The Main Thing

Anything written or said should have a main, central, point. It would be nice if it had some sort of connection with the listeners/readers, but it must have a point. Stories should have a point, and the plot should support the point. Speeches should have a main point, and each element should support the main point (this includes sermons, unfortunately more in theory than in practice).

In the convoluted complex set of arguments that Nicodemus (my new name for the writer of Hebrews) has so far, all have a “main point”. If you don’t believe me, read this:

Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man.

Hebrews 8:1-2 NASB

And it literally has, “main point” in the text. The Greek word, “kephalaion“, is very common outside of religious writings, and only used twice in the New Testament. For the Greek philosophers, it means, “main point”, or “head of the topic”. And they probably extended the meaning from a more common meaning of “principal” (as opposed to “interest”) as in loaned amounts.

This should tell us something really important, and something merely interesting. First, Nicodemus is truly focused on the ministry of Jesus as our High Priest. To this point, he has demonstrated the superiority of Jesus over all the other pretenders to devotion, angels, Moses, even the law. Yet, the point of Jesus’ superiority is to demonstrate how His ministry is, therefore, superior to all other religious practice. The other pretenders all had to do with religious practice to some degree. Jesus and His ministry is superior to all.

So what? It all sounds very Jewish, and it is, which is why the letter is called “Hebrews”. But there is a massive meaning for us, church-going, Bible-believing, disciples of Jesus today.

How many fights, divisions, arguments, bitterness, and strife within church has come over “practice”? Which songs, what sort of songs, drums or no drums, decorations, lighting, traditional-versus-contemporary, all these things have divided our churches and congregations, sometimes virulently. And there are some who have taken their hurt, anger, and bitterness to their graves, and therefore to face their Savior. You think He is honored by that sort of gift? Really?

We have a movement within contemporary Christianity to get away from “religion” in favor of a “relationship”. All that means is that one group (the contemporary group) calls the other group (the traditional group) invalid and unspiritual. According to the inspired Scripture in the letter to the Hebrews, they’re both wrong.

The Nicodemus is writing to Jewish believers in the “Diaspora”, the dispersed community of Jews throughout the Roman Empire, mostly collected around the Mediterranean Sea. They all used the Greek text of their Scriptures. They were “strangers in a strange land”, keeping themselves separate as Jews, and surviving, sometimes thriving, in those lands.

For those of them that devoted themselves to Jesus as their Messiah, things changed in relation to their Jewish brothers and sisters. They were shunned, ejected from Synagogues, and sometimes persecuted in other ways. They were told that the followers of this “Way” were enemies of the Jews, adding them to a long list of “goyim”. How could these disciples of Jesus also be Jews? Wasn’t it practice that differentiated them from the communities around them?

Nicodemus points out that no human religious practice, even the practice given to Moses by God, supersedes the heavenly practice of Jesus. Therefore only His practice truly matters. It isn’t the keeping of the law, the sacrificial system, the priesthood, the music, the decorations, or the lighting that defines who is and is not relating to our Savior.

Is it traditional or contemporary? It’s both. Now, STOP FIGHTING ALREADY! Why can’t we see what Nicodemus clearly points out, that we are heading to REST, not chaos. When we, as the ambassadors of divine Peace, Joy, and Love, fight and divide over stupid stuff, we fail and Satan wins. Sometimes, it’s not a matter of being right, it’s a matter of agreeing in the Lord (Philippians 4:1-3).

For these besieged Jewish disciples, it wasn’t about being right. It wasn’t about being accepted by their brethren. It wasn’t even about being connected to their Jewish community. Those things may have been important, but they weren’t the main point. For them, and for us, the main point remains what our Savior, Jesus, our High Priest, does, right now, today, on our behalf. That remains the Main Point.

So, after all that, what’s your view through the knothole this morning?

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation

Advertisement

What’s In a Name?

As I have been cruising through Hebrews, the writer (I call him Nicodemus now), refers to an obscure character from the Hebrew Scriptures, Melchizedek. He refers to both his appearance in Genesis 14:18, and a strange reference to him in Psalm 110:4. What if the reference in Psalm 110 isn’t a name at all?

The Hebrew text has the following construction: מַלְכִּי־צֶדֶק (see Strong’s H4442) for what is typically referred to as the name of the king of Salem in Genesis 14:18. To break this down a bit, it is a compound construction of two words, “meleki” and “tsedek”. The first word has a suffix (the “i”) which adds a first-person possessive meaning, “my”, to “melek” which renders, “my king”. The second word is the Hebrew word for “righteousness”. And between these two words is a bar, called a “maqaf” which is both a separator and a connector. That sounds odd, but it’s not that peculiar in Hebrew, and it’s the meaning of this punctuation mark that’s in question here.

