Denominations: Eastern Orthodox Church (Part 1)

Posted on March 20, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Many people divide Christendom into three major branches: Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox or Orthodox Catholic, and Protestantism.  The Eastern Orthodox Church is the third largest branch.  It is the second largest denomination in the world.  There are nearly 260 million Orthodox members around the world (Orthodox Christianity in the 21st Century, November 8, 2017, pewforum.org).  “Its adherents live mainly in the Balkans, the Middle East, and former Soviet Countries” (Eastern Orthodox by John Meyendorff, britannica.com).  Membership in America is estimated at nearly 6 million (Orthodox Church in America, britannica.com).  The highest percentage by U.S. state is Alaska, where 5% of the population are members of the Orthodox Church (U.S. States by Orthodox Christian Population, worldatlas.com).

History

1.  Development of 5 Patriarch

The early church had a simple organizational structure.  It was congregational.  It was organized with elders (presbyters) or bishops (overseers), and deacons (Philippians 1:1; Acts 14:23; Acts 20:17 cf. 20:28; Titus 1:5 cf. 1:7).  Elders were told “Shepherd the flock of God which is among you” (1 Peter 5:2 cf. “among you” Acts 6:1-3; 1 Corinthians 1:10-11; 5:1-2, 13; 6:5; Ephesians 5:3; 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).  Charles M. Jacobs, a Methodist, writes, “Originally there had been two offices in every congregation, that of ‘elder,’ or ‘presbyter,’ and that of ‘deacon’ (Charles M. Jacobs, The Story of the Church, p. 19).  Again, “In the middle of the second century there was no general organization of the church.  In each community where there were Christians there was a congregation, but the congregations were not united with other congregations in any formal way” (Jacobs, p. 32).  

However, by 381 A.D., five ‘archbishops’ or ‘patriarchs’ were ruling over territories.  These five were the bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem (Jacobs, p. 37).  It is important to understand that not all accepted their rule (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 293). 

2.  Conflict

Two patriarch emerged as especially powerful.  They were: the bishop of Rome in the west, and the bishop of Constantinople in the east.

Conflicts arose over time.  First, there was the issue of power.  Beginning with Boniface III (606-607 A.D.), and onward, the bishops of Rome claimed to be universal bishops.  The Eastern Orthodox Church believed that the church should be overseen by five patriarchs of equal authority.

Second, there were doctrinal issues. (a) The Filioque-controversy.  The Nicene Creed (325 A.D.) read “we believe… in the Holy Ghost.”  The Nicero-Constantinople creed (381), “We believe… in the Holy Ghost… who proceedeth from the Father” (Schaff, Vol. 3, p. 667-ff).  Latin churches met in the sixth century and changed the wording.  The Third Council of Toledo (589 A.D.) inserted the word “filioque” (Latin, “and from the son”).  The Eastern churches did not accept this change.  There were doctrinal objections.  They also felt left out.  Philip Schaff writes, “The Latin church had no right to alter an ecumenical creed without the knowledge and consent of the Greek church…” (Schaff, Vol. 4, p. 481).  In the ninth century, Photius, the bishop of Constantinople, and Nicholas I, the bishop of Rome, excommunicated each other, in part over this. 

(b) There were other doctrinal differences.  (1) The Roman Catholic Church allowed sprinkling for baptism.  The Eastern Orthodox Church did not.  It practiced triune immersion.  (2) The Roman Catholic Church allowed images or icons in worship.  The Eastern Orthodox Church did not.  However, it did allow flat surfaced pictures.  (3) The Roman Catholic Church started using mechanical instruments of music in worship.  The Eastern Orthodox Church did not use mechanical instruments of music in worship.  (4) The Roman Catholic Church used unleavened bread in communion.  The Eastern Orthodox Church used leavened bread.  (5) The Roman Catholic Church did not allow infant communion.  The Eastern Orthodox Church practiced infant communion.  (6) The Roman Catholic Church required celibacy of all “clergy.”  The Eastern Orthodox Church permitted the “clergy” to marry, with the exception of bishops, archbishops and patriarchs (F.W. Mattox, The Eternal Kingdom, pp. 205-206; Schaff, Vol. 3, pp. 516-517; Schaff, Vol. 4, pp. 306-308).

Third, there was turf dispute.  King Bogoris (or Boris I) of Bulgaria was converted by a missionary from Constantinople (c. 863 A.D.).  The bishop of Constantinople expected that the church in Bulgaria would be under the oversight of Constantinople.  Boris renewed diplomatic contact with the west.  The Pope sent missionaries to Bulgaria.  “The Roman clergy’s stay (866-870 soon became a sore point in the acute rivalry between Rome and Constantinople” (Boris I, King of Bulgaria, britannica.com).  The eighth ecumenical council in Constantinople (869-870 A.D.) formally placed the Bulgarian church under the Patriarch of Constantine (Schaff, Vol. 4, pp. 134-135, 312-313).

3.  The Great Schism

The Emperor of Byzantium, Constantine IX (1042-1055 A.D.), needed help in his conflict with the Normans.  He appealed to Leo IX, bishop of Rome for help (note: the Pope has had an army since the 8th century).  The Emperor was ready to recognize the bishop of Rome as Universal Bishop of the church, in exchange for help.  Cerularius, bishop of Constantinople, closed all Latin churches and monasteries in Constantinople.   On July 16, 1054 the bishop of Rome excommunicated the bishop of Constantinople.  Shortly after, the bishop of Constantinople excommunicated the bishop of Rome (Mattox, p. 205; ed. David Brown, Roman Catholicism, Houston College of the Bible Lectureship, p. 33).  It was not until 1965 that Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenogoras I lifted the mutual excommunication (July 16, 1054 CE: Great Schism, nationalgeographic.org).

This (1054) is the date usually given for a distinct Orthodox Church.  In reality, it is much older.  The word “orthodox” means “right” (orthos) “thinking” or “belief” (doxa).

4.  The Fourth Crusade

There was trouble in Constantinople.  The Emperor Isaac Angeius was imprisoned and blinded by a usurper, Alexius III, his own brother.

The Emperor’s son, Alexius, appealed to Rome for help.  He promised payment.

Help came.  Isaac was restored to his throne.  Alexius III fled.

More trouble came.  Another coup occurred.  Payment did not come as promised.  The crusaders attacked the city.  It fell April 12, 1204.  Unrestrained riot and pillage followed (Schaff, Vol. 5, p. 274). 

This hardened the relations even farther.  “In the minds of most orthodox, a decisive moment was the sack of Constantinople in 1204…  This has never been forgotten” (Eastern Orthodox Church, bbc.co.uk).

5.  Fall of Constantinople   

Islam became a serious threat to Constantinople and the Byzantine empire.  “An agreement was reached in 1439 which placed the Pope at the head of all Christendom and granted the Patriarch the second place in a united church.  But the agreement was only on paper.  The Western princes were busy with their own affairs and did not send the armies that had been expected.  The Easterners angrily repudiated the terms which their representatives had made” (Jacob, p. 162). 

The Islamic threat did not go away.  Constantinople and the Byzantine empire fell to Muslim forces led by Sultan Mehmed II on May 29, 1453.  Constantinople is today known as Istanbul.    The Orthodox Church would continue under Ottoman rule.  However, “with Constantinople’s fall, Orthodox Christianity became a minority faith under Islamic rule.  Moscow’s Orthodox church became the most powerful Eastern Christian Church on sovereign territory” (Why a Centuries-old Religious Dispute Over Ukraine’s Orthodox Church Matters Today by Victoria Smolkin, February 19, 2019, theconversation.com).

Posted in Church Organization, denominations, Doctrine, History, Holy Spirit | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Denominations: Catholic Church (Part 3)

Posted on March 10, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Beliefs and Practices

1.  Original Sin

The Catholic Church teaches that children are born in sin.  Catechism of the Catholic Church reads, “Born with a fallen nature and tainted by Original Sin, children also have need of new birth in baptism to be freed from the power of darkness” (CCC, Paragraph, 1250).

2.  Baptism

It is for the forgiveness of sins.  “By baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as punishment for sin” (CCC, Paragraph 1263).

They practice infant baptism.  “The practice of infant baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church. There is explicit testimony to this from the second century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching when whole ‘households’ received baptism, infants may have also been baptized” (CCC, Paragraph 1252).  [Note: Wayne Jackson remarked, “The first allusion to infant baptism is by the writer Irenaeus (140-203 A.D.)… (Against Heresies 2:22:4).  But a contemporary, Tertullian (150-222 A.D.) opposed the practice… (on Baptism, xvii)” (Spiritual Sword, July 1992)].

What about infants who die without baptism?  In the past, a common belief is that they go to Limbo, a place which is neither heaven nor hell (Limbo, Roman Catholic Theology, britannica.com).  However, the current official position is stated: “As regards children who have died without baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God” (CCC, Paragraph 1261).      What “mode” of baptism do they use?  The Church teaches that either triple immersion or triple pouring of water over the candidate’s head is acceptable (CCC, Paragraph 1239).  [Note: The Didache (c. 120-160 A.D.) mentions pouring when lacking sufficient quantity of water (chapter 7).The first known case of sprinkling or pouring was in the case of a sick man, Novatian of Rome in c. 250 A.D. (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 6, Chapter 43).  Wayne Jackson writes, “Even as late as the eighth century, Pope Stephen III, in France, authorized pouring… only in cases of necessity.  In fact, the council of Nemours (1248 A.D.) limited sprinkling to cases of necessity.  Finally, though, at the Council of Ravenna (1311 A.D.), it was officially made law that the candidate for baptism be given his choice between sprinkling and immersion” (Spiritual Sword, July 1992)]. 

3.  Eucharist

The word Eucharist (the giving of thanks) is what they call the Lord’s Supper.  It comes from the fact that thanks was given before partaking (Luke 22:19-ff; 1 Corinthians 11:23-ff).

They believe in transubstantiation.  This word means to “change into another substance.”  It is taught that the Eucharist elements are transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus.  “Only valid ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and wine so that they become the body and blood of the Lord” (CCC, Paragraph 1411).  “By the consecration the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ is brought about” (CCC, Paragraph 1413).  [Note: Due to the priests role in worship, they have held great power over people.  The interdict or suspension of religious services historically has been used as a tool over towns, districts and even countries (Philip Schaff, History of The Christian Church, Vol. 4, p. 379-ff)].

How frequently do they say to partake?  “The Church obliges the faithful… to receive the Eucharist at least once a year, if possible during the Easter season.  But the church strongly encourages the faithful to receive the holy Eucharist on Sundays and feast days, or more often still, even daily” (CCC, Paragraph 1389). 

4.  Confession of Sins

“Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of penance.  All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted to them in confession, even if they are most secret…” (CCC, Paragraph 1456). 

5.  Mary

The church teaches Immaculate Conception.  This means that she was conceived without the taint of original sin.  “Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854: The most blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception… preserved immune from all the stain of original sin” CCC, Paragraph 491).  This insolates Jesus from original sin.  This declaration of Immaculate Conception was “grandfathered in after the First Vatican Council’s declaration of Papal infallibility in 1870” as an ex cathedra declaration (Is There a List of Infallible Teachings? By Kevin P. Considine, uscatholic.org, May 18, 2011).

The Church teaches perpetual virginity (CCC, Paragraph 499-500).  Celibacy is held to be especially holy in the Catholic Church.    

The Church teaches that Mary lived without sin.  “Mary, free from original sin, was also preserved from all actual sin” (Mary Was Free From All Personal Sun by Pope John Paul II, ewtn.com).

The church teaches Bodily Assumption.  Mary “was taken up body and soul into heavenly glory, and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all” (CCC, Paragraph 966 cf. 974).  This was stated ex cathedra by Pope Pius XII in 1950.

The church teaches that Mary now helps us.  “Taken up to heaven she… by her manifold intercession continues to bring gifts of eternal salvation… Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix” (CCC, Paragraph 969).  “Mary is the perfect Orans (prayer)… when we pray to her, we are adhering with her to the plan of the Father… we can pray with and to her” (CCC, Paragraph 2679).  Gary Workman points out, “The rosary has ten times as many prayers addressed to Mary as to God” (The Spiritual Sword, July 1992). 

6.  Saints

Saints also are addressed in prayer.  “Their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan.  We can and should ask them to intercede for us for the whole world” (CCC, Paragraph 2683).

7.  Celibacy

“All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate ‘for the sake of the kingdom of heaven’” (CCC, Paragraph 1579).  However, they acknowledge, “Nevertheless, in the early Church clerical celibacy was not mandated” (Why Does the Church Mandate That Priests be Celibate?, catholicstraitanswers.com).

8.  Images

“The veneration of images of Christ and His Saints is a cherished devotion in the Catholic Church” (Faith of our Fathers by James Cardinal Gibbons, Chapter 15, Gutenberg EBook).  It is argued that they do not worship these images.  However, at times, it appears that they do.  UPI reported on June 15, 1992 “San Antonio – Thousands of faithful made the pilgrimage Monday to Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church to pray before a statue of the Virgin Mary some believe is shedding tears” (upi.com). 

9.  Afterlife

“The Catholic Church teaches that, besides a place of eternal torments for the wicked aband eternal rest for the righteous, there exists in the next life a middle state of temporary punishment, allotted for those who have died in venial sin, or who have not satisfied the justice of God for sins already forgiven.  She also teaches us that, although the souls consigned to this intermediate states, commonly called purgatory, cannot help themselves, they may be aided by the suffrages of the faithful on earth.  This existence of purgatory naturally implies the correlative dogma – the utility of praying for the dead” (Cardinal Gibbons, Chapter 16).  “The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead” (CCC, Paragraph 1032).  The selling of indulgences enriched the Church in the Middle Ages.  The sale of indulgences was abolished in 1567 by Pope Pius V (Indulgence, britannica.com).

Purgatory is a very ancient belief.  However, Gregory I (590-604 A.D.) popularized this belief (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. IV, p. 398). 

10.  The Seven Sacraments

McClintock and Strong defines the word, “Sacrament (from the Latin Sacramentum, a military oath of enlistment), a word adopted by the writers of the Latin Church to denote those ordinances of religion by which Christians come under obligation of obedience to God…” (biblicalcyclopedia.com).

