Archive for July, 2021

Herman Bavinck on the content of God's Law

July 31, 2021

 Last Week we looked at God being the author of the law.  This Week we are going to tackle the question of the content of the law from Reformed Ethics; Herman Bavinck ; Edited by John Bolt;page 223. 

 

We cannot always see everything; The legal people of Jesus time completely missed the point; We also need to humble ourselves

 

When we look at the content of the law Bavinck mentions the three branches:

1.       Ceremonial

2.       Judicial

3.       Moral

He hits the nail on the head when he says that the law has not been abolished but fulfilled.  Bavinck ebbs the Bible when he says:

 “The shadows vanish when the body is present. What was merely a type in the Old Testament is now exactly what is completely spiritualized and realized. The form has changed; the essence is the same. All sacrifices and priests culminate and find their full realization in the one sacrifice and in the one high priest, in the same way that all the prophets and Davidic kings find their purpose realized in Christ.” (From Reformed Ethics; Herman Bavinck; edited by John Bolt; page 222)

Digression

I’ve just completed writing my commentary on Hebrews 7 and 8 and I can see Scripture from their imbibed in Bavinck here. From https://weaver1hasonline.international/

The reality of the law is here through Christ.  Heaven has broken into this earthly shadowy world.  The earthly tabernacle, the Levitical high priesthood and the sacrifice are only shadows of the reality.  If you read Hebrews chapters 7, 8 and 9 you will see this to be the case.   The prophets and the Davidic kings are correct as well.  In the book of Hebrews there is a shift of accent who the messiah is in light of the Prophets and the Psalms (Royal, Messianic Psalms).    We find this pattern in the quotations of the Old Testament in the argument of Hebrews.  (My own opinion is that Apollos wrote Hebrews) So, the whole Law in the Old Testament including the ceremonial, judicial and moral law finds its realization and fulfilment in Christ. (Page 222).

God and the Moral Law

Having said this when Bavinck talks about law from this moment it will be about the ‘moral law’.   This should not surprise us as he is writing his Reformed Ethics.  Focusing on the moral law Bavinck finds three types of interpreters in scholarship:

1.       “According to some this law is based solely on God’s will: something is good only because God says it is good.

2.       For others the law is based entirely on God’s being.

3.       And for a third group the moral law is based partly on God’s nature—such as the first table of the Decalogue—and partly on God’s free will, as is the case with needing to celebrate the Sabbath on the seventh day, the prohibitions of polygamy and theft, and so on.”  (Taken from page 223 of Reformed Ethics)

So, then we will find out whether or not the law is based on:

1.       God’s will.

2.       God’s being and or not

3.       God’s nature.

Sometimes what looks like a dispensation such as Hosea marrying a prostitute or Moses killing an Egyptian.  I think this covers aspects of ‘God’s will; What God allows.  They are only examples.  Herman is just giving us an outline he is not giving reasons why these things happened. (From Page 223). ’These and more are interesting facts, but Bavinck does not go into detail as he is moves on to the relationship of Law to God’s being (nature).

What Bavinck says about Gods Nature and Gods Law page 223

The law is unchangeable because God in his nature is unchangeable.  Bavinck explains the law is spiritual and he gives us some references as well.  He starts from our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and also quotes St Paul and Psalms.  As well as these we can take into account (which Bavinck he also quotes):

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” (Matt 22.37)

Both Jesus and the faithful followers of Christ see the law as spiritual.   Matthew chapter 5 is cited, and this is correct as Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it (verse 17 for example.  This reference is mine and is not found on page 223).

Bavinck then give us some examples of what this content of the law actually means, and he summarizes this:

“Nothing, then, can be added to it (the law) or taken away from it (the law), because the law orders us to love God and our neighbour, which is everything and includes everything.” (Page 223)

So, then we are to be perfect just like our Heavenly Father.  So how does the law work?

In Bavinck’s own words concerning the law:

“(a) all prohibitions include their opposite as a commandment, and vice versa—divorce is prohibited, so chastity is commanded.

(b) under the heading of a Virtue or vice all corresponding items are included—for example, the commandment to honour one’s parents encompasses love and obedience, including those toward other authorities.

 (c) with an external sin, its source and cause are also condemned—for example, the prohibition against murder includes anger (cf. Matt. 5:22; 1 John 3:15) and even the pretence of anger (cf. 1 Thess. 5 :22).” (Reformed Ethics; Herman Bavinck; edited by John Bolt; page 223)

So, who can keep the whole law without sinning?  The answer is no one.  Bavinck understands the nature of the law that it includes aspects also that are ‘unwritten’.  This is a very important point.   With the interpretation he gives all have failed to reach the perfection of the law.  The Master theologian shows that here isn’t a single man on earth except Christ could fulfil this law.

Reflection

On content of the law Bavinck has managed to capture the essence of what the law of God actually means but I wonder why he didn’t tackle the question of how we can approach God’s presence under such heavy circumstances.  I think he will probably do this in section of his book in ‘Converted Humanity’ which he will but I think the beatitudes’ are seriously important for the believer.  Especially the fist one of Jesus’ sayings:

3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:3 NASB

If you actually go through all the sayings of Jesus in Matthew 5, 6 and 7 one comes to a realization that no ordinary person will ever reach these standards.  When we come to God, we need to realize that we are spiritually dead (running on empty).   Jesus gives the oracles of God and according to the Law we are all locked up in sin.  Our best is never good enough.  This was a seriously bitter pill for the pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes to swallow.  However, we should not point the finger just at them this includes all of us whoever we are.  This was difficult for the Pharisees and Sadducees because as far as they could see, they kept all the written laws.  I actually think they did but then a bombshell hit; This also includes all the laws that were unwritten!

We have all sinned and for Christians there is only one way, Jesus Christ.  In Jesus God became a man, lived among us and died on a cross. On the third day by God’s Authority, he conquered death.  We can only approach God if we first realize we have done wrong and ask God in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit for forgiveness.   Jesus is at the door of your heart.  Making Jesus Lord in your life means taking on a new way of living. 

Jesus is High Priest in Heaven itself and the once for all sacrifice Hebrews 9

July 30, 2021

Jesus has done much for us and today we will learn how he relates to the earthly Tabernacle and to the sacrificial systems of the Old covenant (Moses).   Let’s begin by Reading Hebrews chapter 9 verses 1-10

1 Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary. 2 For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place. 3 Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, 4 having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant; 5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

6 Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9 which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.

We came to understand that the tabernacle was a shadow and copy of the original one in heaven.  One might think ‘it is only a shadow.’ I find this amazing because it is better to have a copy than nothing at all.  If the tabernacle was not even a copy, then the theologian would be mythologizing.  The theologian does not do mythology here but science, real God’s knowledge.  Even a copy of something in heaven gives us insight into heaven and its workings.  I think Apollos understood this.   Apollos goes into a description of the earthly tabernacle, even as a shadow it explains to us that without the shedding of blood there cannot be forgiveness of sins.  The tabernacle was pointing beyond itself, but they do show that a High Priest is needed too as a mediator and his sins and the people’s sins needed to be forgiven. 

In verse one we have a key to unlocking some of the secrets of this beautiful book:

  ‘Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary.’

Obviously, the tabernacle he is talking about is Moses Tabernacle. There was the area of the Holy of Holies in which a high priest came only once a year. He had to be invited by God for this honour.   Then of course there was the holy place. At this place, priests were allowed to come, and they didn’t need to fear for their lives. The writer in this verse is actually reminding his readers what they should already know. He is also preparing them for talk about the Christ and preparation for the ‘real tabernacle’ which is in heaven.

In understanding the Holy of Holy the veil is an important symbol which separates heaven and earth (verse 3). The inner tent where the Holy of Holies was, the priest could only enter this once a year. 

Verse 8

. 8 The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9 which is a symbol for the present time. NASB

So throughout Judaic history according to Apollos it was a waiting time and preparation.  No Levite priest could enter the real Holy of Holies nevertheless God used this means to educate his people.  Apollos gives a limit to what can happen:

Verse 9

…Accordingly, both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.  NASB

A reformation is a time of correction.  If we think about the real protestant Reformation, it was a time to bring the Church back to a purer Christianity.  Obviously if the Tabernacle was a copy, then there was a real need for heaven to break in and really, in truth save us from sin and our corrupt nature.   This basic summary is what the Holy Spirit has told us (verse 8)

In the previous chapters we have seen aspects of this reformation.  Before we had physical temples but now God is moving in the very spiritual aspects of True Worship.  We also know by whom this is going to come through; Namely the Messiah (Our lord and Saviour Jesus Christ).

Chapter 9 verses 11-28.

With special emphasis on verses 11 and 23.

The writer up to this point has led his readers along the road of what they know and understand. But from this moment he is going to reveal the deeper things of God to the readers.

The readers already knew and believed that the Christ was the king of Israel. When Jesus was crucified, and they wrote “The king of the Jews” as a mark of derision. In other words, from the point of the authorities such as the scribes and the pharisees Jesus was seen as a false king but from the point of view of those who trusted in his name Jesus was and is the real king of Israel. The writer to the Hebrews is writing to those who have faith not to those who don’t have faith. So, let us look at these two verses:

Verse 11

“But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, he entered through the greater and the more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation”. NASB

Verse 23

“Therefore, it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these” (verse 23).

So, at this point the writer makes a jump from the earthly evidence of the tabernacle into heaven itself.  The heavenly sanctuary needs ‘better sacrifices than these.’  It is no accident that Apollos says this. 

Verse 24

So, Christ entered Heaven itself ‘in the presence of God the father’ in the Holy of Holies.  

Verse 25

In light of verse 28 Christ who offered himself as the sacrifice (only once), It is not necessary for Christ to offer himself every year with sacrificed blood of lambs etc.

