 The fact that
Judas, the betrayer, fell away was not only “that the Scripture might be
fulfilled” (v. 12), but also because Satan entered into Judas (Luke 22:3). If
the apostles were kept by Jesus’ prayers for them, this implies that Jesus did
not pray such a prayer for Judas.22 The point is that Jesus’ ministry of
intercession for his people began before his ascension. In fact, Jesus even
prayed for future believers in John 17:20. Although his ascension and
exaltation would be very important for his continuing priestly role (see
below), Jesus’ intercession was not rooted in his status as ascended Lord,
but in his role as Son to the Father (Luke 10:21–22).23
Jesus Is Superior to the Old Testament Priests
The emphasis in this chapter has been on how Jesus fulfilled the priestly
role in relationship to the garments, the anointing oil, and the work of the
priests and Levites. It is clear, however, that Jesus is not from the tribe of
Levi but from the tribe of Judah. This lineage disqualified him from serving
as a Priest in the earthly tabernacle at Jerusalem. Jesus never officiated at
the sacrifices in the tabernacle, never handled the blood of the sacrifices,
and never went into the Most Holy Place as the High Priest. Jesus’ lineage
raises the question whether he is qualified to be a Priest for his people. The
book of Hebrews answers this question with support from Old Testament
Scriptures. It sets forth the superiority of Christ over the angels, Moses, and
Joshua (Heb. 1:1–4:13). We are exhorted to strive to enter the rest that is
still available and to not miss that rest because of disobedience (4:11). The
encouragement to hold fast our confession is possible because we have a
Great High Priest, Jesus the Son of God. His superiority over the earthly
priests is demonstrated in his sinless humanity and in his deity (4:14–5:10).
Jesus is a human being like the other priests. In the days of his flesh he
suffered various trials and prayed with loud cries and tears to the One who
could save him from death. He learned obedience through what he suffered
(5:7–8). He was tempted in every way that human beings are tempted, but
he did not sin. Thus he is able to sympathize with our weakness, and we
have confidence that he will hear our prayers as we draw near to God’s
throne to receive grace in the time of need (4:15–16).
Jesus is superior to the earthly priests because of his divine character
(Heb. 5:1–10). After his resurrection and ascension, he passed through the
heavens. His ministry is not at an earthly temple but in a heavenly
sanctuary.24 Jesus, like the high priests of the Old Testament, had to be
appointed for this work. No priest took the honor to himself but, like Aaron,
was called by God. Christ also did not exalt himself to High Priest but was
appointed by God (vv. 1, 5). Two Old Testament passages support this
appointment. Psalm 2:7 shows that Jesus is the Son of God, and Psalm
110:4 shows that Jesus was appointed a Priest forever according to the order
of Melchizedek. Jesus fulfills the priestly role as Son, both in his
humiliation and in his exaltation. Through his obedience he became the
source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a
Priest according to the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 5:8–10). There is but
one Messiah, unique in his sonship and his priesthood.25

A Priest “according to the Order of

Melchizedek”
The author of Hebrews identifies the Old Testament figure of
Melchizedek from the account in Genesis 14:18–20. After Abraham
defeated a confederation of kings and rescued Lot, he was met by
Melchizedek, king of Salem and priest of the Most High God. Melchizedek
blessed Abraham, and Abraham gave to him a tenth of the spoils of victory.
Melchizedek is a mysterious figure; not much is known about him. He met
Abraham in Genesis 14 and then disappeared. Melchizedek and Abraham
worshiped the same God; both use the name “God Most High” (vv. 19–20,
22).26 Melchizedek is presented as a type of Christ.27 He is not identified
with the Son of God, but he “resembles” the Son of God (Heb. 7:3). The
name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness,” and he was also king of
peace based on the name of the city of Salem over which he ruled (7:1–2).
As king of righteousness and king of peace, he was a type of Christ, the
messianic Priest–King. The genealogy of Melchizedek is not recorded,
which is a significant omission in a book in which genealogical information
is given for prominent people.28 He is described as “without father or
mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life” (v.
3). This describes his appearance in Genesis and is not a literal description
of his life. It also sets him apart as a type of the Son of God, who is
eternal.29
It is clear that Melchizedek was superior to Abraham and is thus
superior to Abraham’s descendants from the tribe of Levi (Heb. 7:4–10).
This section of Hebrews begins with an exclamation of how great
Melchizedek was compared to Abraham (v. 4). Hardly anyone is greater to
the Jewish people than Abraham; he was the father of the nation, the one to
whom God gave the covenant promises concerning his posterity.30 The
greatness of Melchizedek over Abraham is shown in two ways. First,
Melchizedek blessed Abraham (Gen. 14:19–20). The inferior party is
blessed by the superior party (Heb. 7:7); that makes Melchizedek the
superior party. Second, Abraham paid a tithe from the spoils of victory to
Melchizedek. The person who receives tithes is superior to the person who
pays them. According to the law, the Levites took tithes from the people
who were also descendants of Abraham. The Levites were mortal men, but
the one who received the tithe from Abraham lives (vv. 5–8). We find no
account of Melchizedek’s death because he symbolizes a priesthood that
abides eternally. This demonstrates that the priesthood of Melchizedek is
greater than the Levitical priesthood, which is composed of men who die.
The author further argues that Levi himself paid tithes to Melchizedek
through Abraham, since Levi was in his loins when Melchizedek met him
(vv. 9–10). Melchizedek was greater than Abraham, and the priesthood
according to Melchizedek was greater than the Levitical priesthood.
The author of Hebrews is laying a foundation to argue for the necessity
of a change in the priesthood. He continues that argument by showing the
deficiencies in the Levitical priesthood (7:11–22). A change of priesthood
was needed because perfection had not been attained under the Levitical
priests; otherwise, there would not be a need for another priest after the
order of Melchizedek. The Levitical priesthood is also associated with the
giving of the law (v. 11). The law and priesthood belonged together, so a
change in the priesthood necessitates a change in the law. In verse 13 the
author begins to show what this means for Christ as Priest. He is descended
from the tribe of Judah, which has no connection to the priesthood. No one
from Judah has ever served at the altar, and nothing is said about priests’
coming from this tribe. The need for a change in priesthood becomes more
evident when one sees the basis for Christ serving as Priest. Christ serves
not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent but by the
power of his indestructible life (v. 16). The character of Christ as divine
necessitates an order of priesthood that fits his divinity. Here Psalm 110:4b
is quoted: “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” Christ
is not susceptible to death, so he serves as a Priest forever and introduces a
better hope by which to draw near to God (Heb. 7:19). With the coming of
Christ, the priestly order was transformed: he fulfilled the law and made the
Levitical priesthood obsolete.31

The Benefits of Christ’s Priesthood

Part of the argument for a change of priesthood is the benefits to God’s
people that it would accomplish. Several benefits are covered in the book of
Hebrews. The superior nature of the priesthood according to the order of
Melchizedek is demonstrated by its establishment by oath (Ps. 110:4a). The
priesthood of Aaron and his sons was enacted by a statute (Ex. 29:9) but not
by an oath. The oath sets the appointment of Christ as Priest apart from the
Levitical priests and makes him the guarantor of a better covenant (Heb.
7:22). The priesthood (v. 11) and the Mosaic covenant (Jer. 31:32) could not
bring about perfection. The superior priesthood lasts forever based on the
character of Jesus and cannot be annulled or set aside because he is the
guarantor of the covenant. The service of Christ as Priest is better than the
service of the Old Testament priests because he is a permanent Priest not
impacted by death. This implies that he is always able to make intercession
for his people and that he is able to save them completely (Heb. 7:23–25).
The character of Jesus sets him apart from the Levitical priests and affects
his priestly ministry. He is holy, innocent, unstained, separated from
sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He is the Son who has been made
perfect forever. Thus he does not need to offer daily sacrifices for his own
sins. He also does not need to offer daily sacrifices for the people’s sins
because his sacrifice on the cross for salvation was sufficient once for all
(7:26–28; 10:11–14). The ministry of Jesus as Priest is not carried out in the
earthly tabernacle, a copy and shadow of the heavenly, but in the heavenly
sanctuary (8:4–5). This point is made several times in Hebrews 9–10. Christ
entered the greater and more perfect tent once for all to offer his own blood
to secure eternal redemption (9:11–14). He does not have to enter the Most
Holy Place every year to offer himself repeatedly; he appeared once for all
to put away sin by his sacrifice (9:23–28; 10:11–14).
Christ could never have accomplished this work of complete salvation if
he had been a priest in the line of Aaron serving in the earthly tabernacle.
The blood of bulls and goats could not permanently take away sin (Heb.
10:4). For eternal redemption to be secured, Christ had to be a Priest
according to the order of Melchizedek. His divine character and
indestructible life meant that the onetime sacrifice of himself fulfilled the
righteousness of God and paid for sin. Christ’s obedience and perfection
(4:15; 5:7–9) are important because the salvation of the people of God
depends on the priest’s being obedient to God’s commands (Lev. 10:1–3).
At his resurrection and ascension into heaven he entered the heavenly tent
and presented his work to his Father for the salvation of his people. In
contrast to the Levitical priests, who stand daily because their work is never
finished, Christ sat down at the right hand of God because his work of
sacrifice was finished.32 His priestly work continues in his continual
intercession for his people. As the One who bore their sin, he is able to
confess their sin so that their transgressions can be forgiven (Lev. 16:21;
Isa. 53:12). His ongoing intercession means that there is present, continual
help for the people of God (Heb. 4:16). The work of Christ as Priest ensures
that his people will not fall away but that they will come through every trial.
The benefits include the forgiveness of sin, the cleansing of the conscience,
peace with God, assurance of salvation, and the gift of eternal life.
Believers are also perfected by being set apart to live a life of holiness,
which will result in the completion of their perfection when Christ comes
again (10:14).33

Blessing the People of God

The role of a priest included blessing the people of God. Just as
Melchizedek blessed Abraham (Gen. 14:19; Heb. 7:1, 6) and the priests
blessed the people (Lev. 9:22; Num. 6:22–27), so Jesus blessed his disciples
at his ascension (Luke 24:50). As the resurrected Lord, he lifted up his
hands and blessed his disciples as he was carried up into heaven.34 As the
ascended Lord, he continues his ministry on behalf of his people. Christ as
our Advocate (1 John 2:1) pleads the believer’s cause with the Father in
heaven against the false accusations brought against God’s people (Heb.
7:25; 1 John 2:1; Rev. 12:10), and through the Holy Spirit believers are
strengthened to carry out their ministry in this world (John 16:8). Christ
continues to pray for the spiritual needs of his people, for their protection,
and for their perseverance in the faith so that they will participate in his
victory. In Revelation, Christ is the Lamb who receives the prayers of the
saints in bowls of incense and is worthy to open the scroll, because through
his blood he ransomed a people for God from every tribe and nation (Rev.
5:6–10). This Lamb is the King of kings who conquers the beasts of
Revelation (17:14). In the description of his coming to lead the armies of
heaven into the last great battle, he is described as wearing a robe dipped in
blood (19:13). The Priest who suffered for his people now comes to
conquer all their enemies.
Study Questions
1. Why isn’t Jesus identified as a Priest during his earthly ministry? Does
this mean that we should not think about the work of Jesus in terms of
a Priest? Why or why not?
2. How was Jesus set apart or consecrated for his work?
3. How does Jesus fulfill the role of guarding and keeping the temple and
his people during his earthly ministry? In what ways do these
examples expand your view of the ministry of Jesus?
4. How is Christ superior to the Old Testament priests?
5. How does Christ relate to the figures of Phinehas and Melchizedek?
6. List some benefits of Christ’s priesthood. How do these benefits
impact your life as a Christian?

_______________
1. Eugene Merrill comments, “The Gospels are virtually silent with respect to any priestly aspect
of Jesus’ messianic office, and Paul likewise gave scant attention to Jesus as priest.” “Royal
Priesthood: An Old Testament Messianic Motif,” BSac 150 (January–March 1993): 51.
2. George W. Stroup III, “The Relevance of the Minus Triplex for Reformed Theology and
Ministry,” Austin Seminary Bulletin 98 (1983): 29.
3. John M. Frame, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief (Phillipsburg, NJ:
P&R Publishing, 2013), 886–87.
4. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1973), 143.
5. Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941), 335. He states that the
Holy Spirit “sanctified the human nature of Christ in its very inception, and thus kept it free from the
pollution of sin.”
6. Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 3, Sin and Salvation in Christ (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 2006), 292–93.
7. The Hebrew verb that means “to anoint” is mashakh, from which the noun mashiakh comes. In
the NT, the Greek verb is chriō and the noun is Christos. Holders of the three offices of prophet,
priest, and king are all anointed with oil in the OT (see chapter 1), but the kingly role became
particularly associated with the coming Anointed One. D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 156. What the term Messiah truly means for Jesus is explained in
the Gospels.
8. For a discussion of the relationship between the deity of Jesus and his subordination to the
Father in John 5, see Robert L. Reymond, Jesus Divine Messiah (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus,
2003), 229–32.
9. These two verbs were also used of Adam’s work in the garden in Genesis 2:15.
10. For a discussion of John’s placement of this incident early in Jesus’ ministry rather than near
the time of his death, as in the Synoptic Gospels, see Carson, John, 176–78.
11. Hendriksen, Matthew, 769.
 12. Herman N. Ridderbos, Matthew (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 385–86. The buying and
selling took place in the court of the Gentiles, an area of the temple that they were allowed to enter.
13. In other words, they did not work on behalf of the people.
14. John shows that the opposition to Jesus included his brothers and the members of his own
household (7:1–9).
15. Leonard J. Coppes, , TWOT, 2:802. The Septuagint translates this Hebrew word with the
same word used in John 2 (zelos).
16. Psalm 106 is the final psalm of Book 4 of the Psalter. The cry to “save us” at the end of the
psalm is answered in Psalm 107, the first psalm of Book 5. For more on these two psalms and the
question of the organization of the Psalter, see Richard P. Belcher Jr., The Messiah and the Psalms
(Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2006).
17. Edmund P. Clowney, “The Final Temple,” WTJ 35, 2 (1972): 173–75. See also the extensive
discussion of the temple in G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology
of the Dwelling Place of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004).
18. Although Jesus supported the temple, his ministry laid the groundwork for a new spiritual
temple. He circumvented the temple by directly forgiving sins (Matt. 12), and he placed himself at
the center of the feasts (John 7–8). See Michael Horton, The Christian Faith (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2011), 488. For how Jesus fulfills the feasts, see John R. Sittema, Meeting Jesus at the
Feast: Israel’s Festivals and the Gospel (Grandville, MI: Reformation Fellowship, 2010).
19. The verb guard (phulassō) is used by the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew word keep
(shamar) in Genesis 2:15 and Numbers 3:7.
20. David Crump, Jesus the Intercessor: Prayer and Christology in Luke–Acts (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1992), 157, 159–61.
21. Ibid., 157.
22. Ibid., 162. This may parallel Jeremiah’s not praying for the people as judgment became
inevitable.
23. Ibid., 74–75.
24. Philip E. Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1977), 170–71.
25. Ibid., 181. Hughes points out that Qumran looked for two messianic figures, a royal, Davidic
messiah and a priestly, Aaronic messiah. These two are fulfilled in Jesus.
26. Ibid., 246.
27. James A. Borland, Christ in the Old Testament: Old Testament Appearances of Christ in
Human Form (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 1999), 139–47. He gives reasons why Melchizedek
is not a Christophany (a preincarnate appearance of the Son of God).
28. William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, Thessalonians, the Pastorals, and Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 185.
29. Hughes, Hebrews, 248.
30. Ibid., 251. Hughes highlights that Abraham is called “the patriarch” (Heb. 7:4), the ancestral
founder of the Hebrew people.
31. Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984),
192. The fact that the Levitical priesthood is obsolete would seem to go against Jeremiah 33:18, “and
the Levitical priests shall never lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings,” which parallels
God’s promise that David will never lack a man on the throne (Jer. 33:17). Christ fulfills the OT
offices and transforms them so that they continue in greater ways. He sits on the throne of David; this
is not an earthly throne but the heavenly throne at the right hand of the Father. Christ transforms the
temple and the priesthood so that the ministry of the church, the new temple of God, is carried out by
the sacrifices of his people. This fulfills Isaiah 66:21 in that Gentiles are able to serve as priests and
Levites. Clowney (“Final Temple,” 170) points out that even if an earthly temple were rebuilt in
Jerusalem, Christ the risen Lord would be barred from that sanctuary while the sons of Levi would
mediate between him and the Father. There is no need for an earthly temple, just as there is no need
for continued offering of sacrifices (Heb. 10:11–18).
32. Hughes, Hebrews, 400.
33. Kistemaker, Hebrews, 282.
34. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1978), 1076. He comments that this blessing is an effective impartation of welfare, peace, and power.
 6
THE ROLE OF THE KING IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT

THE ROLE OF DOMINION given to mankind in Genesis 1 lays the

foundation for kingship in redemptive history. This culminates in Jesus
Christ and will have implications for the continuing role of human beings in
ruling over and caring for God’s creation.
The Seed of the Woman
God created mankind (adam, ) to exercise dominion over creation.
Every human being, created in the image of God, is to rule over creation for
the glory of God (Gen. 1:26–28). His rule on the earth was accomplished
through human beings, carrying out their God-given role under his
authority. Adam and Eve rejected his authority by disobeying his command,
and their rebellion brought God’s good creation under the curse and power
of sin (3:14–19). They failed to exercise dominion over the serpent by not
casting him out of the garden. In turn, they were cast out of the garden.
Someone from the seed of the woman will have to come to defeat the
serpent, to rescue creation from the curse of sin, and to restore the proper
role of dominion to human beings (v. 15).
Because of sin, mankind no longer lives in harmony with creation, so
the exercise of dominion becomes hard work. The presence of sin not only
impacts humans' relationship to creation, but also distorts both the vertical
relationship between humanity and God and the horizontal relationships
between human beings. Dominion can easily become domination,
exploitation, and oppression. These characteristics are exemplified in
Genesis 4 with the triumph and escalation of sin. Cain murders his brother
Abel. Lamech takes two wives (contrary to 2:24) and boasts of killing a
young man. The widespread nature of sin is stated in Genesis 6:5: “The
LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every
intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” God
responds to the pervasive sin on the earth with the judgment of the flood
(6:9–8:19). Noah emerges after the flood as a new Adam with the
continuing responsibility of dominion in a fallen world.1 The animals will
fear human beings, and justice needs to be established by protecting human
life (9:2–6). God’s covenant with Noah ensures that God will no longer
destroy the earth with a flood, and that the cycles of creation (seedtime and
harvest, summer and winter, day and night) will continue to allow human
beings to carry out his mandate to multiply and fill the earth (8:20–9:17).

A Son of Abraham
 The drunkenness of Noah (Gen. 9:20–27) and the Tower of Babel
incident (11:1–9) show the continuing problem of sin. Noah abuses the
good gift of wine, and the people of Babel desire to make a name for
themselves. God begins to work through Abram and his family to restore
the dominion that was lost at the fall. Abram, like Adam and Noah, has the
opportunity to carry out God’s original purpose for human beings.2 Abram
exercises a kingly role by rescuing Lot from a coalition of kings that had
conquered Sodom. God makes the covenant of circumcision with Abram,
promises that Abram will be the father of a multitude of nations, and
changes his name to Abraham (17:4–5).3 God also promises Abraham that
kings will come forth from him4 and that his descendants will take
possession of the land of Canaan (vv. 6–8). Thus Abraham’s descendants
will have the opportunity to establish God’s rule by exercising dominion.

A Ruler from Judah

As redemptive history moves forward, more information is given
concerning the One who will come to rule. In Genesis 3:15, the One coming
to battle the serpent is from the seed of the woman. The focus narrows
when God calls Abraham and makes promises about his future descendants.
God develops the chosen line through Isaac, with the twelve sons of Jacob
becoming the nucleus of the nation of Israel. Near the end of his life, Jacob
blesses his sons and speaks concerning their future (ch. 49). A ruler will
come from the tribe of Judah (vv. 8–12), who is praised by his brothers and
given a place of prominence among them. They bow down before him
because of his victory over his enemies (v. 8). Judah is likened to a lion that
conquers his prey. The lion imagery fits well with the kingly language that
is used to describe his future. This victory will come through a ruler who
will arise from Judah and command the obedience of the peoples.5 The
coming of this ruler will bring abundant blessing (vv. 11–12). There will be
so many vines that people will not worry about hitching a donkey to one,
even though this would destroy the vine. Wine will be as plentiful as water.
This abundance will lead to a healthy appearance among the people (v. 12).

A Star out of Jacob

 Balak, king of Moab, is concerned about the people of Israel as they
travel to the land of Canaan. He is afraid that they are too numerous and
powerful for him to defeat and that they will take over his land. He calls for
Balaam, a diviner, to curse them (Num. 22:5–6). Balaam delivers four
oracles (22:41–23:10; 23:13–26; 23:27–24:14; 24:15–19), but God will not
allow him to curse Israel. In the fourth oracle (24:15–19), Balaam looks to
the future and sees a ruler, called a scepter, who will come from Israel. The
term scepter is also used in Genesis 49:10 and is a symbol of kingship. The
coming One is described as a star that will come out of Jacob (Num. 24:17).
The word star is not often used for a royal figure in the Old Testament (Isa.
14:12), but it is a common designation in the ancient Near East.6 This ruler
will defeat Moab, the sons of Sheth,7 and Edom. This seems to be a
reference to David or the Davidic dynasty because these nations are the
local enemies of Israel and Judah. It is debatable whether this passage is
completely fulfilled in David or whether it is messianic. David subdues
Moab and Edom, but not permanently; Jeremiah 48–49 prophesies against
Moab and Edom. The star out of Jacob refers to David but gives a glimpse
of the messianic hope, even if in an indirect form, when placed in the
context of the whole Bible.8
The Role of the King in Israel (Deuteronomy
17:14–20)
God had promised that kings would come from Abraham. Several texts
have spoken of a King who would emerge from Israel and defeat her
enemies (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:15–19). As the people prepare to enter the
land of Canaan, Moses prepares them with three addresses in Deuteronomy.
He instructs them by reviewing their history (1:1–4:43), by focusing on
their future life in the land (4:44–28:68), and by stressing that faithfulness
to the covenant will give them a future (29:1–30:20).9 These addresses are
followed by an epilogue of the last acts of Moses, including the
commissioning of Joshua.10 The passage defining the king’s role occurs in
the second address in the context of setting forth the leaders of God’s
people. Moses speaks about judges (16:18–20), priests and judges who
would handle difficult cases (17:8–13), kings (17:14–20), and prophets
(18:15–22).

