Research Paper: Christ’s Preexistence - A Doctrine Consistent with Old Testament and Jewish Intertestamental Thought

                                                                             Introduction

The temple is crowded with people going bustling about to worship and sacrifice. A new popular Rabbi has entered the temple. Crowds begin to surround him and sit to hear what he has to say. As he begins to preach, some scribes and those of the Pharisaical order bring women caught in adultery. Yet the Rabbi is unfazed and maneuvers the trap set for him. As he continues to teach and begins to preach, he testifies to who he is and calls himself the Light of the world. He tells the Jews who believe, that they must abide in his word. The Rabbi calls God his Father, and some from the crowd call out that they are Abraham’s children and God is their Father. Tension builds, and then the Rabbi makes a statement that causes some in the crowd to pick up stones. The Rabbi declares, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am. (Jn. 8:58 [ESV])”

In Jesus’ declaration that he was before Abraham in John 8:58, the idea of the preexistence of Jesus is brought into the conversation of who he was. Jesus declared himself far older than those in the crowd he spoke to and even those the crowd had read about in the Scriptures. When using the “I am” language, Jesus connected himself to the God of the Hebrews. This fact was not lost on the ears of the religious leaders, and they picked up stones to end this perceived blasphemy. Of the blasphemous idea that there could be a being that preexisted along with God, Jon D. Levenson writes, “Indeed, this notion of a figure who existed before the creation of the world and will eternally remain in God’s presence seems to collide head-on with what most Jews consider the very animating essence of Judaism …” Even today, there are those who have proposed that Jesus could not be preexistent because, as Adela Yarbor Collins points out, the idea does not fit the Old Testament or Jewish thought. This paper will show that the doctrine of Christ's preexistence is consistent with the Old Testament revelation of other preexistent figures and the Jewish interpretation of those figures during the intertestamental period.

Overview of the Doctrine of the Preexistence of Christ

In his article, “He Came Down from Heaven,” Douglas McCready states, “The preexistence of Christ is part of the foundation of Christian faith on which these other doctrines depend.” McCready’s understanding of preexistence “…means not that the man Jesus existed in any real sense before the incarnation but that God the Son existed apart from and prior to the incarnation. Without the Son’s preexistence there can be no incarnation.” Greg Lanier agrees with the essentiality of the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence when he writes, “One of the prerequisites for a full doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ is that he exists forever in the past … For him to be divine, he somehow must also have had a real, eternal existence even prior to his human birth to Mary.” Friederike Kunath puts the doctrine of preexistence into perspective, stating, “Kuschel and other scholars think of the notion of preexistence as something which, at its core, is not connected to temporality. Talk of preexistence might use the language of temporality, but its actual meaning concerns Jesus’s significance and his belonging to the realm of God.” A simple definition comes from another scholar, Charles C. Ryrie, who states, “Preexistence of Christ means that He existed before his birth.” This makes clear that when Christ’s preexistence is discussed, the whole scope of the eternity of God is to be associated with Christ before the event of the incarnation. 

Millard J. Erickson points out several New Testament passages that stand as the foundation for the preexistence of Christ. These passages include John 3:13, in which Jesus speaks to Nicodemus about being from heaven. Other preexistent passages in the Gospel of John include the seven “I am” statements that David A. deSilva connects to Exodus 3:14 and the covenantal name of God. deSilva states that by making the “I am” statements, Jesus is actually “excepting” himself in light of this Old Testament image of covenant. Erickson also points to Jesus’ first trial before the high priest Caiaphas, where Jesus’ words, “… you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. (Matthew 26:64),” makes a direct and unequivocal connection between himself and God. If this connection is true, then Jesus’ preexistence is assured because whatever attributes are connected to God are rightly Christ’s as well.

However, as McCready points out, several objections exist to the doctrine of Christ’s Preexistence. This paper seeks to address the primary objection of the Religionsgeschichtliche Schule or History-of-Religions school. This school of thought came about around the latter part of nineteenth-century Germany when several faculty at the University of Göttingen. This school believed that the history of Christianity had been corrupt, leading to Jewish ideas of the actual historical Jesus being mixed with those of the pagan Greco-Roman world. They sought to find the historical Jesus by stripping him of anything that would seem pagan by Jewish standards. Yet, in the search for the historical Jesus that Erickson points out, the early man of Jesus being a good teacher tends to do away with his preexistent state. The school rejected the idea that Jesus could be preexistent because the concept was foreign to Judaism and was a later addition to Christianity by pagan influences.

Yet, by rejecting Jesus’ preexistence, issues arise in understanding who Jesus thought himself and in other areas of Christian theology. In fact, Ryrie sees three issues if one rejects the preexistence of Christ doctrine. First, if Christ’s birth brought him into existence, then the eternal Trinity does not exist. This means that the doctrine of the Trinity is intertwined and cannot be hoped to be defended without the understanding that Christ preexisted the incarnation event. Second, Jesus could not claim to be God because preexistence is an essential attribute of God. Jesus’ claims to be God, as seen through the “I am” passage of John’s Gospel, need a preexistent dimension to them because one of God’s primary attributes is that he preexisted all things, for he is the Creator of all things. Finally, Jesus’ statements that speak of his preexistence, such as John 8:58, would be false, and God cannot lie. If Jesus were God, then he would not be able to lie; therefore, his statements of being preexistent would be factual. However, if Jesus was not God, then his statements would be false, and he would also not be preexistent. 

To counter these issues, Ryrie puts forth evidence for Jesus’ preexistence that comes from Christ’s statements and the interpretation of his disciples. In John 3:13 & 31, the author of the Gospel shares Jesus’ words to Nicodemus on his heavenly origins. Jesus states, “No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man … He who comes from above is above all … He who comes from heaven is above all.” Jesus spoke of his heavenly origins and his equality with God. Another piece of evidence from Jesus’ disciples that points to his preexistence comes from Paul, who writes, “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily … (Col. 2:9)”  In addition to these, Jesus is as the Creator of all things, reveals Christ’s work before the incarnation. 

Speaking on the preexistence of Christ in Philippians 2, Ruben A. Bühner writes, “…without Christ’s existence before his earthly life, Paul could not use Jesus’ selfless humiliation as an exhortation to the Philippians within his paraenesis.” Bühner states that although Paul does not disclose what Christ was like or what he was doing in this preexistent form, “… the idea that Christ existed in some capacity prior to his earthly life is hard to deny.”

In addition to the New Testament ideas of Christ’s preexistence, the early Church worked through the idea. Though the preexistence doctrine was not highly discussed in the early Church, there are references to an understanding that Christ was preexistent with the Father. Ignatius writes, “Await Him that is above every season, the Eternal, the Invisible, who became visible for our sake, the Impalpable, the Impassible, who suffered for our sake, who endured in all ways for our sake.” This can also be seen in the Nicene Creed, which states, “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made.”

With this overview of the doctrine of Christ clearly shown, attention is now turned to the issue of the preexistence of two figures in the Old Testament.

Preexistent Figures in the Old Testament

After Jesus’ resurrection, he meets two disciples on the road to Emmaus. Here, Luke tells the reader, “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27)” For the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence to be accurate, it must be seen in the Hebrew Scriptures that there are other instances of preexistence figures who are connected to God and, in a sense, separate from him. To understand the basis of Christ’s preexistence in the Hebrew Scriptures, two figures will be explored below: the figure of Wisdom and the figure of the angel of the Lord.

Concerning Wisdom in the Old Testament, Aquila H. I. Lee writes, “It is widely recognized that the figure of Wisdom played an important role in the development of early christology.” From an Old Testament perspective, Wisdom is a bridge between the divine and humanity, and for the most part, can be seen in personifying God’s intelligence. In the book of Proverbs, Wisdom is said to be a woman who cries out in the streets, dwells “…with prudence …,” and builds a house. These can be simple personifications of Wisdom in keeping with the Old Testament’s use of illusion to help understand an idea. Yet it is in Proverbs 8:22-29 that Wisdom moves from personification into the realm of personhood. C. A. Gieschen comments on this when he writes, “Wisdom speaks in the first person and refers to God in the third person several times (8.22-29). A distinction exists between the origins of Wisdom and those of God; Wisdom is also distinct from the rest of creation (8.22). She is God’s companion, even a participant (“master craftsman” [MT: pax; LXX: apuoiouoa]), in the creation.” Gieschen’s argument extends further to place Wisdom as enthroned with God as an equal in divinity. This is due to the language of “… beside him …” of Proverbs 8:30, which Gieschen states is a phrase within Jewish and Christian literature to speak of enthronement with God. In this way, we can see the concept of Wisdom as both with God and separate from him. Gary M. Burge considers the connection between the Wisdom of God in the Old Testament and the Logos of the Gospel of John 1:1 when he writes, “John begins by introducing Jesus as the Word (Greek logos) … he builds on contemporary Jewish thought where the Word of God took on personal creative attributes …was personified …and known by some as the immanent power of God …”  Finally, David Moser concludes that touring the Arian controversy of the 300s, “… all parties involved in the Arian controversy agreed that the subject who speaks ‘[t]he Lord created me at the beginning of his work, in Prov. 8:22 was not an impersonal divine Wisdom, but Jesus Christ …” Moser continues that Arians believe the term “at the beginning” meant a moment of creation. In contrast, Athanasius interpreted it as “… being an eternal occurrence …” This latter view won the day.

In addition to Wisdom being seen as a preexistent figure in the Old Testament, the angel of the Lord is one of the best examples of a preexistent figure. Lee writes, “The angel of the Lord is one of the most enigmatic and most prominent angelic figures in the OT … On occasions when this angel appears in these books we find a curious oscillation between this angel and God. Frequently this angel speaks and acts as a messenger of God and further along the line he speaks and acts as God himself.” The angel of the Lord is enigmatic because of how the angel speaks and interacts with people. The angel says to Hagar as if he were God, “… I will surely multiply your offspring … (Gen. 16:10)” In this interaction between the angel of the Lord and Hagar, Victor P. Hamilton writes, “The angel of the Lord and the Lord—distinct, yet the same.” It was the angel of the Lord that sat down with Gideon, to which the author of Judges notes, “… And the Lord turned to him … (Jdg. 6:14)” In the Liberty Bible Commentary, Edward E. Hindson writes about Gideon’s encounter with the angel of the Lord, “Verse 14, states the Lord looked upon him, indicating that the angel of the Lord who spoke to him was the Lord Himself!” Finally, the angel of the Lord led the people out of Egypt in the cloud, to which Jude connected to Jesus. This connection is attested to by Bebe, who states, “[Jude] is referring not to Jesus the son of Nun but to our Lord, showing first that he did not have his beginning at his birth from the holy virgin, as the heretics have wished [to assert], but existed as the eternal God for the salvation of all believers.” The angel of the Lord was connected to and separate from the Lord himself, revealing a connection that the New Testament authors saw as Christ himself. 

After reviewing both Wisdom and the angel of the Lord, it is clear that the Old Testament does have a basis for seeing preexistent figures. This basis shows that the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence is consistent with Old Testament ideas. Due to these preexistent figures, Jewish thought during the intertestamental period wrestled with who these figures were and if they were truly separate from God.

Preexistent Figures in Intertestamental Jewish Thought

During the time of the Old Testament and the New Testament, though it is called the silent period, this silence is only from the perspective of God communicating in such a way that new Scripture was being produced. Yet the Jewish community was not silent in wrestling with what would become the standard Rabbinic cannon and producing additional writings in what would become known as the Apocrypha. In addition to translating Hebrew Scripture into Greek, works such as the books of Enoch, Wisdom of Solomon, and Philo’s writings were produced. The first two writings will be given a brief review concerning their understanding of preexistent figures.

The First Book of Enoch 48 is where many scholars, such as Johannes Theisohn, find the preexistent figure of the Son of Man. Verses 2 and 3 are points of interest that read, “And at that hour that Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, And his name before the Head of Days. Yea, before the sun and the signs were created, Before the stars of the heaven were made, His name was named before the Lord of Spirits.” Here, it can be seen that the Son of Man figure’s name was called out before the Lord created. However, as Michael Wade Martin points out, this does not necessarily mean the Son of Man figure is preexistent, but rather that God knew him before the world’s creation. Yet in verse 6, it reads, “In his presence, he existed, and has revealed the saints and to the righteous the wisdom of the Lord of spirits …” This shows that it was not merely the name that the Lord knew, but that the Son of Man figure was preexistent before his role in creation. The obvious connection to the Son of Man language and Jesus’ use of the Son of Man title shows a connection, yet Martin seems to skip over verse 6 and only focuses on verses 5 and 7. Yet, this does not lead Martin to reject the preexistence of the Son of Man figure in First Enoch. Instead, due to the preservation language of both First Enoch 48:6 and 62:7, Martin concludes, “… since preservation implies real existence, these phrases can only be understood to ascribe real preexistence to the Son of Man.” Martin makes a strong case for “…formal and intellectual parallelisms …” with the servant of Isaiah 49 in these First Enoch passages. Other Son of Man references between the Old Testament and the books of Enoch can also be seen. Levenson points to scholars such as Peter Schäfer, who see binitarianism in the Son of Man passage of Daniel 7 and the “Metatron” in Third Enoch. Levenson goes as far as to say, “The Younger God’ Metatron … is to the God of Israel as Jesus, the Son of God, is to God the Father in Christian theology.” Brian Ogren concurs with this reality of the Jewish mind when he writes, “… rabbis entertained the possibility of a kind of co-eternal binitarianism.” The issue then between the Jewish and Christian communities was not whether there was a possibility of a binitarianism within God, but rather, whether there was a possibility of the incarnation.

The books of Enoch’s Son of Man figure, and others like him, reveal that the Jewish mind was wrestling with the images of the Old Testament during the Intertestamental period and coming to a conclusion that there was indeed the possibility of a binitarianism within God. Yet, these books are not alone in the discussion of preexistent figures. Returning to the figure of Wisdom, the Apocrypha book Wisdom of Solomon gives insight into the Jewish interpretation of Wisdom during these “silent years.” Lee points out that 7:22-8:1 is a primary example where most scholars see a preexistent figure. Though Lee does not believe this results in “a divine hypostasis,” he cannot deny the connection and separation between God and Wisdom. This can be best seen in 9:4, 10, where Wisdom is sharing God’s throne; the sharing of throne imagery is consistent with Christ’s words in Revelation 3:21, “The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.” 

The books of Enoch and the Wisdom of Solomon both show that the Jewish mind of the Intertestamental period was wrestling with preexistent figures, and that this thought was setting further ground work that would be realized in Jesus. It must be noted that, in addition to what has been discussed above, other documents from this period, such as the book of Baruch, the book of Sirach, and the material produced by the Qumran community, also point to a preexistent figure in the way of Wisdom and a Messianic figure. In fact Craig A. Evans who gave a series of lectures March 3-4 in 2016, showed that Qumran Scroll 4Q246, points to the direct connection that a preexistent Messianic figure was well in the Jewish thought before Jesus’ arrival. Due to these documents, a binitarianism concept was emerging before the coming of Jesus in the first century A.D. and shows that the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ would not be foreign to the Jewish mindset of this period.

Conclusion

When Jesus began his ministry and proclaimed that he was before Abraham, the Jews were not so much challenging the idea that there could be another preexistent figure, for this had been discussed and wrestled with for centuries; no, their issue was, “You are not yet fifty years old … (Jn. 8:57)” In another instance when Jesus claimed equality with God, the reaction was, “ … It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God. (Jn. 10:33)” The concept the religious leaders were calling blasphemous was that of the incarnation; they could not believe that God would become man. They might have accepted another preexistent figure becoming flesh, since, as has been shown above, preexistence figures had been shown to be revealed in the Old Testament, and the Jews had wrestled with the idea during the Intertestamental period. Yet, as has also been shown in this paper, the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ is consistent with these Old Testament revelations of other preexistent figures and the Jewish interpretation of those figures during the intertestamental period. As Peter Schäfer sought to show, there is a “… long and little-known history of a second, junior god in Judaism, showing how this idea was embraced by rabbis and Jewish mystics …” In the end McCready states, “This doctrine was not the result of early Christianity’s encounter with Hellenism. It arose out of the early Church’s Jewish roots.”

                                                                                            Bibliography

“Book of Enoch,” Accessed February 27, 2025, https://www.pseudepigrapha.com/pseudepigrapha/enoch.htm#CH48.

Bühner, Ruben A., Messianic High Christology: New Testament Variants of Second Temple Judaism, Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2021.