Verse 26

At these end times ‘completion of the ages’ Christ became the sacrifice on our behalf by himself.  He has been ‘manifested’ revealed (φανερόω / Verb: Perf Mid/Pass Ind 3rd Sing)

The use of this verb ‘manifest, disclose, reveal’ is in the perfect tense.  This verb in this context makes perfect sense because Christ is in heaven itself in which God resides.  It is not possible for any human to cross this divide outside of Christ.  This is not mythology but epistemology.  The shadow and copy of the tabernacle on earth is direct evidence to God’s Sanctuary.  Through Jesus Christ by faith, even though we are still on earth we get a glimpse of what is going on in heaven.  The perfect tense is something that has happened in the past but has consequences today.

Verses 27 & 28

Death is but once and then the judgement, so Christ died once so next time he comes it won’t be referenced to sin but the Judgment as King of Kings.  This is a precursor to what Apollos wants to say about Christ as the Sacrifice.

Reflection

In this chapter we have passed some signposts of faith:

1. There is the heavenly Sanctuary
2. Jesus is the High Priest, and he is always in office mediating for us all the time.
3. Christ was the sacrifice once and the work of sacrifice was completed through the sacrifice of himself.      
1. The Tabernacle is a copy of the real tabernacle
2. There is a high priest, but he has to be changed every year.
3. Gifts and sacrifices are often made but they cannot make anyone perfect.

What does this mean for us?

Jesus has done a lot for us so that we can be taken into heaven.  This invitation is open to everyone.  Jesus is Lord yet he knocks on the door of your heart.  He wants by invitation by the Holy Spirit to come into your life and where there was darkness, he brings light.   We all want to do things our way but where has this brought you?

Broken promises, betrayals, anger and although there are people all around you there is an emptiness that no one can fill.   You cannot even forgive yourself and the road seems to have come to an end.  You have made mistakes along the way, but it does not matter how bad you have been God reaches out to you and offers you his grace in Jesus Christ.  Jesus has done the work on the cross and while he was on the cross he said, ‘It is finished’ (God’s work has been completed).

If you choose God’s way allow Jesus the Lordship in your life.  By the Holy Spirit he will take away you sins, purify you and make you into the person you ought to have been.  This process takes a lifetime but becoming a child of God takes a moment.  

Whether we just took the invitation and confessed Jesus as Lord we need to remember that this book has shown us that although Jesus is the second person of the Trinity:

He was active in the creation with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit

He is greater than the angels

He is greater than Moses

He is King of Kings

He is greater than all the prophets because they all spoke of him

He is the High Priest in heaven itself

He was the real sacrifice once and for all.

The Birth Pangs of a New Religion

July 25, 2021

Hebrews 8 and the incendiary idea that changed the old world forever.

Let us begin by reading Hebrews 8

1 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this high priest also have something to offer. 4 Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; 5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “SEE,” He says, “THAT YOU MAKE all things ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A New Covenant

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says, “BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD,

WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT

WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH;

9 NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS

ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND

TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT;

FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT,

AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD.

10 “FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL

AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD:

I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS,

AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS.

AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD,

AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.

11 “AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN,

AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, ‘KNOW THE LORD,’

FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME,

FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.

12 “FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES,

AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE.”

13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. Hebrews 8       We have seen then Jesus was from Judah, and this disqualifies him from the Levitical priesthood.  However, this was not a problem because according to the Scriptures his lineage is from the order of Melchizedek.  

Lets look now at the text and dig a little deeper:

Verses 1 and 2

1 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. NASB

What I have learned so far in this study is that we have hit some serious Royal Psalms. The Lord of heaven speaks to the earthly kingly Lord.  This is the first time that a king held both offices of priesthood and kingship at the same time. Not only this but he is also the High priest of the genuine, real heavenly tabernacle.  It is the Lord that set this original heavenly Sanctuary

Verses 3 and 4

3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this high priest also have something to offer. 4 Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law;

The job of the High Priest was to offer gifts and sacrifices to the Lord.  As we have already seen earlier if Jesus was on earth he would be disqualified in being any type of high priest in terms of the Law of Moses.  For Apollos this tabernacle which was on earth was only a shadow of the original tabernacle. 

Verse 5

5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “SEE,” He says, “THAT YOU MAKE all things ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN.” NASB

Moses had to follow an exact pattern with exact measurements.  Notice that Apollos says the phrase ‘a copy and shadow of heavenly things’.

Verse 6

” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A New Covenant NASB

This is a summing up before the evidence.   Jesus priesthood and officiating from a heavenly tabernacle means that Jesus has a greater ministry and compared to the old covenant of Moses from Mt Sinai; he is a Mediator of a better covenant  and better promises.

Verse 7

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second.

There were obviously faults with the old covenant because of Jeremiah 31:31.

Verses 8 to 12

8 For finding fault with them, He says, “BEHOLD, DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD,

WHEN I WILL EFFECT A NEW COVENANT

WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH;

9 NOT LIKE THE COVENANT WHICH I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS

ON THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND

TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT;

FOR THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT,

AND I DID NOT CARE FOR THEM, SAYS THE LORD.

10 “FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL

AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD:

I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS,

AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS.

AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD,

AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.

11 “AND THEY SHALL NOT TEACH EVERYONE HIS FELLOW CITIZEN,

AND EVERYONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, ‘KNOW THE LORD,’

FOR ALL WILL KNOW ME,

FROM THE LEAST TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.

12 “FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES,

AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE.”

In the mount Sinai covenant the laws were written on stone and the people partied and turned their back on God with the creation of a Golden Calf.  This type of disobedience continued throughout the time of the kings and the prophets until they were exiled (both kingdoms; Israel and Judah)

The centre of solution is found in verse 10:

“I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS,

AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS.

AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD,

AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.”

This is a new type of covenant, and it is spiritual in content.  We know this because Jeremiah talked about ‘writing on hearts. The heart the centre of feeling can only be found inside a person and not outside such as stone.

Verse 13

13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. Hebrews 8

This is a very harsh statement for the Jewish community because the Sinai Covenant has been superseded with the promised Messiah.

Even though Christendom and Judaism have split a long time ago they are still a cousin religion and we share the same Scriptures.  We can disagree but let us always love our Jewish neighbour and show respect even in our differences.

Digression

There are some serious things being said here. We can see a serious battle of ideas going on in Judaism at this time.  This is a battle for the genuine Judaism and where the centre is to be found. 

Let me spell it out:

Is the centre of the covenant in the first five books of Moses? 

Has the centre moved from Moses to a new centre found within the Psalms and the Prophets? 

The old covenant of Moses has not been disestablished but it has a new centre in the Psalms and the Prophets. 

Within Judaism there was a split, and we see right here in this text where the split is.  This is figuratively speaking incendiary, within the Jewish community that would wipe out much of polytheism in Europe and the birth pangs of Christianity. 

What about the Temple?  My own personal opinion is that if we remember rightly King David was forbidden from building a temple because he was a man of war.  However, he prepared a lot of the ground work for Solomon to build a temple in Jerusalem (The first temple).  God also allowed the rebuilding of the temple when Israel was allowed to come back from their exile.  This was a blessing for the Jewish people.   Sometimes I ask myself the question why God allowed the Temple to be destroyed.  One I do know as a fact that Herod had blood on his hands as he murdered children because he feared he would lose his crown.  He did not have a right to touch the Temple.  I do not know what the modern Jewish community thinks about this, and I would like to know more.

Reflection

We can see a paradigm shift happening in Judaism and through Christ the old world would change forever and never be the same again.  For Christians Jesus is the Messiah and he is King; High Priest and sacrifice offered for our sins.  ‘The lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world’ and by his resurrection we have eternal life.

Bavinck is correct separating God from the Good in natural (moral) law is a bad thing

July 25, 2021

 

24 07 2021

So then before we dive back into Bavinck and law, I have a question:

On what basis or foundation does any law work as its final authority?  

In the UK for example in some courts one is supposed to take an oath on some authority that everything you say is the truth.  In a court of law if you are caught lying one can go to prison.  So even in a law court conscience and telling the truth ought to go hand in hand but ultimately there is a higher law than the Judge.  This gray area in law is an area that philosophers, theologians, lawyers search for its foundation.  For a religious mind this is not such a difficult question.  For secularists however, they have various theories and possibly rest it on ‘nature’ or something equivalent.  So, then Bavinck goes into depth here so let us now listen to his voice.

For a bookcase to work everything has to be in place,

in the same way don’t take God out of law as one has to find another foundation

 

 

 

Looking at the author of the law and the conscience bound to it, can only rest on the authority of God, so Bavinck starts this section on the ‘Author of the law’.  However, as we read on many philosophers and theologians have changed the base (as if they can).  For Bavinck the law presupposes a higher authority; “Thou shalt presupposes an “I am the Lord”:

“The law cannot be derived and explained from any of the following: (a) our own ego (“I”), which lays down the law for itself, because it cannot say why I must do this or that or why I do what I do; (b) the authority of parents, the state, or society (Darwin and his followers); since other human beings do not naturally have any authority over us, we feel bound to these authorities only insofar as God’s authority rings through them; (c) the world and nature (Stoics), over against which we feel free and are allowed to control as much as we can. The moral law ought to have the same cause as the conscience, which, like a divine judge, holds us accountable to the law and pronounces sentence on us.” (From; Reformed Ethics, Herman Bavinck, edited by John Bolt page 219)

Natural law for Christians according to Bavinck comes from God’s authority.   Many religious traditions would come to the same conclusion.  Bavinck did not come to this conclusion as if by magic, no he looked at the evidence and that even the pagan philosophies had something to say about it:

“Even the pagans experienced this. Cicero states that “Law is not a product of human thought, nor is it any enactment of peoples, but [is] something eternal which rules the whole universe by its wisdom in command and prohibition. . .. Wherefore that Law which the gods have given to the human race has been justly praised.” (Page 22) From this standpoint then the ancient philosophers (not only Greek; my point of view) wanted to attempt through reason to break through this not knowing and using reason to get at the facts of nature on the moral law.  The Christian Church called this law natural law but God was always the base.  Bavinck goes on to say that this situation was going to change, and it did.  Bavinck mentions “Hugo Grotius (1583—1645), and especially Christian Wolff (1679—1754).”  

So, Bavinck shows that through these thinkers the moral law was abstracted from God’s authority.  In practice then the atheist as well as the believer had to follow the same laws;” The atheist ought morally to act in the same way as the theist, since the actual ground for moral behaviour is situated in the physical nature, not in God. Such is the case with nature obligating us to marriage as well, connecting lust with cohabitation.” (Page 220) All this happened with separating ‘God’ and ‘the good’.   Kant jumped on this bandwagon and “Kant similarly loosens the tie between God and the good, situating its binding power in reason, in the inexplicable categorical imperative of the practical reason.” (Last paragraph page 220). The argument being that if God and the Good are identical then there isn’t a problem in dispatching God from the moral law that He created.  I think the conclusion of breaking this link of God and Good also means a breakage of conscience and moral law (my summing up). 

Herman Bavinck will not agree with any of this, and he shows us through Holy Scripture how we ought to perceive the moral natural law and indeed God has to be the foundation.  It is God who has spoken and as he says the Church is called to be different to the nations. Let us look at Bavincks Scripture contents.

“(Exod. 20:2). The moral law is acknowledged throughout the whole Bible as God’s law, even by Jesus himself, who explicitly speaks of biblical commandments as God’s commands and words (Matt. 15:4). Therefore, the law cannot be undone, only fulfilled (Matt. 5:17; cf. Rom. 7:23, 27; 8:2).41‘” (page 221):

2 “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. Exodus 20:2

4 For God said, ‘HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER,’ and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH.’ Matthew 15:4

17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfil. Matthew 5:17

23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Romans 7:23-25

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. Romans 8:2 (All these verses have been drawn from Olive Tree Bible software)

Bavinck puts this whole discussion in context:

“When modern thinkers posit an evolutionary origin for biblical law and deny its divine source, they need to be Challenged, as Harless has done: “The law of God in Israel is not the product of a development-process in the people of Israel in which they had gradually become conscious to themselves of what is right and good in the relation, whether of man to man, or man to God. On the contrary, God testifies His will in gradual revelation, in opposition to the spirit predominating amongst the people.” (Page 221)

For Christians the above statement from Bavinck is very important.  God is in control and man thinks he is in control.  Bavinck is not saying that reason is completely bad.  However, as Barth and Bavinck would say faith seeking understanding.  This is how we ought to live.  The man of faith puts his reasons at the feet of Jesus and then he is able to understand the greater picture and not someone looking for something in the pitch black of a storm. 

Bavinck finishes the ‘Author section’ by saying:

 “All the relationships between people and God and among his subjects are regulated.43 The source of knowledge of the moral law, therefore, cannot be only our conscience and reason—although they are very valuable—but Holy Scripture in its entirety. This means not only the Pentateuch but also the prophets and the New Testament. The Decalogue is only the summa of the law; the Old and New Testaments are the explanation and commentary.” (From page 222)

Reflection

God created the law, conscience and the world.  Scripture explains to us the facts and as faithful believers we live by these truths.  Those who try to abstract God from the Good (ethics) have to find another base (foundation) and it is generally some form of evolutionary idea that sees things getting better.  We have seen pure reason run into all sorts of problems.  Theology must always use the appropriate tools to come to appropriate conclusions.  We are also dealing with the facts in a scientific way just as much as any scientist this is why Theology is known as the Queen of the sciences.  I don’t believe in using philosophy as a grammar of theology because then the grammar takes over.  It was a good thing that John Calvin dumped Aristotle out of his Institutes.  Let us put Christ first in our live and live by faith.  Ultimately this is the true seat of happiness in the presence of God by the Holy Spirit.

Bavinck helps us to define the nature of Law.

July 15, 2021

 

Our starting point will define our conclusion.  This is my opinion.   What I have learned from Bavinck and Karl Barth is that it is so easy to mythologize religious and theological content by forcing a so-called scientific view on the material without considering religious and theological content.  In the Dogmatics of both theologians God has spoken.  From that perspective as scientists, we cannot observe the object (God) on the contrary we are the object and God is the subject.

 When we do real science, we use appropriate tools to do the appropriate job.  There is nothing unlawful to start from the presuppositions of what Scripture has to say and use our reason in an appropriate believing, submissive spirit.  After all God has given us an intellect.

 At the end of page 216 the Master Theologian explains to us that our rational nature has remained, but it is in a state of sin.   What Bavinck wants to do in the first part of this chapter is to show us that; “In the first part of this chapter we shall see that conscience 

bound to the law, and in the second part we shall explore how this law is

actualized in the individual, in the state, and in society and cultivates civil order.” (From Reformed Ethics; Herman Bavinck, edited by John Bolt page 216)

 Before the fall in God’s Forbearance there is one word ‘lawfulness’ (page 217).  God’s order before the Fall is distinct from the order of grace which is found in the Church.   Before the Fall in the perfection of creation people could do what, they wanted (Adam and Eve).  The only thing that was prohibited was to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 After the Fall everything changed, and we have been bound through our conscience to the Law.  Bavinck quotes 1 John 3.4:

4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness. 1 John 3:4

 What is lawlessness?

Bavinck answers:

“sin is lawlessness” , it violates and puts aside all God’s laws; it is absolute, thorough going wilfulness. The character of sin is that it does not rest until it has shaken off all law and can do anything it wills to do. It wants to be absolutely unruly and absurd. This would result, however, in completely dehumanizing people, in turning us into animals, since animals, after all, do not submit to moral laws but live according to their instincts.”(page 217)

 The antidote for Bavinck is:

“In order to do this, God had to guard the very humanity of people, and he does this by bringing humanity under the law. Lawfulness is the character of God’s patient ordering, the means by which humanity is guarded and prepared for recreation, for the grace in Christ.  Adam stood in the law.” (page 217)  The ‘moral ideal’ outside of Christ is always out of reach.  Sin was held back by God’s grace so that the whole of the human race would not be destroyed.  (page 217) 

Reflection

As I said at the beginning of this section; “Our starting point will define our conclusion.”  Jesus Christ is our firm foundation literally.  The basic themes of the Enlightenment from a 150 years ago is still with us today.  I have also been reading volume one of the Reformed Dogmatics edited by John Bolt.  I recognize these names of the enlightenment Kant, Schleiermacher, and Hegel.  We are fed the lie that things are going to get better.  Kant with the categorical imperative:

“Since by nature (according to Kant) the moral law is universal and impartial and rational, the categorical is a way of formulating the criteria by which any action can pass the test of universality, impartiality, and rationality. That is its only function.” (Taken from https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/medical_ethics_text/Chapter_2_Ethical_Traditions/Categorical_Imperative.htm )

For Schleiermacher the feeling of absolute dependence:

“Schleiermacher says that feeling of absolute dependence on God is the highest grade of immediate self-consciousness, and is also an essential element of human nature (26).” (From http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/relexp/reviews/review_schleiermacher01.htm )

 For Hegel

“Hegelianism is the philosophy of G. W. F. Hegel which can be summed up by the dictum that “the rational alone is real”, which means that all reality is capable of being expressed in rational categories. His goal was to reduce reality to a more synthetic unity within the system of absolute idealism.” (From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelianism ).

All these views fail people’s religious points of view of whatever major religion.   Somehow all three views are progressive and start from unscriptural premises and we need to be wary.   I know there is a saying that philosophy is the handmaiden of religion, but I agree more with Calvin when he dropped Aristotle from the Institutes of the Christian Religion like a brick. 

By changing the foundations of the Fall, one does not need to think so much about sin, but it is still there.  It might be called by other names in the world of the sciences, but it is still sin.  Anything that we do which separates us from the living God is sin.  

These and many more writers like to wrap their ideologies in some type of evolutionary blanket, and I have to say that the various religious communities around the world do not like it.   The various religions including Christianity start from some type of revelation.  The divine somehow breaks into our time and our space.  It makes more sense to discuss from a point of exclusivity rather than exclusivity which is a complete kybosh and does not respect voices that go against their beliefs.   Exclusivity is compromise that doesn’t work.  

Wolfhart Pannenberg is not ashamed of using Hegel’s thesis, antithesis and synthesis but in the progress of humanity the cross is left behind.  It doesn’t work.  Don’t get me wrong Pannenberg has some serious cool things to say in his systematic theology, but Hegel just pulls him down into the dust.   

I know I went on a tangent but let us start from the basics and then the house will stand.  To finish off for now Bavinck says:

“We need to consider the following matters with respect to this law: terminology, author, content, object, and purpose or use” (page 217)

 Terminology

Bavinck opens up by speaking about the ‘moral law’ as the moral law comes from morality; “The moral law is the rule for human being and doing, also for religious being and doing.” (Page 218) Others would also use ‘natural law’ as it comes from’ God’s nature’.   Then there are those who reject the notion of revelation and call it natural because it comes from nature rather than God. There are then definitions from jurists ‘natural justice which teaches all living creatures. ‘This is distinguished from the common law and civil law.  Rothe doesn’t agree with ‘natural law’ because humans are caught up in their sinfulness.  Outside of salvation the law cannot be known.  This law then is a positive law not based on rational terms; “It is a divine law revealed by God, though mediated by human beings.” Page 218.   Harless thinks that for Pagans there is ““is nowhere of

such a nature as to correspond to God’s revelation of Himself in His word. And with respect to the quid velit, we find only a relative approximation.”” (end of page 218).  It is best to understand the terminology as Bavinck educating us to their meaning.  We have learned that various schools of thought use natural law in various ways.  This is very important in theology especially looking at what it means in certain contexts.  This discussion has been very important from another standpoint and that is the relationship of the natural law to the decalogue (10 commandments).  Even though Bavinck doesn’t say it here this is very important as well when we interpret the writings of St Paul.  How the natural law (theologically) relates to the 10 commandments and can this help us to re-read St Paul on law and grace. 

