Bible Difficulties (94 page)

The second passage in Hebrews that must be considered is 10:26-27: "If we deliberately

[
hekousios
may also mean `willingly'] keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God." Here again there is a prior receiving of the knowledge of the truth as it is in Jesus (similar to the "once enlightened" of 6:4) and a full understanding of the meaning of the Cross. But unfortunately it is possible to grasp the plan of salvation as a concept and communicate it clearly to others as a matter of teaching and yet never really yield to the Lord. The Bible defines true believing as a matter of receiving Christ Himself--not simply the teaching of Christ as a philosophy or a theory--as both Lord and Savior: "As many as
received
him...even to those that
believed
in His name" (John 1:12).

The believer who receives Jesus as Lord in all sincerity and truth will never sincerely or willingly go back into the practice of sin, will never "trample on the Son of God" (Heb.

10:29); he will never regard His shed blood as unholy or profane (
koinon
), and will never wantonly insult the Holy Spirit. Anyone who can bring himself around to that kind of ungodliness and contempt toward his diving Savior never gave his heart to Him in the 429

first place. Like Judas, he may have thought that he would just "try Jesus" and see how he liked Him, and whether he would obtain from Him the advantages and blessings he craved for himself and for his own sake. Since he never really faced up to the claims of Christ to total lordship over his life, he was a mere counterfeit Christian right from the start. God is never satisfied with counterfeits. He only accepts the real thing. He can never be deceived, even by the most pious of poses. He reads our hearts.

How can "head of his staff" (Heb. 11:21) be reconciled with "head of the bed" (Gen.

47:31)?

Hebrews 11:21 refers to the dying Jacob as "worshiping on the head of his staff" when he pronounced his blessing on Joseph. But in Genesis 47:31 we read, "Then Israel bowed in worship at the head of the bed" (NASB). Actually the Hebrew text says
àl hammittah

"on the head of the bed"), which perhaps might mean that he leaned his forehead on the headboard of his bed. But this is rather unlikely in view of what he had just been doing, conversing with Joseph, and asking him to place his hand under his thigh as he promised to bury Jacob in Canaan rather than in Egypt. Jacob would have been far more likely to sit on the side of his bed, leaning perhaps on his staff.

Now it so happens that the word for "bed" and the word for "staff" are spelled exactly the same in the Hebrew consonants; only the vowel points (first invented about the eight century A.D. or a little before) differentiate between the two. But the Septuagint, translated back in the third century B.C., reads
m-t-h as mattah
("staff"); it was the medieval Jewish Masoretes of the ninth century A.D. who decided it was
mittah
("bed").

Hebrews 11:21 follows the earlier vocalization and comes out with the far more likely rendering "on the head of the staff"--like the Septuagint and the Syriac Peshitta. In all probability this was the correct reading, and the Masoretic pointing ought to be changed accordingly.

How could men like Barak, Jephthah, and Samson be included in the Hebrews 11

roster of honor, which included heroes like Enoch, Abraham, and Moses?

Hebrews 11:32 says very dramatically, "And what more shall I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets"

(NASB). The most striking manifestation and proofs of their faith and zeal are listed in vv. 33-34, followed by the reference to their willingness to suffer for the sake of the Lord and His holy word (vv. 35-38). It cannot be supposed that all the men listed in v.32

exhibited all these characteristics or stood on the same level of consistent holiness. But even in the case of Samson (who was by far the most vulnerable to criticism out of the entire list referred to in all of chap. 11), it was true that he "became mighty in war" and

"put foreign armies to flight" (v.34). It is also true that in a sense he ended his earthly career (after a long period of penitence for his previous folly and immorality) by one magnificent "act of righteousness" (v.33), when he pulled down the pillars of the temple of Dagon on the jeering crowd of Philistines, as they derided their blinded captive and his

"powerless" God. Samson was willing to give up his own life in the interests of his nation 430

and his Lord--even though part of his motivation was vengeance on his tormentors for putting out his eyes.

As far Barak, it is unclear why his name should be placed in the doubtful column at all.

To be sure, he refused to assume leadership in the war of independence against the pagan oppressors of Israel unless the prophetess Deborah would serve as his partner. But under the circumstances this was hardly an unreasonable request on his part. In the case of Jephthah, his willingness to negotiate reasonably with the Ammonite invaders was hardly a reproach to his honor, even though those negotiations proved fruitless in the end (Judg.

11:12-28). Certainly his valor in battle was crowned with success (vv. 32-33). As for his surrender of his virgin daughter for lifelong service at the tabernacle (cf. article on Judg.

11:30-31: "Why did God allow Jephthah's foolish vow to run its course?), this could scarcely be censured as a failure in his integrity in the performance of his vows. He properly belongs in Hebrews 11:32.

431

1 Peter

Is there a second chance after death?

What is the meaning of 1 Peter 3:19, which speaks of Christ's preaching to the spirits in the prison of hades? Did He preach the gospel to them and thus give them a chance to be saved even after they had already died? If we carefully examine this sentence in its entire setting, we shall find that it teaches no such thing--which would be quite contrary to Hebrews 9:27: "It is appointed for men to die once, and after this comes judgment."

In the NASB, 1 Peter 3:18-20 is translated: "For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water" (NASB). It will be observed from the above rendering that the verb translated "preached" in the KJV is not the Greek
euangelizomai
("to preach or tell the good news"), which would certainly have meant that after His crucifixion Christ really did preach a salvation message to lost souls in Hades; but rather it is
ekeryxen
, from
kerysso
("proclaim a message," from a king or potentate).

All that v.19 actually says is that Christ made a proclamation to the souls who are now imprisoned in Sheol (hades).

The contents of that proclamation are not made clear, but there are just two possibilities: (1) the proclamation made by the crucified Christ in Hades to all the souls of the dead may have been to the effect that the price had now been paid for sin, and all those who died in the faith were to get ready for their departure to heaven--shortly to occur on Easter Sunday--or (2) the proclamation may refer to that solemn, urgent warning Noah made to his own generation, that they should take refuge in the ark of safety before the Great Flood would destroy the human race. Of the two options, while the first was undoubtedly a true occurrence (cf. Eph. 4:8), such a proclamation would have been made to all in hades generally, or else to the redeemed in particular. But the second seems to be the proclamation intended here by Peter, since the only audience mentioned is the generation of Noah, which is now imprisoned in Hades, awaiting the final judgment. This verse means, then, that Christ through the Holy Spirit solemnly warned Noah's contemporaries by the mouth of Noah himself (described in 2 Peter 2:5 as "a preacher [or

`herald'] of righteousness." Note that "preacher" in this verse is
keryka
, the same root as the
ekeryxen
referred to above in connection with 1 Peter 3:19).

It seems quite evident, therefore, that the passage under discussion assures us that even back in Noah's day, in His pre-incarnate state, God the Son was concerned with the salvation of sinners. Thus the entire transaction whereby Noah's family was rescued through the ark was a prophetic event, pointing forward to the gracious provision of God through the substitutionary Atonement on a wooden cross--likewise the sole instrument of deliverance from the flood of divine judgment on guilty mankind. In both cases only 432

those who by faith take refuge in God's means of salvation can be rescued from destruction.

This relationship of type-antitype is then spelled out quite explicitly by the apostle in 1

Peter 3:21: "And corresponding to that [as NASB renders
antitypon
], baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal [
eperotema
] to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (NASB). That is to say, repentance for sin and a trust in Jesus alone for salvation on the basis of His atonement and resurrection are what furnish deliverance to the guilty sinner and make it possible for him to obtain "a good conscience" based on a conviction that all his sins have been paid for in full by the blood of Jesus.

In view of the focus on the generation of Noah as corresponding to the lost world of Peter's day (and of every generation since then, we may be sure), we are forced to conclude that the proclamation referred to in v.19 took place, not when Christ descended into Hades after His death on Calvary, but by the Spirit who spoke through the mouth of Noah during the years while the ark was under construction (v.20). Therefore v.19 holds out no hope whatever for a "second chance" for those who reject Christ during their lifetime on earth.

433

2 Peter

Is 2 Peter an authentic work of Peter?

Among nonconservative New Testament critics, it is common to brand 2 Peter as spurious and nothing more than a pious fraud. Yet there is hardly any epistle in the New Testament canon that contains more definite testimonies as to the identity and personal experience of the author than this epistle. Note the following references: (1) The author gives His name (1:1) specifically as
Symeon
, just as he was referred to by James in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:14). (2) He identifies himself as an "apostle of Jesus Christ" (1:1), a term that generally refers to one of the Twelve. (3) He recalls the overpowering scene of the Transfiguration in the tone of an awed spectator (1:16-18), classifying himself among the eyewitnesses (
epoptai
) and quoting verbatim the divine proclamation "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased," which he affirms he heard with his own ears while he was on "the holy mount." (4) He plainly alludes to Jesus' prediction made to him in John 21:18 as he says, "Just as our Lord Jesus Christ revealed to me" (1:14).

Other significant internal evidences are (1) his description of this letter as his "second epistle" to them (3:1), which plainly implies that he had already written them an earlier epistle (suggesting 1 Peter); (2) his personal familiarity with and warm regard for the apostle Paul as an inspired author of New Testament Scripture (3:15-16 speaks of "our beloved brother Paul" as likewise writing of "the longsuffering of our Lord" as intended for the "salvation" of many more sinners than a speedier Second Advent would allow for

[v.15; cf. Rom. 2:4; 9:22]). Peter classes these letters of Paul as part of the authoritative Word of God, even though there may be some things in them "hard to understand

[
dysnoeta
]" (v.16). Rather than an evidence of much later authorship and of composition after the canonicity of Paul's Letters had been finally accepted by the church at large (as some have urged), these cordial and appreciative references to Paul and his writings are altogether what we should expect if Peter made his way to Rome a few years later than Paul did. His Roman readers certainly would expect him to comment on the work and achievement of his predecessor--in just such a way as he does here.

In view of all this explicit evidence from the text itself as to Petrine authorship, we are forced to conclude that the author of this epistle made such a definite claim to being the apostle Peter himself that it would have been grossly fraudulent and deceptive on his part if the epistle were not authentically Petrine. If it was not really by him, it should not be used or respected by the church at all; and it is unwarranted hypocrisy to use it for preaching purposes, for it should be removed from the New Testament altogether as a sheer imposture. It would be hard to conceive of any valid revelation of divine truth as emanating from such a dishonest pen.

There has been much discussion about the resemblances between 2 Peter 2 and the Epistle of Jude. Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2:4 both refer to fallen angels (though in entirely different wording). Jude 9 and 2 Peter 2:11 both speak of the angels as unwilling to bring 434

a railing accusation even against Satan. Jude 17-18 mentions scoffers who carry on in a carnal and ungodly fashion; this bears some resemblance to 2 Peter 3:3-4, which refers to those who will speak scornfully in the last days concerning the Lord's return in judgment (here again without any verbal resemblance between the two). The tone of denunciation is quite similar, but a careful comparison between the two authors offers little support to the theory that one borrowed directly from the other--or even that one influenced the other. In point of fact it is quite possible that both Jude and 2 Peter were composed between A.D. 65 and 67, and both dealt forcibly with the problems raised by ungodly antinomian heretics infiltrating the Christian community and subverting the faith of some.