Hebrews

Hebrews and the New Covenant (Part 2)

When the Writer of Hebrews describes the New Covenant, it simply replaces the Old. The first covenant was not faultless, but the new covenant will be perfect (Heb 8:7).   The key term is “faultless” (amemptos), a word which is normally associated moral perfection (often in Job).  The problem was not that the first covenant was flawed, but rather no sacrificer was pure in heart, nor was any sacrifice  offered in the first covenant really adequate to deal with the extent of the problem of sin.  This is the same sort of critique of the Law Paul makes in Galatians.  If the law as intended to be a guide for living one’s life in order to obtain salvation, it is a failure!  The Law itself was good, but the people to whom it was given were unable to keep it perfectly.

The key word here is in verse 13, the new covenant makes the old covenant “obsolete,” as most translations render the word.  The word here simple means, “makes old,” in that it is chronologically an earlier version of the covenant.   There is some baggage which comes along with the world obsolete in English. We all have a computer which is obsolete; if I was working with a computer from 1980, it would be completely useless by today’s standards.  For Americans, advertisers have only to suggest that something we own is obsolete and we run out and buy the upgrade.  “Planned obsolescence” is a part of business these days.

But that is not necessarily what this word means in this context.  By way of analogy, I recently renewed my driver’s license by mail.  I sent in my check and got a new license, but I still have my old license.  If I was pulled over by a policeman and tried to use the old license, I would be in a great deal of trouble because it is the old license, it is “obsolete.”   The writer is saying that the old covenant has been superceded by the new chronologically, this is the way in which God is dealing with his people in the present age (recalling 1:1-3 once again).   This is a rabbinic principle which appears several times in Hebrews (4:8, 7:11, 28, 10:2, cf., Philo Rer. Div. Her., 178).  The same principle was applied in 1QHab 1:5 to the New Covenant passage, although with a different application.

The grammar is tricky though – the old is growing old and is “near destruction,” or as the ESV translates, it “is vanishing away.”  Is the Old Covenant gone and the New Covenant already here, or not?   The tense of the verbs are important.  The old covenant “has been made obsolete / old,” in the perfect. This implies a past event with present ramifications. But the next to verbs (in the second half of the verse) are present tense – the old covenant is becoming obsolete and nearing death. But it is not quite there yet!  Ellingworth (NIGTC 417) comments that “old age” is a sign that death and dissolution are near, but not quite present yet.   “Statements about the supersession of the old dispensation appear to grow generally bolder as the argument progresses (cf. 7:18f; 10:9, 18), yet the continued existence of the first covenant is never completely denied.” (NIGTC 418).

Perhaps this is a case of “living between the ages,” after the new covenant has been established, but before it is fully consummated (cf. Eph 1:15-22).

Hebrews and the New Covenant (Part 1)

Hebrews 8-9 are theologically more controversial than the rest of Hebrews because it appears that the writer of Hebrews says that the Jewish people have been replaced by the Church – the New Covenant has replaced the Old, Jesus’ sacrifice is superior to the old sacrifice.  As such, chapters 8 and 9 have been used to teach that the Jewish people are no longer God’s people and the church replaces them completely.  This would therefore imply that any promises made to Israel in the Hebrew Bible are either canceled or to be reinterpreted as applying to the Church.

The theological term for this is supersessionism, the church supersedes the Jews as the people of God.  For some types of theology, the idea that the Jews have been replaced by the church is an assumption, the proof for which is found here in Hebrews, especially chapters 8-9.  The historic view of the church is that it is the new Israel, and all the promises of the Hebrew Bible are fulfilled in the church.  The rebuilding of Jerusalem mentioned in the New Covenant passage is therefore re-interpreted spiritually.  For example, commenting Jeremiah 31,

The “wall great and high” is of no earthly material; the extension is not one of yards on miles, but of nations and ages; the consecration of the unclean places is but typical of the regenerative force of Christianity, which reclaims the moral wastes of the world, and purifies the carnal affections and sinful tendencies of human nature; and no material city could ever “stand for aye.” Only the kingdom and Church of Christ could satisfy the conditions of such a prophecy. (A. F. Muir, in The Pulpit Commentary: Jeremiah 2:28).

However, when one reads Hebrews without the modern church in mind, the book does not argue that Israel has been replaced, but that the promises made to Israel, including the New Covenant, have their fulfillment in Jesus the Messiah.  I find Richard Hays, “We Have No Lasting City,” pages 151-173 in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009) to be an extremely helpful sketch of the problem.  Hays cites his own work as implying that Hebrews is supersessionist, and then shows how a proper reading of Hebrews will show that the book is not actually teaching that the church has replaced Israel.

Why Does Hebrews Start with Angels?

The writer of Hebrews begins his argument concerning the superiority of Christ to everything by discussing his superiority angels.  Why start with the angels?

