The Real Deal

Hebrews 9:1-14, “The Real Deal”
——————–

Introduction:
I’m not a big art fan (certainly not a connoisseur), but I can appreciate good work…and I especially enjoy paintings with a Christian theme. One of Rembrandt’s most famous pieces is “The Return of the Prodigal Son.” I had heard of it in the past & seen pictures of it – but I never truly appreciated it until I saw the original painting hanging in the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Russia. The way the museum is set up, you can walk right up to the painting, look at the brush strokes & see the detail…amazing. There was no comparison from a scan in a book to the real deal.

After all this discussion about the various priesthoods in the book of Hebrews, what the Holy Spirit (through the author) is showing us today is that Jesus is the real deal! He is the true High Priest Who performs the true service in the true tabernacle of God…all that came before Him was like a scan of a painting. All the Levitical priests were meant to ultimately point to Christ Jesus.

‘Man, this is a lot of discussion about priests. Is this really all that important?’ If you came from a Jewish background in the 1st century, the answer would have been so obvious, the question wouldn’t ever have been asked. To them, of course it’s important! Everything about their relationship with God hinged upon the acceptable service of the priests. It didn’t matter what sacrifices an individual wanted to offer to God, if there was no way of offering it…and that was the primary function of the priest. So the author of Hebrews takes a lot of time to dig into the fact that Jesus is indeed our High Priest, that He is eminently qualified for the position, and that His service is perfectly sufficient for our every need – past, present, and future.

We’ve not only seen that Jesus’ priesthood is of a superior order than the other high priests, but the covenant He mediates is better than the covenant the other high priests ministered within… Now the author of Hebrews turns to the place and acts of priestly service. There was definitely an earthly version set up by God, but it pointed to the heavenly version where Jesus served & Jesus is far superior in every respect.

Hebrews 9:1-15 (NKJV)
1 Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and the earthly sanctuary.

A. What did the 1st covenant have? (1) Ordinances of divine service, (2) Earthly sanctuary. Gives us an outline for the chapter:
__a. Vss. 2-5 describe the earthly sanctuary (the tabernacle – PIC). Author of Hebrews concentrates on the Tabernacle here rather than the temples of Solomon, Zerubbabel, or Herod (or Ezekiel, for that matter!) because the Tabernacle is what God had ordained through the Law of Moses. The temples are all based upon God’s original design in the Tabernacle.
__b. Vss. 6-10 describe the ordinances of divine service…
__c. Vs. 11 describes the heavenly sanctuary…
__d. Vss. 12-28 describe the heavenly divine ordinances…

B. The point? If the 1st covenant had these items/components detailed out & addressed, we can be assured that the new covenant will also address these things as well.
.

2 For a tabernacle was prepared: the first part, in which was the lampstand, the table, and the showbread, which is called the sanctuary;

A. The 1st part of the Tabernacle was the holy place – “called the sanctuary.” [PIC] Literally, “holies.” This was the place separated beyond the courtyard for the priests to enter on a daily basis in ministry. It was sanctified away from sin, and for the use of God & His priests. What made it holy? God…that’s it. Otherwise, it’s just a dark room with a lamp in it & some bread. God declared it to be holy, and so it was.
__a. That’s what God did with every born-again believer in Jesus Christ! Through the righteousness that Jesus gives to us (in exchange for our sin), God “justifies” us – He declares us to be righteous in His sight. Thus we are both sinner AND saint, because we have been set apart for God’s use & glory, and have been declared to be holy by none other than the word of God…

B. Several components were included in the sanctuary. You can read about the various details in Exodus 25-30. The design of every single piece of furniture both inside and outside of the tabernacle was given to Moses by God, and it was constructed exactly according to this vision & the written word of God. All of it points to Christ in various ways – which is exactly what God wanted to do, as we’ll see in vs. 9.
__a. Lampstand: Made of a talent of pure gold (over 98 pounds worth!), this was not a candlestick, but a true lamp. There was one main lampstand, and 3 branches going out to either side (7 altogether) – fueled by oil, and trimmed on a daily basis. This was the only source of light in the tabernacle itself…and considering this was a windowless structure covered by several layers of animal skin & cloth on the roof, it would have been pretty dark inside. [] Jesus is the light of the world! Not empowered (fueled) with anything dealing with mankind, but with the oil of the Holy Spirit of God…
__b. Table & Showbread: It’s difficult to separate the two, as the whole purpose of the table was to showcase the showbread. Like the wall-boards of the tabernacle itself (and the ark, the incense altar, etc), the table was made out of acacia wood & overlaid with pure gold. The showbread was also called the “bread of presence” as it not only represented the presence of the 12 tribes of Israel before the Lord, but it was eaten in the presence of the Lord by the priests. [] Jesus is the bread of life! We partake of Him solely because of the grace of God…
.

3 and behind the second veil, the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All,

A. The thing separating the sanctuary from the Holy of Holies? The veil. God prescribed it to be made with blue, purple, and scarlet thread, woven into linen, with artistic designs of cherubim on it (Exo 26:31). This separated the final third of the structure from the rest… The author of Hebrews calls this the “second veil”… The 1st veil was the curtain leading into the sanctuary itself.

B. The 2nd room: “the Holiest of All” or (more literally in the Greek) the Holy of Holies. Why was it so holy? Because this was the earthly representation of the throne room of God…this was the place where the shekinah glory of God dwelt among men.

C. Why the need for the separation between the two? Because God is holy. Not just “holy”, but “holy, Holy, HOLY” (Rev 4:8)… He is pre-eminently holy. For a sinful person to step into the presence of God’s perfect holiness outside of His invitation & covering of sin is to invite death. Our God is a consuming fire (Heb 12:29) – who can withstand His holy wrath?
__a. For Christians, does the veil remain? Gloriously, not! The separation is gone in Christ Jesus! Matthew 27:50-53 (50) And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. (51) Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, (52) and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; (53) and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. [] In Jesus, the curse is reversed, death is conquered, sin is paid for, and we are given an invitation to come boldly before the throne of God to find mercy in our time of need!
.

4 which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant; 5 and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.

A. [PIC] For those of you familiar with the layout of the tabernacle (or looking at the diagram on the screen), you might have noticed a difficulty here regarding the golden censer. The actual altar of incense was located inside the sanctuary; not the Holy of Holies… (re: Exo 30:6) So was the author of Hebrews mistaken? Obviously not – he was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit… … The altar of incense was kept in the sanctuary, but the golden censer was used in the Holy of Holies anytime the high priest entered. The cloud of incense was brought in as a barrier between the priest and the ark of the covenant & mercy seat (Lev 16:13)…utmost care was given to demonstrate the ultimate holiness of God.
__a. Incense typically symbolizes prayer (Ps 141:2, Rev 5:8) – as we’ve already seen, Jesus is our intercessor! He always lives to make intercession for us (Heb 7:25).

B. The only other item ever brought into the Holiest of All? The only item that remained in the Holiest of Holies? The “ark of the covenant” topped by the mercy seat of God. This is what was topped with the “cherubim of glory” (depictions of angels) & what Indiana Jones apparently found. An ark is simply a box – this was a box made of acacia wood & overlaid with gold, dedicated unto the Lord & in many ways symbolized the very presence of God among them. What did it contain?
__a. The pot of manna: This was the Hebrews “daily bread” while in the wilderness, miraculously provided for by God & miraculously taken away. Only this one pot remained, without any rot in the ark for years. [God’s provision…]
__b. Aaron’s rod: When Korah & his companions rebelled against Moses & Aaron in the wilderness, God demonstrated His own choice of a high priest by miraculously causing Aaron’s rod (there was one for each tribe of Israel) to bud leaves & almonds (Num 16-17). [God’s sovereignty…]
__c. 10 Commandments: This was the most famous of its contents & where the ark got its name. When God gave the law to Moses, He had written it upon two tablets of stone with His very finger. Moses broke the original two tablets upon seeing the golden calf, but God gave new tablets that were placed inside the ark (Exo 34:1). [God’s righteousness…]
____i. By the time the ark was brought into Solomon’s temple, the two tablets of the Commandments were the only things that remained inside. We don’t know what happened to the other things along the way (1 Kings 8:9).

C. We’ve spoken in a little detail; the author of Hebrews just mentioned these things in brief. Why? He was writing to Jewish Christians, so they surely knew the background of these items well & didn’t need to review it. Plus, the point of mentioning it was not to give a lengthy academic lecture about the value of each item, but to set up a comparison between the earthly & the heavenly…
.

