Hebrews 3.7 - 4.13

Hebrews Chapter 3.7 – 4.13

The background behind the book of Hebrews is this particular congregation of Hellenistic Jews had received the Gospel of Christ but were now under pressure to regress back in to their old ways and religious practices.  Being Hellenistic Jews caused their expression of Judaism to be different from Palestinian Jews.  For example the author of this letter has to warn the congregation against the worship of angels.  This was because they were more Greek in ethos than they were Jewish in religion.

During our last meeting we discussed the author’s comparison between Moses and Jesus arguing Jesus’ superiority to Moses.  Once again we see another distinguishing example from Palestinian Judaism who would have given more honor to Abraham than Moses.  Yet what the author is telling us is while Moses received great glory Jesus receives even greater glory.  Moses was obedient to God as was Jesus but Moses pointed us to Jesus and therefore it is Jesus who secures our heavenly calling because He is not only our high priest but sent from God to offer true atonement for our sin.

Beginning in verse seven the author writes “Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says”.  We must remember that the author is attempting to show the superiority of Jesus to a group who has fallen back into their old religious ways.  Therefore, the author mentions that this teaching comes from a more superior source, the Holy Spirit.  In other words if you are going to have a correct understanding of the Old Testament then you ought to pay close attention to what the Holy Spirit says about it.  This is how he prefaces Psalm 95.  There is a message here for us today in that our interpretation of Scripture should be from the perspective of the whole text just as the author understands the Old Testament in light of the New.  Those who don’t follow the author’s advice here will stumble all over Scripture. 

Now the author quotes from Psalm 95.  The Psalm begins with a warm and friendly invitation and sense of salvation but follows with a serious warning.  Psalm 95 refers back to the wilderness wanderings where God’s people rebelled and put God to the test in spite of having seen and benefited from God’s mighty works.  In retrospect we could be asking the question “why would God’s people after receiving His provision put Him to the test?”  There are a number of way we describe this, they lacked faith can sum it up quite well.  This testing refers back to Exodus 17 (read verses 1-7).  Therefore this entire moment is captured in Psalm 95.

After delivering this strong warning about lacking faith, verse 11 concludes with an affirmation of “rest” as the final point of God’s covenant people.  Rest is an import ant topic that I will discuss below.  However, it should be understood that true rest is actualized in the New Testament as resting in Christ from the covenant of works.  Rest always was a sign of eternal rest that was coming in the new heaven and the new earth.  There is an interesting interaction that we will get to between rest as place and rest as time. 

One thing to notice is the reference here to Psalm 95 leaves us with an unanswered question.  If “they shall not enter my rest” then who will?  In other words isn’t God’s rest intended for God’s covenant people?  The author’s use of Psalm 95 reminds us that there will be some who appear to be a member of God’s covenant community when in reality are outside of it.  This seemed to be what was taking place in with this congregation being written to.  Moreover, this is important for us today as the Church seems to appeal to a notion of ad populum as the basis for ministerial legitimacy.  It takes more than a building called “Church” or a gospel message that is gutted of grace.  This is much like Aaron who created a golden calf for the people to worship, who they even referred to as YHWH.  It order to be Christ’s Church Christ must be central to its very existence.  Therefore our author points to Jesus being more superior.

In verse 12 through 15 we must now understand this from the context of the new covenant.  In the new covenant the Christian life is a constant calling to renewal.  Therefore we need such things as warnings, calls, encouragements, exhortations.  If we aren’t doing these things we need to consider the possibility that we might not be taking our new calling very serious.  Gross disobedience is a sign of unbelieving heart.  We need to accept the reality that some who profess Christ have an unbelieving heart.  That is why this is such a serious warning to everyone.

What is the practical here?  The remedy for gross disobedience is to first ask yourself if you have a believing heart.  If you can affirm your believing heart then the next thing is to repent because repentance brings sanctification.  When it comes to repentance Psalm 95 is such an appropriate passage because it describes God’s loathing for His people.  Those who have a believing heart do not want to be loathed by God.  Genuine repentance is to recognize that where I have deviated and to repent from it.  This is something that the unbeliever does not do.  Those with the believing heart demonstrate true faith which comes from the Gospel of Christ and once again the faith of the believing heart will embrace it and rest in it with all earnestness.

Rest for the weary who toil in the desert of their day to day lives is a significant comfort.  In chapter 4 verses 1 through 13 the author continues this discussion of rest.  Remember, his argument to this congregation who is experiencing some who have reverted back into their former ways and others who are considering it is that Jesus is more superior than Moses.  The new covenant is more superior than the old because it is in the new covenant that we find actualized which was formerly in the old covenant type and shadow.  So his argument continues that the Sabbath rest is also actualized in the new covenant.

In 4.1 having just quoted Psalm 95 in reference to Exodus 17 where Israel rebels against God and is not permitted to enter His rest or the promise land the author of Hebrews wants to ensure his readers understand that this promise to enter His rest still remains only as we are going to see it isn't a physical geographical location but rather it is a future and eternal rest.  Moreover the author at this point introduces the idea of promise which becomes a constant theme through out the book of Hebrews.  This is because it is God who issues the promise and is the primary basis of our faith.  The problem in this congregation is there may have been some who don't care about the promises of God and some who question whether God will make good on His promise.  What ever the case this is the promise of the new covenant a covenant of grace.  That is the reason for the "fear" for there were some in the congregation that were acting like their rebellious ancestors as they rebelled against God in Maribah (rf. Exod.17 Ps.95).  Why bring this up?  The author of Hebrews is simply asking his readers to weigh the consequences of their disobedience, "do you truly want the Sabbath rest in this life and the life to come?

Verse 4.2 the author reminds them that we have both heard the good news.  Israel had heard the good news through the exodus from Egypt and tearany of sin but also in the covenant of grace given to Abraham for all of his spiritual descendants.  As it turns out Israel didn't believe God's promises.  In spite of His mighty miracles at passover, the splitting of the Red Sea, the provision in the wilderness, they simply did not believe God's promises.  Non-believers are not willing to wait on God's time, if it does not happen now in their own timing they are easily willing to abandon God's promises.  

In Verses 4.3 - 5 the point in this is not that the promise rest was a temporal physical or geographical thing.  The point is that the promise rest began all the way back at creation on the seventh day.  Moreover, on this day God was not at rest because he was tired of all the work he had been doing and needed a breather.  His rest on the seventh day was divine rest.  And while this pattern has health benefits for us, ultimately it is to remind us of our eternal rest.  

Martin Bashir Schools Bill O'Reilly on the Gospel

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Quote of the Day

"No man is really saved unless he is in his heart obedient to Christ."

Interesting quote from the Prince of Preachers.  What do you think it means?

Pentecost Sunday

Pentecost Sunday coming up May 19th.  Πεντηκοστή (or the "fiftieth") always falls 50 days after Pascha (or Passover) and 10 days after Ascension Sunday.  Before I go any further it would be important for me to disclose that I'm not a big Church Calendar guy.  I like it, I think its good to have these bench marks through out the year for us to remember these very significant themes and events.  As it turns out my tradition follows from the Puritan Separatist movement who didn't think very highly of these liturgical devices.  I think it would be a good idea to revisit our reasons for ignoring some of these liturgical practices but that is neither here or there.     

Pentecost Sunday commemorates the work of the Holy Spirit through the Apostles on the day of Pentecost as the preaching of the Word lead to a multitude of believer Baptisms.  Luke records this amazing event of church history in Acts 2.  How about we re-read it in commemoration of Pentecost Sunday.     

Ascension Sunday

Yesterday was Ascension Sunday on the Church Calendar.  It comes 40 days after Πάσχα (or Paska grk.) commemorating the incarnate Son of God:

"and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all". (Ephesians 1.19-23)

As believers this is important theology for us reminding us the Christ has Ascended and now sits at the right had of God the Father where He is currently ruling and reigning till his return.  What are some implications of this?  

2K HITS!!!

Hey i-kone has reached 2000 thousand hits.  Most blogs get that in a day but i'm ok with that.  :)

New "End Times" Date

There is a new group out there setting a new date of August 2, 2027. Siteing Amos 8.9 as a proof text for this date the group believes on this day there will be an eclipse described in the passage. The web address is http://www.august2nd2027.com/

Historically there have always been date setters and there will most likely always be date setters.  I suppose the question to ask is what causes certain personalities to want to commit themselves to a date when of when Christ will return?  When we consider the many predictions that have been made with 0% accuracy rate, why would anyone set themselves up for a false predictions.  Moreover, Christ told his disciples concerning the re-establishment of the kingdom that it isn't for them to know the time or the season (cf. Acts 1.7, 1 Thessalonians 5.1)?

To answer the question why people set dates might almost be as productive as trying to set the date.  However, over the years I have observed several reasons why people do this.  Some use the date setting to instill fear believing that they can scare someone into the kingdom of God.  Others want to be "in the know"and present themselves "more knowledgeable than thou".  Interestingly this personality is prominent among conspiracy theorists because some of the conspiracy theories are worked in to many of the end times scenarios giving the individual the feeling of being "in the know."

No matter what the motive end times dating should never be practiced in the body of Christ. As our Lord has said in Acts 1 there are somethings that are not for us to know.  We are all prone to it.  Many well intending pastors with good reputations have done it.  What we haven't seen are leaders being placed on Church discipline for doing it.  We would do well as the body of Christ to always remember that the purpose of the eschaton or "end" is to comfort us letting us know that while our salvation is presently secure we look forward to the final consumation of our adoption in Christ at His return.  Outside of this we run the risk of encouraging scoffers to ask "where is the promise of His coming?" 

Piper On The Life And Ministry Of Charles Spurgeon

Beards of Ministry

Christianity Today Gleanings: Why 100 Former Muslims Converted to Christianity

Here is some interesting data on Muslim converts to Christianity.  I would take this data one step further and argue that this demonstrates the necessity of the ontological trinity for man's being.  But that's a story for another time.  Tell me what you think.

Christianity Today Gleanings: Why 100 Former Muslims Converted to Christianity

Stephen Hawking M-akes A Case For Big Bang Cosmology With Out God

Recently Stephen Hawking gave a presentation on Big Bang cosmology at the California Institute of Technology where he announced-among other things-that our universe didn't need any divine help to burst into being.

I'd start out by saying I do respect Hawking as a Scientist and a person.  Having said that i'm always leery about scientists who venture outside their specialized fields of expertise to draw conclusions that are outside of their sphere of understanding.  Hawking is intelligent and that is not in question here.  What I am questioning is the validity of using an empirical out look on the world and attempting to answer questions about God.  Discussion's about the validity of God's existence are more conceptual in nature and not empirical which makes empirical arguments an exercise in "putting the cosmological cart before the horse."

Tell me your thoughts.

Church for Atheists: Does This Not Reinforce The Idea That Man Is A Creature That Worships?

Mike Aus is the founder of Houston Oasis, a congregation of non-believers who come together on Sunday morning to draw strength   “Just because you don’t believe in God does not mean you do not need to get together in community and draw strength from that,” said Mike Aus, a former Lutheran pastor.  While they don't believe in God they do subscribe to a creed:

At Houston Oasis we think:

* People are more important than beliefs.

* Only human hands can solve human problems.

* Reality is known through reason, not revelation.

* Meaning comes from making a difference.

* Labels are unimportant.  

* Everyone should be accepted wherever they are as long as they are accepting in turn.

You can check out their website at http://houstonoasis.org/

Baptist Theologians Not Wanted In Baptist Colleges For Being Baptist?

Collin Garbarino has an interesting peace in First Things about an interesting phenomenon of Baptist professors being dropped from their institutions for being Baptist.  Its an interesting read and I found the comments below even more interesting.  Let me know what you think.  Click here.

What's the Difference Between Praise Choruses and Hymns?

Alligator Fridays!

Im not sure what to make of this.  Apparently if you have a strong hankering for alligator and happen to be celebrating lent you are free to have it.  As it turns out the alligator is in the fish family?

Calvin on Lent

Lent has gained some popularity among evangelicals.  Personally I am indifferent to the practices of lent depending on the reason one is exercising it.  But, out of curiosity I decided to read what Calvin had to say on the subject.  His take below:

  20. Then the superstitious observance of Lent had everywhere prevailed: for both the vulgar imagined that they thereby perform some excellent service to God, and pastors commended it as a holy imitation of Christ; though it is plain that Christ did not fast to set an example to others, but, by thus commencing the preaching of the gospel, meant to prove that his doctrine was not of men, but had come from heaven. And it is strange how men of acute judgment could fall into this gross delusion, which so many clear reasons refute: for Christ did not fast repeatedly (which he must have done had he meant to lay down a law for an anniversary fast), but once only, when preparing for the promulgation of the gospel. Nor does he fast after the manner of men, as he would have done had he meant to invite men to imitation; he rather gives an example, by which he may raise all to admire rather than study to imitate him. In short, the nature of his fast is not different from that which Moses observed 
when he received the law at the hand of the Lord (Exod. 24:18; 34:28). For, seeing that that miracle was performed in Moses to establish the law, it behoved not to be omitted in Christ, lest the gospel should seem inferior to the law. But from that day, it never occurred to any one, under pretence of imitating Moses, to set up a similar form of fast among the Israelites. Nor did any of the holy prophets and fathers follow it, though they had inclination and zeal enough for all pious exercises; for though it is said of Elijah that he passed forty days without meat and drink (1 Kings 19:8), this was merely in order that the people might recognise that he was raised up to maintain the law, from which almost the whole of Israel had revolted. It was therefore merely false zeal, replete with superstition, which set up a fast under the title and pretext of imitating Christ; although there was then a strange diversity in the mode of the fast, as is related by Cassiodorus in the ninth book of the History of Socrates: “The Romans,” says he, “had only three weeks, but their fast was continuous, except on the Lord’s day and the Sabbath. The Greeks and Illyrians had, some six, others seven, but the fast was at intervals. Nor did they differ less in the kind of food: some used only bread and water, others added vegetables; others had no objection to fish and fowls; others made no difference in their food.” Augustine also makes mention of this difference in his latter epistle to Januarius.

There is much to say on the subject.  Just not today :)

Garry Wills on the Priesthood

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

I have always believed that Gary Wills should stop being Roman Catholic for the simple fact that he's running out of good reasons to remain RC.  Perhaps I should read his book Why I Am A Catholic.  Or perhaps I can just assume he enjoys living in a dichotomy between what he says he believes and what he actually believes.  That's what is interesting about RC.  One does not necessarily have to believe in its dogmas as long as she is willing to formally agree with the Papacy.

On that note.  What was that rather strange discussion of Hebrews? From my understanding of Hebrews the author (Wills is correct, while we have some good candidates of who might have written Hebrews we don't really know for sure) is addressing a problem of apostacy within that Church.  It seems that many joined the Church but for some reason regressed back in to their previous religion which happened to be a Hellenistic informed Judaism.  So the author sets out to explain that Jesus is superior to Moses and the way to salvation, hence His priesthood.  Where did Colbert get the idea that this was a proof text for human priests?

Let me know if you know the answer to this.



  

Are Christians Monotheists in Their Practical Life?

Its been some time since I posted, ironically before the holidays.  But, i'm back in the saddle to amuse, entertain, and confound mostly myself of this blog.  So no more delay.

I was laying in bed tonight wanting to get some sleep and I kept thinking about a trinitarian theology of justice (I realize that's strange but its perfectly normal for me).  So rather than lay there fretting over it I decided to get up and look at one of the locus communis on this topic The Trinity by Karl Rahner.  One caveat before I go any further.  If you are new to the Christian faith or still learning about the faith I don't recommend Rahner as a source for you.  As I was reading away I came across something interesting he said and it got my attention viola! a blog post was born. 

So here is what Rahner had to say.

“Despite their orthodox confession of the Trinity, Christians are, in their practical life, almost mere ‘monotheists’.  We must be willing to admit that, should the doctrine of the Trinity have to be dropped as false, the major part of religious literature could well remain virtually unchanged”.  

“We may hope that any material could be pressed into service in the attempt to destroy once and for all the false conception that a ‘speculative’ doctrine of the immanent Trinity may perhaps be conceivable today, that it is a completely idle and irrelevant undertaking, possessing neither spiritual nor religious interest to the modern Christian and theologian”

Now I am curious, does anyone believe this might be true?  I will even settle for a feeling.  Does anyone feel that there is a possible hint of truth here?  And the reason I ask is quite legitimate.  From my perspective, as I look around at Churches today especially contemporary evangelical types, I do see Rahner's thesis being demonstrated practically.  Now I am not saying that contemporary evangelicals are self consciously Modern in their theology.  But, I do get the impression they view the trinity as "something we we believe" but not to be central to or inculcated in the life of the church.

Am I being too harsh?  It's not intentional.  I raise this question out of genuine concern.  Moreover, I believe many of the ecclesial problems evangelicals experience today can be answered with a return to a healthy understanding of the ontological trinity.  What says you?

Jon Stewart on The Gospel

Jon Stewart decided to weigh in on Bill O'Reilly's statement that Christianity is not a religion but a philosophy. Irreverent sarcasm aside I agree with Stewart up to the point where he said he would get an "A" in Jesus' philosophy class.  That is the point behind Christianity.  None of us would get an "A" because to do so would require perfect obedience both inward and outward to the law of God.  So Jon, "Barukh ata (expletive)" we are all in serious trouble because we don't meet the righteous demands of God's law.  That is why we believe Jesus the Son of God who died on the cross for our sin and "who ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father and who will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead whose Kingdom will have no end."  Jon this invitation is open for you and anyone one else.

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The War on Christmas: Friendly Fire Edition - Bill O'Reilly's Philosophy
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook