firm until the end

"But Christ as a Son over His house; whose house we are, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end." (Hebrews 3:6)

I have noticed that, among the (small subset of) Christians that I have either talked with or read their works or listened to their letures or sermons, discussion about the place of obedience and steadfastness in relation to the Christian life is often reduced to and exclusively treated in regards the relationship between obedience and (initial) salvation. Put another way, when we hear terms such as 'obedience' and 'faithfulness' it is all too easy to synonymize this with "works" and, thus, especially in Protestant discourses, focus exclusively on the role or non-role of works in (initial) salvation. This is, indeed, quite warranted, given the various extremes that have been expressed and held in the history of the Church. Yet, if we (purposefully or otherwise) hold to such an exclusive treatment of this element in relation to Christian life as only pertinent to entry into life in Christ (even in light of the importance of such discussions), we potentially lose sight of its continual significance after the event we (that is, some of us) refer to as "salvation." This often creates a bit of a confusion among many (at times, myself included) Christians when we encounter exhortations towards obedience, faithfulness, steadfastness, perseverance, and the like, which abound in the New Testament. To give a concrete example, Jesus tells His disciples during the "upper room discourse," "If you love Me, you will keep my commandments" (John 14:15, emphasis added). Soon after, He reiterates this principle by emphasizes not only "having" His commandments, but "keeping" them, and this is evidence of our love towards Him (see 14:21, 23-24; 15:10). But, so many times we are at a loss with regards to how these apply for the Christian who believes in Christ, since we relegate things like "obedience" and "steadfastness" and "faithfulness" to the category of "works" that is not necessary for "salvation." This can result in an extreme position of rejecting these mindsets in our lives, since we fear that we might espouse a "works-based salvation" (again, referring mainly to initial salvation with disregard to its processual characteristics [see, for example, Philippians 2:12; 1 Timothy 4:16; Hebrews 9:28; 1 Peter 1:5, 9; 2:22]). Thus, without an understanding of obedience in love (see John 14:15), many of us are or have been in the position of those in the 1st century church in Rome, to whom Paul was obliged to pen the now infamous rhetorical question, "Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?" (Romans 6:1). We are (often), therefore, utterly ignorant of how to apply the biblical concept of obedience in the Christian life, which, by God's grace, we enter in through Christ ("by grace through faith," see Ephesians 2:8).
With this in mind, I would like to pause briefly on the conditional clause "if we hold fast" in Hebrews 3:6. For, similar to prior exhortations aimed at encouraging obedience and perserverance (see 2:1; 3:1), it sets a trend for a series of content similar exhortations to "believe" and "obey" (or "not disbelieve/not disobey") in the third chapter and beyond. Hebrews specifically, and the New Testament generally, are rife with such exhortations, which out to impel us to seek God for an understanding of how this ought to operate in regards to the life He has given us in Christ, which we now presently experience. The conditional element "if we hold fast" relates back to the expression that we who believe in Jesus are part of His/God's "house." Therefore, we can perhaps maintain that this type of steadfastness and, in a sense obedience by faith (which becomes clear as we read on in Hebrews), is extremely important if not to some degree necessary for being counted among those who comprise Christ's house. This imagery is explained in greater detail by Peter in his first epistle:

And coming to Him as a living stone which has been rejected by men, but is choice and precious in the sight of God, you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For this is contained in Scripture: 'Behold, I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.' This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve, 'The stone which the builders rejected, this became the very corner stone,' and, 'a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense;' for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed. But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light. (1 Peter 2:4-9, emphasis added)

