Biblical Theology Blog

Ruth Class Discussion Questions

Marty — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 15:34:00 GMT

Class,

Some of you asked for discussion questions to faciliate small group dialogue. I put together a few questions, which admittedly, are designed to tackle the issues of modern dating and courtship, as I think this best meets the pastoral needs evidenced in the questions raised in class. I welcome any and all feedback.

Please click here to download the Ruth discussion questions

In Christ, Marty

What is Marriage?

Marty — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 02:39:00 GMT

Question: What is Marriage? Why is it wrong to have sex outside of Marriage? When is divorce permissable? Why were people stoned for sexual offenses in the Old Testament? Is it wrong for a believer to marry an unbeliever? Etc.

Response: After teaching the class on Ruth, I was a bit surprised about these sorts of questions. I have a very strong, albeit potentially controversial view on the whole topic Marriage. I wrote a summary of my views in a paper a couple of years ago for Dr. Walter Kaiser, who disagreed with my conclusion: God made Marriage in His Image. However, through this conclusion, I think I can explain all the biblical data concerning marriage, divorce, and sexual ethics, as well as their theological underpinnings. I have decided to post the marked-up paper here so that you can have a credible counter view to my proposal.

Please click this link to download the paper

In Christ, Marty

Did Ruth (and Naomi) do wrong in proposing to Boaz the way she did?

Marty — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:05:00 GMT

Question: In Ruth 3:1-5, it seems like Naomi's plan is dangerous at best, but also manipulative, as it looks like she is urging Ruth to use her sexuality to "capture" Boaz. What is going on?

Response: I think that the right way to understand this is in terms of call. So, let me walk you through some general guidelines in discerning call and perhaps this will help you discern what both Naomi and Ruth were thinking and why.

1.  Do the Scriptures prohibit it? No, in fact they actually commend it.

Deuteronomy 25:5 "If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband's brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her. ⁶ And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. ⁷ And if the man does not wish to take his brother's wife, then his brother's wife shall go up to the gate to the elders and say, 'My husband's brother refuses to perpetuate his brother's name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband's brother to me.' ⁸ Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him, and if he persists, saying, 'I do not wish to take her,' ⁹ then his brother's wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face. And she shall answer and say, 'So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house.' ¹⁰ And the name of his house shall be called in Israel, 'The house of him who had his sandal pulled off.

The entire premise of Naomi's plan is this: Boaz is a kinsman-redeemer. According to the Law, Naomi has every right to invoke the Law to acquire a suitable husband for Ruth.

2. Can she do it in good conscience?  Yes.

According to Ruth 3:3, Naomi instructs Ruth: "Wash therefore and anoint yourself, and put on your cloak."  In Hebrew, the almost exact same language is used of David when he ends his mourning for his first born son by Bathsheba. I think that commentators are correct in that these actions are less about Ruth making herself desirable, and more about announcing that her time of mourning is at an end. In other words, the reason that Naomi and Ruth had not earlier sued for a husband under the Law is simply that they were still in their mourning and were not ready to do it. So, now Ruth is ready for remarriage and her time of mourning is at an end. In other words, she can now remarry in good conscience.

3. How does this relate to God's covenants? It deeply relates to the Marriage and Sinai covenants.

a. Under the Marriage Covenant, both Boaz and Ruth understand that sex outside of marriage is wrong. Although Ruth 3 is charged with sexual innuendos, it's clear that Boaz does not violate the covenant but rather will now seek to enter into it. This is of course "dangerous" but Naomi has taken a calculated risk that Boaz is truly a man of God, not based on his mere words but in his actions. It is also clear, that Ruth is suing for marriage. In other words, her marriage proposal is absolutely unmistakable. Boaz doesn't reject it nor her, but will now work diligently to respond to it and her.

