Paper Walls is a huge step forward for Yellowcard. If you are familiar with or like Ocean Avenue, then you will love Paper Walls. The music is lively, energetic, pleasing and inspiring. It is a must buy for anyone who loves Yellowcard or likes Ocean Avenue.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Virtual Drum Lessons Update
Material for my free drum lessons blog, Virtual Drum Lessons (http://virtualdrumlessons.blogspot.com), picked up overnight, literally! Due to grad school I was unable to work on my drums blog. However, now that I finished that one particular class, I was able to get some recording in and post the videos last night and this morning.
Here is a list of the videos that I posted along with their corresponding posts at Virtual Drum Lessons:
Here is a list of the videos that I posted along with their corresponding posts at Virtual Drum Lessons:
- Drum rudiments around the kit (Beginner's Lesson 5)
- The essentials of drumming (Beginner's Lesson 6)
- Sticking or hand work (Beginner's Lesson 7)
- Foot work or pedal work (Beginner's Lesson 8)
- Hand-foot coordination (Beginner's Lesson 9)
- Drum solo, breaks stick (Drum Solo)
Currently Reading
I am nearly finished with this book for my Christian Worldview philosophy class for Fuller. It is old with the majority of the essays written in it coming from around the 1920s. The arguments for God are looked upon as a joke and the author's treatment of Jesus according to the Gospels is quite misleading. This book is good to show that one cannot prove nor disprove God exists; however, it is rather annoying that it makes firm statements about Jesus on the basis of poor exegesis. (The author, Bertrand Russell, is not a theologian, but a philosopher, and as such it is not expected that he should have anything but poor exegesis, although he should be well informed.) If you want to know what the arguments for and against Christianity were like back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, buy this book. It very well may be helpful for understanding today's arguments for and against Christianity, since this book was apparently very influential not only in its time but also in forming today's arguments too according to Dr. Richard Mouw, the professor of my philosophy class.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
The Faith of Hebrews is Practical
What is faith in the letter to the Hebrews? Is this theme platonic, i.e. focused on the true things in heaven rather than the copies here on earth? Is it purely intellectual? Furthermore, how does faith function in Hebrews? What purpose does this theme serve? It has been suggested that faith in Hebrews is platonic, that it is understood to be an intellectual understanding of the true heavenly nature of the copies seen on earth. Although the theme of faith in Hebrews might appear to be platonic and purely intellectual at first glance, it is actually quite practical before a Jewish-apocalyptic background. In order to demonstrate this theme’s practical nature in light of its Jewish-apocalyptic background, we will examine two important parts to faith in Hebrews. First, we will look at what faith is and how it is understood in Hebrews. Second, we will look at how this theme functions in Hebrews. Then, after having looked at these two parts, we will briefly determine why faith in Hebrews is not platonic or purely intellectual.
What is faith in Hebrews? Donald Hagner defines faith as follows: “Belief, trust, and obedience to God as revealed in Jesus Christ” (2002, 202). Faith has a prerequisite—belief in God (2002, 145). Faith cannot exist unless one believes that God exists because it requires obedience to God; if one does not believe in God, then one cannot have faith, because it is impossible for one to obey someone that does not exist. Faith is also possible only because Jesus enables it for us (Lindars 1991, 45). Thus, faith is belief and obedience to God, which is made possible through Jesus Christ. Yet, in Hebrews faith is much more developed than this simple definition. It is also a response that is not merely intellectual but practical too (1991, 98). Jesus is the object of faith in Hebrews (1991, 48). Faith is also required and expected of all believers in this letter (Lindars 1991, 107, 112-3). But still, it is much more complicated than this simple understanding of it. Faith is an attitude of the mind (1991, 108), but it is also a response from the heart (43). In addition, faith is “a believing response to the promise of God” (Lane 1991, 315). Barnabas Lindars adds, “Faith in Hebrews is a moral quality of firmness, fidelity, and reliability” (1991, 109). William Lane agrees, stating that faith “is characterized by firmness, reliability, and steadfastness. It is trust in God and in his promises” (1991, 315). Faith in Hebrews “is the proper response to God’s act of salvation through Christ” as well as “a moral quality which should be constantly expressed in Christian living” (Lindars 1991, 110). George Ladd writes, “In Hebrews faith is the faculty to perceive the reality of the unseen world of God and to make it the primary object of one’s life, in contrast to the transitory and often evil character of present human existence” (1993, 631). Furthermore, “Faith is that which makes real to the believer the unseen world of God” (1993, 631). Hagner states it similarly in the following words: “Faith makes concrete what is unavailable to our sight” (2002, 143). To sum up all of these various facets of faith in the letter of Hebrews, we might want to try to produce a working definition of faith that attempts to include as many of the aforementioned elements without becoming so complex that it transforms into something that is unhelpful.
We can define faith as follows: faith is an attitude of the mind and an active response from the heart that is required of every Christian in which firmness, fidelity and reliability should characterize him or her in a constant expression of devoted living through following the example of Jesus Christ, so that the struggle against sin might be maintained, suffering persevered, and persecution withstood. Note the major elements of faith in this definition. Faith is an attitude and a response. Faith is required. Faith is characterized by firmness, fidelity and reliability. Faith is a constant expression of devoted living. Faith is living by the example of Jesus Christ. For Hebrews faith encompasses all of these and much more. Faith is also perceived as the human responsibility in the covenant God made through Christ’s death on the cross (Lindars 1991, 108), which is why it is so important for a Christian to have, so that his or her salvation might be brought to completion (1991, 108). Now that we have seen the intricate understanding of faith in Hebrews, we can look at the function of this theme.
Hebrews uses the theme of faith in order to accomplish several things, such as, but not limited to, to highlight secured forgiveness of sins through the completed work of Christ (Lindars 1991, 103), to exhort the recipients to make extra effort and take extra care to be full participants in all aspects of Christian living (117), to ensure that the struggle against sin would be maintained and suffering would be persevered (113-4). As per our working definition, faith in Hebrews functions to help fight against the struggle with sin, to help persevere through suffering, and to help withstand persecution. This three-piece function is demonstrated in Hebrews 11 and 12, where faith is used to persuade the readers in such a way that they not give up against their struggle with sin, that they persevere through suffering, and that they withstand persecution. Now that we have looked at the function of the theme in addition to its understanding in Hebrews, we can now explore why faith is not platonic or purely intellectual.