The Catholic Church teaches Seven Sacraments (CCC, Paragraph 1113, 1210).  These are: (1) Baptism (see before). (2) Confirmation.  “Confirmation perfects baptismal grace, it is the sacrament which give the Holy Spirit…” (CCC, Paragraph 1316).  “In the Latin church this sacrament is administered when the age of reason has been reached” (CCC, Paragraph 1318).  (3) Eucharist (see before).  (4) Penance.  “It is called the sacrament of confession, since the disclosure of confession of sins to a priest is an essential element of this sacrament” (CCC, Paragraph 1424).  “The penance the confessor imposes must take into account the penitent’s personal situation and must seek his spiritual good.  It must correspond as far as possible with the gravity and nature of the sins committed.  It can consist of prayer, an offering, works of mercy, service of neighbor, voluntary self-denial, sacrifices, and above all the patient acceptance of the cross we must bear” (CCC, Paragraph 1460).  (5) Anointing of the sick.  “Only priests (bishops and presbyters) are ministers of the Anointing of the sick (CCC, Paragraph 1516).  “If the sacrament of anointing of the sick is given to all who suffer from serious illness and infirmity, even more rightly is it given to those at the point of departing this life… The anointing of the sick completes our conformity to the death and resurrection of Christ just as baptism began it” (CCC, Paragraph 1523).  “This assistance from the Lord by the power of his Spirit is meant to lead the sick to healing of the soul, but also of the body if God’s will” (CCC, Paragraph 1520).  (6) Holy Orders.  “Today the word ‘ordination’ is reserved for the sacramental act which integrates a man into the order of bishop, presbyter or deacon” (CCC, Paragraph 427).  (7) Matrimony.  “In the epiclesis of this sacrament the spouses receive the Holy Spirit as the communion of love of Christ and the Church.  The Holy Spirit is the seal of their covenant, the ever-available source of their love and the strength to renew their fidelity” (CCC, Paragraph 1624).  “According to the law in force in the Latin church a mixed marriage ( of mixed faiths-B.H.) needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority… furthermore the Catholic party confirms the obligations… of preserving his own faith or her own faith and ensuring the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic Church” (CCC, Paragraph 1635).

  

Posted in baptism, Catholic, denominations, Doctrine, History, Lord's Supper | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Denominations: Catholic Church (Part 2)

Posted on March 5, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Authority

1.  The Bible

The Catholic Bible contains seven Old Testament books which are not contained in the Bibles we use.  These are: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (of Solomon), Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and Baruch.

Additionally, five more books are attached to other Old Testament books.  The additions to Esther are attached to Esther; The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon are attached to Daniel; and, The Letter of Jeremiah is sometimes attached to Baruch.

The Catholic Church did not officially accept these books as canonical until April 8, 1546 at the Council of Trent [Note: for more information see The Apocrypha by Bryan Hodge].

2.  Tradition

The Church “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone.  Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, paragraph 82).  “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God” (CCC paragraph 97).    It is important to understand that the Bible is not the Catholics only source for authority.  Kerry Duke explains, “If you argue, for example, that the New Testament says nothing about infant baptism, the Catholic will readily admit this.  He will add, however, that sacred tradition does not speak of it – and this tradition is to him just as much the word of God as the Bible is.  In fact, when you cite any passage about the word of God (e.g. Matthew 24:35; John 12:48; 1 Thessalonians 2:13) the Catholic will immediately think not just of the written words of the Bible but also of the spoken words of the apostles handed down through the ages by the Catholic Church (‘tradition’).  Tradition, you see, is his trump card over any verse you quote” (Kerry Duke, Debate Charts on Roman Catholicism, pp. 1-2).

3.  The Magisterium

“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone… This means the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishop in communion with the successors of Peter, the Bishop of Rome (CCC Paragraph 85).  “The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him” (CCC Paragraph 100).  “Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected that one of them cannot stand without the others” (CCC Paragraph 95).

All of this can be very confusing.  Kerry Duke asks: (1) Can I know what the Bible teaches by reading it?  No, the Catholic Church must officially interpret it for you.  (2) Will that official interpretation be all that I need?  No, you need Sacred Traditions.  (3) Okay, then I’ll study the Church Fathers to learn this Tradition.  Will that work?  Sorry, but you must have the Church Magisterium to decide dogma.  (4) Well, I’ll go the Church to get the body of ‘Sacred Tradition” so I can study all the apostles handed down to us.  Is that okay?  Not really, because the Church really doesn’t have this body of teaching written down somewhere.  The Church only ‘extracts’ truths from it as they are needed.  (5) But since a lot of people besides the apostles heard Jesus, maybe some of His saying have been passed down through people other than the apostles.  Is that possible?  No, because only the Catholic Church knows this Tradition.  (6) And what is your proof of these claims? (Duke, p. 17). 

Continual Guidance 

Catholics believe that the Roman Catholic Church is supernaturally guided by the Holy Spirit.  The Magisterium “is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant.  It teaches only what has been handed on to it.  At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it faithfully” (CCC Paragraph 86).    On July 18, 1870, Vatican I declared that the Pope was infallible when he spoke ex cathedra or from the chair.  The final vote of the bishops was 433 to 2 (Why Papal Infallibility Was Made Dogma In 1870, pathos.com).  He has officially spoken ex cathedra once since then [Pope Pius XII did so November 1, 1950 defining the dogma of Mary’s Assumption into heaven (Fr. Hugh Barbour, O. Praem., Q&A The Most Recent Ex Cathedra Statement, catholic.com)].

However, this too can be a bit confusing.  Fr. Hugh Barbour writes, “The requirements for ex cathedra or extraordinary exercise of the Magisterium and the requirements for infallible teaching are not exactly the same.  There can be teachings that are taught infallibly but are not presented in an extraordinary form of definition.  The chief example of this would be St. John Paul II’s declaration on the ordination of women to the priesthood ordination sacerdotalis on May 22, 1994… It is clear that here the Pope is using his full authority and intends for his declaration to be definitive.  He thus fulfills all the requirements for a dogmatic definition, even though his instruction was not announced as such” (ibid). 

Trustworthiness

1.  Changing Positions

Moises Pinedo writes, “Pope Honorius I (A.D. 625-638) was deemed a ‘heretic’ for many years after his death for espousing the doctrine of monotheletism (the doctrine that acknowledged two distinct  natures within Christ, but only one divine will).  He was censured by the Third Council of Constantinople in 680… Another Pope, Eugenius IV (1431-1447), condemned Joan of Arc, considering her to be a participant of witchcraft, though Benedict XV canonized her as a ‘saint’ in 1920… other Popes, such as Paul III, Paul IV, Sixtus IV, Pius IX, et. al., authorized, promoted, incited, and reinforced the ‘Holy’ Inquisition for which the late Pope John Paul II would apologize worldwide.  The same John Paul (1978-2005) gave a fatal blow to the doctrine of infallibility.  In opposition to the declarations of other popes and to Catholic doctrine itself, this Pope declared: The Spirit of Christ uses churches and ecclesial communities other than the Catholic Church as means of salvation (1979, 4.32).  People outside the Catholic Church and the Gospel can attain salvation by the grace of Christ (1990, 1.10).  People can be saved by living a good moral life, without knowing anything about Christ and the Catholic Church (1993, 3).  There is sanctification outside the Catholic Church (1995, 1.2).  The Martyrs of any religions community can find extraordinary grace of the Holy Spirit (1995, 3. 84)” (Moises Pinedo, What the Bible Says About the Catholic Church, pp. 53-54).  [John Paul II cf. Boniface VIII in 1382, O.C. Lambert, Catholicism Against Itself, vol. 1, page 276].

2.  Scripture

“All scripture is given by the inspiration of God… that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16, 17).  Where is the indication that we need scripture, plus tradition, plus Magisterium?

Posted in Catholic, denominations, History | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Denominations: Catholic Church (Part 1)

Posted on March 2, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

The word ‘denomination’ and related words are used in different ways.  The word ‘denominate’ means “to give a name to” (merrian-webster.com).  The word ‘denominator,’ in mathematics, is used of “the part of the fraction that is below the line that functions as the divisor of the numerator” (ibid).  It has to do with division.  The word ‘denomination,’ in measurements, refers to “a value or size… especially: the value of a particular coin or bill” (ibid).  The word denomination, in religion, commonly to refer to “a religious organization whose congregations are united in their adherence to its beliefs and practices” (ibid).  Generally speaking, a denomination is considered to be an organization which is “larger than an individual congregation, but smaller than the whole body of Christ (ed. Terry Hightower, Denominationalism Versus the Bible, Shenandoah Lectures, p. 27).  David Roper adds, “Denominational scholars and theologians now see a sharp difference between a denomination and a sect: where ‘denomination’ describes a group which is but a part of the whole, the word ‘sect’ is understood to represent a religious group which claims that it represents the whole church of Christ” (ibid, p. 29).  The Roman Catholic Church has considered themselves a part of the denominational world since Vatican II, 1962. 

We consider, at this time, the Roman Catholic Church.  The term Catholic means “universal” or “according to the whole.”  It began to be used in the second century (F.W. Mattox, The Eternal Kingdom, p. 149; Frank Mead, Handbook of Denominations, p. 216).  The church, in a sense, is designed to be universal.  “The term, however, was soon applied to doctrine and organization that received the approval of the majority of the bishops” (Mattox). By Roman Catholic we mean the world organization that is led by the bishop of Rome [not Eastern Catholic, Anglo Catholic, or Old Catholic (a term used by some scholars for the pre-council early church cf. Mattox)]. 

Please keep this in mind.  The aim of this series is not to provide a thorough refutation of beliefs and practices found in a denomination.  Instead, the aim of this series is primarily to reveal the history and beliefs and practices of various denominations. 

The Roman Catholic Church is by far the largest branch of Christendom.  It numbers about 1.3 billion members worldwide, as of 2018 (Vatican Publishes New Statistics 2020/03/26, romereports.com).  The distribution in 2013 was: 41.3% Latin American; 23.7% Europe; 15.2% Africa; 11.7%; Asia; 7.3% North America; 0.8% Oceania (How Many Roman Catholics Are There in the World?, March 14, 2013, bbc.com.  The two countries with the largest numbers of Roman Catholics are Brazil and Mexico (The Global Catholic Population, February 13, 2013, pewforum.org).  There are about 71 million Catholics in the U.S.A., making it the fourth largest country by membership (Countries With The Largest Roman Catholic Populations by Kasia Jurczak, July 27, 2018, worldatlas.com, bonus – the Philippines is listed third, and Italy fifth). In the U.S., the states with the highest percentage of Catholics are: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New Mexico (worldatlas.com). The states with the most Catholics are: California, New York, Texas, and Illinois (thearda.com, 2010).

History

1.  Development of 5 Patriarch

In the early church, the term elder (presbyter) and bishop (overseer) were used interchangeably (Acts 20:17 cf. 20:28; Titus 1:5 cf. 1:7).  Paul and Barnabas’ appointed a plurality of men to serve as elders or bishops in every church (Acts 14:23).

However, change soon came.  In the second century, some began to elevate a bishop over elders in a local church.  Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 107) is the first known to make this distinction (Everett Ferguson, Early Christians Speak, p. 174-f). 

In the fourth century, certain metropolitan bishops began to oversee other bishops in a province.  Next, “The logical thing to do was to set a few ‘presiding archbishops’ over several provinces.  Thus, by 381, the church had secured its five ‘patriarchs.’  They were the bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem” (Charles M. Jacobs, The Story of the Church, p. 37).  It is important to understand that not all accepted this oversight (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 293).

2.  Universal Bishop

Two patriarchs emerged as especially powerful.  The bishop of Rome in the west, and the bishop of Constantinople in the east.  Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem were all considered a part of the east.   

Rome and Constantinople became rivals for power.  (a. Leo I, bishop of Rome (440-461),  argued for Roman supremacy on the basis of Apostolic succession (F.W. Mattox, The Eternal Kingdom, p. 139).  (b) John IV (a.k.a. John the Faster), bishop of Constantinople (582-595), claimed the title of Universal Bishop (Mattox, p. 139; Philip Schaff, History of The Christian Church, Volume 4, p. 219).  (c) Gregory I, bishop of Rome (590-604), “was so provoked and irritated beyond measure by the assumption of his Eastern rival, and strained every nerve to procure a revocation of that title.  He characterized it as a foolish, proud, profane, wicked, pestiferous, blasphemous, and diabolical usurpation and compared him who used it to Lucifer” (Schaff, Vol. 4, p. 220).  He went so far as to declare, that whoever calls himself Universal Priest, or desires to be so called, was the forerunner of Antichrist” (ibid).  F.W. Mattox says of Gregory, “At the close of his reign the theory of the primacy of Peter and the Roman bishop as his successor and universal head of the church was well established” (Mattox, p. 140).  Schaff says, “he was inconsistent in disclaiming the name yet claiming the thing itself” (Schaff, Vol. 4, p. 225).  (d) Boniface III, bishop of Rome (606-607), assumed the title “Universal Bishop” (Schaff, Vol. 4, p. 230).  [Note: The term “pope” (father) was used long before this in the west for bishops (Schaff, Vol. 3, p. 290, 300).  It became the exclusive prerogative of Roman bishops by Gregory VII (Hildebrand) in the eleventh century (George Klingman, Church History For Busy People, p. 22)]. 

3.  Date

It is difficult to assign an exact date to the start of the Roman Catholic Church.  What we know as the papacy developed over time.  Britannica says, “The major elements of what appeared later as Catholic structure and Catholic belief cannot be clearly perceived before the 2nd century” (Britannica © 1979, vol. 15, p. 986).  Again, under the subtitle The Middle Ages (313-1517), “During this period Roman Catholicism developed hierarchical structure that endured largely unchallenged until the reformation” (ibid, p. 987).  Some say that Leo I was the first real Pope, as we think of such.  Philip Schaff says, “The first Pope in the proper sense of the word is Leo I (Schaff, Vol. 3, p. 315); Also, Mattox, p. 140).  Others have suggested that Boniface III was the first real Pope since it was he who began to wear the title Universal Bishop (George Klingman, Church History For Busy People, p. 22; Also, Moises Pinedo, What the Bible Says About the Catholic Church, p. 19).

4.  History According to Them

It is well known that “Roman Catholicism claims continuity with the church of the New Testament” (Britannica, p. 986).  It is also claimed that Peter was the first Pope and that apostolic succession has continued to today, 266 Popes in their list to this point (theguardian.com).   

Claims and proof are two different things.  Where is the proof that Peter was the first Pope?  Where is the proof of apostolic succession?  (Notice that I did not say historical connection.  Historical connection does not prove apostolic succession).

One thing is clear, the Roman Catholic Church looks very different today than the church that I read of in the Bible.  The Roman Catholic Church has: Pope, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Deacons and Laity.  I do not find this organizational structure in the scriptures.  Remember that scripture “thoroughly equips us for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

Posted in Catholic, Church Organization, denominations, History | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than The Work of Levitical Priests (Part 3)

Posted on February 24, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

The work of Jesus is superior to the work done by Levitical priests.  This is set forth in three chapters (Hebrews 8-10).  In this writing, we will consider Hebrews chapter ten.

1.  Shadow v. Very Image

“For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year, make those who approach perfect.  For then would they not have ceased to be offered?  For the worshippers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins.  But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sin every year” (Hebrews 10:1-3). 

Two words are contrasted: (1) The law (of Moses) is described as a “shadow” of the good things to come.  Vine’s says of the word “shadow” (skia): “a shadow caused by the interception of light… of the image or outline cast by an object.”  “The good things to come” refers to Christ’s ministry as High Priest (the New Covenant System), and what would be accomplished through Him (cf. Hebrews 2:5-ff; 9:11-ff).  (2) The very image is Christ and His New Covenant ministry.  Vine’s says of the word “image” (eikon): “Hebrews 10:1, negatively of the Law… i.e. not the essential and substantial form… the contrast has been likened to the difference between a statue and the shadow cast by it.” 

The annual sacrifices never ceased according to the law (cf. Exodus 30:10; Leviticus 16; Leviticus 23:27,29; Numbers 29:7,11).  There was no once for all sacrifice.  Tom Wacaster comments, “Ere the blood was poured out on the ground the Jew would know that this innocent animal would not be the last” (Tom Wacaster, Studies in Hebrews).  They were reminded year by year that man had a sin problem that never seemed to go away.

“For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sin” (Hebrews 10:4). 

God required animal sacrifices.  They were a condition for forgiveness under the Law of Moses.  However, the writer states that animal sacrifices were not the basis for forgiveness.  The basis in His plan was Christ.  Kevin Rhodes comments, “These sacrifices fulfilled their purpose but only as they fit into God’s overall purpose.  Standing alone, they could never have provided for the cleansing of sin’ therefore, they offered forgiveness that was prospective, looking toward the time in which someone could offer a sacrifice that they fulfilled what they themselves could do” (ed. Devin Dean, Studies in Hebrews, The Gospel Journal Commentary Series). 

2.  God’s Will

“Previously saying, ‘sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in their (which are offered according to the law)” (Hebrews 10:8). 

This is a quotation from Psalm 40:6.  It is a Messianic Psalm.  Adam Clarke comments on the Psalm, “It is remarkable that all the offerings and sacrifices which were considered to be of cleansing nature, offered under the law, are here enumerated by the psalmist and the apostle to show that none of them, nor all of them could take away sin” (Vol. 3, p. 350). 

“Then He said, ‘Behold I have come to do Your will O God.’  He takes away the first that He may establish the second.  By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:9-10).

Verse nine continues quoting the same Psalm.  This time Psalm 40:7-8.  Jesus came to do the will of the Father (cf. Matthew 26:39; John 4:34; 5:30; 6:38).  In doing the will of the Father two things are stated as being accomplished: (1) The covenant was changed.  The first covenant (the Law of Moses) was taken away (cf. Colossians 2:14).  The second covenant (the New Covenant) was established (cf. Hebrews 9:15-22).  (2) Christians had been sanctified (cf. Hebrews 2:11; 9:13-14; 10:10; 10:14; 10:28-29; 13:10-12; John 17:17; Ephesians 5:25-26).  His offering is once for all (cf. Hebrews 7:27; 9:12; 9:24-26; 10:11-12). 

3.  Daily v. Once

“And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices which can never take away sins.  But this Man after He offered one sacrifice for sin forever, sat down at the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10:11-12).

Like the annual sacrifices, mentioned earlier (Hebrews 10:1-4), the daily sacrifices (Hebrews 10:11) never ceased.  Christ sacrifice was superior to any sacrifices under the…  Old Covenant.  It was (is) once for all.  

4.  Invitation

“Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus… through the veil, that is, His flesh… let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkling from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water” (Hebrews 10:19-22).

We have access into the presence of God (Hebrews 10:19 cf. 4:16).  It is through Christ that this is possible (cf. John 14:6).

Those who draw near are to: (1) Have a sincere faith.  Notice: “With a true heart in full assurance of faith.”  (2) Have their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience.  “Sprinkling” in the book of Hebrews refers to the sprinkling of blood (cf. Hebrews 9:13-14; 9:19-22; 11:28; 12:24).  The blood of Christ must be applied.  (3) Have their bodies washed.  This refers to baptism (cf. Acts 22:16; Ephesians 5:26).  Why is it referred to as pure water?  Here are two suggestions.  Some think it is so called because of the water’s purifying effect.  Others have suggested it means unmixed.  The waters of purification under the law was mixed with the ashes of animals (Numbers 19:1-22). 

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than the Work of Levitical Priests (Part 2)

Posted on February 23, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

The work of Jesus is superior to the work done by Levitical priests.  This is set forth in three chapters (Hebrews 8-10).  In this writing, we will consider Hebrews chapter nine.

1.  Earthly Sanctuary

“Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service and the earthly sanctuary” (Hebrews 9:1). 

The first covenant had ordinances of divine service.  The people were not left to themselves to decide how to worship and serve God.  There were ordinances. 

The first covenant provided ordinances for an earthly sanctuary, or tabernacle, and how things were to be done in it (Exodus 25:8-9, ff).  This tabernacle was prepared (Hebrews 9:2 cf. Exodus 26:40; Exodus 40:16-38).

2.  Earthly Service

“Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went into the first part of the tabernacle, performing the services.  But into the second part the high priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for the people’s sins committed in ignorance” (Hebrews 9:6-7).      

There were two parts of the Tabernacle (and also later the Temple).  (1) The first part was known as the Holy Place (Exodus 26:33b-35).  There was daily and weekly work to be done in this place.  There were: lamps to be kept burning (Exodus 27:20-21; 30:8; Leviticus 24:1-4); Incense to be burned (Exodus 30:1-8); Showbread to be set out (Exodus 25:23-30; Leviticus 24:5-9); and daily sacrifices to be made (Exodus 29:38-42; Numbers 28:1-8); (2) The second part was known as the Holy of Holies or the Most Holy Place (Exodus 26:33b-35).  This place represented the dwelling place of God [Consider: (a) Exodus 25:22 cf. 26:34; (b) Exodus 25:22 cf. 1 Samuel 4:4; 2 Samuel 6:2; 2 Kings 19:15; 1 Chronicles 13:6; Isaiah 37:16; (c) Leviticus 4:5-6; 4:16-18; 16:2 cf. 16:12-13, etc.] There was only one day anyone was allowed to enter this place (Leviticus 16:2 cf. 16:27-28; Numbers 29:7-11).  This was The Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16).  There was only one who was allowed to enter on this day, and he was the high priest (Leviticus 16:3, 17, 32) [Note: It seems that he entered more than once on this day (a) Leviticus 16:12-13; (b) Leviticus 16:14; (c) Leviticus 16:15].

“the Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing” (Hebrews 9:8).

The word “tabernacle”  is being used to represent the whole of the Mosaic system (Tom Wacaster, Studies in Hebrews).  The common Jew did not have access into the Most Holy Place under the Mosaic system.

However, now it is different.  We can now enter into God’s presence by the blood of Jesus, and through the veil of His flesh (Hebrews 10:19-20). 

“It was symbolic for the present time… until the time of reformation” (Hebrews 9:9-10).

The Tabernacle and priestly work associated with it were symbolic (parabole, a parable).  They were “the copy and shadow of the heavenly things” (Hebrews 8:5 cf. 10:1; Colossians 2:16-17).  Here are a few examples: The sacrifice of animals was a type of the sacrifice of Jesus (cf. John 1:29; 1 Peter 1:19-20).  The Most Holy Place is a type of heaven (cf. Hebrews 4:14; 6:19-20; 9:11-12, 24).  The Holy place is a type of the church on earth (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:17; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:5). 

The gifts and sacrifices offered under the Mosaic system did not bring perfection (Hebrews 9:9 cf. 6:1; 7:11; 7:19; 10:1-2).  There was no once for all sacrifice for sin.

There were many fleshly ordinances under the Mosaic system.  There were clean and unclean foods, sacrificial foods and drink offerings, and various washings (Hebrews 9:10 cf. 13:9).  These things were until the time of reformation. Vincent comments, “’The time of reformation’ is the Christian age, when God made his people a better covenant” (Marvin R. Vincent, Vincent’s Studies, studylight.org). Robertson comments, “Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in Hebrews 7:10-17; Hebrews 8:13; and argued clearly by Paul in Galatians 3:15-22… Christianity itself is the great reformation” (A.T. Robertson’s Word Pictures, studylight.org).

3.  Heavenly Sanctuary

“But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation” (Hebrews 9:11).

The words “not made with hands” is a phrase which appears several times in the Bible (e.g. Daniel 2:34; 2:45; 8:25; Colossians 2:11-12).  This means that this tabernacle was not built by men’s hands (cf. Hebrews 8:2; 9:11-12; 9:23-24; Acts 7:48; 17:24). 

4.  Heavenly Service

“Not with the blood of goat and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12).

Christ has offered a superior sacrifice.  It was (is) a once for all sacrifice (Hebrews 7:27; 9:12; 10:12).  It does not need to be repeated year after year (Hebrews 9:25-28).

“For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, not to appear in the presence of God for us” (Hebrews 9:24). 

Tom Wacaster comments, “Being of the tribe of Judah, not Levi, our Lord never once entered into that earthly tabernacle.  But He has entered into that heavenly tabernacle into the very presence of God” (Tom Wacaster, Studies in Hebrews).  He entered into heaven itself, not into the earthly symbolic representation of heaven.

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than The Work of Levitical Priests (Part 1)

Posted on February 4, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

The work of Jesus is superior to the work done by Levitical Priests.  This is set forth in three chapters (Hebrews 8-10).  In this writing, we will consider Hebrews chapter eight.

1.  Two Tabernacles

“We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” (Hebrews 8:1).

We have a High Priest.  The reference is to Jesus (cf. Hebrews 4:14; 5:5-6).  He is described as “such” a High Priest.  The meaning is that He is the Perfect High Priest (cf. Hebrews 7:25-26).   He is seated on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.  He is on the right hand of the Father (cf. Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2).  He is near to the source of grace (Hebrews 8:1 cf. 4:16), interceding for us (Hebrews 7:25). 

“a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man” (Hebrews 8:2).

Two tabernacles are in view.  (1) The tabernacle in which the Levitical priests served was erected by man (Hebrews 8:2 cf. Exodus 40), and made with hands (Hebrews 9:11, 24 cf. Exodus 31, 36-39).  (2) The Tabernacle in which Jesus serves was not erected by man (Hebrews 8:2), or make with hands (Hebrews 9:11, 24).  It was erected by the Lord (Hebrews 8:2).  This is the “true” tabernacle {“True” is used here of superior or substantial [e.g. true light (John 6:31-35); true vine (John 15:1); true holy place (Hebrews 9:24)] Wayne Jackson says “The ‘true’ is that which the symbolic copy represented” (Wayne Jackson, A New Testament Commentary)}.

What is the true tabernacle?  The tabernacle of old had two compartments.  (a) The Most Holy Place represented Heaven or God’s dwelling place (Hebrews 9:7 cf. 9:11-12).  Jesus does not serve in an earthly tent which represents heaven.  He serves in heaven.  (b) The Holy Place appears to represent the church.  The items found in the Holy Place are identified with the church.  The offering of incense is connected with the prayers of the saints (Exodus 30:6-9 cf. Revelation 5:8; 8:3-4).  The seven lamps are connected with the light given off by the church (Exodus 25:31-40; 27:20-21 cf. Revelation 1:12, 20).  The showbread many have inferred to be connected with the Lord’s Supper (Exodus 25:23-30; Leviticus 24:5-9 cf. Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:24-26).  We are a holy priesthood (1 Peter 2:5). 

The things pertaining to the tabernacle erected by man were but “the copy and shadow of heavenly things” (Hebrews 8:5; 9:9, 23, 24; 10:1).  Wayne Jackson comments, “Why would one wish to cling to the copy and reject the heavenly reality?  Yet that was what the Judaizers were doing” (Wayne Jackson, A New Testament Commentary).

2.  Two offerings

“For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices.  Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer” (Hebrews 8:3 cf. 5:1). 

One of the most basic functions of high priest is to offer gifts and sacrifices to God for the sins of the people (cf. Hebrews 5:1).  [Robert Milligan comments, “The word ‘gifts’ (dora) and sacrifices’ (thusias) are sometimes used interchangeably, as in Genesis 4:3-5.  But when contracted… the former is used of bloodless offerings, and the latter for such as required the life of the victim” (A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews)].  (1) Levitical priests offered gifts and sacrifices for sins (cf. Hebrews 7:27; 9:9; 10:1-4; 10:11).  (2) Our High Priest also had something to offer (Hebrews 8:3).  It was an offering which did not need to be repeated.  It was a once for all sacrifice, unlike the Levitical offerings (cf. Hebrews 7:27; 9:12, 23-28; 10:11-12).  

3.  Two Covenants

“But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was founded on better promises” (Hebrews 8:6).

Two covenants are in view.  (1) Moses dedicated the first covenant with the blood of animals (Hebrews 9:18-22 cf. Exodus 24:1-7; 29:19-21).  (2) Jesus is “the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death” (Hebrews 9:15).  He dedicated this covenant with His own blood (cf. Matthew 26:28).  This covenant was prophesied (Hebrews 8:7-13; 10:15-18 cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34).  It is a better covenant.  Under it sins would be remembered no more (Hebrews 8:12 cf. 10:1-4; 10:17, 18).  It was founded on better promises.  While the first covenant focused on a land promise and an earthly rest, this covenant focuses on a rest to come and eternal life (cf. Hebrews 3:16-4:11; 9:15).  Tim Ayers writes, “The promises of the Old Covenant were primarily physical and earthly in nature, although it did include spiritual promises as well… The promises of the New Covenant are better because they are pre-eminently spiritual in nature” (ed. Devin W. Dean, The Gospel Journal Commentary Series, Studies in Hebrews).  Moreover, many promises are only possible because of Christ (cf. Hebrews 9:6-8; 10:19-20; 11:35-40).

