Common Denominator: Explanatory Notes -- Hebrews 12:12-29

Sunday, July 24, 2022

Explanatory Notes -- Hebrews 12:12-29

Here and there over the last two decades I have posted interpretive notes on Hebrews in various forms. This post represents the completion of the more detailed explanatory notes version. I hope to edit those notes and self-publish them within the next few weeks.

______________________

The Consuming Fire (12:12-29)

12. Therefore, strengthen the drooping hands and the having been weakened knees. 13. And make straight paths for your feet so that you might not be lame but rather be healed.

What is the takeaway from the metaphor of a father disciplining his children? The audience needs to get it together. They need to lift their drooping hands and strengthen their weak knees. They need to snap out of it and "just keep swimming." The last part of the chapter climaxes with the judgment while also presenting the great hope of those who are faithful.

The expression of drooping hands and weak knees alludes to Isaiah 35:3. Given that the verses in the last part of this chapter relate to judgment, it is very possible that the context of Isaiah 35 played a role in the author's choosing of this imagery. [1] For this reason, I think it more likely that 12:12-13 are more the introduction of the second half of the chapter than the conclusion of the first half. [2]

Isaiah 35 was about enduring through the hard times that Israel was experiencing because of the promise of salvation that was coming. God was going to come with a vengeance on the enemies of Israel (35:4). God was creating a "highway of holiness" for Israel on which the righteous would walk (35:8).

The parallels to Hebrews are clear. Through Jesus, God had created a highway of holiness for those who have partaken of his sacrifice. Meanwhile, God was going to bring judgment on the enemies of his people, as Hebrews 12 goes on to picture. In the meantime, God's people needed to walk forward in faithfulness in "straight paths."

14. Pursue peace with all and the holiness without which no one will see the Lord...

With Isaiah 35 in the background, it is no coincidence that the author's next thought turns to holiness. In Hebrews, holiness is associated with the purity that comes from the cleansing of Christ's blood. However, maintaining that "sanctified" state requires continuance in faith. This is the main purpose of Hebrews, to urge the audience to continue in faith.

This verse was a classic preaching text on entire sanctification in the Wesleyan tradition. Certainly the pursuit of holiness for Hebrews means moving in the opposite direction as sin. However, it would read foreign elements into the verse to see it as urging the audience toward "a second work of grace," just as Wesley overread Hebrews 6:1 in terms of Christian perfection ("Let us go on to maturity").

The audience is urged to pursue peace with everyone with whom they can be at peace. This statement might especially have in mind any Roman authorities that might look for some excuse to pounce on a Christian community. Nevertheless, it is wonderful instruction for us all in any age. We should not go looking to get persecuted or to get the church in trouble. Christians should be people of peace whom others find to be peaceable.

15. ... watching lest someone should be lacking from the grace of God, lest some root of bitterness springing up should cause trouble and through it, many could be defiled.

Failure to pursue and maintain holiness would result in a loss of the grace of God. The author has already warned them of this possible outcome in 10:29. Those who continue to sin intentionally by walking away from God are treating the blood of the covenant as if it were unclean, even though they were made holy and sanctified by it. They are insulting the Spirit of grace.

How could such a thing happen? It can start with a "root of bitterness." It can start out small. It can be some little thing that begins to drive a wedge between the community and God. One can get weary of persecution and shame. One can have a doubt about whether it is all true. One could wonder where you will get atonement with the temple gone and see the mainstream Jewish synagogue as a haven.

Doubt and hesitance can be contagious. The spirit of weariness can resonate and spread like an infection. Before you know it, many can be defiled. "A little leaven leavens the whole lump" (1 Cor. 5:6).

16. ... lest some sexually immoral or godless [person] like Esau [should arise], who for one meal sold his birthrights. 17. For you know that also afterward, wanting to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he did not find a place of repentance, although with tears having sought it.

These verses give us a third warning passage, the first two being 6:4-8 and 10:26-31. In some respects, it is the most striking of the three. Esau sold his birthright for a single morsel. Then later he could not get it back, even though he wanted it.

Given 13:9, we wonder if there is something involving food that is going on in the audience's environment. It is threatening their "sonship." Barnabas Lindars wondered if it might be a synagogue meal of some kind. [4] If the temple were destroyed, perhaps some argued that participation in the synagogue meal was the best substitute for the sacrificial offerings and meals until God restored the temple. Perhaps some in the audience felt a tug back to the mainstream synagogue in a sense of still needing atonement.

It is a reasonable hypothesis even though quite speculative. 13:9 is probably too peripheral to the overall argument of the sermon to be the reason for the sermon, coming in at the last minute. But it clearly relates to the core concern of the audience for how they might find atonement. We have argued that the destruction of the temple in general could have triggered that concern.

Esau is said to have been sexually immoral and godless. Such descriptions are not entirely apparent in the Genesis text. In any case, what is important with such Old Testament references is the point Hebrews is making, not whether it was using contextual interpretation.

After he lost his birthright, Esau wanted to get the blessing of a son (birthright) back, but he could not find a place of repentance. He did not find a place to turn, even though he sought it diligently with tears. This illustration fits with the most obvious reading of 6:4 and 10:26. Once one has apostatized and abandoned Christ, there is no clear way back.

There is some debate about what "it" is that Esau could not find. The word it here is feminine, so it must refer back to a prior word that is feminine, its "antecedent." However, both the word blessing and the word repentance are feminine, leading some to suggest that it was the blessing that Esau could not find though seeking it diligently with tears. Nevertheless, repentance is the closer feminine word and so by far the most likely referent. Esau sought to find repentance, but he could not. This fits with 6:6, where it is impossible to renew to repentance after falling away.

This interpretation seems overwhelmingly likely. However, as with the two previous passages it wreaks havoc with the theology of most traditions. Some traditions believe that once you are "saved," you cannot become "unsaved." Other traditions, such as my own, believe that it is always possible for the prodigal son to return. Hebrews paints a picture where it takes a significant turn away from God to fall away but that then you can never return.

The pastoral situation seems clear enough. If it is the Holy Spirit that empowers us to repent, then anyone who truly repents can return. Someone who has truly fallen away will not truly repent. They may know with their heads that they need to do so, but their hardened heart will not find its way to do it.

18. For you have not come to what is being touched and having been burning with fire and darkness and gloom and [a] whirlwind, 19. and to the sound of a trumpet and a voice of words that the ones hearing implored that no word be added to them. [3]

12:18-24 contrasts the mountain of the first covenant with the mountain of the second. Within this contrast, 12:18-21 present the first mountain, Mt. Sinai. The purpose is to paint a picture of the greatness of the new covenant in comparison to the old covenant. Throughout Hebrews, the author has used an argument "from lesser to greater" (a fortiori or a minore ad maiorem in Latin, qal wehomer in Hebrew). Disobedience under the old covenant was severe. How much more severe will apostacy be under the new covenant.

These verses are a picture of the giving of the first covenant at Mt. Sinai. There was fire and darkness and gloom and a trumpet (Exod. 19:16-19). The people were afraid to hear God's voice for fear it would kill them (20:19).

20. For they were not bearing that which was being commanded, even "if a beast should touch the mountain, it will be stoned." 21. And so fearful was that which was being seen that Moses said, "I am afraid and trembling."

Even Moses was afraid. In keeping with the holiness of the mountain, any stray animal that touched it must be stoned (Exod. 19:12). This was a physical mountain. It could be touched, another hint of the sermon's dualism. The mountain that follows is a spiritual mountain.

22. But you have come to Mt. Zion and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem and ten thousand of angels in assembly 23. and to the assembly of the firstborn having been inscribed in the skies and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous who have been perfected 24. and to the mediator of a new covenant, Jesus, and to a blood of sprinkling that speaks better than that of Abel.

12:22-24 presents the other mountain, the greater one. It is the heavenly Jerusalem and the true Mt. Zion of the living God. The phrase "living God" has appeared now four times in Hebrews (3:12, 9:14, and 10:31), perhaps implicitly in contrast with the "dead" gods of the other nations.

They "have arrived" at this mountain. The perfect tense is used. It is probably proleptic, meaning that it is a future destination to which their arrival is certain only if they remain faithful to the end. There is no mention of this heavenly Jerusalem ever coming down to earth, as in Revelation 22. However, one way or another, it would seem the only Jerusalem that is destined to remain.

It is the spirits of the righteous that have been perfected, another instance of the dualism of the letter. We also remember from 1:14 that angels are ministering spirits. The spirits of the righteous possibly include the spirits of all the examples of faith from chapter 11, but there is also a sense in which the spirits of the faithful still on earth participate in the worship of the heavens. All of these are the "church of the firstborn" who, unlike Esau, kept their birthright until the end.

Abel's blood spoke for justice. Jesus' blood speaks even better than Abel's blood. Jesus' blood has mediated a new covenant. The new covenant is effective to take away sins, unlike the first covenant which foreshadowed the sacrifice of Jesus.

25. Look not to refuse the one speaking. For if those did not escape who refused the one speaking on earth, how much more [will not escape] we who turn from the one [speaking] from heaven,

We reach the final judgment in 12:25-29. We are about to see the shaking of both skies and earth. The author once again invokes the lesser to greater argument. When God's voice spoke to Moses and Israel from Mt. Sinai on the earth under the old covenant, the penalty of disobedience was fearsome. How much more fearsome then would be to reject the word from heaven. We see the dualism of earth and heaven once more.

26. ... whose voice shook the earth then. But now it has been promised, saying, "Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but also the sky."

The author now quotes Haggai 2:6. In the final judgment, God will not only shake the earth, as at Sinai. God will shake the skies as well. The author probably has the created skies (or heavens) in mind here rather than the highest heaven where God's presence was.

27. The [expression] "yet once more" makes clear the removal of those things being shaken, as having been created in order that things not being shaken might remain.

The removal of what is shaken, since it has been created, sounds like the removal of the created realm. This seems to be what the author means in some sense. The statement helps us hone in on the precise nature of the dualism that the author of Hebrews is operating under. There is that which is created and there is that which is not.

It would be all too easy for us to read our metaphysical assumptions into such a statement. We rightly believe in creation ex nihilo, that God created everything out of nothing--including space itself. However, this understanding was probably formed during the Gnostic controversies of the late second century AD. Just as God did not worry about adjusting the New Testament authors about the earth going around the sun, God probably revealed himself without mentioning to them that he created matter out of nothing. They probably would have assumed that creation was the ordering of matter that was just there.

Therefore, when Hebrews speaks of the removal of that which is created, it probably does not mean the removal of the underlying "stuff" but the removal of the cosmos as it currently exists. It would be rather unprecedented for the author to say that only heaven would be left after the judgment. For many years, this was the interpretation I took of the passage. However, I have eventually conceded that such a meaning would not only be atypical of the New Testament. It would not only be unheard of within Judaism, but it would have been completely unknown in the broader world as well.

Something more akin to "transformation" thus seems to be in view. The created realm is removed in its current form... and a new creation takes place. This is the perspective of 2 Peter 3:13. Even though the elements are consumed by fire (3:12), a new heavens and earth are created. Similarly, after the judgment of the world in Revelation, there is a new heaven and a new earth (Rev. 21:1-2). As dualistic as Hebrews is, it seems likely that the author is expressing something along these lines in highly dualistic language.

28. Therefore, having received an unshakeable kingdom, let us have grace through which we might worship God pleasingly, with godliness and awe, 29. for our God [is a] consuming fire.

What remains after the complete transformation of the cosmos is an unshakable kingdom, presumably on a transformed and recreated earth. The kingdoms that now exist are not unshakeable. They are rather shakeable down to their very bones. But the kingdom that is coming will be purified and completely under obedience to God.

God is a consuming fire, possibly a picture of how God will remove the created realm, as in 2 Peter 3. We remember that the author is clearly warning the audience that they would become the object of that wrath if they abandon their faith. That is what this section of the chapter has been pointed toward. The rewards of continued faithfulness are immense, but so is the doom of any who might turn away.

Therefore, they should conform to the grace of God. They should not insult the Spirit of grace by turning away (10:29). They should not fail in it (12:15). This sense of "falling from grace" (cf. Gal. 5:4) may seem alien to some because they are not operating with a New Testament sense of grace. As we have seen, grace was the language of ancient patronage. [5] True, it was not merited in the sense that it was not earned, but it could be solicited. True, it did not have formal conditions, but there were expectations often involved, informal ones.

The notion that someone would continue receiving grace after scorning and treating the giver with contempt would have been absurd. That is basically what the author of Hebrews is saying. God has extended to the audience a tremendous grace. If they treat that grace with contempt, they should not expect to receive it on the Day of Judgment. The person with uncertain loyalty to God--"let not that person think they will receive anything from the Lord" (Jas. 1:7).

[1] New Testament authors did not always feel the need to bring the context of an Old Testament verse into their use of that verse.

[2] This is always a consideration with the word therefore. Does it conclude what went before or commence a new unit of thought?

[3] relative pronoun conforming to case of antecedent

[4] Barnabas Lindars, The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews (Cambridge: Cambridge University, ***).

[5] See John Barclay, Paul and the Gift ***.

____________________

My outline of Hebrews with links to both the more detailed explanatory notes and the bullet point notes:

I. Sermon Introduction (1:1-2:18)
A. Exordium (also here and here and video commentary here) (1:1-4)
B. Celebration of the Enthroned Son (also here, here, and video commentary here) (1:5-14)
C. Background of Salvation (2:1-18)

So don't slip away (2:1-4)
Christ troubleshooted the human problem (2:5-8)
key verses of Hebrews included (2:9-18)

II. The Argument (3:1-10:18)
A. Enter into God's Rest (3:1-4:13)

Christ, greater than Moses (3:1-6)
Don't be like the wilderness generation (3:7-19)
Enter into God's rest (4:1-13)

B. The High Priestly Argument (4:14-10:18)
1. A Superior Priest (4:14-7:28)
a. Hold Fast (4:14-16) -- explanatory noes on 4:14-5:10
b. Appointed High Priest (5:1-10)
c. Central Exhortation (5:11-6:20)