If faith were platonic in Hebrews, it would follow that the object of faith would be the true thing in heaven as opposed to its copy on earth. However, Jesus is the object of faith, and although he is in heaven, we are not focused on him being in heaven as opposed to his copy that is on earth. In fact, there is no copy of Christ here on earth; there is only Jesus Christ, the human being that died, was resurrected and ascended into heaven where he sat down at the right hand of God. It is this Jesus that Christians center their faith on. Furthermore, Jesus is not a copy but an example to be emulated, so that while being the object of faith, Christians have a responsibility to emulate Christ’s example. This responsibility proves faith to be active, not passive, which means that it cannot be purely intellectual. If it were purely intellectual, it would not allow for any sort of active demonstration. However, the very nature of faith demands that it be an active expression of focusing on the example of Christ. In addition, faith in Hebrews follows Jewish-apocalyptic thinking, in which there is a horizontal aspect to faith. This horizontal aspect looks at faith on a temporal plane, where the perceptions of “before” and “after,” “past” and “present,” and “promise” and “fulfillment” influence this theme rather than the platonic vertical element, which perceives of the “above” and “below,” “heavenly” and “earthly,” and “archetype” and “type.” Therefore, the theme of faith in Hebrews is certainly not platonic, but rather, Jewish-apocalyptic, and it is not purely intellectual, and instead, practical.
Faith focuses on Jesus Christ in the things not yet seen. It is practical, being an attitude and a response that demonstrates daily loyalty and devotion to God through emulating Christ, the perfect example of faith. Faith in Hebrews is not platonic, but rather, Jewish-apocalyptic, and it functions to persuade the recipients of the letter to persevere and withstand persecution. Such a faith is expected and required of Christians, which is not terribly difficult for them because they have Christ, the author and perfecter of their faith, who helps to enable them to continue on towards completion in their faith.
_______________
Bibliography
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academics.
Ladd, George. 1993. A Theology of the New Testament. Rev. ed. Donald Hagner, ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Lane, William. 1991. Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews 9-13. Vol. 47b. David Hubbard, Glenn Barker, and Ralph Martin, eds. Columbia: Word, Inc.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. James Dunn, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
What is faith in Hebrews? Donald Hagner defines faith as follows: “Belief, trust, and obedience to God as revealed in Jesus Christ” (2002, 202). Faith has a prerequisite—belief in God (2002, 145). Faith cannot exist unless one believes that God exists because it requires obedience to God; if one does not believe in God, then one cannot have faith, because it is impossible for one to obey someone that does not exist. Faith is also possible only because Jesus enables it for us (Lindars 1991, 45). Thus, faith is belief and obedience to God, which is made possible through Jesus Christ. Yet, in Hebrews faith is much more developed than this simple definition. It is also a response that is not merely intellectual but practical too (1991, 98). Jesus is the object of faith in Hebrews (1991, 48). Faith is also required and expected of all believers in this letter (Lindars 1991, 107, 112-3). But still, it is much more complicated than this simple understanding of it. Faith is an attitude of the mind (1991, 108), but it is also a response from the heart (43). In addition, faith is “a believing response to the promise of God” (Lane 1991, 315). Barnabas Lindars adds, “Faith in Hebrews is a moral quality of firmness, fidelity, and reliability” (1991, 109). William Lane agrees, stating that faith “is characterized by firmness, reliability, and steadfastness. It is trust in God and in his promises” (1991, 315). Faith in Hebrews “is the proper response to God’s act of salvation through Christ” as well as “a moral quality which should be constantly expressed in Christian living” (Lindars 1991, 110). George Ladd writes, “In Hebrews faith is the faculty to perceive the reality of the unseen world of God and to make it the primary object of one’s life, in contrast to the transitory and often evil character of present human existence” (1993, 631). Furthermore, “Faith is that which makes real to the believer the unseen world of God” (1993, 631). Hagner states it similarly in the following words: “Faith makes concrete what is unavailable to our sight” (2002, 143). To sum up all of these various facets of faith in the letter of Hebrews, we might want to try to produce a working definition of faith that attempts to include as many of the aforementioned elements without becoming so complex that it transforms into something that is unhelpful.
We can define faith as follows: faith is an attitude of the mind and an active response from the heart that is required of every Christian in which firmness, fidelity and reliability should characterize him or her in a constant expression of devoted living through following the example of Jesus Christ, so that the struggle against sin might be maintained, suffering persevered, and persecution withstood. Note the major elements of faith in this definition. Faith is an attitude and a response. Faith is required. Faith is characterized by firmness, fidelity and reliability. Faith is a constant expression of devoted living. Faith is living by the example of Jesus Christ. For Hebrews faith encompasses all of these and much more. Faith is also perceived as the human responsibility in the covenant God made through Christ’s death on the cross (Lindars 1991, 108), which is why it is so important for a Christian to have, so that his or her salvation might be brought to completion (1991, 108). Now that we have seen the intricate understanding of faith in Hebrews, we can look at the function of this theme.
Hebrews uses the theme of faith in order to accomplish several things, such as, but not limited to, to highlight secured forgiveness of sins through the completed work of Christ (Lindars 1991, 103), to exhort the recipients to make extra effort and take extra care to be full participants in all aspects of Christian living (117), to ensure that the struggle against sin would be maintained and suffering would be persevered (113-4). As per our working definition, faith in Hebrews functions to help fight against the struggle with sin, to help persevere through suffering, and to help withstand persecution. This three-piece function is demonstrated in Hebrews 11 and 12, where faith is used to persuade the readers in such a way that they not give up against their struggle with sin, that they persevere through suffering, and that they withstand persecution. Now that we have looked at the function of the theme in addition to its understanding in Hebrews, we can now explore why faith is not platonic or purely intellectual.
If faith were platonic in Hebrews, it would follow that the object of faith would be the true thing in heaven as opposed to its copy on earth. However, Jesus is the object of faith, and although he is in heaven, we are not focused on him being in heaven as opposed to his copy that is on earth. In fact, there is no copy of Christ here on earth; there is only Jesus Christ, the human being that died, was resurrected and ascended into heaven where he sat down at the right hand of God. It is this Jesus that Christians center their faith on. Furthermore, Jesus is not a copy but an example to be emulated, so that while being the object of faith, Christians have a responsibility to emulate Christ’s example. This responsibility proves faith to be active, not passive, which means that it cannot be purely intellectual. If it were purely intellectual, it would not allow for any sort of active demonstration. However, the very nature of faith demands that it be an active expression of focusing on the example of Christ. In addition, faith in Hebrews follows Jewish-apocalyptic thinking, in which there is a horizontal aspect to faith. This horizontal aspect looks at faith on a temporal plane, where the perceptions of “before” and “after,” “past” and “present,” and “promise” and “fulfillment” influence this theme rather than the platonic vertical element, which perceives of the “above” and “below,” “heavenly” and “earthly,” and “archetype” and “type.” Therefore, the theme of faith in Hebrews is certainly not platonic, but rather, Jewish-apocalyptic, and it is not purely intellectual, and instead, practical.
Faith focuses on Jesus Christ in the things not yet seen. It is practical, being an attitude and a response that demonstrates daily loyalty and devotion to God through emulating Christ, the perfect example of faith. Faith in Hebrews is not platonic, but rather, Jewish-apocalyptic, and it functions to persuade the recipients of the letter to persevere and withstand persecution. Such a faith is expected and required of Christians, which is not terribly difficult for them because they have Christ, the author and perfecter of their faith, who helps to enable them to continue on towards completion in their faith.
_______________
Bibliography
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academics.
Ladd, George. 1993. A Theology of the New Testament. Rev. ed. Donald Hagner, ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Lane, William. 1991. Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews 9-13. Vol. 47b. David Hubbard, Glenn Barker, and Ralph Martin, eds. Columbia: Word, Inc.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. James Dunn, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rest as God's Presence in Hebrews
“Rest” is not an easy theme to quickly grasp in Hebrews. There have been many suggestions by scholars and commentators to what the “rest” in Hebrews 3 and 4 might be, such as, but not limited to, present spiritual rest, heaven, cessation from good works, successful Christian living, and peace with God. However, “rest” should be understood as God’s presence, because it best fits the historical and literary contexts. In order to understand the theme of “rest” in Hebrews, we should first seek to understand how David understood rest when he wrote Psalm 95. Second, we should seek to determine what “God’s rest” means. Third, we should briefly examine some other options presented by scholars for understanding this theme. After having surveyed all of these options, we should conclude how we ought to understand “rest” in Hebrews.
David probably thought that “rest” was The Promised Land. In Deuteronomy 12:9, God refers to The Promised Land as his “rest.” Since he would have been familiar with the Torah, it is likely that David thought “rest” was The Promised Land. We ought to note that it is the author of Hebrews and not David who makes the connection between the “rest” in Psalm 95 with the “rest” of the seventh day of Creation. However, since we see an exhortation in Psalm 95 to not take a rebellious position against the word of the Lord today, there is in fact a notion in David’s thinking that the rest was not merely The Promised Land, but it was much more. The author of Hebrews takes the position that “rest” in Psalm 95 is God’s rest from the seventh day of Creation. But what precisely is God’s rest?
God’s rest is two-sided. In Hebrews three and four, God’s rest is the rest from the seventh day of Creation. God rested from his work at the completion of Creation. It is this rest that caused the commandment to keep the seventh or Sabbath day holy in Exodus 20:8-11, thus linking it with Creation. Donald Hagner notes that the Sabbath rest for Judaism involved much more than a cessation from work, that it was also a day of celebration, happiness, feasting, spiritual joy, rejoicing in God’s creation, and an anticipation of final eschatological judgment (2002, 76). At least in part, God’s rest should be understood in terms of the completion of Creation and the Sabbath rest commandment, in which the latter is inseparably linked to the former.
There are three options scholars and commentators have proposed for “rest” in Hebrews that we are going to briefly explore. The first option for “rest” is heaven. Robert Gundry, in describing Christ as better than Joshua, contrasts the location that Joshua brought the Israelites into versus the location that Jesus will bring God’s people into (2003, 464). Gundry writes, “[T]hough Joshua brought Israel into Canaan, Christ will bring believers into the eternal resting place of heaven, where God rests from his work of Creation (4:1-10)” (464). For our first option, Gundry looks at rest in Hebrews as the place where we will rest with God who has been resting since the completion of Creation, that is, in heaven. However, something more than a place is being referred to in Hebrews. To refer to “rest” as heaven does not fit the context as well as one might like and it is therefore unhelpful.
The second option is spiritual rest. Donald Hagner understands rest to be a transcendental spiritual rest involving “security, contentment, satisfaction, and peace for God’s people” (2002, 203). Hagner understands that the believer enters into this kind of rest in the present because it is the sure position and possession of the Christian, yet it will not be completely realized until the end (73). This option is helpful for determining how a believer can have “rest” now, but it does not clearly identify what it is, nor does it explain the connection between God’s rest and the rest of the recipients. This option simply does not help us understand the text as it is, hence it too is unhelpful.
The third option is the presence of God. Lincoln Hurst proposed in a class on Hebrews that “rest” is God’s presence. This line of thought is founded on the basis that religion in Hebrews is total and complete access to God. Indeed, Hebrews is full of access language. Barnabas Lindars takes “rest” to be a new image in Hebrews for the theme of completion of God’s plan, which is “the state of direct access to God” (1991, 49). Lindars demonstrates that the “rest” mentioned in Psalm 95 is future, so it entails an eschatological completion (49). Since God is speaking in Psalm 95 and he makes mention of his rest, Hebrews turns to the seventh day of Creation and applies it to what is in store for believers when they enter God’s presence (49). Similarly, Donald Guthrie points to “rest” as completion. He writes, “What believers can now enter is none other than the same kind of rest which the Creator enjoyed when he had completed his works, which means that the rest idea is of completion and not of inactivity” (1983, 113). This option underscores a present and future rest that runs parallel to God’s rest from the seventh day of Creation. Since believers enter into God’s “rest,” that is, God’s presence, they too share in the cessation of work, which is not for the sake of inactivity but a result of completion. This “rest” points to the eschatological completion, which is the time that God’s plan of salvation will be made complete (Lindars 1981, 49).
“Rest” as the presence of God fits the context of Hebrews three and four quite well. Not only does it align with God’s rest both in reference to the seventh day of Creation and the Sabbath rest, but it also accounts for the warning passage in chapter three. The author of Hebrews points out that the Israelites in the wilderness did not enter God’s rest, that is, His presence, because God’s word was not met with faith; so it should not be for the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews. The author exhorts them to press into the living God and encourage each other every day so that none of them might give up their confession prematurely before the end in the face of persecution. To give up prematurely would be tantamount to having the same rebellious heart of unbelief that the Israelites had, which would keep them from entering God’s presence just as it kept the Israelites from entering it. Understanding “rest” as God’s presence best interprets the theme in accord with the historical and literary contexts and therefore it is the best and most helpful option.
God’s rest has a future function with a present impact in light of past events. God’s rest was The Promised Land for the Israelites and perhaps both The Promised Land and the seventh day of Creation for David. However, for the author and the recipients of Hebrews, “rest” is understood to be God’s presence, which could be experienced at least in part in the present but would be completely experienced in the eschatological fulfillment of time. The theme of “rest” in Hebrews must be understood in light of the seventh day of Creation, the Sabbath day, and the historical and literary contexts of Hebrews. Understanding God’s “rest” as His presence best satisfies all of those necessary considerations.
_______________
Bibliography
Gundry, Robert. 2003. A Survey of the New Testament. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guthrie, Donald. 1983. The Letter to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leon Morris, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company and InterVarsity Press.
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
David probably thought that “rest” was The Promised Land. In Deuteronomy 12:9, God refers to The Promised Land as his “rest.” Since he would have been familiar with the Torah, it is likely that David thought “rest” was The Promised Land. We ought to note that it is the author of Hebrews and not David who makes the connection between the “rest” in Psalm 95 with the “rest” of the seventh day of Creation. However, since we see an exhortation in Psalm 95 to not take a rebellious position against the word of the Lord today, there is in fact a notion in David’s thinking that the rest was not merely The Promised Land, but it was much more. The author of Hebrews takes the position that “rest” in Psalm 95 is God’s rest from the seventh day of Creation. But what precisely is God’s rest?
God’s rest is two-sided. In Hebrews three and four, God’s rest is the rest from the seventh day of Creation. God rested from his work at the completion of Creation. It is this rest that caused the commandment to keep the seventh or Sabbath day holy in Exodus 20:8-11, thus linking it with Creation. Donald Hagner notes that the Sabbath rest for Judaism involved much more than a cessation from work, that it was also a day of celebration, happiness, feasting, spiritual joy, rejoicing in God’s creation, and an anticipation of final eschatological judgment (2002, 76). At least in part, God’s rest should be understood in terms of the completion of Creation and the Sabbath rest commandment, in which the latter is inseparably linked to the former.
There are three options scholars and commentators have proposed for “rest” in Hebrews that we are going to briefly explore. The first option for “rest” is heaven. Robert Gundry, in describing Christ as better than Joshua, contrasts the location that Joshua brought the Israelites into versus the location that Jesus will bring God’s people into (2003, 464). Gundry writes, “[T]hough Joshua brought Israel into Canaan, Christ will bring believers into the eternal resting place of heaven, where God rests from his work of Creation (4:1-10)” (464). For our first option, Gundry looks at rest in Hebrews as the place where we will rest with God who has been resting since the completion of Creation, that is, in heaven. However, something more than a place is being referred to in Hebrews. To refer to “rest” as heaven does not fit the context as well as one might like and it is therefore unhelpful.
The second option is spiritual rest. Donald Hagner understands rest to be a transcendental spiritual rest involving “security, contentment, satisfaction, and peace for God’s people” (2002, 203). Hagner understands that the believer enters into this kind of rest in the present because it is the sure position and possession of the Christian, yet it will not be completely realized until the end (73). This option is helpful for determining how a believer can have “rest” now, but it does not clearly identify what it is, nor does it explain the connection between God’s rest and the rest of the recipients. This option simply does not help us understand the text as it is, hence it too is unhelpful.
The third option is the presence of God. Lincoln Hurst proposed in a class on Hebrews that “rest” is God’s presence. This line of thought is founded on the basis that religion in Hebrews is total and complete access to God. Indeed, Hebrews is full of access language. Barnabas Lindars takes “rest” to be a new image in Hebrews for the theme of completion of God’s plan, which is “the state of direct access to God” (1991, 49). Lindars demonstrates that the “rest” mentioned in Psalm 95 is future, so it entails an eschatological completion (49). Since God is speaking in Psalm 95 and he makes mention of his rest, Hebrews turns to the seventh day of Creation and applies it to what is in store for believers when they enter God’s presence (49). Similarly, Donald Guthrie points to “rest” as completion. He writes, “What believers can now enter is none other than the same kind of rest which the Creator enjoyed when he had completed his works, which means that the rest idea is of completion and not of inactivity” (1983, 113). This option underscores a present and future rest that runs parallel to God’s rest from the seventh day of Creation. Since believers enter into God’s “rest,” that is, God’s presence, they too share in the cessation of work, which is not for the sake of inactivity but a result of completion. This “rest” points to the eschatological completion, which is the time that God’s plan of salvation will be made complete (Lindars 1981, 49).
“Rest” as the presence of God fits the context of Hebrews three and four quite well. Not only does it align with God’s rest both in reference to the seventh day of Creation and the Sabbath rest, but it also accounts for the warning passage in chapter three. The author of Hebrews points out that the Israelites in the wilderness did not enter God’s rest, that is, His presence, because God’s word was not met with faith; so it should not be for the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews. The author exhorts them to press into the living God and encourage each other every day so that none of them might give up their confession prematurely before the end in the face of persecution. To give up prematurely would be tantamount to having the same rebellious heart of unbelief that the Israelites had, which would keep them from entering God’s presence just as it kept the Israelites from entering it. Understanding “rest” as God’s presence best interprets the theme in accord with the historical and literary contexts and therefore it is the best and most helpful option.
God’s rest has a future function with a present impact in light of past events. God’s rest was The Promised Land for the Israelites and perhaps both The Promised Land and the seventh day of Creation for David. However, for the author and the recipients of Hebrews, “rest” is understood to be God’s presence, which could be experienced at least in part in the present but would be completely experienced in the eschatological fulfillment of time. The theme of “rest” in Hebrews must be understood in light of the seventh day of Creation, the Sabbath day, and the historical and literary contexts of Hebrews. Understanding God’s “rest” as His presence best satisfies all of those necessary considerations.
_______________
Bibliography
Gundry, Robert. 2003. A Survey of the New Testament. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guthrie, Donald. 1983. The Letter to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leon Morris, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company and InterVarsity Press.
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Discouragement as Falling Away in Hebrews
Lincoln Hurst said in a class on Hebrews that the warning passages in the letter are designed against discouragement. The purpose of those warning passages are to help bring discouraged Christians back into hope, the cure for discouragement. Hurst said that for the author of Hebrews discouragement in the faith is tantamount to falling away, so that what he is doing is he is persuading them to look toward the future when they will be brought to perfection, that is, completion, and will be rewarded by God. Although they had not fallen away, their discouragement was pointing them in that direction, so the author of Hebrews was discouraging them from their discouragement. He persuades them by bringing to their attention that they are of things that belong to salvation, that they have entered and will enter the promise of God, that they are of faith and therefore are saved, and that they have a sure anchor of hope that they can be made steadfast with to endure persecution and suffering.
Well, I have not exactly come across any explanation like this one in the few commentaries that I have read on Hebrews. However, it does help to explain a few things. First, it explains why the language used in 6:4-6 for example sounds like Christians are being identified. It makes sense that if he is writing to discouraged Christians, which he makes tantamount to falling away although they had not actually done so completely, that they should have all of the qualities and descriptions of being Christians. Second, it explains the punch verses like 6:9 for example to be an encouraging word in a dire situation so as to persuade the recipients to identify themselves with the faithful ones who belong to salvation and remind them of their reward. Finally, it satisfies the historical context for the letter, in which persecution and suffering for being a Christian was facing the recipients, thus leaving them discouraged and tempting them to fall away.
What do you think of this discouragement understanding for the warning passages of Hebrews?
Does it make sense?
Does it fit the text?
What do you propose would be a better understanding?
Well, I have not exactly come across any explanation like this one in the few commentaries that I have read on Hebrews. However, it does help to explain a few things. First, it explains why the language used in 6:4-6 for example sounds like Christians are being identified. It makes sense that if he is writing to discouraged Christians, which he makes tantamount to falling away although they had not actually done so completely, that they should have all of the qualities and descriptions of being Christians. Second, it explains the punch verses like 6:9 for example to be an encouraging word in a dire situation so as to persuade the recipients to identify themselves with the faithful ones who belong to salvation and remind them of their reward. Finally, it satisfies the historical context for the letter, in which persecution and suffering for being a Christian was facing the recipients, thus leaving them discouraged and tempting them to fall away.
What do you think of this discouragement understanding for the warning passages of Hebrews?
Does it make sense?
Does it fit the text?
What do you propose would be a better understanding?
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Hebrews 6 and the Metaphor
I have been continuing to think about the warning passage specific to Hebrews 6, especially since Bill Giovannetti has brought it up in his series called Once Saved, Always Saved. I have noticed something that I have not yet seen or heard of before. I am not saying that someone else hasn't said it, but that I have not yet discovered it in any of my readings or classes. Here is what I have found.
Hebrews 6:4-6 ought to be read and interpreted alongside of Hebrews 6:7-8. Why? It seems that Hebrews 6:7-8 is a metaphor that is used by the author of Hebrews to explain 6:4-6. We have to determine what the metaphor is saying before we can go back and look at what precedes it.
The metaphor is a farming or cultivating metaphor. "Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned (Hebrews 6:7-8, NIV)". "Worthless" is an interesting word in Greek. When referring to humans it is something that is rejected as false. Although it is being used here in reference to crops, it is part of a metaphor that is being used to describe humans. Therefore, I am arguing that "worthless" ought to be understood with the background of being rejected as false. As such, the metaphor is describing in the second instance someone who is rejected as false. But in relation to what?--In relation to being the fruit of the land. Metaphorically, what is the land and what are the crops? The land is the believer and the believer's actions are the crops of the land. A believer that produces worthless or "rejected as false" actions is in danger of being burned.
What are actions that are considered worthless? Might I suggest that they are those that turn away from Christ to those basic tenets of Judaism that are referred to prior to Hebrews 6:4-6? The warning is not to lay such a foundation again but to move on to the more advanced teaching. Perhaps, in light of the metaphor, Hebrews 6:4-6 is saying, "If you forsake the more advanced teaching and cling to the elementary teaching, you will prove yourself worthless and will be rejected because you are a false believer." If this is true, then Hebrews 6:4-6, as understood through the metaphor in vv. 7-8, is not talking about true believers at all, because in the end if someone does not prove faithful it is true that they were not saved. Salvation has a past, present and future reality, but if someone is not able to make good on his or her commitment until the end, then the future salvation is made null and the present void. So we can say that people who have all the appearances of being saved may not actually be saved; the test of time and perseverance is the litmus test for believers because only it can tell us who is truly partakers of Christ. All those who fall away were not true but false believers and will therefore be rejected and burned.
Note that the author is sure that his recipients are destined for salvation. He is sure that they will persevere until the very end and will not be rejected as false but accepted as true (Hebrews 6:9). It seems that he is not talking about his recipients in Hebrews 6:4-6 and vv. 7-8, but rather those who do not hold true to the faith until the end.
Might I suggest, then, in light of this informative idea, that the understanding of the author of Hebrews is those who are saved will in fact persevere until the end, but those who are not saved will show their true colors when faced with persecution and will turn away even though they have all the appearances of being a believer? Whichever position we take, it will have to deal with this metaphor, the foundation of the Jewish tenets, and the acknowledgment of better things for salvation when understanding vv. 4-6. I think, although I admit this idea is off of the top of my head and may be premature, that the present suggestion does lead us to a satisfying understanding of vv. 4-6 and the metaphor, Jewish tenets, and confidence mentioned.
Perhaps this idea is wrong and that would be why I have yet to hear of it in classes or read of it in books. However, what has been proposed in the past has yet to satisfy the student of Hebrews and the debate continues, which means that what has been proposed, all those various presentations, are flawed. There is still some room for enlightenment; I am not proposing that my suggestion is that enlightenment, but it is an idea that I would like to continue to work on and consider.
Hebrews 6:4-6 ought to be read and interpreted alongside of Hebrews 6:7-8. Why? It seems that Hebrews 6:7-8 is a metaphor that is used by the author of Hebrews to explain 6:4-6. We have to determine what the metaphor is saying before we can go back and look at what precedes it.
The metaphor is a farming or cultivating metaphor. "Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned (Hebrews 6:7-8, NIV)". "Worthless" is an interesting word in Greek. When referring to humans it is something that is rejected as false. Although it is being used here in reference to crops, it is part of a metaphor that is being used to describe humans. Therefore, I am arguing that "worthless" ought to be understood with the background of being rejected as false. As such, the metaphor is describing in the second instance someone who is rejected as false. But in relation to what?--In relation to being the fruit of the land. Metaphorically, what is the land and what are the crops? The land is the believer and the believer's actions are the crops of the land. A believer that produces worthless or "rejected as false" actions is in danger of being burned.
What are actions that are considered worthless? Might I suggest that they are those that turn away from Christ to those basic tenets of Judaism that are referred to prior to Hebrews 6:4-6? The warning is not to lay such a foundation again but to move on to the more advanced teaching. Perhaps, in light of the metaphor, Hebrews 6:4-6 is saying, "If you forsake the more advanced teaching and cling to the elementary teaching, you will prove yourself worthless and will be rejected because you are a false believer." If this is true, then Hebrews 6:4-6, as understood through the metaphor in vv. 7-8, is not talking about true believers at all, because in the end if someone does not prove faithful it is true that they were not saved. Salvation has a past, present and future reality, but if someone is not able to make good on his or her commitment until the end, then the future salvation is made null and the present void. So we can say that people who have all the appearances of being saved may not actually be saved; the test of time and perseverance is the litmus test for believers because only it can tell us who is truly partakers of Christ. All those who fall away were not true but false believers and will therefore be rejected and burned.
Note that the author is sure that his recipients are destined for salvation. He is sure that they will persevere until the very end and will not be rejected as false but accepted as true (Hebrews 6:9). It seems that he is not talking about his recipients in Hebrews 6:4-6 and vv. 7-8, but rather those who do not hold true to the faith until the end.
Might I suggest, then, in light of this informative idea, that the understanding of the author of Hebrews is those who are saved will in fact persevere until the end, but those who are not saved will show their true colors when faced with persecution and will turn away even though they have all the appearances of being a believer? Whichever position we take, it will have to deal with this metaphor, the foundation of the Jewish tenets, and the acknowledgment of better things for salvation when understanding vv. 4-6. I think, although I admit this idea is off of the top of my head and may be premature, that the present suggestion does lead us to a satisfying understanding of vv. 4-6 and the metaphor, Jewish tenets, and confidence mentioned.
Perhaps this idea is wrong and that would be why I have yet to hear of it in classes or read of it in books. However, what has been proposed in the past has yet to satisfy the student of Hebrews and the debate continues, which means that what has been proposed, all those various presentations, are flawed. There is still some room for enlightenment; I am not proposing that my suggestion is that enlightenment, but it is an idea that I would like to continue to work on and consider.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
The Warning Passages of Hebrews in Historical Context
Warning passages in the letter to the Hebrews have generated much discussion in Christian circles. The author of this sermonic letter warned his recipients against apostasy several times, which are found in 2:1-4; 3:12-14; 4:1-11; 6:4-12; 10:26-31; 12:14-17; 12:25-29. In order to understand the warning passages in Hebrews, we must first understand the historical context for the sermonic letter before we look at the dynamics of the texts. In terms of the historical context, we need to briefly consider the date, the destination, the recipients and the purpose of the letter.
The exact date of the letter to the Hebrews is not certain, but we do know Hebrews was written before 70 AD (Guthrie 1983, 28). Donald Hagner is certain that this letter was written in the 60s (2002, 25). We know it was not written after 95 AD because it is quoted by Clement at that time (Guthrie 1983, 28). However, since the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple would have been the clinching argument for the author of Hebrews, the fact that it is unmentioned in the letter strongly encourages a time of writing before 70 AD (Hagner 2002, 25). The most logical time for the letter to have been written is sometime in 64-70 AD, but where was it sent?
The destination of the letter is unknown, although we do have a few important clues that point us to Rome. Guthrie boldly writes that Rome is the best choice based on internal and external evidence as the destination of the letter to the Hebrews (1983, 27). Hagner agrees, based on the fact that 1 Clement, written in Rome in 95 AD, quotes from Hebrews extensively, and because the recipients of the letter are identified as generous (6:10; 10:32-34), which we know was characteristic of the church in Rome (2002, 25). If in fact it was written to people in Rome, exactly to whom in Rome was Hebrews written?
The recipients of the letter are not completely certain, but it is very likely to be Jewish Christians who were being written to (Hagner 2002, 23). Hebrews indicates that these Jewish Christians in Rome were contemplating going back to Judaism for whatever reason (Guthrie 1983, 32). The question is, “Why would the Jewish Christians in Rome contemplate going back to Judaism?” It has been suggested that they were feeling a greater benefit from Judaism than from Christianity, and had thus lost confidence in the church, that is, the Christian assembly (Lindars 1991, 12). But the question remains—“Why?” The Jewish Christians were facing persecution, and they were on the point of falling away from Christ so that they might not have to endure the persecution (Ladd 1993, 632). Robert Gundry suggests the possibility that the recipients “are a Jewish Christian group or house-church who have broken away from the main body of Christians in their locality and who stand in danger of lapsing back into Judaism to avoid persecution” (2003, 460-1). Therefore, the situation at hand is a group of Jewish Christians who are facing persecution, but in order to keep from being persecuted it seems as though this group is seriously considering returning back to Judaism and abandoning their commitment to Christ. We find the purpose of Hebrews out of this proposed situation.
The purpose Hebrews is to prevent abandonment of Christ for Judaism. Gundry writes, “The main purpose of the letter is to prevent such apostasy and restore them into mainstream Christian fellowship” (2003, 461). In writing to warn his recipients against apostasy (Ladd 1993, 618), the writer of the letter encourages them to remain in their faith in Christ even though they will not be free or exempt from persecution (632). Ladd writes, “Those who have embraced the gospel and entered the Christian life and the fellowship of the Christian church may become disillusioned because God is not protecting them from evil and suffering” (632). Therefore, they very well may turn their backs on Christ for Judaism (632).
The letter to the Hebrews was probably written around 64-70 AD to a Jewish Christian group in Rome that was facing persecution for being Christians and was very likely to be contemplating giving up their Christianity. For this reason the author writes to encourage against apostasy in the warning passages throughout the letter, to which we now turn.
In Hebrews 2:1-4, the author warns against drifting away from Christ. The author asks a rhetorical question, “How can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?” The answer is clear. It is not possible to escape judgment when the message is being brought and spoken by Christ because his message is superior to that of the angels, yet even their message brought judgment when neglected. The tone of this warning passage is strong, yet not too forceful. It identifies the need to not drift away, but it does not directly point to the severity of falling away as other warning passages do later in the letter.
In Hebrews 3:12-14, a little more severity is evident. While 2:1-4 may be viewed as an unintentional drifting away, Hebrews 3:12-14 certainly has in view an intentional turning away. Furthermore, the responsibility of remaining in Christ is placed on the shoulders of the community when the author exhorts, “But exhort one another every day” (v. 13). The recipients are to be responsible for each other and to keep each other from apostasy so that not even one turns away from the living God (v. 12).
In Hebrews 4:1-11, the author gives an exhortation to take hold of the rest that God has intended for them to receive. This warning passage is not nearly as strong as the others, but it is a warning nonetheless. Hebrews 4:1-11 warns against being judged or seeming to have failed to reach the rest God intended. Hebrews 2:1-4 warns the recipients against drifting away, 3:12-14 warns against turning away, and 4:1-11 warns the recipients against failing to reach the rest God has intended for them.
Hebrews 6:4-12 talks about apostasy in a harsh and severe tone. One who apostatizes is completely unable to be restored to repentance if he or she has been enlightened in the knowledge of Christ and has been a believer—i.e., tasted the heavenly gift, shared in the Holy Spirit, and tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come. For such a believer to fall away is a tragedy, because that apostate has crucified Christ all over again. Such a person can never be restored to repentance. This warning passage is severe, but most of all it is absolute. If there was any uncertainty about the effects of apostasy, Hebrews 6:4-12 functions to clearly identify the dire consequences of apostasy in direct, harsh and final statements.
Similarly, Hebrews 10:26-31 speaks of apostasy with perilous words. Hebrews 10:26-31 not only speaks of apostasy in a harsh and severe tone, but now it attributes a fiery judgment as its consequence. The apostate is one who willfully persists in sin and places himself or herself under God’s judgment—a consuming fire (v. 27).
In Hebrews 12:14-17 and 12:25-29, more exhortations are given to warn against failing to obtain the grace of God (v. 15) and reject Christ lest they place themselves under God’s judgment (vv. 25, 29). These warnings carry on the punishment element from Hebrews 10:26-31 and return to the responsibility to press on from 3:12-14, but they are much less severe and alarming as 6:4-12 and 10:26-31.
The warning passages in Hebrews must be read in light of the letter’s historical context. Because it is most probable that the author of Hebrews was writing to warn against those Jewish Christians in Rome that were facing persecution and seriously considering forsaking Christ in order to follow Judaism in order to evade the persecution, we must understand the warning passages in this letter as an appeal against a deliberate forsaking of Christ. These warning passages functioned to convince the Jewish Christians to not shrink back like cowards, but rather to prove themselves as true disciples of Christ. They must be read in light of their intended use, and they were intended to convince the readers against apostasy. If we fail to understand these passages in light of the historical context, we miss their point, function and intended meaning, thereby misunderstanding what the author is saying. The historical context is crucial, and we cannot escape it if we are to come to a proper understanding of the warning passages in Hebrews.
_______________
Bibliography
Gundry, Robert. 2003. A Survey of the New Testament. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guthrie, Donald. 1983. The Letter to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leon Morris, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company and InterVarsity Press.
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
Ladd, George. 1993. A Theology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Donald Hagner, ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The exact date of the letter to the Hebrews is not certain, but we do know Hebrews was written before 70 AD (Guthrie 1983, 28). Donald Hagner is certain that this letter was written in the 60s (2002, 25). We know it was not written after 95 AD because it is quoted by Clement at that time (Guthrie 1983, 28). However, since the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple would have been the clinching argument for the author of Hebrews, the fact that it is unmentioned in the letter strongly encourages a time of writing before 70 AD (Hagner 2002, 25). The most logical time for the letter to have been written is sometime in 64-70 AD, but where was it sent?
The destination of the letter is unknown, although we do have a few important clues that point us to Rome. Guthrie boldly writes that Rome is the best choice based on internal and external evidence as the destination of the letter to the Hebrews (1983, 27). Hagner agrees, based on the fact that 1 Clement, written in Rome in 95 AD, quotes from Hebrews extensively, and because the recipients of the letter are identified as generous (6:10; 10:32-34), which we know was characteristic of the church in Rome (2002, 25). If in fact it was written to people in Rome, exactly to whom in Rome was Hebrews written?
The recipients of the letter are not completely certain, but it is very likely to be Jewish Christians who were being written to (Hagner 2002, 23). Hebrews indicates that these Jewish Christians in Rome were contemplating going back to Judaism for whatever reason (Guthrie 1983, 32). The question is, “Why would the Jewish Christians in Rome contemplate going back to Judaism?” It has been suggested that they were feeling a greater benefit from Judaism than from Christianity, and had thus lost confidence in the church, that is, the Christian assembly (Lindars 1991, 12). But the question remains—“Why?” The Jewish Christians were facing persecution, and they were on the point of falling away from Christ so that they might not have to endure the persecution (Ladd 1993, 632). Robert Gundry suggests the possibility that the recipients “are a Jewish Christian group or house-church who have broken away from the main body of Christians in their locality and who stand in danger of lapsing back into Judaism to avoid persecution” (2003, 460-1). Therefore, the situation at hand is a group of Jewish Christians who are facing persecution, but in order to keep from being persecuted it seems as though this group is seriously considering returning back to Judaism and abandoning their commitment to Christ. We find the purpose of Hebrews out of this proposed situation.
The purpose Hebrews is to prevent abandonment of Christ for Judaism. Gundry writes, “The main purpose of the letter is to prevent such apostasy and restore them into mainstream Christian fellowship” (2003, 461). In writing to warn his recipients against apostasy (Ladd 1993, 618), the writer of the letter encourages them to remain in their faith in Christ even though they will not be free or exempt from persecution (632). Ladd writes, “Those who have embraced the gospel and entered the Christian life and the fellowship of the Christian church may become disillusioned because God is not protecting them from evil and suffering” (632). Therefore, they very well may turn their backs on Christ for Judaism (632).
The letter to the Hebrews was probably written around 64-70 AD to a Jewish Christian group in Rome that was facing persecution for being Christians and was very likely to be contemplating giving up their Christianity. For this reason the author writes to encourage against apostasy in the warning passages throughout the letter, to which we now turn.
In Hebrews 2:1-4, the author warns against drifting away from Christ. The author asks a rhetorical question, “How can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?” The answer is clear. It is not possible to escape judgment when the message is being brought and spoken by Christ because his message is superior to that of the angels, yet even their message brought judgment when neglected. The tone of this warning passage is strong, yet not too forceful. It identifies the need to not drift away, but it does not directly point to the severity of falling away as other warning passages do later in the letter.
In Hebrews 3:12-14, a little more severity is evident. While 2:1-4 may be viewed as an unintentional drifting away, Hebrews 3:12-14 certainly has in view an intentional turning away. Furthermore, the responsibility of remaining in Christ is placed on the shoulders of the community when the author exhorts, “But exhort one another every day” (v. 13). The recipients are to be responsible for each other and to keep each other from apostasy so that not even one turns away from the living God (v. 12).
In Hebrews 4:1-11, the author gives an exhortation to take hold of the rest that God has intended for them to receive. This warning passage is not nearly as strong as the others, but it is a warning nonetheless. Hebrews 4:1-11 warns against being judged or seeming to have failed to reach the rest God intended. Hebrews 2:1-4 warns the recipients against drifting away, 3:12-14 warns against turning away, and 4:1-11 warns the recipients against failing to reach the rest God has intended for them.
Hebrews 6:4-12 talks about apostasy in a harsh and severe tone. One who apostatizes is completely unable to be restored to repentance if he or she has been enlightened in the knowledge of Christ and has been a believer—i.e., tasted the heavenly gift, shared in the Holy Spirit, and tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come. For such a believer to fall away is a tragedy, because that apostate has crucified Christ all over again. Such a person can never be restored to repentance. This warning passage is severe, but most of all it is absolute. If there was any uncertainty about the effects of apostasy, Hebrews 6:4-12 functions to clearly identify the dire consequences of apostasy in direct, harsh and final statements.
Similarly, Hebrews 10:26-31 speaks of apostasy with perilous words. Hebrews 10:26-31 not only speaks of apostasy in a harsh and severe tone, but now it attributes a fiery judgment as its consequence. The apostate is one who willfully persists in sin and places himself or herself under God’s judgment—a consuming fire (v. 27).
In Hebrews 12:14-17 and 12:25-29, more exhortations are given to warn against failing to obtain the grace of God (v. 15) and reject Christ lest they place themselves under God’s judgment (vv. 25, 29). These warnings carry on the punishment element from Hebrews 10:26-31 and return to the responsibility to press on from 3:12-14, but they are much less severe and alarming as 6:4-12 and 10:26-31.
The warning passages in Hebrews must be read in light of the letter’s historical context. Because it is most probable that the author of Hebrews was writing to warn against those Jewish Christians in Rome that were facing persecution and seriously considering forsaking Christ in order to follow Judaism in order to evade the persecution, we must understand the warning passages in this letter as an appeal against a deliberate forsaking of Christ. These warning passages functioned to convince the Jewish Christians to not shrink back like cowards, but rather to prove themselves as true disciples of Christ. They must be read in light of their intended use, and they were intended to convince the readers against apostasy. If we fail to understand these passages in light of the historical context, we miss their point, function and intended meaning, thereby misunderstanding what the author is saying. The historical context is crucial, and we cannot escape it if we are to come to a proper understanding of the warning passages in Hebrews.
_______________
Bibliography
Gundry, Robert. 2003. A Survey of the New Testament. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guthrie, Donald. 1983. The Letter to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leon Morris, ed. Grand Rapids, Michigan, and Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company and InterVarsity Press.
Hagner, Donald. 2002. Encountering the Book of Hebrews: an exposition. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
Ladd, George. 1993. A Theology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Donald Hagner, ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Lindars, Barnabas. 1991. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Currently Reading
I have not made much progress on this book as I have only began to read it for about one hour. However, it seems to be pregnant with information--with theology that is much overlooked in standard commentaries. The focus of this book is to bring out the theology of Hebrews, which is often neglected by most people who write about this letter. It is only about 130 pages, so why not give it a shot?
Monday, July 2, 2007
Lincoln Hurst, Hebrews 6 and a Word of Caution
I am taking a class on Hebrews in English that is taught by Dr. Lincoln Hurst. He willfully admits that we do not fully understand the meaning of Hebrews 6 and that it and 1 Peter 3 are the two most difficult chapters of the New Testament to interpret. Although he has studied Hebrews in great detail, written a dissertation and several articles on it, and taught on this epistle on more than enough occasions, he still does not have the answer to the Hebrews 6 question, "Can a Christian lose his or her salvation?" He thinks he has an idea about what the author of Hebrews was trying to get at, but he does not think he has a hard-nosed and absolute answer.
I find this fact to be a bit telling. It seems as though we quote Scripture as proof texts without realizing that there is some ambiguity involved in particular passages. Perhaps Hebrews 6 is one of them. Is it not possible that some have looked at Hebrews 6 to prove that one can lose his or her salvation without realizing that even the greatest experts don't fully understand this chapter for themselves?
This fact is enough that we should caution ourselves to not be quick to claim we have all the answers or to claim we know what Scripture says without first doing good research, and even then we might only have an idea about what the biblical authors were trying to get at and not necessarily an absolute meaning. I am not saying that we can't say we have the Bible figured out or that we can't know any absolute meaning in the Bible; what I am saying is that we should be careful when making such claims and that we need to do our homework and still be humble in our answers lest we err and teach something that is not quite fully in line with the truth and then be held accountable to that false teaching (James 3:1).
I find this fact to be a bit telling. It seems as though we quote Scripture as proof texts without realizing that there is some ambiguity involved in particular passages. Perhaps Hebrews 6 is one of them. Is it not possible that some have looked at Hebrews 6 to prove that one can lose his or her salvation without realizing that even the greatest experts don't fully understand this chapter for themselves?
This fact is enough that we should caution ourselves to not be quick to claim we have all the answers or to claim we know what Scripture says without first doing good research, and even then we might only have an idea about what the biblical authors were trying to get at and not necessarily an absolute meaning. I am not saying that we can't say we have the Bible figured out or that we can't know any absolute meaning in the Bible; what I am saying is that we should be careful when making such claims and that we need to do our homework and still be humble in our answers lest we err and teach something that is not quite fully in line with the truth and then be held accountable to that false teaching (James 3:1).
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Currently Reading
I am currently reading Encountering the Book of Hebrews for the Hebrews class I start tomorrow as a two-week intensive course. I am about half-way done with this book, and although it is somewhat entry level or for the student without a knowledge of Greek, it is quite helpful and insightful. If you would like to study Hebrews in a step beyond what study Bibles or Matthew Henry has to say about the letter, purchase Donald Hagner's commentary.
The Problem of God
This book, The Problem of God, written by John Murray, a Catholic, gives a good historical account of the problem of God throughout history. It recognizes that the problem of God is everybody's problem--if God doesn't exist, then no person has the right to say that he does, but if he does exist, no person has the right to say that he doesn't. This book looks at the way the Bible reveals this problem and how humans through history have dealt with and attempted to solve this problem, i.e., it is historical-descriptive. The Problem of God is lucid and suitable for anyone wanting to engage the problem of God through the lens of history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
