Hebrews 2:3b-4 Jesus: The Emboldened Messenger

God Confirms Christ’s Announcement of the Good News of Salvation

Hebrews 2:3b-4: πως ημεις εκφευξομεθα τηλικαυτης αμελησαντες σωτηριας ητις αρχην λαβουσα λαλεισθαι δια του κυριου υπο των ακουσαντων εις ημας εβεβαιωθη συνεπιμαρτυρουντος του θεου σημειοις τε και τερασιν και ποικιλαις δυναμεσιν και πνευματος αγιου μερισμοις κατα την αυτου θελησιν

Hebrews 2:3b-4: “which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by those who heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with different kinds of miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?”

The literal meaning of the phrase “which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord” is “which at the beginning the Lord seized proclaiming constantly”.

The idea the author conveys is that at the beginning of His ministry the Lord took a hold of the good news of salvation (the salvation that is not to be given the same or lesser value as the old revelation) and began to proclaim it without let up.

The picture one gets of the Lord Jesus in this verse is as if He said, “Here, give me the good news of salvation”, as He seizes it from the Father’s hand. He then begins to proclaim it boldly, without let up. This is the picture of Jesus that arises from this passage. He is an emboldened Christ, with a message of salvation of which He is thoroughly convinced, and He runs with it. He will not give it to another. He’ll make it His responsibility at that point for its preaching.

He is here more than a new Moses, a new law giver. He is the messenger of salvation, as well as the giver of salvation. He will not “outsource” His responsibility for the preaching of the good news of salvation. He will make it His own task, His mission, His very life.

The Lord’s announcement of the news of salvation is compared with God’s giving of the law at Sinai. In Sinai the giving of the law to Moses was confirmed by the voice of God heard as thunder and heard by the people.

And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking. And when the people saw, they trembled, and stood afar off. And they said to Moses, You speak with us, and we will hear. But let not God speak with us, lest we die. And Moses said to the people, Do not fear, for God has come to test you, and so that His fear may be before your faces, so that you may not sin. And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was. And Jehovah said to Moses, So you shall say to the sons of Israel, You have seen that I have talked with you from the heavens (Exo 20:18-22).

The testimony of the author of Hebrews is that when the Lord Jesus spoke, His voice spoke with such authority and conviction that for them it was unmistakably the voice of God. In the old revelation the giving of the law had been confirmed by thunderings, lightnings, noise of the trumpet, the mountain wrapped up in smoke. In this greater revelation God Himself, not angels or thunderings or lightnings, or trumpet noises, nor smoke had confirmed Christ’s announcement of the good news. In this revelation it was the voice of God Himself that was heard at the baptism of Christ clearly attesting: “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased” (Mat. 3:17). Then again at the mount of the transfiguration “a voice out of the cloud” was heard saying “This is my Son, whom I love. I am pleased with him. Keep on listening to him!" (Mat. 17:5 ISV).

Once again the author of the epistle focuses the reader’s attention on Christ, His person, His mission, His unique identity as the Son of God, of the same substance of God, as the very YHWH God of the Old Testament!

The “different kinds of miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit” manifested during the ministry of Christ were unique events designed to confirm Christ’s proclamation of the good news of the gospel. Both the Father and the Spirit, according to their will which was to love the Son, were involved in the confirmation of Christ’s announcement of the good news of salvation. This is the reason why Christ’s gospel of salvation is not to be undervalued or given an equal standing with the old revelation. Christ’s announcement of the gospel, His bold act of taking a hold of the good news and making it His task, is a much greater event than the giving of the law at Sinai. His announcement is the new law, the good news of salvation is God’s new law for humankind, and Jesus the Son is both the giver and the substance of that good news!

End-time prophecies and the Cross - A Covert Conversation -

Last night I had a most animated visit with a Christian gentleman whose sincerity, vigor, and integrity is certainly beyond question. He is indeed a most dedicated believer of current events as the exact fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and a host of other biblical texts understood and interpreted as pointing to these very days. It was a marvelous con-fusion of the past, the present, and the immediate future. In his from the heart and mind descriptions, all the current players in the current world crisis are to be found right there in Daniel and Revelation: George Bush, Sadam Hussein, Ahmadinejad, Tony Blair, the Asian economic markets, represented by de-feathered eagles (USA), lame lions (UK), bear (Russia's Putin), leopards (Asian block). In listening, it seemed to me I was hearing William Millier-Uriah Smith revised and updated version (2006-2007). However, this recounting of end time prophecies had some incredible addtions: the earth will stop spinning on its axis, monthly lunar cycles would return to 30 days, yearly solar cycles to 360 days, all due to incredible cataclysims that make Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth seem like the first level of a kids' video game. But there was more. Somewhere it is also prophecied that it will take Jesus three and a half days to come to earth, and that something incredibly suspicious is lurking in the land - all over the world's land - just waiting to surprise humankind: The Vengeful Sword of God. A Geo-Politico-Religious thriller that would have Tom Clancy, Mel Gibson give up their trades as novelists and Apocalypto thrillers. It all led up to one great climactic point which was somewhat unclear graphically, but with one great certainty: God's judgment of all nations would take place... Somehow it was implied that if you just knew this stuff (the prophecies and their fulfillment) you would somehow escape the conflagrations, it would help if you owned some land and bunkered in the backcountry of Idaho... Wow! In the meantime one would have to make furtive raids into the big cities with pamphlets, tracts, in covert operations into shopping mall magazine racks slipping these tracts in between the mags and thrusting them into strangers' hands who might be deemed responsive to the warnings. Were it not that the actual headlines for today are so bad, it would be difficult to imagine that the news could get worse, but indeed the salient message of these apocalyptic scenarios was indeed "Bad News".

Since these scenarios arise from an allegedly Christian background (SDAism) I kept waiting for the "Good News". This was certainly harder to find in these scenarios and it was unclear as to what that might be. It may have been good news for an elite group of 10 Commandment keepers apocalyptically referred to as "the 144,000". Elite because they had achieved a maximum level of character progress (no longer referred to as "perfection") that they were actually on display before the universe as God's proof that upright citizens of planet earth could indeed be found. In terms of today's hype status given to stars on display, these 144,000 character righteous people certainly had been nominated and won the Oscar Holiness Awards, and thus gained special status in proximity to God's throne - forever! There was no other good news left for non-144-thousanders. The only hope was in edging out someone else and make it to this prestigiously eternally blessed group. Wow!

When I was finally able to get a word edgewise and ask about the place of the cross and Jesus' finished and saving work on our behalf I was given the strangest answers: Christ is still tied in chains awaiting the judgment, he died not for our sins but for his sins (what???!!), salvation is still an ongoing process, the cross was important but... "But what?" "But there's so much still to come: the plagues, the judgments, the three and a half years, Lucifer bearing our sins in the desolate earth (What?? Lucifer the sin-bearer??), some obscure Ellen White prophecy from Early Writings about some special group of people translated without seeing death...

And the cross? I looked at the prophetic charts in vain for some sign of the forgiveness of sins through the blood of Christ... Where was the story of the cross in the middle of lions, bears, leopards, eagles, little horns, a tiara bearing man caricatured on the tip of some horn... (That caricature is still propagated?)... Wow!!! And the cross of Christ?

"The cross is important, but..."

"But what?"

I kept praying for some text, some Scripture that would cut through the fog of seas, beasts, peals, and thunders and would lead this gentleman to see the glory of the cross of Christ as the one great apocalyptic event of all human history and the history of the universe.

Somehwere in the back of my head it seemed appropriate to look at the preaching on the day of Pentecost. Certainly that was a key day in the preaching of the gospel. What had been the theme of the apostle's preaching on that day?

Was I in for a surprise. When I looked at Acts 2 the answer was right there and it was something I had never seen before, and yet so appropriate to this very moment. Here it is for you to look at, and see what I saw that day, and what I shared with my dear brother in Christ. Through the marvelous presence of the Spirit, as we read outloud together, the message of the cross did get through...

Peter's messge, I saw consisted of two basic parts. The first part was a defense of the apostles' speaking in foreign languages. It was not only a great defense, but a great use of the end-time prophecies to try to get people scared enough to cry out to God for salvation (as it seemed was the intent of my brother's apocalyptic discourse and pamphlet distribution covert operations):

14. But Peter, taking his stand with the eleven, raised his voice and declared to them: "Men of Judea and all you who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give heed to my words.
15. "For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is only the third hour of the day;
16. but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel:
17. `AND IT SHALL BE IN THE LAST DAYS,' God says, `THAT I WILL POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT ON ALL MANKIND; AND YOUR SONS AND YOUR DAUGHTERS SHALL PROPHESY, AND YOUR YOUNG MEN SHALL SEE VISIONS, AND YOUR OLD MEN SHALL DREAM DREAMS;
18. EVEN ON MY BONDSLAVES, BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, I WILL IN THOSE DAYS POUR FORTH OF MY SPIRIT And they shall prophesy.
19. `AND I WILL GRANT WONDERS IN THE SKY ABOVE AND SIGNS ON THE EARTH BELOW, BLOOD, AND FIRE, AND VAPOR OF SMOKE.
20. `THE SUN WILL BE TURNED INTO DARKNESS AND THE MOON INTO BLOOD, BEFORE THE GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY OF THE LORD SHALL COME.
21. `AND IT SHALL BE THAT EVERYONE WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.'