Burge, Gary M., “John,” The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary, ed. Burge, Gary M. and Andrew E. Hill, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012.

Collins, Adela Yarbor, “The Historical Jesus: Then and Now,” in Reflections, Spring 2008, https://reflections.yale.edu/article/between-babel-and-beatitude/historical-jesus-then-and-now.

Dell, Katharine, “Wisdom in the Old Testament,” B. N. Wolfe et al., eds. St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology, University of St Andrews, June 20,2024, https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/WisdomintheOldTestament.

deSilva, David A., An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods and Ministry Formation, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012.

Erickson, Millard J., Christian Theology, 3rd ed., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.

Evans, Craig A., “Jewish roots for divinity of Messiah in early Christology.” E. Earle Ellis Lecture series, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Forth Worth, TX, March 4, 2016.

Gieschen, Charles A., Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence, Leiden, NL: BRILL, 1998.

Hamilton, Victor P., “Genesis,” The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary, ed. Burge, Gary M. and Andrew E. Hill, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012.

Hindson, Edward E., “Judges,” Liberty Bible Commentary: Old Testament, ed. Jerry Falwell, Edward E. Hindson, Woodrow Michael Kroll, Lynchburg, VA: Old-Time Gospel Hour, 1982.

“Intertestamental History,” LibGuides, Bob Jones University, Mack Library, Accessed February 27, 2025, https://libguides.bju.edu/intertestamental-history.

Kunath, Friederike, “Jesus’s Preexistence and the Temporal Configuration of the Gospel of John.” Early Christianity 8, no. 1 (2017): 30–47.

Lanier, Greg, Is Jesus Truly God?: How the Bible Teaches the Divinity of Christ, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020.

Levenson, Jon D., “Did Jews Really Believe There Were Two Gods in Heaven?” August 4, 2020, https://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/religion-holidays/2020/08/did-jews-really-believe-there-were-two-gods-in-heaven/.

Lim, Timothy, “Understanding the Emergence of the Jewish Canon,” Ancient Jew Review, December 2, 2015, https://www.ancientjewreview.com/read/2015/12/1/understanding-the-emergence-of-the-jewish-canon.

Laurence, Richard, ed., Book of Enoch the Prophet, London, UK: Kegan Paul Trench & CO., 1883.

Martin, Michael Wade, “Whether and Whence Preexistence in 1 Enoch ? Isa 49:1–2 and the Preexistent Servant as the Background for 1 En. 48:3, 6; 62:7.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 32, no. 3 (March 2023): 270–84.

McCready, Douglas, “‘He Came down from Heaven’: The Preexistence of Christ Revisited.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 3 (September 1, 1997): 419–32.

Meeks, Wayne A. “The History of Religions School.” Chapter. In The New Cambridge History of the Bible, edited by John Riches, 127–38. New Cambridge History of the Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Moser, David, “Jesus’ Preexistence and Incarnation,” B. N. Wolfe et al., eds. St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology, University of St Andrews, June 20,2024, https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/JesusPreexistenceandIncarnation.

“New Testament Studies Research: Intertestamental Period aka ‘Silent Years,’” LibGuides, The Master’s University, Robert L. Powell Library, Accessed February 27, 2025, https://masters.libguides.com/c.php?g=820870&p=5858040.

Ogren, Brian, ed., Time and Eternity in Jewish Mysticism: That Which Is Before and That Which Is After, Boston, MA: BRILL, 2015.

An Easter Sermon - "Nonsensical Sense of the Resurrection"

 Moppety-mop and poppety-pop

Went on their way with a skip and a hop.
One with a skip, and one with a hop,
Moppety-mop and poppety-pop!

How many of you have heard the classic rhymes like Eeny, Meeny, Mini, Mo, or the Hokey Pokey, or Hey Diddle Diddle? Each of these classic rhymes are fun and they are meant to teach children things like counting, body parts, time, and direction. Do you know the old rhyme Hickory Dickory Dock?

Hickory dickory dock.
The mouse ran up the clock.
The clock struck one,
The mouse ran down,
Hickory dickory dock.

That rhyme is supposed to teach children how to count and how to tell time on an analog clock. But if you hear one of these rhymes without knowing the purpose, they sound kind of ridiculous. What is a hickory, or a dickory, or a dock? Did any of you know that those words are thought to be old English for counting the numbers 8, 9, 10? (https://americansongwriter.com/behind-the-classic-perseverant-nursery-rhyme-hickory-dickory-dock/) If you didn’t know, don’t worry know really knows, but it’s a part of the funny rhyme scheme.

These types of rhymes sound ridiculous and nonsensical, but that’s half the fun of them. Yet through these rhymes, a underlying meaning awaits to help us learn things as children. 

And it’s this idea of the nonsensical with a deeper meaning that leads us into our Easter passage today. If you have you’re Bibles, we’re going to be looking at Luke chapter 24, verse 1-12, and as we open up to Luke 24:1, I want to give you the lead up to the passage.

One week ago from our passage, Jesus entered into Jerusalem riding a donkey as people laid down their coats and palm leaves and shouting phrases like, “Hosanna,” and “Blessed be the one who comes in the name of the Lord!” We call that moment the triumphal entry, but where the people thought it was going to be a triumph over the political powers that suppressed the Jewish people, Jesus’ triumph was actually going to be through the cross and resurrection. 

Jesus spent the next several days being challenged by the religious leaders, being anointed with expensive perfumes and tears, being asked about future events, setting up rituals that we continue with today in the elements of the bread and the cup, and preparing his disciples for his death and resurrection.

And just like he said it would happen, Jesus was betrayed by one of his own, rejected by the Jewish leaders, turned over to the Romans, found innocent of any crimes, yet crucified as a criminal. His disciples scattered and began to live in fear, his body was taken down and put into a rich man’s tomb. All of this fulfilled dozens of prophecies of the Messiah, the Savior of the world. It was then, one week later, that we come to our passage.

Let’s read what happens next in Luke 24, starting in verse 1. 

“1 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, ‘Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.”’ 8 Then they remembered his words.

“9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened. (NIV)”

Let’s be honest, the resurrection of anyone sounds like nonsense, right? How many of you know people that have been dead and come back to life? Like the 74 year old woman who died in June of 2024 at a Nebraska nursing home, and then when she got to the funeral home, the staff member saw that she was breathing. (https://www.wdbj7.com/2024/06/03/woman-who-was-pronounced-dead-comes-back-life-funeral-home-sheriffs-office-says/)

Or what about the viral video of a women suddenly opening her eyes as she lays in her coffin? Except the 74 year old was taken to the hospital and not long after did die, and the video of the lady in the coffin was found out to be staged. 

We might know people who’s hearts have stopped and they were restarted, but dead, in the ground for a few days and then coming back better than ever? People just don’t do that.

But those stories are not like Jesus’. Jesus’ wounds were far more severe. The flesh on his back had been ripped off by a whip that had shards of pottery attached to it. Nails pierced his hands and feet, and a crown of thorns puncturing his head. As the Roman executioners were checking to see if Jesus was dead, they punctured his side and a mixture of blood and water came out, showing that the heart had failed. 

Back in the 1980s the Mayo Clinic released a doctor’s examination of Jesus’ crucifixion, there conclusion was this, “the weight of historical and medical evidence indicates that Jesus was dead before the wound to his side was inflicted … Interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge. (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-03-28-vw-883-story.html)”

In other words, Jesus didn’t have a heart attack and come back, and it wasn’t staged. All evidence points to Jesus dying on the cross and being buried.

That’s why even the disciples, when they heard the report from the women that Jesus raised from the dead thought it was nonsense. 

So why did they change their minds? Why did Peter, John, Andrew and the others go from being scattered and scarred to boldly telling people that Jesus has risen from the dead, if they thought it was all nonsense at first?

Why did James and Jude, Jesus’ half-brothers, who never believed who Jesus claimed to be, go on to proudly tell people that Jesus was the Risen Lord and Savior, if they thought it was nonsense? 

Why did Paul, who arrested Christians and was involved in some of their deaths, radically change and go all over the know world to tell people about Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, even though he thought it was nonsense at first?

Paul would eventually write this talking about the nonsense of it all in 1st Corinthians 15:14-18, “14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. (ESV)”

Paul believes that if Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, then he and the rest of the disciples are liars, they misrepresent God, that their faith is futile and without purpose, and that they should be pitied for believing it. In other words it would be nonsense if it wasn’t true. 

This past week I had an interaction with a man who said, “There is zero chance that Jesus existed, let alone anything that he said and did.” Though the vast majority of scholars, both Christian and non-Christian disagree, I told him, “You’re one of those who no matter what the evidence, you’ll never believe, aren’t you?” He obviously knew more than the scholars who dedicate their lives to history, but because he did not want to believe, because it was nonsense to him, he has decided to not look at the evidence. To see if it is truly nonsense.

I’ll be the first to admit, that the idea of the Jesus coming back to life after his excruciating death on the cross seems like nonsense. People just don’t do that, right? But if I look at the evidence of the lives of those who were there, who thought it was nonsense too, and how they went from nonsense, to assurance, I have to ask the question, maybe it is true? 

And after over two decades of going back again and again to examine the evidence and the arguments for and against the resurrection, and my own experience following Jesus’ teachings, I am more assured of Jesus’ resurrection today, than I have ever been before. 

And if it isn’t nonsense that Jesus truly raised from the dead, then it isn’t nonsense that he will return one day. And because of that return, we need to be prepared. Jesus never asked us to say a prayer for a get out of hell free, he called us into a life of following him. To accept his sacrifice on the cross, which covered our sins, that was shown to be acceptable to God by way of the resurrection. If we accept Jesus as our Savior, we are to then live our lives for him to also show that he is our Lord. That means my thoughts, my desires, my emotions, and my actions are all transformed into what he wants. We come to a place where we are no longer living for ourselves, but living for what God desires for us. And when we follow, the nonsensical breaks away and the deeper meaning is seen. Our lives find their true purpose in the God who created and saved us.

Jesus is calling each of us to a life of following him. Don’t let the perception of nonsense keep you from the God who loves you. Today, turn your life to Jesus and follow him until he returns or calls you home. 

Paul also wrote, “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Cor. 1:18)” Do not live your life thinking that Jesus’ death and resurrection is foolishness, that’s it’s nonsense, because that just leads to death. Instead live today in the power of God, which is found only in following Jesus.

My challenge for you today, on this Easter Sunday, is to think on this one question this week, “What if the Resurrection of Jesus isn’t nonsense, but really happen?” Then read from the book of Revelation chapter 22, verses 12-17, in our blue church Bibles, it’s on page 1291. 

Let us all follow Jesus, looking for his return, to make sense of everything that seems nonsensical. Amen.

The Myth of a Pagan Easter

  Right around this time, as we head into Easter Sunday, I tend to see and have been told in the past that Easter is a pagan holiday. It is said that, eggs and bunnies are a part of fertility rituals. That the word Easter comes from pagan goddesses. Or that the date corresponds to pagan celebrations. Therefore we should disregard the holiday. If these things were true, then we should not participate in Easter Sunday. We shouldn’t be incorporating actually pagan rituals, or goddesses, or celebrations into our worship of the risen Jesus. 

But history is not on the side of those that espouse that Easter is pagan, and today, we’re going to go through it.

First, let’s talk about the Jewishness of Easter. Originally the event that kicked off this whole thing is found in Exodus 11:1-12:32. The core of this event happens in verse 4, where we read, “4 So Moses said, ‘Thus says the Lord: ‘About midnight I will go out in the midst of Egypt, 5 and every firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sits on his throne, even to the firstborn of the slave girl who is behind the handmill, and all the firstborn of the cattle.’” The event is the final plague of death that forces the Pharaoh of Egypt to let the Israelite people go out of their slavery.

To avoid the coming death we read this starting in chapter 12:3-14, “Tell all the congregation of Israel that on the tenth day of this month every man shall take a lamb according to their fathers' houses, a lamb for a household. 4 And if the household is too small for a lamb, then he and his nearest neighbor shall take according to the number of persons; according to what each can eat you shall make your count for the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male a year old. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats, 6 and you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month, when the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill their lambs at twilight.

7 “Then they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8 They shall eat the flesh that night, roasted on the fire; with unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it. 9 Do not eat any of it raw or boiled in water, but roasted, its head with its legs and its inner parts. 10 And you shall let none of it remain until the morning; anything that remains until the morning you shall burn. 11 In this manner you shall eat it: with your belt fastened, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. And you shall eat it in haste. It is the Lord's Passover. 12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the Lord. 13 The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you, when I strike the land of Egypt.

14 “This day shall be for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord; throughout your generations, as a statute forever, you shall keep it as a feast.”

This Passover event becomes the first of many Jewish holidays and commemorates how God’s judgment passed over the people of Israel to set them free from bondage. This would be known in Hebrew as Pesach.

In Luke 22:1 we read, “Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover.” It is during Passover on a Thursday evening that Jesus eats his final meal, called a Sedar meal. Afterwards he goes to the Garden of Gethsemane to pray. It is there that he is arrested, and brought before three courts over the course of the evening and morning. Jesus is then delivered up to crucifixion, dies, and is buried by sundown on Friday. At the dawn of Sunday’s light, Jesus resurrects, overcoming death. 

From that time on, the Church has celebrated Jesus’ resurrection. Which in Greek became known as Pascha, which is the Greek translation of the Jewish word Pesach. This is the roots of what we call Easter or Resurrection Sunday. However, in our society from both within in the Church and from outside, people have taken issues with some of the things that surround Easter. Going as far as to say the whole thing is steeped in paganism. Let’s look at the three big issues that people have with Easter.

The first issue is the timing of it all. This is actually one of the oldest controversies of the Church. When do you celebrate Pascha? Today, some say because it is celebrated in the spring it must be pagan, because there are tons of fertility gods and goddesses that are celebrated in the spring. However, the controversy in the Church wasn’t that it happened during spring and so had something to do with fertility deities, but rather, how do we celebrated Pascha in light of its very Jewish roots in the Passover?

Do you celebrate it like the Jews did, following their lunar calendar? That means that if you are a Gentile following the Roman Julian calendar, Pascha moves with Passover. Sometimes it would be on a Sunday, other times it would be on a Friday, or a Wednesday. 

This controversy became so big that at the council of Nicaea in 325, it was argued and decided on. The 325 bishops of the council decided to keep the whole of the Church celebrating Pascha on the same Sunday. It was decided that, since Passover coincide with the first full moon after the spring equinox, (or the day the Sun “moves” to a position where the northern hemisphere of earth enters spring) then the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox would be the day the whole Church would celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. This shows that it is not the date that is holy, but the event itself.

However, as the centuries went on, the Western Church adopted the Gregorian calendar, which most of the world uses today, while the Eastern Church continued with the Julian Calendar. This is why you have an Western Easter date, and an Orthodox Easter date. Sometimes they overlap, like this year, and sometimes they’re different, like next year. 

So the date on which we celebrate Easter is keeping with the Passover of Judaism and not any spring deity festivals. 

Now that we understand the date, let’s talk about the second issue, the name. I have been using the term Pascha, because up until roughly the 700s A.D., that was the name used by the Church, and it continues to be used in much of the world. There was a variation of the name, which was Paschal, but the name Easter began to rise as the Church moved into the Germanic area of northern Europe, which was north of the Rhine River. Here we get a Christian sudo-historian by the name of the Venerable Bede (beed) who makes a comment on how Paschal month is translated into a Germanic language. 

Bede writes, “Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated ‘Paschal month,’ and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honor feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honored name of the old observance. (De Temporum Ratione, Chapter 15)”

What Bede is saying, is that the Germanic people had a month called Eosturmonath , which coincides with the Paschal month. Therefore the Germanic people use that language instead of Paschal. Bede then states that this name comes from a goddess that they worshiped called Eostre whom they celebrated in that month. 

However, there is no archeological, oral, or written history about Eostre, except from Bede; who is already looked upon by historians as a hit or miss kind of historian. However, let’s grant that Bede is correct, that the month was named after a Germanic goddess, that would be the same as the months of our calendar which were named after the gods of the Romas. What we would then have is simply the word of Passover from the Jewish Pesach, to the Greek Pascha, to the Germanic Easter. It comes down to a translation issue, not a religious one.

There is one more name of a Summeria goddess Ishtar, but the only connection there is that the names of Ishtar and Easter sound similar, but the goddess was also called Inanna. In reality there is no historical overlap between the two names, and you have a better case for Eostre, than Ishtar. Plus, as we have seen the root of Easter is in the Jewish Passover, and not other Ancient Near Eastern traditions.

Finally, the last issue is about the bunnies and the eggs. The connection begins again with German, and is through a physician named Franckenau (frank-en-ah) in the late 1500s, who wrote an essay on the subject of how German children would searched for eggs left behind by the Osterhase or Easter bunny. He wrote, “In Alsace, and the neighboring regions, these eggs are called rabbit eggs because of the myth told to fool simple people and children that the Easter Bunny is going around laying eggs and hiding them in the herb gardens. So the children look for them, even more enthusiastically, to the delight of smiling adults.” In a sense, the Easter Bunny was a Santa Clause figure for the springtime. The children would make nests in baskets for the Easter Bunny to leave presents for good boys and girls. Then the children would look for eggs left behind as well.

Why eggs? Because after the season of Lent, eggs were a treat because they had been fasted from for 40 days. Why were they colored? Because of a story that came about that Mary Magdalene had carried a basket full of eggs to the tomb and when she arrived, their coloring changed to red.

This Easter Bunny tradition eventually made its way to America, which has morphed them in the traditions we continue to have today.

So the Easter Bunny was a family activity to celebrate the end of Lent, where families could give gifts to their children and eat a treat of eggs. It wasn’t based on a fertility goddess, with rabbits multiplying and eggs being laid as a representation of her benevolence. Their traditions are steeped in Christian generosity, and the familia love of parents to their children.

Because of the history of where the name come from, I have no problem calling Resurrection Sunday, Easter Sunday, because it’s a translation issue, not a doctrinal one, as long as we focus on the Risen Savior. If you want to be as close to the language as possible, you need to forgo both and call it either Pesach or Pascha.

I also have no problem on when we celebrate Easter, because it’s not about the date, it’s about what happened with the Resurrection of Jesus. Similar to Christmas, it’s not about when Jesus’ broth happened, it’s about celebrating God who descended to earth to take on human flesh and be Emmanuel, God with us.

And I don’t have a problem with Easter egg hunts because Jesus called us to not hinder children from coming to him, and a game of hunting for eggs can open a door for children and families to come hear the Gospel message.

So when someone says that Easter is pagan, understand, history isn’t on their side, and they don’t know what they are talking about. So let the ignorant continue in their ignorance, and let’s worship Christ in the freedom he won us through the resurrection.

My challenge for you this week, is to pass out one of our Easter flyers to at least one person. Invite that family to the egg hunt, invite that neighbor to the free breakfast. We’re celebrating Jesus’ resurrection, the event on which everything of our faith hangs, and in what the hope of humanity was realized. People need to hear about his resurrection work, because Jesus will return to restore all things. 

Let’s be about our Father’s work, and celebrate the Risen Son, who saves us from our sin, this Pesach, Pascha, Easter, Resurrection Sunday. Amen.

“3 Offices” Sermon Series - Wk 4 - Office of the Priest

 Every once and a while, we show this video series to the teens called, GOSPEL Adventure. It’s kind of like a reality TV show where different religions and Christian traditions spend a week in the mountains of Colorado discussing the Gospel and going on outdoor adventures, like rock climbing and rafting.

In every episode the leader gives an illustration on what they’ll be taking about that session. On the fourth episode they bring out a small lamb. The participants play with the lamb all the while asking why the lamb is out there. One of the group then makes the remark, “Are we going to kill the lamb?” The camera pans to all the faces and they’re in shock as they begin to see the purpose of the lamb. The camera then turns to focus on the leader who is coming down the hill with a knife. He proceeds to bring the lamb in front of him and begins to talk about the Passover story of how God called the Israelites to kill a lamb and put its blood on the door posts. The leader then told of how the priests would sacrifice thousands upon thousands of animals every year to cover the sins of the people. It’s then that he tells the group that this lamb is like the lambs that were killed for our sin. Holding the lamb in one hand and the knife in the other, with participants start to turn their heads away. Usually at this point, the tension can be felt even in the room as our youth watch the scene play out. The leader then tells them, “But we’re not going to do that, instead, we’re going to name him. The horror of the group fades away and they are relieved that they’re not going to kill the lamb.

But it’s having this understanding that the priests of Israel would sacrifice thousands upon thousands of animals a year to cover the sins of the people, is what brings us to our final week in our 3 Offices Series where we are going to look at the final office of Christ, the Priest. However, before we jump into this office, let’s remind ourselves of where we are as we come to this series end. 

In week one we saw how each of the offices, or authorities of King, Prophet, and Priest, are found in who God is. These can been seen in the first three chapters of Genesis. We see that God is creator of all things and therefore is King overall. We saw how God prophesied to Adam about not eating a certain fruit and that his word came to pass. We saw how after Adam and Eve’s sin, God clothed them in what would become the terminology for the covering of sin. These offices are then delegated to the people of Israel as they participated in their covenant with God. Yet when God descends to earth and takes on flesh, Jesus consolidates these offices, these authorities, back to himself. Giving a clearer picture of what he means in Matthew 28:18, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”

In the second week, we began to walk through these offices in the life of Jesus. We saw how Jesus saw himself as a king, not just of a particular nation, but of all creation. A king that would receive all glory and honor from every person. A king who, at his name, all knees would bow, willingly or unwillingly. A king who has extended the olive branch of peace to all those who are rebelling against his kingdom work. And a king who will one day return to fully establish his kingdom for eternity. The only proper response to this king, is to willing bow to him in all areas of our lives. 

Then in our third week, we walked through the office of Prophet. We saw that the Jewish people were expecting a Prophet like Moses to come as the Messiah. A prophet that was the ultimate revealer of God. We also saw how the disciples believed that Jesus was that Prophet. The reason they believed this, was because he communicated such. He showed himself to be the full revealer of God in the flesh; Jesus spoke as God from the mountain, and he revealed how the entire work of the Scriptures spoke about him. In this way, Jesus showed that he was the great and final revealer of God, the ultimate prophet we need.

It is here that we come to our final office, the office of Priest. But to understand this we must understand two things: First, there are two types of priesthoods in the Bible. The one that is most prominent is the Aaronic or Levitical priesthood. 

In comparing Jesus to this priesthood we have to notice two quantifications. One of these comes from Leviticus 21:6. When God spoke of the priests to Moses he said this, “They shall be holy to their God and not profane the name of their God. For they offer the Lord's food offerings, the bread of their God; therefore they shall be holy.” This didn’t always happen as we can see in the lives of Eli’s sons in 1 Samuel 2, who were some of the most unholy priests in the Bible. However, in order to help keep the priests holy, additional stipulations were to live by, which can be read about in throughout the book of Leviticus. 

In looking Jesus, we can see this holiness in him. Both his disciples and his opponents recognized it. In asking about taxes, a Pharisees’ disciple came and said, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances. (Mark 12:14). ” In the first chapter of the Gospel of Mark, the first demon Jesus encounters states, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God. (v.1:24)” Because of Jesus’ holy life, his disciples would say this in response to Jesus asking if they were going to leave him as others had, “68 Simon Peter answered him, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.’ (Jn. 6:68-69)”

Jesus meets the qualification of being holy to the Lord. However, Jesus doesn’t meet a glaring qualification: Jesus is not from the line of Levite. In both the Gospel of Matthew (v.1:1-17) and the Gospel of Luke (v.3:23-38), we see Jesus’ linage through his birth mother Mary, and through his adopted father Jospeh. In both cases, it is explicitly stated that Jesus is from the line of Judah. The writer the Letter to the Hebrews recognizes this issue, in chapter 7 verses 13-14, “13 For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.” So this would disqualify Jesus from being a part of the Levitical priesthood, and everything we just talked about is mute. Right?

Well, this is where the writer of Hebrews sees that one doesn’t have to be a part of the Levitical priesthood to be a priest of God. In his letter we get another priesthood of the Bible. Starting in chapter 6, verses 20, we read, “where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” Writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Hebrew writer looks at the Scripture and sees that God had priests before he established the Levite’s as the priests of Israel.

Looking at Melchizedek’s story from Genesis 14:18-20, we read, “18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (He was priest of God Most High.) 19 And he blessed him and said, ‘Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; 20 and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!’ And Abram gave him a tenth of everything.” In this moment, for the first time we hear of the term High Priest, and it is the first time we see a true tithe given. The both the title and the gift are give to Melchizedek.

The Hebrew writer sees in Melchizedek an image of Christ. Some say this is a theophany of Jesus before taking on flesh, but it seems that the Hebrew writer merely sees Melchizedek as a portrait of Christ, and not the pre-incarnate Jesus.

Looking at Melchizedek, the Hebrew writer pens these words in Hebrews 7:1-3, “1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 and to him Abraham apportioned a tenth part of everything. He (Melchizedek) is first, by translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then he is also king of Salem, that is, king of peace. 3 He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever.” 

The Hebrew writer ends his chapter about Jesus being a High Priest like Melchizedek with this, “22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant. 23 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, 24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. 25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. 26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. 27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. 28 For the law appoints men in their weakness as high priests, but the word of the oath, which came later than the law, appoints a Son who has been made perfect forever. (v.7:22-28)”

And it’s this forever Priest who stands before God the Father that shows the biggest difference between the Levitical priesthood and the Melchizedekan priesthood of Jesus. In chapter 10 the Hebrew writers states, “1 For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? 3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. (v.1-3)” Dropping down to verse 10 we continue to read, “10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. (v.10-13)”

The writer ends with this idea in verse 18, “18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. 19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. (v.18-23)”

Jesus’ High Priest status reveals a greater work than that of the Levitical priesthood. The Levites ministered to God on their own behalf as well as the people’s. Yet their sacrifices were only temporary. Jesus ministers only on the behalf of his people, with his sacrifice being a completed work for anyone who would accept it. 

Therefore for since the once and for all sacrifice of Jesus was made on the cross and confirmed in the resurrection, it’s not strange then that the temple, its sacrifices, and the Levitical priesthood ended as the Gospel began reaching throughout the known world. Within less than thirty years of Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection, all temple worship would literally come crashing down to an end. The reason for this was that there was no reason to have them anymore. The final sacrifice was made, the final and true High Priest of God was standing before the throne of God for all eternity. He is ministering on behalf of his people as the ultimate mediator and interceder. 

And he is a High Priest that knows us. This is why the Hebrew writer can proudly state, “14 Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need. (4:14-16)”

Jesus, our High Priest, knows us and all the temptations we go through. God in the flesh has experienced them, but he had made it through holy and untainted by the fall to sin. Because of this he calls us to his grace bought with his own precious sacrifice on the cross.

Therefore my challenge is the challenge of the Hebrew writer from chapter 10:24-25, “24 And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.”

Let us encourage each other to love and good works. My challenge is to encourage one believer every day this week to the love and good works that were bought by Jesus. Encourage them to stand steadfast in their faith if they are struggling. Encourage them to turn to Jesus if they are doubting. Encourage them to help their neighbor, or stay away from gossip, or rise above the petty issues of this world, for the day of the High Priest’s return is on its way. 

The day of King, Prophet, and Priest is closer now then it was before, so let us hold tight to Jesus and walk in the holy freedom that that he has bought. Amen.