Anyhow let us now begin to look at the relationship of the natural law to the decalogue.  All this information on page 219 is packed into one paragraph.  He begins page 219 by:

 “Now surely the natural law and Decalogue differ in manner of revelation, in extent, purity, clarity, and foundation (“I am the LORD your God”).”

Bavinck begins with now surely the 10 commandments and the natural law differ in manner of …:

·         Revelation

·         Extent

·         Purity

·         Clarity

·         Foundation

Bavinck then uses a ‘However’ with regard of the natural law that the following points can be known from nature:

“(a) all human beings experience obligations toward God and to their neighbour, regardless of what those obligations are and how they must be fulfilled; and they feel bound to obey the moral law when they know it.

(b) Paul teaches the reality of the natural law in Romans 1:19—20.

(c) our conscience confirms this.

 (d) philosophers such as Cicero testify to it.

 (e) the nations with their natural and national law bear witness to it.

 (f) the church fathers all testify to it “

 (g) without natural law the moral world order, the moral order of God’s kingdom, and human dependence on God would completely collapse (against the libertines [Calvin] and atheists like Hobbes).

The natural law and the Decalogue differ from the law prior to the fall in that they are negative, consisting of prohibitions: “Thou shalt not . . .” So, they presuppose sin, the doing what is forbidden.” (From page 219 Reformed Ethics, Herman Bavinck, edited by John Bolt)

Bavinck the master theologian has opened our eyes to a whole world of law.  The Fall has affected every aspect of humanity (negatively).  However, if there were no laws (Lawlessness) then the situation could have been a lot worse.  Where does law come from?  Where does the authority rest, Who or what does it rest with?  Bavinck will give us answers to these questions under the heading of ‘Author’ (page 219 para 2)

Reflection 2

We started from the premise that God has spoken, and he has. Genesis 1.1 for example.  Before we move on the Christian life it is important for us to have realized that sin has affected  every aspect of the human being. It is no accident that God has shown the world his patience. When there is an illness (The Fall) an antidote is needed (Christ).  We are so blessed that God became a man in the person of Jesus Christ.  In Christ we have a right relationship with God and thus we can in this new state (eat from the tree of life). 

There is a story from a Hindu tradition:

“”He reached to the cave. Inside it, he was very happy: crystal clear the water was there; he had never seen such a water. And he was going to drink the water… suddenly a crow who was sitting in the cave said, “Stop! Don’t do it. I have done and I am suffering.” Alexander looked at the crow and said, “What are you saying? You have drunk, and what is the suffering?” He said, “Now I cannot die, and I want to die. Everything is finished. I have known everything that life can give. I have known love and I have grown out of it. And I have known success; I was a king of crows, and now I am fed up, and I have known everything that can be known. And everybody I knew has died; they have gone back to rest, and I cannot rest. I have tried all efforts to commit suicide, but everything fails. I cannot die because I have drunk from this condemned cave. It is better that nobody knows about it. Before you drink, you meditate on my condition — and then you can drink.” It is said Alexander for the first time thought about it and came back without drinking from that cave and that stream.”

From (https://spiritualgrowthevents.com/alexander-the-greats-quest-for-immortality-spiritual-story/)

 Obviously as Christians we do not believe in reincarnation.  This story however reminds us that in our fallen human state eternal life could be worse than hell because we would be separated from God for all eternity in a state of sin.  Alexander chose death than life in this story. So, then we touched on the fact that after the Fall our conscience is now bound to the law.  Outside of Christ we lived a life of lawlessness, and we were not able to break free of it.  In Christ we are brought back into a right relationship with God, and we are no longer sees as the lawless ones.  We are not perfect; we still fail and do things we ought not to do and so on but by faith in Christ he is able to purify and cleanse us from all sin.

 Many theories of philosophy reject Christ and the fall.  They reject the authority of the Bible for some other authority.  Actually, a lot of these theories are not new but a reinvention of old theories.  The theory of evolution for example can be found in Plato’s writings even Josephus touches on it.  Plato a few hundred years BC and Josephus at the time of Christ.  We then get the psychological stuff from Kant and Schleiermacher.  Feeling (gefhul) can be immediate instead of mediated.  The foundations of knowledge have been moved.  According to a lot of these theories including Hegel Man is supposed to stride towards perfection.  This has not happened.  Two world wars, famines, Hiroshima and Nagasaki (nuclear), et al.

We need to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus and have our understanding nourished from Scripture. Epistemological foundations by the greater community of the learned need to revisit their own foundations before pointing a finger at the Christian community.  The problems that are in our society is more from their side, so they ought to stop blaming religion and theology for the ills of society.

Next time we will look at when the seat of authority of the law comes from; From God, nature or from somewhere else.

You are also invited to read my Hebrews commentary; https://weaver1hasonline.international/

Looking at Psalm 110 and Hebrews chapter 7

July 13, 2021

Christian Doctrine and the importance of Psalm 110 before looking at the book of Hebrews. Part 1

We will do some background reading on snippets from Psalm 110 before starting Hebrews chapter 7.  The interpretation I am giving to it is a Christological bent to it and this fits in with the book of Hebrews. we will then move on to look at Our Saviour Jesus who is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek and what this means in practice for Christians.

Psalm 110  is very interesting in that we have seen that the messiah has two functions. 

Verse 1

1 The LORD says to my Lord:

“Sit at My right hand

Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.” Psalms 110:1

This Psalm is unquestionably a Psalm of David.  In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus had defeated the Sadducees in argumentation.  The Pharisees heard about this and they came to trick Jesus.  This conversation is below:

41 Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question: 42 “What do you think about the [w]Christ? Whose son is He?” They *said to Him, “The son of David.” 43 He *said to them, “Then [x]how does David [y]in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying,

44

‘The Lord said to my Lord,

“Sit at My right hand,

Until I put Your enemies under Your feet”’?

45 Therefore, if David calls Him ‘Lord,’ [z]how is He his son?” 46 No one was able to offer Him a word in answer, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask Him any more questions. “(Taken from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022&version=NASB)

Obviously, this text originally related to king David, but it also relates to the ‘institution of King David’ as an office. Jesus interprets this literally JHWH (Ha Shem; The Lord) speaks to (ADONAI The lord).  Although David was a Messiah (anointed king) David interpreted it as David’s greater King (Messiah).  For Jewish Christians and gentiles of the time this could be no other than our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.  For Jesus and the Pharisees this Royal Psalm had a prophetic element.

According to Jewish Law King David was barred from priestly functions of the Aaronic line. Only a priest could make sacrifices.   Although it is tempting to say that King David ‘sacrificed’

Read 2 Samuel 24:18-25. I think it is better to read this that the sacrifice was at the cost of King David’s purse and that the priests actually did the sacrificing.  David followed God’s command for this.  King Saul also did this but he did it outside of the remit of Gods command and the throne was taken from him. Read 2 Samuel 24:18-25

Chrsitopher R Smith wrote:

“This disobedience did lead Saul to usurp a privilege of the priesthood.  As I discuss in this post, by offering these sacrifices, Saul was imitating the Canaanite priest-king model instead of respecting the separation between the kingship and the priesthood that was established in the law of Moses.” (from https://goodquestionblog.com/2014/09/08/why-did-god-reject-saul-for-offering-sacrifices-but-not-david-or-solomon/)

In Psalm 110 it is the first time that kingship and the priesthood could be officiated under one person and it is not in the Aaronic line of priests. As the text says:

4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind,

“You are a priest forever

According to the order of Melchizedek.” Psalms 110:4 (NASB Olive tree Bible sorftware).

Apollos is correct to point back to Abraham.  In the book of Genesis we read:

17 Then after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King’s Valley). 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High. 19 He blessed him and said,

“Blessed be Abram of God Most High,

Possessor of heaven and earth;

20 And blessed be God Most High,

Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.”

He gave him a tenth of all. 21 The king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give the people to me and take the goods for yourself.” 22 Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have sworn to the LORD God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, 23 that I will not take a thread or a sandal thong or anything that is yours, for fear you would say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’ 24 I will take nothing except what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their share.” Genesis 14:17-24 (NASB Olive tree bible software)

After this story we never hear anything of Melchizedek again in the pages of Genesis.  Psalm 110 gives the office of Melchizedek to the Messiah (For Christians, Jesus Christ). 

Stephen Lawson makes the point that in Christ there will be a first time that; “This will be the first time that one person will serve as both priest and king”.

“The Priestly Redemption of Christ (110:4) SUPPORTING IDEA: David declares that Christ will be appointed as a priest by God. 110:4a. The LORD, God the Father, has sworn to himself that he will send his Son into this world to be a priest. This will be the first time that one person will serve as both priest and king. A priest was one who represented the people before God. Yet the people did not choose their own representative. To the contrary, God the Father ordained his chosen leaders to the priesthood. In like manner, Christ is designated by the Father to this redemptive mission. Regarding this appointment of Christ to this saving work, God will not change his mind. His eternal purposes are fixed and unchanging” (Acts 2:23; 1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 13:8; 17:8).  (From Lawson, Steven. Holman Old Testament Commentary – Psalms 76-150: Volume 12 . B&H Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.)

Enough has been said on Psalm 110.  I would like to revisit Psalm 110 sometime to dig even deeper but for now I think this is enough.  This discussion is open to public dialogue of anyone.  We also need to be sympathetic to Jewish interpretations although possibly we will not agree.

