The epistle for Advent 2 in this Year A is Rom 15.4–13. It follows on from Paul’s discussion about the ‘strong’ and the ‘weak’ in chapter 14, and in many ways summarises the themes of the whole of Romans—that God is uniting Jews and Gentiles who follow Jesus as the goal of his whole plan through scripture.
Paul here cites more verses of scripture in one place than anywhere else in his writings to make this point. And he emphasises that we find our unity in Christ as we gather around the Scriptures that testify to him.
Come and join the discussion!
The gospel reading is Matt 3.1–12, the ministry of John the Baptist pointing to Jesus. You can find the video on that here,
Buy me a Coffee
An excellent introduction into the abundance all that this passage contains of the Glory of God!
“Ought to bear”….
One could quite profitably study the “OUGHTS” of the NT.
Even if one only reads a concordance the Oughts are very instructive
The use of “ought” in the Bible serves as a reminder of the moral and spiritual obligations that define the Christian life. It calls believers to live in accordance with God’s will, demonstrating love, faith, and righteousness in their daily lives. Through the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, the Scriptures provide guidance on what believers ought to do, shaping their conduct and relationships within the community of faith.
Perhaps the experiences of Apollos, Aquila and Priscilla is an example of the strong and weaker brother Acts.18 v 24 – 26
Or the Jerusalem Council, led by the Spirit to offer the right hand of fellowship to Paul and his ministry; howbeit some of that church plagued Paul’s ministry with “doubtful disputations” i.e. Jewish Orthodoxy. Hot headed but cold hearted rather than warm hearted and cool headed.
The ministry ought to be marked by edifying, enriching and nurturing, such as the walk and ministry of Jesus, who suffered much contradictions of sinners.
“Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (Luke 24:26).
Time does not allow to speak of the awesome Glory of God which if we have any concept of it at all fills us with overwhelming Joy and Peace and great assurance and certainty {Hope}
Perhaps peruse John Piper in a funeral oration –
” Glorious Together ” – Six Steps for Abounding in Hope.
Paul’s use of the Holy Scriptures {OT} as the foundation for his exhortations “to be made wise unto Salvation” through the engrafted word. Recommend
“The Power of the Engrafted Word to Transform Your Soul”.
@ https://weinermedia.com
Shalom.
]
Dear Alan No doubt John Piper’s funeral oration “Glorious Together” has its merits. However his overall theological standing has a tendency to run counter to the opinions of Anthony Williamson expressed below. And more to the point perhaps, I would maintain that in several areas they clash with the sentiments expressed in the title of this post. Would you care to comment?
Yes, it is Romans 11, in which Paul affirms that the Abrahamic covenant still applies to the Jews in exactly the way it did before Christ, that causes him to break out into a Doxology. The Mosaic covenant is obsolete and the Messianic covenant alone confers salvation, but the Abrahamic covenant still runs – which is why the Jews still have the right of political hegemony in the Holy Land.
There is more than one Abrahamic covenant.
None of the OT testament covenants is obsolete. They are all fulfilled by, through and in Jesus the Christ, God’s Son, Saviour, as, on the part of man and as, on the part of God, as Israel (son) and LORD, I AM.
Our church is going through Acts, at present and it is not able how Paul preached first to the Jews, and how rebuffed with hostlity and threatened stoning he was. An exception was the Bereans.
Exceptions today are Messianic Jews.
Gentiles are in grafted to the Vine, who is Jesus again and example Jesus fulfilling the Abrahamic covenants.
It’s not very helpful to make such comments without explanation. There is one divine covenant with Abraham (described in Genesis 15), but divine promises were made to him on more than one occasion (Genesis 12, 15, 17).
The Letter to the Hebrews is clear about the Mosaic covenant being obsolete in verse 8:13. That is why Paul is free to eat pork if offered it among gentiles, although he would not eat it or advocate it among Jews; all of that is explicit in 1 Corinthians 9:20.
In Matthew 5:17-18 Jesus says that he came not to abolish the law or the prophets but to fulfil them, and not a jot or tittle of Mosaic Law would vanish while the earth endured. So I am not going to disagree with what you say, but it needs explaining – believers are in Christ and He fulfils the Law. And the Hebrews passage needs to be mentioned at the same time or people get the wrong idea.
There are two Abraham covenants One made by God alone, when God himself ‘cut’ a covenant passing between the animals when Abram was in deep sleep (taking no part). It was an unconditional covenant, in that it could only be fulfilled by God and in the context of covenants of the day, it spoke of what would happen to the covenantor if they broke the covenant. God ensured completion that covenant by ‘cutting’ a new covenant by Jesus on the cross, fulfilling his unilateral covenant with Abram.
The significance of this covenant is frequently missed, ignored.
Earlier Abram was credited by God as righteous for believing God.
Genesis 15.
Anthony, I’m unsure what you mean by ‘get the wrong idea’. Perhaps it is thought that it brings in an open door antinomianism, which it most certainly doesn’t. Neither does it admit of legalism. It is all of grace, salvation and sanctification.
The new covenant is like a new statute, which doesn’t replace an old ones, but consolidates them. In that sense they are obsolete and becoming obsolete. (As in the the rest of Hebrews 8:13 ‘is becoming obsolete.’ )
This is clarified in Hebrews 10:14-18 making clear the laws are to be written on the heart by Holy Spirit quoting and fulfilling Jeremiah 31:33.
Conversion, perhaps?
Sorry but this isn’t clear. We agree that God cut a covenant (terminology still in use today when businessmen cut a deal) with Abraham as recorded in Genesis 15, but I can’t tell if you mean that the second covenant with Abraham of which you speak is the Messianic covenant through Jesus’ self-sacrifice, or not. To remove all ambiguity, please give verse reference(s) for the covenant with Abraham other than the one in Genesis 15.
Much theology! But I can’t work out what you actually believe. Do you believe, please, that gentile bellievers in Jesus may eat pork? Do you believe that Jewish believers in Jesus may eat pork in some circumstances? If you include Yes/No answers to those questions then, whatever else you might say (I don’t wish to limit your freedom), I’ll know much better ‘where you are coming from.’
Don’t have a Bible with me.
God made the unilateral unconditional covenant, passing between the bisected animals.
There is also a conditional covenant with Abraham.
Jesus fulfilled both as man and as God.
There is something of a crescendo in the OT. Are the covenants conditional or unconditional?) The answer comes in the person of Jesus as fully man and fully God. They, the covenants, taken together as a whole, are both un/conditional.
And God did not ‘ divorce’ Israel as per Colin Hamer, notwithstanding his doctorate on the matter.
Eating pork? Yes and yes, especially crispy bacon butties. (We had some, not crispy, a couple of weeks ago at our church prayer breakfast, 7.00 am, on a Friday.
Hope that helps as a summary of where I’m coming from.
Colin McCormack
December 2, 2025 at 4:46 pm
Colin,
Sorry, I am not au fait with Pipers “genaral standing.”
Generaly I tend to hear/read their thinking and as Paul says of himself and the Church “You judge what I say” “If anyone has a revelation etc. let the church / folk judge what they hear”.
As an example I don’t always always agree with Ian Paul as some might do; however I do give credit where due or comment as I judge.
I have not, in all my long years, come across the definitive
orator/commentator, neither am I.
Always read widely and be aware that knowledge can puff some people up , especially amongst Academics I feel. Shalom