So, if this is a name, then it could mean, “my king is righteous”, “my king of righteousness”, or even other options. Now, unfortunately, the Hebrew unicode in this entry is tiny, but you may see the various combination of dots under the Hebrew letters. Those are the “vowels”, which do not appear in ancient or modern Hebrew. The ancient group of Jewish scholars from Europe, known as the Masoretes, added those to enable a consistent use of Scripture in Jewish Synagogues. They also added a lot of notations to enable consistent pronunciation as well, including the maqaf.

And there’s the thing, the maqaf wouldn’t be in the ancient/original text. So, it’s possible that this was originally two words, and the guy who comes out to Abram was known as a “righteous king”, and Abram calls him “my righteous king”. You can see how this might be possible, but also it’s obviously very improbable. Yet, the more modern Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has the following translation of Psalm 110:4

The LORD has sworn and will not relent,
"You are a priest forever, a rightful king by My decree."

Now that is very different than most every translation, including the 1917 edition of the same JPS Tanakh which has the following:

The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent:
"Thou art a priest forever after the manner of Melchizedek."

So, a change was made in the 1985 edition to remove the reference to Melchizedek. Now, why would that option be chosen? By the way, there is a footnote in the 1985 edition that says, “Or ‘After the manner of Melchizedek.'” So, the translator’s acknowledge that the reference to Melchizedek is still valid. But it’s the maqaf, right? Well, maybe not.

The place where David was born is Bethlehem, right? Well, that, too, is a compound word made up of “house” and “bread”. Guess what is always found between the two words in Hebrew? You guessed it, the maqaf. And yet, this is translated as “Bethlehem” throughout the 1985 Tanakh.

When the Jewish scholars of Alexandria Egypt translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek about 150 years Before the Christian Era (for those for whom this a more comfortable reference) or 150 BC (for those more comfortable with the traditional reference), they transliterated Melchizedek into Greek. So, before the Masoretes added punctuation, these brilliant Jewish scholars also understood both references to be a name, not some other reference. In the time of Nicodemus writing Hebrews (you never know, it could have been), the accepted understanding of Psalm 110 was that it referred to the man who brought bread and wine out to Abram after his successful rescue of Lot. And so should we.

And yet, there are those who would see this differently, focus on the slim possibility that David didn’t have this obscure character in mind when he penned this Psalm. Let’s accept that possibility, and still point out that even so, it does not take away from Jesus’ role as our High Priest. So, His order of priesthood would be as a righteous king. I’m good with that. Jesus remains our King, Priest, and Prophet. He is the Anointed One in all roles, and will one day appear on a white horse with a robe dipped in blood. The High Priest will lead the hosts of heaven as King of Kings. I hope to be among the host. You?

I’m excited! Let’s ride!

What’s your view through the knothole this morning?

Intercession

Last week I wrote an entry about Jesus as hour High Priest. In it, I claimed that the qualification of Jesus to be our High Priest is that he made intercession for us. That is an interesting qualification, if you think about it. I’ve been reading through Numbers recently, in a “chronological Bible”, and I find it fascinating how much animal sacrifice was supposed to go on regularly for the people. Daily, monthly, festivals, annually, all the time. Since they ate many of those sacrifices, the Temple would have been one of the best restaurants in Jerusalem.

But what were those sacrifices for? What did they accomplish in the covenant relationship between Israel and Yahweh? That’s not as easy or simple a question as it sounds, because it depends on what you read in the law. Basically though, in one way or the other, these sacrifices are made on behalf of the people. So, in a very practical sense, they are a form of intercession. Therefore, the role of priests, as administers of the sacrifices of the people of Israel to Yahweh, was intercession on behalf of the people.

The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.

Hebrews 7:23-25 NASB

The Greek word for “intercession” in the above passage is “entygchano” (Strong’s G1793), which not terribly common in the Christian Scriptures. When it’s used with the Greek preposition “over” (Strong’s G5228), then “entygchano” means to “intercede on behalf of another”, and specifically to intercede to our Creator on behalf of His human creatures.

As common a theme of prayer as that is, you’d think that this word would be more common in the Christian Scriptures, but it’s only used this way three times (2X in Rom 8, and once here in Heb 7). There is actually a compound word made up of both the Greek word for intercession, and the preposition “under” used in Romans 8:26, but that word only occurs there in all of the Christian Scriptures. So, four times total, even so, still more rare than the common practice would suggest. Why is that?

