HEBREWS: Running a Better Race

Hebrews will be another book that is tricky to deal with correctly within the scope of this series. We could go through it in its entirety like we did Galatians or Romans, but it might be slightly overdone. I’m tempted personally, because it’s one of my favorite books, but I think I may actually hurt my own purposes for this series if I do. Instead, I will point you in a few directions if you’d like to do more work on this book.

First, the context of Hebrews is debated, but recent scholarship is changing our assumptions. We used to believe that Hebrews was written before the destruction of the Temple (in AD 70); most of the reasoning for this was the way the book discusses the Temple and Levitical priesthood in the present tense. However, as we learn more and more about first-century Judaism, this is starting to be questioned. One of my favorite theories is that the “book” is actually a sermon written after the destruction of the Temple to be circulated among the synagogues as a homily addressing a Judaism without the Temple. One scholar has even suggested this homily was read as the holiday reading during the solemn assembly that remembered the destitution of the Temple.

Second, the author of Hebrews is unknown and still debated. While ancient church tradition credited Paul with the writing of Hebrews, that has all but been rejected by modern scholarship for the last couple of centuries. Whoever the author is, they are incredibly fluent in Greek, Alexandrian in their thought, and a second-generation believer. Paul fits none of these criteria. However other options emerge as great possibilities: Barnabas, Apollos, or even Clement are good ideas. My favorite opinion is that the letter is written by Priscilla, and the fact that it is a woman is why the author doesn’t name herself. This can be argued by using some Greek analytical thought, but I digress.

Third, the overarching theme of Hebrews seems to be that Jesus offers a clearer version of everything the Jewish people understand. It’s not that Jesus came and did something new at all — it’s the same story from Genesis on — but Jesus is a better version of everything they held dear in the Levitical system. The Torah was great and a wonderful gift from God, but Jesus takes Torah and makes it even better and more clear, interpreting it through his life. Moses was an amazing leader, but Jesus was everything that Moses was and then some. The High Priest is an incredible thing to have, but Jesus is the best High Priest you could serve. Time and time again, the author says that what they have experienced in God’s Levitical way was a wonderful thing, but now that it has been destroyed, they need not fret, for Jesus has given them something better.

I should point out that we did an eleven-week exegetical Lenten series through the book of Hebrews here at Real Life on the Palouse. You can get to the series by clicking here and enjoying the discussion about the context of Hebrews.

Fourth, speaking of overarching themes, the book of Hebrews contains an incredible use of an ancient Greek literary tool. The book of Hebrews uses something known as an inclusio, a type of literary “bracketing” to identify an argument within a piece of Greek literature. In some ways, it functions similarly to a chiasm (a Hebrew literary tool, which is also seen in Hebrews in addition to the inclusio), only without all the elements of an inverted parallelism. You can see a visual representation of the inclusio of Hebrews that was made by my friend Paule Patterson below, as well as listen to Paule explain the infographic in the teaching here.

Finally, the last dominant theme that seems to serve as the thrust of the exhortation of Hebrews is the idea of perseverance. All throughout the homily, the author insists that Jesus knew what it meant to suffer, was glorified in his suffering, and showed us how to suffer so God could also bring “many sons to glory” through our perseverance. The call repeats itself numerous times throughout the book, finally culminating in the passage of Hebrews 11 (sometimes referred to as “The Hall of Faith”), where the author lists these great heroes of the faith who show us what it means to follow God faithfully. The author will say that since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses (those great heroes of the faith, as well as those great heroes of your faith who have gone before you), we need to run the race with perseverance. It’s one of my favorite passage of Scripture, and you can also see me teach on the idea here.

Now there’s one last seed I want to plant before we move beyond the book of Hebrews. We’ve given you a lot of leads to follow from here if you so desire, so I hope you can enjoy that. But what about this idea of sacrifice?

GALATIANS: ...Two Covenants

Before we move toward the closing of the letter to the Galatians, let’s take a visual look at the world of biblical covenants and try to place Paul’s arguments in their context with pictures.

The first thing we need to be able to see is that covenants are made between two parties (for the scope of this conversation, I will not be diving into the different kinds of covenants that exist; we have talked before about Suzerain-vassal covenants and I have recommended The Epic of Eden by Sandra Richter in order to get introduced to the ideas). This idea seems like a no-brainer, and yet I find it is the one thing we seem to lose track of in the conversations surrounding covenantal theology. The covenant applies to the parties that make it.

With this in mind, the first biblical covenant that we run into is the Noahic covenant. (Some have identified the Adamic covenant, but for the sake of this conversation, we will start with Noah.) When you go back and look at the end of the story of Noah, it is clear that God makes this covenant with all of creation.

The next covenant we might identify is the Abrahamic covenant. Unlike the Noahic covenant, the parties of this covenant are more specific and defined. The Abrahamic covenant is made between God and Abraham’s descendants.

By extension, the rest of Abraham’s descendants will fall under the same Abrahamic covenant.

Just to make sure we are following along with our reasoning, let’s check a few test cases, starting with Esau. Is Esau under the Noahic covenant? Yes; the Noahic covenant is between God and all of creation. Is Esau under the Abrahamic covenant? Yes; he is Abraham’s grandson. The same would apply to Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, and any other descendants from Abraham (i.e., through Keturah). Let’s try someone else. What about Nahor, the brother of Abraham? Is Nahor under the Noahic covenant? Yes; every human being (and animal, for that matter) is under the Noahic covenant. Is Nahor under the Abrahamic covenant? No; he is not a descendant of Abraham.

Hopefully all of that makes sense, as it’s time to add the next layer. Eventually, Jacob will have twelve sons who will become a nation and will stand at the bottom of Mount Sinai and enter into what we call the Mosaic or Sinai covenant.

Just to make sure we’re tracking, let’s run some test cases here. Are the Jews under the Sinai covenant? Yes, of course. Are descendants of Esau under the Sinai covenant? No, they were not present at Sinai. The two parties present at Sinai were God and the descendants of Jacob/Israel.

What throws the Jewish world of the New Testament into chaos is the introduction of the God-fearing Gentiles (or the theosabes).

The Gentiles are clearly under the Noahic covenant, and there is no debate about that (even today, a Gentile could attend a Jewish synagogue service and bless them and their story by referring to himself as a ben Noah, or a “son of Noah”). The question is what to do when they want to become a part of the family. Many Jews in the first century would have argued that, covenantally, God is working through the Jewish people, so the Gentiles need to take on circumcision (and the Law it represents) and fall under the Sinai covenant.

But Paul’s argument is revolutionary. He uses Genesis 15 to claim that the Abrahamic covenant is not based on circumcision, but on faith. He also argues that God’s story has always been about God’s promises. The promise has always preceded the Law and the story of God has never been about the Law that was introduced 430 years after the promise. This means that it is faith that makes one a member of the Abrahamic covenant. He then argues that Gentiles who have faith in the promises of God are b’nei Abraham, or “sons of Abraham.” This claim in Galatians is revolutionary, for it says that a Gentile who lives by faith in the promises of God is MORE than a “son of Noah.” He/she is an adopted “son of Abraham.”

By extension, it becomes clear through the visuals that a Jew would not cease to be a Jew. All descendants of Israel entered into an everlasting covenant with God that remains intact within God’s larger story. What Paul’s gospel does is ensure those Torah-observant lives find their proper place and their priestly calling within God’s narrative. The reality of Jesus and the resurrected Christ does not change their calling in the world, but it does invite a whole bunch of adopted children into the family of God — children who have their own unique calling within the family. This is where we turn our attention to next.

I find that putting Paul’s argument into pictures can help our mechanical, western minds grasp the argument Paul is making. Paul is saying that the issue of God’s story cannot be the Law. The Law was given for its own purposes (to be the “pedagogue”) within the larger story, but the story is about the promises of God. He is insistent that circumcision cannot be the marker of God’s covenant with Abraham, because Abraham was justified before he was ever circumcised. Abraham was justified by faith; faith is what it means to be a true descendant of Abraham.