This leads us to the last occurrence of ‘skene’ in Hebrews, 13.10. Here the writer gives a final exhortation to his readers, converts from Judaism, not to be enticed back into Jewish rituals; our hearts, he says, should be strengthened by God’s grace, not by “ceremonial foods” (NIV). “For we Christians can feed from the altar of Christ’s sacrifice for us; but those priests who still serve in the Tabernacle have no right to eat of this spiritual food.”. To continue to offer sacrifices in the Temple was to deny Christ. Conversely, to follow Christ meant, for a Jew, abandoning the old covenant practices and rituals of Judaism. Hebrews expresses this point with another bold use of typology. Talk of “eating from the altar” reminds the writer that the Tabernacle priests were allowed to eat the remains of sacrificial victims, but not of sin offerings, especially not on the Day of Atonement: these remains were to be “completely burnt up outside the camp” (v.11, Lev 16.27). This regulation he sees as a foreshadowing of the death of Christ, the ultimate and all-sufficient sin offering, who “died outside the gate” of the city of Jerusalem, the contemporary equivalent of the Israelite ‘camp’. Here we come to another paradox. In Hebrews 10.22 (echoing 4.16) he urges his readers “let us approach” God’s sanctuary via the Tabernacle, through the curtain which Christ has opened for us by his blood; now, in 13.13. he urges “so let us go out to Jesus, outside the camp, bearing his reproach”. The Tabernacle in the desert was a parable full of rich truth and prophetic significance, but now its typology has been fulfilled – we live in the age of the antitype! – and its continuing practices, as manifested in the Temple in Jerusalem, must be rejected, even if that meant, for Jews, bearing the stigma of rejection themselves. And just as the earthly, man-made Tabernacle was contrasted with its counterpart, so is the holy city of Jerusalem: “For here we have no abiding city; we are eagerly looking for the city which is to come” – the New Jerusalem, which we will reach eventually !
Friday, 16 December 2011
SKENE 10: 'outside the camp'
This leads us to the last occurrence of ‘skene’ in Hebrews, 13.10. Here the writer gives a final exhortation to his readers, converts from Judaism, not to be enticed back into Jewish rituals; our hearts, he says, should be strengthened by God’s grace, not by “ceremonial foods” (NIV). “For we Christians can feed from the altar of Christ’s sacrifice for us; but those priests who still serve in the Tabernacle have no right to eat of this spiritual food.”. To continue to offer sacrifices in the Temple was to deny Christ. Conversely, to follow Christ meant, for a Jew, abandoning the old covenant practices and rituals of Judaism. Hebrews expresses this point with another bold use of typology. Talk of “eating from the altar” reminds the writer that the Tabernacle priests were allowed to eat the remains of sacrificial victims, but not of sin offerings, especially not on the Day of Atonement: these remains were to be “completely burnt up outside the camp” (v.11, Lev 16.27). This regulation he sees as a foreshadowing of the death of Christ, the ultimate and all-sufficient sin offering, who “died outside the gate” of the city of Jerusalem, the contemporary equivalent of the Israelite ‘camp’. Here we come to another paradox. In Hebrews 10.22 (echoing 4.16) he urges his readers “let us approach” God’s sanctuary via the Tabernacle, through the curtain which Christ has opened for us by his blood; now, in 13.13. he urges “so let us go out to Jesus, outside the camp, bearing his reproach”. The Tabernacle in the desert was a parable full of rich truth and prophetic significance, but now its typology has been fulfilled – we live in the age of the antitype! – and its continuing practices, as manifested in the Temple in Jerusalem, must be rejected, even if that meant, for Jews, bearing the stigma of rejection themselves. And just as the earthly, man-made Tabernacle was contrasted with its counterpart, so is the holy city of Jerusalem: “For here we have no abiding city; we are eagerly looking for the city which is to come” – the New Jerusalem, which we will reach eventually !
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment