It's Not Revelation
No, it's
not Revelation. But it will be helpful
for us to consider Revelation, the "most unusual book in the New
Testament" before movimg on to the "most difficult book" below,
which is Hebrews (it's not "the letter to the Hebrews," because it's
not a letter). We first briefly consider Revelation before Hebrews because of the
striking difference between the two different states of mind needed to
understand first, Revelation, and second, Hebrews. Revelation, to the extent it was meant to be
understood on a rational, cognitive level requires a vivid imagination. If you have a vivid imagination, then you can
make it through Revelation and understand it correctly as long as your
imagination does not run away with you.
If, for example, you can rationally conceive of "four living
creatures, each of them with six wings" (Rv 4:8), or seven angels blowing
their trumpets with all sorts of natural disasters following upon the sound (Rv
8 - 11), or a beast with ten horns and seven heads (Rv 13) and so on and so
forth through the end of the book, your conception of Revelation is as good as
the next imaginative person's.
Actually,
imaginative thinking is no less valid in understanding the reality of
Revelation than the mathematical certitude, as you will see below, that is
required to understand Hebrews. Think of the great inventors, whose creations
started in their imaginations and then were developed into rational and
concrete by-products. Thomas Edison, for example, imagined some technical means
of helping people light their homes, other than with a fireplace, candles and
torches One night, at 3:00 a.m, he jumped
up from a sleepless bed after his imagination led him to conceive of the idea
of a glass bulb containing filaments that glowed when electricity was applied
to the bulb. He drew his imagined light bulb on a poster and from there light
took over darkness in American homes. Revelation requires a bit of Edisonian
imagination to understand it. The genre of Revelation that is responsible for
calling forth imagination to understand it, is known as "apocalyptic"
literature. This genre was popular from 200 B.C. to 200 A.D. Most such writings
took the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament, the apocalyptic work par
excellance, as their model. In fact, the earlier original title of the book
of Revelation in the Bible was "Apocalypse."
The
point about Revelation is that there is no one, perfect meaning intended by the
author, John of Patmos, who may or may not have been the Apostle John. Perhaps
he was a disciple or close associate of the Apostle, that is, maybe he was
writing from within "the school" of John the Apostle. This shared
style of writing by someone under the name of his teacher and spiritual leader
-- who was named the author of a book -- was popular in several New Testament
books. That includes some of the epistles written under the name of Paul, and
likewise the letters written under Peter's name and the Letter of James. In fact, even the Gospels were anonymously written. They were not written by the men whose names
appear in the title of the individual books, although the authors may well have
been students or otherwise associated with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Whoever John of Patmos actually was -- whether John the Apostle or someone else
-- the author nonetheless intended to be understood as presenting John the
Apostle's ideas in the writing of Revelation.
After a
rather straightforward, rational warning to the congregations of the seven
churches named in Rv 1-3, urging them not to lose their original zeal in living
out the gospel, the author writes the remainder of the book as if in a vison.
And as visons are not precise and methodical occurrences, we cannot expect a
logical, rational or academic presentation from the author. He has his own unique apocalyptic symbols in
stating his underlying theme. He presents these symbols to show the reader how
tumultuous the end times will be. He does this to prepare his readers for a
grand upheaval. For example, he wants to assure his readers that even if there
actually won't be "a huge red dragon with seven heads and ten horns"
(Rv 12:3) menacing the world in the last days, Jesus -- called both "the
Lamb " thirty times, and the "King of Kings" twice (Rev 19:11),
will bring final defeat to Satan and his horribly monstrous cohorts.
But in
keeping with our title to this article, Revelation is not actually difficult to
understand. It may strike one as
uniquely strange and perhaps even shocking, but none of the words and phrases
are beyond the reader's imaginative (not "imaginary") understanding.
