The book of Hebrews, of course, addresses the superiority of Christianity to Judaism. This has led many to treat Judaism as repealed — as a mistake that God has now corrected.
I suppose this attitude is the origin of the term “New Testament Christianity” — since I’m not familiar with an Old Testament Christianity. The idea seems to be that the Old Testament is a dead letter, meaningless to the true Christian.
Some of this comes from the “dispensation” theory popularized by the notes in the Scofield Bible in the 19th Century and given near-scriptural status in the Churches of Christ by the Jule Miller filmstrips, which were used to convert many to the Church of Christ point of view.
These filmstrips made a point to emphasize the three major dispensations: Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian, as though they had nothing in common and did not depend on each other at all. I don’t know what imagined error this teaching was intending to combat, but the result was to diminish Old Testament studies to near irrelevance in Churches of Christ.
Let’s see how the Hebrews writer, who strongly argues for the superiority of Christianity, sees things.
We go to Hebrews 11, one of the most beautifully worded chapters in the Bible (which says a lot). Most think of this as a chapter on faith, which is true, but it’s also a chapter on the relationship of Israel to the church.
(Heb 11:1-40 ESV) Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible. 4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. 5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God.
The author repeats the refrain “by faith” over and over, making the point that the faith required by Christianity is not a new thing. The Old Testament, going back to Abel, was about faith, too.
6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith. 8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. 11 By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.
It’s the faith of Abraham and Sarah that brought about the covenant with God on which Christianity is founded.
13 These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.
The author is speaking of the New Jerusalem (Heb 12:22), prophesied in Psa 122:3, kept safe in heaven to be placed on earth at the end of time, as described in Rev. 21-22.
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. 20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. 21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones. 23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict. 24 By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, 25 choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king, for he endured as seeing him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the firstborn might not touch them. 29 By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land, but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies.
The author takes us through the conquest of Jericho — the first city taken in the Promised Land — and then decides that there’s too much more to continue in detail.
32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets — 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received back their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, so that they might rise again to a better life. 36 Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated — 38 of whom the world was not worthy — wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
And verse 39 makes the real point of the chapter —
39 And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.
That is, none of these heroes of the faith had the benefit of the sacrifice of Jesus (yet). None of them was part of the Kingdom in the sense that Christians are. They did what they did in anticipation of the Kingdom, in anticipation of the crucifixion, expecting the Messiah but not knowing him. And yet we should stand amazed at their faith and their sacrifices.
It’s the work of Jesus that ultimately allows God to save them — and in being saved by the power of the death of Jesus, they join us in being “made perfect” with all the saved.
(Heb 12:1-2 ESV) Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.
These heroes are in heaven, the New Jerusalem, and they testify to the importance of living by faith and paying the price to do so, even though they did not yet know Jesus and had far less knowledge of God than we have — or, at least, less knowledge than the knowledge we have access to.
Like them, we should look to Jesus — the Jesus whom we know — so that we run the race set before us.
Ray Vander Laan likes to picture us running in an ancient Grecian athletic field, surrounded by seats filled with witnesses — the heroes of the faith — who are cheering us on, urging us to do what they have already done, persevere to the end despite the temptations and trials of this life, knowing that we have an advantage these heroes never had — we know Jesus.
Rather than being irrelevant and unimportant, the heroes of the Old Testament are in heaven, cheering us on, because we are all part of the same story.
So does it make any sense at all to refer to ourselves as “New Testament Christians” as though the crowd cheering us on to victory are dead and irrelevant to us, as though these heroes we teach our children about really just don’t matter?
I think the author of Hebrews would be astounded at the thought. It all matters. It all fits together. Christianity is better, but we’d not be saved by faith but for God’s covenant with Abraham and but for Abraham’s and Sarah’s faith. We’d not have the promises of the prophets but for the heroism of the prophets in enduring unspeakable trials to speak the word of God. There’d be no nation of Israel, and hence no Messiah, but for the faith of Moses, Joshua, and many others.
