The next course I selected as part of my Unschooled Master of Theology program was the KI course, Book of Hebrews, which covers the letter written to Hebrew believers. Here are the Discussion Questions for the entire course along with my responses.
As a reminder, you can all of my course assignments for the uThM here.
So, let’s get started….
KWL – What I Knew Before Starting This Study?
I’m cheating a little here as I’ve already finished the first lecture of this course before I did this preliminary material. It does not have to be turned in for the course officially, but I do like to include it in the post regardless just for completeness if nothing else.
If I’m completely honest, I really don’t know a whole lot about the letter to the Hebrews. I do know that it is controversial because of it’s lack of a penned author and the speculation that Paul wrote it (of which I was convinced before, but am more thoroughly so after watching the first lecture and seeing the evidence and style similarities).
I, of course, know about the Hall of Faith in Hebrews 11, the individuals from the Old Testament who are counted as operating from faith in God. I also know about the spurious reference in Hebrew 10:25 pertaining to the “forsaking of the gathering.”
It is, unfortunately, a looked over book in the Bible, I think. It has been by myself up until now.
KWL – What I Want to Find Out in This Study?
There are several things I would like to find out in and about this book, especially after watching the first lecture.
1. I would like to be able to present the Gospel and show that Jesus was the Messiah using just the Old Testament.
2. I would like to settle in my own mind the issue of Hebrews 10:25 and the “forsaking of assembling of ourselves” controversy.
3. I would like to have a clear understanding of the Millennium and how Hebrews shows the fulfillment of this time period being the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant.
4. I would like to develop a comprehensive view/understanding of the entire letter so that I might be used for God’s good purpose if called upon to teach it (or another book) in the future.
Lecture 1 Discussion Questions
Using scripture, describe what Dr. Missler means by a “call to spiritual maturity.”
We are called by God not to remain childlike in our faith, in our walk, or in our understanding. As Hebrews 5:11-14 points out, “though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.” They should have long been teachers by the time Paul wrote to them. Instead, they were infantile in their understand of basic tenets of the faith. They required to be hand-fed rather than to be feeding new believers.
I have witnessed this in my own life. God was gracious for me. Much like Paul after his conversion, who spent 14 years in Syria and Cilicia before stepping into his ministry, so that he might be able to grow in faith and understanding and knowledge of Christ, God provided me four years while enlisted in the military, seven years as a single man with no attachments, then another thirteen years after my first marriage, where I could spend much if not the majority of my time emersed in the Word of God.
Now, these 24 years would have been wasted if only for its own sake I spent that time. If only as a hobby had I meticulously poured over the Scriptures and organically acquired systematic knowledge of God’s message and what it means in context, then it would have all been for not. But, God did not let the fruit wither on the vine. At his appointed time, in his perfect way, God first prepared me with diligent study. I was able to complete all my formal schooling and now finish practical ministry preparation at KI. Only then did he equip me with a comparable helpmate (for I was perfectly content in my singleness – at least in my view, God may see differently) who would aid me in whatever ministry he has been and is now preparing me for. In a matter of just a few short months from our marriage, God has streamlined our lives, has brought us to a rural church in our local community that while is pretty established still does need help. He has given both my wife and I a deep and intense desire and conviction that writing stories is at least part if not our primary ministry to the Church (and even more so to non-believers who are lost in our current culture of chaos).
We see not only a great adventure beginning for us and our family, but we also see the potential challenges coming on the horizon that he might be calling us to confront. It is possible that things for the region we find ourselves in will not turn out very well and we could easily see Christian persecution in the future. We are both now preparing ourselves practically, emotionally, and spiritually for that inevitability if it be God’s will (we have considered moving to a more “safe” place, but I am convinced and fully convicted that we are to remain here and help those who are in need if such persecution does arise).
Faith in Christ is not a religion. It is not a formula of steps that one progresses through in the beginning, at which point, once you have finished the short flight of steps, you remain where you are forever. It is an ever call upward (Phil 3:14), it is a never ending process of sanctification until the day of redemption and the revealing of the Sons of God (Ro 8:19). Remaining idle in our walk with Christ means we are rejecting the works in which God has predestined for us to walk in (Eph 2:10).
Why is it important for us to understand the book of Hebrews at this time?
The third purpose of this letter is to comfort those who would go through persecution. If, indeed, God has given us a clear picture of the future (we cannot know with complete clarity what will take place), we can see that this comfort in this letter will be of great importance in the coming years to Christians in the Western World. As the Empire of the West continues to crumble and tyrants step into the vacuum created by corrupt politicians and leaders and rules, we very well may see a time of Christian persecution unknown by the first century or any time throughout church history. With central global governance in full swing, advanced technology harnessed by those who are ravenous for power at any cost the world over, there is a very good chance that we will see wide-spread persecution in the West before the rapture takes place. The letter to the Hebrews could provide a great deal of comfort for those who hide it’s words and message in their hearts going forward.
Compare the ways in which Peter and Paul use the word “grace.”
While it seems correct that no one in the New Testament uses the word “grace” exactly as Paul frequently does, the word itself does occur throughout John’s letters, and again in James 4:6 and it is even found in the final salutation in Revelation 22:21. Despite this, the book of Hebrews does read quite like other letters of Paul’s. The issue of Hebrew’s authorship has been settled for me for many years now.
How do you define the terms sanctification, justification and glorification?
Salvation is divided into three basic states.
1. Justification is the past tense of salvation. It is the gift God gives to those who receive it by faith in Christ. It is what one receives by professing Jesus as Lord and believing that God raised him from the dead.
2. Sanctification is the present tense, that which is currently in action in the daily life of the believer between the moment he is justified and the last breath he breathes or the rapture occurs. This is progressive work by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, continually striving to bring the believer ever closer to Christ-likeness. It is the cause of growth in the individual believer in faith, hope, and knowledge of Jesus, of the Word, in love for the saints, and is solely responsible for fruit in a believer’s life (we cannot produce genuine fruit of the Spirit any other way).
3. Glorification is the future tense of our redemption as all believers will be glorified at the day of Jesus’ return, regardless of where they might be in #2, and only require #1 having been completed beforehand. This is the Revealing of the Sons of God (Ro 8:19), where “we shall all be changed—in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet” (1 Co 15:51-52). This last state is quite possibly exactly like the state Adam and Eve existed in before the fall, or it is, at least, the state we were originally intended to exist in and were designed to exist in before we were created. Humans were not meant or created to be mortal or to experience death (the severing of body, soul, and spirit).
As to the point Dr. Missler makes concerning rewards in heaven and that some believers will have more glory than others, I am skeptical. My wife is convinced that believers will, indeed, receive these “rewards” or “crowns” but then they will cast them at Christ’s feet, knowing that they can do nothing without Jesus as Lord of their lives and everything they have belongs to him (effectively re-equalizing the inhabitants of heaven). While I think this is possible, I don’t see much if any biblical support for it.
My objection to the concept of rewards is:
1. It goes against the very idea of salvation itself (though I admit, it might be just the historical misunderstanding we’ve shared on the subject).
2. It produces a breeding ground for resentment and envy and covertness. If it is possible for angels, as well as Adam and Eve to sin before they had the sin nature (not sure if fallen angels have a sin nature, which would mean that there can be sin even without a sin nature), then it will be possible for post-glorified humans to sin again in the future (unless, of course, the post-resurrection existence is different and distinct from the pre-fall existence). I don’t see God setting it up all over again for there to be a future fall (unless, of course, this is the plan with a new iteration of creation and a new group of beings on the earth that will need to be saved).
The book of Hebrews is full of comparisons and contrasts. Which ones do you see in the first three verses?
In the first 3 verses there is one contrast, that of Prophet and Son. It states at different times and in different ways, the prophets spoke to the people (namely, Israel, but also the entire world through them). But, now, in what the author describes as the “last days,” the one speaking to them is the Son, Jesus Christ. There are a multitude of prophets and they vary greatly in their message, approach, etc. But Christ was both the messenger and the message itself. He was to offer himself as the sacrificial lamb, whereas the prophets were not (though they were also often beaten and murdered for speaking to the people). Those who spoke for God in times past were sinners in need of grace, but Jesus was the grace the world needed. He came in the image of the invisible god (Co 1:15) and in him “dwells the fullness of the godhead bodily” (Co 2:9).
Explain the phrase “heir to all things.”
Jesus the Christ is heir of all things on earth and in heaven, save for the Father who has bequeathed him all things. It is because of this that we, too, are co-heirs with Christ (Ro 8:17 – if we suffer with him).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I do not have any additional statements or information about this lecture.
Lecture 2 Discussion Questions
How could you use the Old Testament Scriptures to present Jesus Christ to a non-believer?
There are several passages that could be used from the Old Testament, but this more often than not appears to be just disjointed passages strung together. Isaiah 53 is quite specific in my view of illustrating Jesus as the Messiah, but there are still gaps remaining. It certainly does not spell out the full gospel.
One possible approach would be to show how the gospel message is hidden in the Old Testament, most specifically in Genesis 5’s genealogical name definitions. But this could quickly lead to disputes over exact definitions, which could be problematic.
I’ve come back again and again to this question because something about bothers me. I’ve never been one that attempts to convert another individual through “roadmaps” in the Bible. First, I don’t think it is possible to provide several Scriptures and convince someone of anything unless the Father is drawing them to Jesus. And this would be the uncomfortable issue I would have attempting to “show” someone that Jesus is the Messiah through the NT as well. the Bible is spiritually discerned. It is not something someone can logically ascertain. Salvation is not derived through reason or human intellect. It is something given to an individual when they are predestined. It is because they are predestined that they receive the call and that call will lead to their justification and that justification will ultimately lead to their glorification. Jesus will not lose a single soul he has been entrusted with by God (John 6:39).
If I were to find myself in a position to be advising an individual about who Jesus was, I would challenge them to begin reading the Bible for themselves. I would say, especially if they are skeptical, to read the Bible at least one time from cover to cover, and see if God does not begin a work in their life.
I do not convince anyone. It is only through the working of God through Jesus that anyone can or could come to understand who the Christ is.
Describe the Jewish view of angels and relate how it affects the words of Hebrews Chapter 1.
Angels are found prominently in the Old Testament. From the Angel of God leading them around the desert to giving direction of the receiving of the law (Acts 7:53) to the two who turned Sodom and Gomorrah into ash and ruin, angels are everywhere. While I would agree that the Jewish people saw angels as important, I can’t find anywhere else that the Jews had 3 Pillars of their religion or that they believed in such.
If you take a second temple period worldview understanding, the Jews had an extra-biblical understanding of angels. They interpreted the world falling into ruin due not to a single event in the garden, but because of three distinct events: the fall of Adam and Eve, the fall of the angels of Genesis 6:2, and the division of the nations at the Tower of Babel. This would explain a high view that Jews would have concerning angels, and would likewise exponentially expand the significance of Hebrews 1. For God never spoke of the angels as having “begotten” them as Sons (but this can be argued against if Ge 6:2 is angels, since they are referred to as “sons of God”). God did not declare that he would be a father to the angels. Instead, all the angels are subject to Jesus, and must worship him. The Hebrews writer goes on to compare and contrast Jesus from the angels, basically concluding that if the angels were significant, all the more so will Jesus be more significant than these.
Why does the author of Hebrews primarily use the Old Testament to prove his points rather than the New Testament?
Well, first off, the New Testament was not really codified into identifiable Scriptures at the point that the Hebrews letter was being penned. Second, the author’s audience were Jews, most likely those of the Diaspora. They would naturally require authentication of any message about the Messiah to come from their trusted documents.
What is the Davidic Covenant and why is it important to the study of Hebrews?
In 2 Sam 7:8-17 it states concerning Israel, “I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own and move no more.” It also states, “the Lord…he will make you a house” and from the “seed” will come the throne of his kingdom forever. And “your house and your kingdom shall be established forever before you. Your throne shall be established forever.”
Unfortunately, for the Jewish people, the Babylonian captivity cast doubt on God’s promise. Then after his relent, again doubt overshadowed with the complete destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. In 1948, though, we see the possible fulfillment of this prophecy in Samuel, or at least the continuation of it (which was not possible for the last 2000 years).
The promise is that David’s throne and lineage would live forever. This is fulfilled in the Millenial Kingdom, first as the Kingdom will be established as described in Rev 11:15ff in “the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ and he shall reign forever and ever.” This is also spelled out in Ezek 37:21ff, in the bringing together of the nation of Israel.
We can see through history that this has already been accomplished. Any Jewish person can option to move to Israel and become an Israeli citizen. There is little chance that there will be another holocaust or that they will be scattered to the same extend that they were after the destruction in 70 A.D. They are home and established.
As is pointed out in the Bible, Jesus has a legal claim to David’s through and kingdom through Joseph. He likewise has the same through his mother Mary.
The connection to Hebrews is that this book talks frequently about the realization of the Millennium and this in turn is referencing the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant.
Explain the different views of salvation seen in Calvinism, Arminianism, and the Overcomers. Which do you believe is right and why?
In the lecture we have Calvinism which came down from the reformation. It is the view that God has predestined people into two distinct categories: vessels of wrath and vessels of mercy, with salvation dependent solely on God with humans having no involvement. If God made you for wrath, there is nothing that will save you. If he made you for mercy, there is nothing you can do to escape his love.
We also have Arminianism, which argues against this view, and divides salvation into two groups: God and man. God calls all people (there is no vessels for wrath and mercy, just all are condemned and he provides a sacrifice for all of them). It is then up to the individual to accept or receive that gift and become a Christian. It is ultimately up to the individual whether or not they will be saved.
Dr. Missler proposes a third view of the Overcomer or Partaker or Metachoi, and sees it as a kind of middle road between Predestination and Free Will. This is an approach that puts those who are predestined in a place where they have entered but have yet to inherit. This connects the sanctification process on earth to the inheritance in heaven as described in Col 1:10-13. It is taking part in the life of Christ, rather than just receiving it that defines the partaker, and it is the act of becoming a partaker that produces an overcomer – those who produce fruit in this life. It is the difference between having the Holy Spirit indwelling us and us, day by day, moment by moment, walking in the Spirit. The final product of turning over one’s life and becoming a partaker of Christ is reward in heaven.
Personally, I am not convinced in the Partaker/Overcomer theory. For the last several years, I’ve drawn closer to Predestination/Calvinism as Scripture is quite clear that everything we do, think, etc is all designed by God and we simply walk in those works, like a kind of play being acted out on a stage (Eph 2:10). Since marrying my wife, we’ve had extensive discussions concerning the Free Will / Predestination topic (she is a die-hard free will advocate). We keep holding each other accountable to the reality that there are many references in the Bible for both camps. Because of this, we’ve both had to acknowledge that it must be both in some way. Either God deals with each of us in different ways (she was given a choice and I was predestined to be saved without a choice) or each of us at different times have some varying degree of free will and also predestination. This would be a kind of sliding scale where the more free will we are able to exercise, the less predestination of God is involved. The more he is involved the less free will we might have.
Either way, I conclude that neither of the three are completely correct. Calvinism denies the free-will passages that are clearly evident in Scripture. Arminianism likewise denies the predestination passages. The Partaker view insists that there are rewards in heaven. I cannot see a way in which God would allow this, since it would demand too high a price for many, if not just some, people once they are glorified to not hold or foster resentments. This stems from my view that there will be the potentiality for future sin in the Kingdom and Heaven based on the fact that Satan, the angels, and both Adam and Eve were able to sin before any of them had a sin nature (not sure if Angels ever had a sin nature but were still able to do so).
I would say the answer is a mixture of Free Will and Predestination, that God deals with different people in different ways when he calls them to himself and to Jesus. He knew that my wife needed to be given a choice. She had to choose to be saved. Forcing her to do so would never have worked. For me, he knew leaving the choice up to me would have never resulted in me choosing him. I was ardently opposed to Christianity and had a worldview that was leading me in a completely different direction, one in which I believed nothing about God and thought we were on a cosmic karmic wheel or reincarnation, and that the only escape was through meditation and achieving Nirvana. By the time I was 17 I was already taking on acolytes, and there was a really good chance that I would have opened a martial arts school and used that as a launch pad to teach Buddhist philosophy. Instead, God took hold of me and stripped away the which offended him (without conferring with me in the process), and left me with an insatiable desire to study his word. Now, in this latter season of my life, after many years of leaving me in a blissful place with him alone to consume the message of the Scriptures, he is now positioning me for ministry, has blessed me with a wife and family, with a wife who is truly a comparable helpmate for me in every conceivable way, and all that preparation he can now utilize in whatever capacity he sees fit.
Is there any significance to the findings that science can now prove the earth is finite?
It is simply substantiating what Scripture would already have proposed. Unlike others who claim that the Bible was never intended to be a scientific book, I am convinced that the Bible is that and so very much more. It is the God-breathed Word, the manifestation in written form of the Christ who is Jesus of Nazareth, the Lamb of God.
Just because the scientific community is behind, that their theories are void of wisdom and knowledge because they willfully “deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:4), really should have no bearing on our faith or the way in which we live.
I would also argue that I don’t think very many scientists or the hangers-on surrounding them would actually admit this today. Most would claim either it is simply not true (and continue the claim that the universe is infinite), or they would ascribe another explanation to why the universe is finite. No one in that camp has given up on evolution and if they have they have replaced it not with a surrender to the God of heaven, but with biogenesis by alien life or other such nonsense that keeps them in their delusion. This is caused by the “futile mind” in which they currently operate in (Ro 1:21). Because of this, God has tried them over to the desires of their heart, to run after their perversions, their delusions, and in doing so, they have sealed their fates in condemnation.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
There is really nothing else I would need to discuss in this lecture.
Lecture 3 Discussion Questions
What does the phrase “until I make thine enemies thy footstool” mean?
In Hebrews 1:13 it states, “But to which of the angels has he ever said: ‘Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool’?” Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation? It is a quote of Psalm 110:1, presenting Jesus the Christ as being higher than the angels.
Dr. Missler has made a very strong case in each session for Paul as the author of Hebrews. If indeed Paul was the author, why did he not sign the book?
I would agree that Paul is the actual author of this letter. I think he did not sign it because of the Judaizers in his day as well as those of the same kind of doctrine in the future (as the Holy Spirit directed him). Because Paul makes such a case that the law is no longer binding on the Christian believer, it is often a difficult teaching to accept. The people of his day lived and breathed the law of Moses, to the point that by the time Jesus fulfilled his ministry, the Jews believed they would be saved by keeping the Law rather than by the Messiah that would be sent to them. After Jesus was resurrected and ascended, there were those who again attempted to put themselves and others back under that same law, claiming that to be saved one had to follow the Torah. Strangely, today, there are certain people who seem to become enamored with the culture of the Jewish people, with the Sabbaths, the festivals, the rituals, and end up putting themselves back under the law by trying to keep some or all of the Law.
I think this is the primary reason Paul did not sign the letter. He did not want the content of the letter to be disregarded simply because of its association with him. I also think it is a judgment against modern messianic movements where the law is being laid out as a possible avenue for salvation.
Why will Christ wipe away tears from the eyes of those in heaven? Please illustrate this based on your own experience.
I now Dr. Missler states that this will be because of missed opportunity that we did not choose to take advantage of while on earth. I would have to disagree with this. This reference is often tied together with the cultic responsible put on every individual believer to evangelize the world, that we will somehow miss an opportunity to save someone, that this individual can only be saved if we speak to them at the right time and in the right way. It asserts that God is incapable of saving those he has drawn to Christ.
Personally, I do not think we can actually answer the question of what causes the tears in heaven. There are many possibilities. We might be saddened at the loss of family or friends. We might be shocked that heaven is not what we were led to believe it should be. We might be overwhelmed by the sheer ecstasy of being in the presence of Christ for the very first time.
This is written in Rev 7:17, Isaiah 25:8; and Rev 21:4. None of these verses actually elaborate on what is being referenced, so I’m not certain we can make a conclusive statement on it.
Personally, just in light of my own intimate prayer life with Christ, I think, at least for me, when I come face to face with my creator, with my Lord and King, tears will be all I can do. I will be beside myself in awe, in shock, in terror, in anxiety, in hope, in fear, and I will be completely overwhelmed with emotion and longing and relief to be done with this god forsaken world I currently live in.
Do a topical study on spiritual complacency, neglect or apathy and report your findings.
When Jesus was out in Gethsemane and instructed his disciples to wait for him so he could go pray alone, it was not long before he returned and found them all sleeping. His response was, “What! Cold you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matt 26:40ff). This passage is an example of spiritual complacency. Jesus desired that his disciples would pray with him, or would be watchful over themselves and not give in so quickly to complacency. But they all too quickly became comfortable, sated, and remained unprepared and unresponsive to the situation they found themselves in.
Again, Jesus told of a parable about talents, how a particular individual received one talent and because of his fear of his master, he took the talent and buried it. Upon his return, the servant returned to his master the talent he first gave him. This passage is an example of neglect. We are called by Christ to not only take care of what he has given us, but to produce a profit with it. This, of course, is not a “financial” profit (though it could be). Ultimately, God is calling us to labor in the fields in which he has called us to. He desires us to fulfill our calling and election, to do those good works in which we were predestined by him to walk in. We cannot do this if we are “sitting on” our talents and abilities that he has given us to use.
It was of the Laodiceans who Jesus declared, “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm…I will vomit you out of my mouth” (Rev 3:14-16). This passage is an example of apathy. The Laodiceans were certainly lacking in the area of concern for Christ or the work of the cross. They did everything in moderation, everything half-heartedly, and were not zealous for the Lord, for the work of the cross, or for the realities that they needed to surrender everything in their lives to Christ Jesus.
Why do you think Paul liked to use the analogy of running a race in his writings? How does your answer relate to Hebrews in this session?
In places like Ro 9:16 and 1 Co 9:24, among others, Paul tends to liken the Christian walk with a race to be run. I think he does this because the journey from salvation to our homeland is often a long, arduous one. In Hebrews 2:1, we find Paul encouraging us to “give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away.” Those who do not give everything to the race they are running will often end up in last place. It’s important that we give our all, give every last bit we have within us to the cause of Christ. We need to give “the more earnest heed.”
Dr. Missler has made frequent references to the Judgment Seat of Christ. Describe that scene in your own words.
The βήμα or “judgment seat of Christ” is the concept that every believer will stand before Jesus after the resurrection and will give an answer for everything he’s done while on earth. This would be differentiated from the Great White Throne judgment found in Rev 20:11ff where all the lost people whoever lived are judged by their works, found not to have their names written in the book of Life, and subsequently, are cast into the Lake of Fire.
My issue with this doctrine is there is no direct reference that explains or describes where in the timeline it will actually occur. Paul seems pretty adamant that Christians will stand before Christ and give an account (Ro 14:10; 2 Co 5:10). But, while Dr. Missler divides the two (the bema seat of Christ and the Great White Throne Judgment) into separate events, the Eerdmans Bible Dictionary states that this is probably not the case, that all three references are referring to the events occurring in Rev 20:11ff.
Dr. Missler states that at this will be the point that Christians are rewarded for their deeds on earth and that those rewards will organically produce a kind of hierarchy in heaven, with “haves and have nots” based on their works. I find this kind of concept a bit repugnant, given the insistence that salvation is by grace through faith, and not of works, lest anyone should boast. If it were the case, I easily see this as a set up for future sin in those individuals who do not have great rewards. Yet, there are some passages that do seem to indicate some will enter into the Kingdom with little to their name save for their own souls (1 Co 3:15).
I personally think there is but one judgment seat of Christ, and this is at the Great White Throne judgment. I do see the possibility that Jesus would address his concerns of his own purchased possession separately from the rest of the world, and that would be his prerogative to do. There is an argument that the βήμα seat is Christ’s judgment of the saved and the Great White Throne is actually God’s judgment seat of the lost. I would also want to add that I do not object to the concept of Jesus critically inspecting those who are his for what they did with the gifts they were given. We are Christ’s slave. But, I don’t think rewards are based on works, or that our works will be rewarded in any other way than to hear, “Well done, good and faithful servant…Enter into the joy of your lord” (Matt 25:21).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
There is really nothing else I would like to discuss in this lecture.
Lecture 4 Discussion Questions
What do you see as the main point of the book of Hebrews? Why will an amillennial point of view cause you to miss the main point of this book?
The purpose of the letter to the Hebrews is threefold. 1. To counter apostasy 2. Encourage spiritual maturity. 3. Comfort those going through persecution.
Amillennialism is a doorway into twisting Scripture. It demands an allegorical hermeneutic and lays an atheistic foundation for faith that breeds only weakness and spiritual immaturity. It also denies the very core of the book of Hebrews: the Kingdom.
Define the difference between an apostle, a prophet, and a priest. Give an example of each.
Apostle – this is a sent one, a messenger, one who is sanctified or set apart for a particular purpose. Paul is the archetypical example of one who is sent out for a particular purpose. He considered himself to be the “least of the apostles” (1 Co 15:9) but yet still authored 14 of the 27 books of the New Testament. Approximately 90% of Christian theology today is derived from Paul’s teachings.
Prophet – this is a proclaimer of God’s word. He is either a representative of God to the people, or he is a preacher or a heralder of God’s truth to the people (in this second sense, he is akin to or could be considered an evangelist). Elijah is one of the classic examples of a Prophet of God. Jonah is an example of an unwilling prophet, who God enlisted by conscription. Of the second sense (the of evangelist or proclaimer of truth and not necessarily prediction or pattern) we have Noah, as well as the illegitimate title of “Pastor” in the modern church. While this position has no biblical grounding, these individuals do serve in a similar capacity as a prophet/proclaimer, but mostly in the secondary sense of evangelist/preacher.
Priest – this is one who presents the people to God. He is the people’s representative before their Creator and he offers collective sacrifices to appease God’s justice and to entice his mercy. Jesus, of course, is the best example for us today as a priest who represents his people to God. Hebrews 3:1 states that Jesus is both our apostle and our High Priest. He’s considered worthy of more glory than Moses.
Describe Christ’s throne (including its location).
The throne of Christ is actually the Davidic throne. It is not currently in existence and was lost at some point throughout history (before Christ). In the millennium, the throne will be re-established (not necessarily restored as the exact or original seat, but the power of King David’s throne) and this will fulfill the prophecies that David’s kingdom would be an everlasting one.
Do a comparative word study on “overcomer” and “partaker.” Which one describes you?
νικάω = overcomer, conquerer
-eat of the tree of life
-not be hurt by the 2nd death
-will receive hidden manna, a white stone, and a new name
-will have power over the nations
-will have white raiment
-their name will not be blotted out from the book of life
-they will be a pillar in the temple
-they will have the name of God and the name of his city, a new name.
-they will sit with him on his throne
-they will inherit all things
μέτοχος = Partakers, one who shares in, a partner.
-Hebrews 3:14 partakers of christ
-all christians will be in the kingdom but not all will be co-heirs
Dr. Missler describes this system as the Partakers or Overcomer. But I am not convinced. He states that the process is: Sanctification > Partaking > Overcoming > Inheriting. But I’m not certain I understand where this is clearly illustrated in the Bible. Second, after looking at the two different words for Partakers and Overcomers in the text, and reading those passages that contain them, it does not seem to indicate anywhere that the “overcomer” or the “partaker” are distinct in any way from the individual Christian.
I would argue that the partaker and overcomer are one in the same, that they are descriptive words used to identify those genuine believers who are saved by the gospel of Christ (rather than the myriad of others who think they are saved but are actually not).
First and foremost, we have to recognize that the “overcomer” is one who “will not have his name blotted out from the book of life.” This would include every single Christian who has professed Jesus as their Lord (before others) and who believes that God raised him from the dead. Secondly, the single verse that Dr. Missler uses to identify the “partaker” is Hebrews 3:14. This verse states, “we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end.” This does not talk about works at all. It does not talk about inheritances or crowns of glory. It simply states that we must hold on to the beginning of our confidence to the end. Whatever that “thing” was that made us believe, that convinced us in the very beginning to believe in Christ as our Lord and Savior, this we need to hold on to until the end. Only by doing this can we be saved. This would likewise indicate to me (when adjoining to the other verses that talk about it) that it is possible that one could actually lose that confidence they first had in their faith, and, thus, forfeit their salvation. They would cease from being overcomers or partakers and would find their faith shipwrecked and themselves disqualified from entering into the kingdom.
I would argue that I am both an overcomer and a partaker of Christ. I am a follower of Christ. I am a slave of Christ. I am not convinced that there are different rewards in heaven, though I am also not opposed to such things if my King and Lord deem it profitable. But I do know that any reward I might receive in heaven I can claim only because Christ has done the work through me by the Holy Spirit. May it be for his glory that anything in me is done well. I am content to serve my King at his pleasure. May his will be done.
Explain what Dr. Missler meant when he said “Christ regained dominion.” What “unfinished business” remains?
The notes state that sovereignty over the earth was given to man in the beginning, but they lost it to Satan at the fall. Christ regained dominion of the earth for man by becoming man and dying and taking power over death and the curse. He will remove the curse and will return authority once again to human beings on the new earth.
Left undone are God making Jesus’ enemies his footstool, the completion of the fullness of the gentiles or otherwise known as the building of the church, then the wrath of God must be poured out onto the earth dwellers in the tribulation, and the salvation of the Jews must take place.
What was the provocation at Kadesh-Barnea? How did it affect God? How did God respond?
In Num 14:11ff we find the people rejecting God, to the extent that they tested God ten times, and were unwilling to heed his voice. His response was rather severe. First, all those who rejected him, all those who disobeyed him, and all those who tested him he removed the promise he’d given that they would possess the land. Instead, they would wander the desert for 40 years until the “carcasses of you who have complained against me shall fall in this wilderness.” Except for Caleb, his son Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun, no one but the next generation of Israelites would enter the land and take possession of it.
As far as how this choice by the Israelite affected God, I’m unclear. He does seem to take it rather personally. He believed they were testing him (as in, seeing how far they could push things until he responded negatively). He seems to take it personally that the Israelites, despite seeing all the signs and wonders he’d done in Egypt on their behalf, still despised the land in which he was bringing them into. It should have been closer. It should have contained more natural resources. It should have not been inhabited by giants.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
There is one interesting thing that came up with this lecture. In the pdf notes, there is a statement made on pg 22: “Messiah regained dominion for Man…But (today) ruled by angels…” I checked again the first and second video, but I could not find any mention of this form his lecture or from the slides.
What I found interesting is that the note seems to indicate that Dr. Missler believes that angels rule the earth today. Of course, we know that Satan stands as the defecto ruler of earth, since there are statements that he is “prince of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2) as well likewise in John 12:31 and 2 Co 4:4. But, there is actually no reference directly describing how Satan came into possession of the earth. He was the architect of the curse (or, at least the instigator of it), but the actual curse itself was pronounced by God onto all three of them. Why would such turn of events place rulership of the earth into one angel’s hands?
I know there is a great deal of talk from those who ascribe to the 2nd Temple period worldview, to the Divine Council model of heaven, that at the Tower of Babel God divided up all the tribes of earth and place angels in charge of each particular people-group, but saved Israel for himself (Dan 10:13, 20; Psalm 82; Gen 11). It makes me wonder if Dr. Missler was referencing this worldview or if he was simply referring to Satan and the fallen angels who sided with him in the Rev 12 war?
One issue with the latter would be: we don’t know exactly when the Rev 12 war occurred (occurs). We assume it happened sometime in-between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, but it also might not have happened yet or it might have occurred long before. Jesus cites that he “saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), but with his eternal perspective, it is hard to gauge if past tense is actually that for him.
I find it interesting that in the Babel account, there is the peculiar plurality of God as seen in Genesis 1:26, “Let us…” Is this reference to the trinity or to God speaking to the heavenly host accompanying him? I think Deut 32:8 is quite telling: “When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations, When He separated the sons of Adam, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 32:8). This passage is fine within itself, but we see in a note starting at “children of Israel” that states in the LXX and Dead Sea Scrolls this is written “angels of God” and “Sons of God.”
I would be interested to find out if this reference in the PDF is about the rule of the angels over the nations as taught by Dr. Heiser and others, or if Dr. Missler is simply referring to Satan’s usurpation of the earth after the fall.
Lecture 5 Discussion Questions
Which occasions are found in the Bible where God “swore an oath and did not repent”? Why did He do so in this session’s situation?
There are actually several. The main focus for several lectures to this point has been the event in Numbers 14, where Israel sent out 12 spies and 10 returned with a bad report and the nation as a whole lamented following God out of Egypt and into the desert.
In Psalm 89:34-36 we find God speaking about his covenant with David, how his seed and his kingdom will be established forever.
In Numbers 23:19, we are told that God is neither a man nor the son of a man, and so he would neither lie nor repent. What he says he will do he will do.
We see in Hebrews 7:21 that the author quotes Psalm 110:4, “The Lord has sworn and will not relent, you are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizekek.” This is a prophecy establishing a new priesthood, different than the Aaronic priesthood with a priest that serves forever as a living sacrifice.
In this lecture specifically, we see the quote Psalm 95:11 from Hebrews 4:3, stating, “I swore in my wrath, they shall not enter my rest.” This was in reference again to Numbers 14 and Israel’s unwillingness to follow God into the promised land. Those who do not believe, they do not enter his rest.
“Enter that rest” is found many times in Hebrews chapters 3 and 4. Do a word study on “rest”. Notice that the word “rest” in Hebrews 4:9 is different than the word “rest” that is used everywhere else in these chapters. What do you think the author is referring to when he uses these words?
κατάπαυσις = rest (8 times)
καταπαύω = cease to do (2 times)
σαββατισμός = a sabbath rest (1 time)
There appears to be three distinct words used in Hebrews for rest. One that denotes a ceasing from doing something, another that argues for a stopping or a calming of activity, and lastly, the one in question, a specifically religious day set aside for that purpose. It is possible that the author in 4:9 is making the claim that, since Israel did not enter that specific special sabbath day of rest back when they were supposed to take the land, and it was offered again in David’s time, that it still remains vacant to this day and that there will eventually come a day when that rest will be taken by Israel.
Do a word study on “disobedience”. How might we provoke God as the rebels did in Numbers 14?
Because God is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of our hearts, and that nothing and no one is hidden from his sight, it is possible that we could all turn so far away from God that he swears to destroy us in our own deserts. But, I struggle with such an idea, because we are now, as the Church, under a different dispensation than those of Numbers 14. For one, we are under seal for the day of redemption (2 Co 1:22) and for another, “Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”” (2 Timothy 2:19). Paul is clear, “Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.” (Romans 8:30).
I have found in my life that, even though I’m may be disobedient, the Lord remains faithful, “being confident of this very thing, that he who has begun a good work in your will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6). The only sure disobedient act we can do is not accept Jesus as our Lord or believe that God raised him from the dead. Of this he will not relent: if our name is not written in the Book of Life, you cannot be saved, you will be cast into the Lake of Fire at the end of all things.
Do word studies on “disinherit” (Numbers 14:12) and “inheritance” and report your findings.
The word for “disinherit” is the same Hebrew word for “inherit.” It occurs 231 times, but only 14 of which is “dispossess.”
Inheritance is translated from several Greek words, but Hebrews 1:14 uses the word κληρονομέω = “inherit” to show a distinction between those who will receive (as an inheritance) salvation and the angels that minister to them. Additionally in Hebrews 11:8, we have Abraham going out to receive his “inheritance” of the land, even though he had no idea where it was or where he was going. This was an act of faith on his part. This word is slightly different than the first: κληρονομία.
Personally, I’m not convinced that the concept of inheritance and disinheritance is correct. With this I mean, while truly it says “he will reward each according to his works” (Matt 16:27), but more specifically, “If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire” (1 Co 3:13), this in no way erects an entire hierarchy of rewards in which one individual will be better than another individual. I am not saying this is impossible, only that it does not seem to fit with either the character of God nor the system in which he has called us to, or the law of Christ by which he has called us to fulfill.
“The word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing …” Report on the use of swords in scripture. What things do you think might be laid open and naked before Christ?
Matt 26:52 “all who take the sword will perish by the sword.”
Matt 10:34 Jesus came to bring a sword rather than peace.
Luke 22:36 Jesus tells his disciples that the first time he sent them out they had no provision and all their needs were met, but now he sends them out again, but this time they must make ready, sell to buy swords, because “the things concerning me have an end.”
Ro 8:35; 13:4 point to the sword as a source or representation of power, of force, of that which takes souls from the earth. It is of immense authority (such as in governments).
Eph 6:17 We have the Sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, part of the armor of God that Paul tells us we need to put on.
Hebrews 4:12 “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.”
