I've been reflecting on Hebrews 12:27 over the weekend. In this verse, the author of Hebrews says that God's shaking of the heavens and earth refers to the metathesis of the things being shaken--since they have been created--so that things that cannot be shaken might remain. The word metathesis can mean either transformation or removal, and certainly a meaning of "transformation" would be far more likely given the background of Jewish apocalyptic and the rest of the NT.
Every time I look at this verse, I waffle on exactly what is being said here and yet still come down with it speaking of the "removal" of the created realm. This is an unprecedented idea, one I find nowhere in any existing literature up to that point in history. I'm contemplating a new spin this time, but in the meantime, here are the reasons I conclude this:
1. It is the very createdness of the skies and earth that make them shakable. This is obviously not God's fault but the inherent instability of the materials themselves. It does not seem likely that belief in creation ex nihilo had arisen yet at this point, so the assumption would seem to be that God did not create the primordial materials of the world, only that he organized them, gave them order. So transformation in that sense does not fix the problem.
2. Hebrews seems to have a more pervasive dualism between heaven and earth than any other part of the New Testament. Although it uses the language and imagery of resurrection (e.g., 6:2; 13:20), it arguably does so in a way that clearly identifies spirit with the highest heaven and consistently/strongly contrasts the materials of this realm with the created realm.
3. We find hints of this position elsewhere. Although it is not clear, if the author equates the universe with a cosmological sanctuary, as I believe, then the removal of the "outer tent" of the true tent might allude to the removal of the creation as the outer room of a cosmic sanctuary whose Most Holy Place is the highest heaven (9:8).
More crucial is 1:10-12, which may provide significant insights. Here Christ may "change" the created realm like a garment. This obviously involves a removal. But if the imagery holds, it would also imply putting a new garment on. I'm contemplating this option today, which would give us a both/and. Yes, the created realm would be removed, but then God, as it were, would create a new one ex nihilo.
Could this be the first implied instance of ex nihilo in extant literature?
Monday, June 13, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
It sounds pretty "gnostic" to me...highest heaven....
OK Ken - here's a bit of fun - suggested by your metatheses. The occurrences of worship in the psalms are all of this form with a metathesized taf. The taf moves into the centre of the word. The stem is שָׁחָה containing no taf. The word in its form in the psalms (imperfect) always has a taf in the middle. The word like the world is shaken but the centre is always the same. For worship, the centre is the taf, symbolizing the cross. For the world, the unshakable centre is the lamb that was slain before the foundation of the world.
The result is viewable in Hebrew and English at my glossary (large file here search for worship). This is part of my analysis following up the Hebrews 2006 conference we attended.
See II Maccabees 7:28. This clearly pre-dates Hebrews.
Bob, I think you strain out a gnat to prove a Christian point...as you use scripture and "christianize" it....
What if the center was to be "God" for the Jewish people, as all religious people?
Or what if as we know that scripture is fallible and that humans are developmental beings...and we believe that a healthy "centered self" is the "center" of civilized society....these know how to negotiate, hold their ground, be honest about their self-interest (survival and personal values), etc.????
So, your solution doesn't really answer the question, unless you want to accept the "whole ball of Christian wax"!
or maybe I should have said, that you accept Bob's interpretation if you want to "swallow the whole camel"....:-)!
I deal with 2 Maccabees 7:28 in the paper I'm writing. It is generally not thought to imply creation ex nihilo. It sure sounds like it does and if the concept had existed at the time surely would have meant that then. But basically it says that God did not create the world out of any of the elements of the world as we now know them.
So, the Jews believed in "mystery"? Was this the reason that some of the mystery cults, such as Christianity, latched on to Judiasm?
The question is, then, if the "mystery" can be "solved" through 'Myth", or through science!!! I think today, we should believe that science has the "upper hand".
otherwise, we have various speculations about "God" and his designs that inhibit, undermine, or limit knowledge to or about "God" alone, instead of seeing the world and all that is as an open "sandbox"....
Angie.From the way you respond to my comment, I doubt you have read much of what I write. I was not answering any question, just noting a word game.
