Somehow this chapter (which has long been fairly familiar to me) always made really logical sense.
By this I mean that the idea of animal sacrifice actually dealing with sin always seemed faintly absurd to me. Now, this is coming from a point of view of a committed Christian, not a Jew, and with the realization that Jesus’ sacrificial death paid for my sin. But even so, I always wondered how in the time before Christ, sacrificial bulls/lambs/pigeons could “cover over” our sin.
In this chapter we read that it didn’t.
The law was only ever (and only ever intended to be) a taste of the reality in Christ, and its stipulations as to how sin should be dealt with are a picture only.
Christ’s sacrifice, by contrast, was once and for all. Once that had happened, the old order of animal sacrifice came to its end.
But Mick isn’t finished yet. He’s bringing out the consequences of this to us today.
He talks about the Holy Place, where previously only priests could enter – when sin had been atoned for. But in Christ, all sin, past, present and future, is atoned for, so logically one doesn’t have to be a priest to come directly to God.
Or perhaps, rather, someone who is in Christ is by default a priest already!
Mick finishes up the chapter by tying the whole thing neatly with peoples’ present circumstances – “Don’t lose heart, keep at it.”
It’s the whole concept of us coming directly to God that I want to briefly chat about. That’s unimaginable! Think about this. Recently my kids and I got to meet the boys from the band Petra. It was incredibly exciting. And I’m not ashamed to say that I was a dead set fanboy around them!
These are just humans. How much more excited should we be to be allowed free access to the God who made the heavens and the Earth? We should be jumping out of our skin to do it!
Instead we sit glumly and say “I’ll pray when I get time.” It’s my belief that this attitude springs from not truly understanding the magnitude of what God is offering us.
So let’s try to understand God. Let’s be just as excited to approach His throne as we are when we shake hands with a rock star or movie actor. Not everyone can do this – we are some of the privileged ones. So let’s understand what we have in our hands, and appreciate it!
29 May 2011
28 May 2011
Chapter 9
After a horrendously difficult week or so, it’s good to be writing a commentary again! However, before you rejoice TOO greatly at the return of your daily dose of borderline heresy, please be advised that I still have a fortnight or so of reports, and it’ll be at least a week (and possibly more) before I can say for sure that we’re back to normal. Up until the last of them are done, I may continue to be a little sporadic!
ANYWAYS . . .
Chapter 9 is a little weird.
I say this because Mick[1] goes into detail about the Tabernacle.
You may be wondering what’s weird about this. Well, there are two things:
1) He’s talking about the TABERNACLE, not the Temple, which was contemporary to the audience.
2) He’s talking to Jews, so shouldn’t he expect them to know this stuff?
A little consideration, though, indicates that the second of these is the key to understanding the first. Mick’s contemporary audience may have known the later temple, especially Herod’s temple, but a world with limited literacy means that the details of the older days may well be lost. Mick makes sure that they are all on the same page.
From here it’s a matter of the immense contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant.
However, the reason for the nature of the ceremonies in the Tabernacle (many of which continued into the Temple) is explained – they are POINTERS to the new covenant.
Why is this important to us?
Well, the main detail for us is one that is important through Hebrews – GOD HAS NOT CHANGED. God hasn’t suddenly gone from works to grace. He was always the same, and the details of the covenant bear this out.
This is critically important because this changelessness is one of the main features of what God is. If He had changed, He’d not be the God we worship. Since He has not, even in thousands of years, we have the confidence that He is indeed the God we know and love.
[1] If you’ve read all of these, you’ll know that this is my shorthand for “The Unknown Writer of the book of Hebrews.”
ANYWAYS . . .
Chapter 9 is a little weird.
I say this because Mick[1] goes into detail about the Tabernacle.
You may be wondering what’s weird about this. Well, there are two things:
1) He’s talking about the TABERNACLE, not the Temple, which was contemporary to the audience.
2) He’s talking to Jews, so shouldn’t he expect them to know this stuff?
A little consideration, though, indicates that the second of these is the key to understanding the first. Mick’s contemporary audience may have known the later temple, especially Herod’s temple, but a world with limited literacy means that the details of the older days may well be lost. Mick makes sure that they are all on the same page.
From here it’s a matter of the immense contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant.
However, the reason for the nature of the ceremonies in the Tabernacle (many of which continued into the Temple) is explained – they are POINTERS to the new covenant.
