Monday, 7 September 2009

Hebrews and Psalm 45

The second of the 'throne' psalms in Hebrews is Psalm 45. The historical setting seems to have been the coronation or marriage of Solomon and its sub-title is a 'Song of Loves'. It is an appropriate title, verses 1-12 being focussed on the King and verses 13-17 on the bride. It is only after the Son had been 'anointed' that the bride comes into view. There could be no church before Christ's coronation.

Again the psalm seems to outstrip its original purpose as it declares; Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You love righteousness and hate wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions. Psa 45:6-7. It is true that rulers were sometimes referred to as 'gods' but what are we to make of the refrain "thy throne... is forever and ever"? Youngs Literal Translation has Thy throne, O God, [is] age-during, and for ever...Psa 45:6 YNG Where the Greek version (LXX) has 'into the age of the ages'. This is a glimpse of an eternal reign!

The author of Hebrews has no doubt that ultimately this is a reference to the Messiah on his eternal throne. He is persisting in his theme of Son and heir but it is the sequence of events that is key too. Notice the order of those events;
1. you have loved righteousness and hated iniquity

2. Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.
This is anointing which follows his triumph. Christ's ascension and accession, ie his coronation is an important truth of revelation. It is because of this that Peter declared; Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. Acts 2:33 It is because he is enthroned and has received this 'anointing' that he is able to 'pour out this which you now see and hear'. In fact, for Peter, the outpouring of the Spirit was the earthly proof of this heavenly reality.

But what kind of anointing is this? Is he anointed King or Priest? The answer to that question will open up the rest of Hebrews to us.

Friday, 4 September 2009

Hebrews and Psalm 2

The author of Hebrews bases his introductory chapter on a group of Psalms. In fact, the whole letter might be seen as a 'sermon' based on texts from the Psalms. These psalms provide a wonderful link to the Old Testament and a thrilling insight into the way that the early Christians 'read their Bibles'. Of course, they didn't have a Bible as we understand it but many would be familiar with much of the Old Testament.

Psalm 2 is a curious psalm. Unless we read it carefully it can be quite difficult to identify the speakers and the listeners. Of the 12 verses we might say that 9 represent God as speaking to the whole world; Psalm 2:1-6, 10-12. But we have three verses in the middle which seem to be out of place; Psalm 2:7-9. Who is the 'I' in Psalm 2:6, and who is the 'I/me' in Psalm 2:7 ? At first glance it seems that it is king David who is speaking and that this is a kind of coronation hymn but the author to the Hebrews sees another meaning in the psalm.

Part of the clue is in the phrase 'I have set my king' (Psalm 2:6) The word translated 'set' is usually translated 'poured out' in the Old Testament and if you 'pour out' oil on a designated person that would make it an 'anointing' and the person would become the Anointed One. This links it with the Anointed One in Psalm 2:2 but the word in verse 2 in Hebrew is 'mashiyach', the Hebrew word for 'Messiah' and the Greek equivalent of that word is 'Christ'.

Now we can see how the author of Hebrews is thinking. This is not simply a coronation hymn for David but a prophecy of 'David's greater son', Jesus Christ. The nine verses are indeed God speaking to the nations but those three verses Psalm 2:7-9 is a glimpse into a heavenly court and can be understood as the testimony of Christ himself. He has been raised from the dead and has ascended into heaven. It is the time of his coronation. The Father publicly acknowledges him as his Son (Psalm 2:7) and his heir (Psalm 2:8) This is the introductory theme of Hebrews 1:2-5 and the 'today I have begotten you' is not a statement of biology but rather the public acknowledgement of given authority.

The final scene of the psalm is a word of counsel to the leaders of the nations to submit to God's duly appointed king and includes the words 'Kiss the Son, lest he be angry'. (Psalm 2:12) This is not a kiss of passion or affection but the kissing of the hand in submission. This is the gospel proclamation. God has set his Son at his own right hand and ruler of heaven and earth and men must surrender to this rule or 'perish'. That is a necessary and sober warning but the psalm ends on a sweeter note; Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him. (Psalm 2:12) Have you?

Thursday, 3 September 2009

Son, heir and firstborn

These three titles from the first chapter of Hebrews have caused many to think that in some way Christ is inferior to the Father. In fact, all three titles are ancient ways of speaking about publicly acknowledged authority.

In 44 BC Julius Caesar 'adopted' Octavius. This was not the kind of adoption that we are familiar with today. Octavius wasn't a bouncing baby but a battle hardened soldier. In ancient times 'adoption' was a sign of favour and acceptance. Men adopted ‘sons’ to ensure the continuance of their empires and fortunes. Octavius became Julius Caesar's 'son', his heir and effectively his 'firstborn'; he is better known as Caesar Augustus. Many Roman Emperors were ‘adopted sons’.

So what point is being made by the author of this letter? In this passage the words son, heir and firstborn have nothing to do with biology but everything to do with a public acknowledgment of the relationship between Christ and the Father. He is publicly acknowledged, by resurrection and ascension, to be the rightful ‘son and heir’. He emptied himself to fulfil the Father’s will and thereby to gain our salvation and now the Father has given him ‘an inheritance’, the reward of his faithful service.

The title of 'firstborn' was used in a similar way in the Old Testament; Then you shall say to Pharaoh, “Thus says the LORD: ‘Israel is My son, My firstborn. So I say to you, let My son go that he may serve Me. Ex 4:22-23. That is a good example of the nature of ancient adoption. The prophecy of Jeremiah has a similar comment about the northern kingdom of Israel; For I am a Father to Israel, And Ephraim is My firstborn. Jer 31:9. We could illustrate the theme from many an Old Testament passage. The ‘firstborn’ was the chief son who was commissioned to carry on the Father’s will into the next generation. Sometimes a first son who failed his father was dispossessed and another son was given the role of ‘firstborn’. The ‘firstborn’ had a double portion of his father’s estate AND his mother and other dependants to care for.

This does not diminish the person of Christ nor does it take away from his divinity. He is co-equal, co-eternal, co-substantial with the Father. Everything we mean when we say God the Father, is equally true of the ‘Son’. The author of Hebrews is consciously putting Christ ‘in his right setting’ so that there are no misunderstandings. He is greater than the angels, greater than Moses, greater than the Aaronic high priests. He has been entrusted with all authority in heaven and on earth. He is the unique expression of God in humanity and to be worshipped as God for ever.

There is an interesting post-script to this idea of ‘son, heir and firstborn’ Our author describes the true church... to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, Heb 12:23. That phrase ‘are registered’ is a verb in its plural form and gives us the clue to something easily missed in our English versions; the word ‘firstborn’ in this verse is plural, the firstborn-ones. What we have here is a whole company comprised of sons, heirs and firstborn ones. This is the constitution of the true church; each member (whether male or female) is acknowledged as one who has the Father’s favour and is entrusted with authority to act on his behalf… not to grow fat on double portions but to provide for the ‘dependants’.

Wednesday, 2 September 2009

God's last word

The letter to the Hebrews begins with a contrast which sets the scene for the remainder of the letter. It puts a clear line of division between 'the old days' and 'now'. Or as the text has it... God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; Heb 1:1-2.

It is contrasting the way that God speaks to us. In 'the old days' he spoke at various times and in various ways and the revelation of truth built slowly so that men could begin to get their clear conception of what God was like. Those revelations were true but not the whole truth; they were partial and some older translations use the language of 'parts' and things 'partial'. We then 'fast-forward' from 'time past' to 'these last days'. The writer speaks from the position of the 'last days' which began with the coming of Christ. He says that 'in times past' God spoke by means of prophets; uniquely commissioned spokesmen for God, but in 'these last days' God has spoken, not through spokesmen, but through his own Son.

This is why John's account of the life of Christ describes him as the Word. Not 'a word', that's what the prophets delivered. But Christ is 'the Word', he is the non-partial revelation of God. God has nothing to say that he has not said in the person of Christ; Christ is God's 'last word'. John's gospel account tells us that 'the Word became flesh and lived among us'. John 1:14. John never recovered from this discovery. In Christ he saw God in all his fulness. John 1:16-18. There may well be fragments of truth in other religious traditions, but everything that God wanted us to know about God is 'visible' in Jesus Christ. This is what Christ himself was pointing to when he answered Philip's request to 'see the Father' with such direct clarity; Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? John 14:9.

And this is why anyone who rejects Christ stands in such great jeopardy. Christ is God's full and final witness, to reject him as 'the Word made flesh' is to turn away from God's last word to the human race. It is also the reason that to think wrongly of Christ is such a foundational folly. We cannot think wrongly of Christ and think right in any other part of our thinking. He is the foundational corner-stone. If that corner-stone is skewed it is impossible to build true in any other part of life. The answer to the question 'what do you think of Christ?' is not religious trivia, it is the difference between light and darkness, life and death.

Tuesday, 1 September 2009

the sole agent

It is part of a beautiful little verse in Peter's first letter; For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God 1 Pet 3:18. This verse could provide us with the perfect material for one of those old-fashioned 'three point sermons'.

The Purpose of His death

...to bring us to God... He did not die as a martyr nor as the result of a miscarriage of justice. Nor was this some divine oversight or cosmic accident, it was part of a definite plan. This does not remove the responsibility of those who did the deed but points to the fact that God was at work in history fulfilling eternal purposes. This simple phrase carries a large implication, it implies that in some way we were separated from God. Why else would it be necessary to do something to 'bring us to God'.

So in what sense are ordinary human beings 'separated from God'?

Christ... suffered... for our sins...

We cannot take the Bible seriously and at the same time ignore this statement. It is a frequent testimony of scripture that Christ's death had to do with 'our sins'; not his sins, he had none. In his death he suffered the due penalty for the breaking of God's known laws; The soul who sins shall die. Ezek 18:20. If you click on the reference you can read the rest of that verse. It says very plainly that every member of our race will receive the due penalty for doing what we knew to be wrong and for not doing what we knew to be right. We are culpable and our sins have separated us from God.

If this is true, and Christ had no sins, how are we to understand his death? He died as the representative and substitute for everyone who had ever broken God's law. He received the punishment that was rightfully ours. An Old Testament prophet had seen this dimension to his death hundreds of years earlier; Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. Is 53:4-6 That is what Bible students call 'substitutionary atonement', Peter simply refers to it as...

the just for the unjust

He took my place, my sin and my punishment. That is what Bible students call 'penal substitutionary atonement'. But in all the wonder of what he achieved we must be careful not to forget that clearly stated purpose. He died in our place, for our sins, as the sin-bearer upon whom God's righteous judgment came, but he did it all, without reluctance... to bring us to God.

What a tragedy it would be if having perfectly accomplished all that was necessary we should fall at the last hurdle... and not come to God. There is forgiveness for sins, peace with God, acceptance, bubbling joy and a million other blessings available... but only for those who will do business with God's sole agent in this enterprise.

Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Heb 7:25

Saturday, 29 August 2009

Living in a patchwork covenant?

Changing the mind-set is a process rather than the result of a single flash of light. The famous Ironebridge in Shropshire, UK was opened on New Year's Day in 1781, the Iron Bridge was the first arch bridge in the world to be made of cast iron. Architect Thomas Farnolls Pritchard commissioned Abraham Darby III, an ironmaster working at Coalbrookdale in the gorge, to cast and build the bridge over the river Severn, which had until then been crossed by ferry. The construction had no precedent, so Pritchard, whose background was in joinery, based the design on carpentry, with joints including mortise and tenon, and blind dovetail.
Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!
iron 'dovetail' joints

Pritchard had a whole new discovery at his feet but initially he was stuck in the mind-set of a previous era. Don't mock him, it happens to Christians all the time. It has sometimes been the habit for preachers to deride the slowness of Peter and the early disciples to 'follow through' in the implications of a New Covenant, but how many who mock Peter are still building iron bridges with dove-tail joints?

One of the great cures for this phenomena is a careful reading and re-reading of the letter to the Hebrews. The New Covenant is not, according to this letter, transition but replacement; then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. Heb 10:9. It is a theme which begins in Chapter 7; there has been 'a change in the priesthood'; Heb 7:12 and the law was a function of the priesthood in the same way that the priesthood was a function of the law; Heb 7:11. The result is that the 'first' or 'earlier' commandment has been 'set aside' as in Heb 7:18.

The New Covenant is not the next step in a kind of evolution of truth but a brand new beginning. It is not a new patch added to an old garment. To live it to its full purpose we shall need to 'set aside' all the 'dovetail joints' of our previous religious experiences and trust the Mediator of this New Covenant to do 'a new thing'. Is 43:18-19

Thursday, 27 August 2009

Drawing near and drawing back.

The letter to the Hebrews contains some of the most solemn warnings in the Bible. Souls with ultra-sensitive consciences often struggle through some of its statements. The letter is full of contrasts. It contrasts Christ with every other servant of God, and contrasts the New Covenant with the Old. There is another, underlying, contrast which is the whole basis of the letter; it is the contrast between drawing near and drawing back.

The letter focuses strongly on faith. Faith is the way that we respond positively to the word of God. In my little thumbnail definition I usually describe it as 'right response to revelation'. The letter to the Hebrews was written to people who have come to a place of personal faith in Christ and had received His Spirit but were in danger of reverting to their original Judaism. The writer, whoever it was, reminds his readers of the way in which old Israel 'drew back' from the promise that God had given them and died... 'out of Egypt' but never 'in the promised land'. I wonder how many this description would fit today? Have you turned your back on the old and known the beginnings of God's redemption but know you have not received all that was promised and find yourself stuck in a 'sub-standard Christianity'? Hebrews has a word for you.

Historically Israel had an Exodus, a meeting with God and, finally, a full entrance into their promised land. I am not suggesting that we create a three stage theology from this but only that these events may focus our attention in a helpful way. It is so easily forgotten, especially by preachers that 'he brought them out so that he could bring them in' is not the whole story. The full story is 'he brought them out so that he could bring them to himself, and after entering into a covenant with them he could then bring them in'. It's not as snappy perhaps that's why we usually go for the shortened version.

Do we have any consciousness of having 'drawn near to God' or is that just the language of the old hymns? On what basis would we be able to 'draw near to God'? Our author has no doubt; it is on the basis of faith. They did not 'draw near' because they had achieved some qualification in terms of righteousness; they 'drew near' because they were invited. Christ's death for us on the cross is the basis for our 'drawing near', nothing else will do. The apostle Peter once summed up the gospel in the words... For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God... 1 Pet 3:18 There is no other basis upon which we can draw near.

But being declared right with God is not quite the same as 'drawing near' to God. It is the necessary condition but not the automatic consequence. The apostle Paul writes of this fact in his letter to the saints in Rome, speaking of Christ he says; through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Rom 5:2-3 He has been speaking about 'justification by faith' but notice now that he says 'faith' gives him 'access into grace'. Faith opens the door and puts us on a right standing with God but we must then walk through it.

The danger for the readers of the Hebrew's letter was twofold; that they would not draw near AND that they would draw back. To 'draw back' in this context is to retreat from the understanding of acceptance with God by faith in Christ's sacrificial death and to set up our camp on the old ground of acceptance with God through human obediences. Those who do so, according to the writer are in mortal danger; Now the just shall live by faith; But if anyone draws back, My soul has no pleasure in him.” Heb 10:38 Just in case you missed it the first time he repeats the statement but in more positive terms in the following chapter; But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Heb 11:6

Acceptance with God is by grace through faith, but the reward is promised to those who 'diligently seek' him.