Wow! What an apocalyptic vision! Complete with blood, fire, and smoke. The sun and moon even seem to go into reverse, akin to my brother's description of the earth coming to a non-spinning halt.

In v. 21 the apostle seems to close his argument by insinuating to the hearers what they should do: Cry out for mercy!

Yet, when he made his pause expecting for the souls to come forward repentant to the altar, there was nothing but complete silence!

No reaction, no response, no convicted sinners.

Always troubling for a preacher. To present his best argument, and have the congregation of unrepentant sinners yawn and look at their watches, or look at each other with the uplifted eyebrow signal: "Let's split".

And yet, the Holy Spirit was at work in the apostle Peter's mind whispering: Try the cross, go to the cross, mention His name and His work on the cross...

And then, as if He got a second wind, and finally got it, he proceeded:

"Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--
23. this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.
24. "But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power.
25. "For David says of Him, `I SAW THE LORD ALWAYS IN MY PRESENCE; FOR HE IS AT MY RIGHT HAND, SO THAT I WILL NOT BE SHAKEN.
26. `THEREFORE MY HEART WAS GLAD AND MY TONGUE EXULTED; MOREOVER MY FLESH ALSO WILL LIVE IN HOPE;
27. BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO HADES, NOR ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY.
28. `YOU HAVE MADE KNOWN TO ME THE WAYS OF LIFE; YOU WILL MAKE ME FULL OF GLADNESS WITH YOUR PRESENCE.'
29. "Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
30. "And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
31. he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY.
32. "This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses.
33. "Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear.
34. "For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: `THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
35. UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET."'
36. "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified."
37. Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
38. Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."

Amazing. It was not until the crowd heard the preaching of Christ, and Christ crucified that of their own, without an appeal, without an altar call, they themselves couldn't take it any more, and cried to God for repentance and salvation.

Amazing how the forgiveness of sins through the shed blood of another works upon the human heart to show the love of God which drives out fear from the mind and heart.

And so it was with my brother.

He looked at the text. I pointed to him that v. 37 (the verse of crying out to God) had not come after the prophetic preaching but after the preaching of the cross. He looked at it again to confirm that it was so. He thanked me for showing this to him... and after prayer he headed off into the night to warn another big city of the impending doom... with I do hope and pray, the message of the cross of Christ as measure of last resorts...

The grace of the Lord Jesus be with us all, Amen.

Hebrews 2:2-4 "How shall we escape if such a great salvation we deem as less?

2. ει γαρ ο δι αγγελων λαληθεις λογος εγενετο βεβαιος και πασα παραβασις και παρακοη ελαβεν ενδικον μισθαποδοσιαν 3. πως ημεις εκφευξομεθα τηλικαυτης αμελησαντες σωτηριας ητις αρχην λαβουσα λαλεισθαι δια του κυριου υπο των ακουσαντων εις ημας εβεβαιωθη 4. συνεπιμαρτυρουντος του θεου σημειοις τε και τερασιν και ποικιλαις δυναμεσιν και πνευματος αγιου μερισμοις κατα την αυτου θελησιν2.

2. For if the word spoken by the angels was trustworthy, and each transgression and each time they did not heed had its due reward, 3. how shall we escape if such great salvation we deem as less? Which from the beginning the Lord took hold of it broadcasting it to those who heard it, being confirmed before us 4. God Himself testifying together with marvels and prodigious and diverse portentous signs and the Holy Spirit administering according to His will.

At the center of this passage is v. 3, which has been most often translated as “How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?”

It is a question that implies inescapable consequences. However, it presents a rather confused concept of the gospel’s announcement of salvation. In refering to salvation it describes it as “such a great salvation”. On the other hand, it implies that we can escape this salvation if we neglect it. If understood in this manner, this salvation is really not all that great or powerful if indeed mere neglect will bring upon us inescapable punishments as sure and as certain as the revelation given by angels to Moses. If we can escape this salvation by mere neglect, then the “greatness” of this salvation is certainly diminished. It may be great, but easy to elude. This interpretation of the text has certainly presented difficulties for believers in the gospel.

Another problem is that the question implies a motivation arising from fear rather than love for accepting Christ’s great salvation. “How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?” If salvation may be lost with a mere neglect (other modern language translations render “careless” [descuido (Spanish)]), we will not escape punishment, therefore Christ’s salvation must be accepted in order to escape punishment. However, this is not the gospel motivation for accepting Christ, and neither does it agree with the testimony of other Scriptures: “If I be lifted up [on the cross] I will draw all unto me” (John 12:32). “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:18,19).

Is there then a way of understanding this question in the light of the gospel? We must remember that Scripture is its own interpreter, and that all Scripture points to Christ and to the great love found in the gospel. That principle is also true here in Hebrews 2:2-4. This Scripture has its sense and meaning in the great revelation of the love of the Lord Jesus.

Verse 2 is the introduction to verse 3. The question found in v. 3, “How shall we escape...?” cannot be understood apart from its connection with v. 2. Verse 2 is a continuation of the author’s entire argument given in chapter 1: The revelation given in the Son is greater than the revelation given to the angels. However, the author does not demean the revelation given to the angels. This revelation was trustworthy as God’s will for Israel. It was trustworthy because it pointed to the coming of the Messiah. The revelation given to the angels was replete with symbols, figures, and types that announced the redemptive work of the Messiah, the work of the Son, the greater revelation. The revelation given to the angels showed God’s relationship with humanity without the redemptive work of the Messiah: “every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward” (Hebrews 2:2).

Therefore, the author’s question of v. 3 is directly connected to v. 2: “How shall we escape if such a great salvation we deem as less?” The question compares the revelation given in the Son with the previous revelation given to Moses through the angels. How shall we escape the consequences if the revelation given in the Son we deem of lesser value than the revelation given to the angels? The question presupposes a comparison between the two revelations. It is not that now we are going to “neglect” or be “careless” with the revelation given in the Son. That is not the target or thrust of the author’s question. His objective is to create a comparison between the two revelations through the incisive question: “If the greater and absolute revelation given in the Son we deem as less in value as that which was given to the angels, we have no other recourse than to await the same consequences of punishment received by those who disobeyed the first revelation. There was no escaping the consequences of not heeding that revelation. How then will there be any escape if the greater revelation we don’t even hold as being equal in value as the old revelation?” Such is the literal translation of the Greek which appears above, which then renders the question as “How shall we escape if such great salvation we deem as less?”

For many, understanding this penetrating question in this manner will be new, and perhaps difficult to accept. In general, modern versions have translated the Greek of this question like this: “How shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?” The difference between the literal translation offered above and the most common translation lies in the translation of the Greek verb “amello”. This verb is most commonly translated “neglect” which is also found in the Latin translations (neglexerum). However the translations which render “neglect” render not the original or literal meaning of the word, but rather the consequential meaning of the word. Among the modern language translations the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras translations point to the earlier meaning of the word when it uses the phrase “tener en poco” (to deem as small). However, the original Greek’s intent is “to deem less than”, “to undervalue”, “to depreciate”. Something that is “undervalued” is certainly “neglected” because it is considered as of “less value” than something else which is given greater value.

However, the precise and original meaning, confirmed by the context of v. 3 is “to deem less than”, “to undervalue”, “to depreciate” (to value something as of less value in comparison to something given greater value).

This translation of “amello” here in Hebrews 2:3 is confirmed by the same use of “depreciating” or “under-valuing” which the same verb word, in the same tense carries in Matthew 22:5. In this text, this same verb is found to describe what those invited to the wedding feast of the king’s son did with the invitation: they “under-valued” it. They deemed the invitation of the king to his son’s wedding feast as below the value of their own interests: to take care of their fields and their own business interests.

(1) The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a certain king, who made a marriage feast for his son, (3) and sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the marriage feast: and they would not come. (4) Again he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them that are bidden, Behold, I have made ready my dinner; my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come to the marriage feast. (5) But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his merchandise (Matthew 22:1-5).

In v. 5 the word that is generally translated “did not pay attention” (CEV), or “did not care” (MKJV), is more correctly translated as “made light of it” in the King James Version. This translation points to the more precise translation of “undervalued” or “deemed less than”. In other words the invitees deemed the invitation of the king to his son’s wedding beneath their own businesses and interests. They compared the importance of two things as having value for their lives: the invitation of the king vs. their own interests. After weighing and comparing they underrated the king’s invitation in value when compared to their own interests. They thought that in the long run they would be better off with the works of their own doing than accepting the generous and free invitation of the king to his son’s wedding. They depreciated or undervalued the king’s invitation when compared to the value of the fruit of their own works. This is the sense of the Greek word “amello”, the same word that is used in Matthew 22:5 and in Hebrews 2:3.

Therefore, in Hebrews 2, the author compares the old revelation given to Moses through the angels with the perfect and complete revelation given “in these last days” in the Son. In 2:2, the author affirms that the old revelation was trustworthy, and to transgress it and not heed it brought its due just consequences. Although the author finds value in the old revelation he now proceeds to weigh the value of the new revelation given in the Son comparing it with the old: “How shall we escape if the new revelation given in the Son is deemed to be of lesser value than the old?

It is a rhetorical question since the answer is obvious. We will not escape because when we value the new revelation beneath the old revelation given to Moses we remain subject to the same punishments that were given for transgressing and not heeding that old revelation. When the new revelation is undervalued, there is nothing better. The old revelation remains in place with its same punishments dealt in due consequence for the transgressions. The theological question the author poses is, "How shall we escape if the old revelation did not provide salvation, how can we expect it to provide salvation now, when a new and greater salvation has been opened in the revelation of Jesus Christ?"

But it is not so with the new revelation. This new revelation in the Son is “so great a salvation”. Therefore, it is strong, powerful, sovereign. Rather, there is no escaping the reach of this salvation given through the grace of Christ bearing our sins on His body on the cross. The author’s argument implies another question: “How shall we escape such a great salvation?” In the old revelation there was no escaping the punishments. In the new revelation there is no escaping the Son’s great power to save.

"(37) All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. (38) For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. (39) And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. (40) For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day (John 6:37-40 ESV)."

Hebrews 2:1 "For this reason"

Hebrews 2:1
δια τουτο δει περισσοτερως ημας προσεχειν τοις ακουσθεισιν μηποτε παραρρυωμεν

"For this we must pay increasingly great attention to what we have heard, lest it slips away from us".

For the author of Hebrews, the matter he refers to when he says "For this" is so clear, he doesn't identify it. Most modern English translations insert the clarifying word "reason": "For this reason".

What is that reason?

It is the reason given in Hebrews 1:5-14: That the Son is entirely and absolutely God, the Son receives the praise and acclamation of God, is called YHWH by YHWH Himself, and thus is infinitely greater than all the angels or beings who in the past have spoken on behalf of God.

"What we have heard"

The author of the epistle has just quoted several verses from the Old Testament where God spoke to the Son acclaiming Him as Son and God. That which "we have heard" is no other than the voice of God proclaiming before all creation the full divinity of His Son. For us as modern readers it is most astounding that the writer of this epistle considered the sacred writings from the Psalms as the voice of God. The written word in the psalms is now proclaimed as the voice of God which "we have heard". The written word is to be paid increasing heed as the voice of God which if disregarded, may not come back to the hearer. However, it is the message of that spoken voice which may slip away from the hearer. That message is that the voice of the Father establishes the infinite superiority and supremacy of the Son over all creation and recognized in full equality with God.

The author enjoins the readers not to let this sovereign truth slip away from their hearing. They must constantly tune in and keep on hearing it. That truth is that the Son is supreme as God's authority and revelation to humanity. Christ's supremacy is the center to which we must take firm hold and not let that truth slip away from us.

Is the Law Divided?

A certain Christian brother has suggested that the 10 commandments were not nailed to the cross, but another "written code which was against us". Thus the perpetuity and binding nature of the 10 commandments is established forever. However, what is being upheld is really not so much the 10 commandments as the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath.

The following is my response:

There is a sense in which the law does not condemn, but the end result is still condemnatory.

Let me explain by using the analogy of US penal law as applied in any State.

Penal law is a corpus or body of law. It is comprised of various components or “codes”. I am describing penal law only from my familiarity with criminal law since I work every day in criminal court rooms (I am a California Certified Court Interpreter). However, I am not an attorney so please take the following only for the sake of argument and not for “the truth of the matter”.

Here are some of the component codes of penal or criminal law.

The Penal Code. This Code by itself does not condemn. It merely states the law. These are the many Do’s and Don’ts that define social behavior in keeping with the State’s legislature regarding acceptable behavior. It is behavior that is either punishable or not punishable “by law”. Yet the Penal Code by itself does not condemn.

The Evidentiary Code. This Code regulates all matters that define the legality of evidentiary proof. Some proof may be considered as evidence, other may not. This Code limits the scope of proof and evidence that may or may not be used against a defendant.

The Trial Code. These regulations define the rules that govern all criminal proceedings. These cover the judges and attorneys’ powers as well as the jury’s function, behavior and authority during an actual trial.

The Sentencing Code. These are the punishments corresponding the violations of the various Penal Codes. These cover from fines to jail, state prison, and even up to the death sentence. These are the condemnatory codes, perhaps akin to what you call the “written code” which are used to pass sentence or condemnation.

These and many other codes form the entire Corpus of Penal or Criminal Law.

Not one of these codes by itself is The Law. All of them, together, as a corpus is The Law.

Not one of them, by itself is condemnatory. All of them as a body of law have a condemnatory function.

The Penal Code which defines appropriate behavior as approved by the State’s legislature representing society, does not condemn. It is only in this limited manner in which I agree with the notion that the 10 commandments do not condemn. Yet the Penal Code for its intended purpose of regulating society cannot be extirpated from its place within the entire corpus of The Law.

Given this analogy is taken from modern criminal law, but the function of law is always the same: to regulate human behavior, and thus “save” society from its destructive elements.

Yet, when applied to the 10 commandments, the analogy holds true.

These laws cannot be extirpated from the Torah. It all belongs together as one corpus of law which included condemnation. This is the reason why Paul in 2 Corinthians 3:7 when referring to the 10 commandments Paul called them “the ministry of death”: “But if the ministry of death, having been engraved in letters in stone”. Then on v. 9 he calls them “the ministry of condemnation”, because they did belong to the entire law which dictated behavior and condemnation. There is no clearer evidence for the law’s condemnatory function than this passage from Paul.

The 10 commandments as such are not condemnatory by themselves, but they don’t exist by themselves. They exist as belonging to a larger corpus of law, with their corresponding sentencing codes. One can argue that the principles they express do exist by themselves, but the fact is that we are talking about commandments and the law, and not about the principles. The argument that the commandments actually express a transcendent principle actually works against the concept that the commandments exist apart from the law. If indeed the commandments express higher principles, why then are 7th day keepers unwilling to accept that it is not the 7th day that is important but it is the rest of trusting in Christ’s finished work towards which the command points? They cannot accept that the rest of faith in Christ through His shed blood and perfect life is the higher principle expressed by the commandment. They must have both. But alas, after the “substance” of the shed blood of Christ has become a reality, the “shadow” of the day has passed away. This is indeed the stumbling stone for Sabbath keepers. One day, the real Rock fell on me, crushed me, and I was made a new creation in Christ forever. I found my eternal Sabbath day in the Person of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. His rest will not set with the sun every 7th day, for there will be no sun or moon there. We are not talking about Isaiah 66 when we talk about the Sabbath, we are talking about Revelation 20-22 where Jesus Himself is the Light, and the Temple, and our Sabbath.

When I share this with my Adventist friends (actually brothers and sisters) for I am of that lineage, they become more defensive, or defend more vigorously the Sabbath than the finished work of Christ, or Jesus, or the cross. They have not entered into His rest. For whoever has entered into His rest, “also has ceased from his own works” (Hebrews 4:10).

Well my brother, that’s about all the input I can give you on that. You do seem to be caught up and convinced about the distinctions you are making, and I certainly cannot take that away from you. However, I cannot find the distinctions you are making.

Your brother in Christ,

Haroldo

The Commandment in Romans 7:7,8

I wrote the following in answer to an inquiry regarding the "commandment" of Romans 7:7,8.

On Romans 7:7,8

On these verses and Paul's use of "commandment" as a reference to the "written code" in v. 6, the Greek grammar is illuminating.

The "commandment" of Romans 7:8 is a reference to the "commandment" cited in 7:7 "Thou shall not covet". This 10th "commandment" is the commandment to which Paul refers through v. 10. The Greek leaves no other inference open. The way Paul quotes the 10th commandment in v. 7 gives an understanding why that particular commandment "killed" him.

Most other commandments are negative injunctions not to perform a certain act, Thou shall not kill, commit adultery, steal. When Paul in service to the law looked upon the law, the law did not condemn him because he was not committing these acts.

But then Paul quotes the 10th commandment. The 10th commandment does not enjoin him not to perform a certain act. The literal translation of the Greek tense is "Thou shalt not be covetous". Do you see the difference here? The 10th commandment asks him NOT TO BE, whereas the other commandments ask him NOT TO DO. When the 10th commandment placed him under the obligation NOT TO BE COVETOUS, OR LUSTFUL, all he could see was that he not only practiced covetousness, but that indeed by nature HE WAS covetous and lustful. He could not get away from condemnation from this commandment. This commandment ordered him to be counter to his human nature. When he realized that there was no way he could perform a deed to get away from lustfulness and covetousness but that the law in the last commandment had gotten to his root problem, that he was sinful, he felt that the commandment "killed" him. To put it more bluntly, the commandment "done did him in", to use bad but clear English.

The commandment promised him life "Do this and live" (v. 7:10), but when he saw that the very commandment that promised him life brought him death ("the wages of sin is death"; "the wages of BEING covetous or lustful is death"). He could not get away from the condemnation of the 10th commandment by doing a certain act, or abstaining from it. Even while abstaining from practicing lust, he was still lustful in his heart. Even though he did not give in to his covetous impulses, HE WAS STILL COVETOUS even though he controlled himself. This truth killed him. We talk little about the power of the 10th commandment, but it was the 10th commandment that led Paul to exclaim, "I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate" (7.15), and "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from this body of death?"

So this "commandment" is indeed a reference to the 10th commandment and not to some other type of written code. The written code is a synonym for the written covenant used in ancient times as a treaty between two parties, in this case the Torah agreement between the people of Israel and God: "Whatever you have said, this we will do".

I hope this is helpful in your study of this entire issue.

I have a further comment on the Adventists of Tomorrow forum as a whole.

The forum does a whole lot of dissecting, examining, analyzing of truth, but little confessing of Christ as Saviour.

We have the privilege of confessing Christ as Savior, and thus as the Lord of the love of our lives. He has conquered our service through the saving act of His life.

If someone has indeed saved my life I will not stop from talking about that person.

Jesus Christ has indeed saved my life from eternal death and condemnation, and I confess His name as my Savior. I literally owe Him my life, my eternal life and my life now. Without His sacrifice I would have no reason to live this life now. That is my truth, my reality, and the truth and reality for every sinner.

I could not do that in my many years as an Adventist seminarian, pastor, overseas missionary, evangelist, theology professor, and even less as one of the top conference officers in the largest conference in the US.

Adventism rather than encouraging, discourages confessing with conviction that one indeed has been saved from sin and death, and has passed into eternal life through Jesus Christ. This is seen as some kind of Protestant evangelical delusion. Thus the power of confessing in Jesus as the Gospel of God is taken away. Jesus is indeed my Savior. I have confessed him with my mouth, I have believed in him in my heart, and He has given me eternal salvation. This is a wonderful truth that rather than giving me some license to sin as is predicated by Adventists, is indeed the Spirit of life which transforms me from within. It is indeed a Blessed Assurance, a foretaste of glory divine.

In His marvelous grace,

Haroldo Camacho

Hebrews 1:8 "The Song of the Bridegroom"

προς δε τον υιον ο θρονος σου ο θεος εις τον αιωνα του αιωνος ραβδος ευθυτητος η ραβδος της βασιλειας σου

ηγαπησας δικαιοσυνην και εμισησας ανομιαν δια τουτο εχρισεν σε ο θεος ο θεος σου ελαιον αγαλλιασεως παρα τους μετοχους σου

Heb 1:8,9 But of the son he says, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy companions.

In order to demonstrate the contrast between the angels and Jesus Christ, the author of Hebrews makes use of Psalm 45 quoting these two verses. As they appear here in Hebrews 1:8, these verses refer to the relationship between Father and Son, a relationship so intimate that in these verses, the author makes it understood that the Father calls the Son “God”. The Father assigns the throne of God to the Son. The Son is also confirmed as the anointed Messiah of God, since the Son has “loved righteousness and hated lawlessness”, referring to Christ’s redemptive work.

In these verses, the author of Hebrews makes use of Psalm 45 to testify of Christ’s divinity. Thus, he opens a window through which we see how he interprets scriptures in light of Christ as the divine Word of God.

Psalm 45 is a love song, and according to the rabbis, it was used as a wedding song. In this psalm the song writer exalts the virtues of the groom, the groom’s God, and the he praises the virtues of the bride.

In order to better understand the use of this psalm in Hebrews, let us study the psalm more carefully.

In verse 1, the psalmist expresses his profound feelings of emotion as he writes his verses:

My heart overflows with a pleasing theme; I address my verses to the king; my tongue is like the pen of a ready scribe.

In vs. 2-5 the psalmist exalts the beauty, courage, spirituality, and moral values of the bridegroom.

(2) You are the most handsome of the sons of men; grace is poured upon your lips; therefore God has blessed you forever. (3) Gird your sword on your thigh, O mighty one, in your splendor and majesty! (4) In your majesty ride out victoriously for the cause of truth and meekness and righteousness; let your right hand teach you awesome deeds! (5) Your arrows are sharp in the heart of the king's enemies; the peoples fall under you.

In verse 6, the psalmist shifts to another person. This verse does not refer to the bridegroom, but to the God of the bridegroom. The psalmist praises the moral greatness of the bridegroom’s God. This God is eternal and just.

Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness;

In verse 7, the psalmist returns to acclaim the bridegroom because just as his God, the bridegroom loves that which his God loves. Then the psalmist proceeds to describe the marvelous consequences to the bridegroom for loving that which his God loves.

You love righteousness, and hate wickedness; therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness above Your fellows.

In verse 8 the psalmist describes the wedding apparel of the bridegroom, and the musical adoration he receives in the palatial surroundings of the wedding.

Your robes are all fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia. From ivory palaces stringed instruments make you glad;

Verse 9 is a transition in which the psalmist turns to describe the beauty and virtues of the bride, the queen. However, this section also belongs to the bridegrooom’s praises. The psalmist praises the bridegroom for the beauty of the bride, the queen, decked in “gold of Ophir”, the finest gold.

Daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.

The remaining verses, from 10-17, describe the bride’s beauty and render praises to her because as she reigns beside the righteous king, she will be eternally remembered by her people.

(10) Hear, O daughter, and consider, and incline your ear: forget your people and your father's house, (11) and the king will desire your beauty. Since he is your lord, bow to him. (12) The people of Tyre will seek your favor with gifts, the richest of the people. (13) All glorious is the princess in her chamber, with robes interwoven with gold. (14) In many-colored robes she is led to the king, with her virgin companions following behind her. (15) With joy and gladness they are led along as they enter the palace of the king. (16) In place of your fathers shall be your sons; you will make them princes in all the earth. (17) I will cause your name to be remembered in all generations; therefore nations will praise you forever and ever.

Therefore in this psalm there are three major characters: the bridegroom, the God of the bridegroom, and the bride.

However, the author of Hebrews, in Hebrews 1:8,9 unifies the characters of the bridegroom and the God of the bridegroom in One person, the person of Jesus Christ.

(8) But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. (9) You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."

Jesus taught that the psalms were about him (Luke 24:44). The author of Hebrews took that seriously. Therefore, when he reads Psalm 45, the author of Hebrews no longer reads a love song. In light of Christ, he can see a glorious reference to the person of Christ, that Jesus is at the same time the bridegroom and the God of the bridegroom to which the psalmist referred.

In unifying these two characters within the person of Jesus Christ, the author of Hebrews infuses Psalm 45 with another dynamic. It is no longer the psalmist’s expression of admiration for the bridegroom and the bridegroom’s God. After the redemptive work of Jesus Christ on the cross, for the author of Hebrews, the Psalm has now become a song of worship and praise between God the Father and God’s Son Jesus Christ.

The bridegroom is now Jesus Christ, whose God is not only the eternal God, but the God that also recognizes the bridegroom also as God, anointed by the same God to reign eternally because he loved righteousness and abhorred wickedness as a human being. And although it is not the expressed intent of the author of Hebrews, the bride of Psalm 45 by reference is the church, the wife of the bridegroom, the wife of God! What a great privilege for believers, to be spiritually married to the great eternal God Jesus Christ, who is Himself acclaimed as eternal God by God the Father.

No wonder the author of Hebrews exalts Jesus Christ above all other beings who serve God, since Jesus is God in Himself serving God and all creation.

Hebrews 1:7 "The Great Contrast"

και προς μεν τους αγγελους λεγει ο ποιων τους αγγελους αυτου πνευματα και τους λειτουργους αυτου πυρος φλογα

But about the angels he says, “the one who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers flame of fire”.

The “but” in the original Greek is intensive. This “but” is a very particular term which in the Greek is used to highlight the contrast between what has been said and that which follows.

The author documents his conviction on the scriptures, quoting Psalm 104:4. This psalm exalts the greatness of God. God’s greatness is partly revealed in his angels. These beings are God’s breath, they are described as scattering the winds which emerge from God. They spread about God’s breath, and propagate it like fire. If this description of angels is taken literally, that they are like “spirits, wind, breath, fire”, these metaphors point to their ability to materialize in various forms as a means of manifesting God’s involvement all over creation. However their own existence is outside any level of existence known to humanity. Notwithstanding their function as supernatural representatives of the Deity, as messengers from God, these beings cannot even be compared to Jesus Christ. This is the reason why the grammatical particle “men” (but) is used, to highlight the contrast.

These beings worship Jesus Christ. It is not Jesus Christ who renders service to these beings.