Ok, you may say, but still it seems really dangerous. It is, but think about it like this: Naomi's life was essentially destroyed because she married a man that seemed like a believer, but wasn't. Naomi and Ruth are going to quickly find out whether or not Boaz is a genuine believer. If he is, he will do what is right. If he isn't, he will succumb to temptation and do wrong. In other words, this is very much a test. And, as it was then, it is today. God is constantly testing us to see if we will obey Him or not, both individually as well as the Church collectively. From time to time, we fail, but God is still faithful. In this case, because of God's faithfulness, both Boaz and Ruth are able to endure the test. I could speak about this much more within the text of the Book of Ruth, but needless to say, it is a test and like all tests, there is the possibility of failure, but Naomi can do it in good conscience because it is a marriage proposal under the guidelines of God's law.

b. Under the Sinai Covenant, Boaz quickly realizes that someone else is before him, although now it is clear that he desires Ruth. He diligently works to satisfy the requirements of the Law, yet in grace, going far beyond its requirements. Boaz and Ruth are obedient to God's Law, despite whatever the outcome may be. In so doing, they honor God and His covenants.

4. What group of people are they to minister to? In short, Ruth and Boaz are called to minister to one another, as well as Naomi. Through them, God will ultimately minister to all His people through Jesus Christ.

5. Has God equipped them with the necessary spiritual gifts? Yes!

It is remarkable that the word "love" doesn't show up in the book of Ruth at all. However, what does show up are the expressions of the spiritual gift of love: forgiveness, acceptance, care, encouragement, support, and submission. So, take notice that both Ruth and Boaz demonstrate love in action to one another, the dead, Naomi, and others. But most importantly, they show their love of God in their firm obedience to His commandments, under His covenants.

6. What does the Church have to say? The Church approves in this case, overwhelmingly.

Where 2-3 are gathered in His name, Christ is with them. Ruth and Naomi think that the marriage is a good idea and within God's will according to the commandments. Boaz does too, and eventually so do all the elders of their town.

7. How will God shape their character?  God shapes Ruth and Naomi through out the book. Ruth and Naomi go from being idolators living in disobedience to becoming children of God redeemed through the Seed of Ruth and now living under obedience to God's commandments.

In Christ, Marty

Agape or Phileo: Which Love is Greater?

Marty — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:43:00 GMT

Question:

C.S. Lewis writes that there are four kinds of love and that the greatest of the four types is Agape. Do you think that C.S. Lewis is right or wrong?

Response:

First of all, I should say upfront that I have not read Lewis' book: The Four Loves. My feeling is that Lewis' thesis is flawed, if used to define biblical love. Let's jump to the Bible and begin with a quick examination of John 21:15-17:

John 21:15-17 ¹⁵ When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love [agape] me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love [phileo] you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." ¹⁶ He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love [agape] me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love [phileo] you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." ¹⁷ He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love [phileo] me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love [phileo] me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love [phileo] you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.

Ok, so I inserted the Greek root into the passage above. Notice that Jesus asks, do you agape [love] me two times and Peter answers him both times that he phileo [loves] him. However, the third time, Jesus asks Peter this question, Jesus asks do you  phileo [love] me and Peter is heartbroken because Jesus has asked him now three times if he loves [phileo] him and responds, "you know that I phileo [love] you.

If you believe that Agape love is somehow greater than Phileo love, then John 21-15-17 doesn't make any sense.  Sadly, I have heard way too many sermons that simply pervert the text and insist that the last round of questioning uses the word agape instead of phileo when it simply does not, in order to support this heretical argument that there are four types of biblical love. The fact of the matter is that in New Testament usage, agape and phileo are interchangeable words for the Hebrew concept of "steadfast love" or "chesed," which is true, biblical love.

As for the other forms of love that Lewis presents, eros and storge, eros is a vice and storge is used neither in the Greek Old Testament, nor the Greek New Testament. In other words, storge is not used in the Bible at all, although it does show up in extra biblical writings like Maccabees, but to use it to define Biblical love is an error.

So, let's go back to John 21:15-17. Why did the writer, John, use agape and phileo so interchangeably? I think the simple answer is this:  the original conversation did not happen in Greek but likely in Aramaic and John did not want the reader to think that the common Greek usage of  agape and phileo defined the nature of biblical love. So, he used both words to show there was something greater at stake than the pagan understanding of love.

So, is C.S. Lewis wrong? I don't know because I haven't read his book, but it sounds like he may have explained how the pagans understood love. Christians should not accept the same understanding, as the Apostles go through great pains to define love in the epistles. So, what is Biblical Love or "chesed?" I will take a shot at doing this in another posting using the epistles.

In Christ, Marty

Ruth - On Christian Courtship Class

Marty — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:55:00 GMT

Class Description: In this class, we will learn about the courtship between Ruth the Moabite and Boaz the seed of Judah. Not only is it a fantastic book towards understanding Israelite life in the Judges period, but it has a highly relevant message today as we meditate on Jesus Christ our Kinsman-Redeemer. Also, of great value, are the tremendous insights into Christian courtship and why it’s so blessedly different than the common worldly view of dating, particularly when contrasted here with New York City.

Schedule: Sunday, February 28 from 12:15PM to 2:15PM.

Location: Hunter College, West Building (Southwest Corner of 68 & Lexington).

Please click here to download the slides

Ruth (February 28)
Date/Time	Class	Description
Feb 28 12:15PM - 2:15PM	Session 1	Please see the above information for details.
Location: Hunter College - West Building (directions) Room 506
Instructor: Marty Young Marty Young and his wife Sandy joined Redeemer after moving to New York from Boston where they met and attended Park Street Church. Marty works in NYC as a financial restructuring and turnaround professional. He is currently pursuing ordination towards military chaplaincy, having recently graduated from Gordon Conwell with an MDIV (Urban Ministry) and ThM (Biblical Theology). A graduate of West Point, Marty serves in the NY ARNG as a Chaplain Candidate and is currently developing an ethics training program for the military. In addition to his theological degrees, Marty earned an MBA from the NYU Stern School of Business and MS (Operations Research) from Georgia Tech. Marty and his wife Sandy have two young children, James and Amanda, and reside in Jersey City, NJ.

Lady Gaga Bad Romance Slides

Marty — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:51:00 GMT

Class,

Please find attached the slides which I used as a class supplement today. We can discuss in further detail in the next class.

Please click this link to download the slides

In Christ, Marty

Becoming Wise: Proverbs and James Class

Marty — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:41:00 GMT

Becoming Wise: Proverbs & James (January 24-February 21 2010)

This course provides a broad overview of biblical wisdom literature, specifically Proverbs and James (the primary Old and New Testament wisdom books). The intentions of the class are as follows:

to increase the student’s biblical literacy
to help establish a framework for understanding reformed theology
to equip the student with basic exegetical skills to analyze and apply wisdom literature.

We will use Scripture to analyze itself, so we will examine passages in Genesis through the writings of various biblical authors: Moses, Luke, John, David, etc. A more literal translation of the bible [RSV, ASV, or ESV] is recommended, but by no means required. The instructor will also post handouts here.

Schedule: Sundays, January 24 through February 21 from 12:10PM to 1:30PM. There will be no class on February 14.

Location: Hunter College, West Building (Southwest Corner of 68 & Lexington).

Childcare: Childcare is provided by RSVP only for children 3 and under. To make arrangements for childcare, please email Bethany at bethany.griffith@redeemer.com at least 4 days prior to the start of the class (Wednesday).