Reflection

Psalm 110 is a Royal Psalm, and it is a Psalm of David.  We need to remember that the priestly functions and kingly functions of the kings of Israel were always separate.  This Psalm takes a strand from Genesis 14 when Abraham after defeating the kings of Israel met Melchizedek and gave thanks and homage to God the Most High.   

Jesus proved to the Pharisees that King David wasn’t talking about himself but about another king (Messiah).  For Christians Jesus has both functions of High Priest and King but not in the Aaronic line but Melchizedek.   This is the first time in Jewish Christian history that one person can hold both offices of priest and king at the same time.

Interpreting Hebrews chapter 712-28 and Jesus’ office of High Priest and King (Messiah) part 2

Let us begin by reading this section first:

11 Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. 15 And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is attested of Him,

“YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER

ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.” Hebrews 7:11-17

Psalm 110 is a main stay of prophecy in the New Testament.  Apollos really brings out what this actually means.  For Judaism the main stay is the law through the Aaronic line and nothing in Judaism has changed this way.  However, Melchizedek as an order of priesthood has been mentioned.  The Psalms and Genesis are Holy Scripture to along with the five books of Moses, so these texts carry tremendous weight.   It is the case that hundreds of priests from Herod’s Temple became obedient to the faith (Acts 6):

“7 The word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.” Acts 6:7

Apollos is starting to state facts about our Lord that he was from ‘Judah’ (a non-priestly tribe).

11 Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? Hebrews 7:11

Apollos is suggesting that perfection could not be found from the Aaronic line of priests.   He points out that there are two orders:

12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. Hebrews 7:12

Laws can ‘change’ if the order changes.  This will become an important point in his discussion.

13 For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. Hebrews 7:13-14

Jesus is not from the Aaronic line. Jesus was descended from Judah, and he has no qualifications for this priesthood of Aaron which Moses spoke about.  Jesus is disqualified from this priesthood.

15 And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is attested of Him,

“YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER

ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.” Hebrews 7:15-17

The requirement for the second type of priesthood is an ‘indestructible life= forever’.  Jesus is the only one in the history of humanity that fulfils this criterion.

 18 For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness 19 (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 20 And inasmuch as it was not without an oath 21 (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,

“THE LORD HAS SWORN

AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND,

‘YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER’”); Hebrews 7:18-21

Two things are going on here.

For Apollos, In Jesus the emphasis of priesthood has changed.   As far as mainline Judaism is concerned, I can understand why Judaism and Christianity split.  The seeds are right here in this text.  Modern Judaism would see this as apostasy from Judaism because it shifted the priesthood away from Aaron and would be perceived as heresy.   

22 so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant. Hebrews 7:22

23 The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, Hebrews 7:23

The Aaronic priesthood was necessary because their posts needed to be changed regularly through death. It was an imperfect arrangement.

24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Hebrews 7:24

25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:25

Jesus has an indestructible life and because of this reason, he is always there interceding on our behalf.

26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; 27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. 28 For the Law appoints men as high priests who are weak, but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a Son, made perfect forever. Hebrews 7:26-28

The most important thing in this section I think is where the writer says:

Obviously, this was a process that started in Babylon with the birth of the synagogues and later with the destruction of the Temple the Aaronic priesthood was as good as dead. 

Reflection

There are a lot of well-intentioned Christians who are hoping that the ‘Third Temple’ of Ezekiel will be built and to celebrate it.  The Third Temple uses the Aaronic priesthood.   I have to say that according to the book of Hebrews Christians have their High Priest in a different priesthood, namely the order of Melchizedek.   Jesus is high priest of an order that is not part of the Aaronic covenant.  The Oath came after the time of the Law (10 commandment) and it overwrites the old Mosaic covenant.  The main points of this section are:

Psalm 110  is very interesting in that we have seen that the messiah has two functions. 

  • As King of Israel
  • As priest

There are two orders:

  • Order of Aaron
  • Order of Melchizedek

Two things are going on here.

  • The law made nothing perfect, and it was time for change.
  • With the change of priesthood comes a new hope.

The new covenant means:

  • This is a new covenant that displaces the old Aaronic priesthood.
  • Jesus is the guarantor of this new covenant.
  • Contrasted to the Aaronic priesthood Jesus’ priesthood is superior as there is no change of post because there is no death.

The most important thing in this section I think is where the writer says:

  • but the word of the oath, which came after the Law, appoints a son.
  • Psalm 110 has a prophetic dimension as Jesus said (David in the Spirit said)
  • And an Oath concerning the Son of God that overwrites the Law of Moses to the effect that the Aaronic priesthood is not important anymore.

Jesus is our great High Priest, and his priesthood is based upon the promise found in psalm 110:

4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind,

“You are a priest forever

According to the order of Melchizedek.” Psalms 110:4

There has been a displacement of the old ways with the new and living way.   Hebrews is also the book of faith. 

Psalm 110 in other places of the New Testament

Psalm 110 is a key text and its influence is everywhere in the new testament.  Here are some proof texts that back up what Apollos says in the book of Hebrews.

Luke 20:42

39 Some of the scribes answered and said, “Teacher, You have spoken well.” 40 For they did not have courage to question Him any longer about anything.

41 Then He said to them, “How is it that they say the Christ is David’s son? 42 For David himself says in the book of Psalms,

‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD,

“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,

43 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.”’

44 Therefore David calls Him ‘Lord,’ and how is He his son?”

45 And while all the people were listening, He said to the disciples, 46 “Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, 47 who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation.” Luke 20:39-47Acts 2:34

For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand,

64 Jesus *said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN.” Matthew 26:64

62 And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN.” Mark 14:62

69 But from now on THE SON OF MAN WILL BE SEATED AT THE RIGHT HAND of the power OF GOD.” Luke 22:69

31 He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Acts 5:31

55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” Acts 7:55-56

34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. Romans 8:34

20 which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. 22 And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all. Ephesians 1:20-23

1 Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. 3 For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory. Colossians 3:1-4

Psalm 110:1 (Matt. 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69; Acts 5:31; 7:55–56; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1).

Apollos wants us to Stay faithful to Christ, no matter what the situation.

July 9, 2021

Today we will be looking at a chiasmus in Hebrews.  If you do not know what a chiasmus is have a look at this video: Our commentary will be on chapter 6.1-12

Let us begin by reading:

“1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do, if God permits. 4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7 For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8 but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.

Better Things for You

9 But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way. 10 For God is not unjust so as to forget your work and the love which you have shown toward His name, in having ministered and in still ministering to the saints. 11 And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope until the end, 12 so that you will not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.” Hebrews 6:1-12 NASB (This has been taken from Olive Tree Bible software)

The video link below explains what a chiasmus is. 

(This is third party)

The book of Hebrews is full of small gems. Before I move on, I want to explain that it is possible that we have a chiasm here:

“[7] Warning against falling away (Heb. 5:11-6:12)

      A(5:11-6:3) 5:14 But solid food is for the mature, for those whose faculties are trained by practice to discern good and evil.(5:14)

                      B(6:4-6) 6:6 and then have fallen away, to bring them to repentance again (6:6)

                      B'(6:7-8) 6:8 But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is rejected; it will soon be cursed and finally burned. (6:8)

      A'(6:9-12) 6:12 so that you may not become sluggish, but imitators of those who, through faith and patience, are inheriting the promises. (6:12)

   A: Wish for growth. B: Person who cannot be saved.” (From http://www.bible.literarystructure.info/bible/58_Hebrews_pericope_e.html#7)

(This is a literary device that was used in the ancient world, and it is also found in the Bible.

So, point A corresponds to point Aand B corresponds to BThis literary form helps to give a particular writing a beautiful structure and according to 村井源    Hajime Murai there are about 17 of these structures in the book of Hebrews.   This shows a serious consistency in the book of Hebrews that might otherwise have been missed out.  I am surprised that some of the commentaries I have looked at miss this type of structure because we not only look at the meaning of words and grammar but also at structure. So how does this help us.  It means that the ethical material of Hebrews continues all the way through to chapter 6 verse 12.)

So in a sense a chiasmus can make the meaning of what is said more forceful.  If I was to paraphrase it:

“Solid food is for the mature so stop being lazy and sluggish.  Those who fall away from the living God are about to be cursed and burned.”

This is pretty strong language! Apollos is not mincing words. It is no accident that this paraenetic material is sandwiched between chapters 5 and 7.  In chapter 5 we have the theme of the obedience of the Son.  It follows naturally that the believers should also follow in the footsteps of their king and Great High Priest.   In this chapter the writer is giving the readers a hard time because he is telling them that they should have progressed in the Christian faith, and they haven’t progressed.

Verses 1 – 3

“1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. 3 And this we shall do, if God permits.”

Apollos gives them a list of things that the Jewish Christian believers should understand and be doing.

Verse 3.  The correct translation is ‘We shall do’ although there is another version that says, ‘We may do’.  Apollos is one who does not mince his words and he is not afraid to state things as they are for me this is a good enough reason to follow ‘we shall do’. The internal evidence gives the readings from Papyri 46 is from AD 200 Alexandrinus is from AD 500.  ‘Shall do’ wins.

(The NASB correctly translates ‘we shall do’ (future plural) This follows papyri 46.  There is another reading though that follows Alexandrinus.   The difference is one letter s + omricon = future tense and s + omega = the aorist plural subjunctive!)

Verses 4 – 8

“4 For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. 7 For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; 8 but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned.”

These verses are hard hitting, and it is aimed at those who turn their back on the Gospel.  I’m sure that Armenians and Calvinists would have a serious disagreement on these verses.  Herman Bavinck gives some useful information in his Reformed Ethics pages 406 and 407 as he writes:

“And third, in their wills and passions, unregenerateness about and fight against their sins (2 Cor. 7:10, “worldly sorrow”); biblical examples include Pharaoh (Exod. 9:27), King Saul (1 Sam. 24:17; 26:21), Felix (Acts 24:25), and Judas (Matt. 27:4). Such people can have a love for virtue, as Balaam did (Num. 22:18; 24:13); think also of men like Cicero and Seneca. They can have some taste of God’s common grace258 (Heb. 6:4–5; Num. 23:10), and even have a desire for grace (the foolish virgins in Jesus’s parable desired oil, Matt. 25:8). If they have a hope for heaven and expect him, they may suffer for Christ (1 Cor. 13:2). They can have the Spirit of God like Balaam (Num. 24:2), prophesy like Saul (1 Sam. 10:11), and, like Judas, cast out devils. Meade enumerates some twenty things that an unregenerate person can have, and Perkins lists about thirty-three. 25” (from page 406)

This is very important because according to these findings both the people of the world and the Christian can have the same types of experience of God’s grace.  Somethings are best left in God’s hands and let God deal with it. Election is a mystery as we were chosen from before the foundation of the world.  Let us also remember that we live the life of faith and if we stay constant, we are the elect.  We are not any better than those who do not accept the Gospel but we can be encouraged that we are living in Christ.

Verses 9 – 12

“9 But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way. 10 For God is not unjust so as to forget your work and the love which you have shown toward His name, in having ministered and in still ministering to the saints. 11 And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope until the end, 12 so that you will not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.” NASB

This is in contrast to the unbelief sections. Those who are being faithful to Christ and his Gospel.  I find this very interesting because it follows the same type of pattern as Psalm 95 being worked out in the Church.  We looked at this Psalm earlier and obviously Apollos is living this Psalm and he is expecting the Jewish believers to follow the same pattern.  In these verses I also feel empathy for the readers. 

Reflection

Hebrews chapter 6.1-12 is ethical material as well as being theological.  He is exhorting his readers to stay faithful to Christ.  Obviously if we were to mirror read the text, we would have to think that some of these believers were thinking about quitting the Christian faith and perhaps go back to traditional Judaism.  Let us even in the 21st century take Apollos’ warning seriously and be faithful to Christ even to the end of our time here on earth.

The Relationship between the Person and the Law in Herman Bavinck

July 9, 2021

 

We have now come to the last chapter of the first book.  We have traveled very far.  We have learned that when God created humanity in Adam and Eve, they were perfect and the world we live in was also perfect. Sin came into the world and there was a fall.  Every aspect of humanity was then tainted by sin and corruption.  We have also learned that a lot of scholars reject this story and follow the path of an enlightenment in which ‘science’ somehow rules.  They follow a line of corruption to perfection.  Many so-called Christian theologians bought into this enlightenment and from my point of view sold out the Christian revelations that is found in Scripture (Holy Bible). 

Karl Barth for example spoke against his own teachers because of this.  He saw through to the conclusion of what was going on.  The extermination of many Jews at Auschwitz, the murder of whole populations in Russia by Stalin, even Churchill had serious attitude problems and blood on his hands towards other peoples under the former British Empire. 

Herman Bavinck in the English-speaking world has been overlooked for a long time I am so thankful and blessed that he has been translated into English.  Herman Bavinck is worthy of study in the English-speaking world just as much as Pannenberg, Barth and other theologians.  Alas I wish that my former tutor professor Colin Gunton was still alive, from my point of view he would have devoured the translations of Bavinck because as far as I am aware he had a Reformed background. 

It does not matter from whatever background we are from; we can learn a lot from him. As I have been reading Bavinck, I find that both Bavinck and Barth covered a lot of the same ground.  There is a lot of fertile ground to compare and contrast methodology; revelation as mediate or immediate; the interpretation of Schleiermacher and the Enlightenment process, and so on in Bavinck and Barth. I will however leave this for a rainy day.

 

Pekka JärveläinenOwn work

 The above picture was taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law#/media/File:Laki-patsas.jpg  This is a photo of a monument in Finland identified by the ID ‘Q60674036’ (Q60674036)

‘The sinner and Law’; In Reformed Ethics by John Bolt, Pages 215 – 234 part 1

“As a sign of God ’s forbearance, an order of lawfulness remains even after the fall into sin. Human moral nature, including the conscience, continues to guide and bind people, albeit imperfectly. That we remain under the law is a sign of God’s favour to us; he has not left us entirely to our own devices and instincts. Human beings have not become beasts; they are still guided by natural law. This reality is taught by the apostle Paul in Romans 1—2 and testified to by philosophers and by the laws and practice of nations.” Page 215

We have already covered a lot of this ground in previous blogs, but the bottom line is that God has not given up on humanity. When God created the world and us, we had a natural law as it were built into our very fabric.  Paul explains this from Romans Chapter 1 and chapter 2.  We as a human species have been protected to a certain extent from wiping ourselves out because of common grace and sense.  Obviously, this inbuilt law was affected and influenced by the Fall: we can also mention the conscience work we did on this too.

 

For Bavinck Scripture takes primacy over the natural law.  Although all people have a sense of this natural law as we saw earlier in our blog the conscience can make mistakes for various reasons.  For Bavinck it is God who binds the conscience as he has full and complete authority over it because he created the natural moral law in the first place.   Various philosophies such as Kant’s categorical imperative; Taken from Wikipedia:

According to Kant, sentient beings occupy a special place in creation, and morality can be summed up in an imperative, or ultimate commandment of reason, from which all duties and obligations derive. He defines an imperative as any proposition declaring a certain action (or inaction) to be necessary.

Hypothetical imperatives apply to someone who wishes to attain certain ends. For example, “I must drink something to quench my thirst” or “I must study to pass this exam.” A categorical imperative, on the other hand, denotes an absolute, unconditional requirement that must be obeyed in all circumstances and is justified as an end in itself. It is best known in its first formulation:

Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.” (From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative)

 

Or even Hegel’s logic which Wolfart pannenberg used in his systematic theology of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.  The following quote was taken from Wikipedia:

 

Within Hegelianism, the word dialectic has the specialised meaning of a contradiction between ideas that serves as the determining factor in their relationship. Dialectical materialism, a theory or set of theories produced mainly by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, adapted the Hegelian dialectic into arguments regarding traditional materialism. The dialectics of Hegel and Marx were criticized in the twentieth century by the philosophers Karl Popper and Mario Bunge.

 

Dialectic tends to imply a process of evolution and so does not naturally fit within classical logics but was given some formalism in the twentieth century. The emphasis on process is particularly marked in Hegelian dialectic, and even more so in Marxist dialectical logic, which tried to account for the evolution of ideas over longer time periods in the real world.” (From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic)

 

Then Bavinck talks about the various evolutionary processes that we already know about such as (my examples) Darwin’s theory of evolution which played a role in the uniformity theories in geology and so on and philosophies that painted an ideal picture.  For that matter Nietzsche’s theory of the death of God!

Zarathustra ties the Übermensch to the death of God. While the concept of God was the ultimate expression of other-worldly values and their underlying instincts, belief in God nevertheless did give meaning to life for a time. “God is dead” means that the idea of God can no longer provide values. Nietzsche refers to this crucial paradigm shift as a re-evaluation of values.[8] According to Nietzsche, the moral doctrine of Catholicism had become outdated. With the sole source of values exhausted, the danger of nihilism looms.” (Taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cbermensch)

 

Reflection

How can any religious tradition buy into these sorts of things?   The truth is they won’t, and it is disrespectful for academia to think that they have to leave their exclusivity behind.  The phenomenology and epistemological foundations of Religious Studies in universities and trying to find an experiential leveller of experience is flawed. It doesn’t work.  I once heard Badawi in the nineties say at the inauguration of the teaching of RE in Tower Hamlets that each child should be taught so they understand what their religion means to them.  A religious Studies teacher is supposed to not take sides but be objective.  The problem is that many children start from their own exclusivity and traditions including atheist children.  Religious Education should start from where the student is.  It is up to the student to decide whether or not they want to convert to another religion.  Many children decide to follow their own religious traditions; some decide to convert to another religion.  If a person cannot respect another person’s conscience in a classroom about various things, then there is a problem.  Confessionalism in academia is dead. That is from my point of view a good thing in a multi-ethnic society.  Forcing someone to believe in a point of view not their own is a type of violence and this should always be illegal in a civilized society.

We are still on page 215 – 216.  We have looked at the idea of the natural law and how it affects us and we have learned that there are many points of view of how this natural law ought to be interpreted (for certain groups of people)

Part 2

‘The sinner and Law’; In Reformed Ethics by John Bolt, Pages 215 – 234 part 2

We are now going to look at the ‘Divine Law’ or the law of God in the first place the Old Testament and its fulfillment in Christ:

The law of God in the Old Testament has three parts: ceremonial, judicial, and moral. All three are fulfilled in Christ. This law is spiritual and unchangeable, and its purpose is to govern the entire person, inwardly as well as outwardly. The moral law needs to be distinguished from the law of thought, from civil law, and also from natural law. God’s law has three functions: a civil use to restrain evil, a pedagogical use to convict us of sin and judgment, and a teaching use as a rule of life to guide believers.” ( Page 216 Reformed Ethics volume 1 edited by John Bolt.)

This is still the introduction to the chapter, but it lays the groundwork for what we are going to learn about.  Before we get started for the Christian person, the natural law is not enough, and we can never please God on the basis of it.   Ceremonially, judicially, or morally from the law of nature it is impossible in our strength to ever please God.  Having said that as Bavinck clearly shows all three areas have been fulfilled in Christ.  If you want to follow me on these ideas go to my other blog;  https://weaver1hasonline.international/

(At the moment I am going through the book of Hebrews, the writer of Hebrews (which I believe was Apollos one of Pauls companions) goes through the nitty gritty of the ceremonial, judicial and moral aspects of the Old Testament law.  I will be starting Hebrews chapter six sometime this Weekend.)