Alexander Campbell also spoke in dispensational terms at times, especially in his early-in-his-career Sermon on the Law, which still has much influence. I remember reading his book, The Christian System, for the first time many years ago when I was a young preacher of c. 24 or 25. I was astonished that nearly all of my sermons (taken as they were from sermons I had grown up hearing) were there in this book from the early 1800’s (130 years before the mid-1960’s when I read it!). I suspect that it was this emphasis that led Jule Miller to frame his film-strips the way he did, based as those were on an earlier set of chart sermons by Winston Atkinson.
Thank you for continuing to stress the continuity between the Testaments. That has become a major theme in my teaching and preaching now as well, though I don’t preach very often these days – except on behalf of Eastern European Mission.
Like Jerry, I think Alexander Campbell had a tremendous influence in this regard. (And Thomas, of course, with some of the points in Declaration and Address)
I was in a meeting when one man brought up a point from the Psalms, and a man who had preached for over 30 years interrupted him, saying, “My Bible says that was nailed to the cross.”
Sigh…
As a young Christian I loved to share my faith. I befriended a co-worker. A deacon said he would help convert him and brought along the Jule Miller filmstrip. It was a disaster. Very impersonal and clinical. I learned later to love people, be their friend, and get to know them. It has been much more effective.
Amen Skip,
I believe in the end we will be judged by how we did just that.
The emphasis on us being NEW Testament Christians is to point out that we are NOT now under law, that we are saved by grace rather than by perfect law-keeping. I think we do well to recognize that we are NEW TESTAMENT Christians. Those who love law and seek to bind laws on others are not understanding the gospel. And many in our churches surely do love law.
Jay,
You begin by making the claim that:
“The book of Hebrews, of course, addresses the superiority of Christianity to Judaism. This has led many to treat Judaism as repealed — as a mistake that God has now corrected.”
Does the book of Hebrews make the claim that “Christianity” is superior to Judaism?
The answer is … No. The letter claims many things –
The Son is superior to the angels … 1:4
The Son, Jesus, is superior to Moses … 3:3-6 … to Aaron’s priestly line … 5:1-10
… and to the ministry, covenant and promises given through Moses … 8:6
The worship brought by the Son is superior to the worship brought by Moses/Aaron
… 9:15 & 10:9-10
And the faith brought by Jesus is superior to the faith of everyone from Adam to Moses
and the rest who died before Jesus came in the flesh … 11:39-40
… but the letter does NOT claim to address the superiority of Christianity to Judaism.
What the letter is contrasting is all the revelation of God in history and Law and the prophets before the Son came versus Jesus and the revelation of God that He brings.
The letter to the Hebrews is not pitting Judaism vs. Christianity. It is pitting every earlier revelation of God against the importance of what we find in Jesus (Heb. 1:1-3).
The whole NT Christianity – Scofield Bible – Dispensationalist Theory – irrelevance in the churches of Christ discussion … all of that becomes meaningless to the discussion because none of that is in view in the letter to the Hebrew Christians … no matter whether you like or despise the Jule Miller filmstrips (which were a response to the lack of evangelistic methodologies easily usable by the Restorationists in the pews).
Jay, you wrote:
“We go to Hebrews 11, one of the most beautifully worded chapters in the Bible (which says a lot). Most think of this as a chapter on faith, which is true, but it’s also a chapter on the relationship of Israel to the church.”
Here again, Jay, you make a claim that the writer to the Hebrew Christians does not make. In fact, in 11:39-40, the writer says that what came with Jesus is superior to what existed before the Son came.
Jay, you wrote:
“It’s the faith of Abraham and Sarah that brought about the covenant with God on which Christianity is founded.”
No, Jay, what brought about the covenant with God through Jesus was Jesus coming in the flesh, being obedient even unto death on a cross, and being raised to glory. The foundation of a Christian’s faith is soaked in the blood of Jesus…not in the faith of Abraham and Sarah.
Jay, you also wrote:
“The author is speaking of the New Jerusalem (Heb 12:22), prophesied in Psa 122:3, kept safe in heaven to be placed on earth at the end of time, as described in Rev. 21-22.”
Yes, Jay, he is speaking of the dwelling Jesus promised in John 14:2. What does that have to do with your points about Christianity and Judaism?
Jay, who is it that claims the men and women of faith (to whom the writer refers in chapter 11) were already as good as Christian because of their faith that God would eventually follow through on His promises? This seems like a straw man argument to me.
Jay, you wrote:
“I think the author of Hebrews would be astounded at the thought. It all matters. It all fits together. Christianity is better, but we’d not be saved by faith but for God’s covenant with Abraham and but for Abraham’s and Sarah’s faith. We’d not have the promises of the prophets but for the heroism of the prophets in enduring unspeakable trials to speak the word of God. There’d be no nation of Israel, and hence no Messiah, but for the faith of Moses, Joshua, and many others.”
And you also wrote:
“These heroes are in heaven, the New Jerusalem, and they testify to the importance of living by faith and paying the price to do so, even though they did not yet know Jesus and had far less knowledge of God than we have — or, at least, less knowledge than the knowledge we have access to.”
Jay, do you believe the men and women of faith were ‘saved’ when they died? Or did God only forgive them AFTER Jesus went to the cross?
You wrote:
“Rather than being irrelevant and unimportant, the heroes of the Old Testament are in heaven, cheering us on, because we are all part of the same story.”
When, Jay, did these heroes of faith go to the New Jerusalem that Jesus told John about in Revelation 21-22? John says that (according to the vision Jesus gave him) the New Jerusalem was not even revealed until AFTER the old earth and heaven had passed away (Revelation 21:1). Since we, you and the rest of us, all live on this old earth … the heroes are not yet in that city which is still yet to be revealed.
Jay, those witnesses are dead. Dead does NOT equal irrelevant or ‘really does not matter’; dead means they did not live long enough to see Jesus, the fulfillment of the promises they trusted.
Finally, Jay, you also wrote:
“So does it make any sense at all to refer to ourselves as “New Testament Christians” as though the crowd cheering us on to victory are dead and irrelevant to us, as though these heroes we teach our children about really just don’t matter?”
And I go back to something else you wrote:
“I think the author of Hebrews would be astounded at the thought. It all matters. It all fits together. Christianity is better, but we’d not be saved by faith but for God’s covenant with Abraham and but for Abraham’s and Sarah’s faith. We’d not have the promises of the prophets but for the heroism of the prophets in enduring unspeakable trials to speak the word of God. There’d be no nation of Israel, and hence no Messiah, but for the faith of Moses, Joshua, and many others.”
Do you really think we would not and could not be saved but for the faith of those heroes? The writer says that they could not be saved apart from us! (See again, Hebrews 11:39-40.) Jay, you seem to have gotten dyslexic and reversed what the writer actually said. So let’s stick to what the writer actually said. His (the author’s point) is a different point than you try to make of it.
The writer to the Hebrew Christians told them that without Jesus, the faith of those heroes loses its meaning … NOT that our salvation depends on or is founded on their faith.
Where did you get all these strange ideas, Jay?
G
oh my where to start
how bout the metaphor of the type and … shadow.
chase that one down…
what is the type…???
griz
Jerry wrote,
I read so many books and articles lauding this sermon as the greatest of all time (or similar), I found it and tried to read it. Wow! It’s one of the most unreadable works I’ve ever come across (and I read bond documents for living!) And I agree that the reputation of the Sermon on the Law pushed the Restoration Movement toward a repealed-OT viewpoint — especially since the Baptist association Campbell’s church was in expelled them over the sermon.
Grizz wrote,
We totally disagree. (I love and respect you anyway.) Hebrews is filled with commentary (Midrash) on OT prophecies. He builds his arguments on passages from the Psalms and Jeremiah, for example. He does not dismiss or belittle these but uses these to warn and teach his readers about Christianity. He shows how the OT builds up to and anticipates the New. So he is certainly not “pitting every earlier revelation” against anything. He uses them to build his case in favor of Jesus (and Christianity, of course). (I really think you’ve misread Heb 1:1-3.)
There is only one truth to be derived from the chapter? Doesn’t the fact that he urges Christians to honor the faith of the OT heroes say something about the relationship of the Old to the New?
Again, you assume that but one answer is possible. Of course we owe our salvation to Jesus, but if you’d read Gal 3 and Rom 4, you’d find that Paul traces salvation by faith to the covenant with Abraham. Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith.
(Heb 12:2 KJV) Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Faith begins and ends with Jesus — in history. But he went through Abraham to reach the end. We cannot dismiss Abraham’s and Sarah’s faith as not mattering, when their faith led to the covenant that Abraham’s descendents will be saved by faith.
Interesting question but not really relevant to this discussion — and would take a lot of space to explain. I think I may have covered this ground years ago in the “Search for a Third Way” series. I don’t think my views have changed as to your question.
(Rev 21:1 ESV) Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
I’m not following you. Yes, the New Jerusalem is not yet visible, but obviously we are aware of its existence NOW.
(Gal 4:26 ESV) But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.
Notice: the “is” is present tense. The Jerusalem above existed when Paul wrote Galatians. It’s a reference to OT prophecy and I see no reason to suppose that it didn’t exist in Abraham’s day. It’s essentially heaven, isn’t it? as shown by Rev 21-22. The New Jerusalem comes down to earth and God dwells with man. Hebrews speaks often of an altar and tabernacle in heaven. It all fits. Why was Jesus able to offer his blood in heaven? Because the New Jerusalem is there, and so there is the altar.
They are dead according to the flesh, but not really dead. God is the God of the living, not the dead. They can hardly be witnesses if they cannot give testimony.
(Heb 12:1 ESV) Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,
“Are surrounded” is present tense. They are not merely moldering in the grave.
Again, you keep assuming that only one conclusion may be drawn from a text. Yes, they need us, but that hardly means that we don’t need them. Does your wife need you? Does that mean you don’t need her?
Paul plainly teaches that salvation by faith comes from God’s covenant with Abraham.
Without the faith of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses … would there be an Israel? Is it not obvious that we owe a great debt to these people? Isn’t it implicit that the author is enjoying an ironic point — that is, while common sense tells us that we owe a great deal to these people and their faith (obviously), they also owe a lot to us because we have something they did not receive but needed (Jesus). Thus, as intensely as we feel gratitude for their faith and sacrifices, we should understand that they care about us!!
Jay,
This will be quick and focus on one point you kept returning to. You repeatedly chided (a pleasant way for brothers to sharpen one another) me, saying that I assume one truth or one answer from each verse.
If I tell you the room is painted blue and all its contents are painted various other colors … shall someone else persuade you that the room is not painted blue? Will you become convinced that because the table is painted red that the room could actually be painted some color other than blue?
When you seek to impose a multiple of interpretations on a single verse or passage or phrase, you leave interpretation and begin editing the author. Where you and I come from is similar to the differences between dynamic equivalence and a conservative linguistic approach. It is no wonder we disagree … for me the text constrains the interpretation … limits it to what the author actually wrote before translation. For you, the message changes every time you read the verse or passage – an approach which places the author’s intent subservient to your skills as an interpreter/editorial reviewer.
This may not be something we resolve either easily or quickly. It is offered anyway so that some will see the consequences of taking an approach which elevates the reader while laying low concern for the author’s choice of words to express their message.
Perhaps you have read Leland Ryken’ s book … Choosing A Bible?? If so, I am sure you get my meaning.
G
Time is not on God’s watch. For he is beyond the space and time continuum.