Please click this link to download the class slides

If you have any questions, please contact: foundations@redeemer.com

Becoming Wise: Proverbs & James (January 24-February 21)
Date/Time	Class	Description
Jan 24 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Pure and Undefiled Religion	In this class, we will study James Chapter 1. This class will provide a framework towards understanding the source of Godly Wisdom and how it compares and conflicts with Worldly Wisdom. We will then see that true Godly Wisdom provides the believer with a means to pursue pure and undefiled religion [James 1:27].
Jan 31 12:10PM - 1:30PM	If Sinners Entice You…	This class will focus on the two archetypes of foolishness found in Proverbs: the adulterous woman and the violent man. We will carefully study these two personalities, using both Old and New Testament sources to understand what they are about and why they are to be avoided.
Feb 7 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Your Father’s Instructions and Your Mother’s Teaching	In this class, we will examine the 10 Commandments to see how they operate as the primary ethic throughout Wisdom Literature, in both the Old and New Testaments.
Feb 21 12:10PM - 2:30PM	Call	In this final class, we will focus on the concept of call. Call is a useful framework towards understanding what jobs we should take, where we should live, and how we should participate in the ministry of the church. This is also where Godly wisdom and earthly wisdom clash.
Location: Hunter College - West Building (directions) Room 506
Instructor: Marty Young Marty Young and his wife Sandy joined Redeemer after moving to New York from Boston where they met and attended Park Street Church. Marty works in NYC as a financial restructuring and turnaround professional. He is currently pursuing ordination towards military chaplaincy, having recently graduated from Gordon Conwell with an MDIV (Urban Ministry) and ThM (Biblical Theology). A graduate of West Point, Marty serves in the NY ARNG as a Chaplain Candidate and is currently developing an ethics training program for the military. In addition to his theological degrees, Marty earned an MBA from the NYU Stern School of Business and MS (Operations Research) from Georgia Tech. Marty and his wife Sandy have two young children, James and Amanda, and reside in Jersey City, NJ.

Fall 2009 Joshua Class

Marty — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:29:00 GMT

Joshua (Oct 25 - Nov 22)

Joshua is probably one of the most misunderstood and misapplied books of the Bible. From this book, false messiahs initiated, prosecuted, and justified terrible atrocities such as the Crusades and the Inquisition. Like Catholics, Protestants too have misapplied the book, as evidenced by various pilgrims migrating from Europe, exterminating Indians, and claiming the United States as their own sort of promised land. Germany, one of the most so-called Christian nations in mid-twentieth century Europe, committed terrible crimes against humanity. In short, lots of so-called holy wars have been fought in God’s name, and sadly, false messiahs tend to cite or at least reference the book of Joshua to justify them.

In response to these false messiahs and ungodly wars, many people reject the book of Joshua altogether, as well as the God of the Old Testament. For Christians, this is dangerous. We Christians believe that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are one and the same. Therefore, an explanation is required to make sense of the book of Joshua and understand its implications for God’s Church today. Although the context of Joshua operates in Theocratic Israel (which has not existed since 70 AD), the book still has tremendous relevance to us in this present day and age. Using both Old and New Testament sources, we will attempt to answer the questions: “What was God’s motive, means, and objective to the Canaanite wars?” and “How is the book of Joshua relevant to the Church today?”

The format of the series will be interactive and will utilize the Socratic Method.

Schedule: Sundays, October 25 through November 22, from 12:10PM to 1:30PM. There will be no class on November 8.

Location: Hunter College, West Building (Southwest Corner of 68 & Lexington), 5th Floor, Room 506.

Materials: Please click here to download the Class Slides

Joshua (Oct 25 - Nov 22)
Date/Time	Class	Description
Oct 25 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Jericho and Genocide	Both liberal and conservative scholars have accused God of genocide in commanding the annihilation of the cities of Jericho, Ai, and several others (Sodom, Gomorrah, etc.). We will review four primary scholarly positions on the issue of Biblical holy war and then evaluate each of them within a framework of biblical theology. Through examining critical Old Testament texts, we will see that God always acts justly and gives sinners ample opportunity to repent. However, like most people today (and throughout human history), the people of Jericho did not repent and accept God’s mercy, but continued their war against God and people made in His Image, resulting in their ultimate and just destruction. We will project the significance of these wars into the current era. The end result is that we will observe that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament are one and the same.
Nov 1 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Rahab and the Gospel	In this class, we will tackle an ancient dispute within both Judaism and Christianity. Was Rahab right to lie to the King of Jericho in order to save the two young men that visited her house? Or did she sin? Unfortunately, this issue has proven to more than academic issues over the life of the Church, particularly in times of war. For example, the story of Corrie Ten Boom, made famous in the film “The Hiding Place” echoed Rahab’s dilemma. In this class, we will examine Rahab’s actions through the lens of redemptive history using relevant data from Joshua, Hebrews, and James. By doing so, we hope to develop a strong theology towards making Godly decisions. We will also see the foreshadowing of the Gospel itself in this amazing Old Testament text.
Nov 15 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Achan and the Unforgiveable Sin	Most readers of the Achan narrative believe that God acted unfairly in commanding the destruction of Achan and his household. Through careful exegetical work, we will see the great extent of Achan’s sin, as well as the sin of his entire household. Despite the magnitude of their sin, God gave them an opportunity to repent. But, Achan and his household committed the Unforgiveable Sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit and did not repent. For their transgression, they were punished accordingly. Like the Acts 5:1-11 narrative of Ananias and Sapphira, this biblical text illustrates the Unforgiveable Sin that Jesus warned about. Although this text is rightfully terrifying, we will see how Jesus saves us from the coming wrath.
Nov 22 12:10PM - 1:30PM	Slaves and Slavery	Did Joshua sin in making a treaty with the Gibeonites and subjecting them to servitude? Some conservative scholars believe that Joshua sinned since he did not obey the so-called letter of the Law and exterminate the Gibeonites. More liberal scholars argue that Joshua chose the lesser of two evils. We will make sense of this confusing and controversial passage within a biblical theology of servitude. We will then project the role of the Gibeonites throughout the rest of Israel’s history to illustrate God’s purposes concerning the institution of slavery within Israel and how it should be interpreted within the Church today.
Location: Hunter College - West Building (directions) 506
Instructor: Marty Young Marty Young and his wife Sandy joined Redeemer after moving to New York from Boston where they met and attended Park Street Church. Marty works in NYC as a financial restructuring and turnaround professional. He is currently pursuing ordination towards military chaplaincy, having recently graduated from Gordon Conwell with an MDIV (Urban Ministry) and ThM (Biblical Theology). A graduate of West Point, Marty serves in the NY ARNG as a Chaplain Candidate and is currently developing an ethics training program for the military. In addition to his theological degrees, Marty earned an MBA from the NYU Stern School of Business and MS (Operations Research) from Georgia Tech. Marty and his wife Sandy have two young children, James and Amanda, and reside in Jersey City, NJ.

What is Reformed Theology?

Marty — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:35:00 GMT

This is a quick essay in my own words. Criticism, comments, and questions are most welcome.

In Christ, Marty

___________________________________________

The center of Reformed Theology is the conceptual framework that God relates to His Creation through a series of covenants. A covenant is a formal agreement memorialized between two or more parties who agree to satisfy certain stipulations in good faith. Unlike a contract, covenants presume a divine witness who will judge each of the covenant parties and administer blessings or curses based on covenant performance. Within Reformed Theology, God is the Divine King who initiates, stipulates, witnesses, memorializes, and judges various covenants with his Creation. Thus, Reformed Theology organizes and interprets the Bible through the lenses of the various biblical covenants found within it. In so doing, Reformed congregations are distinctly different from other branches of the Church, which interpret the Bible through alternative lenses, which may or may not be biblically sound.

Although not necessarily Reformed Theology, closely related Covenant Theology categorizes the various covenants found in the Bible into one of two covenant frameworks: the so-called Covenants of Works and Grace. In addition to these two super-covenants, some Covenant Theologians presume the eternal existence of a certain Covenant of Redemption (Psalm 110, Phil 2:5-11), made before the beginning of time between the Persons of God, meaning within the Trinity itself. The Westminster Confession includes references to the Covenants of Works and Grace based on certain observations of the Adamic (Gen 2:16), Noahic (Gen 9:8-17), Abrahamic[1], Sinai (Exo 20:1-17), and New Covenant. However, in subtle disagreement to mainstream Covenant Theology, the Westminster Confession recognizes various covenants of works, but only one Covenant of Grace, by the clever use of the indefinite and definite articles respectively.

In general, the Reformers recognized that the pre-eminent biblical covenant is the New Covenant, or the Covenant of Grace. However, there also exist other biblical covenants, mostly of works, some of which are operative today. For example, the Bible explicitly mentions the covenants of Marriage (Gen 2:21-25, Mal 2:14), Brotherhood (Gen 4:9, Amos 1:9), and Common Grace (Gen 9:8-17), all of which 1) God instituted, 2) apply to the entire human race, and 3) operate today. Regarding Marriage and Brotherhood, God, as covenant witness and judge, will hold people accountable for the good and bad works they do (i.e. as spouses and siblings). As a result, Marriage and Brotherhood should be properly categorized as works covenants. However, the Noahic covenant, by which God continues to bless the Creation despite the evil that people do is “a” covenant of grace, as God pours out his unmerited grace on the just and unjust. As strange as it may sound, all unbelievers are in covenant relationships with God, and it is through these covenants, they currently experience both grace and judgment. The Noahic covenant, which operates even today, will ultimately expire at the return of Christ and is therefore unable to save, so it is a vastly inferior covenant of grace when compared to “the” Covenant of Grace, meaning the New Covenant. Thus, it is through the various works covenants that God will faithfully execute judgment against all Humanity. It is through the Covenant of Grace that God will choose His Elect and redeem them.

The Reformers recognized that no one, other than Jesus Christ, had faithfully performed his or her responsibilities and obligations under the various works covenants, despite the overflowing and unmerited love God pours onto all of us through the various grace covenants. As a result, all Humanity is justly condemned for its sin. However, Jesus Christ, being human lived in perfect obedience to the various works covenants and being God inaugurated the Covenant of Grace, substituted Himself for the just judgment all Humanity deserved in order to redeem His Elect. It is through this Covenant of Grace that the Reformed Church operates.

For the Reformed Church, the New Covenant supersedes all other covenants. It is an everlasting covenant which will continue from the present time into eternity. None of the other covenants will do that. The law of the New Covenant is love. It is through the New Covenant that God sends His Holy Spirit to equip the Elect with all the spiritual gifts required to build up the Covenant Community. The Holy Spirit is the covenant sign (or engagement ring) of the New Covenant which will ultimately be consummated at the Marriage of the Lamb. The elders of the Reformed Church are primarily called to be the faithful stewards of God’s covenants, ministering to the Church through the New Covenant, but also the World through God’s other covenants. Thus, because of its covenantal framework, the Reformed Church is vitally unique amongst the other branches of Christ’s Church.

[1] I identify 3 different Abrahamic covenants, not 1 as most people do.

Divine Intervention Question

Marty — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:05:00 GMT

Question:

I have a question for you along the lines of "intervention," especially in light of some the recent news stories about Christian parents who refuse medical help for their sick children--believing that the illness is a result of some sin and enough "prayer and faith" will heal. My hunch is that this is wrong and un-biblical but am unable to explain it. Could you help me flesh this out with biblical support?

Response:

First of all, your intuition is exactly right. The key issue is “testing God” which simply means to do something to provoke God to act. This is a grave sin and one of temptations that Satan uses against Christ. It’s also Israel’s sin in the wilderness which they commit 10 times. Hebrews has several discussions about this.

So, these unfortunate stories we read about in the news are basically situations where people are testing God and trying to provoke him to do something (ie – heal children). This is the same sin illustrated in the fictional USC story that is wideley circulated. Understanding that this is similar to that story, you can see that in addition to testing God:

1. It bears false witness concerning Him

2. It operates from a presumption that human beings have some authority over God which is in itself a lie. This of course is idolatry and blasphemes God’s name.

3. It assumes a sort of works-based righteousness whereby people can control the divine through their own actions. This of course makes people their own god and their own source of salvation.

As I say, bad theology always results in bad ethics. So, hence the misfortune of children whose parents believe these lies. The parents, in their vain attempt to control God, end up sacrificing their own children to false gods… Doesn’t it strike you as demonic that these children suffer and even die even though their parents are claiming to be saving them? The fact is that the parents are not trying to save them, but rather they are erecting their own idols to save themselves and the idols are powerless to save.

As for divine intervention, it does happen, but its always within the context of God’s covenants which He Himself has established. So, God intervenes covenantally. Some people mistakenly interpret the Bible to believe that they can claim certain Old Testament blessings that were related to the Sinai covenant. What they neglect to understand is that they actually deserve the curses, not the blessings, in the strict sense of the Mosaic covenant. In the New Covenant, such Mosaic blessings for “good behavior” and curses for “bad behavior” no longer apply since Christians are not under the Mosaic covenant, but rather the law of grace.

I hope this helps, in Christ, Marty