Because the more common way to refer to intercession is “to pray for” someone. Suddenly the common quality becomes obvious, that phrase is used all over, by nearly every Christian author. But now the question becomes, why is “entygchano”, a technical term, different than “praying for someone”? And that question helps us understand the role of Jesus as High Priest.

Jesus is not sacrificing, daily, for the sins of His disciples. He sacrificed Himself, once, and that was all that was needed:

For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.

Hebrews 7:26,27 NASB

Therefore, intercession done by our Savior is not the daily regular sacrifice, even though He “always lives to make intercession for them.” Something else is meant when Jesus intercedes for us as our High Priest. What is it? What does Jesus do in the role as High Priest which intercedes for us?

To answer that, I refer you back to my prior entry, “Why A High Priest” (see the first sentence of this entry). Basically, Jesus offered up “prayers and supplications” on our behalf. It wasn’t presiding over the death and burning of animals, but more the role Moses played in going before God on behalf of the people (see this repeatedly in Exodus and Numbers). Jesus is more a “priest” in the sense of Moses than that of Aaron. Although, Moses’ role is more often thought of as prophet, and Jesus is our Messiah of that type as well.

I believe it’s the right time to state the obvious conclusion. Jesus is our King, Prophet, and High Priest, because each of those designations is simply a different way of saying the same thing. We have needs which categorically fall into each of those roles. Jesus fulfills each and every one of those needs, as He completely fulfills each and every one of those roles. So, once again, through the venue of obfuscating elucidations, we have ended up with a simple answer. Perhaps I should have led with that…

Insult By Way of Explanation

If you are reading this, you probably are wondering at the title. Spoiler alert: I’m not going to insult you. Perhaps I should say that I’m not going to insult you intentionally. If you come this blog regularly, you may have found things I’ve said offensive at some point. If so, sorry about that, but only to the extent the offense was distracting from the message. To the extent the offense made the point more clearly, I have no regret.

More than likely, what frequent visitors find is confusing, or worse, boring. For those things, I truly am sorry. I regret being confusing and boring because it obscures the message I believe my Master gives me. Try as I might, I still wind up as either or both. But the writer of Hebrews uses insult to pull his readers into rapt attention:

Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.

Hebrews 5:11-12 NASB

“Yeah, I’d like to go deeper, but you’re stupid. Are you paying attention now?” That’s what this tactic seems to be for the writer. He goes on in the beginning of chapter 6 to describe some basics he’d like to get past so he can delve into more important things. Why? Why insult his readers/hearers prior to driving to a deeper point?

I get that it’s a literary tactic, but why, with all the available tactics, did he choose that one? Why be insulting? Because they were in grave danger, and I mean “grave” pretty literally, and spiritually. The writer wants his hearers/readers to wake up to this next point, and having insulted them, he is sure to have their attention.

It’s time to leave the connective elements that Jesus’ teachings have with Judaism, and move on to the more important elements. Why? Because if they don’t, they will eventually reach a “point-of-no-return” (see 6:4-8, and my previous entry “No ‘Third’ Repentance“).

As we, Twenty-First Century readers, read this First-Century writing, we need to come to the same abrupt halt. Our attention needs to be arrested. There are points of correspondence between our culture and Christianity. It’s time to get past them into deeper, more meaningful stuff. Because, if we don’t, there will be a point-of-no-return for us as well.

The insult indicates, or explains, the dire importance of “what comes next”. The next thing is pushing past basics elements that teachings of Jesus have with Judaism:

Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.

Hebrews 6:1-2 NASB (emphasis mine)

Those disciples of Jesus believed in and taught new converts, but so did Jews. Jews taught their new converts the same basic elements, they simply had different meaning. A Jewish disciple of Jesus could hold to those basics and not run afoul of their traditional Jewish brothers. But those beliefs were not an end, they were supposed to be a foundation for more.

One of the more disastrous problems with way too many churches today is the failure to “make disciples” of those they convert to faith in Jesus. Few failures can more assuredly cause “shallow soil” and “thorny soil” than the failure to disciple. On the flip side are those churches making disciples of their theology rather than of Jesus. That’s almost worse; except that sometimes, within the bad theology, there are kernels that can lead diligent seekers of truth to the feet of Jesus.

Read Hebrews 5:11 through 6:8 again. Wake up, smell the coffee of the call of Jesus. He calls us to seek HIM, not words about Him. He calls us to seek His face, not opinions about Him. We are to be baptized, immersed in His Spirit, not this world’s view of Him, or even this world’s view of this world.