People reading Revelation may be thinking back to their childhood years when
they used a vigorous imagination for reading folk tales and fables. Yet,
Hebrews, the most difficult book to understand in the New Testament (discussed
below) can not be understood by the same frame of mind to which you will have
brought your imaginative mind to the reading of Revelation. Instead, the frame of mind that you must
bring to Hebrews may be likened to that of a university student scratching his
head to come to an understanding of his mathematics professor in teaching the
student advanced calculus and differential equations.
What,
then, is the winner of the search for that book which is most difficult book to
understand? Here are some clues: We said
above that imaginative thinking can lead to mathematical certitude. But what if our most difficult book was
written with mathematical certitude, absent all of the symbolic phrasing
of Revelation, so that imagination will not help us to understand it? And what if the words and phrases of the book
seem to be intended for people who are well trained in academic discourse? And
what if a a virtually perfect knowledge of the entire rabbinical understanding
of the Old Testament is applied by the author to the New Testament? These
difficulties would have made for the early Jewish-Christians, for whom Hebrews
was intended, trudging along with difficulty, just as we Christians today
sometimes do, to understand the book. So, without further beating around the
bush, let's move on to the New Testament book of Hebrews.
The Learned and Enigmatic Book of
Hebrews
Background
to & Summary of Hebrews' Teaching and Argumentation.
Let's
first list some facts about the background to Hebrews (in the paragraphs
below), which in themselves show that even before reading the book you are
starting out in the arcane world of an intellectual author well advanced in an
understanding of Old Testament theology.
In order to understand Hebrews, it's helpful to learn all you can about
the author, where he wrote Hebrews, the style of the book, and who his audience
was and what the author urged his readers to do after reading the book.
1. In the early years of the Church
scripture scholars attributed the work to St. Paul, but even as early as the
third century -- and continuing into the 19th and early 20th centuries -- St.
Paul's authorship was denied by the Church.
This was especially the case after the publication of three papal
encyclicals transforming and modernizing the Catholic approach to biblical
research: (1) Pope Leo XIII's Providentissimus Deus (1893);
(2) Pope Benedict XV's Spiritus Paraclitus (1920); and Pope Pius
XII's Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943). This papal revamping of Catholic
biblical,scholarship led to a final scholarly pronouncement dropping St. Paul
as the author in favor of a person unknown to this day in the eyes of all
modern Scripture scholars (see paragraphs 2 & 3 below).
2. Hebrews was written originally in
Greek, and not as a translation from Hebrew to Greek. The author is anonymous,
but he undoubtedly was thoroughly schooled in rabbinical Jewish theology. And
since his Greek is perhaps the best and most polished in the New Testament, it
is probable that he lived and wrote in the Diaspora ("Dispersion of the
Jews" from Israel to Greek-speaking, non-Jewish nations). Since St. Pope Clement
I in 96 A.D. seems to be referring to Hebrews in his First Letter to the
Corinthians, it was surmised that Hebrews must have been written shortly before
96 A.D. However, Hebrews itself is
addressed to an earlier audience than one existing in the papacy of Clement.
The book is intended for Jewish-Christians suffering from the chaos and
persecution gripping Judea from 65 A.D. through 69 A.D., stemming from the
Romans' extinguishing of the last days of the Jewish-Maccabean revolt that had
sought freedom from the yoke of the Romans starting in 175 B.C. and ending with
the Romans crushing the Jewish uprising in 70 A.D. The underlying exhortation
in Hebrews is to move its readers from their loss of faith because of these
hardships, and instead bolstering the readers' faith in Jesus to the point of
holding firm against oppression. This would mean it was written before 70 A.D.,
because in that year the Romans burned down the Jerusalem Temple with a large
Jewish congregation inside (probably including Jewish-Christians who still
attended synagogue).
3. While the readers of Hebrews vacillated
in their Christian faith because of persecution, they certainly had not yet
suffered from or complained about the Roman destruction of their Temple. Hence
the date of the book's writing must be before 70 A.D., that is, a little later
than the last letters of St. Paul, who was put to death in 62 A.D. (But see the
quotation from Colosians and explanatory point in paragrph 12, below.) Hebrews
emanated from the Egyptian city of Alexandria in the first century. That
city had a significant Jewish
population, second only to Jerusalem. Alexandria's Jewish population was
probably about 4 - 5%, a large number in a city with nearly two million
inhabitants, and Alexandrian Jews were raised as Greek speakers, using Hebrew
speech only in synagogue worship. The author of Hebrews is regarded by scholars
as Greek-Jewish, most likely born and living in Alexandria during the period
when Hebrews was written. The book was first known and read in Alexandria
before it was carried by Jewish-Christian preachers to Israel for dissemination
there. This has led many scholars to consider Apollos of Alexandria, who was
"an authority on the scriptures" (Acts 18:24, cf. 1 Cor. 3:4),
as the author. Centuries later, even the heretic, Martin Luther (1531 A.D.),
the translator of the Greek Septuagint into German, considered Apollos as the
author of Hebrews. But there is no
direct evidence linking Apollos to the writing of Hebrews. Catholic synods and
councils, beginning in 1215 A.D., had ruled against the naming not only of of
St. Paul, but also of Apollos as author.
4. Its title at first was, in Greek, Pros
Ebraious, or "To the Hebrews." underscoring early belief that the document was intended
as a letter. Yet, as further and more erudite scholarship progressed, the
opinion that it was a letter was dropped in favor of the viewpoint that it was
a homily, and the Pros ("To") was also dropped. Hence
the title became simply "Hebrews." This one-letter title might be
seen as a relinquishment by scholars of the belief that whatever this document
was it certainly was not an epistle like those of St. Paul or other New
Testament letter-writers.
5. If in fact it was a homily, it seems
unlikely that any audience of believers could possibly have sat listening to
the the author's delivery of this abstruse and esoteric document with any but the slightest bit of
understanding. It seems more correct after centuries of study of this somewhat
mystifying instrument to call it not a homily (as if delivered orally), but a treatise
(i.e., as something needing intricate and careful study by
reading rather than by listening). Hebrews does not really belong in the New
Testament section on Letters, even though it is stuck between Paul's letter to
Philemon and the Letter of James.
6. Hebrews is so intensely intellectual,
historical and academic that it might easily have been placed by Catholic
biblical scholars of the Second Century -- when they were arranging books of
the New Testament -- immediately after the Gospel of John, or else after Acts
of the Apostles. Then it would have been followed by St. Paul's Letter to the
Romans and further New Testament Letters. Placement of Hebrews earlier in
position among the New Testament books would have avoided the implicit
instruction given to readers of the New Testament to approach Hebrews as a
letter. As it is, Hebrews sits among New Testament letters lonely and
forlorn. Readers hoping for another
Pauline-style letter before they begin to read Hebrews for the first time are
startled to come upon this document that is scarcely understandable as a
letter, and certainly not a cordial letter with personal details by the author
to a church which the author had founded, as was characteristic of several of Paul's
Letters.
7. The author of Hebrews, in writing this
penetrating but shrouded teaching, does not follow the development of the
Letters of the New Testament by discussing doctrinal themes and moral
exhortations separately. Rather, his in-depth
development of theoretical ideas merging
Old and New Testament theologies, and his urgings to his readers to exert
greater discpline in times of harassment and persecution are intertwined
throughout Hebrews. The author
emphasized to his readers the need to return to their earlier hope as
the basic virtue for keeping their original faith intact. It is this hope which his readers had
displayed with great enthusiasm when they first accepted the gospel. In this
sense Hebrews, as much as it is a major and concentrated doctrinal teaching, is
merged with an emphatic exhortation by the author for his readers to renew and
solidify their baptismal vows.
8. In the doctrinal passages of Hebrews,
the author develops his essential, innovative teaching of Jesus as the "great
high priest" (Heb. 4:14). The title of "priest" for Jesus
is used twenty-seven times in Hebrews, but not once in the Gospels, Acts of the
Apostles or Paul's letters. In those books, the use of "priest" is
applied solely to the Jewish priesthood of Jesus' day. What is meant in Hebrews
by use of the title "priest" for Jesus? Let's first look at the role of the Jewish
priests as recorded in the Old Testament. Moses' brother Aaron was a priest
because God ordered Moses to make Aaron and his sons priests -- thus the origin
of the Levites. The Levites were one of the twelve tribes of Israel, but unlike
the other eleven, all of whom respectively were given large tracts of land by
Joshua when they entered Canaan, the Levites received no land because they were
the tribe of priests. Their role was to
oversee Temple and synagogue worship throughout Israel, and especially to offer
sacrifices as sin offerings in order to persuade God to forgive the people's
sins (as well as the sins of the priests).
Jewish
priests offered both cereal offerings and animal sacrifices (the latter
depicted in the most revolting and gory detail) as sacrifices. When an animal was sacrificed the priests
were to "splash its blood on the sides of the altar." [Further,] the
priests were commanded to "offer as an oblation to the Lord the fatty
membranes over the inner organs, and all the fat that adheres to them, as well
as the two kidneys, with the fat on them near the loins, and the lobe of the
liver, which he [i.e., the priest] shall sever above the kidneys. All
this Aaron's sons shall then burn with the holcaust, on the wood over the fire,
as a sweet-smelling oblation to the Lord." (Lv. 3: 2-5). It is difficult
to imagine that this bloody mess would be "sweet-smelling" tothe Lord.
9. The author takes into account in naming
Jesus a priest, the nature of the Old Testament Levitical priesthood,
concerning which his Jewish-Christian readers would undoubtedly have understood
in detail. Likewise they would have believed that the only way to have their
sins removed was by a priestly sacrifice. Instead of debunking his readers'
belief in the Levitical priesthood's sacrifice for sin, the author reaches out
for a pivotal, even "stunning" doctrine. He does away with the Levitical
priesthood altogether and replaces it with the priesthood of the Son of God,
which is also a priesthood based on sacrifice for sin. The author considered
that he had to give his readers some major principle from the Old Testament to
rely on as he developed for them the mystery of Jesus as "Great High
Priest." He accomplishes this with
his concentrated emphasis on Jesus as faithful and compassionate high priest,
whose eternal priesthood was "according to the order of Melchizedek." (Heb. 7:17) To support
this doctrine, the author relies on Psalm 110:4 to support his doctrine of
Jesus' high priesthood. This eternal priesthood surpasses the Levitical
priesthood and abolishes it. The author says: "The Lord [God the Father]
has sworn and will not waver: 'Like Melchizedek,' you [the Messiah and Son of
God] are a priest forever."
(Ps. 110:4). Jesus, unlike the Levitical priests of the Old
Testament, does not exercise a priesthood through family lineage, but through
his immortal existence. This is why
Jesus' priesthood is "according to the order of Melchizedek," that
is, like Melchizedek's priesthood, so, too, Jesus' priesthood is based on
"the power of a life that cannot be destroyed." (Heb. 7:16). The difference between the
Levitical priests and Jesus as priest in Hebrews, is that Jesus does use
sacrifice as a means to expiate the people's sins, but he does this as offering
himself as the sacrifice.
10. Since Melchizedek is such an essential
figure upon which to base Jesus' priesthood, we should finish the discussion of
Jesus' priesthood by saying more about Melchizedek. Why is Jesus' eternal
priesthood "according to the order
of Melchizedek," and who was Melchizedek anyway? He is a shadowy figure mentioned eight times
in Hebrews, but only twice elsewhere in the Bible, namely, in Genesis 14:18-20,
and Psalm 110:4. In Genesis 14:18-20,
Abram (in the later decades following 1650 B.C. when the Genesis passage is
written, had not yet been named "Abraham") was returning from battle
as a victor over the king of Elam (whose kingdom was somewhere in the eastern
part of today's Iraq in the valley between the Tigris and Euphrates). Abram,
apparently camping after his victory somewhere north of Damascus in today's
Syria, was unexpectedly met by a stranger named Melchizedek, identifed in Gn.
14:18 as "king of Salem [i.e., Jerusalem]...and priest of God Most
High," showing up unexplained to commend Abram on his victory. He entertained Abram with bread and wine and,
as a priest, blessed Abram in the name of "God Most High, who delivered
[Abram's] foes into [Abram's] hands. Then Aram gave him a tenth of
everything." (Gn. 14:18-20).
Melchizedek
is spoken of again in Psalm 110, where God the Father ("The Lord")
speaks to (the "lord," who is the Messiah) and tells him, "Take
your throne at my right hand while I make your enemies your footstool...Like
Melchizedek you are a priest forever." (Ps. 110:1,4). Hebrews Chapter Seven points out the
mysterious identity of Melchizedek in these words: "Without father,
mother, or ancestry, without beginning of days or end of life, [he is] thus
made to resemble the Son of God, [and] he remains a priest forever." (Heb.
7:3) So Hebrews advances the theological doctrine of Melchizedek as a type
of Christ. The rabbis maintained that anyone in the Old Testament whose
ancestry, birth or death are not mentioned, thereby
"remains...forever."
Melchizedek's priesthood was acknowledged with superiority in the
rabbis' eyes, because there is no mention of
his death and thus Genesis implies that Melchizedek's personal
priesthood is permanent. It is this eternal nature of Melchizedek's life that
led the author of Hebrews to declare: "Jesus has entered on our behalf as
forerunner, becoming high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." (Heb. 6:20). Hebrews is
that book of the New Testament which alone brings together in a masterful,
though complex theological discussion and argument, the meaning of Jesus' priestly
sacrifice for the people.
11. The other writings of the New Testament
focus on the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus by largely connecting
those events to the coming of the Holy Spirit to guide the Church further,
after Jesus has returned to the right hand of the Father in heaven. This is made clear in John's Gospel, where
Jesus says to his apostles:
When the Advocate comes whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth that proceeds from the Father, he will testify to me. I tell you the truth, it is better for you that I go. For if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you, But if I go, I will send him to you.[I] am going to the Father and you will no longer see me. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth.
Jn. 15:26-16:12.
The question naturally arises as to whether the author of
Hebrews was ill-informed about the role and purpose of the Holy Spirit, basing
so much of Hebrews as he did on Jesus.
This is not a likely judgement, as Hebrews places the Holy Spirit in a
crucial role in everything that is said in Hebrews about Jesus' eternal
priesthood and eternal sacrifice. The author points to the will of God the
Father verifying Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection beyond the words of
witnesses and other believers in Jesus' resurrection, and also through the
granting of "signs, wonders, various acts of power, and distribution of
the gifts of the holy Spirit according to his will." (Heb. 2:4).Thus the
Spirit participated in Jesus' entire high priestly ministry, including bringing
Jesus to his priesthood and his sacrifice of suffering and death for sinful
humanity as a faithful, compassionate and eternal high priest. Jesus' role as a
priest, namely, sacrifice, which defined the Levitical priesthood of
Judaism, was based on Jesus' suffering unto death, which "for a little
while made him lower than the angels, that by the grace of God he might taste
death for everyone." (Heb. 2:9).
Paul, in his Letter to the Romans, names the Holy Spirit
thirty-three times, and in First Corinthians, thirty-nine times. Hebrews refers to the Spirit eight times. In
the Gospels, together with Acts of the Apostles, the title "high
priest" or "priest(s)" is used
forty-nine times but is never used as a name, title or attribute of
Jesus, or of Jesus' service or sacrifice for believers. In Hebrews, "high priest" or
"priesthood" is used
twenty-seven times, always as a name, title and attribute of Jesus' service to and sacrifice for the
Church. In addition, in the Gospels the word "angel(s)" is used infrequently,
and when so used, it is never spoken of Jesus as higher than the
angels. Rather, "angels" in
the Gospel is used by Jesus as applying it to certain people or
circumstances, as in Luke 20:36, where Jesus speaks of those who are deemed
worthy of the resurrection of the dead as those who "no longer die, for
they are like angels." In Hebrews,
"angels" is used eleven times, always of Jesus, as a great "high
priest" in relation to Jesus' priestly sacrifice of himself for sinful
humanity. It is his high priesthood and his sacrifice that make Jesus a
superior being to the angels.
12. In Hebrews 1:1-14 the author expresses
his conclusive statement about Jesus' superiority to the angels because of his
sonship to the Father. Through this conclusion, the author emphasizes Jesus'
divinity, which is irresistibly proclaimed: "[I]n these last days [God the
Father] spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through
whom he created the universe." (Heb 1:2).
This point -- naming the son as the agent of creation -- is equally
expressed in Paul's teaching:
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For in him were created all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers (i.e., the heavenly choirs of angels); all things were created through him and for him.
Colossians 1:15-16.
This similarity between Hebrews and Colossians on this
powerful truth about Jesus' divine role and participation with the Father in
carrying out the creation of the universe has suggested to some scholars that
the author of Hebrews had Paul's letters available to him. Paul would have written Colossians sometime
between 48 and 60 A.D. His writing ended
in 60 A.D. because he was living in Rome at that time, and the Roman police
prohibited his activity amomg the people on behalf of his ministry of forming
churches. Paul was then put to death in 62 A.D.
As we have stated, Hebrews was written
at some point from 65 A.D. through 69 A.D. The point made by the author concerning
Jesus' role in creation of the universe is very likely separate and distinct
from Paul's words on that subject in Colossians.
13. We have discussed the major doctrinal
points above. All that remains is to say
something about the author's closing remarks to his readers, whuch are
not more about doctrine as we have discussed in Paragraphs 1-12 above. Instead, the central themes of Hebrews 11 -
12 sum up the author's urging his readers to be disciplined in the face of
hardship and persecution, or, in other words urging his readers not to disobey
him when urging them to be strong in their faith. Faith is the core virtue here, and is defined
as "the realization of what is hoped for and evidence of things not
seen." (Heb. 11:1).
The
author gives the most extensive description of faith provided in the New
Testament. Yet, his interest in faith
does not lie in a technical, theological defintion -- "technicality and
theology" having already thoroughly summed up Hebrews in the preceding
chapters. In view of the needs of his
audience the author describes what authentic faith does, not what it is
in itself. Through faith God guarantees
the blessings to be hoped for from him, providing evidence in the gift of faith
that what he promises will eventually come to pass. He summarizes the heroes in faith from the
Old Testament and how firmly they maintained their faith -- giving examples of
Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Rahab, Gideon, Barak,
Samson, Jephthah, David and Samuel. He
emphasizes in these stalwarts their lifestyles of faith: "All these died in faith. They did not
receive what had been promised but saw it and greeted it from afar and
acknowledged themselves to be strangers and aliens on earth." (Heb.
11:13).
The
author tells his readers that they must not entertain the notion that Judaism
and Christianity can be intermingled. As
Jesus died separated from his own people, so must the Christian community
remain apart from the religious doctrines of Judaism. Christ must be the heart and center of the
community. He concludes his exhortation to faith and obedience by saying,
"[W]e who are receiving the unshakable kingdom should have gratitude, with
which we should offer worship pleasing to God in reverence and awe. For our God
is a consuming fire."
--Tony Gilles
No comments:
Post a Comment