6 Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went into the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services.

A. This things had to be prepared (set in order in the tabernacle) 1st, before any sacrifices took place. The priests could not perform their ministry before the Lord if the tabernacle had been set up incorrectly. As is emphasized throughout the NT & OT, we can only approach God by His invitation on His terms (by His grace), and this was the method by which God ordained it with the Hebrews.

B. That said, this comprised their daily duties. Keeping the lampstand lit – maintaining the altar of incense – attending to the showbread every Sabbath day. All of this took place inside of the 1st part – the sanctuary. See vs. 7…
.

7 But into the second part the high priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the people’s sins committed in ignorance;

A. The service inside the Holy of Holies was reserved for the Day of Atonement, when things had to take place in a certain order & condition:
__a. The “high priest” went in: Not any priest – certainly not any Levite or anyone else from the nation of Israel. Only the high priest could enter into that place, and the people weren’t even sure he was qualified. Apparently, they had a celebration every year when he came out, simply because he was still alive.
__b. “Alone”: The high priest could not be accompanied by anyone. He was alone in the presence of the holiness of God atoning for sin. Not unlike Jesus when He went into the grave alone, atoning for the sin of the world… No one could help Him in the effort; the work of Jesus alone satisfies the righteous wrath of God.
__c. “Once a year”: There was a specific time the high priest could enter – utmost care had to be paid attention to it, as he only had one opportunity to get it right.
__d. “Not without blood”: On one hand, this would seem to be obvious, because the very reason the high priest would enter the Holy of Holies was to pour the blood upon the Mercy Seat of God for atonement. But not only was this the reason he entered the room; it was the basis by which he entered the room. He did not dare enter it without blood, because otherwise his sins would be glaringly present.
__e. “for himself”: This is a crucial difference between the high priests of ancient Israel & the superior High Priest Christ Jesus & one the author of Hebrews comes back to again & again. The Israelite high priest was a sinful human being just like anyone else – and he needed the blood of the sacrifice to cover his own sins.
__f. “for the people”: This was why he was commanded by God to enter. Someone needed to bring the atonement on behalf of the people. That someone was the high priest.
__g. For sins done in “ignorance”: It’s not only the sins we know about that matter to God; it’s also the sins we don’t. Just like with the State of Texas, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Just because we think we can claim that we didn’t know (even though the law is written on our hearts – Rom 2:15), that doesn’t make our rebellion any less of a sin against Almighty God. Sins need to be dealt with; and they are only dealt with through the blood of atonement.

B. Great care was taken in all of this – no one went about the ministry of the Lord in a harey-scarey method. And if this much care was taken in the earthly sanctuary, how much more in regards to the heavenly sacrifice? Jesus fulfilled over 300 prophecies in His 1st coming to a “T”… … Jesus always does exactly what God the Father had Him to do…
.

8 the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing.

A. What exactly does the Holy Spirit indicate? That access to the Holy of Holies was completely restricted during the old covenant. The average Israelite may have had a wonderful devotion to the Lord, but he didn’t dare think about barging into the Tabernacle, much less the most Holy place. King Uzziah is a case in point! He obviously had a devotion to the Lord & did what was right in God’s sight (2 Chr 26:4) – but he went too far & tried to take part in the priestly service. 2 Chronicles 26:18-19 (18) And they withstood King Uzziah, and said to him, “It is not for you, Uzziah, to burn incense to the Lord, but for the priests, the sons of Aaron, who are consecrated to burn incense. Get out of the sanctuary, for you have trespassed! You shall have no honor from the Lord God.” (19) Then Uzziah became furious; and he had a censer in his hand to burn incense. And while he was angry with the priests, leprosy broke out on his forehead, before the priests in the house of the Lord, beside the incense altar. [] He was a leper till the day he died. As bad as that was, imagine what would have happened if he had tried to enter into the presence of the ark!
__a. It was restricted! That “way” (path) was not made manifest to the general people of God. It was closed off for a reason: the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ had not yet been made. Only when that was completed was the veil rent in two…

B. BTW – Who inspired the text of the OT? The Holy Spirit. Just like the NT…
.

9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience—10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.

A. All these things were always symbolic. The sacrifices of the law cannot make the priest perfect…it could not bring complete atonement and forgiveness to the priest or the people. And that kind of perfection is exactly what we need. Not merely moral perfection for the future (when we are made new creations in Christ), but a perfect sacrifice for the past, that our sins could be completely atoned for & done away with.

B. ‘So why did God command them? Was it a waste of time?’ No! Ultimately, all this ritual had a purpose: to teach God’s people about God’s glory until “the time of reformation” to when it pointed ultimately to Jesus Christ…until that point, the conscience of the priest (and the parishoner) was never truly cleansed because the nature of the tabernacle demonstrated & taught that the sacrifice was never truly sufficient. “Symbolic” = παραβολε “parable”…they had a purpose of teaching. Teaching what? Teaching the people about Christ Jesus! Teaching them about the holiness of God, the need for atonement, the insufficiency of animal sacrifice, and the promise of God that He would provide the perfect sacrifice in His own chosen Lamb, His only begotten Son.
.

11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.

A. “But”: great conjunction! Jesus is diametrically opposed to those high priests… The old priest could not be made perfect under the law, but Jesus is drastically different…

B. Jesus ministers as our High Priest over what? “the good things to come…” Other translations say, “the good things that have come…” – there’s a bit of debate in the manuscripts. Either rendering is obviously true: Christ is our High Priest now & in the future. We have “good things” now in our justification from sin, our relationship with God the Father, and new life in Christ empowered by the Holy Spirit. We have good things to come in our inheritance in Christ, eternity in His presence, and a guarantee of those promises through His blood. We have only just begun to understand the results of our new covenant in Christ; but one day we will see Him face-to-face & we’ll realize the fullness of it as we worship at His feet.

C. Where does Jesus serve as High Priest? Not at the tabernacle made by hands. That was just the type – just the shadow. That was the teaching illustration. Jesus serves in the real deal; the “greater and more perfect tabernacle” (tent). How did it all work? See vs. 12…
.

12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

A. The old high priests entered with blood; they were forbidden to enter without it. Jesus also enters with blood; but His blood is far more precious than that of goats & calves. He entered the heavenly tabernacle “with His own blood.” We may not understand how every detail worked out on a spiritual level, but we can say with confidence that through the Cross, Jesus rent the veil in two, and His shed blood was the means by which He entered the true throne room of God Almighty. Whereas the Hebrew high priests entered the type & shadow by placing the blood upon the Mercy Seat on the ark, the blood of Jesus Christ was effectual in the true Holiest of places – where the cherubim weren’t mere statues, but living creatures continually surrounding God singing & proclaiming His holiness.

B. He entered “once for all”: This was all that was needed. Keep this in mind for the rest of Ch 9 & part of Ch 10 – it goes to show the value of the blood of Christ. Jesus’ sacrifice was actually effective. It was the price that was required to be paid in order to satisfy the debt of sin. The blood of animals merely set aside the punishment; the blood of Jesus fulfilled it. This shows what the divine service of Christ actually accomplished: The old high priests obtained temporary atonement that needed to be renewed on a yearly basis. Jesus “obtained eternal redemption.” In the end, the only redemption that is truly redemption is that which is eternal…otherwise it’s probation.
.

13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, 14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

A. How much better is the blood of Christ than the blood of bulls! God commanded the blood of bulls because it served a purpose…the temporary setting aside of sin. In fact, that’s the implication of the Hebrew word for atonement (a covering) – sin was merely covered over for the time being. But Jesus is far better & He accomplishes a far better purpose…we have been eternally redeemed, and our consciences are internally cleansed. This was something the law could never offer (vs. 9) – only Jesus truly makes us new creations, washes us by the water & the word, and purifies us from the inside out.

B. A result from this? We move “from dead works to serve the living God.” What a message of hope this would have been for the Jewish Christians reading this letter! No longer did they have to hope in shadows & types that did not truly accomplish what was needed in their lives regarding sin. In that respect, those rules & regulations were dead. Now because of the sole work of Christ Jesus, they can serve the living God with freedom – to worship Him in spirit and in truth!