Now as to the question, Ken is looking at psalm 102 in Hebrews 1. Hebrews quotes the psalms more than any other book of the NT - 25 times by my count. How does this relate to psalm 102 and the concatenation of 7 psalms quoted in chapter 1?
I doubt the author has the awareness of the cosmos in the form that we relate to it. Shaking is a serious business these days and we know that we are a puff of nothing in a vast unknown. These are the 7 psalms - hope I have them in the right order.
So Heb 1:5, ps 2
Heb 1:6, ps 97
Heb 1:7, ps 104
Heb 1:8-9, ps 45
Heb 1:10, ps 102
Heb 1:13, ps 110
Heb 1:14, ps 91
It's marginally difficult to summarize this in a note pushed through a chink in the wall - O Romeo! This is however, a love letter (that's why psalm 45), and it's a warning (hence psalm 2, 110) and it's a statement of power by non-power, hence psalm 102, a prayer of one who is disabled.
Ken, I don't read dualism into this but that's probably just my opinion. I read the psalms and see them in their context even if it seems the writer of Hebrews does not (which I doubt). I expect he knew them much better than I do. And I expect he expected his audience to know them intimately as well.
In Hebrews 1,
- psalm 2 establishes the oracle - this is the son (king, elect, anointed, requiring purity)
- psalm 97 gives the command to worship - as I noted, this is a theme in the psalms - central e.g. to psalm 22, part 2 and 86
- psalm 104 - establishes that we are in the realm of the created order - earth will not be moved (104:5)
- psalm 45 invokes the Anointed as bridegroom and the oil of rejoicing
- psalm 102 - the beginning of the long psalms that cover the gamut of the psalter to 106, this psalm is an appeal from the human to God - so a high Christology is evident in this letter. The Anointed is worshiped as God.
- psalm 110 - the king at the right hand. This psalm also puts the frame of priest front and centre and notes the willingness - free will offering of the people.
- finally psalm 91 invoking Moses, the psalms of comfort in book 4 after the laments of book 3.
So now to Hebrews 12:27 - I think you, Ken, should let the remove stand as referring to the cross where the old creation is removed and a new creation established.
I can't see that the author is referring to physical theories of matter as we seem to.
I apologize if I have missed the intent of your question. Consider the message in the chink and the lion on its way to take care of me.
Bob,
You are using inductive methods that underwrite a "Christian message", a "conditioning" Tradition....
I was attempting to put the book within the context of "human knowledge", or a deductive method..
Human knowledge has grown beyond the times of an ancient text. But, the Church wouldn't want to undermine their "message" otherwise, the "conditioning Tradition" ceases to have power over people....
and ecclesiatical power is useful to promote "Chruch authority", which is seen as "God's authority", instead of the individual living within a civilized society that values the individual's right to choose his own interests, values and think for himself....
I agree with you Angie that there is an issue of power and that power can be abused and is. Whether you can say that that is what I am doing is another question.
Bob,
I in no way was trying to insinuate that you, personally, were trying to 'power up". I was making a statement of fact about what has happened in history. And what has happened in history is also what happens at any other time. That is why absolute power corrupts. Any institution should be open for change....
But, NOT change for change's sake...."self reflection" is good for institutions, as well as individuals! This is why we need to re-evaluate some of the present policies that are undermining our nation!
Angie - I am unsubscribing from this conversation. I do not know what you are referring to. I am not of your nation. It seems inappropriate to clutter off the topic on someone else's blog. I am sorry for the misunderstanding.
Ken,
Can the shaking of the heavens and the earth here and the burning up of them in Peter's writings and Jesus' comments be theological and not physical?
Over in the latter part of Deuteronomy, Moses is speaking to the people and he refers to them as "Listen oh earth and hear me oh heavens".
Can each of these instances be concerning the judgment of Jerusalem 70AD in other words?
Earth and heavens meaning ethnic Israel itself in an apocalyptic genre of speech?
In Peter's comments, he even uses the Greek word for "elements" that the Septuagint used for "elements in the temple worship function" when he describes the "elements being burned up".
Post a Comment