For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. (Matthew 24:38-39)

Most disputes concerning the meaning of the Scriptures are not due to a lack of trying when it comes to hermeneutics. They result from a lack of due process. By this, I do not mean the process of interpretation but the identification in the Scriptures of the processes of God.

An example would be the meaning of Christ’s words concerning the unpardonable sin, which have terrified many Christians unnecessarily. Blasphemy against the Spirit is unpardonable not because it is the worst sin. It is unpardonable because it is the last sin.

This post has been slain and resurrected for inclusion in my 2015 book of essays, Inquietude.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

“Show Us the Father And We Will Be Satisfied” (John 14:8)

This is the third cycle within the “Numbers” or Ethics section of Galatians. Paul is contrasting the external Ethics of the Law (requiring the perfect obedience of Man) with the internal Ethics of the Spirit (resulting from trust in the perfect obedience of Christ). But there is something deeper here which, it seems to me, is often overlooked.

The first thing to note is that, unless we take into account the “Covenant literary” structure of Paul’s writing, we are not going to entirely understand the reason for everything he includes in his argument. This is not simply a bunch of facts presented to the Galatians to set them straight, nor even a bunch of facts presented in a linear, set-by-step argument. Every cycle is truth arranged in the same shape as the very process by which God justifies the ungodly, and it is occurring at multiple levels. To pull a verse out of this “Covenant process” and use it as a proof text is like attempting to pull the three eggs out of the cake you baked.
This post has been refined by fire and included in a new book, The Shape of Galatians.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Paul’s Leviticus

“This is where he picks up the fivefold Covenant structure and turns ‘the right hand of fellowship’ into a set of holy knuckledusters.”

This post has been refined by fire and included in a new book, The Shape of Galatians.

You must be logged in to see the rest of this post.

Join now for a year for $15!

Revelation was written to seven first-century churches as a spiritual wake-up call because of events that were “about to take place upon the whole world [oikoumenē]” (Rev. 3:10). The use of oikoumenē instead of kosmos indicates that the events that were about to unfold were confined to the Roman Empire. The same word is used in Matthew 24:14, Luke 2:1, and Acts 11:28.

Revelation is not describing a worldwide apocalyptic conflagration. Revelation is a prophetic symbolic description of what Jesus prophesied would happen to the temple, the capital city of Israel, and the old covenant world made of things that were destined to pass away. Jesus is the new everything. He’s the better temple, sacrifice, priest, and guarantor of a new covenant:

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption (Heb. 9:11–12).

The book of Revelation is not a warning to what was going to happen to Israel. Jesus had made that clear 35 years before in the Olivet Discourse. Revelation was delivered to seven churches made up of Christians as a wake-up call. They would suffer the same fate as Israel if they followed in the theological moral footsteps of Israel. The indictments that are leveled against the seven churches drip with Old Covenant judgment language — even the threat to come in judgment if they didn’t wake up (Rev. 2:5, 16; 3:3) — pervades the two chapters. They were “about to suffer,” these things were “about to happen” (2:10).

Revelation was not a five-year warning (if it was written around the year 65); it was an ongoing warning. Anybody reading Revelation after the destruction of Jerusalem could have said, “Jesus warned us. He showed us. Everything He said would happen did happen. It could happen to us. Revelation is a lesson for every generation. We can look back and say that what God said would happen, did happen, and we’re not exempt.”

The question is, had some of these churches fallen from the faith in such a short time after their founding? Dr. Simon J. Kistemaker,[1] Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary and co-author of the completed New Testament Commentary series that was commenced by William Hendriksen, argues that there was not enough time for the Asia Minor churches to fall from the faith so quickly if Revelation is describing events around the mid-60s. He writes

Even a cursory reading leaves the impression that the recipients were second-generation Christians. It does not appear that the people in the seven churches had only recently received the gospel. . . . Paul . . . wrote two epistles to Timothy, who was a pastor there in the sixties. Nothing in Acts or Paul’s epistles relates to the conditions prevalent in the church of Ephesus when John wrote the epistle that Jesus dictated.[2]

A few comments are in order. On the day of Pentecost, Luke records “that there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under heaven. . . . Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,” (Acts 2:5, 9). The reference to “Asia” (Acts 6:9; 16:6; 19:10; 20:4; 21:27; 24:18; Rom. 16:5; 2 Tim 1:15; Rev 1:4), the west coast province of Asia, is the area where Revelation’s seven churches were located, including Ephesus.

There’s a good chance that by the time Revelation was dictated to John (around AD 65) that the churches listed in Revelation 2–3 could have been operating for 30 years (Rom. 16:5) started from the testimony of Jews returning to their Asia Minor homeland and telling family and friends about what had been going on in Jerusalem. The message of the gospel could have also come by way of travelers by ship since Ephesus was a coastal city. “Ephesus has been estimated to be in the range of 400,000 to 500,000 inhabitants in the year 100, making it the largest city in Roman Asia and of the day. Ephesus was at its peak during the 1st and 2nd centuries AD.”

A Jerusalem-wide persecution took place after the death of Stephen that scattered many believers: “those who had been scattered went about preaching the word” (Acts 8:1, 4). It wouldn’t have taken long for the gospel to reach Asia Minor. Albert Barnes writes:

The Jews at that time were scattered into almost all nations, and in all places had synagogues. [John 7:35; James 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1]. Still they would naturally desire to be present as often as possible at the great feasts of the nation in Jerusalem. Many would seek a residence there for the convenience of being present at the religious solemnities.

According to Dr. Kistemaker, Paul ministered in Ephesus from AD 53–56. At Paul’s departure, he gave this warning to the Ephesian elders: “savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them” (Acts 20:29–30). “These words, in respect to Ephesus and several of these churches addressed in the Apocalypse, were now fulfilled; the ‘grievous wolves’ had come; these ‘perverse men’ had arisen.”[3] The first of Revelation’s seven churches in Asia is Ephesus (Rev. 2:1–7). Ephesus hadn’t completely apostatized but it was compromised.

There were constant attacks from Judaizers from Ephesus. Paul could not escape them even in Jerusalem:

When the seven days were almost over, the Jews from Asia, upon seeing him in the temple, began to stir up all the crowd and laid hands on him, crying out, “Men of Israel, come to our aid! This is the man [Paul] who preaches to all men everywhere against our people and the Law and this place; and besides he has even brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place. For they had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him, and they supposed that Paul had brought him into the temple. Then all the city was provoked, and the people rushed together, and taking hold of Paul they dragged him out of the temple, and immediately the doors were shut. While they were seeking to kill him, a report came up to the commander of the Roman cohort that all Jerusalem was in confusion (Acts 20:27–31; 2 Cor. 1:8).

The spiritual condition of the churches in Asia Minor were threatened. Paul wrote the following to Timothy: “You are aware of the fact that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes” (2 Tim. 1:15; see 1 Tim. 6:10; 2 Tim. 4:10–11, 16). This description seems to fit what was revealed to John. So whether first-generation or second-generation churches, there was spiritual decline.

Second, it didn’t take long for theological and moral problems to develop in churches. In the Corinthian church, Paul writes, “It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst” (1 Cor. 5:1–2). If the church elders wouldn’t do the removing, then God would (cf. Rev. 2:5).

In his second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul writes words similar to what John was told to write in Revelation:

Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; just as God said, “I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. “Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE,” says the Lord. “AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; and I will welcome you. And I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to Me,” says the Lord Almighty” (2 Cor. 6:14–18; cf. Rev. 2:14, 20).

Paul wrote the following to the Galatians, “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ” (Gal. 1:6–7; cf. Rev. 2:4).

Paul confronted Peter “to his face” over a doctrinal issue “because he stood condemned” (Gal. 2:11).

The writer to the Hebrews says of the recipients of his letter that they “have become dull of hearing,” that by this time in their faith they “ought to be teachers.” Now they “need again for someone to teach [them] the elementary principles of the oracles of God” so that they “have come to need milk and not solid food” (Heb. 5:11b–12).

John mentions “false prophets” that had already “gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1; cf. Rev. 2:2) and even “many antichrists” (1 John 2:18). These antichrists, John writes, “went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us” (v. 19). He writes similar descriptions in his second epistle. “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist” and “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting; for the one who gives him a greeting participates in his evil deeds” (2 John 7, 10–11). Could these antichrists be the ones that make up Revelation’s “synagogues of Satan” (2:9; 3:9)?

Peter writes, “But false prophets also arose among the people just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Peter 2:1). All of these things happened before Revelation was revealed to John. It’s interesting that six of the seven churches did not receive letters from the New Testament writers, at least none that we are aware of. Like Corinth and Galatia, Revelation was their spiritual wake-up call.

So it shouldn’t surprise us that some people (not all: Rev. 3:4) of the seven churches had succumbed to false teaching and even immorality within a short time of their founding as evidenced by so much material found in Acts and the epistles.

Dr. Kistemaker dismisses the pre-AD 70 date for Revelation because, as he writes:

We are never told that John was a pastor in Ephesus before the demise of Jerusalem. The church fathers related that John settled in Ephesus after the Jewish war of A.D. 66–70. But even if he had been in Ephesus before that period, his time of service prior to his exile would have been short. But according to the seven letters to the churches in Asia, John was well acquainted with the spiritual status of each one of them. This hardly seems possible if John was there but briefly.[4]

John wouldn’t have had to be present at any of the seven churches to know their spiritual condition since what he wrote was revealed to him by God (Rev. 1:1–2, 11, 19).

The more I dig through the New Testament, the more convincing evidence I see that it was written prior to Jerusalem’s destruction, not as a warning to Old Covenant Israel (that had been done already) but to New Covenant Israel made of Jewish and Gentile believers so they would not suffer a similar fate (1 Cor. 10:1–11; Heb. 12).

__________________________________________
[1] I learned what I know of NT Greek from Dr. Kistemaker. He would say that I should have learned more. He is right. But I keep learning. I also took a number of NT courses from him. He was a great teacher; I just think on several points he is mistaken.
[2] Simon J. Kistemaker, “Hyper-Preterism and Revelation,” When Shall These Things Be? A Reformed Response to Hyper-Preterism, ed. Keith A. Mathison (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing), 232.
[3] James MacDonald, The Life and Writings of St. John (New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co., 1877), 156.
[4] Kistemaker, “Hyper-Preterism and Revelation,” 233.

Temple and Typology

The evidence that Hebrews was written before the fall of Jerusalem in A. D. 70 is strengthened by a few other observations. Timothy is said to be alive (13:23), and while it cannot be certainly determined that this is the same Timothy that traveled with Paul, there exists no good reason not to think it is the same Timothy to whom Paul wrote two epistles.

More importantly, the Temple and sacrificial system of Israel are clearly still standing at the time of writing (7:27-28; 8:3-5; 9:7-8, 25; 10:1-3, 8; 13:10-11).37 Given the heightened expectation of not merely Hebrews but of the whole of the General epistles—not to mention the New Testament—about the imminent coming of Christ in the vindication of His Church, it remains true that had Hebrews been written after A. D. 70, the epistle would not have been written as though it were still expecting this “soon” event. It would be speaking not of the hope its readers should cling to about the soon-to-come event, but rather as the triumphant announcement that Christ really did remain faithful to His word and truly was vindicated as the Messiah.

Nevertheless, many scholars disagree with this evaluation, arguing that Hebrews isn’t interested in the Jewish Temple at all, on the basis that the book deals with the Tabernacle rather than the cultic practices of its own day. As a result, they think the references to the standing of the Jewish system can be taken as “timeless,” and having no bearing upon the dating of the book. [38] Such an argument is unconvincing given that the extensive use of the Tabernacle in Hebrews is typological in nature, included for the purpose of arguing that the entire Mosaic priesthood and Levitical order is coming to an end with Christ. This Mosaic order includes the Davidic, Exilic and Restoration covenants which were essentially developments of or modifications to the original Sinaitic covenant. [39]

Thus, the extensive use of Israel’s 40-year wilderness wandering as the typological background of the epistle indicates that the author was consciously aware that Jesus would be vindicated sometime around the fortieth year from His ascension to the heavenly throne (2:3) and was therefore eagerly anticipating this vindication sometime on or around A.D. 70. [40] This would also mean that in Israel’s rejection of Jesus’ earthly ministry they were once again stepping back from taking the promised land and would have to fall in the forty years in the wilderness instead of finally entering the Greater Land when Jesus conquered Jerusalem and the nations (cf. Num. 13-14).

The argument which the author of Hebrews is making is that Israel was brought by Moses (a type of Christ) to the Promised Land and through their own cowardice and lack of faith did not enter in. Therefore they were caused to wander in the wilderness forty years until that disobedient generation had died. Only then would Israel enter into the Promised Land in conquest and victory. So too, Hebrews argues, Israel was brought to the heavenly Promised Land by Jesus (the Greater Moses) but rejected Him and did not enter in. Therefore, so that Israel might repent and turn from their lack of faith in the Messiah, they would wander in the “wilderness” for forty years, after which time the Church, the New Israel, would enter and conquer the eternal Promised Land, the whole earth (ch. 3-4). [41]

The argument, then, is that the entirety of the Old Covenant from Moses to Second Temple Judaism was coming to an end, growing obsolete and ready to pass away (8:13), in order to fulfill the Abrahamic covenant of promises. The apostle Paul makes similar points in his own epistles (Rom. 4). This is the whole point of introducing Christ as a priest after the order of Melchizedek; we have returned to the priesthood of the Abrahamic period where one was simply given a special appointment or call by God (5:4-6).

Thus, disagreeing scholars to the contrary, Hebrews is directly concerned with the Temple and Jewish sacrificial system. The argument of Hebrews, however, goes much further back than simply Second Temple Judaism. Christ doesn’t restore us to the Restoration covenant, or the Exilic covenant, or the Davidic covenant, or the Mosaic covenant, but returns us to the covenant of promise made with Abraham. The expectation of Hebrews was indeed concerned with the still-standing Temple, though it looks at the Temple as one piece of the entire Sinaitic order. The Temple would fall in judgment, but along with it the entire Old Creation and its order, hierarchy, and mediation would be thrown down by Christ, which is why He is said to be elevated above the angels who mediated the Old Covenant (ch. 1-2). This means that the references to the still-standing Temple are indeed of great consequence to the dating of the book; they simply participate in the fall of the entire Old Creation.

We can safely conclude that Hebrews could not have been written after A.D. 70. Lane suggests that Hebrews was written sometime between A.D. 65-68, which is just about right. [43]

_________________________________________
[37] J. A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (SCM Press, 1976), pp. 202: Keith A. Mathison, From Age to Age: The Unfolding of Biblical Revelation (Presbyterian and Reformed, 2009), pp. .
[38] Hawthorne, NIBC, 1503; Lane, Hebrews 1-8, lxiii; Craddock, New Interpreter’s, 10.
[39] For some discussion of this, see James B. Jordan, Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World (Wipf and Stock, 2003), ch. ; Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall, ch. ; Leithart, From Behind the Veil, 9-10.
[40] Hawthorne mentions this argument in passing, disagreeing with it, but offers no argument against it. Hawthorne, NIBC, 1503.
[41] See Wilson, Christ and His Rivals, pp.
[42] For more on this delay in judgment, see Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall, pp.
[43] Lane, Hebrews 1-8, lxvi.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

…That the epistle is written to Hebrew Christians is the traditional interpretation of the letter and it seems the only viable reading available which can makes sense of the book in its original context. Despite this, most scholars today have abandoned this reading in favor of one of more general purpose, addressing Gentile Christians or simply Christians generally of every age. [28] Their reasons are untenable, to say the least, and seem to depend more upon the assumption of a post-A.D. 70 date of writing than on any consideration within the text itself.

Exhortations to Persevere

As we have seen it was the Jewish believers who were scattered abroad and who carried the gospel with them. Their work became the seeds that established the churches in those regions, themselves the founding members of the scattered churches. This status as church-builders would have also included the church community addressed in Hebrews, which was well known for its faithful testimony and good works (6:9-11; 10:32-34; and called back to this witness in 13:1-9,16-21).

These church founders or pillars would have been looked up to by those in their churches, who converted on the basis of their testimony. The General epistles make clear that it is this group scattered from the original persecution in Jerusalem which is in crisis and beginning to question the reality of the New Covenant. This would have been worrisome to the Apostles since their influence would lead others to similar conclusions, rather like if Billy Graham converted to Roman Catholicism. The crisis was nothing less than the Church teetering on the brink of collapse, a situation which certainly required a definitive response. What we have recorded as Hebrews, James, 1-2 Peter, 1-3 John and Jude is the result of the Church’s leadership exhorting and encouraging these pillars of the Church to persevere in their faith even in the midst of persecution (1 Pet. 4:13; James 1:1-4; 5:10; Jude 3-5) and so too is Hebrews written as an exhortation to perseverance (12:1-13; 13:13-14).

The Promise of His Appearing

What was the audience of Hebrews spurred on to persevere in? The question must be answered by examining what it was they were in danger of losing. Leithart sets the historical circumstance that gave rise to the writing of the General epistles in his summary of the context for 1 Peter:

the recipients are Jewish believers who are no longer living in Jerusalem, their home city, because of persecution. In 1 Peter, the apostle gives them hope and comfort in the midst of their sufferings, assuring them that a judgment is awaiting their persecutors, which will soon be carried out . . . . But time passed and more and more of the apostles died, and nothing happened. Some, particularly the persecutors whom the church hoped would be judged, began to mock the Christians’ expectation and hope for vindication. They raise doubts that the judgment is going to happen at all, and some believers have broken under the pressure. An apostasy is beginning, and the focus is on the failure of Christ to return. [29]

This presentation would match with the traditional understanding that Hebrews was addressing Jewish Christians who had “renounced their ancient religion with its elaborate external ceremony to embrace Christianity with its contrasting de-emphasis of the externals” and who were now “wavering in their faith because of persecution and were in danger of abandoning Christianity in order to beat a retreat back to Judaism.” [30] Hawthorne’s (admittedly common) misunderstanding that Christianity does away with ritualism and external rites to the contrary, [31] Hebrews itself contrasts an earthly Tabernacle with a very real heavenly Tabernacle into which Christ entered as High Priest and performed the earthly Old Covenant rites, simply in a better Tabernacle, as a better High Priest, with His own blood which is called “better sacrifices,” by the epistle (Heb. 9:24-26).

This context makes clear the reason for the erosion of confidence (3:14; 10:35), [32] impending persecution (12:4; 13:13-14), and the faltering of their hope (3:6; 6:18-20; 10:23-25; 11:1) in Christ’s soon appearing (10:25, 35-39), a belief which Hebrews is concerned to reaffirm (10:23-25). Not only would departing from the New Covenant be a turning away from the living God (3:12), but it would put Jesus to open shame (6:4-6; 10:26-31) by opening the way for Christ’s enemies to mock Him as the nations did when Israel wandered from the faith (Rom. 2:17-24; Isa. 52:5; Ezek. 36:20-23).

Following this, it seems that we can observe a gradual intensification in the anticipation of Christ’s appearing within the New Testament canon. Within the gospels the appearing in vindication is still a long way off, which is why the synoptics all include versions of the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24; Mark 13; Luke 19) but John does not. By the time John was written, there was no need to be reminded of Jesus’ promised appearing, because as the Day grew closer the more people were aware of it. John put off including an Olivet Discourse in his gospel because his epistles would deal with the “last hour” and he would write Revelation, which was (among other things) a massive re-telling of the Olivet Discourse. [33] Where the other gospels end with the pronouncement of judgment on the Temple, John’s gospel begins with it (John 4), the rest of Christ’s work then seen through that eschatological lens.

What John’s gospel does include is Jesus’ promise that John would live to see the Day (John 21:20-25), which his epistles and Revelation would later confirm. [34] Paul mentions the Day approaching, but rarely seems to expect it in the immediate future (Rom. 2:5; 1 Tim. 4:1-2; 2 Tim. 3:1-5). [35] It was coming, but it would be a little while. When we come to the General epistles we find the expectation imminent. The letters address churches struggling to hold the faith in opposition to those who mocked and hunted them, exhorting their readers to hold fast to their hopeful expectation. For John, it is the “last hour,” (1 John 2:18) when the “world is passing away,” (1 John 2:17). For James, Christ the Judge is coming soon, already standing at the door and knocking (James 5:7-9). For Peter the last days are upon them and Christ’s coming is very close; the “end of all things” has arrived (1 Pet. 4:7; 2 Pet. 3:10). Finally, in Revelation, the last days are no longer coming, but have finally arrived and Christ is on His way; it is a revelation of “the things that soon must take place,” (Rev. 1:1; 22:20) when even the ones who crucified Him shall see Him coming in His wrath (Rev. 1:7).

Thus, contextually, the hope to which the author of Hebrews looks—and exhorts his readers to look to as well—is the “coming” or “appearing” of Jesus as Lord. This is the “hope set before” them (6:18), the expectation that shortly thereafter God’s enemies would be judged and Jesus vindicated as the Messiah. The readers of Hebrews are to hold fast to the confession of this, their hope (10:23), “all the more now that you see the Day drawing near,” (10:25). For if we keep sinning after receiving the grace of the Messiah there is no longer any forgiveness of sins (10:26) and what can be expected is the “fearful expectation of judgment,” and a “fury of fire” that will “consume the adversaries” (10:27). After all, if the punishment of abandoning the Mosaic law was death (10:28) how much more punishment would be “deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?” (10:29). Yahweh has promised to come in judgment and vengeance in the prophets of old (10:30-31); for that reason the readers of Hebrews are not to throw away their confidence in the hope of their vindication and the destruction of their enemies (10:35-36). Hold fast, because “yet a little while, and the coming One will come and will not delay,” (10:37).

If the early Church had really been so wrong concerning the timing of this event, the Church would never have been established. The Church would have been just another false expectation, popular for a while only to fade into obscurity like so many of the other messianic movements of the period. If Hebrews is wrong about the nearness of this climactic event of vindication, the entire argument of the book is false and collapses to the ground. If this is indeed the case, then Hebrews is something in which we ought to put no trust whatsoever. If this expected event did not occur in or around A. D. 70, the Church would have realized Jesus was a false messiah and returned to their old religions, the Church project ending with a whimper and, finally, silence. It would have been the final evidence to Israel and the watching nations that Jesus was not truly the Messiah. That the Church exists, however, means that whatever the promised and expected hope of vindication was, it really did happen within the time frame they expected. [36]

________________________________________
[28] Hawthorne, NIBC, 1502; Craddock, New Interpreter’s, 8-10.
[29] Leithart, Promise of His Appearing, 18.
[30] Hawthorne, NIBC, 1501.
[31] The New Covenant is just as external as the Old. See P. Richard Flinn, “Baptism, Redemptive History and Eschatology,” in James B. Jordan, ed., Christianity and Civilization #1 (Geneva Divinity School Press, 1983), pp. 111-151.
[32] That the hope of these Hebrew “pillars” in the Church was faltering because of the death of the apostles and other leaders who had themselves seen Jesus makes the perfect catalyst for the crisis in the church community Hebrews speaks to. We are told that they converted on the basis of the testimony of those who saw Jesus (2:3) and it seems these same people became the leaders in their community (13:7), who it also seems have passed away themselves, which would precipitate such a crisis of faith for those who had believed on their testimony that Jesus would return in their lifetimes. See Lane, Hebrews 1-8, lv; Hawthorne, NIBC, 1530.
[33] For a very brief overview of the book of Revelation, see James B. Jordan, The Vindication of Jesus Christ: A Brief Reader’s Guide to Revelation (Athanasius Press, 2008).
[34] Irenaus even notes that some had seen John after the fall of Jerusalem. Many take this as a reference to the book of Revelation itself, which is seen as demonstration of a late date writing, but the Greek, while somewhat ambiguous, actually refers to John himself. See Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Victorious Hope Publishing, 2010 [1998]), ch. 4.
[35] The epistles to the Thessalonians seem to be the most “anticipatory” of Christ’s coming in Paul, addressing a group of believers who expected to hear of Christ’s appearing by letter (2 Thess. 2:1-2). This could be an internal indicator that the epistles to the Thessalonians was written late in Paul’s career, closer to the coming Day.
[36] In this I am modifying the structure of N. T. Wright’s argument for the historical resurrection: that the resurrection was said to constitute the people of God means that the continued existence of the Church demonstrates the validity of the resurrection. See N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Fortress Press, 2003).

“But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.” (1 Cor. 11:28-30)

Some more detailed thoughts on what God is doing in the Lord’s Table. Part 1 here.

Covenant Renewal Worship follows the Bible Matrix. This means that our Christian worship recapitulates the Creation Week, the Feasts of Israel, and the journey from slavery to Sabbath (servants to sons), and the process of maturity, from childhood to adulthood. [1]

Covenant Renewal Worship gets ridiculed by some, but there is plenty of Biblical and historical background for it. We are not under the Old Covenant, so there is certainly an amount of freedom in how we worship. But the kinds of “freedom” we prize as spiritual adolescents today have only been around for about the last two per cent of Church history. It’s time to wind back the clock.

The process is simple:

Call

…..Confession

……….Ascension to Worship

……………Teaching of the Word

……….Offertory

…..Communion

Commission

Most churches follow something close to this order by spiritual instinct. Although the church bells aren’t heard too often (the Call), the real pity is that many have dropped a Corporate Confession.

We won’t get into steps 3, 4 and 5. My target here is Communion.

If we subscribe to the idea of Covenant Renewal worship, there are implications for those who are practicing paedocommunion. They’re right in linking baptism and Table. But, despite all protests to the contrary, their baptism is hereditary. It is generational instead of “re-generational”, so now their Table is hereditary. The kids who are able to eat solid food are welcome to join in as part of the Covenant community. They have been declared “Christian” in their baptism, and in some mystical way the Table feeds them.

Well, the emphasis on Covenant Community is great. But the typology behind the Table, and its institution by Jesus, make it plain that this is, if not an abuse, a terrible misunderstanding of what the Table is about.

So, just what is God doing in the Lord’s Supper?

Among other things, Communion is a “jealous inspection.” (See Bible Matrix II, chapter 18, “Goblet of Fire,” for more on this.) Communion isn’t a disconnected, freestanding element of worship. Some pastors like to move the order of service around so people don’t get bored. But Communion is part of a process of worship, and it should be celebrated every time we worship, if possible. God is doing something very real in the entire process, so moving the order around is as sensible as drying your clothes before you wash them.

God calls us into His presence (Creation) and separates us from the world (Division). Under the New Covenant, unlike the Old, the world is welcome to come with us as witnesses to the glory! This includes our children. We sing the sacrifice of praise (Ascension).

We are taught the Word (external Law – Pentecost – Testing), [2] then examine and present ourselves (internal Law – Trumpets – Maturity). This brings us to the “Atonement” part of the service. But unlike Israel’s Atonement Day, we do not mourn but celebrate. We did our mourning at Confession (Division).

However, notice that Confession and Communion mirror each other in the “there-and-back-again” process. There is a link between the mourning and the celebration. We examined ourselves and confessed our sin. But God has done something new in the teaching of the Word, while the minister imaged Christ to us in heavenly places. Now the Spirit judges the thoughts and intents of our hearts. We judged ourselves that we might not be judged. In most cases, if not all, He finds internal Law. The Word has not returned empty.

So, the actual feeding isn’t Communion, it’s the Word. In some real sense, in this rite, the Word is eating us — from the inside. Will Jesus spit us out?

If we examine ourselves according to the Word, we don’t drink to the dregs (Atonement). The sword that “passed over” at Confession now passes through, but Communion is a sacramental “dose” of death. This is because we are already clean. We are washed. Like our High Priest, we “taste death for every man.” Firstfruits (Ascension of the Head) was a “taste” of Pentecost (Garden > Land). Atonement (Ascension of the Body) is a “taste” of Booths (Land > World). We taste the cup before handing it to the nations as prophets.

What this inoculation does is turn us into food. At this restricted Table we become an unrestricted Table, a Love Feast for all those “looking in” (Booths). [3] If Communion is about nourishment at all, it’s not about our nourishment. It’s about the Vindication of the Word in us as nourishment for the nations. So, worship begins with the Called and ends with the Sent.

This Table is not for the nourishment of the flesh. It is Covenant renewal, but it is not the renewal of Jesus’ side of things. Jesus renews us so we can be recommissioned to go out and renew the world.

This involves the renewal of our own vows on pain of judgment. This might sound stern, but “if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins.” That’s why we celebrate. If we are struggling with sin, we lay our burdens upon Him and receive new grace. The New Covenant cup only becomes a curse if we have a controversy with God about our sin, not if we are faithfully fighting it and mortifying it. Otherwise it would be a curse to every Christian. The Supper is only a curse to those whose vow is a pretense, like Judas.

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. (1 Cor. 11:27)

In context, it is likely Paul had Judaizers in mind when he wrote this. And it explains much of the book of Hebrews, where all unbelieving Judah, post-Pentecost, gave Judas a new “body”:

“…since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame…” (Hebrews 6:6).

So, if your intentions are not those of Judas, or the Judaizers, or anything like them, come! Be renewed!

The bread and wine are consumed separately, but reunited in our own bodies. The saints are the resurrection body of Jesus. The food the children need is the gospel, mediated by hands and hearts made clean by the power of His resurrection.

It should be clear that the Table is not the place for infants or toddlers. It is a grave place, a place for those who carry the world on their shoulders. The Lord’s Table is for royal advisors, legal mediators, loyal knights, chosen ambassadors, Covenant delegates. It is only “for” the children in the sense that they shelter under this ministry until they, too, can take the vow of the martyroi.

Next post, I’ll cover how I suspect this is all echoed in the architecture of Exodus 24.

_________________________________
[1] See Bible Matrix p. 217 for a basic chart, and Jeff Meyers’ The Lord’s Service for more historical and ecclesiastical background detail than I could ever hope to get my head around.
[2] James Jordan says that this should be primarily teaching, not preaching, at least not the kind of preaching that is aimed at non-Christians. Many churches continually preach at the saints as though they are not saved.
[3] See Eat Local and Die.

Cut and Uncut Stones

4    As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him—

Peter’s use of the stone image should bring many Old Testament images to mind:

• the precious stones of Havilah, intended to be mined from the Land to glorify the sanctuary [1]
• the false stones of Babel (they had brick for stone)
• Jacob’s head on the altar stone, in a deep sleep
• Jacob’s raising of an altar stone in Bethel: “And this stone which I have set as a pillar shall be God’s house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You.”
• Zipporah’s sharp stone of circumcision
• Moses enthroned on a stone at the defeat of Amalek
• Israel’s altars of stone (one stone for each tribe) at Sinai and Carmel
• The precious stones on the breastplate of the High Priest
• The tablets of stone carrying the ten words
• The stones of the “Levitical” house in the city filled with plague
• The stones of judgment, the ground itself as a witness executing transgressors outside the camp
• The black and white stones in the ephod

We have two types of stones: uncut stones (altar, judgment – the Law) and cut, or precious, stones (glory and riches – Grace).

It was forbidden to use worked stones to build holy altars.

“If you make an altar of stones for me, do not build it with dressed stones, for you will defile it if you use a tool on it.” (Exodus 20:25)

These raw stones represent Adam, drawn “raw” from the Land, before he was cut and bloodied under the “raw Law” (stoicheia). Worked stones are Adams prepared to construct the “bridal” Temple. They are not decorative gemstones, but they are indeed precious.

The Jews (“men”) misjudged Jesus and rejected Him as a rough stone, when in fact He was precious. They looked on His outward appearance and found nothing to esteem. But He was already cut, a worked stone, a circumcised heart, the founding work on a Temple for the Spirit.

5    you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Jesus built a house for the Spirit, a “Mosaic Tabernacle” made of His disciples. He filled the house with fire at Pentecost, and it came alive. Once purified, it was ready to be decorated, robed as a bride.

Gemstones are also stones filled with fire — living stones — but they are not united by the mason. They are united on the body of the Bridegroom. These reflect the light of God, and so can enter into the tent, carried upon the High Priest. Adam was supposed to be robed in glory, not bloody skin.

The famous “gemstone” passage in Ezekiel 28 doesn’t refer to Satan. Nor does it refer precisely to the king of Tyre. It is prophetic sarcasm, aimed at the Edenic Sanctuary built by Solomon.

“You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering: The sardius, topaz, and diamond, Beryl, onyx, and jasper, Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold. The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes Was prepared for you on the day you were created.” Ezekiel 28:13

The precious materials for Solomon’s Temple were mined and carried from Tyre. The “king of Tyre” here was the corrupt High Priest, who had capitulated to the false gods of Tyre, reversing the influence of Solomon upon king Hiram. It was reverse evangelism, just as Satan promised a false glory to Adam and to Jesus if they would capitulate to him.

But we have a faithful High Priest, a stone not worked by lawless men but cut by the finger of a lawful God, an Adamic altar stone “cut out without hands,” and glorified with Evian gemstones, stones mined and cut from the Land of Israel — His glorious offspring. Unlike Adam, He has no need to cover Himself and hide.

“Here am I and the children whom God has given Me.” (Hebrews 2:13) [2]

____________________________________
[1] See Worship as Commerce.
[2] See Pilgrim’s Egress for how this “corporate salvation” is overlooked in Bunyan’s allegory.

T R A N S C E N D E N C E
Sabbath Now may the God of peace (Ark)

H I E R A R C H Y
Passover who brought up our Lord Jesus from the dead, (Veil)

E T H I C S  1 – Flesh
Firstfruits that great Shepherd of the sheep, (Altar)
through the blood of the everlasting covenant, (Table)

E T H I C S  2 – Eyes
Pentecost make you complete in every good work to do His will, (Lampstand)

E T H I C S  3 – Life
Trumpets working in you what is well pleasing in His sight, (Incense Altar)

S A N C T I O N S
Atonement through Jesus Christ, (High Priest – “Pass-through”)

S U C C E S S I O N
Booths to whom [be] glory forever and ever. Amen.

Hebrews 13:1-14   |   27 August 2011

Introduction

The book of Hebrews follows the Covenant pattern, most obvious in Deuteronomy. The final point is Succession arrangements, the future. The author outlines the most important things that those in the household of faith must remember. He is dealing with the major landmines hidden in the path of Jewish believers in the first century church.

1  Keep on loving each other as brothers.

-    They were already loving each other, and were not to lose this love, which is the natural way of things. We are to be supernatural. Such undying love comes from God, via the humility brought by the conviction of the Spirit.

-    These Christians were actually brothers, brothers by Covenant, just as David and Jonathan were. Their bond was stronger than blood. It was a bond of kindred Spirit.

2  Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it.

-    Hospitality is one of the most effective methods of evangelism. Perhaps the author refers to Abraham and Lot, and Monoah and his wife. This is unlikely to happen to us, because the New Covenant people are now God’s angels, His messengers. They received the message in their hospitality. We preach the message in our hospitality.

3  Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.

-    It is unclear whether those in prison were there justly or unjustly, but in our case it doesn’t matter. Prison ministry is extremely effective because those in prison know they are guilty. They are at the bottom and can only look up. We are to rejoice with those who rejoice, not to envy them. And we are to weep with those who weep, not to ostracize them as weak or cursed.

4  Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

-    Marriage is to be honoured by all, and not just by those who are married. This means that the relationship between a husband and wife must not be tested or interfered with by outsiders. Flirting isn’t funny.

-    The marriage bed is sacred because sex is fire on an altar, that is, it is both legal and relational. An altar has boundaries that contain the fire.

-    Some marriages are only legal, and some relationships are only relational. God intends for the fire of a physical relationship to be within the legal bounds of an altar, that is, protected by self-sacrifice and submission of the man and his wife to each other.

-    Aaron’s sons offered strange fire on the altar and were incinerated by God. Eli’s sons slept with prostitutes inside the Lord’s tent, and the Lord had them killed in battle.

-    Adulterers are those who violate a marriage covenant. The sexually immoral are those who engage in sex outside of a marriage covenant. Adultery carried the death penalty. Fornication carried the penalty of marriage.

5   Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.”

-    Another major temptation is money. Money is a good servant, but a terrible master. Jesus said we cannot serve two masters, so we must choose. Being generous, and supporting the church’s ministry, is a good way to develop your faith in trusting God for your finances.

6 So we say with confidence, “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?”

-    The key to achieving such faith is not will power. It is trust in the God who owns everything anyway, including our detractors and persecutors.

7   Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith.

-    Remember that this final section concerns Succession. Just like CEOs and managers today, God’s Covenants always outline the possible outcomes. Every act of obedience is a death, a mortification of sin, and every resulting blessing from God is the Spirit giving us the power of Jesus’ resurrection. Obedience is an investment, and the results are the return.

-    Discipleship is imitation. Besides reading the Bible, biographies of well-known Christians are very helpful here. To influence others for Christ, we must allow ourselves to be influenced by godly people. We must choose our friends wisely, because they affect what we consider to be “normal.”

8   Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

-    Although the Covenant world was about to be changed forever, godly living never changes. God has deliberately placed us in the tension between His Word and the world of men so that we develop wisdom. We are to be in the world but not of it. We can study a culture in order to reach it, but we must not compromise the gospel. Some churches remove themselves from the world; others let the world flood in until there is no distinction. Both are errors.

9   Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings.

-    This is another grave danger. The apostles’ warnings against false teachers are extremely harsh. They cursed them openly! Churches must have closed-handed issues and open-handed issues. Closed-handed issues are teachings not open to debate. Open-handed issues are open to debate. Churches where every minute detail is closed become isolated and legalistic. Those where everything is debatable get snuffed out by Jesus, because they have compromised on the fundamentals. True fundamentalism means we can fellowship with anyone who believes the gospel.

9b   It is good for our hearts to be strengthened by grace, not by ceremonial foods, which are of no value to those who eat them. 10 We have an altar from which those who minister at the tabernacle have no right to eat.

-    Our bread is the Word of God. The food laws, like the law given to Adam, were only temporary prohibitions to humble us and teach us to trust in God.

-    Herod’s Temple was still standing when this letter was written. The author is saying that the altar built by Christ is holy and the Old Covenant altar is now unclean.

-    The tent poles symbolized the people of God. We are a living house gathered around the throne of Christ. Physical, ceremonial cleanliness was only a temporary picture. We are washed on the inside and the outside. Christians are the true Jews. The preaching of the gospel cuts us to the heart, and believers are the true circumcision.

11   The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp.

-    Circumcision and other rules decided who could come in. But baptism decides who can go out. Jesus was sacrificed for us, and now He commands us to die for others.

12    And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood.

-    The city gate was the place of judgment. Lot sat in the gate as a judge.

13   Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore.

-    Criminals and lepers were exiled from the city. The world may treat us like lepers, as they did eventually treat Jesus, but like Jesus, we can touch them and make them clean.

14   For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come.

-    The gates of the cities of men do not matter. Their judgment is not sound. The gates we are concerned with are the gates of the New Jerusalem, a city whose judgment is perfectly sound, because God looks on the hearts of men. Faith and baptism put us into that city.

-    Paul told the Galatians that the old Jerusalem was in bondage, but that the Jerusalem above was the mother of the free. Christians who look for the restoration of Jerusalem below are in error. We must love and preach the gospel to Jews, like anybody else. But those of faith are the true children of Abraham.