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood (Part 4)

Posted on January 26, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Jesus’ priesthood is more comparable to that of Melchizedek’s than it is to the priesthood of the Levites.  This point is developed in three chapters (Hebrews 5:5-6, 10-11; 6:19-20; 7:1-28).  In this writing, we will continue to consider Hebrews chapter seven.

1.  Another Priest

“And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek, there arises another priest” (Hebrews 7:15).

“It is yet far more evident” (Hebrews 7:15 cf. 7:14).  The scriptures foretold of one who would come in the likeness of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4).

“There arises another priest” (Hebrews 7:15).  The word “another” is heteros, “another of a different kind.”

“Who has come, not according to the law of a fleshly commandment, but according to the power of an endless life” (Hebrews 7:16).

The Levitical priests, serving under the Law of Moses, became priests by fleshly commandment.  Kevin Berry comments, “Their appointment was made, not on account of any superior excellence on their part, but solely on the ground of carnal descent.  The Law of Moses prescribed the conditions” (ed. Devin W. Dean, Studies in Hebrews, The Gospel Journal Commentary Series). 

However, Jesus was made a priest in a much more dramatic way.  He was made a priest according to the power of an endless life (cf. Hebrews 7:16).  He arose from the dead to die no more (cf. Hebrews 7:23-25). 

“For He testifies: ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’” (Hebrews 7:17 cf. Psalm 110:4). The word “forever” indicates that Jesus’ position as High Priest was to be an enduring one.  It is according to the power of an endless life (cf. Hebrews 7:16).

[Note: The word “forever” does not necessarily, literally mean “forever”; that is eternal.  It can mean “age-lasting” (cf. Exodus 40:15; Numbers 25:10-13).  Jesus would personally serve as intercessor through the Christian dispensation.  This intercessory role may not be needed in the future heavenly existence (cf. Hebrews 2:17-18; 4:14-16; 7:24-25)].   

“And inasmuch as He was not made priest without an oath (for they have become priest without an oath, but He with an oath by Him who said to Him: ‘The LORD has sworn and will not relent ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Mechizedek’), by so much more Jesus has been become surety of a better covenant” (Hebrews 7:20-22). 

This was never said of the Levitical priesthood.  However, it was said of Jesus’ priesthood (Hebrews 7:21 cf. Psalm 110:4).  Jesus’ priesthood would not change or be replaced. 

Jesus’ priesthood implies a change in the law (Hebrews 7:11-14).  This change was needed to bring us to perfection (Hebrews 7:11, 19).  We have a better covenant, with better promises, and a better hope (Hebrews 7:22; 8:6; 7:19).  Jesus Himself is the surety of these things (cf. Romans 1:4). 

2.  Power of New Priesthood

“Also there were many priests, because they were prevented by death from continuing.  But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood.  Therefore, He is also able to save to the uttermost those who came to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them” (Hebrews 7:23-25).

Levitical priests died.  Aaron was replaced by Eleazar, and Eleazer by Phinehas (Numbers 20:21-29; Joshua 24:33 cf. Judges 20:27-28).  There were 81 High Priests who had served by 70 A.D. (Robert Milligan, The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 268). 

Kings also came and went.  Judah had a few good kings.  Most were bad.  Progress that good kings had made was sometimes halted or reversed by the next in line (cf. Psalm 146:3-4; Ecclesiastes 2:18-19). 

However Jesus’ work will not be interrupted by physical death.  Therefore, He is able to save to the uttermost.  J.E. Wright comments, “Salvation to the uttermost does not mean a temporary or partial forgiveness, but absolute pardon forever” (Tom Wacaster, Studies in Hebrews).  He will see this work to its ultimate completion. 

3.  Character

“For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless (innocent – NASB, ESV), undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26).

Five things are said of Him: (1) He is holy.  He is perfect in His devotion to God.  He is without sin (cf. Hebrews 4:15).  (2) He is harmless.  Some take this to be nearly synonymous with the previous point.  Some versions translate the original word “innocent.”  Others take this to mean that He is harmless toward us.  He is without malice or ill will (cf. Hebrews 7:25).  The original word is akakos.  It means “without evil (or harm).”  Either interpretation is possible.  However, since this word is sandwiched between “holy” and “undefiled,” the first position seems more likely.  (3) He is undefiled.  He is pure, free from contamination (cf. Hebrews 13:4; James 1:27;  1 Peter 1:4).  He is without spot or blemish (Hebrews 9:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19).  (4) He is separate from sinners.  Some take this to be nearly synonymous with the previous three points.  Other take this to be nearly synonymous with the last point, which comes next.  That is He is in heaven (cf. Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2).  (5) He is higher than the heavens (Hebrews 7:26 e cf. 4:14).  He ascended far above all the heavens (Ephesians 4:10).  He is positioned “far above all principality and power and might and dominion” (Ephesians 1:20-21).

4.  Different

“Who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for He did once for all when He offered up Himself” (Hebrews 7:27).

The sacrificial work of the Levitical priests under the law of Moses never ended.  It was a daily recurring task (Exodus 29:38-46; Numbers 28:1-10; Hebrews 7:27; 10:11-12).

Jesus’ sacrifice was once for all (Hebrews 7:27; 10:10).  It needs not to be repeated. 

Further, Jesus did not need to make sacrifice for Himself, as the priests of old.  He was (is) without sin (Hebrews 4:15).

“For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever” (Hebrews 7:28).

This is a summary of what has been said.  The Levitical priests and Jesus are being contrasted. 

The Levitical priests had weakness.  What is the weakness in context?  Some believe that it is spiritual weakness.  They sinned, as others did (cf. Hebrews 7:26-27).  Others believe that it is physical weakness or limitation.  They died (Hebrews 7:23).  This position seems more likely to me.  “Weakness” is placed in contrast with “perfected forever.”  “Forever” in context is contrasted with “death” (Hebrews 7:23-24).  The word “perfected” refers to Jesus being made qualified to be a merciful and faithful High Priest (Hebrews 2:10 cf. 2:17-18; 4:15-16; 5:8-9).

Jesus is different.  He is without sin (Hebrews 4:15).  He is holy, harmless, undefiled (Hebrews 7:27).  Moreover, He always lives to make intercession (Hebrews 7:25).  He is the perfect High Priest (Hebrews 2:10, 17-18; 4:14-16; 5:8-9; 7:28). 

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood (Part 3)

Posted on January 19, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Jesus’ priesthood is more comparable to that of Melchizedek’s than it is to the priesthood which existed under the law of Moses.  It was prophesied that He would be a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek (Psalm 110:4 cf. Hebrews 5:6, 10; 7:17, 21).

In this writing, we will consider Hebrews chapter seven.  Chapter seven continues the reasoning from Melchizedek which started in chapter five.  This flow of reasoning was interrupted for a warning (Hebrews 5:11-6:20; Tom Wacaster lists five sections of warning in this book (2:1-4; 3:7-19; 5:11-6:20; 10:26-31; 12:25-29, Wacaster, Studies in Hebrews). 

1.  Character

“Melchizedek, King of Salem, Priest of the Most High God… first being translated ‘King of righteousness,’ and then also King of Salem, meaning ‘King of Peace’” (Hebrews 7:1-2).

Melchizedek is being used as a type of Christ.  (1) The name “Melchizedek” means “King of righteousness.”  Jesus is described as righteous (e.g. 1 John 2:1).  He reigns in righteousness (e.g. Isaiah 32:1; 42:1-4 cf. Matthew 12:15-21; Isaiah 62:1-2).  He will judge, righteously (e.g. Acts 17:31; 2 Timothy 4:8; Revelation 19:11).  (2) Salem is another name for Jerusalem (cf. Psalm 76:2).  It means “peace.”  Jesus is the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6-7). 

2.  Predecessor and Successor

“Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but make like the Son of God, remains a priest continually” (Hebrews 7:3).    The Bible is silent when it comes to certain things about Melchizedek.  It does not speak of a predecessor or a successor to him. It does not speak of his beginning of life, nor his end (cf. Aaron, Numbers 20:22-29). So far as the Biblical record is concerned, he continues as priest.  This silence makes him a better type of Christ, than Aaron. 

The words are difficult to modern readers.  Here is what some commentators have said.  1. Robert Milligan, “The Greeks and Romans were wont to apply the epithets ‘without father’ (apater) and ‘without mother’ (ametor),  (1) to their gods; (2) to orphans; and (3) to persons of unknown or obscure parentage.  Thus, for instance, Livy says of Servius Tullius that ‘he was born of no father’ (Lib. iv. 3).  So also, the Jews were accustomed to use the terms of  persons, the names of whose parents were not given in the Holy Scriptures or in their genealogies.  Philo, for example, speaking of Sarah, the wife of Abraham says, ‘She is said not to have had a mother, having received the inheritance of relationship from her father only” (De Ebriet section 14): meaning that her mother’s name is not found in the sacred record” (Robert Milligan, The Epistle to the Hebrews).  2. Adam Clarke, “This sort of phraseology was not uncommon when the genealogy of a person was unknown or obscure; so Seneca in his 108th epistle, speaking of some Roman kings says… ‘of the mother of Servius Tullius there are doubts; and Ancus Marcus is said to have no father.’  This only signifies that the parents were either unknown or obscure.  Titus Livius speaking of Servius says he was born of a slave named Cornicularia… of no father” (Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary).  3.  Wayne Jackson quoting from A.H. Sayce, “Several of Tell el-Amarna tablets are letters written to the Pharaoh by Ebed-tob… the King of Uru-Salim… He tells the Pharaoh that he was not like the other Egyptian governors in Palestine, ‘nor had he received his crown by inheritance from his father or mother; it had been conferred on him by ‘the Mighty King’” (Wayne Jackson, Biblical Studies in the Light of Archaeology, p. 25).  Wayne Jackson concludes, “He was ‘without genealogy’ not literally, but with reference to his kingly-priestly functions.  His priesthood was not determined by a physical genealogy nor was his office limited by a set number of years… rather it is described as ‘without beginning or end’ i.e., it had no ‘term limit’” (Wayne Jackson, A New Testament Commentary). 

3.  Blessing and Tithes

“New beyond all contradiction the lesser is blessed by the better” (Hebrews 7:7).

Abraham was blessed by Melchizedek (Genesis 14:19-20).  The type of blessing under consideration is from the greater.  Isaac blessed Jacob (Genesis 27:30).  Jesus blessed the apostles (Luke 24:50-51).    

“Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him” (Hebrews 7:9-10).

Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18-20).  This means that Abraham recognized the legitimacy of Melchizedek’s role as priest.  The lesson to be gleaned is that God can set up a priesthood separate from the tribe of Levi.

Moreover, when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, it is as if the Levites did as well.  They descended through Abraham, and there is nothing in their nature to distinguish them from Abraham (as Jesus could be). 

4.  Perfection

“Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood… what further need was there that another should rise according to the order of Melchizedek and not according to the order of Aaron?” (Hebrews 7:11).

There must be a reason for the priesthood of Jesus.  Why did the LORD foretell of one who would come according to the order of Melchizedek? (Psalm 110).  [It is worth pointing out that “another” in Hebrews 7:11 is heteron meaning “another of a different kind”]. 

The implied reason is that perfection was not offered through the Levitical priesthood.  The term “perfection” refers to “the full consummation of God’s benevolent design and purposes in reference to the redemption of mankind” (Robert Milligan, The Epistle to the Hebrews).  It has to do with man being able to draw near to God, as God had planned (Hebrews 7:11).  The word “perfect” or “perfection” is significant in this book (Hebrews 6:1; 7:11; 7:19; 9:9; 10:1-2). 

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Phrase Study, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Better Than Levitical/Aaronic Priesthood (Part 2)

Posted on January 14, 2021 by Bryan Hodge

Christ is a better priest than ever existed under the law of Moses.  His office is better (Hebrews 4:14-7:28).  His work is better (Hebrews 8:1-10:31).

Let’s continue the comparison of office.  This time, we will consider Hebrews chapter five.

1.  Similarity

“And no man takes this honor to himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was” (Hebrews 5:4).

There had been usurpers in Israelite history.  The list includes: Korah (Numbers 16-17); Saul (1 Samuel 13); Jeroboam’s priests (1 Kings 12:31); and Uzzah (2 Chronicles 26:16-ff).  None of these were accepted by God as priest.

However, legitimate priests were appointed by God.  Aaron was appointed to this office (Exodus 28-29; 39-40; Leviticus 8; Numbers 16:5; 17:5; 18:1-ff), as were those who followed in this office (Numbers 20:23-ff; 25:10-ff).

“So also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest” (Hebrews 5:5).

It is affirmed that Jesus was appointed to this role by God.  The writer references the prophetic word as evidence (v. 5 cf. Psalm 2:7; v. 6 cf. Psalm 110:4). 

2.  Difference

“…but it was He who said to Him: ‘You are My Son, today I have begotten You’” (Hebrews 5:5 cf. Psalm 2:7).

This passage has been quoted earlier in this book (Hebrews 1:5).  The reference has to do with Jesus’ coronation as King (Psalm 2:6-12), following His resurrection and ascension (Acts 13:33 cf. Daniel 7:13-14).  He did not usurp this role.  He was appointed to this role by God.

But, what does this have to do with Him being High Priest?  Let’s read on to the next verse. 

“As He also says in another place: ‘You are a priest according to the order of Melchizedek’” (Hebrews 5:6 cf. Psalm 110:4).

This Psalm is quoted or referenced in several other places in this book (Hebrews 1:13; 5:10; 6:20; 7:17; 7:21; 10:12-13).  It concerns Jesus’ role as both King and Priest (Psalm 110; see also Zechariah 6:12-13).  He occupies both roles (Hebrews 5:5-6), as did Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18; Hebrews 7:1).

No Levitical priest ever did so.  The priests were from the tribe of Levi (Hebrews 7:11-14; Exodus 28:1-4 cf. 4:14 cf. 2:1-10).  The kings, descending from David, were from the tribe of Judah (1 Chronicles 2:1-16 cf. 2 Samuel 7:12-17; book of 2 Chronicles; Matthew 1:1-17).  The Old Testament lists 41 kings of Israel and Judah (3 under united kingdom; 19 under Israel, northern kingdom; 19 under Judah, southern kingdom).  Not one served as priest with God’s approval.  Robert Milligan suggests that there were 81 High Priests who had served before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. (Robert Milligan, The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 268).  Not one served as king with God’s approval.  He did not entrust both positions to one person.

However, Jesus is different.  He functions as both King and Priest.  God entrusted both positions to Jesus.

Posted in Hebrews, Jesus, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment