Thoughts on Hebrews 9: New covenant is superior to the old

In this chapter, the author of Hebrews really puts a lot of emphasis on the idea of the "new covenant" as being superior to the old and making the old covenant obsolete.  There is a lot of theological controversy over how far "obsolete" extends (is the OT still relevant in matters of law and morals, should signs of the new covenant mirror the signs of the old, etc).  We won't be getting into those.

What I do want to note is the superiority of the new covenant over the old.  The author of Hebrews briefly described the rarity and difficulty of entering the Most Holy Place, even if you were a priest.  That most holy place was designed as a mere copy of the throne room of God.  Priests had a hard time entering the copy of God's sanctuary.  Jesus stands in the real thing, mediating on our behalf.

Beyond this, we don't have a lot of clues as to what makes this new covenant better.  We do get a brief mention of it being enacted on "better promises".  We don't know exactly what these better promises are, but one thing that jumps out at me is the promise in the old covenant of a promised land vs. the promise in the new covenant of heaven.  I'd say that was a step up.

Thoughts on Hebrews 8: Christ is the superior mediator

Christ is the superior mediator (compared with earthly priests) because he has immediate access to God. The sacrificial system was a mere shadow of the reality of Christ's mediation.

I confess that this isn't something I've thought much about.  This is probably due to my privileged status of being able to just assume this is always the case, and therefore something I take for granted.  But, this really is a very big deal.

Think about it this way.  We are stained with sin, so we cannot enter the very presence of a holy God.  God could not bare it.  There was an impenetrable barrier between us and God.  Christ broke down the barrier, stands in the very presence of God himself, and intercedes on our behalf.  That's a big deal and something I should take more seriously.

I'll discuss more on the new covenant discussion that shows up at the end of chapter 8 while discussing other chapters.

Thoughts on Hebrews 7: The stench of the holy

Continuing our walk through Hebrews, we see a repeated discussion comparing Jesus as high priest to the Levitical high priests.  Chapter 7 emphasizes how Jesus as high priest was higher than the Aaronic priesthood.  The author's claim is that this is because Jesus was high priest in the order of Melchizedek.

In case someone is unfamiliar with the reference from Genesis, Melchizadek was a priest and king from what became known as Jerusalem.  When Abraham encountered him, he tithed 10% of all he had to Melchizadek.  The author of Hebrews points out that this makes Melchizadek greater than Aaron because Aaron's ancestor tithed to Melchizadek.

Truthfully, if one of my students made an argument like this, I would probably tell him that he was really reaching--except for one thing.  Out of nowhere in one of the Psalms, the psalmist makes this odd statement, "I have made you a priest forever in the order of Melchizadek".  Although I am not an expert on Jewish scholarship (or anything else I write about on this blog, for that matter), my understanding is that Jewish scholarship didn't really know what to do with this odd Melchizadek reference in the Psalms.  That is what the author of Hebrews is trying to do here...explain that which wasn't understood.

The more important point here, though, is that after Christ's priestly sacrifice, there is no need for continued sacrifice for sin.  I think this is something modern Christians take too much for granted.  Because we are so removed from the sacrificial system, we have become desensitized to what this means.

I got a small glimpse of this when I was in college and read C.S. Lewis's Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold..  In this work there is a detailed description of the reaction of the main character walking into a temple where animal sacrifice is still practiced.  If I recall, the line Lewis used was, "the stench of the holy".  There were dried blood stains all around.  It smelled of incense and animal slaughter.  It was a stark reminder of the penalty for displeasing God (or the gods in the case of the novel).

As modern (and especially relatively wealthy) Christians, we are far removed from the stench of the holy.  We don't truly appreciate the weight of our sin and the weight of the sacrifice.  Perhaps that is one of the benefits of Christ's "once for all" sacrifice, that we no longer have to contemplate such things.  But I can't help wondering if we would take our sin more seriously if we did.

Thoughts on Hebrews 6: Abandoning your birthright

Hebrews 6 is one of the most controversial chapters in the Bible.  It contains stark language on the issue of whether one can lose salvation.

Today I'm going to take a look at this passage from a different angle.  Although I'm not generally sympathetic to "covenant theology", I think it might be helpful in this case.  After the blunt discussion of apostates not being able to return to repentance, the author of Hebrews returns to a discussion of the Hebrew people--the people of promise.  Clearly, throughout history, many of the Hebrew people, who had a promise as God's chosen people, abandoned the faith and did not return.  This may be partially what Paul refers to in Romans when he speaks of Jews who are no longer Jews.  They had extra opportunities and left their birthright.  This may be what the author of Hebrews is saying--those who were so involved in the Church as to actually taste the Holy Spirit, but left.  (Of course, I freely admit even more than usual to the possibility of being wrong here.)

I think of more practical value is the discussion of the evidence of having left.  Chapter 6 makes special emphasis (after encouraging readers that he expects better things of them than apostasy) of endurance and what Paul called "fruit".  I think our emphasis in this chapter should not be fear of losing our salvation, but rather perseverance in living the Christian life.

Thoughts on Hebrews 5: Learning obedience through suffering

This is the first in what I hope to be a series of personal meditations on my daily scripture readings.  The purpose of this series is for my benefit far more than it is for the wider audience.  My goal is that readers will get on my case if I don't publish here regularly. ;)

This chapter is probably best thought of as being in two parts: Verses 1-10 and then the theme from verses 11 on continue into chapter 6.  Today I will look briefly at the first part (and hopefully be disciplined enough to do the second part when I do chapter 6).

Chapter 5 provides some comparisons between earthly priests and Christ's priestly ministry.  Since my goal is not to provide an exhaustive examination of the passage, I'll just emphasize some things the jumped out at me.

First, the earthly priest is able to be compassionate toward sinners because he is a sinner.  He is reminded of this at every sacrifice as he must atone for his own sins before he can offer a sacrifice for the sins of the people.  Christ, obviously, cannot have compassion grounded in this, as he was without sin.  So, what is the grounds for Christ's compassion?  Suffering.

Verse 8 really jumped out at me in this regard: "Although he was a son, he learned obedience through the things he suffered."  One might think that a passage on Christ's role as a priest would focus on his sacrifice as a replacement for the traditional animal sacrifices.  Instead we get this somewhat strange thought thrown in that obedience in performing the sacrifice was learned through suffering.

Perhaps I am making too big a deal of this, but it is an important lesson for me.  I have felt a lot of suffering recently.  To put it bluntly, I feel like I am being punished by God, without being quite sure what I did wrong.  I wonder if the suffering is to teach me obedience.  And if so, obedience in what area?  I suppose this is something I need to contemplate moving forward in Hebrews as I know this theme will come up again.

Choosing a church with my wife

As I've written about on my personal blog, Intellectual Christian Geek, my new wife and I have had a difficult time finding a church that works for both of us.  The short version of the story is that I moved to the city where she lived after we got married.  She was already established in a church--a church that I don't really care for.

Part of the "deal" we made was that if I was going to give up my life, church, and career when we got married, I would at least get to pick the church we went to.  So, we tried a few churches.  I found one that I really liked and felt comfortable in (which is very challenging for me).  After the service my wife raced out to the car and started sobbing.  So much for my getting to choose the church that I wanted...

So the church search continues.  Last Sunday she was visiting her mom out of town, so I had the opportunity to go back to the church where I felt comfortable.  The sermon was really convicting.  It was actually a tangent in the sermon.  The pastor somehow veered from Hebrews 11 passage to talking about submission in marriage.

First of all, let me recognize the obvious.  This is a controversial topic.  Perhaps it's my "aspieness", but I don't care.  The following are my views and you can take them as that.

Here is the passage in question from Ephesians 5 (New English Translation):

5:22 Wives, submit ³²  to your husbands as to the Lord, 5:23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body. 5:24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 5:25 Husbands, love your ³³  wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her 5:26 to sanctify her by cleansing her ³⁴  with the washing of the water by the word, 5:27 so that he ³⁵  may present the church to himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy and blameless. ³⁶  5:28 In the same way ³⁷  husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 5:29 For no one has ever hated his own body ³⁸  but he feeds it and takes care of it, just as Christ also does the church, 5:30 for we are members of his body. ³⁹  5:31 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and will be joined to his wife, and the two will become ⁴⁰  one flesh. ⁴¹  5:32 This mystery is great – but I am actually ⁴²  speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 5:33 Nevertheless, ⁴³  each one of you must also love his own wife as he loves himself, ⁴⁴  and the wife must ⁴⁵  respect ⁴⁶  her husband.

 Yes, I take this passage seriously.  I do believe wives have a duty to submit to their husbands (although my definition of "submit" is probably different from what most English-speakers think). But I also take seriously the husband's duty to sacrificially love his wife.  I also believe the submission thing becomes a lot more palitable if the husband faithfully fulfills his duty.

So, how does this apply to the current church saga my wife and I are facing?  Well, primarily, it means that I should be the one making the sacrifice.  I'll be going to her church.

Even if one ignores the submission and sacrifice language, it does make sense in our case when you step back to think about it.  First of all, I've been a Christian a lot longer than my wife and have significantly greater understanding of Scripture (although you may not be able to tell from this blog so far).  She needs to be in a church where she can flourish more than I do.

Second, outside of church, my wife doesn't really have Christian friends she would see on a regular basis.  While the same is true of me, it is significantly different since the majority of my strong Christian support lives far away from me anyway (literally scattered around the world).  While it is true that most of my friends in any given city were church friends,  that isn't as much of a need for me as it is my wife.

Third, although I don't particularly like the people, the teaching, or the liturgy at my wife's church, there is nothing really wrong with the church.  It takes the Bible seriously.  There are a number of solid Christians there, even if they aren't people I would choose to hang out with. Nothing about it causes an incompatibility with my "aspieness" (such as loud music). There is nothing at the church itself that deserves a veto on my part.  It just doesn't fit my personal tastes  I can live with that. 

Essentially, my wife needs to be in a church where she is comfortable a lot more than I do.  I have developed the coping mechanisms over the years to deal with a lack of comfort in my surroundings.  She hasn't.

It appears that wisdom matches with my (admittedly conservative) interpretation of Ephesians 5 here.  I just needed to get over myself and my own emotional baggage to make the small sacrifice involved.

God is God and I am Not

This morning at church, before corporate prayer time (it's a small church, so it broke up into small groups) we were prompted to pray for corporate humility on behalf of that local congregation, the community, the Church (as in the universal church), and the nation.  As we broke up into small groups, I was reminded of something I wrote 17 years ago when I was in college.  It was an essay entitled "God is God and I am Not".  (By the way, Steven Curtis Chapman apparently has a song by the same title.  I came up with it first.  Of course, I probably got the idea from someone else, so...)

I'd dig up the old essay, except that I am still in the process of unpacking, so I'm not sure where it is.  I'm also not sure it was all that good, so we'll just try to wing it here in this blog post and see what comes.

The gist of the essay is that we humans are not God although we try to fool ourselves into thinking we are.  We try to fool ourselves into thinking we know what's best for us.  We try to fool ourselves into thinking "I am the most important person here."  We may not be that explicit in words, but our actions too often portray our deepest inner feelings.

As a newly-wed, I've been thinking a lot about this type of thing.  Before the wedding, I was reading a book by Mike Mason called The Mystery of Marriage: Meditations on the Miracle.  As a 37-year-old getting married for the first time, I could resonate a lot with Mason's perspective.  If I'm remembering correctly, he used to be a monk.  He spoke about how marriage really opened his eyes to just how selfish he is; how the selfishness penetrated areas he never even thought about.  This perspective really opened his eyes to Paul's message about understanding the sacrifice Christ made for the Church.  Marriage is a true giving up of yourself.  It is placing the needs of your spouse above your own wants.

In fact, as I am writing this, I keep getting interrupted by texts from my wife, who is out of town visiting her family.  This is after finishing a 45 minute phone call from my mother where she didn't really want to talk about anything.  (I am NOT a phone person, so long phone conversations are painful for me.)  I wanted to start writing this post at 9pm and it's now 10:45pm.  My human nature wants to scream at people for them to stop interrupting me.  After all, I'm trying to serve God through this blog post here!

Oh, wait.   God wants me to serve my wife and my mother.  It's not like I couldn't set this aside and finish it tomorrow.  It's my pride getting in the way of performing the service God placed in this stage of my life.  God knows how I need to serve Him better than I do.  God is God and I am not.  I just need to keep reminding myself of that.