Why is this important to us?
Well, the main detail for us is one that is important through Hebrews – GOD HAS NOT CHANGED. God hasn’t suddenly gone from works to grace. He was always the same, and the details of the covenant bear this out.
This is critically important because this changelessness is one of the main features of what God is. If He had changed, He’d not be the God we worship. Since He has not, even in thousands of years, we have the confidence that He is indeed the God we know and love.
[1] If you’ve read all of these, you’ll know that this is my shorthand for “The Unknown Writer of the book of Hebrews.”
26 May 2011
Another announcement
Hey all!
Since I have managed to do better than expected with my reports, I'll be doing a commentary Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights. Monday to Friday will be possible, but we'll have to see - it depends.
Hope you're all doing well,
Johno
Since I have managed to do better than expected with my reports, I'll be doing a commentary Friday, Saturday and Sunday nights. Monday to Friday will be possible, but we'll have to see - it depends.
Hope you're all doing well,
Johno
24 May 2011
Announcement
Hey readers.
Reports are due in over the next week and a half or so, so I'll be taking it a bit easy. Some nights (such as tonight), there won't be a commentary; other nights it'll be on. It depends on how high the stack of marking has got.
Hopefully we shall return to normal Friday 4th June. If I need any more time after that I will let you know.
Thanks so much for your encouragement - it really means a lot to me when you people email or send a facebook comment!
Love in His name,
Johno
Reports are due in over the next week and a half or so, so I'll be taking it a bit easy. Some nights (such as tonight), there won't be a commentary; other nights it'll be on. It depends on how high the stack of marking has got.
Hopefully we shall return to normal Friday 4th June. If I need any more time after that I will let you know.
Thanks so much for your encouragement - it really means a lot to me when you people email or send a facebook comment!
Love in His name,
Johno
23 May 2011
Chapter 8
Mick has been really pushing this concept of Jesus as the High Priest, and no wonder – to a Jew of the 1st Century AD, religious ceremonies were ALL about the priesthood. You couldn’t sacrifice without a priest – all gifts and offerings had to be given in his presence. The priesthood was, to not put too fine a point on it, at the centre of the Jewish religious identity.
So Mick goes into some detail about Jesus’ position. He compares and contrasts.
Like a Jewish priest, Jesus offered gifts and sacrifices (vs 3 – 5). Of course – that’s what a priest does. But Mick is quick to point out that if that was all he did, Jesus wouldn’t have needed to come to Earth in the first place. After all, regular human priests could do that just fine.
Here’s where the difference comes into it. For the first time in the book of Hebrews, Mick starts talking about a new COVENANT.
If you’ve spent any time reading about the Jews, especially in the first five books of the Bible, you’ll know that their religion was all about covenant. The idea was simple – God had made a deal with Israel – the Covenant – that He would be their God, and they would be His people. And since Israel were His people, they would follow His law; and in return, He would bless them, and ultimately He would bless all the nations through the people of Israel.
The trouble was that the people of Israel could not keep their end of the bargain. Even simply following the law was beyond them; they kept sinning. God was faithful and kept His end no matter what, but it was increasingly clear that the old Covenant didn’t work.
But Hebrews quotes some verses from one of the truly great chapters of the Bible – Jeremiah 31. As you may recall, we trudged through jeremiah, and a lot of it was heavy going. But this chapter was great, and more importantly it pointed the way forward to a future time in which the Covenant of law would be replaced with something more personal. He would “Carve it onto the lining of their hearts.”
Sometimes atheists pooh-hoo prophecy, but in my opinion, it’s hard to imagine a more stark prediction of God’s action than this; and it’s hard to find a clearer fulfillment of this prophecy than the actions of Christ Himself.
For us, this is critical – One more time, our relationship with God is not based on what we do any more; rather, it’s based on who we are. It’s not so much about us obeying God (though we should!), but about us getting to know God at a personal level.
This can be easy and it can be hard. It’s easy when you’re a young Christian, still excited. When you’re old, though, it can get hard. When you are old enough, sometimes you’ll struggle to know if God is really there. It’s important to remember in THOSE times that you're supposed to connect deeply with God - so next time it's getting too much to bear, remember that God still wants to connect with YOU.
So Mick goes into some detail about Jesus’ position. He compares and contrasts.
Like a Jewish priest, Jesus offered gifts and sacrifices (vs 3 – 5). Of course – that’s what a priest does. But Mick is quick to point out that if that was all he did, Jesus wouldn’t have needed to come to Earth in the first place. After all, regular human priests could do that just fine.
Here’s where the difference comes into it. For the first time in the book of Hebrews, Mick starts talking about a new COVENANT.
If you’ve spent any time reading about the Jews, especially in the first five books of the Bible, you’ll know that their religion was all about covenant. The idea was simple – God had made a deal with Israel – the Covenant – that He would be their God, and they would be His people. And since Israel were His people, they would follow His law; and in return, He would bless them, and ultimately He would bless all the nations through the people of Israel.
The trouble was that the people of Israel could not keep their end of the bargain. Even simply following the law was beyond them; they kept sinning. God was faithful and kept His end no matter what, but it was increasingly clear that the old Covenant didn’t work.
But Hebrews quotes some verses from one of the truly great chapters of the Bible – Jeremiah 31. As you may recall, we trudged through jeremiah, and a lot of it was heavy going. But this chapter was great, and more importantly it pointed the way forward to a future time in which the Covenant of law would be replaced with something more personal. He would “Carve it onto the lining of their hearts.”
Sometimes atheists pooh-hoo prophecy, but in my opinion, it’s hard to imagine a more stark prediction of God’s action than this; and it’s hard to find a clearer fulfillment of this prophecy than the actions of Christ Himself.
For us, this is critical – One more time, our relationship with God is not based on what we do any more; rather, it’s based on who we are. It’s not so much about us obeying God (though we should!), but about us getting to know God at a personal level.
This can be easy and it can be hard. It’s easy when you’re a young Christian, still excited. When you’re old, though, it can get hard. When you are old enough, sometimes you’ll struggle to know if God is really there. It’s important to remember in THOSE times that you're supposed to connect deeply with God - so next time it's getting too much to bear, remember that God still wants to connect with YOU.
22 May 2011
Chapter 7
Expanding on the last couple of chapters talking about the Ultimate High Priest, this passage today is looking at Jesus and comparing him with an enigmatic character from the Old Testament – Melchizedek.
Melchizedek appears suddenly in Genesis, when Abraham has won a victory and gives a tithe of the plunder to him. He very clearly treats this man like you would God Himself. Then Melchizedek disappears, leaving behind him a trail of questions.
“Who is Melchizedek?” would be favourite.
Melchizedek’s name means “King of peace.” And he was a priest, and yet a king at the same time. Sound familiar? In fact there are many Christians who see Melchizedek as just that – a pre-incarnate Christ!
Anyway, Mick uses this enigmatic behaviour of Melchizedek to make a point. He demonstrates that Melchizedek jumps into and out of history. And whether or not Melchizedek was actually an early appearance of Christ, Hebrews at the very least uses this concept as a metaphor
Mick then contrasts Melchizedek, who presumably eventually died, with Christ, who died but then rose.
Jesus replaces both forms of priesthood – Aaron’s and Melchizedeks, to be precise – which is important because our Judge is not locked to our world (as we saw in previous chapters) but is also the victim of the crime (to extend the courtroom metaphor) – And therefore He has the right, not only to try the case – but also to forgive debts – a right He uses frequently.
Melchizedek appears suddenly in Genesis, when Abraham has won a victory and gives a tithe of the plunder to him. He very clearly treats this man like you would God Himself. Then Melchizedek disappears, leaving behind him a trail of questions.
“Who is Melchizedek?” would be favourite.
Melchizedek’s name means “King of peace.” And he was a priest, and yet a king at the same time. Sound familiar? In fact there are many Christians who see Melchizedek as just that – a pre-incarnate Christ!
Anyway, Mick uses this enigmatic behaviour of Melchizedek to make a point. He demonstrates that Melchizedek jumps into and out of history. And whether or not Melchizedek was actually an early appearance of Christ, Hebrews at the very least uses this concept as a metaphor
Mick then contrasts Melchizedek, who presumably eventually died, with Christ, who died but then rose.
Jesus replaces both forms of priesthood – Aaron’s and Melchizedeks, to be precise – which is important because our Judge is not locked to our world (as we saw in previous chapters) but is also the victim of the crime (to extend the courtroom metaphor) – And therefore He has the right, not only to try the case – but also to forgive debts – a right He uses frequently.
21 May 2011
Chapter 6
I thought it worth recording (because otherwise, reading this page in a year or so, we might forget) that today was predicted by some to be the Rapture.
Well, it wasn’t. And once again, we learn the hard lesson – No-one knows the date when Christ will return – and if someone thinks they DO know, guess what day it WON’T be!
ANYWAY, now that I have got that off my chest, time to get back to Hebrews.
Chapter 6 is a difficult chapter to write on, because we have two distinct topics covered, the first of which is a continuation of the last couple of verses of the previous chapter (insert my standard rant about the selection of chapter breaks). Verses 1 – 12 deal with the idea of “re-crucifying Christ”.
This is a fairly strange expression, but when you read it, it’s actually saying something interesting and worrying – it gives the idea that if someone has experienced Christ and turned their back on Him, that they cannot ever again be saved.
Needless to say this bothers a lot of Christians (including myself), but just on reading this today I think it doesn’t deserve as much stress as we give it.
It’s not saying that if you have a brief moment of doubt in your faith, that’s it, bye bye! Nor is it saying that even a person who has spent a couple of years in the wilderness is headed for hell. No, what it’s saying is that if you have made a lifestyle of turning away from God – that is, if it’s something that characterizes you for the last part of your life – THEN you may have cause for worry.
The second bit is about God and His promises. It comments about whereas we need some authority to back up our promises (e.g. swearing on the Bible, signing a legal contract), God IS His own authority, so He doesn’t need so say “I swear on myself”! He is already there. He already will keep His promises!
Getting back to the first of the two concepts, I wanted to raise that one with you, gentle reader. All my life, a battle has raged about what the status of someone in Christ who turns away.
I didn’t realize until tonight that this passage was there. It seems to imply that someone CAN lose their salvation.
Is it the case? My tip would be “It depends”.
It depends on whether Mick is talking about the final result of a life In which Christ has been forgotten, or whether it is something that happens instantly. My money would be on the former scenario, simply because to go for the second option includes the quite horroible idea that Jesus’ death isn’t REALLY enough for dealing with sin – that the Devil can override in some circumstances. Personally I believe God is powerful enough that there is no way the enemy can change what He has decided.
Well, it wasn’t. And once again, we learn the hard lesson – No-one knows the date when Christ will return – and if someone thinks they DO know, guess what day it WON’T be!
ANYWAY, now that I have got that off my chest, time to get back to Hebrews.
Chapter 6 is a difficult chapter to write on, because we have two distinct topics covered, the first of which is a continuation of the last couple of verses of the previous chapter (insert my standard rant about the selection of chapter breaks). Verses 1 – 12 deal with the idea of “re-crucifying Christ”.
This is a fairly strange expression, but when you read it, it’s actually saying something interesting and worrying – it gives the idea that if someone has experienced Christ and turned their back on Him, that they cannot ever again be saved.
Needless to say this bothers a lot of Christians (including myself), but just on reading this today I think it doesn’t deserve as much stress as we give it.
It’s not saying that if you have a brief moment of doubt in your faith, that’s it, bye bye! Nor is it saying that even a person who has spent a couple of years in the wilderness is headed for hell. No, what it’s saying is that if you have made a lifestyle of turning away from God – that is, if it’s something that characterizes you for the last part of your life – THEN you may have cause for worry.
The second bit is about God and His promises. It comments about whereas we need some authority to back up our promises (e.g. swearing on the Bible, signing a legal contract), God IS His own authority, so He doesn’t need so say “I swear on myself”! He is already there. He already will keep His promises!
Getting back to the first of the two concepts, I wanted to raise that one with you, gentle reader. All my life, a battle has raged about what the status of someone in Christ who turns away.
I didn’t realize until tonight that this passage was there. It seems to imply that someone CAN lose their salvation.
Is it the case? My tip would be “It depends”.
It depends on whether Mick is talking about the final result of a life In which Christ has been forgotten, or whether it is something that happens instantly. My money would be on the former scenario, simply because to go for the second option includes the quite horroible idea that Jesus’ death isn’t REALLY enough for dealing with sin – that the Devil can override in some circumstances. Personally I believe God is powerful enough that there is no way the enemy can change what He has decided.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)