 

We have seen that the law of nature affects all of us.  Apart from Christianity this natural law is around us and if it wasn’t there the world would be a lot worse than it is.  What does God’s law do?

For Bavinck as he says:

Nonetheless, Christianity has influenced, modified, and improved natural morality. From the perspective of God and his kingdom, natural morality has absolutely no value; it does bring us a step closer to the kingdom of heaven. It does have great value from an earthly perspective: it leaves humanity without excuse; it restrains persons; it alleviates life’s burdens and makes human life bearable, even to give it some joy so that it is not yet a hell on earth.” From page 216

For the Christian this is true.  For me though as well as the morality we go into the salvific value that it is impossible to know Christ without faith and grace.  Bavinck here goes a stage further to claim that God’s law has had such an impact that it has changed society for the better.  In a lot of cases this is true, but it is sad to say that there are many people who don’t even listen to this natural law.  There are many strings pulling society to and thro.  Bavinck goes on to say that natural morality serves the Church as a ‘presupposition of faith.’ (page 216) Regenerate people are ‘double persons’ as Christ lives in them but they still live in the world as Paul describes this as ‘the flesh’.

Herman Bavinck finishes of his introduction with a real gem:

‘The purpose and task of ethics is therefore to describe how regenerate people are to manifest their eternal heavenly life in the form of the temporal earthly life.’ (page 216)

Reflection 2

The main emphasis of Book 1 of Bavinck’s Reformed Ethics has been about ‘humanity before conversion’.  This is an important chapter because it is a lynch pin to his second book which is about ‘converted Humanity’.  We have seen that the law of God is very important, and it modifies natural law.  Indeed, it is the case that throughout the centuries the 10 commandments have played a very important role.  I would go a stage further that the 10 commandments have somehow played an important role in three great religions: Islam, Judaism and Christianity.    Herman Bavinck didn’t actually say that up to this point or in other places (as far as I am aware), but this is a good reason for other religions to also read Herman Bavinck. 

Reformed Ethics up to this point has been a very balanced book.  We have had to walk through the valley of the shadow of death before we can start to climb the mountain top of faith with its lower peaks along the way.  I hope this has whetted your appetite to look at what he has to say about the law of God a precursor preparation for the Gospel and what it really means to be a Christian and a member of the Church.  Bavinck has also shows us movements of thought that go against God’s revelation of his Son Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.  Next time we will start to look at ‘the law’ a little more closely.

What type of conscience do I have and how can I improve on my choices?

July 4, 2021

 

Butterfly from my garden.

Having gone this far on the topic of conscience we can see that it is a very important subject and topic.  This is something that should certainly be in any Religious Studies course. Possibly educationalists would prefer to have it under psychology.  One of the problems with comparative religion at schools and colleges is that each religion is looked at for its main features, practices, geographical location et.al.  Then one might have compare contrast, explain questions and finish off with an essay type question.

This does not answer the question of how religious or non- religious people look at how to get on with their neighbour or what to do when one sees a crisis brewing. For people in general doing the ‘right thing’ is important and for others ‘what they can get away with.’ As a society of fellow human beings, when we do something wrong, how is the after feeling?  Or when we do something right, how is the after feeling? 

Having a look at the conscience objectively in a safe classroom environment with an empathetic teacher I feel, is important.  Obviously, ethics is taught in Religious Studies such as abortion, euthanasia, war and so on and with various religious points of view but perhaps a student needs to look at the very ‘root’ of why they come to certain conclusions.  I think that Herman Bavinck certainly gives us the tools to be able to do some of this soul search findings.

What I wrote above is my reflections for a secular and religious audience.  So then; this is going to be the last look at the conscience and Bavinck is now ready to take us through the types of consciences that there are:

·         Natural (Pagan) and Christian (Enlightened) Consciences

·         Good and Bad Consciences

·         Upright and Erring Consciences

·         Assured and Doubting Consciences

·         Strong and Weak Consciences

·         Broad and Narrow (Scrupulous) Consciences”

·         Sleeping and Alert Consciences

These subheadings were taken from Reformed Ethics; Herman Bavinck; edited by John Bolt; pages 207-212

So then on the first one the Christian conscience is ‘enlightened by the word of God’.  The ‘pagan’ has the law of nature. 207

Secondly ‘A good conscience exonerates while a bad conscience accuses.’.  Bavinck notes though that the standard can have false premises.   He gives more information here about the natural and regenerated human being et al.  pg 207

Thirdly Bavinck says “But, in the first place, Holy Scripture clearly teaches the reality of an erring conscience:

The heart is deceitful above all things, / and desperately sick; / who can understand it? (Jer. 17:9)

However, not all possess this knowledge. But some, through former association

with idols, eat food as really offered to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. (1 Cor. 8:7)

. . . if his conscience is weak. (1 Cor. 8:10; cf. v. 12; 10:28—29)

. . . through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared. (1 Tim. 4:2)

To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. (Titus 1:15)”

So yes, for Bavinck the conscience can make mistakes ‘Err’.   I felt it was important to quote the scripture references so one can see why he came to certain conclusions.  However, he also looked at some great theologians of the time on this topic such as Ames, Braun, de Moor, Witsius, Buddeus, Rothe, Schenkel.  These theologians either fell on the side that the conscience cannot err, or it can err. Pages 207 – 208

Fourthly Bavinck begins by saying “A conscience is identified as doubting when, in answering the question of whether a particular act is permitted or not, it does not know how to answer.” Bavinck then shows various on this topic of assured and doubting consciences.  He looks at a range of points of view starting from Jesuit casuistry (probability) to confidence. Pages 209 – 211

Fifthly I will quote this section because Bavinck goes into scriptural references.  Bavinck says; According to Ames, “A good conscience admits of degrees, for which cause it is by the apostle distinguished into a weak and a strong conscience” (Rom. 15:1). A strong conscience is one that “is established in the truth” (Rom. 14:5; cf. 2 Pet. 1:12), which “knows that an idol is nothing” (1 Cor. 8:4, 7 NIV), bears the weak (Rom. 15:1), and is not offended (Rom. 14:3). A weak conscience has been improved by faith, but, nonetheless, still depends on someone other than God and something other than his Word (Rom. 14:15). Consequently, it still considers some things unclean (1 Cor. 8:7; Rom. 14:14), is quickly saddened (Rom. 14:15), is easily offended (Rom. 14:15, 21; 1 Cor. 8:9, 12), and condemns others (1 Cor. 10:29; Rom. 14:3, 15). The distinction between a free and an unfree conscience is closely connected with this distinction between strong and weak.” Pg 211

Sixthly the conscience can be broad or narrow.  In that a broad conscience basically allows more things than a narrow conscience that judges everything.

Seventhly a conscience can be sleeping or seared.  Bavinck gives the example for the former:

 21 Then they said to one another, “Truly we are guilty concerning our brother, because we saw the distress of his soul when he pleaded with us, yet we would not listen; therefore, this distress has come upon us.” Genesis 42:21 NASB

The brothers were guilty of selling Joseph into captivity, but the day came when a situation was set up and they saw their guilt. 

A seared conscience is dead to every kind of sin:

2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, 1 Timothy 4:2 NASB

An alert conscience on the other hand is fully functional.

We now move on to the last two sections of this chapter on conscience.  Firstly, we need by faith to have our consciences cleansed:

14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 9:14 NASB

As Bavinck continues; “Once we have obtained an objectively good conscience, it must also be made subjectively good. We accomplish this, first of all, by bringing the Word of God more and more into the syntérésis and freeing it from all laws that conflict with it. Christ must be the content of our conscience. The subjective standard in our conscience must be brought increasingly into correspondence with the objective standard. Christ must liberate our conscience from every external authority and make it acknowledge God’s will as the only valid authority.” Page 212

Anyhow this obligation for the Christian is only possible through God’s grace and faith. 

Bavinck finishes off by reminding us that the conscience is universal.  There is the moral natural law that we are all under then he goes on to say:

“The moral law is one, immutable, and valid for all people. At the same time, different people interpret the moral law, each in their own way; they assimilate it in accord with their own nature, with the groups to which they belong, and with the societies in which they live.” Page 213

Bavinck finishes this chapter by saying on the individual level that the conscience only binds the person it belongs to.

On a state and Church level he says that neither institution can compel someone to go against their conscience. However, there are still requirements for its members.   Bavinck finishes off with ‘conscientious objection’. Page 214

Reflection

At this point we need to stop and think, what type of conscience do you have? 

I find it a deeply important and humbling subject.  We go through life thinking that we are doing the right thing and then realize that perhaps some of our decisions have been wrong and perhaps we should have gone another route. 

For Christians we have the Holy Spirit and Scripture to help us in making our decisions but even then, the culture we live in influences us in our decisions.  If the Bible is the word of God:  

Have we interpreted the Bible correctly?  You see the problem is that when making decisions, if we have been praying about a particular situation and we have misinterpreted some part of Scripture then we have missed an alignment for our conscience and we make a drastic mistake. If it wasn’t for God’s grace we would fail every time.  In our own nature we do not have all the answers and we can become ‘good people’ but this is not enough.  We need to remember the Fall and how sin came into the world.  We are all sinful and even Christian’s sin.  This is my understanding of it so I am not forcing my will onto you the reader.  On the other hand, one might be a child of the enlightenment and that there was no ‘fall’ and one sees the evolutionary process moving the human to perfection… One makes their own decisions. My friends I also think this is a failure.  Even with utilitarianisms there are many people on the streets without food: What sort of perfection is that?