Everything is “laid open and naked before Christ.” Hebrews states that “all things” are this way before him. This would include everything we do, what we say, what we think, the secrets we harbor in our own hearts, the thoughts we have that we tell no one about, our hidden or suppressed desires. In Ge 6:5 God makes an astute assessment of the (fallen) human condition, “every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” But he is a God that judges both the living and the dead (1 Pe 4:5; Ro 14:9; 2 Ti 4:1).
How do you reconcile the 40 years of wandering God decreed in Numbers 14:28-35 with the actual 38 years of wandering? Was God in error? How long did they actually wander? Use Scripture to support your answer.
Forty is apparently a rounding up as Deut 2:14 clearly states, “thirty-eight years.” Yet, in Numbers 14:34ff it does state that they were to spend a year for each day they spied out the land, which was 40 days = 40 years.
The confusion is resolved in the ISBE’s entry, “From the time of their first arrival at Kadesh-barnea, in the autumn of the 2d year, to the day that the Hebrews crossed the brook Zered in Moab on their final march, is said to have been a period of 38 years (Dt 2:14), during which the first generation died out, and a strong race of desert warriors succeeded it.” It was 2 years from the leaving of Egypt to the first arrival at Kadesh-barnea. 38 from then until the crossed into the promised land to provide the total of 40.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
In this lecture, Dr. Missler makes the distinction between the soul and the spirit, stating that it requires the word of God to make such divisions. We can also see that death is a natural divider of soul, spirit, and body (trichotomic), but much of modern evangelical Christianity today is insistent that the soul and spirit are interchangeable terms (dichotomic). It was refreshing to see that Dr. Missler the former, though I don’t think this is one of his more recent reconsiderations.
Lecture 6 Discussion Questions
How is Psalm 95 significant to both us and the Jews?
The significance can be found in the word “today.” For, it was David who penned the Psalm, and he was much later in the Jewish timeline, and yet it seems to indicate there is still a pathway for Israel to enter into his rest.
It’s also a little fascinating that the author of Hebrews cites the Holy Spirit and not David in Hebrews 3:7 for Psalm 95.
But, personally, I do not see a connection to this Psalm. Yes, it has relevance to the Jewish people, in that it hints at a still remaining hope that they might be saved. But we know from other places (Ro 11:23, 26; 2 Co 13:15) that Israel’s falling away was predestined to allow a way for God to redeem “those who are not of Israel” (Ro 11:25) and in vs. 26 Paul makes it very clear: “all Israel will be saved.”
As for Christian believers today, we enter into God’s rest (He 4:3), which is the promise of the gospel itself, as Jesus stated, “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28).
Explain the meaning behind the Paradigms of Rest.
Dr. Missler states there are three different types of rest: Justification, Sanctification (or spiritual maturity), and Kingdom Inheritance. These are past, present, and future tense as we who are saved have already been justified before God, and as we allow the Holy Spirit to work in and through us we find that we grow in our faith and become more Christ-like. Finally, once we are glorified in the Kingdom to come, we discover that we are co-heirs with Christ as believers and members of his bride, the church.
I would not ascribe to Dr. Missler’s interpretation that the Kingdom Inheritance is based on works or that the inheritance is some hierarchical structure of glories or crowns or rewards based on our efforts. I think what we do in this life will be self-evident in the next. I think there will be those who are placed in high positions in heaven and others who are placed in lower positions in heaven. But I do not think we will receive these as greater or lesser than. All members of the body serve a purpose and the art of heaven is selfless service. A hierarchical structure of rewards based on past performance would only breed resentment, bitterness, and sin in heaven.
What are the implications of the high priest being divinely appointed by God?
The high priest was taken from among the people. He was ordinary and has no special dispensation or ability. He was not exempt from his own sin or his own limitations. But also very important, he was not self-appointed to the task. They represented the people collectively to God, while the prophet represented God to the people.
Which individuals tried to usurp the role of high priest and what were the repercussions?
Korah – led a rebellion against Aaron, but God had the earth swallow him completely (Nu 16:1-15).
King Saul – he attempted to perform his own sacrifice rather than wait on the priest to do so. This led to Saul’s ultimate rejection as king of Israel (1 Sa 13:5ff).
King Uzziah – he attempted to burn incense but was struck with leprosy for doing so (2 Ch 26:16ff).
Discuss Melchizedek and explain the differences between his and Aaron’s line of the Priesthood.
In Psalm 110:2-4, we see that Melchizedek is found to be a priest forever, that Jesus would be likewise a priest forever “according to the order of Melchizedek.” This is because Melchizedek is a type of the new covenant, which supersedes the old covenant, as the Hebrew writer spells out, using Genesis 14:5-20 as support. For it was Abraham who gave Melchizedek tithes when Aaron was still unborn, thus, Aaron is subject to Melchizedek through Abraham (He 6:20). Likewise, this is reinforced again in He 7:24,w here the Melchizedek priesthood is said to be an “unchangeable” one. This was not the case for the levitical priest hood, which changed with every passing priest, and whose sacrifices were mere shadows to what was to come (Col 2:17). Then again, it was not the intent to throw away the levitical priest hood or the law, but to fulfill it in all of its requirements fully (Matt 5:17).
Additionally, Melchizedek was portrayed in Genesis to be both a priest and king. This was not found in the Levitical arrangement, where the priestly and ruling roles were separate (with grave consequences for cross contamination of roles). In the Bible, though, we see the common thread between Jesus, Melchizedek, and future Christians, all being considered priests and kings in the afterlife.
Does the “dull of hearing” condition exist in today’s society? If so, what do you think contributes to it and how can it be corrected? If not, justify your position.
Paul described the “dull of hearing” about the Jews when he was under house arrest in Acts 28:26ff where he quotes from Isaiah 6:9-10. When the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke in parables, this was also his answer, so that “seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, no do they understand. That in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, ‘…the hearts of the people have grown dull…’ “ (Matt 13:12ff).
I would argue that while this specific prophecy from Isaiah was fulfilled in the first century, there is a similar condition, the “debased mind” (Ro 1:28) which is God has given to people who refuse to “retain God in their knowledge.” This is a worse state than the “dulling of one’s heart” in that the first is correctable while the second is not. They have not been given to such a dullness like the Israelites were so their dullness would provide a doorway for the Gentiles to be grafted in, but their “depraved mind” is a state in which they are overcome by futility. They were given such a mind so that they could sin all the more and bring condemnation upon them. The former is escapable for the Israelite once the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. Paul assures us, the dullness of their heart will be removed and they will be saved. But the “futile mind” of today has no assurance given to it. They have no hope, save Christ while they still have breath within them. But, if they are vessels of wrath (Ro 9:22), I do not think they are even capable of being saved.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I think the statement made by Dr. Missler in this lecture, “allegory is the license to invent” is spot on. I try to steer away from it entirely, unless the Bible itself interprets the allegory (Re 2-3). It is simply too easy to be misled by such tactics.
Another question that came up with this lecture is the issue of eternal security. This is a very difficult topic and is akin to the theological question of predestination vs. free will. The Scripture at least appears to be divided on the issue:
Can Lose Salvation – He 6:4-8; Matt 7:21-23; 24:13; 2 Pe 2:20-22; Col 1:21-23; Ro 11:22; Gal 5:4; 1 Co 9:27; 1 John 2:19*.
Can’t Lose Salvation – Ro 8:38-39; 11:29; John 10:28-29; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; 1 Co 3:15-17; 15:2; 2 Co 1:22; Phil 1:6.
The question is proposed as a hypothetical: if I were teaching a bible study and a student asked about this verse, asked if it were possible to lose our salvation, what would be my response. It would be:
Hebrews 6:4-8. The whole chapter is talking about leaving the “discussion of the elementary principles of Christ” and moving on to perfection. In my estimation, this chapter is providing a warning to those who insist on remaining or returning to milk (basic principles) rather than pursuing maturity in Christ. By returning to basic topics, it is possible (maybe even likely) for the individual Christian, despite his already established state, to “fall away” (vs. 6). The warning is, if someone who is already so established in the faith does, indeed, fall away, there is no grace for them any longer to return to the faith. To do so would require, he argues, the re-crucifying of Jesus all over again. This is not talking about inheritance or reward, since it specifically states they could not be “renewed to repentance.”
So, from this verse alone, it is pretty clear that there is no eternal security as it is taught today. It is saying that it is possible for an established believer (who ought to be mature) to regress to the point that they actually fall away from their faith entirely. If this were not the interpretation, then there would be no reason to include this section in Hebrews 6 at all. Add this passage to other verses like Matthew 7:21-23 in that not all who calls Jesus “Lord” will be saved and you begin to see a clearer picture. There will be even some who do miraculous works in his name, and yet he will cast them into the lake of fire because they neither belonged to him nor did he ever know them. It would also agree with Matt 24:13 and Col 1:23 that attest that questioning the genuineness of an individual’s conversion: “If, indeed, you continue in the faith,” and “he who endures to the end will be saved.”
We also have John telling us in his letter that the genuineness of a particular believer’s conversion will bare out in his perseverance to the end. This is in line with the idea purported by predestinationists, that of irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints: if you are truly one of us you will not leave us (1 John 2:19).
Ultimately, this doctrinal question must be wrestled with by the individual believer. The Bible is a supernatural book and is spiritually discerned. But there is only one accurate interpretation. When building a personal theology, all Scripture must agree, otherwise we either deny the inspiration of Scripture or we find ourselves with an improper interpretation.
Lecture 7 Discussion Questions
Why was it necessary for the Hebrews to be rebuked?
They were suffering from stagnation in their faith, in their sanctification. They were even considering (which the author states is a genuine risk) returning to Judaism to avoid the persecution they were experiencing. We, as believers, are not to live or wallow in milk alone forever. We are to press on and pursue the higher calling of Christ, as it says, “much is given, much is required” (Luke 24:48). If we have faith, we are responsible to fan that kindled fire into a larger flame. There is no living a Christian life and also a life of the world simultaneously. We must choose which master we will serve.
What do you believe to be the meaning and intent of the third warning? Why?
Chapter 6 is a very fascinating passage in this letter. It is basically stating to the Hebrew believers, who are not only languishing in their shallow and immature faith but are also considering abandoning that faith altogether and returning to Judaism, that if they remain backsliden there is a real risk of falling away from the faith entirely. I do not think “falling away” here means simply to lose an inheritance or a reward. The word ἀποστασία means “to rise up in rebellion against” which is what we find in 2 Th 2:3 when Paul states the “falling away must come first.” Back in Hebrews, the word for “falling away” is παραπίπτω and this means more of a “turning away from, abandoning” and is less aggressive. The latter would simply lose interest while the former would be in strenuous objection to. But, neither of these words indicate anything other than actual salvation and both seem to point to the loss of the saving grace in which they once had. Pair this with Galatians 5:4, “You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” and you have a real recipe for disaster for anyone who attempts to abandon the faith for greener pastures.
I would argue this passage is stating: If you are a seasoned believer, well-established in the faith, and you become lax in your sanctification, and stop pursuing Christ and follow after other things (the world, the basics of the faith, etc) then you are in jeopardy of losing your faith altogether. If you do that, you forsake the grace you have already been given, and there is no more sacrifice (Jesus on the cross) any longer for you to be returned to the faith (to repentance). To do so would require Jesus being crucified all over again. To leave the faith is to consign your soul to the lake of fire. Period.
Which foundational teachings were the Hebrews instructed to leave? Why?
Paul gives them an interesting list of doctrines they are to have already a firm grasp on (if they are babes in Christ) and should move on toward other, more weighty doctrines of faith. Those basic doctrines were: repentance from dead works, faith toward God, baptisms, laying on of hands, the resurrection from the dead, and eternal judgment. These the first century church (or at least Paul) considered basic teachings. Today we would categorize these as: The gospel; Salvation; Ordinances; End Times; and Judgment. There are few people let alone congregations that can agree on the fundamental teachings of these categories today, let alone see them as the basic teachings of the church. In fact, End Times and the Judgment would be considered advanced Bible Study topics today in the modern churches.
They were instructed to leave these doctrines behind (not leave as in abandon, but put aside as having already learned them) so they could go on to “perfection.” Paul wanted them to pursue more solid food, doctrines like the Order of Melchizedek, etc.
Do a word study on “mature” and “maturity.” How important is spiritual maturity to the Christian walk?
Maturity in the Christian walk is spelled out in Ephesians 4:11-16. All the ministry gifts have been given to equip the body of believers, “until we all come to the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God…..that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine…but…grow up in all things into him who is the head….joined and knit together by what every joint supplies…edifying itself in love.”
The greek word τελειότης means “complete, or mature,” which Paul encouraged, “as many as are mature, have this mind.” We see it in 1 Co 2:6; 14:20, indicating a mind that is not mired in the basic tenets of the faith.
The challenge, of course, is if the individual becomes so entangled, it is possible they might very well lose their salvation altogether, from which there is no return.
Spiritual maturity is akin to Christ-likeness, and it is essential, it is the aim of the walk in Christ.
Define repentance. Compare God’s repentance to man’s repentance.
Repentance is the changing of one’s way of life, way of thinking, focus. It is a change of course from the direction in which we were previously running. But, regardless of who’s repentance it is (man or God’s), I do not see this talking about anything other than salvation.
To argue that the text grammatically states that the impossibility of renewal toward repentance ceases when the person stops the action that caused the impossibility is, I think, straining for the text to say it. The text clearly says, “if they fall away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, as this would require the crucifying of Jesus all over again.” Even if the individual stops their “falling away,” the impossibility does not arise from their falling away. It originates from the fact that Jesus would have to be re-crucified all over again and God is not going to do this. This is why it is a grave warning.
Describe the judgment at the Bema Seat (including the setting, the people and things judged, and the types of rewards or punishments).
This term only appears once in the Bible, in 2 Co 5:10. While it is referenced several times concerning the Roman tribunals or judge seats or when Jesus is put on trial, the only places it references individual believers standing before the judgment seat of Christ is Ro 14:10 and 2 Co 5:10. In the first, we see the greater context is taking about “every knee shall bow….and every tongue shall confess” and in the second, “that each one may receive the things done in the body.” These both seem to speak of a final judgment, such as the only one described in the Bible in Rev 20:11ff.
The argument, of course, is the Bema Seat of Christ is the event directly after the rapture when every Christian will stand before Jesus and give account for what they did on earth. It is said that salvation is secure, but their rewards are up for grabs and they are based entirely upon works. This, of course, is simply a way to reincorporate works based religion back into the evangelical paradigm rather than allow the individual Christian to be moved and directed entirely by the Holy Spirit. This is because modern evangelicalism has certain “rules” and “rituals” that the leadership desire the flock to follow or complete. Church attendance, tithing, evangelism are always at the top of the list because it promotes bringing every increasing numbers of people into the local assemblies. But, the fact remains, the Bema seat of Christ is no different than the final judgment of God at the great white throne, and there are no references in the Bible establishing a time or place for this supposed event. I’m not saying the Bible does not call for an accounting of our actions on earth (this actually occurs at the great white throne), but I would say there is no evidence for a judgment of Christians that is separate from the judgment of the rest of the world at Rev 20:11ff. This text even includes the Book of Life and those represented by their names being written in it. If an individual’s name is not so written, they will be cast into the lake of fire.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I have no other information here to discuss in this lecture.
Lecture 8 Discussion Questions
Examine the kings who tried to do priestly acts and report your findings. Were there any kings who did acts reserved for priests who were not judged for such acts?
There were two kings who attempted to usurp the authority of the priestly order and attempted to perform their own sacrifices, etc. This was King Saul (1 Sam 13:5-14), King and King Uzziah. King Saul lost his throne because of it and King Uzziah was struck with leprosy (2 Chr 26:16-23).
David was one of three priest-kings represented in the Bible. In 2 Samuel 6, he represented both himself as the rightful King of Israel as well as practically fulfilling the role of Melchizedek during the return of the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem. Melchizedek himself in Genesis 14 also represented a priest-king. We also find Jesus being represented in Hebrews as a priest-king forever, according to the Order of Melchizedek. Lastly, we find the 24 elders in Re 1:6; 5:10 are known as both “priests and kings.” The four latter examples are all legitimate before God under the Order of Melchizedek. The first two were illegitimate and were punished for attempting to usurp the separate lines.
What is the significance of the battle of the 9 kings? Why was Lot taken captive? Does this battle have any prophetic significance?
The battle of the nine kings set the stage for Lot and all of his people and possessions to be taken and carried off into captivity so that Abraham would receive word of the event and he would raise an army within his own household and defeat the kings in question. But, the battles that ensued were not the main plot of the story. The main purpose was for Abraham to succeed in retrieving Lot and his people and things, and then on the way home, Abraham was approached by Melchizedek, a king of Salem and also a priest of the Most High God.
Abraham bizarrely gave a tenth of his rewards from the battles to Melchizedek in a tithe (which was before the giving of the law). Melchizedek brought bread and wine and gave this to Abraham and blessed him. The writer of the letter to the Hebrews stated that the Order of Melchizedek is a greater priestly order than that of the Levitical priesthood because Levi was unborn within Abraham when Melchizedek blessed him (Heb 6:20).
The battles of the 9 kings was all prelude to set the stage for prophecy to be written and fulfilled. This would be written down in Psalms 110:4, in Genesis 14, and would show up for David first in 2 Samual 6 and then lastly in Hebrews for Jesus Christ.
What allusions do you see in the service of bread and wine throughout scripture?
Dr. Missler makes a point that there are types throughout the Bible concerning bread and wine, but I really do not see them. A cursory search shows that bread and wine were a very common meal during that period.
I do think it is significant that Melchizedek brought out bread and wine, but only because of his already bizarre typology to Jesus Christ, which is also supported by the letter to the Hebrews. I don’t see the Joseph story as relating, but I could certainly be incorrect there.
Chart all of the comparisons made between the pillars of Judaism and Jesus Christ (include scriptures).
There are supposedly three pillars of Judaism, though I have been unable to find external support for this kind of reference. But, as Dr. Missler outlines, there are Angels, Moses, and the Levitical Priesthood.
The Angels are shown to be inferior to the God-man because of Jesus’ deity (He 1:4-14), his humanity (He 2:5-9), and the nature of the salvation he provides (He 2:10-18).
Moses, likewise, is shown to be inferior to Christ in that, while Moses was a man of God, a descendant of Abraham, a prophet, a priest, even a king in Jeshunun, was the instrument used to deliver Israel from Egypt, built an earthly tabernacle for the Lord and ultimately (successfully) led the nation through the Wilderness, Jesus was so much more. He was not a man of God, but God himself. He did not represent God to the people or the people to God, but was sinless, contained within himself pure truth, was considered not just a king but the King of Kings, was immortal, was made into the image of mortal man so that he could be raised up higher than the heavens or anything created within the supernatural realm, and would lead the captives to glory.
Lastly, the Levitical Priesthood is shown to be inferior to the Order of Melchizedek, a priesthood that stands to have no end. The Aaronic Priesthood stood singled out by God (Ex 16:33; 28:1; Num 17:8). It was inhabited by mortal men and they performed sacrifices of innocent animals that neither aided in the forgiveness of sins nor washed them clean of the fallen natures. Melchizedek, on the other hand, has an eternal priesthood with combined priesthood and kingship components. His throne and priesthood would live forever in David and ultimately in Jesus Christ. In order for Jesus to fulfill this priesthood performance, the Levitical priesthood would have to be done away with. Interestingly, those of the Order of Melchizedek are made priests without an oath.
Explain Hebrews 7:6,7. Why is this so difficult to understand from a Hebrew mindset? Support your answer with scripture.
The Jewish people, especially the Pharisees and Saducees, Scribes, and priests, were all convinced that being Jewish was equivalent to being saved. They derived their salvation from being God’s chosen people, regardless of the hidden attestation that Melchizedek had a superior order of high priest who would represent both the Jew and the gentile in the future to come (Hebrews 7:5–8). This mystery, as Paul puts it, was what caused Israel’s blindness so that a way would be afforded to the gentile through the dispensation of the church age (Romans 11:25).
The Jewish people mistakenly believed that “in the scriptures you think you have eternal life” (John 5:39). The problem was, of course, they missed the fact that, “these are they which testify of me.” This blindness is the same veil that remains over their eyes when even modern Israelites read the Old Testament, because until they accept Jesus as their Messiah, the veil will not be removed (2 Corinthians 3:14).
Why was the case for putting aside the law presented so strongly? Do you think this is the reason behind the lesson on spiritual maturity? Why or why not?
The Jewish people being written to were at the time backsliding in their Christian faith. Not only were they not progressing and actively pursing weighter things in the Spirit, but they were regressing back to basic teachings, even to the point that they might fall away completely (abandon their salvation by no longer believing).
This was most likely due to the persecution in which they were suffering under. For a Jewish person to abandon the religion of the people was a serious thing. They were being persecuted by other Jews, most likely family, friends, and the religious leadership. It probably spilled over into their regular daily lives – how they were able to make a living, where they could get food, even being kicked out of the synagogue. At this point, they basically had a choice: continue to suffer under persecution or return to Judaism and abandon Christianity. It was a lure and is still a lure for some today: “Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment—” (Acts 15:24).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
There is nothing else in this lecture I have need to discuss.
Lecture 9 Discussion Questions
Explain Hebrews 7:18. Do word studies on “disannulled” and “unprofitableness.”
Annulling = translated from three Greek words in the NT, meaning “make void, revoke, reject, setting aside.” The greek word in Hebrews 7:18 is ἀθέτησις which means “annulling, putting away, setting aside” and occurs only twice in the NKJV, and once in the LXX (meaning betrayal or rejection).
Unprofitableness = translated from 7 greek words in the NT, meaning “useless, become depraved, worthless.” The greek word in Hebrews 7:18 is ἀνωφελές which means “without advantage, offering no special benefit” and it occurs only 2 times in the NT. It occurs another 5 times in the Greek Septuagint and is translated “useless” or “unprofitable.”
Jesus did not want us to think that he “…came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill” (Matthew 5:17). So, in this sense, the law was not annulled but unprofitable for it was both perfect and effective. It was the weakness of the people (humanity as a whole) that was incapable of living up to the law or exercising its ability to save us.
We are told by Paul that the law was temporary. “…before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed.” (Galatians 3:23). So in one sense the law has been annulled due to its unprofitableness to bring about perfection in fallen souls. But, the Law of Christ is it’s replacement, and as we can see from the gospels, this is all the more so a more severe and exacting Law to be under. But more so because it demands, to fulfill it, that one be genuinely redeemed, transformed, and indwelled by the Holy Spirit. For the individual cannot do the will of the Father without the power of the Holy Spirit in every and all things.
Why would it take a Millennium to make the Kingdom Throne presentable? What does that mean?
I do not recall this in the lecture (not that it isn’t there) and I could not find any reference to it online or in the notes. One student suggests that it will take a 1000 years because it will take that long to subdue Israel and the rest of the world until all people are in subjection to the reign of Christ.
I suppose this is a valid theory, though it is not technically borne out of Scripture. It will be interesting if the Millennium is a kind of dress rehearsal for the final act, the actual judgment of all people who have ever lived at the great white throne judgment (Re 20:11ff).
How did the Old Covenant foreshadow Christ? (Use scripture to explain.)
There are many types and figures used in the Old Testament that later serviced as devices for the NT authors to represent Jesus as the Messiah. We have Melchizedek (Gén 14; Ps 110:4), a priest with no genealogy, no birth or death, who lives forever, representing Jesus as the Messiah and the new High Priest. We have Joseph (Gen 30-50) who was a type of Christ to his brothers and to the rest of the world. We also see the gentile brides depicted throughout the Old Testament, from Eve, to Rebekah, Rahab to Ruth, etc. These women never had their deaths recorded (unlike Rachel whose death is recorded – Gen 35:18ff). Lastly, the animal sacrifices, from Isaiah’s sacrifice of his son to the sacrifices in the temple, all point to Jesus Christ (Le 9:15; 6:26; Isaiah 53).
These are but a handful of examples. An exhaustive analysis of the OT would most certainly reveal that all of its stories, accounts, and characters all point to Jesus as the Messiah in some way. For Paul states of Jesus, “In the volume of the book it is written of Me” (He 10:7) and again Jesus says of himself, “Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”” (Luke 24:44) and again, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.” (John 5:39).
I think, once all the “form of this world” passes away, we will come to understand just how central, how crucial, how elemental Jesus is to everything in creation.
Contrast the Old and New Covenant terms.
There are actually several covenants in the Bible, from the Edenic Covenant in Gen 2:16, to the Adamic Covenant in Gen 3:15, the Noahic Covenant in Gen 9:16, the Abrahamic Covenant in Gen 12:2,3, the Mosaic Covenant in Ex 19:5, the Land Covenant in Deut 30:3, the Davidic Covenant in 2 Sam 7:8-17, and then the New Covenant in Jer 31:31-34 (Hebrews 8).
The Old Covenant itself is the previous covenant that God had specifically with the Nation of Israel. It was never applied to the gentiles or the rest of the nations on earth. Those people groups were without hope of salvation by their maker, as they were turned over at the Tower of Babel to the administration of the angels (Gen 11:1-9; Deut 32:8-9).
The old covenant provided a tutorship to the Israelites, keeping them “under guard” (Gal 3:23ff), and exacerbating the human need for a savior (Ro 5:20).
We see in Hebrews 9 a complimentary working together of both covenants. The first covenant brings about the transgressions while the second covenant brings about the redemption, since the first one causes death and death is required for a testament to be enforced. The Old Covenant was focused on the efforts of the human toward God while the New Covenant is focused on God’s efforts within the human, transforming that which is impossible with man alone.
The very idea of the law being a tutor indicates its transient property. “But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” (Galatians 3:25). “Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, “but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. “Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. “But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, “to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. “And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”” (Galatians 4:1–6).
Scripturally refute the statement “Jesus could not have been a priest because he was not of the Levitical line.”
Jesus’ claim to priesthood rests on the mythical identity of Melchizedek. We do not know very much about him. But the writer to the Hebrews attempts to establish Jesus as a new kind of High Priest (He 7:14-19), one senior to the Aaronic priesthood, one that has no beginning and no end, where the High Priest according to the Order of Melchizedek never dies. His was greater than that of the former, in that it would be eternal, the sacrifices were once for all rather than needing to be continually repeated, and actually produced righteousness.
What does the scripture mean by “Jesus is sitting at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us?” What does that mean to you personally?
Intersession is the Greek work ἐντυγχάνω, which means “to speak on another’s behalf.” In the previous tabernacle, there were no seats for the priest to sit down, but were continually required to offer sacrifices. Jesus, on the other hand, sat down after the first and only sacrifice (He 10:11). He now awaits all his enemies to be put under his feet.
The phrase appears 12 times in the NT, and illustrates the particular place, position, and activity the Lord is engaged in during this time in which we live in between his first resurrection and his second return. The fact that he is speaking to God the Father on our behalf tells me there is much, much more to salvation and the supernatural realm than we care to admit.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
This lecture pointed predominately toward Jesus as the new High Priest and how that role is far superior to the old ways, to the Law of Moses, to the priesthood of Aaron, etc. I think it important to acknowledge also that Jesus is different than any other being in creation. He was the instrument used to create everything by the Father’s direction. This is not really something that can be comprehended or understood very well, given our mortal and fallen faculties. But, Jesus is all things and is in everything and maintains everything as it exists. He is both he cause and the conduit by which reality is held together. There is no other. There is a great deal of talk in Christian circles debating what is the center of the physical universe. As I understand it, the universe is neither geocentric or heliocentric. It is not human centric either. It is Christ who is at the center of everything we know to exist. He is the author of it. The maintainer. The substance of it.
Lecture 10 Discussion Questions
Describe the terms of the four unconditional covenants and their bearing on us today.
I wasn’t able to find this in the study notes, nor do I remember it from the lecture, but I think these are the four unconditional covenants found in the Bible:
• Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 12:2,3) – this covenant was given as a promise to Abraham, that his seed would bless the entire world (all of humanity). It has no additional conditions in which Abraham or the people must keep. It is simply something God will and is doing.
• Land Covenant (Deut 30:3) – this covenant pertained to the land in which God gave to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and it is likewise without condition. There is nothing the Israelites need to do to “own” the land as an inheritance. It is simply theirs perpetually. They may not have possession of the land, which has been seen at least twice in recorded history (Babylonian Captivity, 70A.D. Destruction), but their rights to the land are unconditional and irrevocable.
• Davidic Covenant (2 Sam 7:8-17) – the fact that this covenant is made through the Melchizedekian Order, that it is perpetual in that order under its High Priest (Jesus), and that the return of this throne or rule will be the fulfillment of the millennial prophecies as well as fulfilling the promise that Jesus will sit on the throne of David forever, all point to the reality that this covenant God made with David and with the people is unconditional.
• New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34) – Lastly, this covenant has been declared but has yet to be fulfilled. If it pertains to the church (the fullness of the gentiles) then it is already underway. But, if it only pertains to the Israelites, then they still live under a veil and are blinded in part until the church is completed. Once that occurs, then God will turn again to Israel as his main focus, and this prophecy will be fulfilled. It is a covenant that requires nothing from the nation. It is simply something God will do.
Describe the Tabernacle by showing the symbolism between Christ and its construction, furniture, and fabrics.
There was brass fire, which symbolized Jesus’ judgment. Gold symbolized his diety. The silver sockets the entire structure rested on was emblematic of blood, which is what our salvation rests on, Christ’s blood. The coverings of the structures were porpoise, ram, goat skins and hair, so that it would not be desirable, just as Jesus was at the cruxifixction. On the inside, though, there was an embroidered linen of a cherubim, that was gold, purple, blue, scarlet.
What do you think happened to the pot of manna and Aaron’s budded rod? When were they last known to be in the Ark of the Covenant? What is the symbolism of their absence?
The gold pot of manna was placed into or on the side of the Ark in Ex 16:33-34, but it does not appear to be mentioned again until Solomon builds the temple and places the Ark within it (2 Ch 6:11). It is mentioned by God once more in Jer 3:16, ““Then it shall come to pass, when you are multiplied and increased in the land in those days,” says the LORD, “that they will say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of the LORD.’ It shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they visit it, nor shall it be made anymore.” (Jeremiah 3:16) and again in Hebrews 9:4 concerning the implements in question. We don’t see explicitly that the items disappeared from the Ark by the time it was placed in the temple of Solomon. We just know that at some point before the destruction of the temple it was removed, or, at worst, it was utterly destroyed during the melee.
Personally, I think the ark and all its contents, including the manna and the staff, were either destroyed by the Babylonian army, or Solomon was able to sneak it out of the country with the aid of his and the Queen of Sheba’s son, to Ethiopia. If it was the latter, then there would be reason to think they have the Ark of the Covenant today, and the items are all still in place and they will deliver the ark, or at least the mercy seat, to Jesus Christ at his second coming.
What is the significance of the red heifer’s ashes (in times past and today)?
This was the means by which the individual was cleansed after touching a dead body (Num 19:1-22). Today this process has little bearing on gentiles or non-believing Jews, or the rest of the world. But, of those who are waiting for the building of the third temple in Jerusalem, the red heifer represents the first and essential stage in purifying the people and the implements to be used. Once purified, they can begin the daily sacrifices again.
For the church, there is only the prediction aspect of end times prophecy being fulfilled that the red heifer indicates. For us, the law is now obsolete, having been fulfilled by Jesus during his life and culminating in his death. We now live by the Law of Christ, empowered by the Holy Spirit to grow into maturity and perfection, to walk by the Spirit and not by the flesh.
Define “sprinkled.” What does your study show you about Christ’s redemption related to the atonement processes of the past?
Sprinkling is the simple act of applying a small amount, usually liquid, but also sometimes ash, but typically blood on an object as a purifying ritual. Hebrews points out (Hebrews 9:13-14) that if the blood and ashes of animals purifies the unclean and sets apart the individual for service, how much more would Jesus’ sacrificial blood being spilled cleans our conscience? Both processes prepare the individual, but the former prepares him outwardly only, while the latter prepares the individual inwardly, in the soul and for conscience’s sake, allowing the individual to go forward in service to the living God.
Did sin originate in heaven? How were the heavens purified?
This is a very provocative question. It cuts to the heart of my own research into the angels and their origins and why it is that things pertaining to angelic beings, those who exist in the supernatural realm, are mostly hidden from us.
In answer to the question, we are referencing Hebrews 9:23ff, in that “it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these (blood of animals), but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands…but into heaven itself…”
It appears as if Dr. Missler is indicating that the temple in heaven, the implements therein, were in need of purifying because of the sin initiated by Satan and the angels in at least 2 incidents, if not 3.
It is provocative that Job 15:15 mentions that “the heavens are not pure in his sight.”
But, the question still begs: is there, was there, could there have been sin in heaven? We know from Isaiah 14:12ff and Ezek 28:11ff that Satan sparked sin within himself, becoming proud. We know that at some point (in the past or in the future is unclear) Satan will band together an army of angels (1/3 of the host of heaven) and they will declare war on heaven (maybe on humans, possibly even on God) and their insurrection will ultimately be put down (Rev 12:7ff). These were then cast out of heaven or the supernatural realm, most possibly unable to return to that dimensionality ever again. At that point (we assume the time frame) that Satan is now bound to the earth or to the physical universe (dimensionally), and this has caused the rage within him, “because he knows that his time is short” (Rev 12:12).
We know that evil is not sin, for God created both good and evil. (Eccl 7:13-14; Isaiah 45:7; Matt 5:45). He likewise created both vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath (Ro 9:22ff). But, the creatures in which at some point (we assume) he created, made the choice (we assume it was a choice and not predestined – Psalm 139:16) to commit sin. Satan did so even before the Garden of Eden events. He did so again then. The angels of Genesis 6:2 likewise appear to have chosen to abandon their place and positions in heaven for the sake of taking wives and living on earth. Again, the angels of Rev 12 appear to have been convinced that siding with the dragon was in their best interest. Even further, Adam and Eve chose (not sure how much of a choice it actually was) to sin when they ate of the forbidden fruit. This was before either of them had a sin nature or were bound by mortal flesh. All of this tells me that not only were sinless beings capable of sinning, that we, as a mater of extrapolation, will likewise have the same capacity when we are transformed into immortal beings. We will be like the angels. We will be equal to them.
As to the purification of heaven, the only options I see are two: Jesus purified heaven at his death, or God purified heaven continually, repeatedly, but casting out the sinner from among their presence. I would opt for the latter, as it is clear, sin nor the sinner are tolerated at all in the dimensionality of heaven. Not only is the sinner’s presence removed immediately and seemingly without option for return or repentance, but the sin itself is punishable by the Lake of Fire (whether the sinner resides in heaven or on earth). We see Satan’s ultimate destiny is the Lake of Fire. It was created for him and for his angels. We see the angels who fell in Genesis 6:2 are likewise imprisoned for the day of judgment, in which, we presume, they will suffer the same fate.
I would proffer this theory: heaven was expunged of sin (and the sinner) by the removal of the sinner from the dimensionality of the supernatural realm. Ultimately, the sinner must pay the penalty for sin in full (i.e. the Lake of Fire). The removal of sin and sinner would thus purify heaven of sin and sinner.
My question would be, what happens after the resurrection and the events of Rev 20:11ff? When there is a new earth and new universe, will sin be tolerated in heaven thereafter? Will we be capable of sinning? If an individual who has been transformed by the blood of Christ sins after the “old things have passed away,” will there be grace afforded that person as there is now in life? I think not. I would argue that there is no grace any longer in heaven, once we are revealed as Sons of God. Instead, we will live and die by the code of heaven, the Law of Christ no longer affording us forgiveness of sin. If we, then, perpetrate a sin, are we then to be removed from heaven and immediately cast into the Lake of Fire? Or, will there be a new heaven and a new earth with the expressed intention of a new redemptive story for a new people who are much like humans in our redemptive story? Will we then, if sinning in heaven as the angels did during our redemptive story, be segregated like the Angels of Gen 6:2 and held for another judgment day at the end of all things (for the new redemption)?
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
So, I’m still having difficulty understanding why the old Law needed to pass away before Jesus could become High Priest under a new order. If he were under the Order of Melchizedek, this would have no cross over on the Levitical Priesthood. In fact, this priesthood is still in effect because there will come a time (if end times prophecy is correct) when the temple will be rebuilt and the daily sacrifices restarted. So, in reality, the Law has not been done away with in the sense that it still remains in the hearts and minds and actions of the Jewish people who are blinded to the gospel of Christ, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. It will be only then that the Law will actually pass away, though, as believers, we understand that the Law has been fulfilled in Christ, and that the reality of the Law is that it was created for only one human to fulfill it completely, that being Jesus.
I think it’s fascinating that Jesus is depicted in heaven, sitting on the father’s throne, at the Father’s right hand. Yet, during Stephen’s stoning, Jesus is depicted as standing up at the Father’s right hand.
I liked the statement by Dr. Missler, “You’re not saved because you changed but you are changed because you were saved.”
The Architecture of Man has been a fascination of my for several years. I do like Dr. Missler’s depiction, though I’m not sure it is entirely accurate. We certainly have hardware, the body. Our software is our inner self, though this has become murky over the years with the influence of dualism and physicalism. Our software is hard to locate within physical space, if such a thing is even possible. We have our soul, with is the seat of the individual. The Mind houses the capacity to think, to reason, to maintain consciousness. Within the mind resides our memories, our emotions, and our different states of existence. This, the soul, is the “I” of the individual. It is the personality, the substance that God knew “being yet unformed.” It is the “who” of him or her. The body serves as a vehicle for that “who” that “I” individual and it is the tether to the physical dimensionality of existence, if, indeed, the soul does not actually reside within the body. There is a better chance that it does reside actually within the body because of the account of Rachel, when she died, the Scripture states, “as her soul was departing” which indicates a directional ascent of the soul. It was “leaving” wherever Rachel happened to be. Then again, it is possible that the physical and supernatural dimensions are so intertwined that they are specially co-located. This would allow for the soul to depart to hades because that is other than where the individual is co-located in time and space in both dimensions.
But, what is often so crucial, is the definition of the “spirit.” Too often the dichotomic view is favored, which it should not. The individual living being is brought into existence and given “life” by the spark of the spirit. The spirit is the animator, and we have our breath and live because of it. When we die, the body ceases function, and the soul goes to hades and the spirit (the quickening to life) returns to God (Eccl 12:7).
Lecture 11 Discussion Questions
Do a thorough study on “Yom Kippur.” How does it compare to what we have through Christ?
-Yom Kippur or the Day of Atonement was a special sacrifice done once a year. It was not burned in the temple, but the body and remains were removed from the camp and burned there (Lev 16:27) to indicate the removal of sin. It was not available to be eaten as food by the people and those who were within the city gates could not participate in it. Unfortunately, despite its annual offering, it could never produce in man the ultimate goal: to make the individual prefect before God.
Jesus, on the other hand, was offered only once for everyone throughout all time. I would argue that he was not only offered for those who have lived on earth in this iteration, but he was also offered for those in possible previous iterations as well as those in future interactions if such things actually exist. The word for “world” is κοσμος which means “universe” and extend much further than just this planet. If a different race of beings had been or would be made at any point of time, it would not require a re-crucification of Jesus Christ, but simply would require them looking toward the finished work on the Cross at this particular time and place. His blood is sufficient to save those afar off. Jesus even hits at this by saying, “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd” (John 10:16).
In Jesus’ offering, the individual people’s sins are remembered no more (He 8:12). He is able to produce in man what Yom Kippur could not: perfection. He became the final sacrifice, offered outside the gates of Jerusalem, where he died outside the city walls.
Define the word “piercing.” Explain what being a “bond slave” to Christ means to you in light of the Old Testament process of piercing.
This was the process by which the indentured servant, who had served his master for a predetermined amount of time, made the decision that he would rather remain in his master’s house and under his master’s provision rather than go out on his own into the world.
This was a perpetual position, for life. He would become to his master a δοῦλος or a “bondslave.” To commemorate this decision, the master would take the slave to the doorpost of the house and would pierce his ear with an awl. An earring would be placed in his ear as a reminder of the slave’s choice.
For myself, I can only partially relate to the concept of being a bondslave. This is the case mostly because I really had little choice in the matter of becoming a Christian when I did. It was something that “happened to me” rather than a “decision I made.” It was not a forced conversion by another human, but when God took hold of me, I was free. I was a Buddhist and quite happy in my worldview. If I had been asked at that time (or really any other) I would never had made the choice to become a Christian. I was on my way toward achieving Nirvana and escaping the world of pain and misery, so Christianity and Jesus had little to offer. But, God took a free man and made him a slave (still the word δοῦλος for both voluntary and involuntary slavery). I can identify with what Paul describes, “For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave.” (1 Corinthians 7:22). I was free when Christ called me and I became a slave. He gave me no choice. He decided for me at that point in time that I would no longer be allowed to pursue Buddhism as a worldview or a religion. He took it from me (against my will). He likewise put in place of my ability to pursue Buddhist (he took away my ability to pursue it, not my desire to do so) a desire and a thirst for the Word of God, something that has never been quenched in 30+ years.
Even today, God works with me not as a willing bondservant but as an involuntary slave. He tells me where to go. He tells me what to do. He is clear about his directives and there is no choice. He does not ask my opinion. I serve my King at his leisure. It is simply the reality of the situation that I find myself in.
Discuss two or three of your favorite stories of sacrifice. Which category of sacrifice are they? How did Christ fulfill that “type?”
There are two that come to mind. The first is the sacrifice Abraham made of his son Isaac. This was a voluntary sacrifice, though if he had not performed it it would have meant that he had failed the test God was giving him. Jesus fulfilled this same kind of sacrifice on the same mountain thousands of years later, fulfilling the typological prophecy left by the hands of the Holy Spirit.
The second example is that of Esther’s sacrifice in putting her own life at risk for her people. This is also a voluntary sacrifice, for she could have played it safe and kept her mouth shut and just let the Jews be killed off. No one would have ever known she herself was a Jew. There is no way she would have been able to say unequivocally that she was to blame for the genocide of her people. That was the doings of Haman. But, instead of being silent, she spoke up and did what was right for the sake of her people (there was nothing in it for her to do it other than this). Jesus fulfilled this sacrifice category by voluntarily doing what needed to be done for the sake of his people, the people God the Father gave him to protect and even die for. Jesus is the ultimate voluntary sacrifice for the entire world and maybe even beyond that.
Chart the seven contrasts made in the Epistle to the Hebrews which show Christ’s superiority.
The priests in the temple were always standing and working while Jesus worked once and then sat down at the right hand of the Father. The priests offered sacrifices continually, daily, while Jesus offered a single sacrifice and accomplished with that sacrifice all his work. The priests atonement for themselves and for the people simply covered their sins with the blood of animals, while Jesus’ atonement actually took away the sins of the world.
Describe the different symbolisms that you see in the ripping of the veil. Why are they important?
The renting of the veil symbolized the completion of the old covenant and the ushering in of the new. The old law, which could not accomplish its purpose except for in one man (Jesus), was utilized in the sacrifice of Christ so that Jesus might have power over death and could remove the curse. The renting of the veil symbolized the removal of anything between God and man, for Jesus is the one and only mediator between the two. Jesus is actually now able to bring us to the Father, where before our presence before God would never have been allowed.
I don’t know if I can say the symbolism is necessarily all that important other than it provides comfort and textual evidence to the overall design of the Bible itself. It certainly is not a collected book of myths, for it fits together like a puzzle, and its message is unifying and purposeful.
Explain Hebrews 10:25 as completely as you can. What do you see “approaching” that will affect the Christian community? What advice would you give Christians to help them prepare for the future?
Most of evangelical Christianity would argue that Hebrews 10:25 is a command to attend church on Sundays. They would argue that forsaking the “gathering together” is akin to apostasy. Dr. Missler, though, now seems to be indicating that this is not what the text was intended to say. He argues that this text is referring to the Hebrews being addressed in the letter, that they were tempted to abandon Christianity altogether and stop fellowshipping with other believers entirely, returning back to Judaism. Personally, I think Paul is stating that we should not stop assembling together as believers. But I do not think this applies to or obligates us to attend weekly meetings at modern Christian religious organizations. I would argue that these are excluded because they are neither the Christian church nor are they modeled after the biblical church. They are modeled after the world, function like the world, and have the fruit of the world. What they produce or promote is infantile and is meant not to equip the body of believers, but is meant to keep them docile and to encourage the exchange of money for entertainment.
I would also argue that the “assembling of ourselves” is accomplished in many different ways, from small groups, to online meetings, and can be both synchronous and asynchronous as well. I am in fellowship with other believers if I am communicating with them, even if years pass between us. I am in fellowship with another brother when I read what he has written, even if he is long dead. Today I attend a local church in a rural area. I do so in full faith and confidence that I’m doing what I’m called to do, not because I should attend an organized church’s meetings, but because my wife seeks out fellowship with other believers. I personally do not have that same desire to be around others or to interact with other people. I struggle because we both are convicted that we have been called to this particular church group (this body of believers) to serve a particular purpose, to build up, to edify, to support. But, I have not received from God a clear purpose. I do not know how I am supposed to be serving these people. There does not appear to be any kind of actual need and the typical “needs” are already handled. I am not there to be “fed” as the preaching and teaching is very basic. But most of my encouragement as feeding as a believer comes from 1. Studying at KI and 2. Writing books and 3. Studying with my wife.
So, I personally think Hebrews 10:25 is encouraging us to not forsake the gathering together with other believers. Christians should be banding together and meeting regularly, but it does not in any way obligate us to be a part of or come under the authority of what is commonly referred to as “the church” today. These are man made organizations and has little to do with the church Jesus is building.
What do I see approaching? For our time and our particular place, I see persecution coming for the American church and maybe the global church. Much of the church in other areas is already under persecution and has been for thousands of years. American Christians, though, have somehow escaped much of it. But if America breaks up (as the Soviet Union did), I see three countries forming from it: the West Coast, the core of what will remain America in the central states, and the East Coast. The two coasts will certainly become authoritarian and here we will see most of the persecution of Christians and the propagation and legalization of the new cult religion. It is my prayer that this does not happen in my lifetime or the lifetime of my children, but God’s will be done. If it does happen, the conviction is clear for me and may family to remain here on the coast, to serve people in need as best we can, and to serve our King, even if it means to the death.
How can believers prepare for the future? I think most importantly, Christian believers, especially American Christians, need to make a priority of memorizing large tracks of the Scriptures. Whole books if possible. This way, if the Bible is outlawed we will be able to still carry with us the World of God in our hearts. Next, people need to get out of the cities, unless God has specifically convicted them to remain there. Nothing good comes from living in this metropolitan areas, and when the country breaks apart, it will be the cities that fall to crime and chaos. I’ve always lived in rural areas and my family now has a small piece of land on the coast that we intend to move to full time in the next two years. It is remote, difficult to get to, and quite beautiful. We plan to raise our children without the indoctrination of public education, without the mind poison of the world that is being pushed by every institution, and have every intention of making disciples for Christ (what they do with that training is between them and the Lord). We want them to be able to think critically, and biblically, about the world around them, and be able to interact with people on a intellectual basis, but also be wise and prudent in their dealings with the populous (for the people are madness). Other than this, people need to make sure they are not relying completely on the systems that are in place or that will be coming online in the future. All of these systems will come with strings attached. It is best to cut ties now with the world than let the world drag you down to hell with it.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I’ve always been curious about the quote that we find in Hebrews 10:7, “In the volume of the book it is written of Me.” In Hebrews it states “volume” but in the Hebrew text that it is quoting (Psalm 40:7) it states “scroll.” Even looking at the LXX shows “scroll.” But last night I looked at the underlining word and both the LXX and the Hebrew has the exact same word, κεφαλίς. So the issue is not in the original text, but in the English translations that futility change the world (still unclear as to why).
Overall, though, this lecture was interesting. I think mostly I came away with the realization that Jesus is the final sacrifice, the fulfillment of the Law, to the point that now the Law has been rendered obsolete. Not that it has in some way been disqualified (for it is still capable of doing what it was intended to do), but it is simply no longer needed in that Jesus, in fulfilling the law completely, is now able to exercise power over death and over the curse and to remove both from the plight of the sinner. Through faith we have standing now before God in Jesus who is the Christ. We, the wild olive, are grafted in. We have both salvation and the seal of that salvation until the day of redemption in the Holy Spirit. We can have confidence in Christ before God the Father, that he finds favor in us, if only in Christ in us.
Lecture 12 Discussion Questions
Use scripture to explain in depth the meaning of Charles Spurgeon’s quote “It is not thy hold on Christ that saves thee; it is Christ. It is not thy joy in Christ that saves thee; it is Christ. It is not even thy faith in Christ that saves thee, though that be the instrument. It is Christ’s blood and merit.” Describe a past experience when you recognized the truth of this quote.
Paul said that Jesus is the “author and finisher of our faith,” (Hebrews 12:2). He is the only one by which people will be saved because “there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12). This was because the Law was incapable of saving anyone but Jesus, because only Jesus was able to live on this earth with all the temptations associated with a fallen existence and actually fulfill the law. It was because he was able to do that on our behalf that a way was opened for the gentiles, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,” (Ephesians 2:8) and “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:36).
As for myself, the last seven or eight years have illustrated to me in increasing ways how very true it is that this that is happening within me is a work of God and I have no control over it and no power to bring it about. I can look back at just about every event in my life and see the fingerprints of God all over it. He has truly been involved in every aspect of my life. To name just a few: he brought me a wife this year, a relationship and a life I never thought I would ever actually have. Likewise, God also brought me to finish my education, something I also never thought I would ever finally do. Not only did he have me finish, but I was able to pursue the research I desired to study, and was able to do so for free. Lastly, God has given me a potential gift that could be used as a ministry. When my wife find out about this gift, she became very excited and is my biggest supporter in pursuing it. Our life itself, as we pursue it together, is shaping up to be a kind of dream life in both general day to day living as well as in ministry together and in raising our children and how we make a living.
None of it was due to my own effort or my own hand or talent. It was all a gift from God to serve his purposes.
Use scripture to show why it appears that the ear is God’s “information portal” and the eye is Satan’s.
We are cautioned by James to to be “swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath,” (James 1:19) and by the assembly leader, “Walk prudently when you go to the house of God; and draw near to hear rather than to give the sacrifice of fools, for they do not know that they do evil.” (Ecclesiastes 5:1), though this sacrifice of fools would, I assume, be many words rather than what one can consume with the eye. Lastly, Jesus tells us that “The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” (Matthew 6:22–23).
I could not find any Bible references to Satan using the eye as as the main avenue to the soul or to tempt us with. It would stand to reason given that Jesus indirectly inferred this in the last quote, but it actually seems as if the eye is either good or bad, not necessarily a conduit.
Briefly detail one of the heroes in the Hall of Faith. Include their acts of faith, their major challenges, and how they overcame them. Has God asked you if you trust Him? Explain.
Enoch is mentioned only in the Genesis 5 genealogy, briefly again in 1 Chron 1:3, in the genealogy in Luke 3:37, and then in Hebrews 11:5 and lastly he is quoted by Jude in 1:14. This Enoch should not be confused with the Enoch of Genesis 4:17. But in the passages proper we discover:
1. When he was 65 years old he had a son, Methuselah. At this point something presumably changed for Enoch, as he then “walked with God three hundred years.” In the LXX it states, “Enoch was very pleasing to God…for two hundred years…” It states that Enoch was 165 years old when he had Methuselah, was pleasing to God for 200 years, ending with him being “not, for God took him” after 365 years, or god “transposed” him.
2. He either “walked with God” or was “well pleasing to God.” Either way, it is important to note that the writer to the Hebrews quotes the LXX in that “he had this testimony, the he pleased God.”
3. It’s also important to note, the writer to the Hebrews points out that Enoch was, indeed, raptured (taken, snatched up) because he states, Enoch “was taken away so that he did not see death.” This was not a spiritual rapture or symbolic of something else. It was a literal, physical, tangible disappearing of a fallen human, which is in line with both Jesus’ rapture into heaven (the ascension), as well as our presumed rapture as described in 1 Co 15:51-54 and 1 Th 4:15-17.
4. Lastly, the writer to the Hebrews points out that Enoch’s efforts were wrought out of faith (Hebrews 11:5–6).
A second fascinating person mentioned in the Hall of Faith was Jephthah. Granted, he is mentioned in passing, as the writer to the Hebrews states that he did not have time to delve into people like this, but Jephthah is one of those peculiar individuals who does something that appears to be grotesque and yet is praised for it by God in his word. It is only after some investigating that we discover the truth lying underneath.
Jephthah is actually found in just two chapters of Judges (11-12), 1 Samuel 12:11, and then lastly in Hebrews 11:32. Here is what can be found:
1. Jephthah wasn’t really that great of an individual. He was a warrior, but also the son of a harlot. When he became of age he was driven out of his father’s home by his siblings who wanted him to have no part in their father’s inheritance. He fled from his brothers and became what appears to be the leader of bandits in Tob.
2. After some time, war came to Israel and the people of Gilead sought Jephthah’s help. He was a little less than enthusiastic at their request for help. But they were in such trouble that they promised to make him their leader if he fight for them.
3. In Judges 11:30 Jephthah made a vow before the Lord stating that if he is victorious, then whatever comes out of the front door of his house when he arrives he will offer that up as a burnt offering. He was ultimately victorious, and when he returned home, his daughter came out through the front door to greet him. He was distressed that he would now have to offer her up to God. She encouraged him to do so, but wanted two months to “bewail” her virginity. He allowed her to do so and she did. Once finished it says , “she returned to her father, and he carried out his vow with her which he had vowed. She knew no man.”
In this I’m very divided. On the one hand, there is a possibility that he never intended a burnt offering, but simply an offering to make whoever walks through the front door to be “set apart” like Samuel. But, even if this was not the case, and Jephthah really did intend to make a burnt offering of whoever walked through the door, and he actually did it, what of it? Does it really change the character of God all that much? The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob is a vengeful God. He is an angry God. And he is a God of sacrifice. He called for the sacrifice of Isaac. He sacrificed his own son on our behalf. But the final nail in the coffin is the fact (revelation) that Jephthah is listed in the Hall of Faith in Hebrews. There is no better credential but having Jesus’ direct endorsement. So, whether Jephthah intended to sacrifice his daughter or wanted to put her away and keep her a virgin, or whether he made the vow in haste or not, the writer to the Hebrews accredited it to him for righteousness. To this end, the problem of what Jephthah did is our, not Jephthah’s.
His challenge was:
1. He was going to have to sacrifice his only daughter who was his only child.
2. His lineage would most likely end with her.
His solution:
1. He kept his vow to God regardless of the consequences. Whatever it was he intended to do, he followed through with it.
Now, as far as how God has asked me to trust him. There are a myriad of ways:
1. He asked me to trust him when I was a Buddhist at 17, when he stripped me of the ability to meditate, removed my ability to practice the Martial Arts, and put inside me a thirst for his word. He didn’t tell me then what Christianity was. He didn’t ask me if I wanted to be one. He expected me to trust him that he would work everything out on my behalf.
2. He then asked me to trust him when I was sent into the world (after the military and after my 2 years in Germany where I was raised up in Christ). I had no idea what I was doing. I was accepted by no one. All I knew was there was something terribly wrong with the modern church, how it functioned, and it was not following a biblical model, nor was it modeled after nor did it serve Christ. But God simply told me to study, learn, grow in faith and in knowledge of him. He said I needed to trust him to work out the details.
3. Countless times God has placed me in harms way, whether that was in the mouth of ravenous wolves (people not the animals), or in my terrible first marriage, or in different employment positions, all of which looked terrible and menacing and like grave jeopardy while I was going through each situation. But God asked each time for me to trust him. He would work it out.
4. Then God put me in a job that was a dream come true. He gave me a house, he gave me a paradise property on the lake of my youth, he gave me the funds to pay both off, and the time (semi-retirement) to enjoy them. During this time, again, he granted me the ability to invest all my free time into studying Scripture. He did not give me (still has not yet given) how I would use it or what purpose it serves, but God also provided the opportunity to finish my Master’s program and also go on and finish my doctorate. I have no idea why he did so, but once I was finished with them, the disquieted voice in my head finally ceased. He is still, though, asking me to trust him. I am confident that time I invested will not go to waste.
5. Lastly, about a year ago, God made it pretty clear that he was going to make some changes in my life (even though I at first was not at all receptive to those changes). After about a month of dealing with me and me not even recognizing what he was doing within me, he made it abundantly clear his plans. He told me: “You need to prepare for a future wife.” Long story short, three months later I met my future wife, and within three more months we were married. I moved. We started looking for a local fellowship to join, I changed jobs (which my previous experience helped with greatly), and now we are gearing up to return back to the coast where all my work and accumulation of house and property for the last 7 years will pay off with massive dividends, allowing us to save thousands of dollars a month. Our lifestyle in a few years will be one of fairytales, a kind of dream life, and God will be using all the things I’ve done and amassed over the years. Nothing has gone to waste. Nothing has been left unused. It even appears as if he’s led us to a home church in a rural community on the coast where the leadership there need genuine help and we both are gifted exactly in the way in which we can actually help them and ask for nothing in return. Yet, through all of this, God is asking me continually, at every step to trust him. To wait on him. To love him.
As the passage says in Hebrews 11:5-6, “without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.”
Describe the New Jerusalem as completely as you can. When will we see this city?
This shows up in Re 3:12 and 21:1-2, 9. It is part of the New Heavens and New Earth, and New Jerusalem, at the end of the Millennium. When it says “new heavens” I do not think this is referring to the supernatural realm, the other dimension in which exist and dwell God or the angelic hosts. I think it refers to the universe proper, the cosmos, the dimensionality we know as the physical universe and all that is contained within it. The “new earth” is, of course, a new planet, since the earth we currently exist on today will at that time melt away into its constituent parts and pass away from existence.
Explain Hebrews 11:13 as completely as you can. What are the covenants that God has yet to keep with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?
“These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.” (Hebrews 11:13).
Those who came before Jesus died on the cross, they all looked forward toward a saving grace and they did so by faith. In their death, they had not received the promises that are made by grace through faith in Jesus, or in the Messiah, but they died in faith, having hope that one day they would receive the promises, most importantly the promise of resurrection (Job 19:24ff). This is similar to us, in that we look forward to the promise of the resurrection, yet for us, we have a more sure word of prophecy, in that we were visited by Jesus 2000 years ago and have the benefit of the eyewitness accounts (the New Testament) of that visitation. We look back to the cross for our salvation (the actual work that redeems us) while the OT saints looked forward to the cross that had not yet occurred. The Jews of the first century who were visited by Jesus were not really looking at all as they viewed their salvation came through the upholding of the law of Moses and they saw their Messiah as a political figure who would free them from the oppressive bondage of the Romans. They were blinded in part by God in this (that they would not see him for who he was when he came) so that a way would be made for the Gentiles to be grafted into the vine. When the time of the Gentiles is over (the church is complete) all those who died in faith, in hope of a future salvation will then be raised again by God and will face judgment (Hebrews 9:27). Paul concludes that “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26).
What is the significance of Isaac being dead in the mind of Abraham for three days? How do we know this?
This made a picture of what would come in Jesus, as God sacrificed his son on the same mountain. In He 11:17-19 it confirms this by the statement, “concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.” The figurative sense here being the fact that even though God provided his own sacrifice, Isaac was not seen again until 3 days later.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
Everything in God’s program for us on earth is centered around faith. As is stated in Hebrews, “without faith it is impossible to please him, for he who comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him” (He 11:6). God asks us to trust him, to rely on him, to believe in him instead of relying on what is evident around us or what we could ascertain through logic or reasons. In fact, God asks us, requires us, to do all things through faith, as Paul concludes, “Whatever is not from faith is sin” (Ro 14:23).
Lecture 13 Discussion Questions
Define “chasteneth.” Write your own personal paraphrase of Hebrews 12:5-11 to match the results of your word study.
It is παιδεία or “the rearing of a child, training, teaching, education” or “punishment for the purpose of improved behavior.” This word occurs 6 times in the NT and 109 times in the OT (LXX) and surrounds this idea of “instruction.” God disciplines those he loves (Pr 3:11-12).
This passage of Hebrews I would paraphrase as:
Vs. 5 Do not reject discipline from God. Do not be discouraged when he rebukes you.
Vs. 6 Because the Lord disciplines those he loves and corrects a son in good standing.
vs. 7 If you endure he treats you as a son, for every son is disciplined by his father.
vs. 8 If your father does not discipline you, you are illegitimate.
vs. 9 Our mortal fathers corrected us and we accepted their discipline. We should do so all the more for the Father of spirits which his discipline allows us to live.
vs. 10 Discipline by fathers is only for a few days, but those few days are for our benefit, that we gain access to his holiness.
vs. 11 Discipline is not enjoyable when it’s happening. It’s often rather painful. But afterward, we reap the results of righteousness because we’ve been trained by that discipline.
Why are justified hurts the most dangerous ones? Have you ever experienced a ”justified hurt?” Explain the situation and how you handled it to avoid the “root of bitterness.”
Justified hurts are those wounds that we harbor that actually occurred. They are not perceived hurts. They are not unrealistic or irrational hurts. They are the wounds that were caused by another where we have actually been wronged by a person for whatever reason. This kind of wound is so dangerous because they are “justified.” There is a reason why we harbor them. It is an offense that has been done to us and is most often one sided and unprovoked. We are justified in our hurt and in our anger, in our resentment and our bitterness, so we are less inclined to forgive those kinds of injuries done to us. They foster all manner of gossip, backbiting, and deep-seated resentment.
As for myself, “justified” is a loaded word. There have been instances in my life where I’ve been surrounded by wolves, vipers who have done things to me, harmed me verbally, emotionally. But for a long time now I’ve separated myself from what these people have done. Whatever they might do to me, they actually are doing to my King. What can they do to me? Kill me? They cannot kill my soul? They cannot harm me beyond my body and I don’t even want to be here in the first place. Insults. Injury. Death. It is all against Jesus anyway. So, I don’t feel as if there is such a thing as “justified” hurts.
The church (I mean here the individual believers, not the building or the organization) tends to hurt people, and does so deeply. But we need to be resolved that we will continue in service to the church regardless of the hurt we have received.
This all being said, I often wonder if I have a root of bitterness concerning people in general and especially concerning the church. I approach people and especially “the church” as if they already have hurt me, or as if it is a guarantee that they will hurt me or reject me. This comes from 10 years of trying to serve churches in my 20’s only to come away with the realization that no one was interested in what the Bible actually says. They are interested in their folk theologies, in the doctrines they’ve concocted over the centuries, and in their artificial programs geared to draw people into the modern church organization rather than into the living, breathing body of Christ.
But, this is now changing for me. God has redirected me from my long-held isolation and has sent me on a path that has first equipped me with a wife (a true and genuine helpmate) and a family, and has then placed me in a small rural church where the pastor and his wife need genuine help. It is certain that this small group of people will at some point disappoint me. At some point, I will be tasked to teach, I will be asked to build a discipleship program and all the effort and all the time invested will be met haphazardly or with a lukewarm response. At the same time, though, I now know that it is God who is building his church, not me. If I do something and it does not produce fruit, then that is not something God favored to be done. I simply need to retool, pray more earnestly, and begin again. Pain and loss and hurts and betrayal, this is simply the natural results of being called a disciple of Jesus.
Hebrews 12:16 gives a different explanation of the Esau birthright loss than most people normally believe. Define the word “profane.” Was Esau justified in his anger?
The word βέβηλος means “allowable to be trodden, permitted, worldly, pertaining to being profane, in the sense of worldly or godless.” Esau not only sold his birthright cheaply, but he actually despised it (Gen 25:34). The writer to the Hebrews calls him “a fornicator,” which is a pretty strong declaration. I don’t agree that this is a “spiritual fornication” or he would have stated this. He was the firstborn but he did not act accordingly. Because he gave up his birthright his double-portion was forfeited. The blessing at the end of Isaac’s life, though, seemingly appears to still be rightfully Esau’s, as it requires deception for Jacob to receive it (Gen 27). We also should keep in mind that Esau was not prone to making good choices in his life. We see this in his reaction to the birthright fiasco, in that he vowed to kill Jacob (Gen 27:41ff), and also in his poor selection of a wife (Gen 26:34ff; 28:8ff; 36:2ff).
Esau was not justified in his anger against his brother Jacob because it was his own choice to sell off his birthright, and also Jacob had help (though I would argue that Esau did have a legitimate grievance for the theft of the blessing). Jacob was not the only one involved in the plot to take his blessing. Rebekah was instrumental in Jacob doing what he did, almost to the point that Jacob is viewed as innocent of any wrongdoing. Most likely, Rebekah was acting this way because she already saw a pattern in Esau’ choices, how they were not wise ones. Because of this, she had to act prudently, choosing her younger son over her elder son.
Study the concept of “firstfruits” and share your findings.
Jesus is the first fruits of those who believe (1 Co 15:20ff; James 1:18) and there are those who are of the church that are first fruits of the saved (Re 14:4). The first fruits originated with Abel and Cain. Cain brought an “offering” of the fruit of the ground but Abel brought “the firstborn of the flock” and of their fatness. The LXX provides a better understanding of the events, as God said in response to Cain’s disappointment, “Have you not sinned if you offer rightly but do not divide rightly?” Cain failed to offer the first and the best of his crop, but just offered some of it. We don’t know exactly how he apportioned the crops in question. All we know is God determined that he had not “divided rightly.”
What are the five warnings given in the Epistle to the Hebrews? What factors caused them to be written?
The Danger of Drifting (Hebrews 2:1-4)
The Danger of Disobedience (Hebrews 3:7-4:13)
Progress toward Maturity (Hebrews 5:11-6:20)
The Danger of Willful Sin (Hebrews 10:26-31)
Warning against Indifference (Hebrews 12:25-29)
The Hebrews Paul was addressing were struggling to grow in their faith, even though they were seasoned believers and should already have been teachers at this point. They were backsliding, or intentionally or instinctively returning back to the “milk” of the word rather than pressing on to perfection and consuming the “meat” of the word. This placed them in a precarious position of possibly losing their salvation altogether, of backsliding so far that there was a possible chance they might fall away entirely, forfeit their salvation. Paul warned them: if they fell away after having already been so established in the faith, there would be no more grace by which they could be redeemed again to Christ once more. Their apostasy would be permeant and they would lose their salvation.
According to this study what things are being shaken? What things will not be shaken?
In Hebrews 12:26 both heaven and the earth (the physical realm and the earth itself – I do not think the “heaven” here refers to the supernatural realm). These things will be removed, being things that are made. That which cannot be shaken remains, that is the kingdom that we will receive on the earth, the kingdom that resides in the supernatural realm (heaven).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
We christians have had a race set before us. A race that we need to run with endurance, looking to Jesus who is the author and finisher of our faith. We should likewise not become weary or discouraged. We have not resisted to the point of death to keep ourselves from sin.
My favorite verse in this chapter: “pursue peace with all people (He 12:14). This I’ve tried to do much of my adult life. I concluded long ago that it was better for me to be absent from the modern organized “church” than to be a part of it and cause confusion and disagreement. They will do what they will do and I was afforded (I think by God) to separate myself from others, to focus my efforts on the study of God’s word, to grow in grace, in faith, in knowledge of my Christ and King. The time spent doing so has prepared me well, I think. Organically. Theologically. Systematically. Now, as I’m being called out by God to serve the actual church he is building that is found fractured within the human organization called “the church,” God has made a concerted effort that all that I’ve done for the last 18 + years has not been a waste or a distraction or a rebellion, but it all has worked together for the greater good. I’m excited and a little anxious and nervous about what is to come in the future. I don’t know if there will be a time where I’m called to train and raise up others for Christ, who will be firmly established on the apostles and prophets so that they might be sent out and feed the lost sheep in the hills, or if persecution is coming and it is time to band together, despite our differences, and recognize that to be a Christian it means, “we must through many tribulations enter the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:22).
Lastly, the statement in Hebrews 12:22 that states, “To an innumerable company of angels” is actually καὶ μυριάσιν ἀγγέλων in the Greek and should be rendered “and countless angels.” I don’t know what it is. I am fascinated with the angels in the Bible. I wish there was more information available on their origin, on their substance, on their similarities (and differences) with humans on earth. Did they once populate the earth before Gen 1:1? Were they directly created to be the “heavenly host” or did they attain to such a position after having gone through a redemptive process much like (or even different from) our own? Were they once saved by grace through faith, only to reach their own “revealing of the sons of God” to now have no grace afforded to them? Will we likewise experience the same stripping away of grace in heaven? Or, are humans different? All the references I come across in the Bible, including this one, are always cryptic, off-handed comments that are missing any real explanation or substance. It is a struggle for me to wait on God concerning this matter because their account could very well explain a great deal about our own fate.
Lecture 14 Discussion Questions
Describe the future Messianic Kingdom.
The messianic kingdom is mentioned in the Bible several times (Heb 1:9,13,14; 4:1-11; 6:9; 10:25,37,38; 12:28). It is a place that Jesus is currently preparing for us (John 14:2-3 – though, I’m not as certain this passage is referring to the Millennial Kingdom or where we will dwell in our final glorification). It is considered a place not bound by bondage (Gal 4:26) which is compared to the current Jerusalem which is bound by bondage (or the curse). In the end, it will be replaced by the everlasting kingdom or the eternal order (Re 20-22).
My personal understanding is this: the Millennial Kingdom will be established on Eartha after Jesus returns, defeats Satan and he is bound and cast into Tartarus for 1000 years. During that 1000 year period, Jesus will reign from David’s throne (Luke 1:32ff) on earth and will subdue (or the nations will already be subdued or will be immediately subdued) all the nations both believer and non-believer alike.
It will be a much different Kingdom than what has previously occurred on earth. It will be a period of peace on the earth (Micah 4:2–4; Isaiah 32:17–18), and joy (Isaiah 61:7, 10), and comfort (Isaiah 40:1–2). Christ will rule as king (Isaiah 9:3–7; 11:1–10).
It appears as if the “church” (all the Christians who believed) will be “raptured” before this period (middle of the 7 year tribulation) and will remain with Jesus for the second part of the 3 1/2 years. There is no more mention of the church through the millennial period, only those who were martyred during the second half of the tribulation will reign with Jesus during that 1000 year period. Paul tells us that after the rapture, the church remains with Jesus and “we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Th 4:17). So this would require that the church remains with Jesus during this 1000 period of time, it is just not mentioned specifically so we do not know what it is we will be doing.
One possibility is the those who are “Sons of God” (angels, messengers, supernatural beings equal and like the angels) are continually “with” Jesus regardless of their actual geo-spacial location in the physical dimension or the spiritual one. This would allow for the church to take her place along side the host of heaven and begin their work and service to the Lord.
Do a comparative word study between “firstborn” and “firstfruits.” What are the rights of the firstborn in a Jewish culture? How do these words relate to us and our inheritance in Christ?
Firstfruits occurs throughout the New Testament and refers to either those who first believed of the Jewish people during Jesus’ visitation or to Jesus himself. I would actually disagree with the idea that there is a distinction made in Hebrews 12:22ff between OT saints and NT saints or even us, post-OT/NT saints. I would argue that “the spirits of just men made perfect” is referring to both OT and NT saints. This is a general statement referring to believers. Sinners who have been made perfect. I could say there is an argument that they are “spirits” because it is a reference to those who have died before Christ and in Christ (but all are in Christ if they died in faith), with the differentiation between the dead and the living. But this does not in any way distinguish between OT and NT. If dividing dead from living, then this is because those beings who are spirits are such because they are disembodied in hades. They will not receive their bodies again until the resurrection. This has not yet happened. For OT saints, it’s possible that their resurrection will occur during the Ezekiel 37-38 dry bones situation. This would allow for every Jew who has ever lived to be resurrected and thus fulfilling Paul’s claim that “all Israel will be saved” (Ro 11:26). It is likewise possible that this will correspond to the resurrection of those who are dead in Christ along with their rapture with those who are alive in Christ at that time. This would then constitute as the first resurrection (Rev 20:5-6). But it is more likely that the Ezekiel 37 resurrection of Israel will be a separate resurrection (most likely the 2nd), occurring after the millennium but before the 3rd resurrection at the great white throne judgment.
Firstborn is a position of honor, it is the place in a given family in which the lineage is carried on through genealogy. This individual received a double portion of the inheritance, but also was required to care for his entire family, both to look out for their well being but also financially.
Most often in the biblical account, the individual in the firstborn’s natural position tended to forfeit his birthright. This occurred for various reasons and typically meant the second, third, or fourth, sometimes an adopted son, and even sometimes a daughter took the place of firstborn heir.
Examples of this would be: Cain forfeited and the birthright was given to Seth. Same for Japheth to Shem. Ishmael to Isaac (though it could be argued that Ishmael did nothing wrong but this was done to him). Esau gave his to Jacob. Reuben to Judah and Joseph. Aaron to Moses. Jesse’s sons to David.
From the text, though, we see that the word for firstborn πρωτότοκος occurs 9 times in the NT and 8 of those refer to Jesus Christ (Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7; Rom 8:29; Col 1:15, 18; Heb 11:28, 12:23).
These both relate to our inheritance in Jesus Christ because Jesus has become the “firstborn among many brethren.” (Romans 8:29). Jesus died so that we might be adopted as sons to God. This, I think, will be different for the Jewish people who will inherit the earth in the afterlife. They will have the same immortality, but they will most likely dwell on the earth as Adam and Eve once did while the church proper will occupy heaven and be revealed as sons of God.
There are numerous firstfruits in the NT. Either referring to Jesus (1 Co 15:23), or those who become believers first in a particular area (1 Co 16:15) or referring to believers in general (James 1:18), this term identifies those who first come to Christ, and those who are first revealed as sons of God as firstfruits.
What are the rewards for those entering heaven? Which crown(s) do you expect to receive and why?
It is clear from from 1 Co 3:11-15 the whatever we do while on earth it will be tested by fire. If the work remains, we will receive a reward. If not, we will suffer loss. And yes, we must all stand before the “judgment seat of Christ” (2 Co 5:10), but this does not mean we will receive a hierarchical system of rewards based on works. This is simply a mechanism employed to get around salvation by grace through faith.
I have two issues with the concept that there are “crowns” or “rewards” based on works (even though there still may be both).
1. A hierarchical system of rewards that leads one into a status position will inevitably lead individuals at the lower ends of that structure toward resentment. This would be a breeding ground for jealousy and sin to surface. It happened first with Satan, then with Adam and Eve, then with the angels of Gen 6:2. Sin is apparently possible in both heaven (the supernatural realm) and within being (both spiritual and living) that have no sin nature and are not contaminated by the curse. I don’t think (I could be wrong) God would set up his everlasting kingdom in this manner. Then again, he might very well be priming the pump for a new creation with a new group of individuals who need redemption.
2. The individual believer who is genuinely saved by grace through faith is one who has been indwelled by the Holy Spirit as a seal for the day of redemption. This means that individual will begin to be transformed from the inside out from the moment of a saving belief to the moment they die or the moment they are resurrected or raptured (and the transformation process is completed). This process will move them (willing or not) to the finished work of Christ. All the works they are to be doing in this life have been predestined for them beforehand “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:10) and “Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.” (Psalm 139:16). These are not our works. They are not choices we make. These things have been preordained and we simply “walk in them.” If we are responsible for anything in this life it is a single choice that we continually make again and again, day after day, to surrender ourselves to God. Everything else is the work of God hand in our lives.
Likewise, the crowns mentioned in the Bible are interestingly all related to salvation and not to works. The Crown of Life is given to those who have suffered for his sake (Jas 1:12; Rev 2:10). But life is also given to everyone who believes. Some believers do not “suffer” in the same way at the same time or to the same degree for Christ. But if we are a believer then we will in some way suffer for his sake. Likewise, the Crown of Righteousness (2 Tim 4:8) is given for those who loved His appearing. This is true, but righteousness is likewise given to every believer because it is the righteousness of Christ. The Crown of Glory (1 Pet 5:4): for those who fed the flock, but also for those in the end who are glorified and receive their immortal bodies and are revealed as Sons of God. The Crown Incorruptible (1 Cor 9:25) for those who press on steadfastly, but also for those who are raptured and put on immortality. The Crown of Rejoicing (1 Thess 2:19) for those who win souls, but everyone in heaven will be rejoicing and not everyone is called to be an evangelist and I doubt that Jesus gives more weight of worthiness to the evangelist than he does to the teacher or to the individual who faithfully gives or to the individual who cleans the church after every service (though I’m not certain this is a spiritual gift, but certainly an act of service).
I do not argue that there are not crowns mentioned in the Bible. But I don’t think they will be used as a means of categorizing saved individuals into a hierarchy of good, better, best. But, to be honest, I say this because I don’t really concern myself with crowns or rewards. I’m only interested in serving my King in whatever manner I can, in prayer and petition and with a thankful heart, in hopes that I might not represent him poorly to my wife, to my family, to the church, or to the world. Rewards I could care less about. Once I get to heaven I will happily pick up my mop and get to work.
Describe the cosmic war of Psalm 2:1-3. What are the rage and vain imaginations all about?
This has been a long-time favorite Psalm of mine. I memorized it back in my 20s. It records the desire of the people of the earth to overthrow the rulership of the trinity, and then records the conversation had between the godhead concerning their desires.
Dr. Missler points to Acts 4:25-28 as the point in which this began. But, really, I think it began back in Gen 4:26, when “men began to call on the name of the Lord.” (For in Onkelos this is translated “Then in his days the sons of men desisted (or forbore) from praying in the name of the Lord”) and also “the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of his heart was only evil continually” (Ge 6:5).
Compare the Millennial and Solomon’s Temple, including the priestly garments. Who will worship in the Millennial Temple?
The sanctuary itself is an exact copy in the Millennial temple of Solomon’s temple as it is with the Tabernacle (though, the temples are twice as large as the tabernacle itself).
The Millennial temple, though, is unique in that it has several objects missing. There are objects in all the other temples (Moses’, Solomon’s, Herod’s) that are not found in the Millennial Temple. There is no veil between the holy place and the holy of holies. In the Millennial Temple there is no table of shewbread, no bread of God, no lamp stands, no ark (I question this, there may be no actual ark but there is the mercy seat). There is also no high priest either. Lastly, the eastern Gate in the Millennial Temple is closed and shut. It is speculated that this will be the gate through which Jesus, when he returns, will enter the temple and that gate will be there after continually shut as a sign of respect and honor for the King (Ezekiel 44:1-2).
In the Millennial Temple, everyone will worship there. The offering and sacrifices will resume and the temple itself will only be opened on the Sabbath Day and New Moons. The priestly garments are symbolic of righteousness (white), with blood being put on their right ear, right thumb, and right foot. They are likewise anointed with sacred oil.
Compare the bride of Christ and the body of Christ. Describe the bride’s raiment.
Dr. Missler makes a distinction between these two descriptors: that the body of Christ is the whole of the church, and the bride of Christ is a subset group from within the body of Christ that will experience the most intimate relationship with him).
I would disagree with this assessment. I would argue that these two terms are synonymous. The body of Christ is the bride of Christ. But, I think there needs to be a further clarification: not all who claim to be Christian are part of the body (Matt 7:21-23). Throughout church history and very much so in modern evangelicalism, that which is identified as “the church” is not really the church that Jesus is building. He appears to work from individual stone to individual stone, and those stones are found scattered throughout the human made and human directed organizations that are called “the church.” Persecution tends to purify the church of those who are not actually believers, but in the day and age where the Christian title carries with it little to no cost, the multitude are fine with picking it up.
The church and the bride are the same, but Christian is not necessarily the same as the body or the bride. I do not see from Scripture a separate subgroup that will enjoy a more intimate fellowship with Jesus than the rest of the actual church that he is building. Why would there be? He is already called out the genuine church from the non-believers. This is his bride. And he will finish with her, in her, and through her what he has begun. Why would he then cast a portion of her aside for a then yet still smaller group to show partiality? The whole church he loves, but this subset group he really, really loves? This does not balance with the whole of Scripture.
We find in Re 19:7-9 a description of the bride’s attire: she is dressed in fine linen, that is clean and bright, and these are the righteous acts of the saints.
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I have come away from this study with the realization that it is quite possible that I’ve misunderstood the end times and the rapture and the resurrection altogether. At least in its details and timings. If the first resurrection occurs only for the tribulation saints who have become martyrs, then when is there a resurrection for the general Christian? What about the OT saints? What about everyone else (the non-believer)?
1. The first resurrection must contain all people in the Church since Paul uses words like “the dead in Christ” which indicates not that “some who are dead in Christ” but all who are dead in Christ. Likewise, for 2 Co 5:10ff and 1 Th 4:16ff to harmonize with Re 20:4ff (and since it does not say exactly when the tribulation martyrs are resurrected only that they are part of the first resurrection), we have to say that all three of these passages are referring to the point in time when the 1st resurrection occurs, and the whole of the church is raptured (this would be OT saint, NT saint, Tribulation saint). This would have to align with Re 11:15ff as part of a Mid-Trib resurrection and rapture. The church is caught up into the air to meet the Lord and are then forever with the Lord. We can assume that the church is “with” Jesus during the 1000 years since we will forever be with the Lord, but we cannot assume that we will reign with Christ in the 1000 years (only the tribulation martyrs have this explicitly stated). We know the 24 elders are both “priests and kings” (Re 5:10) and it is possible that they represent all the saved, given that Jesus has “redeemed us to God by his blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation” (vs9; Re 1:6), but this is speculative. All we know for certain is that we will be “revealed as Sons of God” (Ro 8:19) and this is something the whole of creation waits earnestly for.
2. Bizarrely, there appears to be three distinct types of Jews in existence. There are those who are of Israel (corporate), which is every Jewish person to ever live. Then there are those “first fruit” Jewish people who were called out of the general assembly to be a part of the mystery, the church. This would include all those who have had their faith “accredited to them for righteousness” (i.e. Abraham, Rahab, etc). Then there is a third group of Jews who say they are Jewish but are not actually part of Israel. Paul makes this distinction in Romans 9:6ff. Now, will the OT saints (those who are part of the church) be caught up and out of life at the 1st resurrection? I would have to say, yes. They will from then on no longer be a part of Israel but will be the church (as they are already considered so). But this would require that they believed in the Messiah to come, that he would save them, and that they would have been given a particular and special dispensation of grace for such belief. The rest of the Jews, even if they were looking to the Messiah in the future, they would have died in faith but without having received the promises, and would thus remain dead in faith and in hope of being counted worthy to attain to the resurrection from the dead. These (the corporate Israel) will not be resurrected until Ezekiel 37 dry bones prophecy, in which all of Israel will be brought back to life and will inhabit Israel so that they might fulfill what has been prophesied). This group will continue on through the 1000 years, living and dying, until the last battle and Jesus saves them and they accept their messiah. Then they will inherit the promises of the land in which they were first promised and they will forever live on the new earth. The third group of Jews who are not actually part of Israel will not be resurrected again until the (3rd?) resurrection. There is no exactly timeframe for this, but we know it happens at some point between the end of the Millennium and the Great White Throne (Re 20:5, 11ff).
Lecture 15 Discussion Questions
Do you think you have ever “entertained angels unaware?” Describe the situation. What would make you think that it was angelic visitation? How does it compare with angelic visitations in scripture?
I’ve had several dreams over the course of my life, even before I was a believer, that I am certain were from God. But I cannot recall an interaction with another individual in which I would say is suspect of being an actual angel in disguise. My wife, on the other hand, has recounted a few experiences that I am certain were visitations by angels. The descriptions she’s given concerning a man who approached her and gave her a ride to her first child after she’d been kidnapped from a kids sporting event I believe was an angel. It had been about two hours since her daughter had disappeared. The police were everywhere. No one could find her. Then a man came up to her from out of nowhere and said they had found her that everything was okay. He instructed her to get into his truck and he would take her to her daughter. She did. None of the police seemed to realize she was leaving or tried to stop her. The man drove a few minutes to another part of town, to a small park, and my wife spotter her daughter sitting nearby. She got out and grabbed her daughter, hugged her. When she turned around to thank the man for bringing her to her daughter, the man was gone. She flagged a passing police car and told him where she was. When she returned to the sports field, the police had no idea that her daughter had been found, who the man was that had taken my wife to her daughter, or who it was that had taken her in the first place. When asked, her daughter stated that the man who took her said he was her friend but that after driving around for awhile he suddenly felt really sick and pulled over and told her to wait at the park for her mom to come get her. The description she gave of the man who abducted her was nothing close to the description of the man who had picked my wife up and reunited her with her daughter. I am convinced this man was an angel. I think, for whatever reason, when they located the man who had abducted her, they made him physically sick and made sure she was fine, sending the one man (an angel) to my wife, tasking him to bring them back together. Her daughter was completely and fortunately unharmed.
Why is it significant to us, that Christ became mortal man, then immortal man, and even now is man, sitting on the throne?
It is crucial that Jesus became a man so he would experience every temptation that we experienced. He had to be fully human, had to be imbued with a sin nature, just like all other humans from Adam on, so that he could be a suitable substitute. Once he lived his life free from sin, yet also was sacrificed by God and died willingly on the cross (innocent of any personal sin), and also the willingness I think was also a catalyst, but he was able to then provide himself as a propitiation for our sin (since his death was not needed to pay for his own sin). Not only did this empower his resurrection from the dead (and he was given power over death and the curse) it also empowers the promise of our own resurrection from the dead if we are in Christ, and God is able to fulfill both his own sense of righteous and justice as well as his mercy. The payment for sin has been made (through Jesus) and once for all he has purchased us to God as a purchased possession. When we stand before the judgment seat of Christ, we will be judged, but we will not be condemned, for God will see the blood of Christ and our sins will not be imputed to us. Instead, he will only see the word of Christ.
He then became immortal, which likewise will give us the model for which we will also become, for we will be like him for we will know him as he is (1 John 3:2). It is unclear what this exactly means, but it is a promise given to us in Christ through his Word. As Paul states, “For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Romans 8:19). This is the ultimate description of our glorification. It is the entire point of Jesus’ sacrifice and it is the solution to the problem that originated in the garden. It also somehow resolves the issue between God and Satan that originated before Gen 1:1.
Explain Hebrews 13:9. What are your protections against such? Have you ever had an experience where you recognized a false teaching? What did you do?
This passage refers to all other teachings other than what is “sound doctrine” (1 Ti 1:10; 2 Ti 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1). Various and strange doctrines are those things that are extra-biblical, non-biblical, or even anti-biblical. They all boil down to false teaching and are categorized as either “doctrines of men” (Matt 15:9; Col 2:22) or “doctrines of demons” (1 Ti 4:1).
Given this definition, I would also argue that there is a distinct difference between “being carried about” and “exploring” different hypothetical theories. It is incorrect to rely on human intellect alone. It is idolatry to place fables or endless genealogies above Scripture, or to twist the message of the Bible to justify evil or sinful behavior. But I would argue there is a place for speculative theology as well as extrapolation from a solid foundation of Scripture. But, that being say also, it is better, when teaching, especially when teaching young or immature believers, that focusing solely on Christ crucified is the safest course. Our liberty in Christ as seasoned believers should in no way jeopardize a new person’s faith or walk in Christ. Paul stated, “the Jews request a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified” (1 Co 1:22-23) and later, “I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Co 2:2). More often than not, it is better to keep these things between ourselves and God than to shout such “theories” from the rooftops. “Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves” (Ro 14:22).
Personally, my protection against such kinds of false teachings is an intimate, daily study, the attempt to keep a consistent prayer routine, and continually, moment by moment, pursuing submission to Christ and to the Holy Spirit so that my sanctification would not be stalled. As Dr. Missler often states, being intimately familiar with the original allows us to easily and quickly spot the counterfeits.
My experience with false teachers has been a myriad. It is important to recognize that truth of Scripture is spiritually discerned (1 Co 2:14). I typically experience firsthand what Dr. Missler talks about. When I am listening to a teacher and they derail into non-biblical teaching or presumption or the doctrines of men (denominationalism including non-denominationalism), it simply feels wrong, sounds wrong. There is something immediately amiss with what they are saying. Scripture is like an instrument in tune and the more familiar you are with Scripture the more that tune resonates within you. When false teaching is being offered instead, it sounds, feels like an instrument that is out of tune.
One pastor I was asked to struggle with for several months because he had driven off the whole community form the church and there was remaining only a small band of rabid believers who were following his twisted interpretations. From every sermon it was clear that he was ungrounded, unmoored from biblical truth. Most of his sermons were about one thing – the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. Everything centered around this. If you were not speaking in tongues you had no faith, you were not saved, you were a carnal Christian. He eventually brought in another teacher whose teachings were even more outlandish than his own. In one service I had to raise my hand, stand up, and confront this false teacher with Scripture because he was obviously unhinged. This caused a great deal of distress among the few members, and a great deal of anger from the pastor. The meeting was ended and discussions were had among all. The next Sunday, myself and another brother were met by newly appointed “elders” of the church (who had been appointed by the pastor in question) and we were escorted from the property and told to never return or they would call the police and arrest us for trespassing. My witness at that church was finished at that point, but now several years later, that pastor has been replaced and the community has been invited back. The insanity that was once a stranglehold on the church is no more.
Recently, my wife and I attended a church near the town we intend to move to in a few years. We were unaware, but the church has struggled in recent years to attract a pastor. A few weeks or months before, they had found a defrocked pastor from a charismanical denomination who was willing to take the position. It was very evident from the service that he has every intention on turning that once Baptist church, now community church, into a faith-movement church. My wife and I both felt from the moment we stepped foot in that building that we were neither welcomed nor did we want to stay there. We left immediately after the service, and the conversation that took place on our way home led to us visiting the church of an acquaintance of mine, that I had not even considered before that moment. This is the church we both now feel very much drawn to and called to serve. The spirit there is wholly different than the former.
False teachers are everywhere and they seem to be increasing as the Day draws nearer. It is all that much more important that we cling to the Word of God, consume it, and take to heart that “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God” (Luke 4:4) as well as “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together…exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching” (Hebrews 10:25). Our purpose is not to sit idly by. It is not to, as the Hebrews did, languish in the basic tenets of the faith when they should instead have been growing in their faith and teaching others to do the same. Our purpose as the church and as individual members of the church is to fulfill the call of Christ, to “equip the saints for the work of service, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the son of God…to the fullness of Christ…to no longer be children…”
Do you believe Christians today need to identify with Jesus rejection? Prove your viewpoint with scripture. If so, how do we do that? How do we go “outside the camp?”
Hebrews 13:13 is specifically speaking to Hebrews, to encourage them to abandon the law, for as long as they are under the law they cannot be partakers of Christ’s sacrifice. For, if we are under something other than Christ, if we are attempting to save ourselves or be saved through some other means, then we cannot partake of the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.
Jesus told us this much when he said, ““Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber” (John 10:1). He continued, “I am the door. If any enters by me, he will be saved…” (John 10:9). Peter even says, “there is no other n name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
I also recognize that the extra-biblical sources for the Christians leaving the city are supportive of such, but it is not Scripture. I’m not certain we can claim this passage mentioned here is a warning to the Christians in Jerusalem that they needed to leave the city because it was going to be destroyed a few years later. Then again, I am not a first century Hebrew Christian. I am removed by a few thousand years and am of no real ethnicity or nationality.
I think this passage extends to the Christian that thinks he must place himself funder the Law of Moses to be saved. I think it also extends to the Gentile Christian who believes he too must keep the Mosaic Law or who is involved in some kind of cult that states he must do XY or Z to be saved other than what the Scripture explicitly say (Ro 10:9). But, does it say that this was a warning to the 1st century Jews who needed to flee Jerusalem because of its coming destruction? No, I do not think it can extend this far.
Explain the phrase “submission shows obedience.” What are its implications? Have you ever had a leader that was really difficult to be submissive to? How did you handle it? (Alternate option: In the upcoming election, how will you handle it if your candidate is not elected?)
I would agree up to a point, but not as far as Dr. Missler would possibly go. I agree, submission to Jesus is essential to salvation. I would also agree that Scripture does state that we need to submit to the elders in the Church. But (and it is a BIG but), there must first be elders to submit to. If there are no biblical elders then there is no one to submit to in the Church, for the church is therefore not a biblical church. Now, one may “attend” (for you do not actually “attend” church but are a part of the church that Jesus is building) in which they find a plurality of seasoned men who are operating as elders yet because of the doctrines of men (denominationalism) they are not so identified, this is easy: submit to those who are functioning with such apparent gifts. But, a multitude of men in the so-called “church” are titled “elder” but they are neither qualified nor function as biblical elders. To these men there is no need for the congregation to submit. These men are counterfeits. Just because these men happen to be titled in a particular church does not mean they rule over you or that you must be submissive to them. For they neither watch for our souls, nor do they desire joy in service, but have their reward in lording it over the people.
To say, “….All of the privileges believers have do not release them from being obligated to spiritual oversight….” This is shortsighted, since there is no other mediator between God and men but Jesus who is the Christ (1 Ti 2:5). It is my estimation that if an individual is in a church that has these “titled” elders who are counterfeits, it would be better for him to leave that church to their delusions and find a biblical church instead. If there is no biblical church, then they need to search their hearts to determine if God is raising them up to start a small group fellowship (for I do not think God calls anyone to start a modern denominational church) in their home or business. If not, God may be calling them to a solitary life, a single life, a celibate life, or simply a married life to “make disciples” through raising a Godly family. But, even I can attest, who spent the better part of 13 years as a hermit and a contemplative, there are still some biblical churches and even those that are not could possibly be the field in which you are being called to. There are just as many lost souls in the modern evangelical church today as there are saved people. Probably disproportionately more.
Have I ever had a leader that was difficult to submit to? I’ve attempted to do so with several Church leaders in the past, but they have proved insufficient leaders.
1. The pastor I spoke of before who was rabid with extra-biblical theology.
2. Another pastor who was very nervous about the way I talked about the Bible. God was certainly moving him to include me, but it was clear he was struggling and wrestling against that conviction because he knew what I believed was in direct contradiction to his means of support, and his way of life.
3. Another pastor was simply a mouthpiece for modern positive psychology. His sermons were topical, aimed to be always “relevant” but were so watered down to do little good. He was rather arrogant in the few conversations I had with him.
In every instance, I left these churches in search for a biblical church with biblical elders. To date, I’ve found none. I came to the conclusion a few years ago that the biblical account of the church no longer exists or has never existed. It most likely is a perfect version of what the church should look like, but it will never look like this until Christ returns and we are all transformed (I wonder if it will not still be broken then, too).
Now, with the latest church I’ve been called to, it is somewhat different and I’m not certain I understand why. As my wife has stated, she thinks this is the very first church that I’ve found that might accept me for who I am. It’s a little scary. But, to be honest, I think mostly it is the first church I’ve come across that actually has voiced it needs help. The pastor and his wife have shared this need with us in our conversations, which tells me I actually, for the very first time in dealing with modern churches, might have an actual purpose there. It is not a biblical church and it is steeped in denominationalism and folk theologies. But, as I’ve said before, even a broken church has sinners that are in need of being saved. And there is no telling what God is doing, or why he has brought us there, or what he is preparing in the future.
In this we certainly must surrender everything and in everything and with all I have I lay at his feet. He is my Lord and my God and my King. I serve at his pleasure. But I do not think we are called to submit or surrender to fallen humans who are not walking in the Spirit and who are instead walking by the flesh.
Lastly, the alternative option asks what I will do in the upcoming election if my candidate is not elected? This is simple. I will do the same thing if a candidate I favor is elected. Nothing. Long ago I came to the conclusion that it does not matter what candidate is put forward (at least in American elections) for anyone who is able to advance to and secure a particular office, they are so thoroughly compromised, that they are beyond repair. The political system in America is so corrupt, there is no actual representation of the people. America is dead, both politically and culturally. I am convinced it is only a matter of time before the union itself breaks apart, either by mutual consent or through civil war. When this happens, the western and eastern states (on the coasts) will form loose totalitarian regimes and the central states will attempt to retain the constitution, bill of rights, and the American way of life that was attempted in the 1950’s. There will be widespread crime, famine, death, misery, and above all, the persecution of the church in the ocean adjacent countries. This will serve as a fire that will fan the flames of revival and also the falling away. The denominational churches will be purged of the hangers-on, who claim Christ but who have not been reborn, who have not been drawn or called by the Father. My family and I live near the ocean, and I am certain, if such does occur (I do not pretend to be any kind of prophet), we will be needed here to help people, hide people, and ferry people across the lines toward the middle states if such options exist. It might be that we are being called to stand in this place and proclaim the good news to a fallen word, and then to die for Christ and share in his sufferings.
That being said, though, I do not think this particular passage is referring to government officials or politicians. I think it only extends to the servants of the church, those who are called by Christ to be apostles, prophets, evangelists, elders and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for works of service to build up the body of Christ (Eph 4:11-16).
How is the benediction of Hebrews 13:20-21 an apt conclusion to the Epistle of Hebrews? Explain thoroughly.
The entire letter to the Hebrews is arguing that Jesus is a better remedy to sin and to the plight of fallen man than anything else. He is better than the whole of the Law and the Levitical system. He is better than Moses. He is better than the angels, better than the sacrifices or the human high priests. The first covenant was faulty in that it could do nothing to make fallen man whole again before God. It could not bring about righteousness. But Jesus, through his sacrifice of his blood on the cross, was able to, once for all, fulfill the law completely, and then pass that fulfillment to everyone who believes.
Not only does God himself (through Jesus) fix the rift between him and his creation (after the fall), but he also indwells each believer with the Holy Spirit so that we who are incapable of doing “every good work” might be able to do every good work through the Spirit and not through the vain flesh. This is why Jesus said, “My yoke is easy and y burden is light” (Matt 11:30).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
I wanted to comment on the passage, “Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Hebrews 13:4). In today’s world this is simply cast aside as antiquated and something we can do without. I was told when my first wife was explaining to me why she was leaving me, “If two people fall out of love, you break up and find someone else. Love and marriage shouldn’t be a struggle and it shouldn’t be hard.” But, this is not what Jesus said about marriage. He said, “because of the hardness of your hearts, Moses permitted you to divorce…but from the beginning it was not so…whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality and marries another, commits adultery (Matt 19:8-9). I have personally been wounded by an adulterous woman, but it is not a something that has overtaken me that is not common to man (1 Co 10:13). It took 13 years before God moved in my life and literally told me out of the blue (I had been single and celibate all that time, convinced that I would be so the rest of my life) “You need to prepare for a future wife.” I did so the best I could, and a few months later God introduced us, and a few months after that we were married. The difference this time (I hope and pray) is that both of us are seasoned Christians. We have both been marred by adultery from our first marriages. We both are committed to serving Christ in and through our marriage and doing so in service to each other. It is a shame and a sign of the times and of the brokenness of the church that the divorce rate among Christians is no different than that of the rest of the world.
“Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you.”” (Hebrews 13:5). This verse I dearly love. Do not covet. Be content with what you have. I first heard this in Buddhism as a teenager, for the myriad of possessions are a snare and a trap and a prison for the one who possesses them. It is better to possess nothing for when one possesses things it is the things that possess us. Then I read it in the NT when I was a new believer and reading it for the first time while in Basic Training. Then I re-read it when I was in Germany when I read through the entire Bible for the first time. Then I also was exposed to it in the book, “Your Money or Your Life” which teaches how things are not the equivalent of happiness or even satisfaction. Stuff is only a tool. Our focus should be on how satisfying those things are that we possess. If they are not satisfying, if they are unhealthy, if they are weighty in their cost to maintain or keep, then it is better to get rid of them. Then I later read from Thoreau, “It is better to learn to live without a thing than it is to try and learn how to afford it.” That quote sealed within me a perpetual frugalness and minimalism that has lasted for most of my adult life. Now I try to take Paul’s observation, “I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content: I know how to live humbly and I know how to live in prosperity. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Phil 4:11-13).
Lecture 16 Discussion Questions
What was the key event in Matthew 12 that caused Jesus to publicly speak in only parables after that point? Why did Jesus make this change?
Jesus actually answers this question in the next chapter when his disciples came to him and asked, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” (Matthew 13:10–13). His answer was straightforward.
1. It was given to them (the inner circle) to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but this was not given to the general public.
2. It was to fulfill prophecy. He quotes Isaiah 44:18; Jeremiah 5:21; Isaiah 6:9-10; Ezekiel 12:2.
Write a report on the Maccabean Revolt and the Celebration of Hanukah.
This was a spontaneous revolt that turned form a guerrilla battle to a full scale military action. It was sparked by Mattathias and his five sons who became the central figures in the fight against Antiochus. The war was left to Judas when Mattathias died and through his leadership they were able to defeat the Syrian army, recapture Jerusalem, and rededicate the Temple, which is the purpose of Hanukkah celebrated each year.
Explain completely the Parable of the Fig Tree. What does it mean for you?
This is a parable that Jesus used as an example to prove his point at least twice, but it is recorded in the gospels at least three times. It describes the natural process by which a tree shows signs of summer coming, when its branches become tender and it puts out leaves. This is traditionally very telling that summer is not far behind. Jesus used this as an allusion to the signs that were coming that would precede two events: 1. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and the Tribulation event when Jerusalem would be surrounded by the enemies of God.
In both of these illustrations, he states that “this generation will not pass away before these things take place.” This indicates actually two different generations since it appears the Luke 21 and Matthew 24 are referring to the two different events listed above. There is a generation that was alive during the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and there is a particular generation that will be alive when Jerusalem is surrounded during the Tribulation.
These two events are also punctuated by two distinct Desolations of Jerusalem, the first one from Antiochus IV in 168 BC, but I’m not certain I understand how this is connected to something that happened in 70 A.D. The second Desolation, of course, is committed by the Anti-Christ after the first 3 1/2 years of the Tribulation.
For me, this parable simply indicates that the end times will be predictable when it comes. There will be events listed in the Matthew 24 passage that will indicate the Tribulation has begun, just as there were signs listed beforehand for when the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. would occur. This is likened by Jesus as the fig tree and how it acts when summer is about to arrive. It is also symbolic that the fig tree acknowledges when summer is coming, since summer is always a more enjoyable time outside, and the kingdom will likewise be more enjoyable and beneficial compared with the winter we experience now with the rulership of mere men.
Do a word study on “pangs.” What do you think about using the birthing process as a sign of the beginning of the last day events?
This was difficult to find since my translation does not often use the word “pangs” but “beginning of sorrows” (Matt 24:8). But I found passage like Romans 8:22, “For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now” and Mark 13:8, “For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be earthquakes in various places, and there will be famines and troubles. These are the beginnings of sorrows.” (Mark 13:8), and “For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. “For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.” (1 Thessalonians 5:2–3).
I personally think its fitting to use this idiom to describe the beginning of the last days because it is indicative of something new happening, or about to happen. As Paul states, “For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Romans 8:19).
Explain as completely as you can why you think Mark 13:32 says that the Son does not know when He is going to collect His bride (the church). How can this be?
I do not think there is a trinity in that they are the same God and share a consciousness. They are not three persons in one where they are not differentiated as different persons. The Father is superior to the Son and both are superior to the Holy Spirit. They work willingly in unison. But they are three distinct beings and they are not co-equal. Jesus was always the Word the Logos. The Holy Spirit was always the distinct and separate from both the Logos and the Father, even though he speaks for them.
As Dr. Missler has explained it, the timing for Jesus to be sent to collect his church will be the moment after the last person enters into the church. No one knows who that last person is, except for the Father, for he draws them to Jesus. This is part of the suffering of Satan, as he is unsure how much time he has left, which is why he tries to thwart the work of the church at every turn (Re 12:12).
What do you think is meant by so many phrases that warn: “Take heed!,” “Watch!,” “Watch and pray!” ? How does this compare to the warnings given to the Jews when they were to watch for the coming of the Messiah the first time?
I think we are instructed to be watchful, sober, and prayerful because of Matthew 24:31, “Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.” This in itself means that we cannot know when the rapture will come. But, that is not to say, if our interpretation is correct, that it can happen now. When the signs come, then its anyone’s bet. But, since I am mid-trib, there is no way the rapture can occur before the Temple is rebuilt (now I wonder about this).
The prophets of the OT have been looking toward the Messiah for some time, as far back as Genesis 3:15. In Psalms and Isaiah, there are several prophecies that predict the coming Messiah. The OT jews waited patiently, but their views began to diverge from person to person over time. Many believed their Messiah would be a mortal man, but that he would have certain characteristics of God. The Sadducees, on the other hand, dismissed the idea of an eschatological Messiah altogether. Many thought he would be a descendent of David, and it was a quite popular belief that he would be a mighty political figure or a ruler, king, emperor – someone who would free them from the oppression they often found themselves under. The Maccabees in particular thought the Messiah would be a Levitical priest.
The major difference between the call we have to be watchful, to be sober, and to be prayerful and the OT Jews is that we have what Peter called, “a more sure word of prophecy” (2 Peter 1:19). We know who it is we are looking for in the sky. We have the Word of God that tells us who Jesus is, what he is like, and what is expected of us. We also have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, if indeed we are truly called and transformed by a saving faith in Christ. Additionally, the OT Jews sought the Messiah but died without the promises being fulfilled. We, on the other hand, have become “more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Ro 8:37).
K-W-L Self Assessment: L- Describe what you LEARNED from this session.
Hebrews is primarily written to Jewish believers who were backsliding, not growing in their faith, who should by now have been teachers but were stuck perpetually relearning fundamentals of the faith.
But the author hammers away that Jesus is a better sacrifice than what the Law of Moses or the Levitical system can offer. Jesus actually was the only man who could fulfill the law perfectly, and by doing so he ushered in a new priestly system, the Order of Melchizedek. There is only one priest – Jesus – forever. There is only one offering, his death on the cross. This was done once for all and those who fall away cannot come back again even if they would want to. This Jesus was better than Moses, better than the angels, and the Law of Christ is superior to the Law of Moses.
They were also given five warnings:
1. Warned against drifting away
2. Warned against disobedience
3. Warned against a lack of maturing
4. Warned against willful sin
5. Warned against indifference
But I don’t really see in Chapter 12 how this is referring to the Millennial Kingdom, simply just a kingdom that we will receive that “cannot be shaken” (vs 28). This could be the afterlife, after Re 20:11ff, after the Great White Throne judgment, after all is said and done, and there is a new heaven (the universe) and a new earth.
I also do not think Chapter 13:7-8 is about secular rulers, but about genuine elders that are raised up by Christ in the church he is building (not necessarily the titled individuals who lord it over the congregation in the man-made denominational organizations called churches today).
Conclusions
This is a great letter in the Bible and this course ties it quite well to the rest of Scripture. I would highly recommend the study for anyone’s systematic review of the 66 books of the Bible.
Until my next assignment….
Please consider supporting my writing, my unschooled studies, and my hermitic lifestyle by purchasing one or more of my books. I’m not supported by academia or have a lucrative corporate job – I’m just a mystical modern-day hermit trying to live out the life I believe God has called me to. So, any support you choose to provide is GREATLY appreciated.
Excerpt from Sacred the Circle:
There was a knock at the door.
Campbell got up from the chair and crossed the small distance so he could open it.
A young man stood in the doorway, probably in his early twenties.
Campbell could tell he looked a little disheveled.
Confused.
He had deep rings around his eyes, as if he hadn’t been sleeping much, and he kept checking the hallway in both directions, as if half expecting someone to be stalking him.
“Hey,” Campbell said.
“Uhm….is…this….?”
The kid was stumbling over his own words.
Campbell leaned out into the hallway, checking to make sure there was no one else listening.
This guy wasn’t the only one who was becoming paranoid.
There were two students hanging out at the foyer, near the stairs, but the rest of the floor was clear.
“I’m sorry,” the kid said. “Must be the wrong place. I’m mistaken.”
He started to leave.
“Wait,” Campbell said, putting a hand out. “Hold on a second.”
The kid paused.
“What’s your name?”
“Uh, I’m….Lloyd…”
He fidgeted with his collar.
“I know it sounds crazy, but – ”
“You’re not crazy, Lloyd,” Campbell said, grinning.
“Did you – ? ”
The kid paused, as if unsure if he should continue.
He looked back toward the stairs, then at Campbell.
“Did you know I was coming?” he finally asked. “I mean, that’s not possible, but, were you expecting me?”
Campbell chuckled to himself.
“What’s so funny?” Lloyd asked.
“Well – “
Campbell pushed the door open all the way so Lloyd could see inside his dorm room.
The entire room was full of them, students, non-students, ranging from what looked like eighteen to even a few middle-aged men, scattered about the room, sitting wherever they could find a comfortable spot.
Lloyd’s mouth dropped open.
“I wasn’t really expecting them, either,” Campbell said. “So, I hope you don’t hold it against me when I tell you, I had no idea you’d be showing up here. Do you care to join us, anyway?”
Buy my book Sacred the Circle to find out what these men are hearing from the supernatural realm. Will they answer the questions tugging at them? What are the visions saying? Who are the Multitude? Why are all these men being brought together? By whom? And why, above all else, are they being convicted….to pray?
Get your copy of Sacred the Circle today! Get the upcoming sequel, Sacred the Sent as well so the story never ends !
But, trust me when I say, you’ll be white knuckling this one with every turn of the page!
What do you think?