CLOTHED AND IN MY RIGHT MIND

PART 4 – EXPLORE THE VISUAL IMAGERY

​

Chapter 21 - RAGS, RICHES AND WEDDING CLOTHES

 

You will surely have noticed the common elements in the stories of Joseph’s promotion to chief minister, and the healing of the man possessed by evil spirits. In both cases the change of outward clothing and physical appearance is symbolic of an inward transformation, as well as a change in the individual’s personal relationships and promotion from a position of shame to one of honour.

​

This kind of imagery occurs numerous times in the Biblical narrative, from God clothing Adam and Eve in animal skins in Genesis 3, to Zechariah’s vision of the high priest Jeshua, having his filthy garments removed and being re-clothed in fresh, clean priestly garments (Zechariah 3), to Jesus’ parable of the wedding guest condemned for not wearing the correct wedding clothes (Matthew 22).

​

We can, in fact, follow the same imagery all the way through from Genesis 3 to Revelation 3, where Jesus advises the church in Laodicea to “buy from me… white garments, so that you may be clothed and that the shame of your nakedness will not be exposed.”

​

There is a very important lesson here in being aware of visual imagery throughout the “Big Story” of Biblical narrative and being able to relate imagery in one part of Scripture to similar imagery elsewhere. You may be familiar with using Bible concordances and other Bible helps to follow theological themes or word studies throughout the Scripture. I would argue that we should also train our minds to look for comparisons and developments in visual imagery, and that such studies might be equally enlightening.

​

So in this chapter I will follow through on some of the most important “re-clothing” imagery, from Genesis to Revelation, and see how we can learn and benefit from comparing between these different examples.

 

 

1. THE VERY FIRST COVER-UP  (Genesis 3:6-7)

​

The woman was swayed by the serpent’s speech.  She saw that the fruit of the tree
     - looked good to eat,
     - was beautiful to look at
     - and had the ability to make one wise.

​

So she took some fruit from the tree and ate it. And she gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he also ate it.  Then their eyes were suddenly opened to see things in a new way, and they were ashamed to realise that they were naked; so they took some fig leaves and sewed them together and made coverings for themselves.​

​

This is the first time in the Biblical narrative that nakedness is identified as a problem! Before Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden fruit, they stood naked before one another and before God, without any sense of shame.

Actually their state of shameless nakedness before their fall from grace should probably count as our base line. From this point on, throughout the “Big Story” of the Bible, it is always considered unacceptable to appear naked, whether before our fellow human beings, or before God.

​

The requirement to cover up reflects the fact that – both literally and metaphorically – there are things that it would be shameful to bring into the open, and need to be kept hidden. With Adam and Eve it is the shame of having disobeyed God, of having given in to Satan’s temptation and believed his insinuations that God was a liar, and was preventing them from achieving their full potential. They knew in their hearts their action would have created a rift between themselves and God, and feared God’s anger. Hence they not only covered themselves in fig leaves, but hid among the trees when they heard God walking in the garden.

​

But, as the rest of the story tells us, the fig leaves didn’t wash with God! Something more was required to cover their sin and restore their relationship with God, so God made them clothing from animal skins.

​

It is possible to argue that the animal skins are a recognition that a sacrifice had to be made for the covering to be effective, and that the doctrine of sacrificial atonement is inherent in this image. But if we compare with other examples of the “re-clothing” imagery, atonement (though it may be indirectly inferred) is not the main focus. The story from Genesis 3 tells us that:

1. Certain types of action or situation cause shame with respect to our relation with God and with others.

2. Shame that is uncovered results in broken relationships.

3. We cannot cover our shame by our own human efforts. Only God can provide a suitable covering.

4. Accepting the covering that God provides allows our relationships with Him to be restored.

 

Because I failed to see the full significance of the covering which God provided through his provision of animal skins to hide Adam and Eve’s nakedness, I used to puzzle over whether Adam and Eve were actually forgiven. Was their relationship actually restored to its former state?

​

Well, the story shows their relationship was restored, but not on the same basis as it was before their disobedience.

​

Before the fall Adam and Eve had a perfect relationship with God, and with each other, because there was no sin or imperfection to spoil it. There was nothing that needed to be kept covered.

​

After the fall they were able to continue with a relationship with God, but on an entirely different basis. The sin and shame was a permanent feature of their lives, and had eternal consequences for them. There was no way to go back to their previous open, shame-free fellowship with God. But God provided a way for that shame to be covered. Which means, provided they relied on God’s covering, they could enter God’s presence, experience his blessing and relief from their toil and pain.

​

And the ongoing consequence is that, from now on, no-one is able to enter into God’s presence unless they possess the appropriate clothing – visually symbolized as animal skins, priestly garments, wedding clothes, or pure white robes that are “washed in the blood of the lamb”. These images all help us to grasp the message of God’s grace, and his desire to accept us in spite of our sins and restore us to his care, for “while we were still sinners, Christ died for us”. Christ Jesus has provided the garments of righteousness that are indispensable for our salvation.

 

2. PROMOTED FROM PRISON… REPRIEVED FROM THE PIG-PEN

​

We already considered the transformation of Joseph from prisoner to Prime Minister as an outward visualisation of his inward transformation, and gifting of both personal and political honour and status. But like many Biblical stories these events can be read on a higher – allegorical – level. Almost as a parable.

Compare the re-clothing of Joseph with the homecoming of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:21-22):

​

Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Since God has revealed all this to you, no one else is as intelligent or wise as you are. You will be in charge of my household, and all my people will take orders from you. I hereby place you in charge of the entire land of Egypt. Only I, Pharaoh, will have a rank higher than yours."

Then Pharaoh removed his signet ring – his royal seal of approval – and placed it on Joseph's finger. He dressed him in fine linen clothing and hung a gold chain around his neck.

----------------------------------------------------------

The son said to his father, 'Father, I have sinned against God and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. '

But his father said to the servants, ‘Bring the finest robe in the house and put it on him. Bring a signet ring for his finger and sandals for his feet. (

​

There are some quite amazing similarities between these two stories:

• Both Joseph and the prodigal are coming from a position of shame; Joseph from prison, the Prodigal Son from the consequences of his own wasteful actions and reduced to eating the food given to the pigs. Visualize the physical state and appearance (and smell!) of the Prodigal Son after sleeping and eating in the pig pen, and compare that with Joseph’s appearance on emerging from jail.

• Neither Joseph nor the Prodigal Son were physically, mentally or spiritually prepared for the transformation that was about to occur, and the honour they were destined to receive.

• The re-clothing itself consists of two main items which are virtually identical:

1. The fine linen garment for Joseph, the best robe for the Prodigal Son, symbols of high position, honour and authority.

2. The signet ring, which would have contained the official seals belonging to Pharaoh, and to the father in the parable of the Prodigal Son. With this, Joseph would have been able to sign and seal official edicts with the same level of authority as Pharaoh, and the Prodigal Son would have been able to seal official contracts on behalf of his father. In both cases a sign that each was entrusted with the highest level of responsibility.

 

The parable of the Prodigal Son is very clearly intended as a representation of God’s plan and process of salvation, rescuing us from the shame of sin and restoring us to fellowship with the Father. But what about the story of Joseph? Are we justified in reading into this episode something above and beyond Joseph’s rise to political power and authority under Pharaoh?

​

Most definitely, yes! We learned from previous studies that Joseph, before he was sold into slavery in Egypt, was caught up in the rivalry and antagonism between Rachel’s family and Leah’s. Maybe more through naiveté than anything else, but he was not without blame, and was at least partly responsible for his brothers’ jealousy and hatred. His experience in Egypt, with Potiphar and in prison, was designed by God to transform his character and prepare him for the task that God had set before him. That task was not just as a representative for Pharaoh, but as God’s representative, to bring his family to the safety of Egypt and save them from starvation.

If we can learn by comparing the similarities between passages, we can also learn by noting the contrasts, and there is one very important contrast between these two examples. That is, the status to which the person concerned is promoted/restored.

​

In the story of the Prodigal, the focus (as the usual title suggests) is on Son-ship, the end result of the Prodigal’s restoration is a new relationship with and experience of a loving Father. With the story of Joseph, the focus is on sharing God’s authority and participating in his purpose and plan. The third items of clothing presented to them are indicative of this distinction; Joseph’s gold chain represents the authority of his appointed office, while the Prodigal’s sandals are rather more domestic items, representing the distinction between a son and a hired servant (who would work in bare feet).

​

These aspects are not contradictory, but complementary. The Bible teaches us that salvation and restoration results in us both coming into his family as children of a loving Father, and reigning with him in power and authority.

 

3. FILTHY RAGS TO FINE PRIESTLY GARMENTS

​

The re-clothing theme occurs in a very different kind of passage in the prophecy of Zechariah. The passage describes a vision which God gave to Zechariah concerning Jeshua the High Priest, who was one of the leaders who returned to Jerusalem with Ezra, and was responsible with other priests for rebuilding the Temple and restoring its contents.

​

We read in Ezra chapter 3:

In the early autumn, after the Israelites had settled in their towns, everyone assembled in Jerusalem with a common purpose. Then Jeshua son of Jehozadak joined his fellow priests, including Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and his family, in rebuilding the altar of the God of Israel, so that they could once again offer sacrifices in the way that the law of Moses instructed.  (Ezra 3:1-2)

 

Here is the vision as Zechariah describes it (from Zechariah 3:1-8)

 

​The angel showed me Jeshua the high priest standing before the angel of God. Satan, also called the Accuser, was standing at the angel's right hand, making accusations against Jeshua. God said to Satan, "I, Yahweh, rebuke you Satan. I who have chosen Jerusalem as my dwelling place. This man is like a burning ember that has been snatched from the fire."

​

Jeshua was dressed in filthy clothing as he stood there before the angel. So the angel said to the others who were standing around him, "Take off his filthy clothes." Turning to Jeshua he said, "Pay attention to what is happening to you. I have taken away your sins, your filthy garments, so that I can clothe you in fine new robes."

Then I said to the angel, "He also needs a clean headdress." So they put a clean priestly turban on his head and dressed him in new clothes while the angel of God stood by watching.

​

Then the angel spoke very solemnly to Jeshua and told him, "This is what the Lord Almighty says: If you walk in my ways and follow my commands, then I will give you authority over my Temple and everything in it. You will take your rightful place among these others who are standing here. Listen to me, Jeshua, and all you priests here with us. You are appointed as symbols of things to come. At the appointed time I will reveal my servant, the Branch, and you are his fore-runners.

​

The general shape of this visual image should be familiar, but there are some aspects of the vision which clarify, or add to what we have learned from the previous re-clothing imagery. In the first case, this vision specifically identifies the metaphorical meaning of certain aspects of the image.

​

Filthy rags

​

Firstly, the old “filthy” garments are specifically identified as representing Jeshua’s sin. The angels tells Jeshua the High Priest, “Look, pay attention!”, in other words, “I want to you to understand exactly what this vision represents.” And he goes on to say, “I have taken away your sins.”

​

Bearing in mind Jeshua’s position as the High Priest, the one responsible for offering sacrifices for his own sins, and the sins of the people of Israel on the Day of Atonement, the implications are extraordinary. The inference is that all the formal sacrifices offered on the altar cannot cover Jeshua’s iniquity and render him fit to stand in God’s presence. Jeshua needs to be clothed in clean priestly garments provided by the angel of the Lord, garments which by his own efforts he is unable to acquire.

​

Just how filthy and disgusting our efforts to cover our own shame really are is emphasised by a parallel passage in Isaiah, who tells us (Isaiah 64:6):

Our righteous deeds (or those we consider to be righteous) are in fact nothing but filthy rags.

​

Most English translations here fails to convey the true meaning of the Hebrew. The term in the original Hebrew is in fact so disgusting and offensive that very few have the courage to give us a literal translation. The Complete Jewish Bible translates this verse: “All our righteous deeds [are] like menstrual rags.”

​

In the Old Testament context, bear in mind that this image is not just shameful and offensive, but according to the ceremonial law in Leviticus, any contact with a woman during the time of her monthly period renders a person ceremonially unclean: "Whenever a woman has her monthly period, she will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, and anyone who touches her during that time will be unclean until the evening." (Lev 15:19). So the metaphor here implies that Jeshua’s sin renders him ceremonially unclean and therefore incapable of fulfilling the high priestly function to which he has been appointed. For Jeshua to come into the Holy of Holies to offer sacrifices to God, without his sin and shame covered by the righteousness which God provides, would by utterly shocking and as dishonourable to God as if he were wearing soiled menstrual rags! It’s hardly possible to imagine any visual metaphor more shocking and offensive to the holiness and majesty of God.

​

Priestly garments

​

So let’s turn to the new garments provided as a covering for Jeshua. What do these new clothes represent? Clearly these are garments that fit him for his role as a High Priest, and qualify him for the task of entering the Holy Place and standing before the altar in the Temple. But remember the metaphorical nature of the image. These are not normal human-made garments. They represent the need for a spiritual covering of righteousness. Can we infer anything more about the nature of these garments?

 

My Servant, the Branch

​

The angel is speaking to all of the priests present in the vision when he says to them, “You are appointed as symbols of things to come.” They are to be signs, or fore-runners, of “My Servant, The Branch.” This double reference is clearly Messianic. The title for Jesus as “The Branch” is probably taken from the symbol of Aaron’s rod, which budded, blossomed and produced almonds, as God’s confirmation that Aaron’s descendants were the ones he had chosen to fulfil the duty of priests in the Tabernacle (Numbers 17:18). Jesus is to be the final culmination and fulfilment of the role of High Priest, the One who offered himself as the eternal sacrifice for the sins of the world.

​

There is a second vision described in Zechariah chapter 6, which also refers to Jeshua. In this case Jeshua received not a priestly turban, but a royal crown, symbolizing the Messiah’s role as king, as well as priest:

​

Accept the gifts of gold and silver which will arrive from the exiles in Babylon. Make a crown from the gold and silver and put the crown on the head of Jeshua son of Jehozadak, the high priest. Tell Jeshua, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says: This represents the man who is called the Branch. He will branch out from his predecessors and take his rightful place. He is the one who will rebuild the Temple of the LORD. He will reign in royal splendour and will rule from his throne as both king and priest. And these two roles will sit perfectly side by side.' (Zechariah 6:11-13)

​

Taking these two visions together, we can be certain that “The Branch” is a reference to Jesus Christ, who in his role as High Priest (which is in focus in Zechariah 3) will offer himself as the perfect sacrifice and in doing so obtain the righteous garments sufficient to cover our sins.

​

Foreshadowing the righteousness of Christ

​

A very important aspect of the imagery of Zechariah’s vision is the idea that the re-clothing is not only for the benefit of the person who is being re-clothed, in this case for the spiritual covering of Jeshua himself. The righteous covering is also a necessary component of Jeshua’s role (and the role of the priestly class in general) as a symbol, or fore-runner, of Christ the coming and perfect High Priest, the one who is called “The Branch”.

​

Jeshua and his fellow priests must wear Christ’s garments of righteousness in order to reflect Christ’s likeness and to set an example that mirror’s the holy character of the one whom they represent. And this is true for us, since all who belong to Christ are intended to reflect his likeness.

 

Revisiting Joseph

 

This revelation may cause us to re-evaluate the vision of Joseph being clothed in royal garments. Joseph was raised to the highest position in Egypt, except for Pharaoh himself, clothed in royal robes, with a gold chain round his neck, and the signet ring – symbol of authority – on his finger. It’s possible to read this as symbolic of Jesus’ exaltation to the right hand of God the Father.

​

This imagery is reflected in Daniel’s vision (Daniel 7):

​

I saw someone with the likeness of a human being (a son of man) coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient One and was led into his presence. He was given authority, honor, and sovereign power over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race, nation and language would obey him.  (Daniel 7:13-14)

 

Paul also uses the same imagery, reminding us in Philippians 2:6-11 that Jesus, although he was equal with God, humbled himself, offered himself on the cross in obedient service to his God and Father, and was consequently “exalted to the highest place of honour” at the Father’s right hand.

​

As Jesus has been “clothed” in honour, glory and authority by the father, so he is empowered to clothe us with honour, glory and power, so that we are able to share his role as a kingdom of priests and reign with him in judging the nations.

 

4. APPROPRIATE WEDDING GARMENTS

​

We will consider just one more image before we conclude this chapter, the image of the wedding garments that is included in Jesus’ parable of the wedding banquet in Matthew 22:1-14.

​

Jesus told the people another parable to illustrate the Kingdom of Heaven.

​

“Once,” he said, “there was a king who prepared a wedding feast for his son. When the banquet was ready, he sent his servants to call those who were invited. But they could not be bothered to come. So he sent other servants to tell those who were invited, 'The feast has been prepared. The meat is roasting on the spit.. Everything is ready. Hurry up and come to the banquet!' But the invited guests continued to ignore them and went about their own business, one to his farm, another to his office. Some even attacked his servants and insulted them and killed them.

​

"The king was furious, and he sent his troops to destroy the murderers and burn their town. Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding feast is ready, and the guests I invited don’t deserve the honour. Now go out to the highways and byways and invite anyone you happen to find.' So the servants brought in anyone they could find, good and bad alike, until the banquet hall was filled.

​

"But when the king came in to meet the guests, he noticed a man who wasn't dressed in appropriate wedding garments. 'Friend,' he asked, 'how did you manage to get past the door without the proper wedding clothes?' But the man had no reply. So the king said to his body-guards, Tie him hand and foot, and throw him into outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are invited, but few are chosen."

 

A friend from church commented on this parable, saying she thought it was very unfair on the guest to be thrown into outer darkness just for not wearing the right wedding clothes! What was that all about!

So this is where an understanding of the re-clothing imagery throughout the Biblical narrative starts to pay off.

 

Let’s summarise some of the things we have learned so far from the imagery we already explored:

​

1. We cannot stand before God naked – i.e. with our sin and shame exposed.

2. We must have our nakedness covered, but we cannot do that by our own efforts.

3. Only God can provide the righteous garments that qualify us to enter into his presence.

4. These righteous garments represent the righteousness that Christ gains for us through his office as High Priest.

5. The garments not only cover our nakedness, but clothe us in the likeness of Christ, so that we can reflect his righteous, holy character before God the Father, and before the world.

6. The garments fit us for our chosen role as a kingdom of priests and qualify us to reign with him in glory.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

​

Questions for consideration or discussion

 

So here are some questions to help you reflect further on the Parable of the Wedding Banquet.

​

The imagery is pretty much consistent with previous imagery of re-clothing, with the proviso that Jesus is applying the imagery to a new concept. We are told that Jesus tells this parable (among many others) as an illustration of the Kingdom of God.

​

Those who heard Jesus’ parable would have been very familiar with the Old Testament passages, but this gave the familiar imagery a new slant.

• What does the Wedding Banquet stand for?

• What specific aspect of the Kingdom of God is Jesus illustrating here?

 

The king has invited his guests to the wedding feast, who would (in the real world) naturally have been from among the most honourable and respected people in his kingdom.

• Who do these guests represent?

• What were these guest missing by not turning up?

• What do you think would happen, in normal life, to guests who ignored the invitation of the King (or Queen, in our case)?

 

Because these invited guests have turned down the invitation. So the king sends out his servants into the highways and byways to round up whoever they can find.

• Who do these people represent?

• What kind of people would the servants find wandering the byways?

• Imagine what they might be wearing, what about their appearance, their smell, their behaviour?

• If they needed to wash, shave, get dressed in clean clothes, from where would they find these things?

 

When we lived in Cairo, we took the opportunity on several occasions to visit the Opera House, where there was a fairly strict dress code. Men were not allowed in unless they wore a jacket and tie. But if you were unprepared, all was not lost, you could hire a jacket and tie for the evening at the entrance. In the cultural context of Jesus’ day, I’m sure that the king would have had attendants waiting at the entrance, making sure that everyone was clean, shaved, and clothed in garments fit to appear in the king’s presence.

​

Somehow this unfortunate guest seems to have snuck in wearing his old clothes, instead of changing into new, clean clothing appropriate for the wedding banquet.

• It must have been obvious that everyone else was dressed in new clothes! So what does this suggest about the character of the unwelcome guest? Why might he have rejected the new clothes provided for him?

• What do these new clothes – the wedding garments – represent?

• Why is it so essential for every wedding guest to wear the correct wedding clothes?

• Now do you think the judgement on this guest was justified?

 

Which of the characters in this story do you most empathise with? Why?

What action should you take to follow up what you have learned from this study?

 

​