C. How was Jesus offered?
__a. “through the eternal Spirit”: Some take this to be a reference to the work of the Trinity in salvation – demonstrating that Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit when He offered Himself on the cross. That is undoubtedly true, but others see this reference to “Spirit” not as the Holy Spirit per se, but as a reference to Jesus’ eternal Person. Jesus was not compelled to go to the cross by any man (no one took His life from Him – John 10:18), but Jesus willingly went there out of obedience to His Father, for the glory of God, and His love for us.
__b. “without spot to God”: No sacrifice could be offered to God that wasn’t perfect. Lambs could have no spot nor blemish – otherwise it was an unacceptable sacrifice. Jesus is absolutely perfect! Tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin. No spot of sin can (or was) ever found in Him – He is truly the acceptable sacrifice!

Conclusion:
Christian, you can be sure of your salvation in Christ! It was paid for in full by the only Person who could pay for it, in the only place where it could be paid, with the only price that could be received for our debt.

A. Person: Jesus as our High Priest – the only One truly qualified to enter into the Holy of Holies…
B. Place: the true tabernacle of God. Not the earthly shadows made with human hands, but the real sanctuary built by God Himself…
C. Price: the spotless blood of Christ… We were not redeemed with gold, silver, or precious stones. We weren’t redeemed by the blood of unworthy bulls and goats. We were purchased out of the slavery of sin and death through the precious blood of the Messiah! The Son of God Himself…

Just like the Jewish Christians of the day, we can find ourselves putting our trust into dead works. Things not necessarily bad (and perhaps very good!), but never effective for our relationship with God. “I’m giving to the poor!” Amen! But are you trusting Christ? “I’m exercising spiritual gifts!” Praise God! But are you letting them be a substitute for your Savior? “I’m sharing the gospel!” May more join with you! But are you partaking of it yourself? There are many things about the Christian life that are valuable & worthwhile. But NONE of them are a replacement for Christ Himself. Be careful never to stray from the realization that your sins were truly paid for by the blood of Christ Jesus. It may be basic. It may be repetitive. But it is the foundation of your faith! And you can never dwell too much on that truth…it gives us cause to shout for joy, to lift our hands in praise, to worship our God, and to surrender our lives completely to Him in joyful response & sacrifice.

This is great news! Don’t let it pass you by. Too many people (esp. in the Bible belt) have heard this all their lives, and they just ignore it… But know this for a fact: you will not forever be able to ignore God. One day, you WILL see Him face-to-face in all of His terrible holiness. Will your sins be paid for? Will you have been made perfect in the sight of God? Or will you stand trembling in His presence, convicted of your own sin, knowing your judgment is absolutely deserved? Please know that God wants to save you. He desires that ALL men come to repentance and be saved. The gospel call has gone out to the whole world, including you. Don’t ignore it one more time and further harden yourself to the gospel…

Religion for Hire

Judges 17-18, “Religion for Hire”
—————

Introduction:
At this point in the book of Judges, we’ve looked at all the judges/deliverers that God put into the book. Some believe the remaining chapters are more of an epilogue – perhaps hearkening back to an earlier time right after Joshua. Others believe this is just continuing the downward spiral of Israel after Samson. If you thought things could get too much worse for Israel (who went for longer & longer periods of time in captivity before ever crying out to God in repentance), you’d be wrong. By the time the book ends, Israel is in complete chaos & shattered after civil war.

How do they get there? 1st they have to abandon God – which is exactly what the story of Micah shows. From the Levite – to the soldiers of Dan – to Micah himself, there are no “good guys” in this history…merely people who immersed themselves in selfishness & idolatry. So with that cheery intro, let’s dig in!

Judges 17 (NKJV)
1 Now there was a man from the mountains of Ephraim, whose name was Micah.
A. Definitely not the prophet who’s book comes much later in the OT. Translation = “Who is like Yahweh?” …definitely ironic considering what Micah is about to do in idolatry.
.

2 And he said to his mother, “The eleven hundred shekels of silver that were taken from you, and on which you put a curse, even saying it in my ears—here is the silver with me; I took it.” And his mother said, “May you be blessed by the LORD, my son!”

A. How much was 1100 shekels of silver? According to today’s prices ($13.86 per oz), about $5500…a lot of money for the economy. In vs. 10, we find 10 shekels (in addition to room & board) is an adequate annual salary. This would have been a small fortune for his family.

B. Apparently, he stole the money from his mother & now is giving it back…Scripture doesn’t tell us any of the circumstances surrounding it. His mother not only forgives him, but blesses him. This sounds good until we realize she had originally put him under a curse for stealing it. This isn’t Godly blessing from a mother; this is a woman basically attempting to work witchcraft on her thieving son. She only calls upon the Lord as window-dressing.
.

3 So when he had returned the eleven hundred shekels of silver to his mother, his mother said, “I had wholly dedicated the silver from my hand to the LORD for my son, to make a carved image and a molded image; now therefore, I will return it to you.” 4 Thus he returned the silver to his mother. Then his mother took two hundred shekels of silver and gave them to the silversmith, and he made it into a carved image and a molded image; and they were in the house of Micah.

A. How does Micah’s mother give thanks to God for the return of her money? By making 2 graven images for idols. Direct violation of the 2nd Commandment! Exodus 20:4-6 (4) “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; (5) you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, (6) but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. []

B. Was her intent good? Perhaps…but you know what they say about ‘good intentions.’ Just because someone has good intentions in worshipping the Lord doesn’t mean they are actually worshipping the Lord God…hence the reason for worldwide missions & evangelism! Paul recognized the same thing with the Athenians in that they worshipped the “Unknown God” & Paul was constrained to proclaim Him to them (Acts 17:23). [] In the mother’s case, she said she had dedicated the money to the LORD God (Yahweh!), but obviously worshipped God in a false way. Not only that, but she said she “wholly dedicated” the money to the Lord; yet only a small portion of it went to the idol. So not only did she break the 2nd Commandment, she broke the 9th as well (false witness).
.

5 The man Micah had a shrine, and made an ephod and household idols; and he consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest.

A. Not only does Micah build an idolatrous shrine, he sets up an unbiblical priest. God had given the priesthood to the Levites, and any outsider who approached the work was to be put to death (Num 3:9-10). Keep in mind that everything about the priesthood, tabernacle, & sacrifices ultimately points to Jesus & His work. To assume that an outsider can come & be a priest is to assume that people are allowed to approach God outside of Christ Jesus… Impossible! (John 14:6)
__a. (Unger) “What a pointed illustration this is of ritualistic, humanly concocted worship that ignores the Word of God. A man-made god, a man-made worship, and a man-made priest have often characterized ritualistic Christendom, as well as lawless cults.”

B. ‘Does any of this really matter? After all, at least he & his mom are trying to worship God. We can’t judge their heart.’ It’s not a matter of judging their heart; it’s plain enough to judge their actions. And their actions are striking in their opposition to the revealed word of God… … And yes, it absolutely does matter! What good is it worshipping a god with all your heart & soul if it’s the wrong god?! Someone’s individual sincerity may be nice, but it doesn’t make their belief system right. They can be sincerely wrong. …
.

6 In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

A. This is going to be a theme in the last several chapters… Here, we see the religious decay; Ch 19-21 will be civic decay. The time is ripe for a king, and God is going to provide one – ultimately through the line of David…

B. In many ways, this is held up to be an ideal situation in our culture today. “You do what’s right for you, and I’ll do what’s right for me.” Big problem with that…what happens when what’s right for me interferes with what’s right for you? Worse yet – what happens when what’s right for you interferes with what’s right for God? … What happened in Israel was not an enlightened form of postmodern relativism; it was anarchy! GOD was supposed to be their king, but they definitely did not recognize Him as such (as demonstrated by Micah’s idolatry)…
.

7 Now there was a young man from Bethlehem in Judah, of the family of Judah; he was a Levite, and was staying there. 8 The man departed from the city of Bethlehem in Judah to stay wherever he could find a place. Then he came to the mountains of Ephraim, to the house of Micah, as he journeyed.

A. Already we have a problem with the Levite. The Levites were not given land of their own as an inheritance (their inheritance was to serve the Lord), but they were given 48 cities (Josh 21), and Bethlehem was not one of them… [MAP] This man was a wanderer, not attending to the things of the Lord, as was his calling…

B. So what? So he’s leaving himself open for sin. Anytime we neglect doing what God calls us to do, we’re leaving the door wide open for temptation to come rolling through & run us down…quite often, then we ask wondering, “What happened?!” Falling into temptation rarely catches us truly by surprise; it begins with a lot of tiny steps away from the Lord Jesus.
.

9 And Micah said to him, “Where do you come from?” So he said to him, “I am a Levite from Bethlehem in Judah, and I am on my way to find a place to stay.” 10 Micah said to him, “Dwell with me, and be a father and a priest to me, and I will give you ten shekels of silver per year, a suit of clothes, and your sustenance.” So the Levite went in. 11 Then the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young man became like one of his sons to him. 12 So Micah consecrated the Levite, and the young man became his priest, and lived in the house of Micah.

A. Instead of serving the Lord how he was supposed to, the Levite prostitutes his services for 10 shekels of silver (presumably from the returned money), a change of clothing, and room & board. For the wandering Levite, this must have looked pretty good. He can hang out, be well fed, and minister to someone. Big problem here: he’d be ministering idolatry!! He doesn’t seem to think twice about going with Micah, much less go before the Lord in prayer or seek out the Scriptures. Bad decision!
__a. Gives an indication of a big underlying problem: There’s no fear of the Lord in his eyes! The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Prov 9:10), and the Levite’s actions show himself to be a fool. If he truly feared the Lord, he wouldn’t have
__b. The Levite’s one concern (which will be verified in Ch 19): How will this benefit me?
__c. Beware of self-centered or man-centered faith…it’s a false faith!

B. Is the Levite the only one at fault here? Of course not. Micah had no business offering him a position as a personal priest, and certainly didn’t have the authority to consecrate him as such…
.

13 Then Micah said, “Now I know that the LORD will be good to me, since I have a Levite as priest!”

A. Completely false assumption… Saul thought the same thing when he attempted to justify his sin with false piety: 1 Samuel 15:22-23 (22) So Samuel said: “Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, As in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams. (23) For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, And stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He also has rejected you from being king.” []

B. Ultimately Micah is trying to justify his actions through works-righteousness…trying to curry & earn favor with the Lord by the things he did & people he surrounded himself with…
__a. The favor of God is never earned through works; only by the grace of Jesus!
.

Judges 18 (NKJV)
1 In those days there was no king in Israel. And in those days the tribe of the Danites was seeking an inheritance for itself to dwell in; for until that day their inheritance among the tribes of Israel had not fallen to them.

A. What’s going on with Dan? They definitely had an inheritance in the land assigned to them (Josh 19:40-48) – but they were not yet able to occupy it for whatever reason (Judges 1…) … It seems that they were not satisfied with their own inheritance, so they went off looking for easier land to conquer.

B. Are we satisfied with what God has given us? Or is the grass greener on the other side?
.

2 So the children of Dan sent five men of their family from their territory, men of valor from Zorah and Eshtaol, to spy out the land and search it. They said to them, “Go, search the land.” So they went to the mountains of Ephraim, to the house of Micah, and lodged there.

A. [MAP] Much further north than where their original inheritance was…
.

3 While they were at the house of Micah, they recognized the voice of the young Levite. They turned aside and said to him, “Who brought you here? What are you doing in this place? What do you have here?” 4 He said to them, “Thus and so Micah did for me. He has hired me, and I have become his priest.”

A. How did they recognize his voice if they were of Dan & the Levite had previously lived in Bethlehem? It’s certainly possible they knew the Levite personally (he seems to have wandered from city to city); possibly they just recognized his accent as being foreign to the area.
.

5 So they said to him, “Please inquire of God, that we may know whether the journey on which we go will be prosperous.” 6 And the priest said to them, “Go in peace. The presence of the LORD be with you on your way.”

A. Is there any indication that the Lord actually gave this word to the Levite? No. The so-called priest was in sin just by being there – there’s no indication he ever consulted the Lord in prayer – he seems to answer just off the top of his head. Men who claim to represent God have no business saying something that God has not shown them… How do we know? Through the written word of God!

B. Things were bad in Israel! (Guzik), “This shows what a spiritually confused time this was in Israel. Danites on a sinful mission met with a sinful Levite, and wanted to know from a righteous God if their mission would be successful. Then the sinful Levite sent the sinning men on their way with God’s blessing.”
.

7 So the five men departed and went to Laish. They saw the people who were there, how they dwelt safely, in the manner of the Sidonians, quiet and secure. There were no rulers in the land who might put them to shame for anything. They were far from the Sidonians, and they had no ties with anyone.

A. Their journey was indeed prosperous. Lucky guess? He had a 50/50 chance…
.

8 Then the spies came back to their brethren at Zorah and Eshtaol, and their brethren said to them, “What is your report?” 9 So they said, “Arise, let us go up against them. For we have seen the land, and indeed it is very good. Would you do nothing? Do not hesitate to go, and enter to possess the land. 10 When you go, you will come to a secure people and a large land. For God has given it into your hands, a place where there is no lack of anything that is on the earth.”

A. IOW, “What are you waiting on? Let’s go!”
.

11 And six hundred men of the family of the Danites went from there, from Zorah and Eshtaol, armed with weapons of war. 12 Then they went up and encamped in Kirjath Jearim in Judah. (Therefore they call that place Mahaneh Dan to this day. There it is, west of Kirjath Jearim.) 13 And they passed from there to the mountains of Ephraim, and came to the house of Micah.
A. [Reference map again…]
.

14 Then the five men who had gone to spy out the country of Laish answered and said to their brethren, “Do you know that there are in these houses an ephod, household idols, a carved image, and a molded image? Now therefore, consider what you should do.” 15 So they turned aside there, and came to the house of the young Levite man—to the house of Micah—and greeted him. 16 The six hundred men armed with their weapons of war, who were of the children of Dan, stood by the entrance of the gate. 17 Then the five men who had gone to spy out the land went up. Entering there, they took the carved image, the ephod, the household idols, and the molded image. The priest stood at the entrance of the gate with the six hundred men who were armed with weapons of war.

A. Once they got there, the 5 spies remembered Micah’s idols & figured Dan would gain favorably by taking the ‘gods’ with them into battle. Pretty ironic considering that if the idols could really help them, the soldiers wouldn’t have been able to steal them from Micah to begin with…the idols would have stopped them.

B. Underscores two things: (1) Idols are fake. False gods have no power to help because they are false. (2) Man’s desire to worship idols is centered around his selfishness. God may have made us in His image, but typically people want to worship a god in their own image…they want something of their making. … Why? Just like the Devil attempting to throw God off His throne, that’s what people want to do in their own lives. We don’t want God to be in control; we want to be in control. So what do we do? Make up an image of God in our own mind & claim to worship it.
__a. So what to do? Throw out the false idols & worship the true God! The God who created the heavens & earth – the God who gave you life & breath – the God who came incarnate as a Man, died on the cross for your sins, and rose again to new life! Humble yourself – die to yourself, and surrender your life to Christ Jesus as Lord & Savior…
.

18 When these went into Micah’s house and took the carved image, the ephod, the household idols, and the molded image, the priest said to them, “What are you doing?”

A. Reasonable question, considering the Danites were stealing the idols from Micah’s house… At the same time, it’s hard not to wonder if the Levite was truly concerned about the theft (for breaking the commandments of God) or if he was just worried about his employment.
.

19 And they said to him, “Be quiet, put your hand over your mouth, and come with us; be a father and a priest to us. Is it better for you to be a priest to the household of one man, or that you be a priest to a tribe and a family in Israel?” 20 So the priest’s heart was glad; and he took the ephod, the household idols, and the carved image, and took his place among the people. 21 Then they turned and departed, and put the little ones, the livestock, and the goods in front of them.

A. This was the exact same thing Micah had said to the Levite earlier; only now it was for a much more prestigious position… He was prostituting his calling from God – selling it out to the highest bidder. How different than what Jesus does for us! John 10:11-15 (11) “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. (12) But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. (13) The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. (14) I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. (15) As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. []

B. Not only did the Levite sell out for a greater opportunity to sin, his “heart was glad” about it! [] Don’t be deceived by good “feelings” in making decisions… The heart is deceitful above all things (Jer 17:9) – your heart can easily lead you astray. Base your decisions upon the solid word of God!
.

22 When they were a good way from the house of Micah, the men who were in the houses near Micah’s house gathered together and overtook the children of Dan. 23 And they called out to the children of Dan. So they turned around and said to Micah, “What ails you, that you have gathered such a company?” 24 So he said, “You have taken away my gods which I made, and the priest, and you have gone away. Now what more do I have? How can you say to me, ‘What ails you?’ ”

A. Good point from Micah. Basically says, “You stole all my stuff – of course I’m chasing you down!” …

B. BUT. Micah is chasing after his SIN. He wants to continue in his sin. Instead of thanking God for His loving chastisement in allowing it to be stolen from him, he’s chasing after the guys in order to continue his idolatrous worship…
.

25 And the children of Dan said to him, “Do not let your voice be heard among us, lest angry men fall upon you, and you lose your life, with the lives of your household!” 26 Then the children of Dan went their way. And when Micah saw that they were too strong for him, he turned and went back to his house.

A. Micah couldn’t win the battle, so he went home…

B. Micah’s story ends here in the Bible…but I have to think this was the best thing that ever happened to him. God made it impossible for Micah to worship his idol; the only two options left for Micah were to either (1) ignore God altogether…which doesn’t seem likely considering his desire to worship (starting with his son & following with the Levite), or (2) seek God in spirit and truth…
.

27 So they took the things Micah had made, and the priest who had belonged to him, and went to Laish, to a people quiet and secure; and they struck them with the edge of the sword and burned the city with fire. 28 There was no deliverer, because it was far from Sidon, and they had no ties with anyone. It was in the valley that belongs to Beth Rehob. So they rebuilt the city and dwelt there. 29 And they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who was born to Israel. However, the name of the city formerly was Laish.

A. Conquest of Laish… Those ‘mighty’ warriors of Dan were able to conquer a peaceful people who were “quiet and secure.” The land was certainly given to the people of Israel by God, but the author here doesn’t give any glory to the Danites. The original land given to them was possessed by Philistines who could actually fight – Dan left the challenge & went to go pick on folks they knew they could beat.
.

30 Then the children of Dan set up for themselves the carved image; and Jonathan the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.

A. Finally get the name of the Levite: Jonathan… Alternate possibility for “Manasseh” is “Moses” – which would fit well with Gershom, who was indeed Moses’ son. Also keeps Jonathon in the correct tribe – unless “Manasseh” was an otherwise unknown person & not the son of Joseph…
.

31 So they set up for themselves Micah’s carved image which he made, all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh.

A. Micah’s idols had a lasting impact…it seems that the city conquered by Dan retained it’s affinity for idolatrous worship. By the time of King Jeroboam, he had 2 golden calves made for worship – he put one in Bethel & the other in Dan (2 Kings 12:29). Who knows how many untold people and generations were stumbled because of one man’s idolatry? No wonder God states that the iniquity of the fathers is visited upon the children of the 3rd & 4th generation (Exo 34:7). That’s not ‘meanness’; it’s just a fact! Our children tomorrow are affected by the way we walk with God today…

Conclusion:
Have you ever found yourself chasing after idols? (Or whatever besetting sin you may have…) Where on one hand you tell yourself you want to worship God alone, but on the other, you have something you simply don’t want to give up for Jesus. Know this: there is no substitute for Jesus Christ!

People will try to substitute all sorts of things for Jesus Christ – but it doesn’t matter how fancy our idol is or how much money we may have spent on it. It doesn’t even matter how many other people want it for themselves… There is no substitute for Jesus. Grace and forgiveness of sin comes ONLY from Him. Relationship with God Almighty comes ONLY through Him. New & eternal life comes ONLY through Him. He is the way, the truth, the life, and there is no substitute!

So Christian, don’t settle for anything less. If some preacher comes on TV proclaiming anything but the gospel of Jesus Christ & the word of God, don’t listen to him…he’s just selling himself out for 10 shekels and a shirt. If some otherwise well-meaning person calling themselves ‘Christian’ starts holding up ideas and gimmicks that are completely opposed to the Bible, don’t believe them for a minute. They may be sincere, but they are sincerely wrong. Don’t settle for anything less than your Savior – the Son of God, Jesus Christ.

Millennialism – Ch 4: Covenantism

As with Ch 3, the focus of Ch 4 isn’t so much a primer or explanation of what Covenant theology teaches; but rather a critique of certain areas of Covenantism & a rebuttal to arguments Covenant theologians use against Dispensationalists.

Dr. Feinberg shows the Covenantalist canard that ‘Dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation’ is often taught, but of course, untrue (pg. 83). He shows that Covenantalists divide up the Scriptures just as much as Dispenstationalists while claiming unity throughout just as Dispensationalists do (pg. 87). He demonstrates that Covenant theology is almost as young as Dispensationalism, and certainly cannot lay claim to any advantage of age (pg. 89). And of course, he take issue with their interpretation of Scripture – as seen in many examples throughout the chapter, pointing out inconsistencies regarding the plan of salvation (mostly ppg. 86-89).

Personally, I do wish Dr. Feinberg had taken the time to systematically go through specific tenets of Covenantism & critique them. But then again, I suppose that is what the remainder of this book will be dedicated to, at least in the area of the Millennium.

Exit quote from the 2nd endnote on the chapter:

“It should be stated that the concepts in a covenant of works and a covenant of grace are not unbiblical; however, nowhere can one find them systematized into covenants in Scripture. Even the nomenclature of the covenants never occurs in the Bible (Ryrie, Dispensationalism Today, pp. 177, 183-184). It needs no argument to prove that dispensations are found in the Bible (cf. Eph 1:10, 3:9). It is passing strange that Scripture nowhere mentions a covenant of works or a covenant of grace as it does with a covenant with Abraham, the covenant with Moses at Sinai, or the new covenant.” (pg. 90)

Millennialism – Ch 3, Dispensationalism

As ought to be expected, a book dealing with premillennial eschatology is going to at some point take up the criticism of Dispensationalism, and that is exactly what Dr. Feinberg does here. Feinberg had earlier in the book freely admitted his bias for the dispensational system, and it certainly played out in his career, in part as a member of the Scofield Reference Bible Revision Committee.

The chapter is not a primer on Dispensationalism. He touches on a bit of the basics, but leaves the discussion of what Dispensationalism actually is to men like Chafer, Scofield, and Ryrie. Instead, the chapter is a defense against the numerous critics of Dispensationalism.

To this extent, much of this chapter reads like insider baseball…if you know the players & statistics, it’s a lot easier to follow along. For the rest of us, we’ve no choice but to rely on the reporting in the chapter, trusting the accounts are accurate and fair (and from what I’ve heard of Dr. Feinberg, I’ve no doubts to the contrary).

Feinberg covers a lot of ground here in a short amount of time. He shows that roots of Dispensationalism go much further back in history beyond Darby & the Brethren, but to some of the earliest theologians in the church (ppg. 68, 80). He demonstrates (quoting LS Chafer in the process) that ALL Christians adhere to at least some aspects of dispnsationalism (pg. 69). He destroys the accusation that Dispensationalists have wrought great havoc and division upon the church:

“Let us turn to specifics: Can anyone compute how many men and women have been challenged in prophetic conferences to trust Christ for salvation, to make their Bible study more meaningful, to answer the call of God to the mission fields of the world, to live lives honoring to the Lord? Let Bass or any other nondispensationalist name one study Bible with as much blessing spread to the people of God as the Scofield Reference Bible. As for divisions in the Christian church, have the divisions in the Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, Episcopal, and independent denominations been caused by adherence to dispensational theology? The controversies have been over personalities, polities, practices, liberalism versus orthodoxy, rather than over dispensationalism. In the heat of controversy, let no one overstep the bounds of truth.” (pg. 76)

From here, Feinberg spends a bit of time on a few of the distinctions between Covenant theology and Dispensationalism, quoting Ryrie as the main difference. For Covenant theology, the main “unifying principle…is soteriological.” For Dispensationalism, the main unifying principle is what Feinberg calls:

“theological or perhaps better eschatological, for the differing dispensations reveal the glory of God as He shows off His character in the differing stewardships culminating in history with the millennial glory.” (pg. 77)

The chapter is much shorter than the preceding one, and (again) is addressed more at the critics of dispensationalism rather than putting forth a positive argument for it. With Feinberg’s high regard for Scofield, Chafer, and Ryrie, it seems that he allows them to make those arguments, whereas his focus was more directed at defending the use of the system to help us look at the Scriptures regarding the Millennium.

Chapter 4 takes up the flip side of this argument and is entitled, “Covenantism.” Hopefully I’ll pick up there sometime later this week.

Pictures from the Baptism!

What a blessing it was to baptize 5 people yesterday!

First up was my daughter, Olivia – who had been asking to be baptized for months.

I asked who was next, and David didn’t hesitate!

The triplets decided to continue to birth order, so next up was Steven. He looked really happy to be there.

Amanda came up next. What a great day for their whole family!

Chris was our last one for the day…what a praise for a transformed life!

All of us together before we celebrated with swimming & food.