Jesus is the Person who stands as the point of the Scripture He inspired. What is necessary to know to know Him is found in there. Once what is necessary to know Him is found, we actually come to know Him through our obedience to Him. It’s not what we find in Scripture that defines our relationship with our Creator, it’s what we do with what we find in Scripture. It’s obedience to our Creator that defines our relationship with Him.

It’s not “work” that saves us, but work demonstrates we’re saved. It’s not a confession of word as much as a life lived in deeds that declares our allegiance. Do we live as if this world is passing, and we’re looking for that city “who architect and builder is God”? (Hebrews 11:10) Or are we distracted, seeking rather to conform to this world instead of the one to come? The writer of Hebrews leads his readers to an enduring faith, enduring to the Eternal City of God. And yes, he insults people along the way. Because it’s important.

Let’s be insulted, offended, challenged, and driven to reach that city. Let nothing stop us.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation

Why a High Priest?

Jesus is our Prophet, King, and Priest. He is our “High Priest”, but according to the order of Melchizedek. And you may think you know how He is our High Priest, since He became our “sin offering”, as Paul points out (Romans 8:3 and Ephesians 5:2). And notice He offers Himself, according to Paul. Yet, Paul never refers to Jesus as our High Priest. So, what is it about Jesus that makes Him our High Priest?

The writer of Hebrews is, as far as we can tell, the first Christian writer to refer to Jesus as our High Priest. There are several problems with viewing Jesus in this way, even though Paul may allude to it in his “sin offering” references. The biggest issue is that Jesus is not from the tribe of Levi, nor from the Aaronic or Zadok line. And that is more significant than you may think.

Jesus’ lineage is probably the biggest reason for the writer of Hebrews to refer to Jesus as a High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek. But that doesn’t explain how or what Jesus does that indicates how He functions as our High Priest. The writer alludes to Jesus’ death on the cross, but even that isn’t what is used to define His role.

In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 5:7-10 NASB

So, when did this happen? If you are familiar with the Gospel accounts, it may seem like a reference to the Garden of Gethsemane. But there, Jesus prayed for the “cup” of suffering to be removed, and it wasn’t. The reference above sounds like Jesus received what He asked for. Perhaps it’s more likely a reference to the “High Priestly Prayer of John 17. But, honestly, we don’t know. There could have been lots of places where Jesus prayed this way, any given morning, and a good case can be made for the Garden of Gethsemane prayer as well. Not knowing when Jesus did this doesn’t change the fact of it as His qualification.

Jesus prayed and He learned obedience (which sounds weird for someone already perfect) from suffering. Because of these two things, Jesus is “designated” High Priest, becoming the source of eternal salvation. Again, salvation is predicated on “obedience”, so it sounds like “works” salvation, but isn’t. The obedience is “perseverance in faith”, not performing elements of the law for “worship”, “festivals”, and so on.

So, it seems that the role of High Priest isn’t predicated on the self-sacrifice of Jesus, but rather the activity of Jesus in prayer (interceding) for others, and suffering. Perhaps the “suffering” is a reference to His death on a cross, but it may not be. Notice that the “One able to save Him from death” heard Him, and yet He still died. While not definitive against seeing “suffering” as a reference to His death, it does seem a strange way to put it if it were.

Jesus removes the penalty of our sin through His work on the cross. He empowers our life through His resurrection. But it’s His passionate prayers and obedient suffering that fulfill this role of High Priest. If Philippians 2:5-11 is a pattern set by Jesus, then how is this? If Jesus is our High Priest, aren’t we called to be “priests” (see 1 Peter 2)? So, we too are to be passionate in prayer for others, and obedient through suffering. We are to follow this pattern set by Jesus, and, in this way, continue in faithful perseverance.

This is another place that I see I am to be active in my faith, but I am not. I see the call to passionate prayer for others, but it seems I can’t be bothered. I see the call to obedience through suffering, but I’d rather not, I’d rather remain comfortable. What about you? Are you passionately praying for others? Are you pursuing obedience, even though you suffer for it? I need to turn this are of my life around, over to my Master, and commence changing my attitude.

What do you see through your “knothole”?

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation

No “Third” Repentance

A few weeks ago, I wrote an entry from Hebrews 3 in which I claimed that the writer held the possibility that salvation could be rejected after being accepted. I said some things in that entry that one visitor took issue with, and we had a lengthy discussion among the comments. Neither convinced the other, but it was interesting to me because his support he used was unexpected. You can read the entry and the comments on that entry, “Falling Away“

One of the things I said there is that I don’t really fit into either camp on the discussion of apostasy (the technical term for “falling away”). And that may sound weird, but the common term is “loose salvation”, and I very strongly disagree with the term “loose” used with this topic. I loose my keys, my phone, my wallet, and so on. I don’t “loose” my salvation. The problem of apostasy Scripture speaks of is not that simple.

One of the several issues I rarely hear those in the camp of “transitory salvation” is that there is only one chance at it. I said in my entries on Hebrews that the writer seems to support both sides of the issue of salvation loss. Here’s one of the reasons I say that:

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

Hebrews 6:4-6 NASB (emphasis mine)

What this clearly says is that, if someone has a relationship with their Savior, and then rejects it (looses it), there’s no coming back. “It is impossible to renew them again to repentance”. Repentance, the change of mind, heart, and then behavior, which indicates a state of being in relationship with our Savior, is impossible if we “repent” from it back to where we were before.

Said another way, people say (not me, but others) that repentance is a 180-degree turn away from what we were, how we thought, and how we lived, and toward our Savior, His ways, and His thoughts. If so, then the loss of salvation represents a “repentance” away from our Savior, a 180-degree turn away from His ways and His thoughts, and toward what we were, how we thought, and how we lived. And once that “second repentance” happens, there’s no hope of coming back again to our Savior.

Did anyone experience a “chill” reading that? I felt one writing it. It’s frightening, and it’s supposed to be. Salvation, our relationship with our Savior is serious. And it’s so serious, it isn’t something that can be left on the subway by accident. It’s not something buried under your jacket around the house. You can’t leave it in the last place you remember having it. You can’t loose it. It’s life and death, not a ticket to heaven!

It’s like being married, being in the military, or being employed by large company: you don’t forget those things, you consciously choose to break with those things. And for that there are, or can be, serious consequences. “Saved” means you are a disciple of Jesus, and that is an expensive commitment to make. It’s not something you take lightly, nor do you live it out lightly.

In fact, one of the claims of those in the eternal security camp is that anyone who “falls away” was never actually saved in the first place. That, while wrong and missing the point, is closer to the truth than the other side. The danger of that position is that it holds the hope of being saved eventually. Sorry, there’s no pass to get around this inspired claim of the writer of Hebrews. Our Savior, the Spirit of Jesus, inspired this passage to deliver a message to us: DON’T GIVE UP! It comes with the associated warning that, if we do, we’ve made an eternal choice from which it is impossible to come back.

But there’s no reason to fear. The point isn’t to be afraid that you might “fall away” by accident or unknowingly. The point is that we don’t out and out reject the “Way” of Jesus for another path. If you question your commitment, you are probably good to go. You show interest in your relationship with Jesus. You may not be a great disciple, but you’re in the fray. And being in the fray means there’s hope you will be an even more faithful servant of Jesus.

See, it’s not the husbands who wonder if they’re good husbands that are the “looser husbands”. It’s not the wives who wonder if they’re good wives that the “worst wives”. It’s the spouse who doesn’t care about the other, the ones who think only of themselves, what they want, their desires and their feelings. When there’s no regard for the other spouse, then the marriage is basically a paper certificate filed in some county records holding area. But when there is some regard, some thought for the other, spouse, then there’s hope. They may not be a great spouse, but there’s hope for improvement.

In the same way, if there is some regard for our Savior, even misguided, there’s hope. There are exceptions, such deep deceptions that the regard isn’t for anything even close to Jesus, but in general, those are rare. I’m not a perfect disciple of Jesus. Sometimes, I’m not even a good disciple, and at other times, I’m a down right bad disciple. But I have regard for my Savior, I seek to please Him, I’m concerned about how I treat Him, and it wounds my heart to be that bad disciple, and even missing the mark of “good disciple”. I want to be a great disciple. But one thing I don’t fear is forgetting where I put my faith.

Where is your faith, your hope in eternity? If you have never had hope, then I recommend Jesus. If your faith is in Jesus already, live it out, follow His pattern of living. If it used to be Jesus, but you’ve woken up and realized it’s been years since you were living as a disciple, is this a wake up call? See, if you’re looking at Him again, I believe it’s possible you didn’t actually “reject” Him, or it’s possible you never really had faith in the Savior revealed through Scripture (see how close I am to the “eternal security camp”?).

In any case, where are you now, and what will you choose today? I’m choosing to be a disciple, and I am going to work on being a great one, even though the prospect terrifies me. I may only end up being a good one. Okay, as long as I’m a disciple, I can’t let go of that.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation