partsofspeaking

Chapter 4:2.   For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.   Who is “them”? The Israelites in the third chapter who did not enter into the “rest” of the Holy Land. They did not believe the word and the leadership of God through Joshua and Moses, and died in the wilderness before the entrance into Canaan. They got out of Egypt, but didn’t move into the next step. It is a metaphor for the spiritual rest of Christ. I don’t think we can spiritualize or allegorize this into a “you can get deliverance but not the real Christian experience” idea. That is not the emphasis.   The emphasis is that the message (called the gospel here, of deliverance and rest, but not fully of Christ’s propitiation) was not “mixed with faith in them that heard it.” That’s an interesting phrase. The gospel message can have no consequences, then, if a person does not “mix it with faith.” We see this; m

 I'm fixing to defriend a lot of people on Facebook because of their obnoxious, relentless political opinions. On both sides. I am no friend of Trump. Not at all. Rarely if ever have said a good thing about him, because there is little good to say. Don't know what I'll do about voting. (Other than doing it in person). I have to vote for positions other than the president. (I never use the phrase "fixing to" either, except when angry.) But this slander against Amy Coney Barrett by women is amazing. Disconcerting. Disgusting. As someone quipped, "Yeah, it's like the Handmaid's Tale if the handmaids had law degree sand were appointed to the highest court on the land." Do they think they are helping the cause of women? Do they really think Roe will get overturned? Why are they so afraid of that? (Maybe because it's bad law?) Do they really just think we need more abortions in this country? Are they embarrassed because of their own deficiencies? J

Moving into Chapter 4, we encounter the second warning passage, and have to see that or the flow of thought will be confusing. After referring to the Israelites' many instances of unbelief leading to disobedience leading to some kind of judgment, the writers ends: So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief. Entering the promised land is a metaphor for something in the Christian experience, either a realization of rest from “dead works” and dependence on law keeping, or a stage in spiritual maturity, or heaven. I tend to see it as the first. I cannot help but think of Matthew 11, the end, which we should recognize as following judgment calls on several cities that rejected Him. I’m using the Old King James here, for a change.  25  At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26  Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy

 Up to this point I have focused on the second part of the chapter, rather than the first. So let's start at the beginning.  Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus, 2  who was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was faithful in all His house. 3  For this One has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as He who built the house has more honor than the house. 4  For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God. 5  And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, 6  but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope [ a ] firm to the end. As mentioned before, one argument of Hebrews is that Christ was superior to all other persons and processes that people have used to approach God, especial

The writer uses the word "harden" three times here. So we have to ask, do we harden our hearts? In this case it is not in regard to human compassion, but hardening in rebellion against God and hardened because of the deceitfulness of sin. (And if we are hardened in those ways, we are more than likely hardened to compassion for fellow humans.) Think of the parable of the sowers. What we should take from that is that our hearts need plowing up. We are not receptive to God or His Word when we do not open our minds and hearts and say, "There is a lot I don't know; a lot of what I think I know may not be right; worse, I might be hardened to in other ways." The soil of my heart is packed down, to the point that it is like asphalt and only heavy machinery could break it up."  It's an interesting metaphor. We've all seen the bumper sticker: "Minds are like parachutes. They are only good if they are open." Humorous, thoughtful, but not always relev

 Evangelicalism has some problems nowadays. A recent Twitter thread (yes, I know Twitter is a toxic waste dump) shows some disturbing pictures from Hobby Lobby that show we have a brand problem. Not that I consider Hobby Lobby my representative. I've only gone into one a handful of times. Once was to find Advent candles and the associate didn't have a clue what I was asking for. (Concerning.) But I do like their museum in DC. Do we rehabilitate the brand or discard it and start to live right, politically-neutral, focused on service to God's Kingdsom? Anyway, this is an example of our Double-mindedness as a group. For every MAGA hat wearer, there are dozens of gentle servants of God doing humble work. They get no press or Twitter threads, of course.  However, double-mindedness mostly shows within ourselves, the Jonah-Peter-Elijah kind. We have a great victory and then fall into the dumps (or water, in Peter's case). We trust God and then despair. Some have more trouble w

 Notice in this chapter how interpersonal communication and relationship are central to the commands about faith.  v. 13: but [ b ] exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. Exhorting one another daily. I'm doing so in this blog. However, on a daily basis, how much do we turn to another believer and say, "God wants you to move on in your faith and not harden your heart against him and be deceived by sin." We can, of course, do it in a caustic and superior manner, like that. Or we can find more winsome ways, ways where the Venn Diagram Circles of truth and love are completely congruent.  And, since I like to get into the granular level of communication, how would we do that? Thoughts? We start by listening. We start with Scripture. We start with the fruit of the Spirit. We don't start with "I" do it this way or that way.  It is amazing that the book of Hebrews doesn't have the pron

 Often in the morning I listen to Tim Keller podcasts. Recently they have been about Jonah, an odd story with a very human underpinning.  He indirectly points out some things that deserve pondering.  Psuche means soul; it's the word we get psychology from. Psychology as a science doesn't seem to be that concerned about the soul. (That second sentence is mine.) Jonah goes through a harrowing experience, gets back on track, preaches the message, sees repentance of the Ninevites, whom he hates, and then pouts. It's worse than a pout; it's an existential despair. He ends up mourning the death of a plant and God says, "You're upset about a plant; shouldn't I be concerned about human beings?" Obviously, that is a call to all of us to change the focus of our concern from material to human, something we have to be reminded of every day. Also, however, I see a common theme in Scripture. We see it with Job, Elijah, Jonah, David, Peter, and others.  Wild vacilla

 Chapter 3 holds one of the five warning passages, the second. It is in 7- 15. The major question is, does this passage apply to us, Gentiles in modernity? (or post modernity, although I think we live in a mixed world in terms of those two worldviews)  Yes and No is my toothless answer. The audience at that time was in a unique historical and cultural position. It is possible they were living just prior to the destruction of the temple (although it is not mentioned outwardly) in 70 A.D. I have in the last year of study realized that the destruction of the temple was a pivotal event, one we must take into account in the early church.  There is a distinct difference between the books written before and those written after the destruction of the temple, and the subjugation of the Jews under Titus. It started the separation between Christians and Jews, for one, even though many of the Christians were of Jewish background; they had had to make a choice, because prior to the 70 AD date, pers

Before I move on, a couple of disclaimers/explanations/random thoughts.  The more one posts, the more "looks" one gets. In the last month I've had 1.75% of all my posts for 14 years (and more) of this blog. That means with these daily, twice daily posts, I've upped the traffic.   Of course, I have no idea who these folks are (no one comments!) and I suspect the majority are bots or some other mechanism that just comes to blog sites for nefarious reasons. If anyone benefits from these posts, I am grateful. I ask you to look at my books on Amazon, under Barbara G. Tucker and Barbara Graham Tucker. Barbara Tucker is a hip hop singer and you won't get much more than here if you just use that name, unless you put one of the titles.  Second, because I don't plan to be working on this study into the new year, if we are granted such and I am well, I will probably pick up the pace a bit, starting today.  Chapter 3 closes the part of the argument in 2 and gives a length

 The beauty that is Hebrews 2 has not been fathomed, but I will make this my last post for now on this chapter, or really, 10-18. Three observations.  "For both he who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one." Other than WOW!, let's see this word "sanctifies." First, it's in present tense; it's in process. When does it end? death? maybe? Second, it is active voice for Christ and passive voice for us; sanctification is being accomplished on us and for us, not by us. Third, we misinterpret what sanctifies means. It means "set apart." It has the sense of "set apart for holiness" but if we get too focused on the holiness part we might miss something. We might become self-righteous, and Heaven knows we don't need any more self-righteous Christians right now (cue John MacArthur tweets and comments, especially about women.) We are set apart for use. We are set apart for identity, and for eternity, and for protection.

Perhaps it is my emotional state, but today in reading verses 10-18, the main thing I thought about was how much God loves us, and by logic, me. Not me because I have anything to offer or that I have any virtue, but me because I am part of the we, because I am beyond weak and a sinner and still His creation, bearing the Imago Dei. 1.      He identifies with us, calling us brethren (siblings), the children God gave Him, 2.      He suffered like us and to some extent with us. 3.      He suffered for us. 4.      He tasted death for everyone (going back to verse 9). Now, let’s take that apart. “Everyone” is, linguistically, distinct from “all.” It emphasizes every one, the individuals, not just the corporate. We get to, we must, keep that in balance. Unfortunately, today we have it unbalanced on the side of just “me, myself, and I.”     We believe individually, not as a group, yes, and we are loved individually but not separately. I don’t believe that the trope “if you were the

Hebrews 2:10-18 is very dense in meaning. One must be in a certain frame of mind to explicate it, and my dog is sick! However, the overall point is Christ's identification with those who believe Him and follow Him. "He is not ashamed to call them brethen," "the sanctifier and the sanctified are all of one," "He was partaker of flesh and blood like the children," "In all things He was made like His brethren...." Perhaps this emphasis is to combat three wrong ideas of the time, and still today. First, that the angels have anything to do with salvation, and 2. that the body reality of Christ not central for Him to identify (it is), and 3. His identification is incomplete. It is complete, a hard concept for us to follow because we also believe Him to be God.  The take-away is that Jesus understands rejection and unwarranted criticism and denigration from others who should know better and even from the closest family members. Even his brothers tho

When the writer of Hebrews brings up the cross, he also "finishes" it with Christ's enthronement and exaltation. 2:9, 1:3, most of 1:5-13, 2:17, and so on. We pair cross and resurrection, but that is incomplete. I don't think this is a characteristic of the writer only as much as a characteristic of the early church.  What Jesus is doing NOW is as important as what He did THEN. He's the High Priest, for one, aiding those who are tempted. It's a whole package. It's hard to humans to focus on more than one thing at a time, so we study the cross separate from the resurrection separate from the ascension separate from the exaltation and separate from the Second Coming/perfect kingdom. But that is not an option.  God understands our frailty, of course, but He wants us to see the whole panorama and not just bits and pieces. 

 The notes in my version of the Word say that 2:5-18 "is an important sectional theologically in that several reasons for the incarnation as a necessity are listed." So we will look through that lens  However, as this is Sunday, I will only refer the reader to Psalm 8, which is quoted in 6-8. The wording is slightly different because the writer of Hebrews uses the Septuagint. It would do well for any person studying the New Testament to read a little about the Septuagint, often referred to as LXX (70). This is a good source: https://biblearchaeology.org/research/new-testament-era/4022-a-brief-history-of-the-septuagint   O Lord , our Lord, How excellent is Your name in all the earth, Who have set Your glory above the heavens! 2  Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants You have [ b ] ordained strength, Because of Your enemies, That You may silence the enemy and the avenger. 3  When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You h

 I feel as if I am only skimming the surface. If you come here for quick tips on Hebrews or something immediately inspirational, something predigested, I apologize--that's not what we're doing. It's a looping back on itself study.  It occurred to me this morning that if we want to know something about angels, which perhaps you do not, Hebrews is a good place to start. At least to say, our 2020 view of angels is definitely not the first century or previous view. In the Hebrew, sometimes angels are referred to as "gods" with the word Elohim. (Adonai and the "I am that I am" name reserved for God Himself.)  We don't want to think of angels as some sort of Mt. Olympus crowd, which of course they aren't, so we stick with the "messenger" view, (the Greek translation) although that is a bit limited. They do not just bring telegrams from God.  The writer says in 2:2: "If the word spoken through angels proved steadfast..." My Bible ver

"One of the few things I know about writing is this: Spend it all, shoot it, play it, lose it, all, right away, every time. Don’t hoard what seems good for a later place in the book, or for another book; give it, give it all, give it now. The very impulse to save something good for a better place later is the signal to spend it now. Something more will arise for later, something better. These things fill from behind, from beneath, like well water. Similarly, the impulse to keep to yourself what you have learned is not only shameful; it is destructive. Anything you do not give freely and abundantly becomes lost to you. You open your safe and find ashes." This comes from Annie Dillard, whom I really need to reread in light of a deeper understanding of writing and ....well, everything.  This quote I lifted from a website called Brain Pickings that has many interesting articles on art, although with a (typically) "inclusive" focus. You can take that adjective f

 Taking a survey. Instead of "minority" the word is "minoritized." HUMMMMM.  Social construct versus demographic reality?

 https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/intelligent-minds-like-tim-cook-jeff-bezos-embrace-rule-of-awkward-silence-you-should-too.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab I often say to my students: "Any questions? I'm going to stare at you until you say something." And I do. Awkward silence. I do get a response.  Silence is a very excellent tool for so many things.  

 I met my "life group" (a portion of it) last night for a monthly meeting of fellowship and friendship, and rejoiced over one lady becoming engaged, and that we were all well. We decided to start meeting again on Sundays when the church permits it.  Church leaders fear that 30% or more of attendees will not come back, at least not for a while. I think there are a lot of reasons for that. Fear (I think unfounded, but I know folks disagree) and comfort zone/laziness. And maybe because they didn't much like it in the first place and only went out of obligation or guilt.  Gathering is not to sit and be entertained, of course. It is to create a dynamic "synergy" (OK, I know, that's a buzzword but there is reality to it) for spiritual growth by bumping up against one another. Instead of one source of information/input, we have more. We see how God is working with others, for one thing.  Hebrews 1 says that God spoke in times past by the prophets and lately by Chri

 I told my students this week that I can remember 9/11/01 like it was yesterday. (Same with the assassination of Kennedy, 57 years ago when I was 7, and the Challenger Disaster, and the Moon Landing.) All of these are mediated and also not immediate to our lives happening in New York, Dallas, Florida, and, well, the moon. My students were mostly babies, and the freshmen hadn't been born. That's ..... concerning. They won't understand a pivotal moment in our history. They will take for granted that it's an ordeal to get on a plane, for one. They will also be scarred by this pandemic. Will we stop shaking hands, even? They will not understand how for a couple of hours we really didn't know who or what would be attacked next. That a planeful of brave Americans kept the capitol building from being destroyed, or the White House, and thus how many lives were saved?  It gives me chills. And for a few months, Americans actually thought about God.  What would make them think

 One must admit that the argument of Hebrews, while logical, is dense and tight and needs a lot of untangling. Women know how necklace chains get tangled and have to be carefully undone; studying Hebrews is a bit like that linguistically. I correct myself also; I wrote earlier that there are four warning detours, but there are five. 2:1-4 is one of them. The writer seems to say at a high point (as in 1:13-14): Pay attention! Don't forget this! Don't stop assembling with others! Don't go back to dependence on sacrifices! I for one see the need for this. We call it nudging, and it's annoying and necessary. The human mind, especially today, is so distracted, that we really do have to be reminded of things many, many times. We have to hear something a dozen, two dozen times before it really lodges in. I could give lots of examples, but COVID is one. We are constantly reminded of the mask/handwashing/distancing/etc. because we won't get it just one time. I remind my stud

  Verse 3 also speaks to the methods of this salvation being communicated. To those who would say Jesus preached a different gospel than Paul (heresy; Paul is spinning in his grave over that one), the salvation being spoken of “was preached by the Lord and confirmed to those who heard Him.” They didn’t see a breach between what Jesus preached and accomplished and what the apostolic church proclaimed. It is of a piece. If we see a distinction between the kingdom and justification by faith, it is only because our cultural intellectual world view has made it so, specifically our extreme individualism, which plagues us worse than COVID. Does the writer give something away here: Was confirmed to us by those who heard Him? Is the writer saying he was with Christ during the earthly ministry? (I’ll drop the gender argument for ease of writing and to avoid they, which I realize is acceptable now but grates against this old English prof obsessed with grammatical agreement).   Was this writer

  What is so great about this salvation? Is that a serious question?  Well, yes, it could be. Not to sound like a Baptist preacher, but it’s great in depth, length, width, and height. Depth: the gospel changes everything. It is transformative to our cores. Length: it is eternal (and one could argue backwards and forwards on eternality. I did just watch Tenet and am having space-time continuum distortion!). It’s great in width—no one is excluded. My favorite verses in the Bible are Revelation 5:9 and following. And height: it reaches to where God is, and takes us there.   It’s great in effect, eternity, and extent, if one wants alliteration. Only one who feels the depths of sin, and of despair sin causes, can fully appreciate so great salvation. Even after years of being a believer, Paul said he was the chief of sinners. I think as we grow in Christ we are more aware of this fact, not less aware.  On this point, I recommend the reader listen to Tim Keller’s podcasts. I don’

V. 3 is more revealing than on first glance. How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation.   We must understand this “So great a salvation,” and then the method of its coming to mankind. Before I go on, most commentaries will include the information that the recipients of the letter were under persecution. Early Christians, Jews and Gentiles, found persecution from the Temple and the Tiber, one might say. If the Jewish community didn’t bring it, the Romans did. I take issue with Rodney Stark, who claimed that only a couple of hundred Christians were actually martyred.   Even Wikipedia puts it at up to 3500. (That number is low compared to martyrdoms today in parts of the world.) So, we must see that if the readers were tempted to “go back,” and neglect so great a salvation, it was not just because they had intellectual problems with the gospel; in fact, that was probably not the case. It was because the call of culture and family was so strong for

 I think it might be good to post the actual passage I'm contemplating.  We must pay the most careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2  For since the message spoken through angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, 3  how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. 4  God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will. (NIV, in this case) Hebrews 2 starts to get more complicated, at least for people of certain traditions (and I would be in that one, which is making me rethink my tradition to align with Scripture rather than the typical "let's explain this away to make it fit my traditional theology").  We first get stuck on "so that we do drift away" or in other version "lest we d

 Many of my friends have totally shut their lives down because of COVID. I, on the other hand, have been more adventurous and some of them seem shocked by my cavalier attitude.  I went to my office two or three times a week, even though no classes were being taught face-to-face.  I teach my classes face-to-face. I got my hair cut the very first day we were allowed.  I go to church every Sunday since they've allowed us.  I've given blood once and plan to again soon.  I've been to the dentist and several doctors. I went to a movie this weekend. I was the only sentient person in the theater. It was creepy as all get out (ha, ha, get it, "Get Out." I walk every day.  I shop freely.  I'm 64 and pretty healthy. I take my temperature almost every morning. I go nowhere without a mask. I try to be a a distance. Will I get sick? Maybe I'm waiting for the shoe to drop. But I'm not sure it would matter if I were more "careful." I have O negative blood. I

Briefly, we will look at the end of this chapter. From verse 8 on the writer is quoting First Testament, and the question remains, to me at least, why he is applying these specifically to Jesus Christ rather than God in general. That is perhaps a question deeper than I can answer here, but the writer does in his attempt to argue that Jesus is superior to all other possible means of salvation or faith--angels, priests, sacrifices, etc. Angels being the first, the writer uses Psalm 45:6-7, Psalm 102:25-27, and Psalm 110:1, and indirectly probably other passages in Psalms, to prove that angels are never addressed in certain ways and are never ascribed certain attributes. The three main characteristics here are: The Son is enthroned as King The Son is Creator of a Creation that changes and decays but He Himself does not change or fail.  The Son is victorious (enemies are footstool). In context, at least 8-9 and 13 seem to apply to the Messiah; 10-12 are less clear, at least to me. Of cours

 In church, thanks to some assertions from the minister preaching, I got to thinking about how we talk about the Glory of God. The passage was John 11, about which I have written a Bible Study (forgive the plug, but I think it would be helpful to a small group) https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-According-Lazarus-Study-John/dp/172604291X/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1599401269&sr=8-4 The preacher, and rightly, pointed to John 11:4 where Jesus says, "This sickness is not unto death but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it." This connects with 9:3, when He was questioned about what had caused the blind man's disability.  I felt the preacher went a little far, though, in saying that "Our suffering is for God's glory." So let's parse this out. In both cases in John, the God's glory part was that there would be triumph over the suffering, not that the suffering in and of itself was glorifying to God.  I have

 It might be time, as we will have a couple of posts wrapping up Hebrews 1(and it may be a few days before I start into chapter 2), to step back and ask a few questions.  1. Why these posts? Ultimately, for the edification of anyone who comes across the blog or reads it more regularly, which is only a handful of people. I always define handful as the number of fingers, so maybe it's two handfuls.  2. To process my own thinking and put it in more permanent form.  3. To engender discussion.  4. Honestly, in hopes it will draw people to my other writing. Sorry not sorry.  I am not writing these because I think I'm an expert or have anything much new or profound to say. I do not. However, I will say this. Hebrews is, and I think has to, challenge our thinking. I don't like the cliche about the box, but it's making me think that way. My theological life has been risk-averse: don't go outside the lines of what the "conservative evangelical John MacArthur Moody Bible

If Hebrews 1:1-4 is a masterpiece, a hymn, 5-14 becomes a rhetorical exercise and a bit of a quandary. We might not see all of these verses, on the surface, as testifying to the superority of Jesus--and to His deity--over the angels. The writer has some hits but, from our perspective, some misses, in his choice of the First Testament passages he uses to support the argument.  But that is just our perspective. I speak of 5b. This is a promise to David that would seem to be about his near "sons," but the Jews took it as the Messiah, a double prophecy. Also, 10-12 does not appear to be Messianic., referring to Psalm 102-25-27. So we modern English speaking may not get al the significance here. We're back to the main point. Jesus Christ is better than the angels. If anyone is tempted to put angels, who are "mnistering spirits" above Jesus, they do ill. And we're back to verse 4. This placement above the angels is at least partially due to the gospel story, what

 For some reason, yesterday there was no installment. What does one say after "He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high"? And to be honest, when I come to v. 4, I'm sort of, "What?" To be perfectly honest, I just ran out of time. I have a class at 9:25 and 10:50 on MW, and those tend to divert my attention from long typed discourses. "...having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obained a more excellent name than they." After praise to the fully human and fully God Messiah, why is the writer bringing up angels? Of course Christ is better than angels. What do angels have to do with it? Because it is the human condition to get confused about such things. Angels do some pretty powerful things in the "First Testament" and the New. They show up and immediately say "Fear not" because their power and appearance knocks the visited off their feet, literally. They are eternal, and they serve and surrou