 |
| Picture by Penny Juncker |
There is a great deal to applaud in the sixth lesson of the
Presbyterian Women’s Bible study Who is
Jesus? What a Difference a Lens Makes.
The author Judy Yates Siker, in this lesson,
“According to Hebrews,” at the end, answers the question about Jesus’s identity
in this manner:
“The writer of Hebrews goes to great lengths to demonstrate
the majesty, the grandeur, and the perfection of Jesus. Yet, this Jesus is one
who can relate to us in our earthly circumstances. Truly, there is in every
generation the need to carry the message of the good news forward, in spite of
trials and frustrations of the day. The writer of Hebrews tells readers then
and now to be strong, to give thanks for the unshakeable kingdom in which
Christ reigns. Through the lens of this first-century writer, we are called to
be strong in the faith, and through this lens, we are able to see the person
and work of Jesus, the one who makes that faith possible.”
Siker understands that Jesus is both priest and sacrifice, and
that he is both human and divine. She comforts her readers with the biblical
truth that Jesus “can sympathize and empathize with people.”
And yet, still, there is the continued push to de-emphasize
the wholeness and completeness of the biblical witness to Jesus Christ as fully
God and fully human, as both Lord and the ransom for sin. Furthermore, there is
the continued apology and concern about the witness to Jesus of the early
church and how that affected their relationship to the Jewish people as a
whole.
A High
Christology:
First, in writing about the Christology of Hebrews, Siker, in
note 2, reminds the reader that, as she has put it, the synoptic Gospels have a
lower Christology, John a higher Christology, but Hebrews has both. But as I
have pointed out in my introduction
to this whole study:
“A high Christology is a Christology that is superior in that
it not only emphasizes the divinity of Jesus but also affirms the humanity of
Jesus. It is a balanced account of the person of Jesus, fully God and fully
human. Think of the creed of Chalcedon. A fence is placed around the person of
Jesus Christ and there are some things that cannot be said. A low Christology
does fail to uphold Jesus’ divinity.
And I added the words of biblical scholar Larry W. Hurtado,
author of Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to
Jesus in Earliest Christianity. In a comment on his blog he wrote:
“But certainly Mark reflects and presumes a very “high”
view of Jesus. E.g., the opening lines effectively make Jesus the “Lord” whose
paths are prepared for by the Baptist. And at various points Jesus is pictured
as heralded by demons who (unlike the humans in the story) perceive his
transcendent significance. And Jesus acts in ways that allude to YHWH in the OT
(e.g., walking on the waves and calming them).”
The same sorts of
explanations can be given for Matthew and Luke. The question, "Who is
Jesus?” cannot be rightly answered using the type of divisive exegesis Siker
uses. Even the Old Testament looks forward to the answer: Jesus Christ, fully
God, fully human.
Jesus the High Priest and Sacrifice:
While Siker correctly writes
that Hebrews is the only New Testament book that speaks of Jesus as high
priest, she begins this section with a rather strange explanation of why a high
priest and a sacrifice.
Rather than simply referring
to the Old Testament’s God given instructions to the people of Israel, Siker
refers to the sacrificial offerings of all of the nations. She writes:
“Unlike our world today,
almost all societies in the ancient world practiced animal sacrifice. The
Greeks and Romans built countless temples to their gods and offered them daily
sacrifices. Similarly, the temple in Jerusalem was the place where sacrifices were
offered every day.”
And then speaking of Jesus as
the perfect sacrifice and what that means, Siker writes, “So Jesus was viewed
as a perfect sacrifice—that is, a sinless sacrifice. Only in this way could he
be an appropriate sacrifice to atone for human sinfulness.” But Siker ruins all
of her words with her conclusion, “This is how the sacrificial mindset of the
earliest Christians, including that of Hebrews, worked.”
The similarities are little. The sacrifices in the temple were
meant to fulfill God’s commandments for the people of Israel. The order was to
be rightly fulfilled, but the heart, full of repentance and thankfulness, was
important too. The rituals were not the same as the rituals of other nations
offered to false gods. Most importantly, the sacrifices were symbols and types
of the coming Messiah. [1]
Siker does refer to Jesus as the Passover lamb, but she does
not acknowledge that he is truly the fulfillment of God’s promise seen within
the offering. She only acknowledges that the early Christians including the
author of Hebrews saw him that way.
The question comes to mind, does Siker believe that God
commanded the sacrifices that the Israelite priesthood performed?
Melchizedek:
Siker also writes about Hebrews’ references to the high priest
Melchizedek, a mysterious person to whom Abraham pays tithes. (Genesis 14:18)
She refers to Jesus as a descendent of Melchizedek because Melchizedek was,
according to speculation, taken up into heaven.
And likewise, Jesus was resurrected. But the author of Hebrews is using
Melchizedek as a symbol of Jesus. The scripture does not give Melchizedek’s
parentage nor speak of his death, therefore it can be said that he is, “Without
father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor
end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.”
(Hebrews 7:3) Jesus is of “the order” of Melchizedek’s priesthood.[2]
But Siker, in note 4, evidently does not believe that
Melchizedek is a real person. In the note she writes, “Scholars continue to
debate the image of Melchizedek and its creation
(whether by the author of Genesis or earlier in Jewish tradition.” It is
important to see Melchizedek as a real person, but without the speculation. (Emphasizes
mine)
Speaking philosophically, if Melchizedek is not a real person
but the Jewish priests are real people, the author of Hebrews loses his
argument that Jesus’ priesthood is greater than the Aaronic priesthood. Real
existence takes priority over non-existence.
But, having written all of the above, still, Siker’s
explanation of Jesus as the high priest is very good and helpful for the
reader. She explains how the Jewish high priest was the only one who was
allowed to enter the Holy of Holies, and how Jesus who had no sin is the one
who enters the heavenly Holy of Holies. He could offer the sacrifice, himself,
without needing to sacrifice for himself.
Supersessionism:
Supersessionism, the idea that Christianity replaces God’s
covenant with Israel is considered a problem in the book of Hebrews. Siker sees
it simply as sibling rivalry. She believes this was an argument between
different Jewish sects who would later become Rabbinic Judaism and
Christianity. But the problems and the
answers are deeper than that.
The early Christians did meet in the synagogues as well as
homes but nonetheless they also believed that Jesus was the fulfillment of the
promises of God in the Hebrew Bible. They also believed that only in Jesus
could anyone be saved including their fellow Jewish relatives. However, the
apostle Paul gives what was meant to be the correct understanding of the
position of the Jewish people who did not follow Jesus:
“From the standpoint of
the gospel they (the Jews who rejected Jesus) are enemies for your sake, but
from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the
fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” (Romans
11:28-29)
God still keeps covenant with the Jewish people but he only
offers salvation through Jesus Christ. How could it not be so; from Genesis
3:15 to the end of Malachi, God’s promises to his people look forward to Jesus.
He is the seed of Eve who bruises Satan’s head and he is the ideal priest and
messenger of the covenant in Malachi. He is the one who purifies the sons of
Levi. (Malachi 3) Jesus is every biblical promise fulfilled.
[1]
For deeper reading on the priesthood of Jesus and his sacrifice I recommend puritan
writer John Flavel and his book, The
Fountain of Life: Presenting Christ in His Essential and Mediatorial Glory. Flavel
has four chapters that deal with Jesus’ priesthood, including his sacrifice and
his intercession. It is very rich.
[2]
F.F. Bruce, The New International
Commentary on the New Testament, The Epistle to the Hebrews, F.F. Bruce,
General Editor, reprint (Grand
Rapids: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company 1981)
“Of Melchizedek ‘it is witnessed that he liveth’ in that sense that we never read of him otherwise than as a living man; of Christ it can be said He lives in the sense that, having died once for all and risen from the dead, He is alive for evermore.” 142.
“Of Melchizedek ‘it is witnessed that he liveth’ in that sense that we never read of him otherwise than as a living man; of Christ it can be said He lives in the sense that, having died once for all and risen from the dead, He is alive for evermore.” 142.
No comments:
Post a Comment