At the moment in society there doesn’t seem to be any civic conscience either.  Before Rabbi Sacks died, he reminded us that this society is full of individualists with not a lot of care for our interactions with our neighbour whoever our neighbour might be.  I see selfishness and greed around a lot of corners.  These last years have been horrendous from a political point of view.  It isn’t just Trump, but it is also Johnson.  I long for the day that when someone makes a statement, they are willing to live by their statement instead of hiding the realities and promising people unrealities.  We can learn a lot from the Apostles here whether one is a Christian or not.   They had a message to take to the whole world: What happened?

St Paul had his head chopped off.

St Peter was crucified upside down because he did not see himself worthy to die in the same way Jesus died.

The list continues:

https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/64320/Local-News/How-did-the-apostles-die

They were men who were willing to die for what they believed in.  How low do things need to get?

Yes, the conscience is an important topic and I hope and pray that we learn to listen to our consciences again.  Regeneratively by the Holy Spirit and Scripture and for all people to be aware of the natural law and although not religious, at least listen and make good decisions that help the whole of Humanity.

Jesus our Great High Priest in the order of Melchizedek

July 3, 2021

Chapter 4. 14 -5.14

Jesus is indeed our great High Priest.  He speaks and mediates on our behalf. As we saw earlier in chapter 4. 14 up to the end of the chapter.

Just to remind you there are two areas in which Apollos prepared the groundwork for chapter 5.

As a reminder these points from verses 14 to 15 sets up the scene for chapter 5

“In verse 14 Apollos sets the scene and reminds his congregation of some facts.  Below in the first list are the heavenly, divine characteristics of our Lord and we are called on holding on to this confession.

1.   Jesus is the Great High Priest.

2.   Jesus entered heaven.

3.   Jesus is the Son of God

4.   We are to hold to our confession.

In verse 15 we have the earthly temporal characteristics of our Lord. That Jesus really understands the problems that we are facing:

1.   We have a High Priest who sympathizes with our weaknesses

2.   Who has been tempted in all things like other believers

3.   Jesus has no sin.” 

So, we have in the two lists above divine and earthly characteristics of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and these points will be worked out in chapter 5 more fully.   Chapter 5 is such a small chapter that it is worth reading all of it:

​“ For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; 2   he can deal gently with the ignorant and misguided, since he himself also is  beset with weakness; 3 and because of it he is obligated to offer sacrifices for sins, as for the people, so also for himself. 4 And no one takes the honour to himself, but receives it when he is called by God, even as Aaron was.
5 So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him,
YOU ARE MY SON,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”;
6 just as He says also in another passage,
“YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.”
7  In the days of His flesh,  He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. 8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. 9 And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, 10 being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.
11 Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. 12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have
their senses trained to discern good and evil.” Hebrews 5 Olive Tree Bible software.

For the believers and Apollos, Jesus was God’s Messiah.  This is an especially important understanding of the nature of Kingship in the Old Testament.  Setting the scene:

The first four verses are an explanatory reminder to the Jewish Christians. The facts show that the person who is to be High Priest is called by God.

His main functions are

  1. The High Priest is to be called by God even as Aaron was.
  2. He deals gently with the ignorant and misguided and he is not any better than they.
  3. One of his main job descriptions is to offer sacrifices on behalf of the people and himself.

In the same way then Jesus did not take this honour on himself, but he was called by God.  Two Psalms are quoted from the Royal Psalms.  These are not any ordinary Psalms.

“ Royal Psalms

The ten so-called Royal Psalms (2; 18; 20; 21; 45; 72; 89; 101; 110; 132; Nordic scholars set the figure higher)’° only form a ‘Gattung’ or ‘type’ insofar as they relate to the so-called ‘Ritual of the King’, and the royal cult at the state sanctuary.  Since they stem from the heritage of the first temple, we must apply to them the liturgical categories of pre-exilic period (as indeed to the other older hymns). They therefore defy any classification which is mainly derived from post-exilic times. Their group identity bears the stamp of the pre-exilic tradition. Sample text: Ps. 2.”  (Taken from Introducing the Psalms; Klaus Seybold; Page 115)

So, then scholars believe that Psalm 2 and Psalm 110 are clearly from the first Temple time, so they are very early.  These Psalms therefore are linked to the rituals performed in the Temple at Jerusalem and shows the close relationship between God and the King.  Psalms 2 and 110 are explicit references to Christ the Anointed One.  You need to remember that all the kings of Israel and Judah were anointed.  It is the title only given to a Royal King of Israel.  This practice was obviously taken over by the British Royal Family! (Note that the Messiah was understood to be the king of Israel. The king was the representative of YHWH on earth.   The commands from heaven were to be carried out here on earth. Note that Apollos sees this present earth only as a shadow of the real thing.) 

So then on the one level Jesus Shared some characteristics of the High priest hood but then Apollos takes us to a completely higher level when it comes to Christ.   The Validation of Christ as a High Priest is found in Psalm 2:

“YOU ARE MY SON,

TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”

And Psalm 110:

“YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER

ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK.”

We have already met Psalm 2  in Hebrew.1 5 In that original place Apollos proved that Jesus was greater than the angels.  In that the writer showed the close bond between the Father and Son that angels could never be part of. 

In this scriptural recipe Apollos is showing that the Son is a High Priest in an order of priesthood that the ordinary High Priests could never share and in fact they were excluded from this High priesthood! Christ is a High Priest in the order of Melchizedek.   Generally, the High Priests came from the Line of Aaron so what gives?  We will go into greater depth when we hit chapter 6. 

However at the moment Apollos wants to continue on the Sonship motif as we need to listen very closely to what is being said.  Let us now look at verses 7 through to 10:

“7  In the days of His flesh,  He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. 8 Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. 9 And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, 10 being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. ”

So, the text is basically saying is while Jesus was a human being on earth he prayed a lot and asked for many things.  I especially like John 17 in which Jesus prays for our behalf which is still in effect even for the believers today 2000 years later. Jesus did not only hold a title of Son of God, but he also proved it throughout his life.  Jesus was indeed obedient to the point of death on a cross.  Now because of his life and sacrifice Jesus Christ is indeed the only source for eternal life.  There is no other way.  As we said earlier, Apollos reaffirms that Jesus is a High Priest in the order of Melchizedek.

So how does all this relate to the believers?

This is an important question because we also need to take seriously what he said!

“11 Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. 12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.” NASB

It looks like Apollos is taking the readers back to basics.  What amazes me is that this theology is high theology and I think the readers must have had some serious education on these points.  Comparing his teachings to the ordinary believer in a church today; if what he is saying is ‘milk’ what spiritual food are we then drinking: Water?  

I think that we also need to take chapter 6.1 into account “1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity…  Hebrews 6:1” NASB

Apollos is an excellent teacher as he really knows how to get the readers attention.  On the one hand he says that they need to go back to basics but then in 6.1 he says your now ready to listen to the heavier teachings.  Obviously, this Church really loved Apollos and Timothy 3.23.   

Reflection

This Week I have also been reading some of Acts.  One important question that comes to my mind about these believers is what sort of backgrounds did these believers come from?  Internally to this letter we have serious Jewish topics going on.  This book has tentatively been given an early date:

Could this be a clue to us?

“7 The word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.”

Acts 6:7 NASB

Could it be the case that Apollos was talking to some of these priestly converts?

I have no evidence for it, but it is a tantalizing hypothesis.  What I mean to say is that; in this letter we have a high theology. This theology is encased in a full proof argument that I believe needed a highly skilled scholar to compile it.  The content is high theology that I believe may have been aimed at members who had a profession within a priestly class and were interested in this kind of theological material.   On the other hand, it is a great work that all believers throughout the centuries have looked to for comfort.  John Owen is a prime example from the Puritan era.  He wrote a seven-volume set on this small letter and each volume is made up of hundreds of pages!

Reflection

Apollos is writing to a set of believers who are suffering for their faith.  Indeed, my thinking is leading me to think about this particular church to be in Jerusalem rather than in a larger diaspora.  Whatever the case; Apollos shows us the important work Jesus is doing for us as a High Priest and his High Priesthood is higher than the Aaronite priesthood line found in the fertile pages of Genesis and the Psalms.

Why is this important for the believer?

Jesus Loves his Church. He loves us so much that he intercedes on our behalf.  You are not alone.  If this was the Church in Jerusalem, they were to go through the collapse of and sacking of the Jewish temple. Obviously, it is my hypothesis that it were these Christians who suffered so greatly at this time.  The horrific sacking by the Romans and the carrying away of the Temples utensils.   We are now in the 21st century so what is this book telling us.  When I look around the world in prayer, I see much suffering, needless suffering.  The message for the Christian is the same; Have faith; be firm and follow Christ come what may.    How has the Church changed since then?  I see a lack of faith because many believers just want a quick Sunday fix or to see their favourite pastor online.  Whilst looking at these issues I also looked at chapter 13:

19 And I urge you all the more to do this, so that I may be restored to you the sooner. Hebrews 13:19

And

23 Take notice that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom, if he comes soon, I will see you. Hebrews 13:23

Apollos is going to be ‘restored’ and Timothy is to be ‘released’.  I haven’t made any judgements about these words, but I have to say perhaps they are implying some time of imprisonment.  Isn’t it the case that Christians around the world are suffering from corrupt leaders and this at times can mean more suffering?  So let us remember to pray for our brothers and sisters that we have never met but are undergoing persecution for their faith.  Persecution does not have to be far away as I saw on Twitter  this 11-year-old boy was writing about alms and not arms:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/27/11-year-old-boy-reported-prevent-teacher-mishears-alms-arms/

So, my friends be strong in the faith and trust Christ as we are called to live for him.  Next time we will look at Hebrews chapter 6 and are going to have a closer look at how we ought to live material or the paraenetic material.