Angels were very popular in Jewish mythology from the second century B.C. through the first century A.D.   A whole hierarchy of angels was developed along with some theological teachings that were not present in the Old Testament.  In the re-telling of Biblical stories writers often had angels performing acts that were acts of God in the Hebrew Bible.  Although the imagery is found in Daniel 10, the appearance of angels as glowing white, fiery, glowing, etc. was developed during this time as well.

What is more, the angels are associated with the giving of the Law in early Judaism.  This tradition appears in the Hebrew Bible as early as Deut 33:2, although the “holy ones” merely accompany the Lord as he arrives at Sinai. Stephen refers to the Law as “delivered by angels” in Acts 7:53.  The book of Jubilees predates Hebrews clearly has the belief that an angel wrote a text for Moses:

Jubilees 1.27-28 And He said to the angel of the presence: ‘Write for Moses from the beginning of creation till My sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity.’ (Charles)

This tradition is found in later Judaism as well:  “The presence of angels at the event of the giving of the law was a favourite bit of embroidery in rabbinic tradition, and was meant to enhance the glory of Sinai” (H. Schoeps, Paul, 182).  The emphasis in this literature is on the angels as intermediaries, delivering the Law to Moses.  When God revealed himself to Moses, he used angels.

Since the writer of Hebrews began his book by saying that God is new revealing himself through his Jesus, it is possible a Jewish reader might think of Jesus as an angel, like a Michael or Gabriel.  He must therefore begin by showing that Jesus is something other than an angel, he is “Song of God.”

One last observation:  Is this a “difference” between Jewish Christian literature and the Pauline Letters? Perhaps not.  While Paul cannot be accused of emphasizing angels, he does use the same sort of language as Stephen in Gal 3:19: The law was “put in place through angels” (ESV).

Faithful to the End on Hebrews

You can download a free PDF sample of Faithful to the End:  An Introduction to Hebrews Through Revelation by Terry L. Wilder, J. Daryl Charles, and Kendell Easley courtesy of Broadman and Holman.  It is the entire chapter on Hebrews and gives you a good idea of what the whole book is like.

I am using Faithful to the End as the textbook for my Jewish Christian Literature class this spring and have enjoyed it so far.  While there are not very many books covering this section in survey fashion, this is certainly one of the best.  It forms the last part of a NT survey set, with Craig Blomberg covering the Gospels and Acts and Epistles in two separate volumes.

The Purpose of the Book of Hebrews

One of the problems with reading Hebrews is identifying the date and recipient of the letter. I am fairly well convinced that the recipients were in Rome, living just before the Neroian persecutions.  I think the standard arguments for this position are solid (see Faithful to the End, for example).

Given this context, the recipients struggle with the promises of Christian faith.  If Jesus is the true sacrifice and the fulfillment of the promises of the Hebrew Bible, why have they suffered so much?   As J. W. Thompson says in his Hebrews commentary, the book is written to “reorient a community that has been disoriented by the chasm between Christian confession of triumph and the reality of suffering it has experienced.”

This is not apologetics in the modern sense, it does not argue against Judaism, nor does it state that Judaism was bad or wrong in any way.  Rather, the writer constructs a positive argument for Jesus’ superiority to various elements of Judaism; he is superior because he is the fulfillment of these things. (He is the substance to which the shadow pointed).  If I am right about the context of the book and the recipients have suffered for their faith already (and are about to suffer even more so under Nero), then the readers may very well have struggled with the shame of suffering in a culture which did not see suffering as a virtue.

  • Within a Jewish context, suffering is sometimes seen as a result of sin, or at the very least, a lack of blessing from God.  We only need to look at the discussion in the book of Job to see that there was a lively discussion of why humans suffer.  If Christians are right and Jesus has triumphed, then why are his followers not blessed?  Why are they suffering?
  • Within a Greco-Roman context, Christians were not seen as successful because they suffered.  Roman thinking was very much based on honor and shame, of one suffered shame and humiliation in public, one cannot be described as successful!

The book therefore addresses a very real problem.  If Jesus is already seated at the right hand of the Father, why is it that Christians suffer shame and persecution?  Christians are not “of this world,” they are part of the real, unshakeable reality which is not of this world at all.

The theological dissonance which the book of Hebrews addresses is certainly applicable to the church today, especially in America.   Evangelical American Christian can be described as “triumphant,” especially in the last half of the 20th century.  Evangelical churches expanded greatly and had a greater impact on culture than at any time in history.

We very well may be past that now.  Studies indicate that the church is still growing, but at a pace which is slower than the general population.  We are beginning to lose ground and we have in many ways lost our voice in the public square.   Perhaps this is due to Christians who have humiliated themselves and brought shame to the cause of Christ, or because some very bad people chose to use evangelical Christianity as a way to advance political careers.

Whatever the reason, the tide is turning in America and we may face a time when we can ask, like the recipients of Hebrews, “what good is being faithful”? We think we have been faithful and we continue to suffer shame and humiliation.  We are in fact losing ground to the secular world.   Certainly this has already happened in Europe, Christian is a minority voice, evangelical Christianity has virtually no impact on culture in Europe.