Kings in the Ancient Near East

The main characteristic of the role of the king within Israel is the limits
placed on him. He is not the highest authority in the land. This role of the
king was different from the way kings functioned in other nations in the
ancient Near East. In Egypt the king was the central figure of society. He
was the absolute monarch and the chief executive officer of the state. He
was the source of all laws and the foundation of moral righteousness. He
was the supreme high priest, who was the main link between the gods and
humanity. This link guaranteed the triumph of order over chaos on the
earth. This universal order, called ma’at, was maintained by the reign of the
king. He functioned as a key component of society’s proper order. He held a
divine office derived from the realm of the gods. No enemy could stand
against him.11
The role of the king was understood in a variety of ways throughout
Mesopotamian history.12 In general, he was not a god but was endowed
with divine vocation as the gods’ representative or administrator; thus he
wielded superhuman power that put him on the same plane as the gods.13
He was the image of the gods and their representative, filled with their
divine power and authority to rule on earth.14 Evidence of the Canaanite
view of the king comes mainly from the Ugaritic texts. This evidence is not
as abundant as the evidence from Egypt and Mesopotamia. The king was
considered the son of the god El. Theological language sets him apart from
common humanity, the priesthood, and nobility. He bridged the boundary
between the divine and human orders and thus somehow shared in the
divine realm.15 As the god’s viceroy, the king administered the deity’s
territory. One of his major roles was to ensure that justice and righteousness
prevailed in the nation.16
Kings in the ancient Near East were the highest authority in the land.
This view made it difficult for anyone to criticize their policies or actions.
The role of the king in Israel was different because he was not considered to
be a god or divine, and there was a higher authority over him. His power
was limited in a number of ways. The recognition that Yahweh is the King
of Israel limited the earthly king’s authority. Yahweh fought and defeated
Pharaoh and the gods of Egypt to deliver his people from bondage. The
victory song after crossing the Red Sea celebrates Yahweh as a man of war
(Ex. 15:3) who defeated the army of Pharaoh (vv. 4–10). Such actions will
bring dread upon the inhabitants of Canaan. God will plant his people in the
land, and he will reign over them (vv. 14–18). The Lord is King because of
the glory of his majesty and his power to defeat all his enemies.17

Kings in Israel Rule under God’s Authority

Yahweh brought the people to Mount Sinai and entered into a covenant
with them. He gave them his law and took his place among them in the
center of the camp (Num. 2), the place where the king would normally
place his tent.18 God led them forth toward the land of Canaan (10:35–36)
and sent his heavenly commander to lead them into battle (Josh. 5:13–15).19
Based on the way that the Israelites conquered Jericho (ch. 6) and the way
that creation assisted in their victory against the five Amorite kings (10:12–
14), it is clear that Yahweh fought for his people and defeated all their
enemies. It did not matter if the enemies of Israel were more numerous or
had more powerful weapons because no human army can defeat Yahweh
(Judg. 4–5; 7). When the people came to make Gideon king, he rejected
their offer with the proper response: “I will not rule over you, and my son
will not rule over you; the LORD will rule over you” (8:23). Yahweh is the
true King of Israel.
Statements in Deuteronomy made it clear that even if Israel appointed a
human king, that king would rule under the authority of Yahweh, the true
King. Yahweh established the covenant relationship, and the covenant
regulated the various responsibilities of the leaders of the nation. The law of
God was the standard by which the nation and her leaders, including the
king, would be judged. The king was just one of the many important leaders
of Israel. There was a balance of power presented in Deuteronomy 16:18–
18:22 that limited the power of all offices, including the king; the laws
worked together as the constitution of the nation. Thus power was not
concentrated in one office, but authority was found in a number of offices
based on the authority of the law.20 The king was to keep a copy of the law
with him and read it all his life (17:18–20). This would keep the king
humble and remind him of his true source of authority. He would learn to
fear God by reading the law and keeping all its words so that his heart
would not become full of pride. The king submitted to the authority of
Yahweh by submitting to the law of God.21
At Mount Sinai Israel became a nation, but having a king to lead the
nation was not a top priority. Several important leadership roles are
mentioned in Deuteronomy 16–18 before the role of the king is described,
such as judges (16:18–20) and priests and judges who would handle
difficult cases (17:8–13). The role of the prophet is described after the king
(18:15–22). The prophet will speak God’s word to the king and call him and
the nation back to obedience when they disobey. The way in which the role
of the king is introduced shows that having a king will come with certain
temptations. When the people come into the land, they will desire a king so
that they can be like other nations (17:14–15). The fact that kingship is
listed among the leaders of the land shows that the role itself is not wrong,
but the motivation for having a king can be misguided (see the discussion
on 1 Sam. 8 below). In fact, God declares that they may have a king of his
choosing: “you may set a king over you, whom the LORD your God will
choose” (Deut. 17:15). The point is that Israel can become a nation without
a human king because Yahweh is her King.22 Kingship will become an
important role within Israel, but it will function within certain limits.
 Limits on the Power of the King
Certain temptations to abuse power accompany kingship. Deuteronomy
17:16–17 tried to address these temptations by limiting the actions of the
king in three areas. First, the king was not to acquire many horses for
himself. This restriction put a limit on the size of Israel’s army. The
prohibition against returning to Egypt to acquire horses may have also
limited foreign alliances to secure horses for military purposes.23 There was
a great temptation to trust in the strength of the army for military victory
rather than trusting in the power of Yahweh. He, however, was the One who
led the people into battle, fought for them, and secured their victory. A
human king was to continue to depend on the Lord for military victory.
Second, the king was not to acquire many wives for himself. This
prohibition also limited foreign entanglements because many times when a
treaty was made with another nation, a wife would be given to the king.24
These wives would be foreign women who worshiped false gods, and they
would bring this influence into the nation of Israel. The temptation to
worship false gods would increase because of the proximity of these foreign
wives to the king.
The third and final limit on the power of the king was that he should not
acquire excessive silver and gold for himself. This also limited commerce
with foreign nations and the king’s accumulation of personal wealth, which
would bring him more power and set him above other Israelites.25 Wealth
would increase his temptation to think himself above others and to disobey
God (Deut. 17:20).
The kings of Israel were to be different from the kings of the ancient
Near East. The Israelite king did not have absolute power but shared in the
administration of the law with other leaders. They were all subject to God
and to his Word; in this the king was not to view himself as different from
other Israelites. He would be blessed if he obeyed the law of God. He was
to live in dependence on God in how he ran his court. He was not to trust in
things that most kings trusted in to show their glory and power. There
would be a great temptation to establish a seat of centralized power with a
massive bureaucracy needing to be supported by increasing taxes. It is easy
for the trappings of power to become more important than anything else.
Power easily corrupts, and sadly becomes a pattern later in Israel’s history.
The Need for a King: The Book of Judges
Moses fulfilled various roles within Israel, including covenant mediator,
judge, prophet, and general leader of the people. He ruled over the people in
his various roles, but it would be a misnomer to call him a king. The same
could be said about Joshua, who took over from Moses and led Israel into
the land of Canaan. His main role was as Israel’s military commander to
fulfill the mission that God had given to Israel: to drive out the Canaanites
and to give the land to Israel as her inheritance. Joshua fulfilled that mission
by breaking the Canaanites’ control in the land, enabling each tribe to finish
the job of driving out the Canaanites. When Joshua died, no successor was
appointed to take his place. The covenant had been renewed just before
Joshua’s death (Josh. 24), but the Israelites had no central authority
structure. God was their King, and the tribes were to complete the conquest
of the land allotted to them. Although there was some initial success in
driving out the Canaanites, Israel failed to complete her mission (Judg. 1).
The Israelites allowed the Canaanites to remain in the land. They disobeyed
God and began to worship false gods. This began a cycle: the children of
Israel disobey God, he gives them into the hand of an oppressor, they cry
out to the Lord, and he raises up a deliverer to save them from the oppressor
(2:11–19). These deliverers—called judges—were not civil magistrates,
kings with a dynasty, or officials elected by the people. They were military
leaders spontaneously raised up by God to deliver the people from an
oppressor.
A downward spiral in the book of Judges marks the judges themselves
and the condition of the people.26 Othniel, the first judge, is presented in an
ideal way. He defeats a very powerful enemy named Cuthan-Rishathaim
(the name means “dark, doubly wicked”) with a simple description of
victory emphasizing the role of Yahweh (Judg. 3:7–11). Ambiguity
surrounds the way in which the next judge, Ehud, uses deception to kill
Eglon, the king of Moab (vv. 12–30). Barak is hesitant to lead Israel into
battle without being accompanied by Deborah; this leads to the statement
that the glory of the victory will go to a woman (4:8–10). A significant
decline occurs with Gideon because the Israelites are worse off at the end of
his life than they were when he was called as judge. At the end of Gideon’s
life, Israel is involved in idolatry because of an ephod that Gideon made
(8:22–28). The downward spiral continues when Jephthah makes a rash
vow that leads to the sacrifice of his daughter (11:29–40),27 and Samson
embodies the nation of Israel when he does what is right in his own eyes
(14:1–7). He disregards the Nazirite vow, he battles against the Philistines
for personal revenge, and he goes after foreign women. One of those
women leads to his downfall. He ends his life, however, killing thousands
of Philistines by bringing the temple down on them and himself.
Kingship is a theme in the book of Judges; more specifically, the
argument is made that Israel needs a godly king to keep society from falling
apart.28 False views of kingship arise in the account of Gideon and
Abimelech. The people come to Gideon and ask him to become their king.
Gideon gives the right answer to their request: “I will not rule over you, and
my son will not rule over you; the LORD will rule over you” (Judg. 8:23).
Although Gideon rejects the offer of dynastic kingship, he later lives like a
king and his son seeks to become king. Gideon names his son Abimelech
(“my father is king”), and his death triggers a struggle for dynastic
succession because Gideon had acquired a considerable harem, which
produced seventy sons (v. 30). Abimelech seeks to become king through
self-assertion and by eliminating Gideon’s other sons. He, however, comes
to a tragic end. The Canaanite—or worldly—way of becoming king does
not work in Israel.
The book of Judges ends with several chapters that show the complete
disintegration of Israelite society (chs. 17–21). Morality breaks down at
both the national level and the individual levels. A Levite and a tribe
participate in the establishment of their own religious system. A city in
Benjamin acts like Sodom and Gomorrah. A Levite shows little concern for
his concubine, who is abused by the inhabitants of Gibeah. The response of
the other tribes of Israel against Benjamin makes matters worse. The refrain
of this section is that “in those days there was no king in Israel” (18:1;
19:1), and “everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (17:6; 21:25).
This refrain emphasizes that a king is needed to give spiritual leadership to
God’s people. Instead of an external threat, the end of Judges describes the
internal threat of the disobedience of God’s people. It shows the complete
breakdown of God’s law, leading to sexual and social perversion. A godly
king is needed to keep Israel on the path of holiness so that she can fulfill
her mission.
Israel’s Request for a King: The People’s Choice
The deteriorating condition of society reflected in Judges continues in
the book of Samuel. The word of the Lord was rare in those days (1 Sam.
3:1). The priesthood was corrupt. The sons of Eli, the priest, did not know
the Lord, and they abused their position as priests for their own benefit
(2:12). They stole food from the sacrifices, they slept with the women who
served at the Tent of Meeting, and they did not listen to the rebuke of their
father (vv. 12–25). Judgment was pronounced by a prophet against the
household of Eli (vv. 27–36).
The spiritual barrenness of Israel, represented by the priests, is
paralleled in the physical barrenness of Hannah. The family of Elkanah and
Hannah is contrasted with the condition of the nation. Elkanah is faithful in
worship, and Hannah takes her problems to God in prayer. Her physical
barrenness is more than just a personal problem and becomes the avenue
through which God provides for the spiritual barrenness of Israel.29 The
birth of Samuel ends Hannah’s physical barrenness and is the answer to
Israel’s spiritual decline. Samuel becomes a godly leader who brings
religious stability and fruitfulness. He is dedicated to God and grows up
serving at the tabernacle in the presence of the Lord (1 Sam. 2:21). He
grows in favor with the Lord and the people (v. 26), and none of his words
fall to the ground because the Lord is with him (3:19).
One of Samuel’s important roles is serving as a transitional figure
between the era of the judges and the establishment of kingship in Israel. At
the end of his life, the elders of Israel come to him to request that he appoint
a king over them. His sons, who are judges, do not walk in the way of the
Lord, and they turn aside after gain (1 Sam. 8:1–3). The elders ask for a
king to judge them like the kings of the other nations (vv. 4–5). They also
desire a king who will go before the people and fight their battles (v. 20).
The divine analysis of this request is that they have rejected Yahweh as their
King (v. 7). The desire to have a king is not wrong, but their motivation for
a king is misguided.30 The elders are seeking to be like the other nations
instead of being a distinct nation. Israel wants a king who will give her
power and political influence. Leading the nation into battle is not a right
granted to the king in Deuteronomy 17. This request shows a lack of trust in
Yahweh, who leads the nation and wins her battles. Yahweh fights and gives
the victory not only in the book of Joshua but also in the victory over the
Philistines in 1 Samuel 7. The elders now reject this arrangement in their
request for a king. God tells Samuel that this request fits Israel’s pattern of
rebellion since the exodus from Egypt. Samuel warns the Israelites what a
king will demand by showing how he will take from them (8:11–17). The
people, however, are firm in their resolve to have a king (vv. 19–22).
The Lord gives them the kind of king they desire. Saul appears to have
the qualifications to be king. The lengthy genealogy (1 Sam. 9:1–2) shows
that he comes from a substantial family in Israel. He is an imposing figure
who stands out in a crowd because he is a handsome young man and “taller
than any of the people” (v. 2). He is described as a military leader (nagid,
), and after he is publicly proclaimed king he leads the people to victory
over the Ammonites (ch. 11). There are, however, negative descriptions
connected to the character of Saul.31 He is from the city of Gibeah of the
tribe of Benjamin, where heinous acts of sin occurred in the book of Judges
(chs. 19–20). The description of being tall is normally used for Israel’s
enemies (Num. 13:33; Deut. 2:10), and may indicate that Saul is like the
other nations’ kings. When he is publicly proclaimed king, he is found
hiding among the baggage (1 Sam. 10:20–22). These negative elements are
possible indications of problems with Israel’s first king.
God rejects Saul as the king of Israel because he is unwilling to submit
to the word of God. Before the battle with the Philistines (1 Sam. 13), Saul
becomes impatient and does not wait for Samuel to arrive to offer the
sacrifice. Although the people begin to scatter, Saul could have called them
to faithful obedience and waited for Samuel, according to his instructions.
Instead, Saul offers the sacrifice himself. Samuel confronts Saul with his
disobedience, and Saul is told that his kingdom will not continue. In the
battle against the Amalekites (ch. 15), Saul does not carry out the command
of the Lord to devote to destruction everything captured in battle. When
confronted with his sin, Saul does not repent but seeks to save face before
the people. Samuel must finish the job by putting to death the king of the
Amalekites. Samuel specifically states that because Saul has rejected the
word of the Lord, the Lord has rejected him as king (v. 26).
David: God’s Choice for King
When Saul rejected Samuel’s word and offered the sacrifice before the
battle with the Philistines, Samuel told Saul that his kingdom would not
continue; God had sought a man after his own heart to be prince over his
people Israel (1 Sam. 13:14). The phrase “a man after God’s own heart”
may emphasize Yahweh’s freedom to choose according to his own criteria
in selecting a replacement for Saul.32 The phrase may also speak positively
about the character of the next king. He will be like-minded with the Lord
and will surrender to God’s word.33
The way in which David is chosen to be king emphasizes that he is
God’s choice. During a feast Samuel is sent to Jesse the Bethlehemite to
anoint the next king. Samuel is impressed with the appearance of the
firstborn son. The Lord’s decision, however, is not based on outward
appearance but on seeing the heart (1 Sam. 16:7). All the sons of Jesse pass
before Samuel, but none of them is the chosen king. David, the youngest
son, is tending the sheep. He was not considered significant enough to be
invited to the feast, but Samuel is told that he is God’s choice when he is
brought in. David is anointed king in a private ceremony.
David’s rise to power shows that he is a man who is willing to follow
God’s lead. When Goliath defies the armies of Israel and no one, including
Saul, is willing to fight him, David slays him and gives Israel a great
victory (1 Sam. 17). David faithfully serves Saul by playing the harp to
soothe Saul’s troubled spirit (16:14–23). When Saul rashly seeks to kill him
because he is jealous of David’s popularity and believes he will take over
Saul’s kingdom, David waits on God’s timing to become the next king. He
does not take matters into his own hands, even when he has the opportunity
to kill Saul (chs. 24, 26). David seeks to serve God by fighting Judah’s
battles even when he is running from Saul (ch. 27). When Saul and
Jonathan are killed in a battle against the Philistines, he does not rejoice but
mourns their deaths (1 Sam. 31–2 Sam. 1). David is finally anointed king
over Judah (2 Sam. 2) and then over all Israel (ch. 5).
David continues to demonstrate his character when he becomes king.
He consolidates the kingdom through the defeat of Israel’s enemies (2 Sam.
8). When confronted with his sin—adultery with Bathsheba and the betrayal
and murder of her husband, Uriah—David does not make excuses but
confesses (2 Sam. 12; Ps. 51). When he is betrayed by Absalom and must
leave Jerusalem, he leaves the ark behind. He submits himself to God’s
sovereign will concerning whether he will find favor in the eyes of the Lord
and return to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 15:24–26). As he leaves the city, he
humbly accepts the cursing of Shimei as from the Lord (16:5–14). When
judgment from the Lord falls on the people because of David’s sin in
numbering them, he requests that the hand of God be against him and his
house rather than against the innocent people (24:17). David had many
flaws, but he was God’s choice, and his heart was committed to the Lord.34
God’s Covenant with David
David consolidated the kingdom by defeating his enemies, and God
gave him rest on every side (2 Sam. 7:1). This rest was a fulfillment of a
promise that God made to his people before they took over the land (Deut.
12:10). After the defeat of his enemies, David desired to build God a
permanent house. God did not allow David to build a temple because of all
the wars in which he participated. Instead, God promised that David’s son
would build a temple and that God would establish David’s house. The
Lord sovereignly established David’s dynasty, and that dynasty would
establish God’s dwelling (2 Sam. 7:13), binding David’s rule to his rule.
God entered into a covenant with David and made promises concerning his
descendants. This covenant established an enduring Davidic dynasty and
changed the king’s relationship to God in the unfolding of redemptive
history.

The Terms of the Covenant

Although the word covenant is not used in 2 Samuel 7, Psalm 89:3
refers to God’s promises as a covenant. The promises include the
establishment of a kingdom through one of David’s offspring. This
descendant will build a house for the Lord, and the throne of his kingdom
will endure forever. A father–son relationship will be established between
God and the king. If this king commits iniquity, God will discipline him,
but God’s steadfast love will not depart from him as it did from Saul. The
outcome of this covenant: David’s house, kingdom, and throne will be
established forever.
This covenant, like most others in Scripture, has conditional and
unconditional elements.35 The conditional element is that the king from
David’s line must live in obedience to God or he will experience God’s
discipline. The unconditional element is that God will not take his steadfast
love away from the king, rejecting him and his descendants as God did with
Saul. The covenant promises of an eternal kingdom and an eternal throne
will be fulfilled. No amount of human disobedience will be able to hinder
the fulfillment of God’s promises to David.
 The Outworking of the Covenant in History
Solomon is the initial fulfillment of the promises in the Davidic
covenant. He is the descendant of David who built the first temple (1 Kings
7–8). If David can be described as the ideal king, Solomon’s reign can be
described as the ideal kingdom of peace and security. Many of God’s
promises to his people are initially fulfilled in Solomon’s kingdom: the
Abrahamic promise that the people would be as numerous as the sand on
the seashore (Gen. 22:17; 1 Kings 4:20); the promise that God would give
the land to Abraham’s descendants (Gen. 12:7; 1 Kings 4:24); and the
blessings of the Mosaic covenant—the kingdom is blessed with peace and
abundant prosperity (Deut. 28:1–14; 1 Kings 4:25), and all the nations see
God’s blessings on Israel (Deut. 28:10; 1 Kings 4:34).
Solomon’s kingdom is a partial restoration of the dominion human
beings lost at the fall. There are possible allusions to Adam in the
presentation of Solomon; in a partial way he functions as a second Adam.36
Solomon is acclaimed king at Gihon (1 Kings 1:33, 38, 45), a water source
on the slope below Jerusalem that bears the same name as one of the
primeval rivers of Genesis 2:13. Solomon is urged to become a man (ish,
) and keep (shamar, ) the charge of Yahweh (1 Kings 2:2–3). These
concepts suggest a link with Genesis 2:15, where the first one to be called
man (ish) is charged with keeping (shamar) the garden sanctuary as a priest
guards the tabernacle (Num. 3:32; 2 Kings 12:9).37 Solomon exercises
dominion over God’s creation by his understanding of animals and plants (1
Kings 4:33), as Adam did in the garden (Gen. 2:19–20). The difference is
that God gives Solomon great wisdom to administer justice in the kingdom
(1 Kings 3:9, 28). The administration of the law to ensure justice is
important for government. The prospect of life is held out to Solomon,
conditional on his obedience to the divine command (9:1–9), just as it was
to Adam (Gen. 2:16–17).38
The early period of Solomon’s kingdom also fulfills the ideal of Israel’s
mission.39 Israel was to live in the land that God gave her and obey the law,
and then he would pour out his blessings so that nations would see and
come to Jerusalem to give glory and honor to God. This mission is reflected
in Solomon’s prayer of dedication (1 Kings 8:41–43). It is exemplified in
the visit of the queen of Sheba, who offered praise to Yahweh for such
marvelous achievements (10:9), and in the statement that the whole world
sought an audience with Solomon (v. 24). Other nations and kings brought
their wealth to Jerusalem (vv. 11–12, 25). Israel was at the height of success
with the fulfillment of the promises of God.
The early reign of Solomon manifested the blessings of a righteous
kingdom (Psalm 72). And yet there are hints of trouble that culminate in 1
Kings 10–11.40 The decline of Solomon’s kingdom is directly related to the
warnings given to kings in Deuteronomy 17:14–20. Solomon accumulated
wealth (Deut. 17:17; 1 Kings 10:14–29), he accumulated horses (Deut.
17:16; 1 Kings 10:26–29), and he accumulated wives (Deut. 17:17; 1 Kings
11:1). His intermarriage with foreign women led to idolatry. Solomon’s
heart was turned away from the Lord, and he worshiped foreign gods (1
Kings 11:1–8). The results to his kingdom were devastating. God raised up
adversaries from other nations (vv. 9–25), and he decided to tear the
kingdom of Israel into two parts. He saved one tribe for the line of David
but promised to give ten tribes to Jeroboam (vv. 31–35).
Rehoboam, son of Solomon, foolishly followed his young advisers and
promised the people that his reign would be harder than Solomon’s. The
people rebelled, and the kingdom was divided. The history of the northern
and southern kingdoms was a history of decline. No good kings ruled in the
northern kingdom because they all followed the sin of Jeroboam, who set
up his own worship centers to keep his people from going south to worship
at Jerusalem. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 b.c. Some
good kings, who sought to follow God, reigned in the southern kingdom,
particularly Hezekiah and Josiah. But most did not follow God, and the
people also broke God’s covenant. The southern kingdom fell to Babylon in
587 b.c. The kings as shepherds of God’s people bore a large part of the
responsibility for the judgment of God against his people (Jer. 23; Ezek.
34:1–16).
The Promise of a Coming King
The covenant with David partially fulfills the previous promises for One
who would come to rule Israel (Gen. 3:15; 49:10–12; Num. 24:17).
Deuteronomy 17:14–20 had specified how a king was to function in Israel.
The passage emphasizes that the king was to be an Israelite—not a
foreigner, but a brother to his companions (v. 15). He was to obey the law
so that his heart was not lifted above his brothers (v. 20). The king was a
common Israelite ruling in a context of covenant equality with other
leaders.41 The covenant with David does not deny what Deuteronomy 17
teaches, but it elevates the status of the king, who is now in a father–son
relationship with God (2 Sam. 7:14). During the exodus, Israel was called
God’s firstborn son (Ex. 4:22), and now the king of Israel has the status of
son. The king as son represents the people to God and takes on certain roles
that were not clearly the role of the king in Deuteronomy 17, uniting in his
person things that were kept separate.42 The administration of justice is
divided among various groups in Deuteronomy 16–18, but it becomes the
particular responsibility of the king (Ps. 72).
The king also took on certain responsibilities for worship. He supported
the true worship of God and—in certain situations—had a role in offering
sacrifices. David brought the ark to Jerusalem, wore a linen ephod, offered
burnt offerings and peace offerings, and blessed the people in the name of
the Lord (2 Sam. 6). This was a special occasion, and there is no evidence
that David regularly offered sacrifices. He made extensive preparations for
building the temple, which Solomon completed. Evidence shows that
Solomon offered sacrifices regularly, but at Gibeon and not at the altar at
Jerusalem (1 Kings 3:3–5).43 He did offer sacrifices at Jerusalem after the
Lord appeared to him in a dream in which he was promised great wealth
and wisdom (v. 15). Solomon built the temple and dedicated it to the Lord
in a great ceremony (ch. 8). The ark was brought to the temple with many
sacrifices offered (vv. 4–5, 62–64), and Solomon offered a blessing to the
people (v. 14), a prayer of dedication (vv. 22–53), and a benediction (vv.
54–61). The elevated status of the king gave him certain privileges related
to worship and the offering of sacrifices. This did not mean, however, that
the kings became priests or that the establishment of a special royal
priesthood combined the roles of the king and priest (see the Excursus).
There were clear limits throughout the Old Testament on what the king
could do in the holy areas of the temple. When the ark was brought to
Jerusalem in 1 Kings 8, the priests brought it into the Most Holy Place.
When Uzziah tried to offer incense on the altar in the temple, he was struck
with leprosy because only the priests were allowed to offer incense (2
Chron. 26:16–21). A clear line divided the role of the kings and the role of
the priests in the regular worship of God. Kings could support the worship
at the temple and on certain special occasions could offer sacrifices, but
they were limited in what they could do.
Another way in which the covenant with David elevated the role of the
king was its promises that the kingdom of David and his throne would be
established forever (2 Sam. 7:16–17). This expectation became important
when the southern kingdom fell and there was no king ruling over Israel.
Also, the terminology of the covenant lends itself to being understood as
referring to a coming eschatological ruler, who will not only rule over Israel
but rule over the nations forever. The failure of kingship at key points in
Israel’s history leads to the prospect of a coming ruler who will be faithful
to the Lord. At times this ruler takes on characteristics that go beyond what
might be said of a purely human ruler. For example, when King Ahaz
refuses to trust Yahweh and rejects the offer of a sign, there follows a series
of prophecies concerning a coming ruler. God himself gives the sign of a
virgin who will bear a son whose name will be Immanuel, “God with us.”
This Child will embody the very presence of God. Isaiah 9 speaks of the
birth of a son who will sit on the throne of David and establish his kingdom
through justice and righteousness. The character of this Child is emphasized
by the name given to him. He will be called Wonderful Counselor because
his plans will not fail (unlike King Ahaz’s plans). He will be called Mighty
God. This phrase is used of Yahweh, the Holy One of Israel, in Isaiah
10:21–23. This son not only will embody the presence of God but will take
on the character of deity.44 He will be called Everlasting Father because as a
King he will be the benevolent protector of his people. And finally, he will
be called Prince of Peace because he will establish peace.
The character of this King’s reign is described in Isaiah 11. The One
who will establish the kingdom is described as “a shoot from the stump of
Jesse, and a branch from his roots”45 (v. 1). The effectiveness of his reign is
due to an outpouring of the Spirit on him. In verse 2 there are four uses of
the word Spirit, denoting the source of this ruler’s wisdom, knowledge, and
fear of the Lord. This King will rule in righteousness by which he will
judge the poor, decide with equity for the meek, and slay the wicked with
the breath of his mouth (v. 4). The results of his rule reflect Eden-like
conditions of harmony and peace among the animals and between animals
and human beings. There may be an allusion to Genesis 3:15 with the child
playing over the hole of the cobra without fear of harm.46 The earth will be
filled with the knowledge of the Lord, and the nations will submit
themselves to the Lord.
The Psalms emphasize the role of a king and also keep alive the hope
for a coming ruler. Certain royal psalms in the first three books of the
Psalter focus on key elements of his rule. Psalm 2 emphasizes that God’s
reign will be established through his anointed king. The king’s special
relationship to God is emphasized in verse 7: “You are my Son; today I
have begotten you.” Sonship is not a physical or mythical relationship; it is
a legal relationship between God and the king, which ensures the king’s
victory. He will one day rule the world. The reign of a righteous king and
the results of his reign are given in Psalm 72. It includes the establishment
of justice, dominion over the nations, and an abundance of blessings for the
people under his reign. In Psalm 89 the promises of the Davidic covenant
are highlighted, with God’s faithfulness being the foundation. The Davidic
king is called the firstborn (v. 27), a term that refers to his position as “the
highest of the kings of the earth.” The lament at the end of the psalm is
shocking to the reader in light of the early strong emphasis on God’s
faithfulness to the covenant promises (vv. 38–45). The humiliation of the
king is described in these verses. The problem is not God’s faithfulness but
the unfaithfulness of the anointed king. The questions at the end of the
psalm (vv. 46–51) call upon God to show again his favor to David and
establish his covenant promises.47
Books 4 and 5 of the Psalter reflect the exilic and postexilic situations of
the people. Book 3 ended with the kingship in trouble (Ps. 89), and Book 4
begins with a psalm of Moses, taking the people back to their foundation as
a nation. God’s steadfast love has not been totally removed from the people
(92:1–2), and even if the human kingship is in trouble, Yahweh still reigns
(Pss. 93–100). Book 4 ends with a cry that God would save his people from
exile (106:47). This is answered at the beginning of Book 5 (107:1–3),
which puts psalms in groups that emphasize what is important to the
postexilic community, including worship (Pss. 111–118; 120–134), the law
(Ps. 119), and kingship (Pss. 108–110; 138–145). The Psalter ends in a
fireworks of praise as it recounts the destiny of the righteous who celebrate
God’s victory (Pss. 146–150).
The two groups of Davidic psalms in Book 5 remind the people of the
kind of king they need. Psalm 110 is an important psalm that sets forth the
coming King as One who sits at the right hand of God and who is a Priest
according to the order of Melchizedek. The coming ruler will be both a
King and a Priest. It is difficult to apply the role of a priest–king to any
Israelite ruler. The Israelite king supported the worship at the temple and
even on some occasions offered sacrifices himself, but there were strict
limits on what the king could do in the sanctuary (2 Chron. 26:16–21). It is
difficult to see any king in the history of Israel fulfilling the role laid out in
Psalm 110. The King who will sit at the right hand of God and be a Priest
according to the order of Melchizedek is a coming ruler who will combine
these two roles in his reign. How such a King could also be humble (Zech.
9:9–10) and experience humiliation (Ps. 89), in addition to being highly
exalted, is a puzzle that will not be solved until the One comes who is able
to accomplish all the purposes of God.
Excursus: Was There a Royal Priesthood in
Israel?
Passages in the Old Testament present the kings of Israel acting as
priests. Other passages seem to identify the sons of David as priests. How
are these to be understood? Did a royal priesthood related to David and his
descendants develop in Israel? If it existed, what did this mean for the kings
of Israel in the nation’s worship?

The Argument for a Royal Priesthood in Israel

The evidence for a royal priesthood comes from how certain passages
present the actions of the king in relationship to worship and how certain
passages seem to identify David and his sons as priests (2 Sam. 8:18).
Second Samuel 20:23–26 identifies Ira the Jairite as the priest to David in
addition to the official Levitical priests Zadok and Abiathar. First Kings
4:1–5 also mentions Zadok and Abiathar, but also identifies Zabud the son
of Nathan as a priest and the king’s friend. Some argue from these texts that
there were priests in early Israel who were connected to the royal house but
were not of the Levitical order. The function they performed is not entirely
clear.48 Based on David’s role in bringing the ark to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6)
and the roles of Zadok and Abiathar during this period, the conclusion is
drawn that David was the chief sacrificial and priestly intermediary
between Yahweh and the people during his reign. The same could be said
about Adonijah (1 Kings 1:9, 18) and Solomon (chs. 3, 8), who undertook
similar priestly activities.49
The priestly model for these kings is not the Levitical order but the
order of Melchizedek taken from Psalm 110. This psalm sets forth the
prototype of the messianic High Priest. The priestly activities of David and
Solomon hold special significance in light of this psalm. These connections
establish that there was a strong sense of royal–priestly ideology that
existed in early Israel. The order of Melchizedek serves as a prototype in
which David and Solomon are thought to act as priests.50 In fact, David
himself is the link between Melchizedek and Jesus because he is the subject
of Psalm 110. David is a royal priest, and he is the precursor in a line of
priests that finds its fullest and perfect expression in Jesus.51
Key to this understanding of Psalm 110 is the identification of the one
addressed at the beginning of the psalm as “my Lord.” Those who
understand the psalm to be speaking directly of Christ see my Lord as
referring to Jesus. The problem with this view is that Psalm 110 would then
lack a clear occasion and would not have relevance for its own historical
context. The my Lord could be referring to David, whose priesthood is
being described in verses 2–4. This priesthood operates outside the
boundaries of the normal cultic sphere. In this view David functions as a
messianic type not only regarding the kingship but also regarding the
priesthood. He fills both roles and discharges both responsibilities
simultaneously. The priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek is
modeled by David, who is also declared to be a priest after this order and
who exercised this priesthood from time to time, as did his dynastic
successors.52

Royal Priesthood: Strictly Messianic

Others argue that the priesthood according to Melchizedek is not
historically manifested in any king of Israel but is fulfilled only in the
priesthood of Jesus Christ. This view takes Psalm 110 as directly
messianic.53 It is a psalm of David, so he is the one speaking in the psalm
and he is not the subject of the psalm.54 David writes that “the LORD”
(Yahweh) addressed someone that David describes as “my Lord.” Thus
three people are referred to in this verse: (1) Yahweh, (2) the sovereign
Lord, and (3) David, who claims to have a close relationship with the
sovereign Lord.55 The king of Israel is not being addressed by Psalm 110:1.
The king sits on the throne of Yahweh as a representative of God, the true
King. The one addressed as “my Lord” sits at the right hand of God, an
exaltation to a special participation in God’s reign.56 The New Testament
clearly identifies David as this psalm’s author, not its subject (Matt. 22:43–
44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42; Acts 2:34).57
Other factors argue against the view that David the king is being
established as a royal priest. One would assume that a priest according to
the order of Melchizedek would not be hindered in fulfilling any of the
priestly roles, including the privilege of sacrificing in the sanctuary and
receiving the tithes of the people.58 Thus, if David had no claim on the
tithes of the priests like Melchizedek, and if Davidic kings were denied the
authority to offer sacrifices, how can David be called a priest after the order
of Melchizedek?59 King Uzziah was prohibited from offering incense to the
Lord on the altar inside the Holy Place because only the priests were
consecrated to offer incense. When Uzziah persisted, leprosy broke out on
his forehead. This separation of the kingly and priestly privileges was so
important that he remained a leper to the day of his death (2 Chron. 26:16–
21). To establish a royal priesthood of David requires evidence not that the
king played a priestly part in certain festival rites, but that he ordinarily
exercised the priest’s functions and was as truly the priest as he was the
king.60
It is also important to recognize that the priesthood according to
Melchizedek in Genesis 14 is a type of a completely different order from
the Aaronic priesthood. As a type, it looks forward to the priesthood of
Christ, who ministers as a Priest at the heavenly sanctuary. If the priesthood
of Melchizedek is another kind, it would not be a priesthood that could be
fulfilled in any Israelite king, even if he offered sacrifices in the temple in
the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement.61 The priesthood of
Melchizedek is a type of a heavenly priesthood that only Jesus can fulfill
(Heb. 7:15–19).62
If Psalm 110 does not establish the Davidic king as a priest according to
the order of Melchizedek, then how can David’s actions—and those of
other kings—in offering sacrifices be explained? It was in the best interest
of the king to ensure proper worship. This was true in the ancient Near East
and became true in Israel with the elevated status of the king as adopted son
of God in the Davidic covenant. Once David had consolidated his kingdom,
he desired to build God a permanent temple. He prepared for the building of
the temple, and Solomon completed the work. But even in the ancient Near
East, there was a clear distinction between the administrative royal priest
(the king) and the functional cultic priests. The latter were responsible for
the cultic service at the temple. The former had only an administrative role;
it did not include performing services in the temple. The king was
responsible for the organization and administration of state worship. He was
involved with organizing the priesthood and arranging for the construction
of temples and financing sacrifices on behalf of the throne and the state.63 If
the king could not officiate in the temple in the regular worship, his role
was limited to special occasions.64
Several passages seem to argue for the existence of priests outside the
Aaronic priesthood; these might support the view that David and his
descendants are priests according to the order of Melchizedek. The most
obvious passage is 2 Samuel 8:18; there, in a list of royal officials, the
statement is made that “David’s sons were priests.” This text seems to be
fairly clear, but the parallel text in 1 Chronicles 18:17 throws doubt on its
meaning. Both verses state that Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada, was over the
Cherethites and Pelethites, and both mention the role of David’s sons. First
Chronicles 18:17 does not call David’s sons priests but calls them “chief
officials in the service of the king.” This ambiguity allows for the
possibility that priests in 2 Samuel 8:18 has a different meaning.65 In 1
Kings 4:5, two of Nathan’s sons are given important roles. Azariah is over
the officers so that he supervised the district officers (vv. 7–19). Zabud is
called a priest and the king’s friend. These terms could refer to the role of
special counsel to the king.66 The same could be said for the statement in 2
Samuel 20:23–26 that “Ira Jairite was also David’s priest.” If these men are
not royal advisers but serve as priests to David, it does not prove that they
are of the order of Melchizedek. Several orders of non-Levitical priests,
even if they do exist in Israel,67 do not establish a priestly order of
Melchizedek that is hereditary in the Davidic line. Second Samuel 20:23–26
provides a second listing of key administrative officials under David. This
list probably represents those who served near the end of his reign.68 Ira the
Jairite is listed as David’s priest. It is possible that the omission of David’s
sons as priests means that he reduced the significance of their priestly role
during his reign and that these duties were assumed by Ira.69 Whatever one
concludes from these texts, the scriptural evidence is too ambiguous to
draw definite conclusions about a priestly order according to Melchizedek
that historically existed in Israel’s history.
Study Questions
1. What impact does sin have on the exercise of dominion? Trace the
development in Genesis through Numbers of the One who will come
to rule.
2. How did the role of the kings in Israel differ from the kings of the
ancient Near East? How do we account for this significant difference?
3. What is the basic argument of the book of Judges? How does this shed
light on the role of the king in Israel?
4. What was wrong about the people’s request for a king in 1 Samuel 8?
How might this instruct the church as she relates to the surrounding
culture?
5. Why does God reject Saul as king over Israel? What does this teach us
about God’s priorities?
6. What promises did God make to David in the Davidic covenant? What
is the significance of this covenant?
7. What is meant by the term royal priesthood? What are the arguments
for and against the existence of a royal priesthood in Israel?

_______________
1. Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990),
313.
2. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50 (Dallas: Word Books, 1994), 22.
3. Many nations come from Abraham, including the descendants of Ishmael (Gen. 17:16; 25:12–
18) and the descendants of Esau—also called the Edomites (36:1–43)—includ-ing the Temanites, the
Horites, and the Amalekites. This promise is also fulfilled through Christ (Gal. 3:29), when many
nations will become part of Abraham’s offspring through faith. John D. Currid, A Study Commentary
on Genesis, vol. 1, Genesis 1:1–25:18 (Darlington, UK: Evangelical Press, 2003), 312.
4. The promise of kings includes the tribal rulers of Ishmael (Gen. 17:16; 25:12–18), the kings of
Edom (36:9–43), and the Israelite kings from the tribe of Judah (49:8–12). The ultimate fulfillment
will be Jesus, the son of David, who will “reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom
there will be no end” (Luke 1:33).
5. For a discussion of the meaning of shiloh, see Richard P. Belcher Jr., Genesis: The Beginning
of God's Plan of Salvation (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2012), 268–69.
6. Timothy R. Ashley, The Book of Numbers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 500.
7. The sons of Sheth are not the whole human race (Sethites of Adamic lineage) but are a people
group from the lineage of Seth based on the parallel with Moab. R. Dennis Cole, Numbers
(Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 427.
8. Ashley, Numbers, 503.
 9. These addresses are divided by “these are the words” (1:1), “this is the law” (4:44), and “these
are the words” (29:1).
10. The book of Deuteronomy can be approached in numerous ways. It is a covenant-renewal
document that parallels the covenants of the ANE. Meredith Kline, Treaty of the Great King (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963). For a general discussion of this relationship, see Eugene Merrill,
Deuteronomy (Nashville: Broadman & Holman), 28–32. Some also view Deuteronomy as an
exposition of the Ten Commandments. John D. Currid, A Study Commentary on Deuteronomy
(Darlington, UK: Evangelical Press, 2006), 19–24. These views are not necessarily mutually
exclusive. Others argue that Deuteronomy is the first book in the Deuteronomistic History
(Deuteronomy–Kings), written in the exile to justify Judah’s punishment for disregarding the word of
the prophets. Martin Noth, The Deuteronomistic History (Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press, 1981). Many
works have responded to and adjusted the original work of Noth, such as F. M. Cross, Canaanite
Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973). For a textual analysis of
the insights of the different approaches to Deuteronomy through 2 Samuel, see Anthony Campbell
and Mark A. O’Brien, Unfolding the Deuteronomistic History: Origins, Upgrades, Present Text
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000). For an evaluation of this view, see Merrill, Deuteronomy, 34–
37.
11. Ronald J. Leprohon, “Royal Ideology and State Administration in Pharaonic Egypt,” in
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, ed. Jack M. Sasson (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 273–
74. For a discussion of the concept ma’at, see John D. Currid, Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), 118–19.
12. W. G. Lambert, “Kingship in Ancient Mesopotamia,” in King and Messiah in Israel and the
Ancient Near East, ed. John Day (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 54–71.
13. J. N. Postgate, “Royal Ideology and State Administration in Sumer and Akkad,” in
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, ed. Jack M. Sasson (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000), 397,
399. The complexity of the relationship between the king and the gods is discussed by David
Beckham, “Kingship and Divinity in Imperial Assyria,” in Text, Artifact, and Image: Revealing
Ancient Israelite Religion, ed. Gary M. Beckman and Theodore J. Lewis (Providence, RI: Brown
Judaic Studies, 2006), 182–88. He argues that the office, not the king, may be considered divine.
14. Bruce K. Waltke, Genesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 66.
15. Nicolas Wyatt, “The Religious Role of the King in Ugarit,” in Ugarit at Seventy-Five, ed. K.
Lawson Younger Jr. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007), 41–74.
16. Gosta W. Ahlstrom, “Administration of the State in Canaan and Ancient Israel,” in
Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, 590, 598.
17. John N. Oswalt, “Exodus,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, ed. Philip W. Comfort
(Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 2008), 1:399. Numbers 23:21 also recognizes the Lord as the
King of Israel.
18. Tremper Longman III and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 2nd
ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 77.
19. This person identifies himself as the commander of the army of the Lord. The evidence that
he is heavenly, even divine, is seen in the fact that Joshua falls on his face to worship this figure and
is told to take off his sandals, for the ground on which he stands is holy (Josh. 5:15).
20. Patricia Dutcher-Walls, “The Circumspection of the King: Deuteronomy 17:16–17 in Its
Ancient Social Context,” JBL 121 (2002): 603–4.
21. The king is presented as a model Israelite. Duane L. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1:1–21:9, rev.
ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001), 386. The picture of the king reading the law of God parallels
Psalm 1, where the faithful Israelite also meditates on the law of God.
22. Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 253. He
comments that this section is the only one of its kind in the Pentateuch; it takes the form of
permissive legislation rather than posting a requirement. It anticipates a time when kingship might
become a necessity for practical and pragmatic reasons, and it specifies the characteristics required of
a king in a state that was a theocracy.
23. See the discussion in ibid., 255–56.
24. Christensen, Deuteronomy 1:1–21:9, 388. He notes that the harem of the Middle East was a
center of political intrigue and power. Solomon’s many wives were an integral part of the foreign-
policy system, and in direct violation of the law of the king, since each wife would represent a formal
political alliance.
25. Dutcher-Walls, “The Circumspection of the King,” 604.
26. Daniel I. Block speaks of the increasing intensity of the nation’s depravity and develops the
theme of the Canaanization of Israel during the period of the settlement. Judges, Ruth (Nashville:
Broadman & Holman, 1999), 58.
27. Whether Jephthah actually sacrificed his daughter or whether she spent the rest of her life
serving at the tabernacle is a subject of disagreement. For the latter view, see C. F. Keil and F.
Delitzsch, “Judges,” in Commentary on the Old Testament, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978),
388–95. For the former view, see K. Lawson Younger Jr., Judges and Ruth (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2002), 261–67; Barry G. Webb, The Book of Judges (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012),
331–36.
28. Block (Judges, 57–58) argues against the view that Judges is pro-monarchy because such a
view is too political and does not emphasize other aspects of the period. And yet the political aspects
of the lack of a king and the spiritual issues of apostasy are related to each other. For the view that
Judges is an apologetic for the Davidic monarchy, see Keil and Delitzsch, “Judges,” 247–49.
29. John Woodhouse, 1 Samuel: Looking for a Leader (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 35–37.
30. See Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel(Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2002), 112–13.
31. Bergen (ibid., 35–36) has a good discussion of both the positive and negative characteristics
of Saul’s character. He also discusses Saul beginning on page 118.
32. David T. Tsumura translates the phrase as “a man of his choice.” The First Book of Samuel
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 345.
33. Bergen (1, 2 Samuel, 151) gives both views as possible meanings of this phrase.
34. David was very sincere in his repentance, but his life shows the devastating consequences that
his sin brought on his family, in part by his unwillingness to discipline his sons (2 Sam. 12–20).
35. Bruce K. Waltke, “The Phenomenon of Conditionality within Unconditional Covenants,” in
Israel’s Apostasy and Restoration, ed. Avraham Gileadi (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 130–32. For
more on the Davidic covenant, see O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg,
NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1980), 229–69.
36. Many of the connections between Solomon and Adam come from John A. Davies,
“Discerning between Good and Evil: Solomon as a New Adam in 1 Kings,” WTJ 73, 1 (2011): 39–
57.
37. For a discussion concerning whether David or Solomon had other priestly duties or acted as
priests, see the Excursus. Davies discusses the roles of prophet, priest, and king in relationship to
Solomon and concludes that if Solomon is portrayed as a priest, such a portrayal is highly irregular in
terms of the Deuteronomic legislation.
38. The prayer of dedication for the temple contains many references to the curses of the
covenant, such as defeat by the enemy (1 Kings 8:33–34; Deut. 28:25; Lev. 26:17), no rain (1 Kings
8:35–36; Deut. 28:23–24; Lev. 26:19–20), and exile (1 Kings 8:46–50; Deut. 28:36–37, 41; Lev.
26:33).
39. Israel’s mission is discussed in chapter 1.
40. For a discussion of the negative aspects of Solomon’s kingdom, see Yong Ho Jeon, “The
Retroactive Re-evaluation Technique with Pharaoh’s Daughter and the Nature of Solomon’s
Corruption in 1 Kings 1–12,” TynBul 62, 1 (2011): 15–40.
41. Christopher Wright, Deuteronomy (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 210.
 42. J. G. McConville, Deuteronomy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 295, 306.
43. Many reasons are given for why Solomon offered sacrifices at Gibeon. There are political
reasons, since Gibeon was the natural hub of conflict between Israel and Judah. It was also home to
the largest high place in the country. August H. Konkel, 1 & 2 Kings (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
2006), 78. Second Chronicles 1:5–6 explains that the ark was at Jerusalem and that the Tent of
Meeting and bronze altar were at Gibeon. Paul R. House, 1, 2 Kings (Nashville: Broadman &
Holman, 1995), 109. Before the temple was built, sacrifices were offered at a number of places.
44. For commentaries on Isaiah arguing that these names refer to the character of the coming
ruler, see those by Edward J. Young, J. A. Motyer, John N. Oswalt, John L. Mackay, and Gary V.
Smith. Mackay answers the views that these terms are really describing God, not the coming king, or
that the king described is a descendant of Ahaz. A Study Commentary on Isaiah, vol. 1, Chapters 1–
39 (Darlington, UK: Evangelical Press, 2008), 241–42.
Oswalt interacts with the view that these names are throne names related to the various gods, as in
Egypt. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 246; see also Gary V.
Smith, Isaiah 1–39 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2007), 240.
45. For a discussion of the term branch (nezer) and its possible connection to Matthew 2:23, see
Mackay, A Study Commentary on Isaiah, 290. After the condemnation of the kings of Israel in
Jeremiah 22:1–23:4, God promises to raise up for David a righteous branch (tsemakh); for a
discussion of this term, see John L. Mackay, Jeremiah: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 2,
Chapters 21–52 (Ross-shire, UK: Mentor, 2004), 50–54.
46. Commentaries on Isaiah that understand Isaiah 11 to reference a return of Eden-like
conditions include those of Edward J. Young, J. A. Motyer, John L. Mackay, and Gary V. Smith.
Young answers objections brought by those who argue against the literal interpretation of the
passage, favoring a figurative view that the animals stand for the nations. The Book of Isaiah, vol. 1,
Chapters 1–18 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 390–91. Of course, the nations are impacted by
renewal brought by the reign of the Messiah (Isa. 11:11–16).
47. For more on these psalms and the structure of the Psalter, see Richard P. Belcher Jr., The
Messiah and the Psalms (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2006), and O. Palmer Robertson, The
Flow of the Psalms: Discovering Their Structure and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing,
2015).
48. Carl Amerding, “Were David’s Sons Really Priests?,” in Current Issues in Biblical and
Patristic Interpretation, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 75–76.
49. Ibid., 82–83.
50. Ibid., 84.
51. Eugene H. Merrill, “Royal Priesthood: An Old Testament Messianic Motif,” BSac 150
(January–March 1993): 53.
52. Ibid., 54–58, 61.
53. For an analysis of how the different historical settings impact the interpretation of Psalm 110,
see Belcher, Messiah and the Psalms, 143–48.
54. F. Delitzsch, “Psalms,” in Commentary on the Old Testament, ed. C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 5:188; see also Michael Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the
Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010), 165–68.
55. Gerard Van Groningen, Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1990), 391. See also Allan Harman, Psalms, vol. 2, Psalms 73–150 (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus,
2011), 793.
56. Delitzsch, “Psalms,” 5:189.
57. Merrill (“Royal Priesthood,” 54) recognizes that this is the view of the NT, and yet it does not
affect his view that David is the subject of the psalm and not the author.
58. This is especially true if Melchizedek in Genesis 14 is a high priest (Delitzsch, “Psalms,”
193). Bergen argues that (1) David and his family line attained the priestly status “in the order of
Melchizedek,” and (2) as king of Jerusalem, David would become a priest of Yahweh but would still
be prohibited from performing certain priestly functions reserved for the Aaronic priesthood. 1, 2
Samuel, 332. This view better fits the OT evidence, but see below for the view that the priesthood
“according to the order of Melchizedek” is a unique priesthood.
59. Delitzsch, “Psalms,” 5:193.
60. M. J. Paul, “The Order of Melchizedek (Ps 110:4 and Heb 7:3),” WTJ 49, 1 (1987): 197–98.
61. Van Groningen, Messianic Revelation, 395.
62. Paul (“The Order of Melchizedek,” 203) argues that the eternal nature of the priesthood of
Melchizedek is concerned with a single person, not with many descendants.
63. Herbert W. Bateman IV, Darrell L. Bock, and Gordon H. Johnston, Jesus the Messiah (Grand
Rapids: Kregel, 2012), 97–98. This work argues that David was a royal priest, but does not take into
account the implications of the king’s limitations in worship.
64. Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961),
114; Patrick Miller, The Religion of Ancient Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press,
2000), 194. The historical period between the tabernacle existing at Shiloh with Eli as priest and the
dedication of the temple by Solomon gives evidence of fluidity concerning the offering of sacrifices
by Samuel and Solomon (Paul, “The Order of Melchizedek,” 196–97).
65. Gordon J. Wenham argues for emending the text from priest ( ) to administrators (
). “Were David’s Sons Priests?,” ZAW 87 (1975): 79–82. An emendation of the text is not
necessary. Others see the role of David’s sons as court chaplains. David Firth, 1 & 2 Samuel
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009), 399.
66. House, 1, 2 Kings, 115. Keil and Delitzsch understand “the king’s friend” in 1 Kings 4:5 to be
an explanation of the word priest. Thus 2 Samuel 8:18 is referring to the king’s confidential advisers.
Others argue that the fact that David’s sons are not mentioned in this text could be evidence that their
role as priests was temporary. Roger L. Omanson and John E. Ellington, Handbook on First and
Second Books of Samuel, 2 vols. (New York: United Bible Societies, 2001), 2:790.
67. Amerding, “Were David’s Sons Really Priests?,” 76.
68. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, 438.
69. Ibid., 439.
 7
CHRIST AS KING IN HIS HUMILIATION AND
EXALTATION

THE ROLE OF DOMINION was clearly given to human beings in Genesis

1:26–28. The fall into sin made dominion difficult, but its continuing role
was evident in Israel’s conquest of Canaan and in the establishment of the
king to rule according to God’s law. The king was to lead the nation to
fulfill the mission that God had given her to be a light to the nations.1 The
failure of Israel’s kings to live in obedience to God led to the hope of a
coming King, who would properly lead God’s people in righteousness to
establish an everlasting kingdom (see chapter 6). The Jewish people of
Jesus’ day had certain expectations concerning the coming King. They were
looking for a king like David, a warrior king, who would conquer the
Roman government and establish Israel as a great nation as in the days of
David and Solomon. The problem with Jesus was that he did not fit the
mold of a king who would lead Israel into revolt against the Romans. Much
of his teaching advocated submission to the authorities (Matt. 5:38–42;
26:51–54; Mark 12:13–17), and he seemed to speak against the religious
leaders of the Jewish people more than the leaders of Rome (Matt. 23).
Jesus also talked a lot about his coming suffering, which the disciples did
not understand (Mark 8:31–33; 9:30–32) because it did not fit with their
notions of the coming Messiah and his kingdom. The expectations of the
disciples were not completely wrong. The timing of their expectation of a
conquering king must be adjusted, and the definition of the kingdom that
Christ came to establish needed to be understood. Part of the purpose of
Jesus’ earthly ministry was to help the disciples understand his mission and
the nature of his kingdom.
Jesus as King during His Earthly Ministry
The disciples did not understand the nature of Jesus’ kingship partly
because suffering and kingship do not easily fit together. A suffering king
seems to be a contradiction. How can someone exercise rule and authority
through suffering? But the rule of Jesus is demonstrated in several ways
during his earthly ministry of humiliation.

Dominion over Creation

Part of Jesus’ mission was to show that he had the power to restore
creation. He demonstrated this power through his miracles. He calmed the
wind and the storm at sea, showing his rule over the elements of creation
(Matt. 8:23–27; Mark 4:35–41; Luke 8:22–25). Jesus rebuked the wind,
showing his authority over it (Luke 8:24). The disciples were amazed and
asked the question, “What sort of man is this, that even winds and sea obey
him?” (Matt. 8:27).2
Jesus also demonstrated his rule over creation when he healed many
people of illness and disease. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record miracles
of healing at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. These healings generated a
lot of interest in him. Great crowds followed him (Matt. 4:25; Mark 1:29–
34), and opposition began to form against him (Mark 2:1–12). These
miracles were an outpouring of great blessing from God and indicated that
he was at work. It was natural for questions to arise concerning Jesus’
identity in light of his power to bring great blessing into people’s lives.
Jesus fed the five thousand, and the people responded by wanting to make
him king (John 6:1–15). They saw the connection between material blessing
and the righteous reign of the king to come.3 Jesus knew their plans and
withdrew from them. Their perception of kingship was not in line with the
kind of King that Jesus came to be in his humiliation. These miracles,
however, were evidence of his power to restore creation as part of his
mission.

Dominion over the Demons

 Jesus did not come to be a mere dispenser of material blessings. The
blessings that came through his miracles gave evidence of a spiritual battle
that he participated in as King. Many of his miracles were related to his
power over the spiritual forces of wickedness represented by Satan and his
demons. Near the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, he healed a man with an
unclean spirit (Mark 1:21–28; Luke 4:31–37). The demon clearly expressed
his conf lict with Jesus, and that Jesus’ coming would have an impact on his
own world of demonic activity. He asked Jesus, “Have you come to destroy
us?” This question recognized the true source of Jesus’ origin and the true
nature of Jesus’ mission. The demon also confessed the true identity of
Jesus as the Holy One of God. He correctly identified Jesus as his great
opponent who had come to defeat the forces of wickedness.4 Jesus drove
the unclean spirit out of the man, and the people responded with amazement
that Jesus was able to command the unclean spirits and that they had
obeyed him (Mark 1:27). This incident caused Jesus’ fame to spread and led
to people’s bringing the sick to be healed. He also cast out many demons
(vv. 29–32). Mark has an interesting comment that Jesus would not allow
the demons to speak because they knew him (v. 34), even proclaiming that
“you are the Son of God” (Luke 4:41). There was danger that the people
would misunderstand the true nature of Jesus’ ministry before he had an
opportunity to explain his mission.
Many of Jesus’ works demonstrated his power in the spiritual realm. He
healed the paralytic to show that he had the power to forgive sins (Mark
2:1–12). Jesus raised several people from the dead to demonstrate his power
over death. He raised Jairus’s daughter from the dead to show that, in his
presence, death is like sleep from which he has the power to wake people
up (Matt. 9:22–26; Mark 5:35–43; Luke 8:49–58).5 He raised the widow’s
son from the dead, a miracle that people saw as evidence that God had
visited his people (Luke 7:11–17). Luke follows this incident with John the
Baptist’s question whether Jesus was the One who was to come. Jesus
highlighted how his ministry aligned with the coming One described in
Isaiah 61, including “the dead are raised up” (Luke 7:22). His greatest
confrontation with death, apart from his own death on the cross, comes in
John 11 when he raised Lazarus from the dead. Jesus was deeply moved in
his spirit and greatly troubled at Lazarus’s death. He even wept (vv. 33–35).
It is not the weeping people but the tomb that evoked these intense
emotions of aversion and sorrow.6 He was staring death in the face. Calvin
comments, “Christ does not come to the sepulcher as an idle spectator, but
like a wrestler preparing for the contest. Therefore no wonder that he groans
again, for the violent tyranny of death that He had to overcome stands
before His eyes.”7
Jesus used Lazarus’s death to teach about spiritual life and the
resurrection. He proclaimed, “I am the resurrection and the life” (John
11:25) and went on to explain what he meant in verses 25 and 26. The
statement I am the resurrection is explained by “whoever believes in me,
though he die, yet shall he live.” Someone who believes in Jesus will be
resurrected to life after death. The statement and the life (with the I am
implied) is explained by “and everyone who lives and believes in me shall
never die.” Someone can now experience the life Jesus offers by believing
in him. This life is greater than death and will overcome death.8 Jesus
demonstrated his statements’ truth by raising Lazarus after he had been
dead four days.

The Kingdom of God

Matthew, Mark, and Luke mention the basic message of Jesus at the
beginning of his ministry. Mark 1:14–15 states, “Jesus came into Galilee,
proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the
kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel’” (see also
Matt. 4:17).9 This proclamation of the kingdom is followed by casting out
demons and by healing many who are sick (Mark 1:21–34). After these
miracles, the people sought Jesus and did not want him to leave their area.
His response was: “I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to
the other towns as well; for I was sent for this purpose” (Luke 4:43). His
miracles and his power over creation and the demons is evidence of the
kingdom that he had come to establish.
Jewish Expectations of the Kingdom. Part of the reason why Jesus told
the demons to keep quiet about his identity is that people would
misunderstand the nature of his mission in light of their expectations of
what the coming King would accomplish. The Old Testament depicts the
role and mission of the One who will come in several different ways, and it
is difficult to put these threads together into a whole picture. The Old
Testament speaks of a coming King who will defeat the enemies of God’s
people and establish a rule of righteousness and peace (Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1–9).
It speaks of a coming King–Priest who will be used by God to execute
judgment on the nations (Ps. 110:4–6).10 It also speaks of a Servant who
will suffer on behalf of the people (Isa. 52:13–53:12) and a King who will
come in humility to Jerusalem (Zech. 9:9). It is difficult to comprehend how
the suffering and the conquering fit together into a unified picture. The
nature of the kingdom and Jesus’ mission begins to make sense of these Old
Testament threads so that a comprehensive picture emerges.
The people of Jesus’ day were expecting a king like David who would
destroy their enemies, including the Roman government, and establish
Israel as a great nation. They were expecting a powerful king who would
establish a political kingdom. The reign of such a king would impact the
nations. The nature of Jesus’ kingdom—at least the one he came to
establish during his earthly ministry—did not fit their expectations.11 The
nature of his kingdom can be seen in the passages where Jesus specifically
mentions that the kingdom of God was in their midst through his ministry.
His power to cast out demons caused his popularity to grow. They were
amazed when they saw the before-and-after condition of a man who had
been demon-possessed. This authority leads to the question of Jesus’
identity, with people raising the issue, “Can this be the son of David?”
(Matt. 12:23). Earlier in Matthew, two blind men seeking healing cried out
to Jesus as he passed by, “Have mercy on us, son of David” (9:27). The
term son of David is used in reference to Jesus’ power to heal and to cast
out demons. Evidence shows that son of David had become a formal
designation of the Messiah.12 When the Pharisees were asked to identify the
lineage of the Christ (Messiah), they responded, “The son of David”
(22:42). The identification of the Messiah with the son of David shows that
the people expected a king to arise like David to sit on the throne of David.
The Pharisees could not allow a connection between Jesus and the son
of David to stand, so they attributed his power to cast out demons to
Beelzebul, the prince of the demons. In other words, Jesus’ power to cast
out demons came from the prince of the demons himself. Jesus responded
by highlighting the absurdity of their statement, arguing that if he cast out
demons by the power of the prince of demons, then the kingdom of the
demons was divided against itself. Satan was casting out Satan. A divided
kingdom would not stand. The true source of his power came from the
Spirit of God. Jesus was in conf lict with the world of Satan and came to
plunder his house (Matt. 12:29). Jesus came to battle Satan and to restore
what Satan had distorted and destroyed. To do this, Jesus had to restrict and
overcome the power of Satan, as he had done in casting out demons. This
hostility resulted from the entrance of sin into the world (Gen. 3:15). Jesus
was reasserting the power of God over the demons through his ministry. In
fact, through Jesus’ ministry the kingdom of God had come.
The Present Reality of the Kingdom. If the kingdom of God is a present
reality available through Jesus, it can be entered immediately. Jesus tells the
chief priests and elders that tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the
kingdom of God before them. This statement must have come as a shock to
the Jewish leaders, since they despised both groups. The tax collectors and
the prostitutes are part of God’s kingdom, but the Jewish leaders are not
part of that kingdom. How could this be? The issue comes down to
believing God’s message. Those who are entering the kingdom of God
believed the message of John the Baptist, but the Jewish leaders did not
(Matt. 21:32). John pointed the way to Jesus, and ultimately a person’s
relationship to the kingdom will be determined by his or her relationship to
Jesus. For one to enter the kingdom, one must be born again by believing in
Jesus through the power of the Spirit (John 3:3, 6, 15).
If the kingdom of God is present through the ministry of Jesus, and
people can enter it through faith in him, what is the nature of this kingdom
that he came to establish? The word kingdom is generally associated with a
territory or realm over which a king rules. It can also refer to the authority
and sovereignty exercised by a king.13 This meaning is seen in Ezra 8:1,
which speaks of the kingdom or reign of Artaxerxes (see also 2 Chron.
12:1, which refers to the rule of Rehoboam). In Luke 19:11–12, a nobleman
went into a far country to receive a kingdom and then returned. This
nobleman went to receive the authority or right to rule over the territory that
he left behind. Many times the word kingdom refers to the authority to rule
or the exercise of that authority. When Jesus came proclaiming the kingdom
of God, many might have associated it with the land of Palestine over
which the son of David would establish the rule of God. Jesus uses the word
kingdom to refer to his authority to rule, and people can enter by submitting
their lives to his rule. They recognize that he has the authority to rule their
lives.
The Spiritual Nature of the Kingdom. The nature of the kingdom that
Jesus came to establish is present, but it is also spiritual and hidden. The
spiritual nature is seen in the spiritual emphasis of Jesus’ ministry. He heals
a paralytic to show his power to forgive sins (Mark 2:1–12). He battles with
the demons and overcomes Satan’s temptations (Matt. 4:1–11). In John 18
Pilate asks Jesus whether he is the King of the Jews. Jesus avoids answering
him directly, because as a Roman official Pilate would have in mind the
political sense of the word king.14 Jesus does make a statement about his
kingdom: it is not of this world. If his kingdom were of this world, his
servants would fight to keep him from being delivered over to the Jews.
This definition would remove any possibility of offense against the
Romans.15 Jesus’ kingdom does not have its origin in this world, and it
operates with different methods. It does not advance through military
activity. Pilate responds to Jesus’ answer by asking, “So you are a king?”
Jesus then defines his “kingly mission” in terms of truth. He has come to
bear witness to the truth, and everyone who is of the truth listens to his
voice (v. 37). This response summarizes his ministry of disclosing the truth
about (1) his relationship to his Father in heaven, (2) his identity as the
Christ of God, and (3) his mission to give his life as a ransom for many. His
kingdom advances as people submit themselves to him as the way, the truth,
and the life (14:6). Such a king would not be a threat to the Romans.
The spiritual nature of Jesus’ kingdom does not mean that it is inactive
in this world, or that it does not engage the world. Many of his parables
define the nature of his kingdom as a mystery (Matt. 13:11; Mark 4:11;
Luke 8:10).16 George Eldon Ladd defines mystery as “a divine purpose,
hidden in the counsels of God for long ages but finally disclosed in a new
revelation of God’s redemptive work.”17 This mystery refers to the way in
which God’s kingdom is established.18 On one level the kingdom begins
small (Matt. 13:31–32), is hidden because it works behind the scenes (v.
33), and can be rejected (vv. 8–23).19 The Old Testament expected that
when God comes to save his people to establish his kingdom, he will also
destroy all their enemies.20 The parable of the weeds shows that both the
weeds and the wheat will grow together until the end of the age (vv. 24–30;
see also the parable of the net in vv. 47–50). The character of Jesus’
kingdom did not fit the political expectations of the people of his day, but
its value is like a treasure found in the field (v. 44) or the one pearl of great
price (vv. 45–46). One should sell all that one has to become a part of Jesus’
kingdom.
 The Future Glory of the Kingdom. Although the kingdom starts small
and works behind the scenes, the end result will be great. The kingdom may
start as a small seed, but it will become a tree so that the birds of the air can
make nests in it. It is like leaven, of which a small amount added to flour
will permeate the whole. At the end of the age there will be a harvest during
which the weeds are burned and the wheat is gathered into the barn. The
parable of the weeds (and the nets) shows that after the passing of time,
there will be an end to the present age (Matt. 13:30, 49).21 A future
manifestation of the kingdom is coming, when it will appear in all its glory.
Jesus speaks of the end of the age and his own coming in glory in Matthew
25:31–40. There will be a separation of the sheep from the goats, and the
sheep will be told to inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the
foundation of the world (v. 34). A glorious manifestation of the kingdom is
coming. Although it can be entered now, the full inheritance will come in
the future. This kingdom will not be hidden, but will be visible to all.
People from all over the world will participate in its blessings (Luke 13:29).
Christ will reign not only in the hearts of his people, but also over the whole
world (Rev. 11:15). This kingdom will be everlasting (Luke 1:33).22
Clearly, Jesus came to establish the kingdom of God. He began his
ministry with a message of the kingdom (Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:15), he taught
his disciples to pray “your kingdom come” (Matt. 6:10; Luke 11:2), and he
exhorted them to seek first the kingdom (Matt. 6:33). It is presented as a
reality that can be entered today (12:28; 21:31) and as a reality that will be
established in the future (8:11; 1 Cor. 15:50). The kingdom of God has the
character of an inner spiritual blessing of righteousness, peace, and joy in
the Holy Spirit (Rom. 14:17), and it is an external reign that will encompass
the whole world (Rev. 11:15). The parables establish that it is already
present in the world but not yet in its full manifestation. The kingdom
comes by the power of God, not by human wisdom or effort.

The Suffering of the King

If the kingdom that Jesus came to establish did not match the people’s
expectations, it is no surprise that the kingship that Jesus came to fulfill did
not match their expectations of what a king should do. Jesus did not come
proclaiming that he was a king, but it is evident that he saw his ministry as
being related to kingship.23 One reason that Jesus told the demons and the
people he healed to keep silent was that people might draw the wrong
conclusions concerning his ministry. He began to teach his disciples what it
meant for him to be king by telling them that he must go to Jerusalem to
suffer, to be killed, and to rise again (Matt. 16:21–23). He even used the
phrase Son of Man in relationship to his suffering (Mark 8:31–33; Luke
9:21–22). This phrase must have further confused the disciples, for they
associated it with the glorious figure of Daniel 7. Although Jesus used the
phrase in that way (Matt. 24:27; Luke 17:24), he also used it in reference to
his humiliation and suffering. Peter even rebuked Jesus and said that this
would never happen. The disciples did not understand how the suffering of
Jesus related to his ministry. They continued discussing the glories of the
kingdom and that one of them would be the greatest (Mark 9:33–34). Jesus
mentioned his suffering and death to his disciples at least three times, trying
to prepare them for the events that would take place in Jerusalem.
In John 10 Jesus identifies himself as the Good Shepherd. This concept
opens up many associations for his work. Shepherds protect and risk their
lives for the sheep (1 Sam. 17:34–35). The shepherd of Psalm 23 is
identified as the Lord who provides everything that the sheep need. The
kings of Israel were also considered shepherds who provided for the people.
Ezekiel 34 condemns the shepherds for abandoning the sheep by not
feeding them and attending to their needs. Instead, the shepherds have been
concerned only about meeting their own needs, and the sheep were
scattered and exposed to danger. God himself pledges to shepherd the sheep
and to set over the people one shepherd, his servant David, who would
shepherd the people by feeding them (vv. 23–24). The description of what
the shepherd needs to do to restore the sheep in verse 16 sounds much like
the ministry of Jesus: seek the lost, bring back the strayed, bind up the
injured, and strengthen the weak (Luke 7:22; 15:1–10). Jesus is the
Shepherd King of Israel, who will provide for the needs of his sheep and
will lay down his life for them.
The disciples and people of Jesus’ day may not have associated the
King with suffering, but Old Testament passages indicated that suffering
was an aspect of the work of the coming One. The Servant of the Lord was
raised up because Israel, as God’s servant, had failed in her mission (Isa.
42:1–4; 49:3). The Servant’s mission centers on suffering on behalf of
others (52:13–53:12). Most of the language of this text focuses on
sacrificial terms of innocent suffering on behalf of others—terms that are
more in line with a priestly emphasis. It is possible, however, to see Davidic
associations. The expression my servant is commonly used of royal figures
(37:35). The Servant will bring justice to the ends of the earth (42:1–4), an
act that is a royal responsibility. The promise of victory with the idea of
dividing the spoil supports a royal emphasis.24 These royal associations
foreshadow a Suffering Servant who will also be a King.
There are many ways to connect suffering with the role of Jesus as
King. In the events leading up to the crucifixion, he maintained complete
control of the situation. He showed his royal authority even in his
humiliation. When they came to arrest him, he pronounced, “I am he,” and
the arresting party fell to the ground (John 18:6). He allowed himself to be
arrested. He told Peter to put away the sword, and he healed the ear of a
man that Peter had struck. He allowed himself to be mocked as King by the
soldiers, who clothed him with a robe and put a crown of thorns on his
head. Even from the cross he admitted a sinner into his kingdom and was in
control of the exact moment of his death (Luke 23:43, 46). The death of the
King destroyed the powers of Satan and death, delivering his people from
the dominion of sin so that they could live as members of his kingdom.
It is also important that David as king experienced great suffering from
his enemies. He was wrongly pursued by Saul and became a refugee,
unable to live in Judah. Many of the Davidic psalms speak of his suffering
at the hands of his enemies. Book 1 of the Psalter (Pss. 1–41) contains only
psalms of David (a few psalms do not specify an author), and they contain
more references to the wicked than any other portion of the Psalter. Psalm 1
contrasts the righteous and the wicked, and that contrast is developed in
Book 1. Half the references to the wicked occur in the next thirty-nine
psalms, with Psalm 37 being the most extensive discourse on the
relationship between the righteous and the wicked. After the first two
introductory psalms, the first Davidic psalm begins, “O LORD, how many
are my foes!” (3:1). The historical title to Psalm 3 references David’s
fleeing from his son Absalom. David’s lament psalms show the extent of his
suffering and the hope of salvation that can come only from God. David had
to deal with mocking (Ps. 3:2), slander and lies (4:2; 12:3–4), hatred (69:4),
betrayal by friends (7:4–5), and the possibility of death (6:4). Many of his
experiences foreshadow the sufferings of Christ on the cross. A few
examples: not one of Christ’s bones is broken (Ps. 34:20; John 19:36), he is
betrayed by a close associate (Ps. 41:9; Matt. 26:23), and he is offered sour
wine to drink while he is on the cross (Ps. 69:21; Matt. 27:34, 48; Mark
15:23; Luke 23:36; John 19:29).
The greatest example from the Psalms that foreshadows Jesus’ suffering
is Psalm 22. David describes an intense situation by using metaphors to
explore the depths of his suffering (vv. 1–21).25 His cry of being abandoned
by God is the cry of Christ on the cross (Ps. 22:1; Matt. 27:46). The way in
which David describes his suffering goes beyond any individual experience
of suffering in the Old Testament. As Mays notes:
There is intensity and comprehensiveness about the psalm that presses toward ultimate
possibilities that lie in the event sketched in the psalm. . . . The intensity and the
comprehensiveness are a fact of the psalm’s composition; it is there in the text itself.26

The intensity and exuberance of poetic expression sets the stage for a new
and expanded vision of Jesus Christ. The suffering of the individual in
Psalm 22 is a type of Christ’s suffering.27 Christ experienced the shame and
humiliation expressed in verses 6 through 8 as scoffers mocked him, shook
their heads at him, and called on God to save him if he really trusted in God
(Matt. 27:38–44; Mark 15:27–32). Some of David’s metaphorical
descriptions of his suffering are fulfilled literally in Christ. He was hounded
by his enemies and surrounded by those who would do him harm (Ps.
22:16; Matt. 27:27–31; Mark 15:16–20). Crucifixion included both physical
and emotional dissolution (Ps. 22:14–15, 17). His garments were divided
among those who crucified him (v. 18; Matt. 27:35; Mark 15:24). The
words I thirst (John 19:28) can be related to Psalm 22:15: “my tongue sticks
to my jaws.” David’s suffering was real, but Christ’s suffering was so much
greater in being crucified and in bearing God’s wrath for the sins of his
people.
Just as David the king suffered in Psalm 22, Christ is mocked by the
Roman soldiers with the words, “Hail, King of the Jews” (Matt. 27:29), and
is crucified with the charge written on the cross, “This is Jesus, King of the
Jews” (v. 37). The charge seemed so outrageous, it was a way to mock him.
And yet in God’s wisdom, the suffering of King Jesus was God’s appointed
way to save his people from their sins. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a
donkey in fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9, “Behold, your king is coming to
you” (Matt. 21:5). When Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?”
he subtly answered in a way that confirmed that he was a king: “You have
said so” (Matt. 27:11; Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3).28 His and Pilate’s definitions
of kingship were very different from each other (John 18:36–37). Although
it looked like this King was defeated in being nailed to a cross, a glorious
victory was soon coming when he would divide the spoil as the fruits of his
victory (Isa. 53:12).29
Jesus as King in Ruling at the Right Hand of the
Father
The Old Testament is clear that God is King of Israel (Judg. 8:23; 1
Sam. 8:7) and of the whole earth (Pss. 22:28; 103:19; Dan. 4:17). If God is
already King, in what sense does Jesus establish God’s reign in his earthly
ministry? In what way is God’s sovereign rule now exercised that it was not
exercised before the coming of Jesus? One answer is that the reign of God
has now come into the lives of people who submit their lives to Jesus.
Another answer is that in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, he
receives sovereignty in a way that he had not previously possessed it. More
specifically, he received the kingdom as a human being. In Jesus’ exaltation
there is a reinstatement of the originally intended divine order for the earth,
with a human being properly situated as God’s vicegerent (someone
appointed to act for another).30
The exaltation of Jesus begins with his resurrection, which was a
momentous, life-changing, and creation-changing event. It marks his
victory over sin, the power of Satan, and death. The resurrection is essential
to the gospel, for if Jesus is not raised from the dead, we are still in our sins
(1 Cor. 15:17–18). The gospel itself centers on the Son who was descended
from David according to his human nature. Jesus was also declared to be
the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:2–4).
This declaration does not focus on his eternal status as Son; it refers to the
new phase of his messianic lordship:31 his exaltation as a human being to
the position of ruler over his people, the nations, and all creation. Jesus
received the kingdom as a human being, and as a human being he ascended
to the right hand of his Father’s throne in heaven. The incarnation did not
change the Son’s status as God (Phil. 2:6) but defined his human role as a
Servant who had come to be obedient to the point of death on the cross (vv.
7–8). Humiliation led to exaltation, and the Son received the name that is
above every name and the homage of every knee as the result of his earthly
ministry. In his incarnation he did not give up his deity, and in his exaltation
he does not give up his humanity, but every tongue confesses that Jesus
Christ is Lord. He is the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15), who shows
us what God is like, and he has come to restore the divine image in human
beings through his incarnation.32 His exalted status is shown in the
description of him “as the firstborn of all creation” (v. 15). This phrase
reflects Psalm 89:27, where David is called the firstborn, the highest of the
kings of the earth. Christ’s preeminence above all creation is evidenced in
that he is before all things, that he is the Creator of all things, and that all
things hold together in him (Col. 1:17).33 As the firstborn of the dead, he
takes his place as the head of the church to continue his work of reconciling
all things to himself (vv. 18–20). He assumes this position not only as God,
but also as man, so that now a human being has the highest and most
powerful position in the universe.
Jesus now reigns above all authorities and powers as all things are put
under his feet for the sake of the church (Eph. 1:20–23). He rules this
universe for the good of his people and guarantees that believers, who are
already seated with Christ in the heavenly places (2:6), will be with him in
glory (John 17:24). The relationship of Christ’s reign to humanity’s exercise
of dominion is brought out in Hebrews 2:5–11. Hebrews 2 quotes from
Psalm 8, which in turn looks back to Genesis 1:26–28, to establish
mankind’s role in God’s creation. The role of dominion over creation that
God gave to Adam and Eve—and thus to all human beings—is fulfilled in
Christ.34 The parallels between Hebrews 2 and Psalm 8 are striking:

Psalm 8 Hebrews 2
a little lower than the heavenly a little lower than the angels (v. 9)
beings (v. 5) crowned with glory and honor (v. 9)
crowned with glory and honor (v. 5) putting everything in subjection to
put all things under his feet (v. 6) him (v. 8)

Just as human beings were made a little lower than the angels, so also Jesus
was made a little lower than the angels. Just as human beings were crowned
with glory and honor, so also Jesus was crowned with glory and honor. Just
as human beings were given dominion over creation so that all things are
under their feet, so the same is true for Jesus. God has left nothing outside
his control, except that we do not yet see everything in subjection to him.
Jesus rules this universe at the right hand of the throne of God, but not
everything in creation is subject to him. A day is coming, however, when
everything will be subject to him (Phil. 2:9–11; Col. 1:15–20). Psalm 8 and
Genesis 1:26–28 find fulfillment in Jesus, who restores our proper place of
dominion in creation. The reestablishment of God’s reign in Christ also
brings the restoration of our rule over creation. That one day everything will
be subject to Jesus means that one day everything will be subject to us.
Jesus, who is fully God and fully man, will reign until all his enemies
are destroyed (1 Cor. 15:24). This reign includes the conquering of people’s
hearts through the proclamation of the gospel and the spread of the church
throughout the world. This reign will also culminate in the coming of King
Jesus back to this earth, riding a white horse as he leads the armies of
heaven into battle (Rev. 19:11–16). He will defeat and destroy all his
enemies so that his people will also experience complete victory in the new
heavens and the new earth.
Study Questions
1. How did Christ not meet the Jewish people’s expectations concerning
the coming King? (This issue is covered in several places in this
chapter.)
2. In what ways does Christ exercise dominion during his earthly
ministry?
3. Define the following characteristics of God’s kingdom and state why
they are important: (1) present reality of the kingdom, (2) spiritual
nature of the kingdom, (3) mystery of the kingdom, and (4) future
glory of the kingdom.
4. How does Jesus use the phrase Son of Man? How does he exercise
kingly authority even in his suffering and death?
5. What new aspect of kingship came through Jesus’ exaltation to the
right hand of the Father?
6. How does Hebrews 2 use Psalm 8 to show Christ as fulfilling the role
of dominion given to human beings?
7. If Christ is indeed King, how should we relate to him?

_______________
1. Chapter 1 discusses the mission of Israel in light of the roles of prophet, priest, and king.
2. This incident shows Jesus’ humanity in his sleeping during the storm and Jesus’ royal rule in
his power over the wind and the sea.
3. Richard P. Belcher Jr., The Messiah and the Psalms (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2006),
138–39. Jesus’ first miracle in John’s Gospel, turning water into wine (2:1–12), is not just a good
gesture to help out at a wedding. His statement to his mother in verse 4 shows implications in this
miracle that relate to his ministry. The wine is a reminder of the great blessings that will come
through Jesus, even a transformation of creation, as prophesied in Amos 9:11–15, where abundance
of wine is a sign of great future blessing.
4. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel according to Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978),
265.
5. The comparison of death to sleep does not mean that the girl did not die. Death is also
compared to sleep in the case of Lazarus, who was raised after being dead four days (John 11:11, 39–
44). The comparison means that death is temporary. Both incidents also teach that faith in Jesus is the
way to overcome death.
6. Herman N. Ridderbos, The Gospel of John: A Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans), 402.
7. John Calvin, “John 1–11,” in Calvin’s Commentaries, vol. 17 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996),
442.
 8. Ridderbos (John, 396) explains verses 25b through 26 this way: “Vs. 25b refers to death in the
natural sense and to living in the sense of eternal life. ‘Lives’ in vs. 26a, on the other hand, refers to
natural human existence, while ‘never die’ refers to the eternal life that natural death can neither
prevent nor affect.” The first statement refers to the deceased believer who will live and the second
statement to the one who lives in faith and will not die.
9. There is virtually no difference between the phrase kingdom of God and kingdom of heaven.
Matthew uses the phrase kingdom of heaven in line with the fixed Jewish linguistic usage in which
the name of God was usually avoided. Herman N. Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom
(Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962), 19.
10. For the view that Qumran expected two Messiahs, a kingly and a priestly, see Craig A. Evans,
“The Messiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Israel’s Messiah in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed.
Richard S. Hess and M. Daniel Carroll R. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 85–108.
11. Ridderbos, Kingdom, 35.
12. Herman N. Ridderbos, Matthew (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 190.
13. George Eldon Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 19;
Ridderbos, Kingdom, 24–25.
14. Ridderbos, John, 593.
15. D. A. Carson, The Gospel according to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 594.
16. The Greek word is mystērion, translated as secret by the esv, but mystery by the NASB and
the NKJV.
17. Ladd, Kingdom, 52.
18. Ridderbos, Kingdom, 127.
19. Ladd (Kingdom, 56–59) explains that the parables of the mustard seed and the leaven teach
that the kingdom of God is present among people in a way not previously revealed. The parable of
the four soils teaches that the kingdom of God is here, but not with irresistible power.
20. Ibid., 53.
21. Ridderbos (Kingdom, 143) notes that a delay of judgment is emphasized in many of the
parables.
22. For discussions of the kingdom, see also Geerhardus Vos, The Kingdom of God and the
Church (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1972).
23. Robert Letham, The Work of Christ (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 197.
24. Daniel I. Block, “My Servant David: Ancient Israel’s Vision of the Messiah,” in Israel’s
Messiah in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. Richard S. Hess and M. Daniel Carroll R. (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 2003), 50–51. Block emphasizes the royal Davidic role of the Messiah and tends to
downplay the Messiah’s other roles of Prophet and Priest, or at least sees these roles through the link
with David. Thus, if Jesus was a prophetic figure, this role derived not from any link with Moses but
from his connection with David. Block writes, “There is no evidence within the Old Testament itself
that anyone in ancient Israel understood the office of the prophet typologically, that is, as
foreshadowing ‘a future figure who will play an authoritative role in the end time.’” For a different
view, see chapters 2–3 of this book.
25. No one agrees on the historical situation from which Psalm 22 originated. Calvin argues that
David does not just refer to one experience of persecution but comprehends all the persecutions he
experienced under Saul. John Calvin, Psalms 1–35 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 357.
26. James L. Mays, Psalms (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994), 106–7.
27. For more on Psalm 22, see Belcher, Messiah and the Psalms, 166–72.
28. The following commentaries all affirm that the statement you have said so is an affirmation of
Jesus’ kingship (Hendriksen on Matthew, Lane on Mark, Geldenhuys on Luke, and Carson on John).
29. Alec Motyer writes, “Total supremacy is, however, his by right of conquest.” The Prophecy of
Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 443.
 30. Dan G. McCartney, “Ecce Homo: The Coming of the Kingdom as the Restoration of Human
Vicegerency,” WTJ 56, 1 (1994): 1–21. Theologians distinguish the rule of the Son as God from the
rule of Christ as the God-man. The former is called the natural kingdom, and the latter is called the
mediatorial kingdom. See Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, trans. George Musgrave
Giger, vol. 2 (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2014), 486; Letham, The Work of Christ, 197–209.
31. John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 9–10.
32. E. K. Simpson and F. F. Bruce, Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and the
Colossians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), 194. Bruce goes on to comment on the close
association between the doctrine of man’s creation in the divine image and the doctrine of the Lord’s
incarnation.
33. These descriptions are too lofty to refer to anything except an origin above creation.
34. Some discuss whether the quote from Psalm 8 in Hebrews 2 refers primarily to human beings
or to Christ. Kistemaker understands the reference to be first to mankind and then to Christ. Simon J.
Kistemaker, Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 66. Hughes
argues that with the phrase a little lower than the angels, there is a transition from man-in-general to
man-in-particular (Jesus). Yet human beings are not omitted from the discussion because the destiny
of mankind is fulfilled in Jesus. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the
Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 85–86. The ambiguity of reference makes the point that
what was originally designed for human beings is fulfilled in Jesus so that the statements can apply to
both. Christ, however, came to restore the dominion that was lost at the fall.
 8
PROPHET, PRIEST, AND KING:
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE CHURCH

JESUS’ FULFILLMENT of the roles of Prophet, Priest, and King has

implications for the mission of the church and for the role of individual
believers. The work of Jesus allows the church to fulfill its mission among
the nations. When God delivered Israel out of Egypt, his purpose was to
establish her as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Ex. 19:6). When
God establishes his church and gives her the mission of proclaiming the
good news of the gospel to the nations, the church also becomes “a
kingdom and priests to our God” (1 Peter 2:9; Rev. 5:10). Thus, it is
appropriate to reflect on how the church fulfills these roles.1 Certain
activities of the church can be described according to more than one role.
For example, prayer is used in connection with both prophetic and priestly
roles, so some fluidity exists in the development of these ideas.2 Unity in
Christ’s mediatorial work ensures that these roles cannot be completely
separated from each other.
The church is empowered to carry out its mission by Christ’s death,
resurrection, and ascension. The death of Christ restores the church’s
broken relationship with the Father. The resurrection of Christ gives the
church the power of new life to fulfill her mission. And the ascension of
Christ gives confidence to the church that the mission can be accomplished.
Christ sits at the right hand of the Father, directing all things for the sake of
the church (Eph. 1:20–23). Christ has also equipped it to fulfill its mission
by sending the Holy Spirit as his own presence to be with his people (4:11–
13). The roles of prophet, priest, and king demonstrate how the church can
carry out its mission as the body of Christ.
The Prophetic Ministry of the Church

Joel’s Prophecy and the Day of Pentecost

On the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit was poured out upon God’s
people in fulfillment of Joel 2. The book of Joel focuses on the day of the
Lord, which is a day of judgment that calls for repentance from God’s
people (vv. 1–14). Following the judgment of the day of the Lord, there will
be a full restoration. Material prosperity is promised in response to the
devastation of the locust plague. The invading army will be removed (v.
20), and conditions that yield abundance will return (vv. 21–24), so that
what has been destroyed will be restored (v. 25). Salvation is also promised,
accompanied by great wonders in the heavens before the coming of the
great and awesome day of the Lord (2:28–3:3). This text is a good example
of how the prophets view the future. They see the coming day of the Lord
as one big event when both judgment and salvation occur together at the
end of history. When God comes to save his people, he will also destroy all
their enemies. Thus, Joel can lump together the outpouring of the Holy
Spirit, people’s calling on the name of the Lord to be saved, the wonders in
the heavens, and the events on the great day of judgment. Christ did not,
however, come to bring the final day of judgment. In Luke 4, when he reads
from the scroll of Isaiah at the synagogue, he reads chapter 61 through the
phrase “to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:19). He then rolls
up the scroll and proclaims that this Scripture has been fulfilled in his
audience's hearing (v. 21). The next phrase in Isaiah 61:2 is “and the day of
the vengeance of our God.” Instead of one big event of salvation and
judgment, there are two events. Salvation is accomplished through Christ’s
death on the cross, and the final day of judgment is still in the future. In his
first coming, Christ inaugurated his kingdom that will culminate in his
second coming (see chapter 7 for a discussion of Christ’s kingdom).3
The fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy is recorded in Acts 2 on the day of
Pentecost. The sending of the Holy Spirit is the culmination of Christ’s
work and inaugurates the messianic age, characterized by the preaching of
the gospel in fulfillment of the mission that Christ gave to his disciples
(Matt. 28:19–20). The aspects of Joel’s prophecy that have been
inaugurated relate to that mission, including the salvation of those who call
on the name of the Lord and the increase in prophecy. The wonders in the
heavens, described in Acts 2:19–20, will be manifested with the great day
of judgment at the second coming of Christ.4
The outpouring of the Spirit was essential for the church’s mission to
make disciples of all nations and to teach them to observe all that Christ had
commanded the apostles.5 The expectation of prophetic activity goes along
with major redemptive events to explain their significance.6 Establishing
the new covenant would also generate written texts testifying to the terms
of the new arrangement that God was establishing with his people.7 Jesus
promises his disciples that the Holy Spirit would be given to them to teach
them all things, to bring to remembrance all that he had said to them, and to
guide them into all the truth (John 14:26; 16:13). The apostles are agents of
God’s revelation and play a key role in laying the foundation of the church
(Eph. 2:20).8 They perform signs and wonders regularly among the people,
particularly healing the sick and those afflicted with unclean spirits (Acts
5:12–16; 2 Cor. 12:12). In fulfillment of Joel 2, many others become
recipients of God’s revelation during the period of the apostolic church. In
Acts, both major figures (Peter, Stephen, Paul) and minor figures (Ananias,
Cornelius) see visions and dream dreams.9 Agabus is identified as a prophet
who spoke by the Holy Spirit concerning Paul’s visit to Jerusalem (Acts
21:10–14). Philip had four unmarried daughters who prophesied (v. 9). The
church in Corinth was gifted with those who prophesied and spoke in
tongues (1 Cor. 14). This increased prophetic activity fulfilled the prophecy
of Joel.
Once the apostles laid the foundation of the church, there was no need
of further prophetic revelation. The focus shifted to proclaiming and
explaining the Word of God that had been given to the apostles. Teaching
that was not in line with apostolic teaching was accursed (Gal. 1:6–9).
Anyone who added to the revelation given to the apostles was also under a
curse (Rev. 22:18–19). This shift did not mean that the prophetic activity of
the church ceased, but it did mean that no new revelation was given. The
task of the church to preach and teach the Word of God is a continuation of
the prophetic role that God has given to his people.10

Word and Worship

 The prophetic ministry of the church is carried out in a number of ways.
The corporate church fulfills a prophetic ministry by a commitment to the
truth of God’s Word and the faithful proclamation of the gospel. The church
has been given the Word of God and, like the prophets of old, must
faithfully proclaim his message. In this way the church calls people to
repent of their sin and to believe in Jesus. Corporate worship, especially the
singing, is a way for God’s people to teach and admonish each other (Eph.
5:19; Col. 3:16) by declaring praise to God for who he is and what he has
done (1 Chron. 25:3). Just as the people declared the kingship and majesty
of God through song after the exodus (Ex. 15:1–21), so the church exalts
the kingship of Christ by declaring his victory (Rev. 5:9).

The Prophetic Role of Elders

God helps the church fulfill this prophetic task by providing leaders
who are given a prophetic role for her sake (Eph. 4:11–12).11 Elders are
charged to be faithful to the Word of God, are to be given to the ministry of
prayer (Acts 6:1–6), and are to pass on the Word to others who will be
faithful to it (Acts 20:28–30; 2 Tim. 2:2). God promises to accomplish his
purposes and to grow the church through the preaching of the Word (Acts
2:41; 12:24; 19:20). The Word establishes God’s people in the truth and
corrects errors of thought and behavior (2 Tim. 3:16–17). The elders must
commit to regularly pray for the people of God and to faithfully preach and
teach the Word of God. This commitment includes the hard work of
studying (2:15), of faithfully preaching (4:1–2), and of faithfully applying
the Word of God to the lives of his people to strengthen them and build
them up in the faith (Eph. 4:13–14).

Implications of Prophet, Priest, and King for

Preaching
The importance of the prophetic ministry of the Word of God cannot be
overestimated because it is through the Word that God accomplishes his
purposes (Isa. 55:10–11). Those purposes include salvation, building up
God’s people in the truth, protecting the church from false teaching (Jude),
and hardening the hearts of people who reject the Word of God (Isa. 6:9–10;
Mark 4:10–12). The church fails in her mission whenever she neglects
portions of God’s Word, adjusts the message of the Word to make it more
acceptable to the culture, or teaches what is contrary to the Word.12 Just as
Adam and Eve in the garden and the false prophets of the Old Testament
misused the word of God, so the church must guard against misusing the
Word and against false prophets and teachers.
When one understands the roles of Prophet, Priest, and King and how
they relate to Christ, it affects preaching and teaching. Preachers can easily
develop patterns in which their preaching will flow along the same lines.
One of these patterns is always ending the sermon with the obedience of
Christ or his death on the cross on our behalf. Justification by faith becomes
the main ending for many sermons. This commonly happens when the
preacher makes the point that we are not able to fulfill whatever the text has
set forth as our responsibility. We cannot do it, we fall short, and so we need
Christ.13 Obviously, this is a major emphasis of Scripture, but many times
such an exhortation goes against the grain of a text that might be moving in
a different direction. The roles of Prophet, Priest, and King set forth the
full-orbed, manifold aspects of Christ’s work. A preacher can make a text
relate to Christ in many ways other than his priestly work on the cross. If a
text emphasizes the work of a prophet in the Old Testament, then it is
appropriate to relate that text to the prophetic ministry of Christ. Many of
the texts of wisdom literature can be related to the teaching ministry of
Jesus, or to an aspect of Jesus as the wisdom of God.14 If a text is
encouraging the people of God to be obedient to him, the continuing work
of Christ’s priestly ministry after his ascension can encourage us to be
obedient through the power of the Spirit, to help us in our sanctification. If
a text emphasizes the struggle with sin and victory over sin, Christ as King
—who has won our victory over sin and has empowered us to live for him
—can be emphasized. By understanding the different aspects of Christ’s
ministry based on his roles as Prophet, Priest, and King, the preacher is
better able to preach all aspects of the Christian life, including justification,
sanctification, and glorification.

The Prophetic Role of Individual Believers

 The prophetic role is also important for individual believers. The
Heidelberg Catechism connects the prophetic, priestly, and kingly roles to
the believer’s life through how Christ fulfills those roles (see also WCF 8.1;
WLC 41–45; WSC 23–26). Question 31 reads, “Why is he called Christ,
meaning, ‘anointed’?” The answer is given in terms of how he is Prophet,
Priest, and King. Jesus is described “as our chief prophet and teacher who
perfectly reveals to us the secret counsel and will of God concerning our
deliverance.” Then Question 32 asks, “But why are you called a Christian?”
The answer: “Because by faith I am a member of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12–27)
and so I share in his anointing (Acts 2:17; 1 John 2:27). I am anointed to
confess his name” (Matt. 10:32; Rom. 10:9–10; Heb. 13:15).15 The
anointing of the Holy Spirit is mentioned in 1 John 2:27 in the context of
dealing with false teachers who deny that Jesus is the Christ. This anointing
refers to the ministry of the Holy Spirit in bringing people to an
understanding of the gospel and of the person of Christ. The Spirit
regenerates and indwells believers and continues his ministry of
illuminating their minds to the truth of God’s Word. This anointing is a
remedy against false teaching because the believers that John is writing to
are not inferior to the false teachers. They also have the Spirit who teaches
them. John is not denying the importance of teachers in the church when he
says that the believers have no need for anyone to teach them. Rather, he is
invalidating the authority of the false teachers.16 He also needs to encourage
the believers to continue under difficult circumstances, following what they
know to be true.17
The prophetic role of believers consists in the faithful handling of the
Word of God and its use in their daily lives. Every believer has a prophetic
role in fulfillment of God’s promise (Acts 2).18 There are many ways to
think of this role. A believer must be committed to study and understand the
Word of God to fight against sin in his or her own life (Heb. 4:12–13), to
minister to others, and to speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15).19 A father
must understand Scripture to lead his family in the study and use of God’s
Word, and a mother must be able to apply the Word of God to her children
daily.20 In this way the Bible becomes foundational to everything a believer
does in life. Even when Christ comes again, the prophetic role will not
come to an end, but the original prophetic purpose that God had for Adam
will be fulfilled. In the new heavens and the new earth, we will correctly
handle the Word of God and speak only the truth about God and the
world.21
The Priestly Ministry of the Church

The “Service” of the Levites

The corporate church fulfills its priestly role as the body of Christ in
several ways.22 The worship of the church is service to the Lord, both to its
members and to the world. This aspect of service continues an Old
Testament emphasis on the work of the priests and Levites. The ministry of
the Levites at the tabernacle is called their “service” (Num. 7:5, 7, 8;
8:22).23 Later, some of the Levites are put in charge of “the service of song
in the house of the LORD” (1 Chron. 6:31). Once the ark came to rest in
Jerusalem, their job shifted from carrying the tabernacle to assisting the
sons of Aaron in the service at the house of the Lord. Their tasks included
(1) helping with the showbread, the flour of the grain offering, the wafers of
the unleavened bread, the baked offering, and the offering mixed with oil,
and (2) praising the Lord every morning and evening when the burnt
offerings were presented (23:26–32). The work of the priests is also called
their “work of service” (1 Chron. 24:3; 2 Chron. 8:14; Luke 1:23). This
included keeping the Passover and sacrificing burnt offerings (2 Chron.
35:16). The word service is also used of the ministry that Christ has
received in mediating a better covenant (Heb. 8:6). He is a minister
(leitourgos) in the heavenly temple (v. 2). Hebrews 10:11 uses the verb
form of leitourgos for the priest who stands daily at his service by offering
sacrifices. The same verb can also be used of Christian worship (Acts
13:2).24

The Priestly Ministry of Elders in Worship

The service of worship carried out by the priests and the Levites at the
Old Testament temple is now carried out by Christ in the heavenly temple
and by Christians in the spiritual temple of God’s new covenant people.25
Although Jesus is the only High Priest through whom we approach God, the
elders have an important priestly role in assisting the church in worshiping
God.26 They oversee the worship service, and they lead God’s people in
worship. Thus they guard the spiritual temple of God by making sure that
worship is God-honoring. The elders call God’s people to worship and lead
them in its various prayers.27 Like the priests of the Old Testament, they
lead God’s people in confession of sin and pronounce over them God’s
benediction.28 It is appropriate to see pastoral work as a vocation in which
one is supported by the church in the work of ministry (1 Cor. 9:10–11; 1
Tim. 5:17). Pastors and elders must also make themselves available for
pastoral care when members of the congregation need spiritual help and
counsel (1 Peter 5:1–2).29

The Priestly Role of Individual Believers

Individual believers also actively participate in worship by responding
to God’s Word and by singing. The service of song has a prophetic function
(Col. 3:16–17), but it also has a priestly aspect. The church is a holy house,
a spiritual priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ (1 Peter 2:5).30 In the Old Testament, the fellowship offering—
also called the peace offering (Lev. 3)—could be brought for a variety of
reasons: thanksgiving; a vow offering; or a freewill offering (6:11–18) in
response to God’s goodness in the life of the worshiper. The church in
worship continues to offer “a sacrifice of praise” to acknowledge God’s
name (Heb. 13:15). Through their formal worship they serve God, other
believers, and unbelievers, giving testimony to God and calling people to
acknowledge him.31
Individual believers also have a priestly role to fulfill in their daily lives
(normally called the priesthood of believers). Again, Heidelberg Catechism
Question 31 asks, “Why is he called Christ, meaning, ‘anointed’?” The
answer related to the office of a priest says that Christ is “our only high
priest who has set us free by the one sacrifice of his body, and who
continually pleads our cause with the Father.” Then Question 32 asks,
“Why are you called a Christian?” The answer related to our priestly role is
“to present myself to him as a living sacrifice of thanks (Rom. 12:1; 1 Peter
2:5, 9).” The sacrifice of praise that a Christian offers is a continual
sacrifice (Heb. 13:15), not limited to the formal worship of the church. A
believer is always to be giving thanks and praise to God. In fact, our lives
are to demonstrate a willingness to give up everything for the sake of Jesus
Christ. We are to deny ourselves, daily take up our cross, and follow him.
We are to live in constant self-denial so that our lives become a sacrifice for
Christ. We are to present our bodies as living sacrifices to God, not being
conformed to this world but by being transformed by the renewal of our
minds (Rom. 12:1–2). Not just our minds but our bodies are to be devoted
to pleasing God. Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit who lives in us,
so we should flee sexual immorality (1 Cor. 6:19–20). Just as holiness was a
major focus of the priests in the Old Testament, so believers are set apart to
live holy lives for God.
Christians carry out their priestly role in a number of ways. The mission
of the church includes taking the gospel to all nations. Paul understands his
ministry of taking the gospel to the Gentiles to be “in the priestly service of
the gospel” so that the offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable to God
(Rom. 15:16). Paul also describes his life as a drink offering being poured
out in fulfillment of his ministry (2 Tim. 4:6) and says that he bears on his
body the “marks of Jesus” (Gal. 6:17). These marks (stigmata) of Jesus are
scars of the persecution and physical suffering that Paul has received in his
apostolic ministry.32 Jesus received these marks by his death on the cross
when he offered himself as a sacrifice for sin. The persecution—and even
death—that believers experience for the sake of Christ can be related to the
priestly role of living for Christ and taking the gospel to the nations.
Persecuted Christians offer their lives as sacrifices in a special way, serving
the world by faithfully giving testimony to the truth of Christ.33
Christians are to serve in other ways as part of offering their lives as
sacrifices to God. The sacrifice of praise in Hebrews 13:15 is to be offered
continually. Such spiritual sacrifices, which are pleasing to God, include
doing good and sharing with others (v. 16).34 Intercessory prayer and
confession of sin are related to suffering, sickness, and healing (James
5:13–16).35 The elders play a role in this ministry, as they are specifically
mentioned in James 5:14, but individual Christians can also minister by
interceding for the needs of others. The physical needs of the widows in
Acts 6 are so important that the church sets aside deacons to be sure that
these needs are met. The church’s primary responsibility is to care for her
own, without neglecting “the unique dispensation of service given to every
born-again believer through the providential ordering of God”36 (see Gal.
6:10). Individual Christians are sent into the world to do the good works
that God has prepared beforehand that they should do.
 The priestly ministry also includes ministering to one’s own family. The
priests in the Old Testament had a teaching role related to the law of God
and the worship of God. Parents also serve a priestly role for their children
by bringing them to worship, by presenting them to the church for baptism,
by teaching them the truths of the faith, and by being a conduit of blessing
to them.37
One way that believers can serve both their family and others is through
work. Adam’s work in the garden was related to the priestly role because
the two verbs used of Adam’s work (Gen. 2:15) were later used of the work
of the Levites at the tabernacle (see chapter 1). Work is not just an
occupation or a way to make money; it is a vocation, which means a calling
from God. Before the Reformation only the priests were considered to have
a vocation, and this applied only to their spiritual work. The Reformation
extended vocation to include the work of everyone, so that a banker, a
janitor, or a homemaker could be seen as having a vocation from God.38
Whatever work God has given a believer to do is his or her calling for that
particular time in that person’s life. This transforms work because if it is a
vocation from God, it should be done to the glory of God in the service of
others. God uses this work to supply the needs of others. Every Christian
should view a daily job as a way to minister to his or her family by
providing for their needs and as a way to serve others. Thus everyday,
ordinary life is transformed by the presence of God.39
The Kingly Ministry of the Church

The Rule of Elders

The church fulfills a kingly role by participating in the victory and reign
of Christ.40 The proclamation of his reign is essential to the mission of the
church and gives others the opportunity to submit their lives to King Jesus.
The church also engages in spiritual warfare by using the spiritual weapons
that God has given her to battle spiritual forces in heavenly places (Eph.
6:10–20). Thus she participates in defeating Satan through the power of
Christ and has the promise that Satan will be crushed under her feet (Rom.
16:20). Elders assist the church in this kingly role by their authority to
govern. Christ is the head of the church and rules the world for the sake of
his people (Eph. 1:22). Elders govern the church under the authority of
Christ (1 Peter 5:1–2). The term elder has a rich Old Testament heritage that
refers to someone with wisdom and maturity.41 Elders are also called
pastors (Acts 20:28), the term for shepherds that expresses care for the
spiritual health of the flock.42 Elders are also designated as overseers (v.
28), a term that emphasizes the activities of leading, guiding, and ruling.43
The oversight of the church includes the authority to admit someone into
the membership of the church (Matt. 16:19), the protection of the flock
from false teachers (Acts 20:29), and the exercise of church discipline
(Matt. 18:15–18; 1 Cor. 5:9–12).44 Church discipline sounds harsh to many
people, but it has several goals that benefit both the church and the
individual under discipline. Goals of church discipline include restoring the
sinner, protecting the innocent, maintaining the purity of the church as
separated from the world, and acting as a warning to others in the church.45

The Dominion of Individual Believers

Individual believers also participate in a kingly role by being members
of Christ’s kingdom and being subject to Christ the King.46 Heidelberg
Catechism Question 31 asks, “Why is he called Christ, meaning,
‘anointed’?” The answer related to the office of a king says that Christ is
“our eternal king who governs us by his word and Spirit, and who guards us
and keeps us in the freedom he has won for us (Matt. 28:18–20; John 10:28;
Rev. 12:10–11).” Then Question 32 asks, “Why are you called a Christian?”
The answer related to our kingly role is “to strive with a good conscience
against sin and the devil in this life (Gal. 5:16–17; Eph. 5:11; 1 Tim. 1:18–
19), and afterward to reign with Christ over all creation for all eternity
(Matt. 25:34; 2 Tim. 2:12).” Part of Christ’s work was to restore to human
beings the exalted place in God’s creation that they are supposed to occupy
(Gen. 1:26–28; Ps. 8; Heb. 2:5–9). Believers are to rule over God’s creation,
exercising dominion over it as his stewards (Gen. 1:26–28).47 This
dominion includes mastery over different areas of creation. Proverbs 25:2
states, “It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to
search things out.” The use of Elohim for God and the reference to the
heavens and the earth in the proverb pair of verse 3 suggest that what God
conceals includes his wisdom in his acts of creation.48
In contrast, the glory of kings is to search things out, an activity that
should not be limited to judicial decisions or affairs of state.49 Kings can
investigate God’s creation (1) to understand how it works, (2) to assist
others in that understanding by naming and explaining it, and (3) by
constructing things to show its beauties.50 Both Adam (Gen. 2:19) and
Solomon (1 Kings 4:33) searched things out to discover how the world
works. People continue this activity today in numerous ways, from a
company that develops a better formula to clean certain types of floors to
scientists who explore how creation works.51 Dominion also includes using
creation for the benefit of others and caring for it. We labor under Christ’s
authority and do all our work for his glory (1 Cor. 10:31). As individuals,
we also put on the full armor of God so that we can stand against the wiles
of the devil (Eph. 6:11). We seek to extend the reign of Christ by standing
for the truth of his Word and by protecting and defending what he has
entrusted to our care. This rule includes almost anything over which we
have oversight and control, but it especially includes parents’ protecting and
defending their children from the harmful influences of the world. All our
actions and our use of resources should advance the kingdom of Christ.
When Christ comes, we will reign with him forever in the new heavens and
the new earth (Rev. 22:5).
Conclusion
The examination of the roles of prophet, priest, and king began in the
early chapters of Genesis with Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, where
God established the proper place of mankind within his creation. The
garden was a special place of his presence, where Adam and Eve had
communion with him. God gave to the pinnacle of his creation the kingly
role of ruling under his authority. He also gave to Adam work in the garden,
work that is described with two verbs later used for the priestly work of the
Levites. He also gave to Adam his word, which Adam passed on to Eve and
which became the center of their discussion with Satan. Adam and Eve
failed in their prophetic role by mishandling the word. They failed in their
kingly role by not exercising dominion over the serpent, and they failed in
their priestly role by not protecting the sacred space of the garden through
casting out the serpent. Disobedience led to expulsion from the garden and
a struggle to carry out their God-given roles.
The prophetic, priestly, and kingly roles needed to be redefined so that it
would be clear how human beings were to fulfill them. All three roles are
exemplified in Abraham and then are defined in the nation of Israel’s
offices of prophet, priest, and king. Christ fulfills and transforms these roles
in his earthly ministry and continues to exercise them in his heavenly
ministry from the right hand of the Father. The corporate church, the elders
of the church, and individual believers continue to carry out these roles. It is
helpful to distinguish these roles from one another to define them, but in
reality it is difficult to completely separate them. Many activities of
Christians can be defined by these roles. This chapter closes with an
exercise that should help believers think about how these roles can be lived
out in their lives.
Worksheet on the Implications of the Prophetic,
Priestly, and Kingly Roles for Believers
1. Work: How can God use my work to bring honor to himself?
(a) How can God use me in my work to spread the truth of God’s
Word (prophetic role)?
(b) How can God use me in my work to serve others (priestly role)?
(c) How can God use me in my work to rule over those areas for
which he has given me responsibility, to be a good steward of
what has been entrusted to me, and to extend his rule and
kingdom in this world (kingly role)?
2. Family roles: The following questions can be applied to husbands and
fathers, wives and mothers, and also children. Supply the family role
that best fits your situation.
(a) How can your role as a family member spread the truth of God’s
Word?
(b) How can your role as a family member serve your family?
(c) How can your role as a family member honor God by properly
interacting with other family members, by being good stewards
with what God has entrusted you, and by extending God’s rule
and kingdom?
3. Prayer: How does prayer relate to these roles?
(a) How can God use prayer (or my prayers) to spread the truth of his
Word?
(b) How can God use prayer (or my prayers) to serve others?
(c) How can God use prayer (or my prayers) to extend his rule and
kingdom in this world?
4. The role of elders: How does the role of elder fulfill these roles?
(a) How do elders carry out a prophetic role in the ministry of the
church?
(b) What implications are there for preaching and teaching when one
understands the roles of prophet, priest, and king?
(c) How do elders carry out a priestly role in their ministry in the
church?
 (d) How do elders carry out a kingly role in their function in the
church?
5. Worship/singing (the following passages can be used to answer these
questions: Exodus 15, 1 Chronicles 25:3, Ephesians 5:19, Colossians
3:16, and Revelation 5:9):
(a) How can God use worship/singing in a prophetic way?
(b) How can God use worship/singing to minister to others?
(c) How can God use worship/singing to express his kingship?

_______________
1. Both Israel in the OT and the church have a witness to the nations, although that witness is
carried out in different ways (see chapter 1 for a description of the mission of Israel). Continuity
exists between the descriptions of Israel and the church in their roles of being a kingdom and priests
(Ex. 19:5–6; 1 Peter 2:5, 9). G. K. Beale argues that Christ has installed saints in the present to
function as kings and priests. See The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 193–95.
2. This chapter can only begin to offer general suggestions of how the church and individual
believers carry out their prophetic, priestly, and kingly roles.
3. John the Baptist had the same view as the OT prophets. He states in Matthew 3:12 that “his
winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the
barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” Gathering the wheat is a statement of
salvation, and burning the chaff is a statement of judgment.
4. Duane A. Garrett, Hosea, Joel (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997), 372–73. He notes that
the tongues of fire are symbolic not of judgment but of the saving power of the Holy Spirit. F. F.
Bruce relates the wonders in the heavens with what took place at the crucifixion, such as the sun’s
turning to darkness and the possibility of the full moon’s appearing blood-red in the sky. He calls
these unusual events tokens of the advent of the day of the Lord. Commentary on the Book of Acts
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 69.
5. Christ the Prophet continues his life-changing proclamation of the truth through the work of
the Spirit, especially through regeneration and illumination. Robert Sherman, King, Priest, and
Prophet: A Trinitarian Theology of Atonement (New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 253–55.
6. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 15; Michael J. Kruger,
Canon Revisited (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 170–74.
7. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 166–70.
8. Robert Letham, The Work of Christ (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 95–100.
He argues that one way in which Christ continues his prophetic role is through the apostles.
9. David P. Moessner, “Two Lords ‘at the Right Hand’? The Psalms and an Intertextual Reading
of Peter’s Pentecost Speech (Acts 2:14–36),” in Literary Studies in Luke–Acts, ed. Richard P.
Thompson and Thomas E. Phillips (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), 219. Moessner
shows how Joel’s statement about prophetic activity is fulfilled in the book of Acts.
10. It is beyond the scope of this book to interact with the various views concerning the
continuation of prophecy. A major question centers on whether there is any difference between the
apostolic church and the postapostolic church. Some, such as the New Apostolic Reformation
(NAR), see little difference between the two. NAR believes that there are apostles and prophets today
who function much like the apostles and prophets of the apostolic church. See R. Douglas Geivett
and Holly Pivec, A New Apostolic Reformation? A Biblical Response to a Worldwide Movement
(Wooster, OH: Weaver Book Company, 2014). Once differences between the apostolic and
postapostolic church are acknowledged, the question relates to the differences between the two. For a
readable, accessible approach that prophetic activity has ceased for the postapostolic church, see
Samuel E. Waldron, To Be Continued: Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? (Merrick, NY: Calvary
Press, 2005); Thomas R. Edgar, Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit: Affirming the Fullness of
God’s Provision for Spiritual Living (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1996). For the view that prophetic,
revelatory activity continues for the church—although he argues that such prophecy is not on the
same level as Scripture—see Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today
(Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1998). For an analysis of Grudem’s view, see Edmund P. Clowney, The
Church (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995), 255–68. For the argument that the NT
prophetic phenomenon is in continuity with the OT prophetic phenomenon, which leads to the
conclusion that there is no need for a new kind of NT prophecy less authoritative than OT prophecy,
see John W. Hilber, “Diversity of OT Prophetic Phenomenon and NT Prophecy,” WTJ 56,2 (1994):
243–58.
11. Charles Hodge states that ministers are not prophets. It is important not to call ministers
prophets because this gives the impression that ministers may receive revelation from God. It is
appropriate, however, to refer to pastors as having a prophetic role in their teaching and preaching
ministry. Systematic Theology, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 462.
12. For reflections on how the church fulfills the prophetic, priestly, and kingly roles, see Gerry
Breshears, “The Body of Christ: Prophet, Priest, or King?,” JETS 37, 1 (March 1994): 3–26.
13. Some of the grace-based approaches and the redemptive-history-only approaches fall into this
pattern of consistently ending with justification by faith. For further analysis of the different
redemptive-history approaches, see Robert J. Cara, “Redemptive-Historical Themes in the
Westminster Larger Catechism,” in The Westminster Confession of Faith in the 21st Century, ed.
Ligon Duncan, 3 vols. (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2009), 3:55–76. For an analysis of the
problems of a truncated view of sanctification, see David Powlison, “How Does Sanctification Work?
(Part 1),” Journal of Biblical Counseling (March 2013): 49–66. For a historical analysis of these
issues with modern-day implications, see Mark Jones, Antinomianism (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R
Publishing, 2013).
14. Daniel J. Ebert IV, Wisdom Christology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2011).
15. The Heidelberg Catechism (Grand Rapids: Board of Education of the Christian Reformed
Church in America, 1975), adopted by the United Reformed Churches in North America.
16. Gary M. Burge, Letters of John (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 132.
17. George L. Parsenios, First, Second, and Third John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2014), 90.
18. Vern S. Poythress, “Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts: Affirming
Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology,” JETS 39, 1 (1996): 71–101. He
gives a biblical framework for thinking about gifts of the Spirit as analogous and subordinate to the
ministry of Christ. Poythress has a chart that shows how the prophetic, kingly, and priestly roles (1)
originate in Christ, (2) are continued in the works of the apostles, who have a unique divine authority,
and (3) are then carried out by elders and pastors (in a special office) and by every believer (in a
general sense). The latter two categories are under the biblical authority of Christ and the apostles.
19. Karl H. Hertz defines the role of the Christian as prophet, priest, and king, but he distorts the
prophetic role of believers by not defining it according to Scripture and by limiting the discussion to
speaking the truth to social injustice. Everyman a Priest (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960).
20. Gene Edward Veith Jr. and Mary J. Moerbe, Family Vocation: God’s Calling in Marriage,
Parenting, and Childhood (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012). This book specifically discusses the
vocations of parenthood under the office of father and the office of mother.
21. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 630.
22. For the complex nature of how the term body of Christ is used in the NT, see Paul S. Minear,
Images of the Church in the New Testament (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004).
The aspect of the body of Christ relevant to this discussion is this: “His headship means that his body
continues the work of reconciliation (ch. 1:19), continues its participation in his sufferings (chs. 1:24;
3:5f.), continues his ministry of love (ch. 3:14) as a sign to the world of Christ’s victory over its
gods” (207). The references are to the book of Colossians.
23. The Hebrew word avodah ( ) is translated leitourgia by the Greek OT. The verb form is
leioturgeō.
24. For an analysis of this word group, see T. F. Torrance, Royal Priesthood: A Theology of
Ordained Ministry, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993), 15–20. Torrance shows that the word
group leitourgia is used of the ministry of the church in the NT.
25. Paul finds the community of the church, particularly the church composed of Jew and Gentile,
and the church’s spiritual activities prefigured in the OT. Even the work of priests and Levites is
given to Gentiles in a future age (Isa. 66:18–21). Some have called this aspect of Paul’s hermeneutic
“ecclesiocentric.” See Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1989), xiii, 84–86. An emphasis on the church as prefigured in the OT does
not have to be in competition or in contrast with an emphasis on Christ as also prefigured in the OT.
26. Jack Dennis Kinneer, “Priesthood and Ministry,” in Order in the Offices: Essays Defining the
Roles of Church Officers, ed. Mark R. Brown (Duncansville, PA: Classic Presbyterian Government
Resources, 1993), 180–201; see also the chapter by Charles Dennison, “Worship and Office,” 257–
79. Ryan M. McGraw makes the important distinction that ministers are not priests who present
people holy in the sight of God, but that their role is to present Christ to people and he makes them
holy. “The Benediction in Corporate Worship,” The Confessional Presbyterian 7 (2011): 119.
27. For an analysis of the different public prayers in worship and their function in the worship
service, see Andrew Blackwood, Leading in Public Prayer (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1957); Hughes
Oliphant Old, Leading in Prayer: A Workbook for Worship (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995).
28. For a detailed analysis of how benedictions functioned in the OT, the justification for the
continuing use of benedictions in the NT church, and the proper use of benedictions in a worship
service, see McGraw, “The Benediction,” 111–22. He connects the continuing use of benedictions to
the ministry of the Word carried out by priests in the OT, rather than to their specific role as priests.
But as long as ministers are not called priests, there is not a problem connecting the benediction to a
priestly role of the minister of the Word.
29. Hodge (Systematic Theology, 2:467) denies that ministers carry out a priestly function and
affirms that they are priests only in the sense in which all believers are priests: they have liberty of
access to God through Christ. Letham (The Work of Christ, 122) limits the priesthood to the
corporate church and not to individual believers, partly because individual believers do not represent
anybody. A more satisfying view is given by Albert Vanhoye, Old Testament Priests and the New
Priest (Petersham, MA: St. Bede’s Publications, 1986), 312–18. He argues that there is only one
priest in the full sense of the term (Christ) and that Christians possess a common priesthood through
his mediation, which brings about a participation (on a different level) in his priesthood.
30. Edward G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter (London: Macmillan, 1946), 292. He draws
parallels between (1) the work of the Levites and priests and (2) the Christian life of the members of
the church.
31. Grudem (Systematic Theology, 630) argues that Christians will be priests forever by offering
eternal worship to the Lamb before the throne of God (Rev. 22:3–4).
32. Timothy George, Galatians (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 441–42.
33. In Colossians 1:24 Paul states, “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh
I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.” The
focus of this verse is not the complete satisfaction that Christ has made to his Father by his death, but
the relationship of the members of Christ’s body with his sufferings. Calvin writes, “Christ has
suffered once in his own person, so he suffers daily in his members and in this way there are filled up
those sufferings which the Father hath appointed for his body by his decree.” “Philippians,” in
Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 21:164.
34. Philip E. Hughes identifies these spiritual sacrifices as praise to God and compassionate
service to others. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977),
583.
35. David P. Nystrom, James (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 303. He notes that the theme of
this passage is prayer because it is mentioned in every verse: the prayer of the individual (James
5:13), the prayer of the elders (vv. 14–15), the prayer of friends and companions for one another (v.
16), and the prayer of the righteous prophet Elijah (vv. 17–18).
36. George, Galatians, 427.
37. Veith and Moerbe, Family Vocation, has sections on the vocations of parenthood and
childhood.
38. For a discussion of work as vocation and the significance of the Reformation in the historical
development of this idea, see Gene Edward Veith Jr., God at Work: Your Christian Vocation in All of
Life (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2002).
39. For an insightful analysis of the problems of work (idolatry and idleness) and how the gospel
impacts work, see Sebastian Traeger and Greg Gilbert, The Gospel at Work: How Working for King
Jesus Gives Purpose and Meaning to Our Jobs (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2013).
40. For a discussion of the source of church power (Christ), the rule or law of church power (the
Word of God), and the spiritual nature of church power, see James Bannerman, The Church of Christ,
2 vols. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1974), 1:187–222, 223–34; Guy Waters, How Jesus Runs
the Church (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2011), 64–80.
41. Alexander Strauch, Biblical Eldership, rev. ed. (Littleton, CO: Lewis and Roth, 1995), 122–
23.
42. It is significant that kings in the OT were considered shepherds. It was the failure of Israel’s
shepherds that led to the judgment of exile (Ezek. 34).
43. John R. Sittema, With a Shepherd’s Heart: Reclaiming the Pastoral Office of Elder
(Grandville, MI: Reformed Fellowship, 1996), 6. See also Cornelius Van Dam, The Elder: Today’s
Ministry Rooted in All of Scripture (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2009).
44. For practical help in church discipline, see Jay Adams, Handbook of Church Discipline
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986); and for practical help in dealing with conflict in the church, see
Ken Sande, The Peacemaker, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004).
45. Michael Dixon, What Is Church Discipline? (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing,
forthcoming).
46. For a discussion of the relationship between the kingdom and the church, see Geerhardus Vos,
The Kingdom of God and the Church (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1972), 77–90. He
argues that the church is part of the kingdom of God, but that the kingdom of God is broader than the
church. Every legitimate province of human life can become a part of God’s kingdom because of the
absolute supremacy of God in all things.
47. Greg Forster, Joy for the World (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014), 166. He defines stewardship
in a broad way to include all of life, not just stewardship of the environment. In Part 2 he defines the
role of Christians in terms of prophet, priest, and king.
48. Bruce K. Waltke, The Book of Proverbs: Chapters 15–31 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005),
311.
49. Derek Kidner, Proverbs (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1964), 157. He limits the
search when he sees this verse as primarily praising administrative probes into events in the kingdom,
and he omits academic research.
50. Even pagan kings unknowingly demonstrate this truth by their building projects, such as the
pyramids in Egypt and the hanging gardens in Babylon, which are each considered one of the seven
wonders of the ancient world.
 51. For the evidence that the flowering of science took place in the sixteenth century within the
theological assumptions unique to Christianity, see R. Hooykaas, Religion and the Rise of Modern
Science (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972); Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 2003).
 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amerding, Carl. “Were David’s Sons Really Priests?” In Current Issues in

Biblical and Patristic Interpretation, edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne, 75–
86. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.
Bannerman, James. The Church of Christ. 2 vols. Edinburgh: Banner of
Truth Trust, 1974.
Bateman, Herbert W., IV., Darrell L. Bock, and Gordon H. Johnston. Jesus
the Messiah. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012.
Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. Vol. 3, Sin and Salvation in Christ.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006.
Beale, G. K. The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of
the Dwelling Place of God. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
2004.
Belcher, Richard P., Jr. The Messiah and the Psalms. Rossshire, UK:
Christian Focus, 2006.
Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941.
Borland, James A. Christ in the Old Testament: Old Testament Appearances
of Christ in Human Form. Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 1999.
Breshears, Gerry. “The Body of Christ: Prophet, Priest, or King?” JETS 37,
1 (March 1994): 3–26.
Cara, Robert J. “Redemptive-Historical Themes in the Westminster Larger
Catechism.” In The Westminster Confession of Faith in the 21st
Century, edited by Ligon Duncan, 3:55–76. 3 vols. Ross-shire, UK:
Christian Focus, 2009.
Clowney, Edmund P. The Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,
1995.
———. “The Final Temple.” WTJ 35, 2 (1972): 156–89.
Crump, David. Jesus the Intercessor: Prayer and Christology in Luke–Acts.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.
Davies, John A. “Discerning between Good and Evil: Solomon as a New
Adam in 1 Kings.” WTJ 73, 1 (2011): 39–57.
Day, John, ed. King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East.
Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.
Deenick, Karl. “Priest and King or Priest-King in 1 Samuel 2:35.” WTJ 73,
2 (2011): 325–39.
Dennison, Charles. “Worship and Office.” In Order in the Offices: Essays
Defining the Roles of Church Officers, edited by Mark R. Brown, 257–
79. Duncansville, PA: Classic Presbyterian Government Resources,
1993.
de Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1961.
Dutcher-Walls, Patricia. “The Circumspection of the King: Deuteronomy
17:16–17 in Its Ancient Social Context.” JBL 121 (2002): 603–4.
Ebert, Daniel J., IV. Wisdom Christology. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R
Publishing, 2011.
Edgar, Thomas R. Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit: Affirming the
Fullness of God’s Provision for Spiritual Living. Grand Rapids: Kregel,
1996.
Frame, John M. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief.
Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013.
Geivett, R. Douglas, and Holly Pivec. A New Apostolic Reformation? A
Biblical Response to a Worldwide Movement. Wooster, OH: Weaver
Book Company, 2014.
Gordon, Robert P., ed. The Place Is Too Small for Us. Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbrauns, 1995.
Grudem, Wayne. The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today.
Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1998.
———. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Haran, Menahem. Temples and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel. Winona
Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1985.
Harris, R. Laird, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds.
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Chicago: Moody
Press, 1980.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Christology of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids:
Kregel, 1970.
Hess, Richard S., and M. Daniel Carroll R., eds. Israel’s Messiah in the
Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003.
Hilber, John W. “Diversity of OT Prophetic Phenomenon and NT
Prophecy.” WTJ 56, 2 (1994): 243–58.
Hoeksema, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. 2nd ed. Grandville, MI:
Reformed Free Publishing Association, 2004.
Hooykaas, R. Religion and the Rise of Modern Science. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1972.
Horton, Michael. The Christian Faith. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011.
Huffmon, Herbert B. “The Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets.” JBL 78
(1959): 286–95.
Jeon, Yong Ho. “The Retroactive Re-evaluation Technique with Pharaoh’s
Daughter and the Nature of Solomon’s Corruption in 1 Kings 1–12.”
TynBul 62, 1 (2011): 15–40.
Jones, Mark. Antinomianism. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013.
Kinneer, Jack Dennis. “Priesthood and Ministry.” In Order in the Offices:
Essays Defining the Roles of Church Officers, edited by Mark R.
Brown, 180–201. Duncansville, PA: Classic Presbyterian Government
Resources, 1993.
Kruger, Michael J. Canon Revisited. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012.
Ladd, George Eldon. The Gospel of the Kingdom. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1959.
Letham, Robert. The Work of Christ. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1993.
Limburg, James. “The Root and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches.” JBL
88 (1969): 291–304.
Lioy, Dan. Axis of Glory: A Biblical and Theological Analysis of the
Temple Motif in Scripture. New York: Lang, 2010.
Longman, Tremper, III. Immanuel in Our Place. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R
Publishing, 2001.
McCartney, Dan G. “Ecce Homo: The Coming of the Kingdom as the
Restoration of Human Vicegerency.” WTJ 56, 1 (1994): 1–21.
McGraw, Ryan M. “The Benediction in Corporate Worship.” The
Confessional Presbyterian 7 (2011): 111–22.
Merrill, Eugene. “Royal Priesthood: An Old Testament Messianic Motif.”
BSac 150 (January–March 1993): 50–61.
Miller, Patrick. The Religion of Ancient Israel. Louisville, KY: Westminster
John Knox Press, 2000.
Minear, Paul S. Images of the Church in the New Testament. Louisville,
KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004.
Moessner, David P. “Two Lords ‘at the Right Hand’? The Psalms and an
Intertextual Reading of Peter’s Pentecost Speech (Acts 2:14–36).” In
Literary Studies in Luke–Acts, edited by Richard P. Thompson and
Thomas E. Phillips, 215–32. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press,
1998.
Owen, John. The Priesthood of Christ: Its Necessity and Nature. Ross-shire,
UK: Christian Focus, 2010.
Paul, M. J. “The Order of Melchizedek (Ps 110:4 and Heb 7:3).” WTJ 49, 1
(1987): 195–211.
Powlison, David. “How Does Sanctification Work? (Part 1).” Journal of
Biblical Counseling (March 2013): 49–66.
Poythress, Vern S. “Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts:
Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist
Theology.” JETS 39, 1 (1996): 71–101.
———. The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses. Phillipsburg, NJ:
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1991.
Pratt, Richard. “Historical Contingencies and Biblical Predictions.” In The
Way of Wisdom, edited by J. I. Packer and Sven K. Sonderlund, 180–
203. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000. This article can also be accessed
at thirdmill.org.
Reymond, Robert L. Jesus Divine Messiah. Ross-shire, UK: Christian
Focus, 2003.
Ridderbos, Herman N. The Coming of the Kingdom. Philadelphia:
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1962.
Rydelnik, Michael. The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really
Messianic? Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010.
Sherman, Robert. King, Priest, and Prophet: A Trinitarian Theology of
Atonement. New York: T&T Clark, 2004.
Sittema, John R. Meeting Jesus at the Feast: Israel’s Festivals and the
Gospel. Grandville, MI: Reformation Fellowship, 2010.
———. With a Shepherd’s Heart: Reclaiming the Pastoral Office of Elder.
Grandville, MI: Reformed Fellowship, 1996.
Sklar, Jay. Sin, Impurity, Sacrifice, Atonement: The Priestly Conceptions.
Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2005.
Stark, Rodney. For the Glory of God. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 2003.
Strauch, Alexander. Biblical Eldership. Rev. ed. Littleton, CO: Lewis and
Roth, 1995.
Stroup, George W., III. “The Relevance of the Minus Triplex for Reformed
Theology and Ministry.” Austin Seminary Bulletin 98 (1983): 22–32.
Torrance, T. F. Royal Priesthood: A Theology of Ordained Ministry. 2nd ed.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1993.
Traeger, Sebastian, and Greg Gilbert. The Gospel at Work: How Working
for King Jesus Gives Purpose and Meaning to Our Jobs. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2013.
Van Dam, Cornelius. The Elder: Today’s Ministry Rooted in All of
Scripture. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2009.
———. The Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient
Israel. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997.
VanGemeren, Willem A. Interpreting the Prophetic Word. Grand Rapids:
Academie Books, 1990.
———, ed. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and
Exegesis. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.
Van Groningen, Gerard. Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1990.
Vanhoye, Albert. Old Testament Priests and the New Priest. Petersham,
MA: St. Bede’s Publications, 1986.
Veith, Gene Edward, Jr. God at Work: Your Christian Vocation in All of
Life. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2002.
Veith, Gene Edward, Jr., and Mary J. Moerbe. Family Vocation: God’s
Calling in Marriage, Parenting, and Childhood. Wheaton, IL: Crossway,
2012.
Vos, Geerhardus. Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948.
———. The Kingdom of God and the Church. Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1972.
Wainwright, Geoffrey. For Our Salvation: Two Approaches to the Work of
Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.
Waldron, Samuel E. To Be Continued: Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?
Merrick, NY: Calvary Press, 2005.
Waltke, Bruce K. Finding the Will of God: A Pagan Notion? Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1995.
Waters, Guy. How Jesus Runs the Church. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R
Publishing, 2011.
Wenham, Gordon J. “Were David’s Sons Priests?” ZAW 87 (1975): 79–82.
Wood, Leon J. The Holy Spirit in the Old Testament. Eugene, OR: Wipf
and Stock, 1998.
Young, Edward J. My Servants the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1952.
 INDEX OF SCRIPTURE

Genesis
1—5–6, 7n11, 8, 105
1–2—7n11, 8, 8n15
1–3—5
1:26—6, 6n8
1:26–28—5, 105, 139,
156–57, 176–77
1:28—6
2—7–8
2:5—7, 7n11
2:13—124
2:15—9, 59, 90n9, 124,
174
2:16–17—10, 124
2:19—177
2:19–20—124
2:24—7, 106
3:3—11
3:8—11, 12n18
3:8–19—11
3:11–13—12
3:14–19—105
3:15—13, 106–7, 126,
129, 146
3:16—12
3:21—64
4—12, 106
4:26—13
6:5—106
6:9–8:19—106
8:20–9:17—106
9:2–6—106
9:20–27—106
11:1–9—106
12—2, 3, 4
12:7—124
13—5
14—4, 5, 97, 134n58, 135
14:12—5
14:14—5
14:18–20—97
14:19—102
14:19–20—97–98
14:22—97
15—3
15:1—17
15:6—93
17:4–5—107
17:6–8—107
17:16—107n3, 107n4
18—3
18:22–33—38
20—2–3, 17, 27
20:7—3, 30, 38
22:17—124
25:12–18—107n3, 107n4
28:10–17—27, 39
36:1–43—107n3
36:9–43—107n4
37:3—64
41—27
49—107
49:5–7—70, 72n29
49:8—108
49:8–12—107n4, 107,
 109
49:10—108
49:10–12—126
49:11–12—108
49:12—108

Exodus
4:14–16—61
4:16—21
4:22—126
6:16—67
6:23—67
6:26—71
7:4–5—53
8—3
8:8–15—39
8:19—54
9:27–35—39
10:17–20—39
11:10—61
12:12—53
12:43—61
13:1–2—71
13:18—71
15—180
15:1–21—164
15:3—111
15:4–10—111
15:14–18—111
16:2—61
19:5–6—13, 159n1
19:6—159
19:22—71
19:24—61
20:26—63
24:1—61
24:16–17—63
25–31—62
26:1—64
28—62–64, 67, 82
28–29—60
28:1—61–62
28:2—63
28:4—62, 64
28:5—64
28:6–14—64
28:6–39—68
28:12—65
28:15—65
28:15–30—65
28:17–21—65
28:22–28—65
28:29—65
28:30—65
28:31—64n10
28:31–35—66
28:36–38—67
28:38—67
28:39—64n10
28:40—63, 64n10
28:41—67–68
28:42–43—63, 64n10
28:43—76
29—67, 71
29:6—81n51
29:9—100
30:34–38—77n38
32—61, 62, 78, 78n40
32:1–8—61
32:11–14—62
32:21–25—61
32:22—61
32:25—61
32:25–29—72
32:28–29—70
32:29—78n40
34:29–34—62
34:30—61
35–40—61
39—62

Leviticus
1–7—60, 75
1–15—79
1:9—75
3—75, 171
4:6—76
4:30—76
6:8–7:37—75
6:11–18—171
8—67, 76
8–9—60, 62
8:6—67
8:10–13—68
8:14–21—68
8:22–29—69
8:31–36—69
8:33—69
9—76
9:22—102
9:23–24—77
10—60–61, 76
10:1—77
10:1–3—101
10:9—77n38
10:11—77
10:17—67
11—77
16—82
16:2—82
16:4—82
16:6—82
16:12–13—82
16:18–19—82
16:20–22—83
16:21—101
17–20—80
17:11—76
21—80
21:3—80
21:5—80
21:7—80
21:9—81
21:10—80n45
21:11—80
21:17–21—81
21:22—81
22:1–9—81
22:10–16—81
26:17—124n38
26:19–20—125n38
26:22—36
26:22–33—27n14
26:33—125n38

Numbers
1—71
1–4—71
1:1–10:10—71
1:47–54—72
1:50—72
1:51—72
1:53—72, 91
2—72, 112
2–4—10, 60, 84
3—71–73
3–4—72
3:5–10—72
3:6—73
3:6–7—71
3:7—72–73, 94n19
3:7–8—9, 90
3:10—91
3:11–13—71
3:14–20—72
3:21–39—73
3:32—124
4—72–73
4:1–15—73
4:3—73
4:15—73
4:16—73
4:20—73
4:23—72n29
4:31—73
6:1–8—81
6:9—81n51
6:18—81n51
6:22–27—60, 79, 102
6:25—79
6:26—79
6:27—79
7:5—169
7:7—169
7:8—169
8:22—169
8:26—9
10:11—74
10:11–36—74
10:34—74
10:35—74
10:35–36—112
11—40
11:26–30—43
12—3
12:6—3, 24, 27–28
12:8—25
12:13–15—39
13:33—120
16—76
18—78n40
18:5–6—9
18:19—78n40
18:21—70
19:10–22—80n45
22:5–6—108
22:41–23:10—108
23:13–26—108
23:21—111n17
23:27–24:14—108
24:15–19—108–9
24:17—108, 126
25:1–13—78n40
25:11—92
25:11–13—78n40
26—70
27:21—27

Deuteronomy
1:1—109n9
1:1–4:43—109
2:10—120
4:5–8—14
4:44—109n9
4:44–28:68—109
6:13—47
6:16—47
7:8–16—14
8:3—47
12:10—122
16–18—113, 127
16:18–18:22—18n1, 112
16:18–20—18, 109, 113
17—119, 126
17:8–13—18, 110, 113
17:14–15—113
17:14–20—ix, 18, 24,
109–10, 125–26
17:15—126
17:16—125
17:16–17—113n20, 114,
182
17:17—125
17:18–20—113
17:20—114, 126
18—22, 24, 46
18:1—70
18:9–14—18–19
18:10—18–19
18:11—19–20
18:15—24, 24n8, 25,
39–42, 44, 46, 57
18:15–22—vii, 18, 20,
45, 60, 110, 113
18:16–17—21
18:18—21
18:19—22
18:19–22—24
18:20—22
27–28—11, 22
27:11–26—25
28:1–14—14, 25, 124
28:10—124
28:15–68—25
28:23–24—125n38
28:25—124n38
28:30—26
28:36–37—125n38
29–30—25
29:1—109n9
29:1–30:20—109
29:29—20
32—3, 25
34:10—25, 44
34:10–12—25, 39, 41

Joshua
3:7—30
4:15—30
5:2—30
5:13–15—112
5:15—112n19
6—112
6:2—30
8:1—30
8:18—30
10:12–14—112
13:1—30
19:1—70
19:9—70
24—115

Judges
1—115
2:1–5—31
2:11–19—116
3:7–11—116
3:12–30—116
4–5—112
4:8–10—116
6:7–10—31
7—27, 112
8:22–28—116
8:23—112, 117, 154
8:30—117
11:29–40—116
14:1–7—116
17–21—117
17:6—31, 117
18:1—117
19–20—120
19:1—117
21:25—117

1 Samuel
2:12—118
2:12–17—31
2:12–25—118
2:18—60
2:21—118
2:25—182
2:26—118
2:27–36—118
3:1—31, 34, 118
3:10—31
3:19—31, 118
4:10–22—31n22
7—119
7:3–4—32
7:5—32
7:9—32
8—113, 137
8:1–3—119
8:4–5—119
8:7—119, 154
8:11–17—119
8:19–22—119
8:20—119
9:1–2—119
9:2—119
10—35n26
10:10–13—34
10:20–22—120
11—119
12—32
12:23—3
13—32, 120
13:13—32
13:14—120
15—32, 120
15:26—120
16:7—121
16:14–23—121
17—121
17:34–35—150
19—35n26
19:20–24—34
22:5—33
23:1–12—32
23:6—27
24—121
26—121
27—121
28:6—19, 26
31—121

2 Samuel
1—121
2—121
2:1–2—32
5—121
6—13, 127, 132
7—123
7:1—122
7:13—122
7:14—126
7:16–17—128
8—122
8:18—132, 136, 136n66
12—122
12–20—122n34
13:18—64
15:24–26—122
16:5–14—122
20:23–26—132, 136–37
24:11—33
24:11–14—33
24:17—122
24:18–19—33

1 Kings
1–12—183
1:9—132
1:18—132
1:33—124
1:38—124
1:45—124
2:2–3—124
3—132
3:3–5—127
3:5—27
3:9—124
3:15—27, 127
3:28—124
4:1–5—132
4:5—136, 136n66
4:7–19—136
4:20—124
4:24—124
4:25—124
4:33—124, 177
4:34—124
7–8—123
8—127, 132
8:4–5—127
8:14—127
8:22–53—127
8:33–34—124n38
8:35–36—125n38
8:41–43—125
8:46–50—125n38
8:54–61—127
8:62–64—127
9:1–9—124
10—15
10–11—125
10:9—125
10:11–12—125
10:14–29—125
10:24—125
10:25—125
10:26–29—125
11—15
11:1—125
11:1–8—125
11:9–25—125
11:31–35—125
12:25–33—33
17:1—54
17:17–24—36, 54
18—22, 54
19:10—92
19:16—29
20:13—33
22—22
22:14–28—3
22:17—23

2 Kings
2:13–15—36
3:27—20
4:1–7—55
4:8–37—36
4:9–17—55
4:18–37—36
4:32–37—55
4:38–44—55
4:42–44—36
5:1–14—55
6:1–7—35–36, 55
6:8–23—36
6:18–20—55
8:16–19—33
9:1–4—33
9:1–5—35
10:16—92
11:1–3—33
12:9—124

1 Chronicles
6:31—169
15—74
15:15—74
15:16—74
15:19—74
15:22—74
15:24—74
16—74
16:4—74
16:6—75
16:37—75
18:17—136
23:26–32—169
24:3—169
25:1–12—35
25:3—164, 180
29:29—22

2 Chronicles
8:14—169
12:1—146–147
18:18—21
26:16–21—13, 128, 131, 134
29:25—22
35:16—169

Ezra
2—27
2:63—27
8:1—146

Job
1:5—4
1:6—3
20:8—27

Psalms
1—113n21, 152
1–41—152
2—130
2:7—97, 130
3—152
3:1—152
3:2—152
4:2—152
6:4—152
7:4–5—152
8—156–57, 157n34, 158,
176
8:5—157
8:6—157
12:3–4—152
19:7–11—56n29
22—153, 153n25, 153n27,
154
22:1—153
22:1–21—153
22:6–8—153
22:14–15—154
22:15—174
22:16—154
22:17—154
22:28—154
23—150
34:20—153
37—152
41:9—153
46—9
51—122
57:9—14n25
69—91
69:1–4—91
69:4—152
69:6–7—91
69:8—91
69:9—91–92
69:21—153
72—125, 127, 130
89—130–31
89:3—123
89:7—3
89:27—130, 156
89:38–45—130
89:46–51—130
91:11–12—47
92:1–2—130
93–100—130
103:19—154
105—30
105:12–13—30
105:15—29, 30
106—93n16, 93
106:1–2—92
106:3—92
106:30–31—92
106:31—93
106:47—130
107—93n16
107:1–3—130
108–110—131
108:3—14n25
110—15, 131–33, 133n53,
135
110:1—134
110:2–4—133
110:4—97, 99–100,
134n60, 184
110:4–6—144
111–118—131
119—131
120–134—131
138–145—131
146–150—131

Proverbs
25:2—177
25:3—177

Ecclesiastes
5:3—27

Isaiah
2:1–5—15
2:6–7—15
6—36
6:5—29
6:9–10—37, 49, 165
9—128
9:6–7—144
10:21–23—128
11—129, 129n46
11:1—129
11:1–9—144
11:2—129
11:4—129
11:11–16—129n46
14:12—108
37:35—151
40:3—42
42:1–4—151
42:18–19—15
49:3—151
49:5—15
49:6—14
52:13–53:12—144, 151
53:4—83n56
53:12—83n56, 101, 154
55:10–11—37, 165
55:12–13—37
61—39, 142, 161
61:1—68, 87–88
61:1–2—55
61:1–4—89
61:2—44n6, 161
61:5–7—15
63:12–14—63
63:15—63, 63n6
65–66—15
66:18–21—170n25
66:21—100n31

Jeremiah
1:5—28
1:6—21, 29
1:8—37, 37n28
1:10—51
1:16–19—28, 37
7:1–4—51
7:16—3, 39
11:6—25
11:14—3, 39
11:19—38, 52
11:21—29, 52
11:21–25—38
14:11–12—3, 39
15:16—29, 38
15:17—38
15:18—38
18:18–20—3, 79n41
20:1—52
20:1–4—38
20:1–6—29
20:7—38
20:9—29, 37–38
20:10—51
20:14–18—38
21:1–10—38
22:1–30—52
22:1–23:4—128n45
23—126
26:7—52
26:16–19—38
26:19–23—52
26:20–23—38
28—22, 23
28:1–16—52
28:5–16—38
28:11—23
29:8–9—27
31:32—100
32:1–5—38
33:17—99n31
33:18—99n31
37—51
48–49—109
Ezekiel
2:4—37
2:4–7—28
3:1—29, 37
3:14–15—29, 29n17
3:16–21—29, 37
5:10–17—27n14
7:26—79n41
21:21—19
21:21–22—19
24:15–24—37
33:1–9—37
34—150, 175n42
34:1–16—126
34:16—151
34:23–24—151
44:22—80
47—9

Daniel
2—27
4:17—154–55
7—150

Hosea
1:1—3

Joel
1:1—3
2—40, 160, 162
2:1–14—160
2:20—160
2:21–24—160
2:25—160
2:28–29—43
2:28–3:3—161
2:31–32—40
Amos
1:1—3, 21
1:2—36
3:7—3, 28, 36
3:8—36
9:11–15—141n3

Obadiah
1—3

Jonah
1:1—3

Micah
1:1—3
3:8—37
3:11—79n41

Nahum
1:1—3

Habakkuk
1:1—3

Zephaniah
1—26n14
1:13—26

Zechariah
4:1–14—68, 87
4:14—29n18
6:11–13—15, 15n26
8:20–23—15
9:9—144, 154
9:9–10—131
14—15
Malachi
1:6–2:9—76–77
1:7–8—78
1:12—78
2:1–9—77
2:2–3—78
2:4—78
2:5—78
2:6—78, 95
2:7—78
3:1–3—91
4:4–6—36
4:5—40
4:5–6—43

Matthew
1:18–25—86
1:20—27
2—27
2:23—129n45
3:1–3—42
3:7–10—43
3:11–12—43
3:12—161n3
3:15—42
3:16—88
4:1–11—147
4:3—47
4:5–6—47
4:9—47
4:17—144, 149
4:25—141
5:17–48—95
5:38–42—140
6:5–15—51
6:10—149
6:33—149
7:28–29—47
8:11—149
8:23–27—140
8:27—140
9:1–8—51
9:22–26—142
9:27—145
10:32—167
11:1–3—89
11:16—44
11:20–24—51
12—94n18
12:23—145
12:28—88, 149
12:29—146
13:8–23—148
13:11—148
13:14–15—49
13:24–30—148
13:30—149
13:31–32—148
13:33—148
13:44—148
13:45–46—148
13:47–50—148
13:49—149
13:51–52—56
13:53–58—52
13:57—52
14:23—50
16:19—175
16:21–23—150
17:2—44
17:5—42
17:24–27—94
18:15–18—176
21:5—154
21:12–13—90
21:31—149
21:32—146
22:15–21—52
22:23–33—52
22:42—145
22:43–44—134
23—140
23:1–36—49
23:37–39—49
24:27—150
25:31–40—149
25:34—149, 176
26:14—52
26:23—153
26:36–46—52
26:38–45—50
26:39—50
26:51–54—140
26:57–58—52
27:11—154
27:27–31—154
27:29—154
27:34—153
27:35—154
27:37—154
27:38–44—153
27:46—153
27:48—153
28:18–20—176
28:19–20—15, 161

Mark
1:1—55
1:14–15—143
1:15—55, 149
1:21–28—141
1:21–34—144
1:27—142
1:29–32—141
1:29–34—141
1:34—142
1:35—50
2:1–12—56, 141–42, 147
3:21—52, 52n25
4:10–12—165
4:11—148
4:11–12—49
4:35–41—140
5:35–43—142
6:46—50
8:31–33—140, 150
9:30–32—140
9:33–34—150
11:15–19—90
11:16—91
11:17—94
11:18—52
12:13–17—140
12:36—134
14:34—50
15:2—154
15:16–20—154
15:18—154
15:23—153
15:24—154
15:27–32—153

Luke
1:23—169
1:26–38—86
1:33—107n4, 149
1:35—87
2:32—55
2:40—87
2:46–47—88
2:52—55
3:21–22—49
4—161
4:1—88–89
4:14—88–89
4:16–21—55, 88
4:19—44n6, 161
4:21—161
4:31–37—141
4:34—54
4:41—142
4:43—144
5:16—50
6:12–13—50
7:11–17—142
7:16—53
7:22—142, 151
8:10—148
8:22–25—54, 140
8:24—140
8:26–39—54
8:40–43—54
8:49–56—54
8:49–58—142
9:11–12—147
9:18—50
9:21–22—150
9:28–29—50
9:31—53
9:51—89
10:21–22—95
11:1—51
11:2—149
11:15—53
11:20—54
11:29—48
13:29—149
14:25—49
15:1–10—151
17:11–14—94
17:24—150
18:9–14—49
19:45–48—90
19:47—94
20:42—134
21:15—56
22:3—95
22:20—49
22:31—95
22:31–32—51
22:39–46—89
22:44—50
23—51
23:3—154
23:18–25—52
23:28–31—52
23:34—51, 51n23
23:36—153
23:43—52, 152
23:46—152
24:19—44, 53
24:50—102

John
1:1—55, 87
1:3–4—55
1:14—55
1:19—41
1:20–21—45
1:21—41, 43
1:29—48n17
1:41—88
1:49—48
1:51—48
2—92n15
2:1–12—141n3
2:4—141n3
2:13–22—90
2:15—91
2:19—93
3:3—146
3:6—146
3:13—87
3:15—146
3:34—55, 88
4:24—94
4:25—45
4:42—48n17
5—89n8
5:17—89
5:19–20—89
5:24–25—89
5:26—89
5:28–29—89
5:39—45
5:46—45
6:1–15—141
6:52–71—51
7–8—94n18
7:1–9—91n14
7:40–41—45
8:58—87
9:39—56
10—150
10:28—176
11—142
11:11—142n5
11:25—143
11:25–26—143n8
11:26—143
11:33–35—143
11:39–44—142n5
14:6—56, 148
14:26—56n30, 95,
162
15:26—95
16:8—102
16:13—95, 162
17:5—44, 87
17:6—94
17:6–8—88
17:9—51, 95
17:12—94, 95
17:17–18—89
17:20—51, 95
17:24—156
18—147
18:6—89, 152
18:36–37—154
18:37—147
19:28—154
19:29—153
19:36—153

Acts
2—161, 168
2:14–36—163n9, 184
2:17—167
2:19–20—161
2:34—134
2:41—164
3:11–16—46
3:17–21—46
3:22—46
3:22–23—46
3:24—46
5:12–16—162
6—173
6:1–6—164
6:7—56
7—45
7:52—46
9:31—56
12:24—56, 164
13:2—169
16:5—56
19:20—56, 164
20:28—175
20:28–30—164
20:29—175–76
21:9—163
21:10–14—163
28:31—56

Romans
1:2–4—155
1:4—88
2—11
4:13—15
12:1—172
12:1–2—172
14:17—149
15:16—172
16:20—175
1 Corinthians
1:24—55
3:16–17—94
5:9–12—176
6:19–20—94, 172
9:10–11—170
10:9–10—167
10:31—177
12:12–27—167
14—163
15:17–18—155
15:24—158
15:45—88
15:50—149

2 Corinthians
3:17–18—88
12:12—162

Galatians
1:6–9—163
3:29—107n3
5:16–17—176
6:7—172
6:10—173

Ephesians
1:20–23—156, 160
1:22—175
2:6—156
2:20—56, 162
4:11–12—164
4:11–13—160
4:13–14—165
4:15—168
5:11—176
5:19—164, 180
6:10–20—175
6:11—177

Philippians
2:6—155
2:7–8—156
2:9–11—157

Colossians
1:15—156
1:15–20—157
1:17—156
1:18–20—156
1:19—169n22
1:24—169n22,
173n33
2:3—55
2:15—54
3:5—169n22
3:14—169n22
3:16—164
3:16–17—171, 180

1 Timothy
1:18–19—176
5:17—170

2 Timothy
2:2—164
2:12—176
2:15—165
3:16–17—165
4:1–2—165
4:6—172
Hebrews
1:1–13—56
1:1–4:13—96
2—156–57, 157n34, 158
2:5–9—176
2:5–11—156
2:8—157
2:9—157
3:1–6—45
4:11—96
4:12–13—168
4:14–16—85
4:14–5:10—96
4:15—87, 101
4:15–16—96
4:16—101
5:1—97
5:1–5—60
5:1–10—96
5:5—97
5:7—50
5:7–8—96
5:7–9—101
5:8–10—97
7:1—102
7:1–2—98
7:3—97–98, 134n60,
184
7:4—98, 98n30
7:4–10—98
7:5–8—98
7:6—102
7:7—98
7:9–10—99
7:11—99–100
7:11–22—99
7:13—99
7:15–19—135
7:16—99
7:19—99
7:22—100
7:23–25—100
7:25—102
7:26–28—100
8:2—169
8:4–5—101
8:6—169
9–10—101
9:11–14—101
9:14—88
9:23–28—101
10:4—101
10:11—169
10:11–14—100–101
10:11–18—100n31
10:14—102
13:15—167, 171–73
13:16—173

James
5:13—173n35
5:13–16—173
5:14—173
5:14–15—173n35
5:16—173n35
5:17–18—173n35

1 Peter
2:5—159n1, 171, 172
2:9—159, 159n1, 172
3:18–22—88
5:1–2—171, 175
2 Peter
1:16–21—56

1 John
2:1—102
2:27—167
5:18—94

Revelation
5:6–10—102
5:9—164, 180
5:10—159
11:15—149
12:10—102
12:10–11—176
17:14—102
19:11–15—158
19:13—102
19:13–15—56
22—9
22:3–4—171n31
22:5—178
22:18–19—163

1 Maccabees
4:46—41
9:27—41
14:41—41
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND NAMES

Aaron, 9, 21, 60–73, 76–78, 86, 97,

100–101, 169
Abiathar, 132
Abimelech, 2–3, 17, 27, 39, 117
Abraham, 2–4, 13, 16–17, 28, 30, 38, 59,
97–98, 102, 106–7, 109, 124, 178
Absalom, 122, 152
Adam, 5, 7–13, 15–17, 47, 59, 63–64,
73, 87, 90, 94, 105–7, 124, 157,
165, 168, 174, 177–78
Adonijah, 132
Ahab, 23, 33, 35
Ahaz, 33, 128
Ahijah, 33
Ahlstrom, Gosta W., 111
Amerding, Carl, 132, 137
Amos, 3, 21, 28, 36, 141
anointing, 15, 18, 29, 34, 42, 55, 60,
67–68, 75, 87–88, 96, 121, 130,
167, 171, 176
Ashley, Timothy, R., 72, 74–75,
78–79, 81, 108–9
atonement, 3, 67–68, 70, 76, 82–83,
135

Balaam, 108
Bannerman, James, 175
Barr, James, 7
Bateman, Herbert W., IV, 135
Bavinck, Herman, 13, 88
Beale, G. K., 9, 46, 94, 159
Beckwith, Roger, 41
Belcher, Richard P., Jr., xiv, 6, 12, 56,
93, 108, 130, 133, 141, 153
benediction, 60, 79, 102, 127, 170
Bergen, Robert D., 119–21, 134, 137
Berkhof, Louis, 1, 2, 87
Block, Daniel I., 9, 29, 116–17, 151
Bock, Darrell L., 135
Boda, Mark J., 15, 28–29
Borland, James A., 97
Breshears, Gerry, 165
Bruce, F. F., 46, 156, 162
Burge, Gary M., 167

Calvin, John, 1–2, 30, 143, 153, 173

Cara, Robert, J., 166
Carson, D. A, 45–46, 48, 88, 90, 147,
154
Christensen, Duane L., 113–14
Christ’s exaltation, 1, 35, 50, 87, 95,
97, 134, 139, 155, 158
and ascension, 16, 56, 85, 95–96,
101–2, 155, 160, 166
and resurrection, 88, 96, 101, 143,
155, 160
Christ’s humiliation, 1, 97, 130–31,
139–41, 150, 152–53, 156
church discipline, 176
Clements, Ronald E., 41
Clowney, Edmund P., 94, 100, 163
Cole, R. Dennis, 71–72, 74, 108
consecration, 67, 70–72, 81–82,
85–87, 89, 103, 134
covenant blessings and cursings, 11,
 22, 25–27, 36, 124
Craigie, Peter C., 24, 113
Crump, David, 50–51, 95
Currid, John D., 18, 20, 53, 65–66,
69, 81–82, 107, 109–10

David, 2, 8, 27–28, 32, 35, 50, 61, 65,

74–75, 91–92, 95, 99, 107–8,
110, 120–39, 145, 147, 151–55,
163, 166, 173
Davidic covenant, 32, 122–23, 126,
128, 130, 135, 138
Davies, John, A., 124
Delitzsch, F., 116–17, 133–34, 136
Dennison, Charles, 170
de Vaux, Roland, 136
divination, 18–19, 27, 40
Durham, John I., 14

Ebert, Daniel J., IV, 166

Eden, 8–9, 59, 73, 178
Edgar, Thomas R., 163
elders, 40, 51, 119, 146, 164, 168–70,
173, 175, 178, 180
Eleazar, 67, 73
Eli, 31, 118, 136
Elijah, 29, 34–36, 40, 42–44, 53–54,
57, 92, 173
Elisha, 29, 34–36, 40, 54, 57
Eve, 5, 7–13, 15–17, 47, 59, 63–64, 105,
157, 165, 178
exile, 15, 25–27, 109, 125, 130, 175
Ezekiel, 9, 19, 27–29, 37, 79, 150

Forster, Greg, 177

Frame, John M., 3, 86
Freeman, Hobart, 34–35
Fretheim, Terence E., 14

Gad, 32
garden of Gethsemane, 50, 89
Garrett, Duane A., 75, 162
Geivett, R. Douglas, 163
Geldenhuys, Norva, 54, 154
Gentry, Peter J., 10
George, Timothy, 86, 146, 148, 155,
167, 172–73
Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, 72
Gilbert, Greg, 174
Goldingay, John, 30
Gordon, Robert P., 28
gospel, xiv, 143, 155, 158–59, 161, 164,
167, 172, 174
Groningen, Gerard Van, 133, 135,
185
Grudem, Wayne, 3, 163, 168

Habakkuk, 26, 51
Hamilton, Victor P., 106
Haran, Menahem, 64, 75
Harris, R. Laird, xv
Hartley, John E., 4
Hays, Richard B., 170
Heidelberg Catechism, 2, 166–67,
171, 176
Hendriksen, William, 48, 51, 53, 87,
90, 98, 102, 142, 154
Hengstenberg, E. W., 46
Hertz, Karl H., 168
Hess, Richard S., 144, 151
Hezekiah, 126
high priest, 27, 52, 60, 62–68, 77–78,
80–84, 96, 110, 134, 171
Hilber, John W., 164
Hodge, Charles, 2, 164, 171
Hoeksema, Herman, 2
Hooykaas, R., 177
Horton, Michael, 3, 94
House, Paul R., 127, 136
Huffmon, Herbert B., 25
Hughes, Philip E., 96–98, 101, 157,
170, 173

image of God, 6, 105

intercession, 3, 38–39, 50, 95,
100–101
Isaac, 30, 107
Isaiah, 15, 28, 36, 39, 44, 49, 63, 83,
88–89, 100, 128–29, 142, 154,
161
Ithamar, 67

Jacob, 27, 30, 37, 64, 70, 107–8

Jehu, 35, 92
Jeon, Yong Ho, 125
Jeremiah, 3, 23, 26, 28, 37–39, 51–52,
79, 95, 99, 109, 129
Jeremias, Joachin, 50
Jeroboam, 33, 125–26
Jerusalem, 19, 23, 26, 37–38, 41, 49,
52–53, 74, 86, 89–90, 94, 96,
100, 122, 124–27, 132, 134, 144,
150, 154, 163, 169
Job, 3–4, 27, 59
Joel, 3, 39, 43, 160–63
Johnston, Gordon H., 135
John the Baptist, 36, 41–45, 54, 57,
89, 142, 146, 161
Jones, Mark, 166
Joshua, 27, 28, 30, 96, 109, 112, 115,
 119
Josiah, 126

Kaiser, Walter C. Jr., 14, 61, 63,

65–66, 71
Kidner, Derek, 177
king
believer as, 176
Christ as, 1, 164
Davidic, 85, 108, 123, 130, 134–35
role of, 12–14, 16, 88, 105, 107–9,
111, 134, 144, 147, 158, 160, 165,
167–68, 175–76, 178–80
kingdom of God, 54, 143–46, 148–
49, 176, 178
kingly ministry of the church, 175
Kinneer, Jack Dennis, 170
Kistemaker, Simon J., 98–99, 102,
157
Kline, Meredith, 12, 26, 109
Kruger, Michael J., xiii, 56, 162

Ladd, George Eldon, 146, 148

Lambert, W. G., 110
Lane, William L., 52, 154
Lazarus, 142–43
Leprohon, Ronald J., 110
Letham, Robert, 3, 14, 150, 155, 162, 171
Levi, 67, 70, 72, 75, 78, 85, 92, 96,
98, 100
Levites, 9–10, 41, 60, 70–72, 74–75,
78, 84, 86, 90–91, 94, 96,
98–101, 132, 168–71, 174, 178
Limburg, James, 26
Lioy, Dan, 8
Longman, Tremper, III, 60–61, 72,
 74, 76, 82, 112
Lot, 4, 97, 107

Maccabean period, 41
Malachi, 15, 40, 43, 77–79, 91
Mathews, Kenneth A., 3
Mays, James L., 153
McCartney, Dan G., 155
McGraw, Ryan M., 170
mediator, 60
Melchizedek, 86, 97–103, 131–36
Merrill, Eugene H., 15, 18, 85, 109,
132, 134
Messiah, 15, 45–46, 51, 55–56, 68,
87–89, 93, 97, 110, 129–30, 133,
135, 140–41, 144–45, 151, 153
Micaiah, 23
Miller, Patrick, 136
Minear, Paul S., 168
Miriam, 39
Mission of Israel, 13, 16, 139, 159
Moerbe, Mary J., 168
Moessner, David P., 163
Mosaic covenant, 11, 13, 25–26, 40,
59, 79, 100, 124
Moses, 3, 21, 24–25, 31, 36, 39, 42,
44–46, 53–54, 57, 61–62, 64,
67–68, 70–71, 74–75, 78, 96,
109, 115, 130, 151
Motyer, Alec, 154
Mount Sinai, 2, 4, 17, 21, 44, 61, 63,
71, 74, 112–13
Murray, John, 155

Nadab and Abihu, 61, 76–77

Nathan, 32–33, 132, 136
new covenant, 23, 49, 56, 162, 170
Noah, 4, 59, 106
Nystrom, David P., 173

offerings, 4, 59, 69–70, 76, 78, 81, 91,

99, 127, 169
ordination, 69
Oswalt, John N., 67–68, 111, 128–29
Owen, John, 3, 8

Parsenios, George L., 167

Paul, M. J., 134
Pentecost, 160–61, 163
Peter, 7, 10, 24, 42, 46, 50, 56, 88,
95, 113, 150, 152, 159, 162–63,
171–72, 175
Phinehas, 78, 92, 103
Pivec, Holly, 163
Postgate, J. N., 110
Powlison, David, 166
Poythress, Vern S., 64, 168
Pratt, Richard, 24, 26
prayer, 3, 17, 38–40, 48–51, 57, 90,
94–95, 118, 124–25, 127, 159,
164, 170, 173, 179–80
preaching, 2, 27, 41, 161, 164–65,
180
priest
Christ as, 85, 99–101
role of, 1, 4, 8, 11, 16, 59, 71, 75,
79, 85, 95–97, 100–101, 134,
137, 159, 166, 168, 170–72, 174,
178–80
priestly garments, 60, 62, 68, 82
prophet, 1–3, 5, 10–11, 13, 15–18,
21–24, 26–29, 31–33, 35–36,
38–47, 49, 52–57, 78, 86, 88,
113, 115, 118, 124, 139, 151, 159–
 60, 162–68, 171, 173, 177–80
Christ as, 41
false, 22–24, 27, 38, 40, 165
role of, 3, 10, 16–18, 28, 31–32, 36,
39–40, 52, 60, 113
school of, 34
prophetic ministry of the church,
160

queen of Sheba, 15, 125

Rehoboam, 125, 147

Reymond, Robert L., 89
Ridderbos, Herman, 42, 45, 48, 90,
143–49
R., M. Daniel Carroll, 144, 151
Robertson, O. Palmer, 26, 123, 130
Rooker, Mark F., 77, 80–81, 83
royal priesthood, 85, 127, 131–34,
138, 169
Rydelnik, Michael, 24, 133

sacrifices, 4, 8, 13, 59–60, 67–69,

74–77, 79, 82–83, 96, 100, 118,
127, 131, 134–36, 169, 171–73
sacrificial system, 83
Samuel, 3, 19, 26, 31–32, 34–35, 39,
64, 109, 118–21, 123, 132, 134,
136–37, 163
sanctuary, 9, 76, 78, 83, 96, 100–101,
124, 131, 134–35
Sarah, 2, 39
Satan, 10, 12, 17, 46–47, 53–54, 88,
95, 105, 107, 141, 144–45, 147,
150, 152, 155, 175–78
Saul, 19, 27, 32–35, 119–21, 123, 137,
152–53
seed theology, 105, 107
Selwyn, Edward G., 171
Sherman, Robert, 3, 162
Sittema, John R., 94, 175
Sklar, Jay, 76
Solomon, 15, 27, 32–33, 114, 123–25,
127, 132, 135–36, 139, 177
Sproul, R. C., 47
Stark, Rodney, 177
Stokl, J., 28
Strauch, Alexander, 175
Stroup, George W., III, 86
suffering, 38, 47, 51–52, 57, 87, 140,
144, 150–54, 158, 169, 172–73

tabernacle, 9–10, 13, 59–62, 64,

68–69, 71–73, 76, 80, 82, 84,
86, 91, 94, 96, 100–101, 116,
118, 124, 136, 169, 174
temple, 9, 32, 46–47, 59, 74, 86, 88,
90–94, 96, 100, 103, 117, 122–
24, 127, 131, 135–36, 169
Tent of Meeting, 9, 62, 67, 76,
80–81, 118, 127
Thomson, James, 49, 51
Torrance, T. F., 169
Traeger, Sebastian, 174
Trinity
and the Holy Spirit, 34–35, 37, 39,
42–43, 49, 55–56, 68, 86–88, 95,
102, 146, 149, 160–62, 167, 172
and the Father, 45, 48, 50–51, 56,
87–90, 94–95, 100, 102, 154,
158, 160, 172–73, 178
and the Son, 42, 45, 47–48, 50–51,
56, 88–89, 96–97, 100, 135,
 142, 155
Tsumura, David T., 121

Urim and Thummim, xv, 19, 27, 30,

40, 185
Uzziah, 13, 127, 134

Van Dam, Cornelius, 27, 30, 65, 175

VanGemeren, Willem A., xv, 20, 33
Vanhoye, Albert, 171
Veith, Gene Edward, Jr., 168, 174
Verhoef, Pieter A., 34, 78–79
Vos, Geerhardus, 149, 162, 176

Wainwright, Geoffrey, 3
Waldron, Samuel E., 163
Waltke, Bruce K., 19, 111, 123, 177
Waters, Guy, 175
Wellum, Stephen J., 10
Wenham, Gordon J., 4, 77, 80, 107,
136, 186
Westminster Confession of Faith,
xv, 166–67
Westminster Larger Catechism,
xv, 167
Westminster Shorter Catechism,
xv, 167
Wilson, Gerald H., 4
Wood, Leon J., 34–35
Word of God, 3, 10–11, 13, 17, 23,
29, 32–33, 35, 37–39, 46–49,
51–52, 55–57, 88, 120, 163–65,
167, 175
Wright, Christopher J. H., 15, 126

Young, Edward J., 34, 45, 128–29

Zabud, 132, 136
Zadok, 132
 from

Your gateway to knowledge and culture. Accessible for everyone.

z-library.se singlelogin.re go-to-zlibrary.se single-login.ru

O cial Telegram channel

Z-Access

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-Library
ffi