Читать книгу The Second Chance for God’s People - Timothy W. Seid - Страница 20

My hero can beat up your hero. Did you ever get into an argument like that when you were a kid? We love our heroes, don’t we? By admiring a hero or heroine, we claim something for ourselves. The virtues, strengths, and accomplishments of that person represent who I am or who I aspire to be. That hero or heroine could represent my family, like an uncle or aunt who became a leader in local government. The hero or heroine could be a model for my country, like a war hero or someone who gave great service to the country by fighting against a disease or working toward justice for an oppressed segment of the population. A hero or heroine could also be an icon of a religion. He or she embodies the best of what that religion has to offer. To extol the virtues of that person, is to extol the virtues of the religion.

I had a long line of heroes as I was growing up. I had a Batman phase. I remember getting a Batman disguise, it was sort of a hard plastic helmet. But I couldn’t really be Batman without the cape. I went to the neighbor lady and asked her about what I could use for a cape. She gave me a long, black, silky piece of material for a cape. For days I went around with this old lady’s slip tied around my neck. I had other heroes too, most of them ones you would recognize: Superman, Green Hornet, John Glenn (my space phase), and Hercules (my Classic Comic book phase in third grade).

I can’t say that Jesus was ever my hero. I didn’t act like the Ned Flanders twins on The Simpsons and act out scenes from the gospels as a child. “No, I want to play Jesus this time, you played him last time.” Imagine your sister complaining, “I don’t want to be the woman caught in adultery again. You throw too hard.”

Jesus is a hero, even though we may think that designation is too mortal to apply to the divinity of Jesus. Jesus has been compared to other religious figures, like the Buddha, Moses or Mohammed, or to people like Gandhi. The more we can say about our religious representative in comparison to others, the more we can say about our own religion and its ability to raise us up to be like that person.

The Greco-Roman world loved its heroes—the super-human, semi-human, or simply human figures that represent the character and virtues of the city or nation. Poems and plays depict their stories with their great feats of prowess and wisdom. Praise speeches extol the nobility, upbringing, education, offices, and service to the city-state. One way to amplify the virtues of a person was to draw a comparison between him and some other figure from popular culture. Teachers of Greek rhetoric left behind for us instructions on how to write a comparison and gave models for its composition. As we’ve been seeing, the author of Hebrews is familiar with the writing of comparisons and uses them throughout the book of Hebrews.

Remember what we’ve said about the writing of comparisons. The goal of a comparison is to show how your subject is equal to or better than some other good subject for the purpose of praising your subject and exhorting others to model themselves after the virtues of the subject. One wouldn’t choose an inferior subject for comparison. It does little good to compare the virtue of loyalty with that of laziness. Of course loyalty excels laziness; that would be a weak comparison. The form of the comparison is also important. A more forceful comparison is one that treats one topic at a time in a series of comparative exchanges. Another form of comparison practiced in Greek literature is one in which the topics for comparison are treated for one subject and then the topics are covered for the second subject under comparison. This latter type is what we find in this comparison in Hebrews.

In the comparison in chapter five, Hebrews is going to treat each topic for one character, the High Priesthood and then those same topics beginning at verse five in reverse order for the other character, Jesus. The ordering of topics creates what’s called a chiasm. Chiastic structures occur when an author deals with several topics and then returns to the same topics but in reverse order. The outline below illustrates the chiastic structure. Not only are the topics in the comparisons similar, but the author uses key terms that are either linguistically related or are synonymous words in Greek.

Points of Comparison: High Priest (5:1–4)

1A Appointment (kathistatai) to High Priesthood (5:1)

1B Ability to have empathy (metriopathein) with weak (5:2)

1C Makes offerings (prospherein) (5:3)

1D Honor (timēn) of High Priesthood Not Taken (5:4)

Points of Comparison: Christ (5:5–10)

2D Christ did not glorify (edoxasen) Himself (5:5–6)

2C Offers prayers (prosenegkas) (5:7)

2B Learned obedience through experiences (epathen) (5:8)

2A Designated (prosagoreutheis) a High Priest (5:9–10)

The goal of the comparison is not simply to reinterpret Old Testament texts for a new context. It is rather to persuade the audience to value the excellency of God’s work in Christ and encourage the audience to remain committed to God and to the community of faith in spite of persecution and suffering. This comparison actually does not assert Jesus as more excellent than the high priest, but simply attempts to show equality. Jesus deserves our loyalty by being everything that a high priest should be: someone appointed to the role (5:1 and 5:9–10), who feels for people (5:2 and 5:8), makes offerings for them (5:3 and 5:7), and who is divinely appointed rather than self-seeking (5:4 and 5:5–6).

Appointment to Priesthood (5:1 and 5:9–10)

First on the list for comparison is the appointment of the high priest. In 5:1 Hebrews describes the high priest as “put in charge.” Then in verse 9 and 10, Jesus is also described as “having been designated” by God as a high priest. Both terms refer to the appointment of a high priest.

The language of verse nine may be surprising to us. It says of Jesus, “having been made perfect.” We typically think of Jesus as the perfect Son of God made incarnate in the world and then slowly revealing his true nature. We don’t tend to think in terms of Jesus as a young man who handled life in a way that caused him to become a complete, mature, perfect human and by means of that perfection to become the source of salvation. But that’s what Hebrews says. In Jesus’ early years, according to Luke 2:52, “Jesus increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor.” In Jesus’ final years, according to Hebrews, Jesus matured in the fullest sense and God exalted him.

The culmination of this section is the reference to Melchizedek. With this reference, the author of Hebrews will begin a parenthetical section that comes back around again to the topic of Melchizedek at the end of chapter six. Chapter 7 contains a comparison focused on the character of the Melchizedek priesthood. The primary lineage of high priests comes through the line of Aaron, which we begin to read about in the book of Exodus. Before that priesthood, however, we find in Genesis a person that Abram meets: “King Melchizedek of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High” (Gen 14:18). Nothing much is known of this prototype of the priesthood. Notice that he is both a king and a priest. His name means “my king is righteous.” The city is named Salem (a term related to shalom, “peace”), which is considered the area later known as Jerusalem. You can see that “salem” remained in the name of the city of Jerusalem.

The point of the comparison is Jesus’ equality with the high priest. Just as high priests were appointed to the role, so also was Jesus appointed by God to the role of high priest. In Hebrews chapter seven, the author will argue that Jesus’ priesthood is greater, since it is an eternal priesthood.

How might we think about this aspect of the priesthood? For most of us, when we think about priests, we think about the Roman Catholic Church. For the sake of illustration, let’s imagine two young men, good Italian Catholics. They live in the same city but are from different parishes. Antonio is from the Saint Dominic’s parish; his friend Marco is from Saint Sophia’s. Saint Sophia’s has a new priest, Father Jesús. Marco admires his new priest and thinks that wonderful things are happening at Saint Sophia’s. Antonio is skeptical of the new priest at Saint Sophia’s and considers their priest at Saint Dominic’s to be a regular guy, someone who really is in touch with the people. Antonio claims that this Father Jesús bought his way into the priesthood. Marco defends his priest, “Not only was Father Jesús appointed by the bishop, he was clearly appointed to be our priest by God because of what he has been able to do in our parish.”

Jesus wasn’t from a priestly line, and he did not serve as a priest in the temple. Nevertheless, Jesus has shown himself to be a high priest in that God has appointed him in the way that God appoints high priests. By realizing this, Hebrews expects us to respond more faithfully toward God. Even though there is not an earthly high priest any longer, there is a high priest in heaven appointed by God.

Feeling for Others (5:2 and 5:8)

The second comparison relates to the relationship of the priest to those whom he serves, and it is found in verse two and then in verse eight. Hebrews says that the high priest is able to “deal gently.” It’s an unusual verb in Greek, metriopatheō, a compound of two words the second of which is patheō, which means “to experience extreme emotion, suffer.” This word metriopatheō is frequently used in contexts where it means “to moderate the passions,” an idea attributed to Aristotle to describe his position that one does not completely remove bad desires, but one must learn to moderate them. In the context of verse two, Hebrews is saying that the high priest is able to moderate his anger with people because he has the same failings as they do.

The comparison in verse eight says that Jesus “learned obedience through what he suffered.” Here is the verb patheo in verse eight which we saw within the compound word in verse two. The high priest of Israel is metriopathetic with people’s weaknesses, while Jesus also functioned as a high priest by being empathetic. Here again Jesus is described as “learning obedience.” Hebrews pictures Jesus as someone who grows and matures. Through his actions he attains a particular stature in the eyes of God and as a consequence becomes the high priest in the heavens.

Back to our illustration. Antonio tells Marco one day how good their priest is at Saint Dominic’s. His priest has compassion on people. He loves them, he doesn’t get angry with them when they miss church or confession. Antonio challenges Marco about his priest, Father Jesás.

“You want to talk about passion for his people,” Marco asks, “let me tell you about passion.” He goes on to describe the pain and suffering Father Jesús has experienced with the people at Saint Sophia’s. “Your priest may be compassionate,” Marco says, “but our priest knows the passion of Christ, who feels the pain of his people and experiences the suffering for himself.”

That’s our great high priest. That’s the one to whom we owe our allegiance. His priesthood is based on his own sufferings for us. What else should we do than to claim Christ as our great high priest and remain loyal to him?

Making an Offering for the People (5:3 and 5:7)

In the third comparison, the high priest is said in verse three to “offer” sacrifices. Notice in verse seven that Jesus “offered up” prayers and supplications. The same verb is used in both cases. The high priest offers a sacrifice; that’s what a high priest does. Jesus is also a high priest because he also made an offering to God. That offering was his prayers and supplications along with his loud cries and tears. His offering was to the one able to save him from death. That much we understand, but Hebrews says Jesus was heard on account of his reverent submission. In other words, Jesus earned the right to be heard as a high priest.

Once again Antonio is boasting of his priest at Saint Dominic’s. He describes how the priest makes a point of acknowledging his own sinfulness, his own need for divine forgiveness. Antonio likes that humbleness of his priest. Marco is surprised by that attitude. What they have noticed at Saint Sophia’s is how Father Jesús prays to God for strength both for him and for the people. He nearly cries out to God for Saint Sophia’s to be a place where people are committed to God in all aspects of their lives. For Marco, that makes Father Jesús a better priest than any other, and someone he will continue to support.

Jesus wasn’t a priest in the temple in Jerusalem and didn’t carry out the daily, weekly, or yearly function of the high priest in making offerings to God. He did, however, fulfill the priestly role by offering up prayers to God, and God heard his prayers. No stronger claim can be made for priests than to see evidence of God hearing their prayers. We can be sure that Jesus fulfills that aspect of being a high priest, and he does it in a way that challenges us to stay faithful to God.

Not Seeking Honor For Oneself (5:4 and 5:5–6)

Finally, in the fourth comparison, the high priest in verse four does not “take the honor on himself.” One would not be so presumptuous as to run for the office of high priest. Rather, one is called to it. Christ, by comparison in verse five, “did not glorify himself.” Instead, God appointed him by choosing him to be the Son. Remember that the anointed king in Israel is called the son of God. The royal installation psalm, Psalm 2, says of the newly anointed king through the voice of Yahweh, “You are my son, today I have begotten you,” meaning, “on this day of your coronation as king, it is like I have given birth to my divine designate.” Because of Jesus’ endurance, faithfulness and obedience, God exalted him after death which signified that Jesus Christ was the appointed king-priest, God’s right-hand man in heaven.

The same psalm that begins with Psalm 110:1, “The LORD says to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool’” is the one that goes on to say, “The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’” (Ps 110:4).

The most damaging claim that Antonio makes is that Father Jesús was an opportunist who pulled strings in order to get what he wanted from the church. Antonio claims that Father Jesús was practically moved in before the bishop recognized his appointment to that parish. Marco defends his priest. He tells how Father Jesús grew up in a Catholic home, attending a Catholic school. He decided at an early age to take his vows. Not only was he a good student in seminary, he also was active in mission work in the city and in developing countries. Father Jesús had sensed a calling to come to Saint Sophia’s. He was obedient to that calling, even to the point of staying in the rectory while he waited to hear from the bishop. If being called by God to the priesthood is what makes a good priest, then Father Jesús is an excellent priest.