The Gospel According to Methuselah, Part Two
A Devotional Series from Genesis
Online Bible Audio/Readings Links (ESV)
5/23 Reading Portions: Numbers 32; Psalm 77; Isaiah 24; 1 John 2
Genesis 5:25-27
When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he fathered Lamech. Methuselah lived after he fathered Lamech 782 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.
SEE
Yesterday, we considered how Methuselah was a type of Christ. Today, we will see how Methuselah was also a type of the heavenly Father.
Methuselah, as mentioned yesterday, lived longer than any other soul; and also, that the years of his life, when measured from the creation of Adam through the genealogies recorded in Genesis 5, was such that Methuselah’s death coincided with the year that the floodwaters of the great deluge came upon the earth (Gen 6-9). Again, the floodwaters came 1,565 years after the creation of Adam.
Now, Lamech, who lived 777 years upon the earth (Gen 5:31), died five years before the flood. This means that Methuselah witnessed the death of his son, the prophet Lamech (which is a great biblical test question, by the way: “Who was it that witnessed the death of his son but never saw the death of his father?”). So, how does this make Methuselah a type of the heavenly Father? I’m so glad you asked. Here’s how…
Although the heavenly Father poured out His unbridled wrath upon His one and only begotten Son for sins that Jesus did not commit, His will and holy justices was not only satisfied by the holy Son’s suffering, death, and shed blood, but the Son was also eternally and well-pleasing to the Father in all He think, said, and did; and therefore, the Father was supremely pleased by the Son laying down His life upon Calvary’s tree. This is one of the most supreme reasons that Jesus’ holiness, righteousness, and sinless life was superlative and exclusively distinctive beyond all descendants of Adam combined. If theoretically a descendant of Adam could have kept all the law actively and passively, none of our fallen race would have gone to the cross for the sake of others (Rom 3:23). Jesus came to earth specifically to do just that. The Father looked upon that Sacrifice as the most excellent good work in the universe, and Satan will do all that he can to destroy it, or denigrate it, or dismiss it altogether. Yes, the Father indeed looked upon the Son. It is written,
Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush Him; He has put Him to grief; when His soul makes an offering for guilt, He shall see His offspring; He shall prolong His days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. Isaiah 53:10
It was YHVH’s will to crush His Son. The Father put Jesus to grief though Jesus did nothing grief-worthy. And when Jesus laid down His life to make His soul an offering for the guilt of sinful men, the heavenly Father saw His holy Offspring, the virgin-born Son, and was pleased. The English word “will” is also correctly translated “pleased.” It’s the Hebrew word חָפֵץ (cha-FĀTZ), and it means “to be inclined toward,” “to delight in,” “to be pleased with,” “to will or determine.” The same word is also used at the end of the verse. The KJV renders it like this:
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He hath put Him to grief: when Thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. Isaiah 53:10, KJV
Which version is correct, the ESV or the KJV? My answer: Yes.
I know that there has been some preaching of late saying that the Father’s eyes are too pure to look upon evil, misunderstanding Habakkuk 1:13. I have mentioned this in an earlier devotional thought from Genesis 3:15 (you can find that devotional by clicking here). But I will post a more comprehensive article later today so that you have a clear understanding why the Father could not have turned away from the Son. It would run contrary to the New Testament concerning our own salvation. Keep an eye out for the article.