Millennialism – Ch 2, part 2

Continuing on in the background of Biblical interpretation. Dr. Feinberg is a staunch proponent of the grammatical-historical-literal hermeneutic (as are most dispensationalists), and he provides an excellent apologetic for it.

Numbers: A favorite area of symbolism for Amillennialists is that of numbers – specifically in the book of Revelation. To which Dr. Feinberg replies,

“It cannot be denied that numbers have symbolic value, but that is not admitting that they have no temporal significance. Prophetic numbers are symbolic just because and only because they are literal.” (pg. 42)

Reasons for the literal method (ppg. 46-47):
(1) God intended His prophecy to be understood in understandable terms.
(2) God often calls attention to the literal fulfillment of prophecy
(3) Literal interpretation does not minimize the value of the Old Testament
(4) The literal method does not require every word to be literal. Rather, the text is analyzed for the type of Scripture it is, and then interpreted according to the rules of that particular form of grammar (types, metaphors, etc.)…Scripture itself being the key determiner of what form of grammar it is.

Why is the method of Bible interpretation important to study? Because this is the foundational difference between premillennialism and amillennialism. Dr. Feinberg asserts (to which I have no reason to doubt) that the early church was almost entirely premillennial up until the influence of Origen’s allegorical interpretation. Whereas many amillennialists disagree with Origen’s method, the impact of his teachings are found wherever spiritual prophecies are spiritualized in their application. Dr. Feinberg lists examples of this in ppg. 49-52.

The remaining 10 pages of Ch. 2 are dedicated to various amillennial theologians’ complaints against the literal method of interpretation, as well as Dr. Feinberg’s answer to them. There are obviously too many to list in this limited format, but here are a few highlights:

F.E. Hamilton concedes that if a literal method of interpretation is taken, the most logical conclusion is the premillennial position. Yet he proposes an all-or-nothing scenario. “…if it be admitted that even one prophecy can be interpreted symbolically or spiritually, the whole principle…breaks down,” (pg. 53).

— Dr. Feinberg’s answer:

“But that rule will have to work both ways. It must mean that once the amillennialists interpret any prophecy literally, then their position breaks down. They believe that Christ is coming again. That means they must have taken the many prophecies of His second coming literally.” (pg. 53)

In other words, this is an objection the amillennialists themselves cannot sustain, when the rule goes the other way.

Murray complains that the literal method leads people to the mistake of the Pharisees by expecting a “literal fulfillment of every prophecy which led them to reject and crucify their Messiah.” (pg. 55)

— Dr. Feinberg’s answer:

“We should like to ask whether the prophecies of the first coming of Christ were literally fulfilled? They assuredly were, as Matthew testifies again and again.” (pg. 55)

Hughes argues that the kingdom of heaven is a reference to a “kingdom that is not this-worldly and that is eternal because it is the kingdom of God.” (pg. 58)

— Dr. Feinberg’s answer:

“That does not mean the kingdom cannot be on earth, as he denies on the basis of John 18:36. Christ said, “Not of this world,” but He did not say, “Not in this world.” That shopworn argument against premillennialism could be removed for good, if only the rest of the verse (John 18:36) were considered, for it interprets the first clause of the verse.” (pg. 58)

Ladd is not an amillennialist, but nevertheless has complaints against the literal method & Dispensationalism. He makes the accusation that “Dispensationalism forms its eschatology by a literal interpretation of the Old Testament and then fits the New Testament into it. A nondispensational eschatology forms its theology from the explicit teaching of the New Testament.” (pg. 60)

— Dr Feinberg’s answer is multi-faceted:
(1) Are the amillennialists afraid of a conflict between the Old Testament & New Testament?
(2) Ladd’s assertions about nondispensational teachings being based on the “explicit” teaching of the NT are a gross oversimplification & without proof. [Personal note: the exact same argument could be posed by dispensationlists the other way.]
(3) There is no evidence that the promises of Israel are fulfilled in the Church.
(4) Ladd’s arguments sound more like the arguments for the amillennial position, which he is opposed to.

Whew! That’s a lot for one chapter. Ch 3 will deal directly with the topic of Dispensationalism, and it appears to be much shorter in comparison with this foundational topic of Biblical interpretation.

For me personally, I hold to the literal method of interpretation…which is no surprise given my viewpoint regarding pretrib/premill eschatology. The question I have is: why would anyone want to interpret the Old Testament symbolically? Shouldn’t we *desire* to know the literal interpretation for what God inspired to be written? If we’re truly seeking His will & His word, why wouldn’t we want to know what He literally said?

Perhaps that’s an unfair question taken from a biased point of view…but it seems to me that a literal interpretation is simply the most logical place to begin in Bible study.

Different Priest; Different Covenant

Hebrews 8:1-13, “Different Priest; Different Covenant”
——————

Introduction:
“Is it live or is it Memorex?” For those of us who remember such things as recordable cassettes , this was the slogan (usually along with some poor soul’s wine glass shattering) for Memorex cassette tapes (or VHS tapes later on). They claimed the recording quality was so good, we’d never be able to tell the difference…until CD’s came out. Once you heard what digital recording was like, the “hiss” became all too loud & obvious.

With apologies to the author of Hebrews, that may be similar to what some think about the comparisons of the priesthoods between the Levites & Jesus. Nearly every chapter in the letter has introduced the concept of Jesus as our High Priest in some fashion & in Ch 7 the writer fills out the comparison. Jesus isn’t a High Priest according to the Levitical law, but according to the order of Melchizedek: He’s a King AND Priest – the king of peace & king of righteousness – His priesthood has no end – His priesthood is acknowledged as greater by none other than Abraham – He is a perfect priest, superior to the Levite priests in every way & including the sacrifice He offers, which is sufficient once for all time.

To those Jewish Christians who were contemplating a return to Judaism, the author of Hebrews has been hammering home the point: there’s nothing in Judaism to return to! It’s not like they can choose the sacrifice of the Son of God one day & the sacrifice of a goat the next. Jesus is fully superior to anything the old covenant had to offer, and now that He has been fully revealed, the imperfections (the “hiss”) of the old covenant cannot be ignored. As we’ll see through today (and the following chapters), one reason the old covenant was given was that the Israelites would understand it was merely a shadow of things to come; an inferior copy ultimately to introduce them to the true work done by our Savior.

Thus here in Ch 8, the author makes this comparison plain. We have a different kind of priest Who mediates & administers a different kind of covenant. Not different as in ‘apples & oranges’, but different as in ‘apple-flavored-drink & real apples’ or ‘grainy cassette tape vs. the real deal live.’ Jesus is far superior to every high priest & the covenant before Him!

Hebrews 8 (NKJV)
1 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,

A. The “main point” of what? The main point of the arguments made up to & through this point in the letter. We have a perfect High Priest! Everything that we absolutely need from our High Priest (whether or not we understand we need it) is provided for in Christ Jesus. We have “such a high priest” – the perfect High Priest Whose work is everlasting and sufficient in every way.

B. “seated”: speaks of the finality of His work. Jesus always lives to make intercession Heb 7:25), and is active in that way. But the work of the sacrifice is complete! Jesus never needs to bring another offering for sin. He is finished & He is seated…

C. “right hand”: speaks of His favored position. Jesus is the Chosen Anointed One of God the Father – the right hand is the privileged & honored position…

D. “throne of the Majesty”: God the Father… He is on the throne! Always sovereign…

E. “in the heavens”: this is the location – speaks of the Ascension of Christ. Jesus died – Jesus rose – Jesus lives and will never die again…
.

2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.

A. Jesus isn’t just Majestic; He’s a “Minister” – not the normal word we see in NT, but still a reference to a “servant” – in this case, someone who serves many people, used throughout the LXX as a reference to priestly functions. Emphasizes again Jesus’ priesthood is of the order of Melchizedek: king and priest.

B. Minister of what? The “sanctuary & true tabernacle”… There is another sanctuary in the heavens built by God. What was built by Moses was a type & shadow (vs. 5) of what God had already created in the heavenlies. What’s it like? Stay tuned till Ch 9.
__a. The point? This “true tabernacle” (tent) is where Jesus serves as the priestly minister. He doesn’t serve in the copy here on earth; His ministry is exalted to a far superior place – the very throne room and sanctuary of God Almighty.
__b. Does location matter? After all, Jesus told the Samaritan woman that the time was coming when it didn’t matter where we worshipped God, as long as believers worshipped Him in spirit & in truth (John 4:24). Understand the subject here isn’t one of worship; it’s one of priestly service. The offering had to be made – and it had to be made in the right place. You bet location matters! For someone coming from a Jewish background, this idea would have been astounding. The Holy of holies was so revered that only one person could go into the room one day every year, and only in the right way…yet it’s not even the true tabernacle! How much MORE holy would the true tabernacle & sanctuary of the Lord God be? And that is where Jesus serves as High Priest, seated at the right hand of God because His sacrifice was so perfectly sufficient… … (Again, the refrain: Jesus is superior!)
.

3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer.

A. High priests offer gifts & sacrifices – that’s just what they do. Jesus isn’t any different; He offers a gift…Himself!
.

4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law;

A. In His earthly ministry, Jesus didn’t serve as a Levitical priest. His offering of the sacrifice was not done in the Temple, etc…Jesus wasn’t qualified to do so! He is the Perfect & Superior High Priest, but His qualifications were of the order of Melchizedek; not Levi/Aaron. The Levitical priests do it according to the Law; Jesus fulfills the Law of the covenant and institutes a new covenant…

B. BTW – great clue to the writing of the epistle. Note the present tense regarding the priests “who offer the gifts”, i.e. the gifts were still being offered. Had to have been written prior to 70AD.
.

5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”

A. Where did the Jewish high priests serve? The temple. As grand & glorious as Herod’s temple was (it took 40 years to build!), it was still only a loose copy – based upon previous temples, and based upon the tabernacle built by Moses. Yet even that was a copy! As grand & symbolic as the descriptions of the tabernacle are (Exo 25-40), it was still just a type and a shadow of what already was built by God in the heavens.

B. Quote – probably Exo 25:40…God emphasized this point with Moses a minimum of 3 times. He was not to vary one iota from what God had shown him (probably in a vision) on Mt. Sinai. Why? Because God was obviously creating a picture of what the heavenly sanctuary is like. We pick our paint colors & carpet patterns on our own, no big deal. And that’s ok because this is a building in which we worship God; it’s not a copy of the sanctuary of God where the blood of the atonement needs to be placed on the mercy seat. For THAT place, it’d better be done according to the commandments of God b/c the only way we can approach God is upon His holy terms through His marvelous grace. Everything about the Tabernacle spoke of Jesus – His divinity, sacrifice, purity, holiness, judgment, etc. It had to be made absolutely right. But even then, it’s only a shadow; Jesus in His far superior priesthood ministers in the substance.
.

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.

A. Better ministry: it’s “more excellent” because it’s not the shadow. Jesus’ ministry is the true ministry of the priest. He brought the only sufficient sacrifice. He has the better work & service.

B. “Better covenant…promises”: How much better? In what ways? This is what the writer will describe in the rest of Ch 8. Jesus’ work, authority, and qualifications as High Priest are better in every respect, and it’s only logical that the Covenant He brings & promises He makes would be far superior to what came before.

C. Jesus is our Mediator! ‘Great! What’s a mediator?’ A mediator is a person sent on behalf of another to ratify a treaty or covenant/contract (like an arbiter). We need a covenant with God & we need someone to bring that covenant to us & take our need for forgiveness to God. Who’s our arbiter? Jesus! Jesus is the one mediator between God & man (1 Tim 2:5)…no other mediator will do. Moses doesn’t work b/c he was the mediator of the old covenant – but now there’s a better one, instituted by a better priest, mediated by a better Mediator.
.

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

A. How can the 1st covenant have fault? Doesn’t the Scriptures proclaim that “the law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul” (Ps 19:7)? Absolutely. Didn’t Paul affirm that the law is good? “Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law…” (Rom 7:7). We know that the law of God absolutely does convert the soul because it condemns us and brings us to the feet of the only One who can save us (Christ Jesus). The law of God came from God; so we know it must be good! So what exactly is the fault with the 1st covenant? The law cannot justify us; it just leaves us condemned. Under the law, we see our sin for what it is: sheer selfish rebellion against the Creator God of the Universe… We are left condemned, crying out for grace – but grace isn’t found in the law. What we need for true forgiveness from sin is justification/imputed righteousness. We need to be declared right in the sight of God. That never comes through the law of Moses; only via the grace of Jesus Christ. John 1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. []

B. Because there is indeed this fault, there is a need for a 2nd covenant…a 2nd priesthood…promises based upon the sure person & sacrifice of the Son of God Himself…
__a. Note this reemphasizes a crucial point about the necessity of the grace of Christ: If the keeping the law was enough to satisfy the righteous judgment of God (no matter how difficult it may have been), the 2nd covenant of grace would never have been necessary. But keeping the law isn’t sufficient! It doesn’t matter how many laws we’ve kept if we’re already guilty of breaking others…thus it’s like we’ve broken the whole thing – we’ve already incurred the justified wrath of God with one sin (Jas 2:10). And even beyond our known sins, every single human being is born a sinner because we are born with a fallen nature (Rom 5:12). Thus we are out of reach of the law; we MUST have grace.
__b. Legalism NEVER works. NEVER. If legalism earned our salvation, we’d never have seen Jesus die on the cross. It’s ONLY through His grace we are saved…

C. Author of Hebrews is going to highlight prophecies showing that they were to expect a day when the old covenant would change & that a new covenant was coming… Specifically the lengthy quote of Jer 31:31-34 beginning in vs. 8.
.

8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD.

A. Original context of Jer 31? Jeremiah was of course one of the final prophets God gave the people before Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians. Much of his prophecy dealt with how God would discipline the people through captivity (ultimately pointing toward the Great Tribulation), and then restore the people back to the land (many times referencing the Millennial kingdom). In Jer 29, God gives Jer a series of letters preparing various people in Judah for eventual capture by the Babylonians – but God also defines their time there as limited (70 years – vs. 10). In Jer 30, God comes out of that with very hopeful prophecies that both Judah AND Israel will be returned to the land. There will be tribulation, but God will bring healing. Jer 31 continues that thought, declaring a new covenant between God and with Israel & Judah – emphasizing God’s love for them & desire for them to serve Him alone.

B. God makes this covenant with Israel & Judah (shows reconciliation between the divided nations!) – is this only for Israel & Judah? Of course not; it’s also for the Church… It’s the foundation of our relationship in Christ… Symbolized through communion… Does this mean we ought to think of the Church as a NT substitute for Israel & Judah? Absolutely not…there are promises from God to ethnic Israel that are already answered in Christ Jesus, but yet to be fulfilled in time (the main point of Rom 11).
__a. How can we be so sure? Keep the original intended audience for this letter in mind: Jewish Christians…hence the name “Hebrews”. Of course the writer is going to make reference to Israel & Judah; he’s been doing the same thing throughout the letter so far in comparing Jesus to the Law… Other passages in the Scripture make it plain – the new covenant begins with Israel; it proceeds to the world. Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. [] Jesus explicitly commissioned the apostles to make disciples of ALL the nations (Matt 28:19); He told them to start in Judea & proceed out to the earth from there (Acts 1:8). The new covenant has been made available to Israel, but they (except for a remnant) rejected it; we (the rest of the Church – mainly Gentiles) have been grafted into these promises (Rom 11:17).

C. The point of vss. 8-9? That Israel & Judah broke the original covenant. They disregarded God & thus God disregarded them. God had given them freedom from Egypt – a home & inheritance in Israel – and a special relationship with God Himself. Yet they “did not continue” in that relationship – they ignored the law of God – they sacrificed to idols – they took the gracious covenant of God & trashed it. Obviously a new covenant was needed…
__a. Before we get too cocky as Gentiles, let’s remember we were no better. Gentiles may not have had a covenant with God, but we were given the testimony of God through creation (Rom 1) & we still rebelled violently against everything we knew about God. Instead of submitting to Him & humbly seeking His face, we set up idols in our own hearts – we dishonored our parents given us by God – we lusted after people & possessions. We are fully guilty of our own sins, and we are in desperate need of a Savior!
.

- 1 cause of the covenant; 4 main benefits
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 in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

A. The cause? God. “I will make…” The Mosaic covenant was conditional (see Deut 28 – “if you” repeated 6 times). This covenant is UNconditional & based solely upon the work & will of God! Jesus Himself provides the surety for us (Heb 7:22).
__a. This covenant will not be broken! Amen!!

B. Benefit #1? The law is no longer externally enforced; the people are internally changed…

C. Benefit #2? The relationship with God that the Israelites discarded will be renewed & those who are covenant with God will be the people of God.
.

11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.

A. Benefit #3? Knowledge of God is not restricted to only the kings & priests; we are all a royal priesthood of believers & all Christians know God…
.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

A. Benefit #4? Sins are no longer temporarily set aside through ongoing sacrifice; it’s permanently atoned for through the sacrifice of Christ Jesus…

B. To what extent has Jesus paid the price for your sins? So much so that God no longer even remembers them! I.e., He’ll never bring them up against you for all of eternity – Psalm 103:11-12 (11) For as the heavens are high above the earth, So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him; (12) As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us. [] Through Jesus Christ, we have been pardoned; our sins are completely & utterly forgiven!
.

13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

A. How ready was it to “vanish away”? Enough for the Temple to be completely destroyed in 70AD – Jews couldn’t offer sacrifices there if they wanted to! … The point? The author is saying, “Don’t go back!” To those Jewish Christians who still considered offering sacrifices at the Temple, this is one more appeal (1) showing it’s not necessary, & (2) it ought not even be an option to a Christian.

Conclusion:
So which is better? The Memorex grainy hiss or the truth?  The new covenant is far better! Fully made available to us through the one High Priest who mediates it: Jesus Christ.

Vs 1-6: Jesus is a different kind of priest. He’s the perfect priest that ministers in truth; not in shadows…
Vs 7-13: Jesus mediates a different kind of covenant. The first is made obsolete because everything hinted at in the old is fulfilled in the new. Laws on our heart – real relationship with & knowledge of God – true forgiveness of sins.

So what? So this is our Priest & this is our Covenant! We’re recipients of the promise because we’ve been adopted into the family of God through Jesus Christ… If you’re a born-again believer, you can be assured that your sins have been completely atoned for, because your High Priest ministers in truth – and His blood has satisfied the righteous wrath of God… Your relationship with God is not based upon your actions – His love for you is not based upon your worthiness (because you have none); it’s based upon Christ Jesus & the covenant into which He’s included you! This is glorious! …

What if you’re not a born-again believer? (If you haven’t turned away from your sins & placed all your hope & trust into Jesus Christ as the Son of God risen from the dead…) Then you are outside of the covenant. You don’t have the perfect High Priest mediating for you. Your sins still place you squarely within the judgment of God. That’s not God’s will for you! God desires the whole world to come to repentance…including you. Turn away from your sins & turn to Jesus today. He offers you grace, forgiveness, new life – and an incredible covenant of mercy, relationship, and peace with God.

Millennialism – Chapter 2, Biblical Interpretation (1)

Due to the length of the chapter & my time constraints, I’m going to have to finish the chapter later, but there were some things Dr. Feinberg points out that are so striking, I just had to share them in advance.

Chapter 2 is dedicated to the question of Biblical Interpretation. Dr. Feinberg rightly points out that the differences in hermeneutics are the foundation of the differences between premillennialism & amillennialism, so it makes sense to truly begin the study here.

He begins by laying out some basic rules of the grammatical-historical-literal (GHL) method, compares the spiritualization method (the basis for amillennialism) against the GHL, gives examples of spiritualization, and provides arguments for the GHL. That takes us to page 47 or so, when I had to stop for the time being.

He lays out great logic throughout the chapter, and it’s evident that Dr. Feinberg was an experienced debater on eschatology. So many of the arguments that are commonly brought up about premillennialism are addressed throughout the chapter. When opponents of premillennialism bring up weaknesses (from their perspective) or objections, Feinberg reminds us of 2 things:

First:

“First, when certain difficulties are affirmed of a doctrine that claims to be biblical, one is only required to show that a solution of the alleged problem is possible.” (pg. 39)

In other words, it’s not up to the proponent of premillennialism to so thoroughly argue a point that the only avenue left is the premillennial one. We merely need show that it is exegetically possible from the text.

Second:

“If any doctrine is shown on the basis of the laws of exegesis to be taught in the Bible, then to prove the doctrine false more is needed than the mere statement that the teaching brings to light even unanswerable problems.” (pg. 39)

The point here being that even if questions *do* arise from premillennial doctrine (when properly exegeted), it does not invalidate the already-arrived conclusions of premillennialism; it simply means there are questions. This throws out the red-herring arguments that go along the line of “But what about ____. How do you account for that?” There are questions with every viewpoint; but our exegesis needs to be what guides us through those questions; we don’t throw out the exegesis simply because we have questions along the way.

Dr. Feinberg goes into depth about such topics as spiritualizing numbers & other text (which he handles deftly) – I’ll need to save that for next time.

Millennialism – Chapter 1

If there’s one thing for certain, I’m going to know how to spell “Millennialism” by the end of this book. It’s always been a word that tripped me up (how many “n’s” again?).

The edition of the book I have (3rd & enlarged edition – 2008) actually has all the forwards & prefaces for all the previous editions included. All of them are worth reading & help give a background to the book – but I’m not going to report on them here.

The 1st chapter is short, sweet, and to the point. Dr. Feinberg basically addresses three issues:
(1) Why study eschatology?
(2) Admitting only 2 reasonable schools of thought: Millennialism & Amillennialism
(3) Shows a historical basis for Millennialism.

On the 1st point, Feinberg hits several of the arguments common today about promoting the study of eschatology. (I should add – the points he mentions are common *today*; but may not have been at the time this was written…I’m not aware of the rest of the thought at the time.) He notes that much of the Bible is dedicated to prophecy – that all theology eventually ends up in eschatology – and the way we view the end-times has a profound affect on the way we live today.

On the 2nd point, Feinberg freely admits his own position as premillennial and dispensational. But at the same time, he writes very honestly that there are only 2 logical positions in eschatology; and that they are mutually exclusive.

If the Bible does teach a Millennium, then we are compelled to admit that the premillennial view of biblical eschatology is the correct one. If, on the other hand, it can be demonstrated that the Word does not teach a Millennium, then we are logically constrained to acknowledge that the truth is with the amillennialists. (ppg 32-33)

The 3rd point is the most interesting to me, as I’ve heard so many complaints against Millennialism based on the supposed argument: “But the Bible never teaches it…there’s only one small spot in Revelation 20 & you’re basing a massive doctrine upon it!” Dr. Feinberg deftly and effectively blows this falsehood away as he brings the chapter to a close.

In the first place, by way of reply we can say that if God would choose, which in this case He did not, to give us a doctrine in one passage, He could easily do so. One portion of His Word is just as worthy of our faith as another. In the second place, the groundlessness of the statement made so often by amillennialists is easily brought to light, because it is well known that the Jews had a fully developed doctrine of the millennial age long before the book of Revelation, or any portion of the New Testament for that matter, was written. (ppg. 34-35)

I think I’m going to really like this book.

I don’t know how long the wait will be till Chapter 2, but I hope to get to it later this week.

Book Review – Millennialism

I don’t normally do book reviews for a few reasons:
(1) The books I typically make time to read aren’t very new. Book reviews are generally reserved for titles that are new-releases.
(2) The time I do have to read these not-so-new books is not nearly as plentiful as necessary to make a review series comprehensible.

However, I’m going to put those objections aside to tackle a book that was highly recommended to me by a very Godly & knowledgeable pastor that I’m privileged to have ‘met’ online. It’s definitely not new – the original copyright is 1936. It’s also very comprehensive & I’m not sure how much time I’ll have to blog about it. But because I think it is such an important book to read & understand, I figured blogging an ongoing review/synopsis of the chapters will help motivate me to dig into it a bit better.

The book is simply entitled “Millennialism,” authored by the late Dr. Charles L. Feinberg. Dr. Feinberg was raised in an orthodox Jewish home and had trained to be a rabbi. After converting to Christianity, he became a respected scholar, professor, and conference speaker. From the original foreword (written by LS Chafer), it appears that this particular book was originally written as a thesis for one of Dr. Feinberg’s degrees at Dallas Seminary…it has since gone on to be a classic work on the distinction between Premillennialism and Amillennialism.

Why bother writing a review/synopsis of the book?

Because it’s one thing to know WHAT we believe; it’s still another to know WHY we believe it.

For all the raucous debate that takes place about the end-times, it generally ends up in chest-thumping & flag-waving contests among people who (under normal circumstances) would share a cup of coffee together, pray for one another, and dig deep into the riches of Scripture together.

My personal thought is that the better we know our own position, the less likely we’ll be one of those who has to raise the volume of our voice in order to ensure we’ve made our point.

Feinberg’s book is an excellent place to begin. And so, with many thanks (and apologies) to the late Dr. Feinberg, we’ll begin shortly.