This passage serves as the substance by which Peter urges his readership towards faithfulness and obedience (see, for example, the rest of chapter 2), although their relationship with Christ (being in Him) is not predicated on such. Note the similarity in language between Peter's epistle and the epistle to the Hebrews: just as we are the "house" of Christ "if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end," as in Hebrews, so we are "built up as a spiritual house" with Christ as the chief cornerstone so that we might "offer up spiritual sacrifices" and "proclaim the excellencies" of God. In short, both of these passages resonate with the importance of, to use Jesus' language in the book of John, "keeping" His "words" and "commands" if indeed we love Him. Does this in any way mean that our initial salvation, our entrance into Christ and His body, depends upon obedience and faithfulness, which is perhaps to say, "works"? I maintain that biblical Christianity will clearly and definitively dictate that the answer to this is "no." For, as Paul writes, we are not justified by works of the Law (Romans 3:20, 28; Galatians 2:16). Or, to use the quintessential Pauline example, we agree that Abraham was justified by faith since he believed God (see Romans 4).
But this begrudgingly brings us back to our original predicament: What is the role of obedience in the life of a Christian if it is not necessary for (initial) salvation? If we do not understand the answer to this question as properly as is possible for us, we will not understand the exhortations in Hebrews (and elsewhere in the NT) which are directed toward believers in Christ to persevere and obey. Not without irony, I believe the resolution to our conflict is found in a somewhat paradoxical passage in James that appears to be in direct opposition to Pauline soteriology. Speaking of the relationship between faith and works, James writes that "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself" (James 2:17). And he pushes the relationship further still, declaring that "a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (2:24). If you didn't catch the supposed contradiction, reread that verse along with Romans 4, and then return to James' discussion of Abraham, of whom it is said that "as a result of [his] works, [his] faith was perfected" (2:22).
This last verse gives us a glimpse of hope in understanding this issue (to the degree that we can), maybe not by "resolving" it per se, but allowing for the mystery and admitting the mutual compatibility of these passages in a biblical framework. Justification is truly grounded in faith (and that in Christ), but the genuineness of our faith is manifest and, in some way as James indicates, "perfected" by works and obedience. Therefore, it is not surprising that, as we read Hebrews and consider its original audience who appear to be believers in need of encouragement and perseverance, we find multiple exhortations aimed at producing steadfastness and obedience that relates to our being part of Christ's "house." We, just as they, who are believers in Christ who are saved "by grace through faith," have continual need to press on "firm until the end;" we need to "take care" that we do not, by an unbelieving heart "fall away from the living God;" we need to not follow an example of "disobedience" (Hebrews 3:12, 14, 18-19; 4:11). And, lest we think that we have anything in and of ourselves about which to boast, we must always remember that, as did Abraham and all the great "cloud of witnesses" before us, we too should "work out [our] salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in [us], both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Hebrews 12:1; Philippians 2:12-13). This second aspect, which itself has primacy, can never be forgotten when we consider the importance of the former part. Everything in our life as Christians - belief, initial salvation, love for God, sanctification, obedience, steadfastness, faithfulness, holiness, etc. - is recursively dependent and saturated with God's grace and mercy.

of our confession

"Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession..." (Hebrews 3:1)

Before having first read (or just read) the above verse, How would you have filled in the blank for the following?:

Jesus is the Aposlte and High Priest of our __________ .

There are several quite reasonable (and perhaps many more quite unreasonable) responses, but again let me turn to the question, What would we answer? Consider a few options, such as:

1) Jesus is the Apostle and High Priest of our salvation
2) Jesus is the Apostle and High Priest of our lives
3) Jesus is the Apostle and High Priest of our faith
4) Jesus is the Apostle and High Priest of our God

Perhaps there is a good degree of truth in some or all of these options, but we must consider why these (or any others) are not chosen by the author of the epistle to the Hebrews. When I read the verse Hebrews 3:1, though this may be due to my more nondenominational, Evangelical background, the answer there provided is, to me, rather striking. In much of the Evangelical world the main emphasis is on initial conversion (though this is, of course, not the only truth proclaimed), and therefore, confession is frequently associated with this single event, often referred to as "salvation" (though, this indeed has processual and transformative elements and is not merely a distinct point in our own past). In all honesty, not having read this at some prior point, I doubt I would have answered the aforementioned question by placing "confession" in the blank. I would most likely be apt to answer (1) above, sort of in line with an important thought already expressed in Hebrews, namely, that Jesus is the "author" of our "salvation" (2:10). I have to admit that in certain ways this concept of "confession," of which Jesus Himself is "the Apostle and High Priest," is very foreign to my life in Christ (in the sense that it is typically not a primary emphasis for me), though in reality it ought to be central to it.
There are several meanings of "confession" that are both in use today and have more traditional, historical roots. For example, in the 4th century, Augustine inaugurated a sense of writing that is typified by a more personal journal/diary style (e.g., Augustine's Confessions). Prior to that, within the Church there were several applications of the term that were not unrelated to one another: confession of sin(s) in either a public or private manner (e.g., the Confiteor, or confessing our sins one to another [James 5:16], or confessing our sins to God [1 John 1:9], or what some consider the sacrament of penance, or confession and renouncing of sins at baptism, etc.), or confession as a statement and assertion/articulation of belief(s) (e.g., the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed) that was held individually and corporately, and often expressed publicly. These two aspects, confession of sins and profession of belief/faith, are quite related because any true confession of sins is always a confession of Christ, for in Him and through Him alone is there forgiveness and remission of sins. This is why in many Christian traditions, for example, one both renounces sin and confesses Christ at baptism.
Interestingly, confession in the Christian framework has an inherently personal dimension, and we can see this in the following four elements: 1) we often confess to one another or in the presence of one another as members of the Body of Christ, 2) we ultimately confess to the Person of God who hears us through Christ, 3) the nature of our confession places (in a sense) some burden on the one who confesses, and 4) the value of our confession relates to the One whom we confess. These last two points are especially relevant to the content of the one we are exhorted to "consider" in Hebrews 3:1. That is, again (as discussed beforehand in other posts) we should bear in mind as we read the entire epistle how many instances of encouragement and exhortation we come across, for it is evident that the author wishes that the reader remember the foundation that was laid upon the Person and work of Christ, and their belief in Him. So we read:

For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard (2:1)

[C]onsider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession (3:1)

Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God (3:12)

[L]et us be diligent to enter into that rest, so that no one will fall (4:11)

[L]et us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find help in time of need (4:16)

[L]eaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity (6:1)

[S]ince we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus [...] let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith (10:19, 22)

Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering (10:23)

[D]o not throw away your confidence (10:35)

[Y]ou have need of endurance (10:36)

Though we could include a wealth of other exhortations in Hebrews, these help us to understand that the concern of the writer was to constantly remind these believers of the confession that they had made. Thus, it makes sense that here we find it said of Jesus that He is "the Apostle and High Priest of our confession," because this places to some degree the burden on those who have and do confess in order to remind them of the firm foundation and anchor that stabilizes their souls, Jesus Christ (3:1; 6:19; 10:39).
As alluded to above, the second point we might note about this verse, which itself actually has primacy, is that our confession is deeply rooted in the One whom we confess, who presides over it as "the Apostle and High Priest." When we consider confession in the sense of "confession of sin(s)," as Christians we cannot separate this action from the very Person from whom we expect forgiveness of sins (and our expectation is predicated upon and validated by His faithfulness; see 1 John 1:9). Jesus is the One who was sent by God (thus, Jesus is the Apostle) to mediate (as High Priest) between God and humankind so that He might voluntarily offer Himself for the life of the world as the propitiation for our sins. Moreover, when we consider confession in the sense of "profession of faith," neither can we truly separate this from the One in whom all faith is placed. This type of confession is not merely intellectual assent to a set of abstract principles, nor is it purely a past event. Confession can and does refer to a past event, but it is also an ongoing process; it is something we actively and continually participate in and engage. Our admission of "the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints," that is, our confession of that faith, is rooted deeply and intimately united to the very Person who Himself serves as the substance of that faith (Jude 1:3).
The value of our confession, therefore, is no greater than the value of the One confessed. And we know that Christ, who is Himself fully human and fully divine, is by virtue of His deity the highest being that exists. We rest in the derived value of our confession that is conferred by His intrinsic value, rooted in His eternal nature. When we, as Christians, maintain and declare that, among other things, we believe that "for our sake and for our salvation" Jesus "came down from heaven" to become incarnate, we profess His Apostleship. When we, as Christians, maintain that we believe that He was born, lived, died, crucified and was buried, but rose again and ascended into heaven, "for the remission of sins," we acknowledge His role as the Great and eternal High Priest, who, "[w]hen He had made purification for sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Hebrews 1:3). He is the Apostle because He was and is God's most perfect messenger, revealing the things that the Father spoke and taught with utmost fidelity (John 8:28, 38; 20:21). He is exalted as High Priest because, having been seated, His work of defeating death and sin is forever and definitively finished, forever and definitively established - it is indeed "once for all" (Romans 6:10; Hebrews 7:27; 9:12; 10:10; 1 Peter 3:18). With all this in mind, then, if we find ourselves in the circumstances like those to whom Hebrews was written, we, too, can be encouraged by the exhortation to "consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession."

faithful in all things

"Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession; He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all his house. For He has been counted of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house. For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God. Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later; but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house..." (Hebrews 3:1-6a)

When understanding the meaning of any particular passage, it is indeed beneficial to consider the intended audience so that we might arrive more closely at the author's intention. In this way, we can (by one among many methods) guard against eisegesis - importing our own ideas into the text as apposed to drawing the truth out - and ultimately work towards overcoming one of the many "gaps" that loom in between us and the Bible (though, unfortunately, they are all too often ignored). This is an important point to recognize and admit, since, whether we like it or not, we all come to the text of the Bible (or any text) as interpreters. Moreover, since we are dealing with a rather unique book, that is, one inspired by God through human agencies, then it is necessary to understand His divine purposes and truths in Scripture as well as taking into account the author's original intention(s), as far as we can recover them. With regard to the Epistle to the Hebrews, we have little explicit internal evidence as to the identity of the initial readership, except perhaps most obviously in the phrase "to the Hebrews" as indicated by the title. Further internal signposts evidenced by various exhortations to the primary audience, descriptions of their spiritual circumstances/condition, and commentary on their social milieu (such as the possibility of temple worship still in place or experience of persecution; see, for example, Hebrews 8:4; 10:32-34) pairs well with external evidence to paint a clearer picture of the first recipients of this letter. Namely, a theme that resonates in many commentaries is the proposition that these Christians to whom this letter was first written and sent were Jewish believers in Jesus Christ that had undergone mild persecution (thus, most likely before Nero) and were considering abandoning the Christian Gospel in favor of its (and their) Jewish heritage. Thus, we should not be surprised to encounter exhortations toward perseverance and steadfastness and the need to not "shrink back" or reject the all-sufficient voluntary Self-offering of Christ (10:39). As the writer states at one point later in the epistle, "you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised" (10:36). Though the object of their faith was not wavering, their faith in Him was, and so they were encouraged to consider the nature of His Person and work so that their faith might be strengthened by the (re-?)realization of what Jesus accomplished and fulfilled.
If these inferences are correct, then it is apparently the burden of the author to convince the audience of the excellencies of Christ, but also with special attention paid to how principles established/revealed in the Old Covenant are in actuality shadows that relate to a greater and more meaningful substance, Jesus (8:1-5; 9:23-24; 10:1; Colossians 2:16-17). With this in mind it is no surprise that the first two chapters of this epistle are largely doctrinal, with heavy Christological emphasis. As has been discussed in previous posts, the author definitively maintains both the deity and the humanity of Christ in accordance with His hypostatic union. But, returning to the points mentioned above, we might ask the following: If the author is indeed trying to convince unstable Christians who are contemplating returning to Judaism (and thus denying Jesus as both Messiah and God), what arguments could the writer propound in order to turn their hearts and minds to the truth found in Jesus? The answer to this question, as it pertains to the epistle to the Hebrews, is really quite similar to a dilemma that Jesus Himself posed to certain Jews that doubted His validity:

You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me (John 5:39, emphasis added)

Yet the dilemma itself is not truly presented in the above statement. Instead, it appears in the loving criticism that follows: "and you are unwilling to come to Me that you may have life" (5:40, emphasis added). This is the question with which these readers were confronted, and one that we, too, must answer - Am I willing to come to Jesus, the One of whom the Scriptures testify, so that I may have life?
Consequently, in chapter 3 the author of Hebrews embarks upon a journey through prominent people and principles in the Scriptures (the Old Testament) in order to assure the readership of the supremacy of Jesus Christ. Interestingly, rather than focusing on the temple (which may have still stood at the time of writing), the writer chooses to highlight a more unifying concept and one that essentially possesses primacy, that of the tabernacle and its "regulations of divine worship", such as the Levitical priesthood, the various articles in the tent, and the sacrificial system (Hebrews 9:1). All these necessarily relate to the Covenant that God established with His people on Mt. Sinai, when Moses was called by God to mediate between Himself and the people of Israel. Therefore, the first verses in chapter three involve a comparison between the Person and work of Jesus, and the person and work of Moses. In a sense, then, we might say that the writer begins this portion of the argumentation by inviting the reader to consider what or whom they are really left with if they abandon Christ.
Recall that in the prior chapter, the author urges the believers to whom the letter is written to "pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it" (2:1). What "we have heard" is the testimony of "so great a salvation" that is found in Jesus alone. Moreover, we might infer that the in some way the readers were being tempted by their doubt, and thus were in need of hearing about the infinite ability of Jesus "to come to the aid of those who are tempted" evidenced by the incarnational reality of Jesus' suffering. The proposed remedy for ensuring stability (i.e., not drifting) and overcoming temptation is strikingly simple: "consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession" (3:1). Why consider Him? The answer that comes makes sense to a believer in Christ who has a Jewish background: "He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house" (3:2, emphasis added). At this point it seems as though the writer is only concerned with (roughly) equating Jesus' ministry with that of Moses, that is, just as Moses was faithful over God's house, so was Jesus. But the writer presses on to a greater truth with even greater immediacy, namely, that Jesus "has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses" (3:3). The force of this second claim in the context of a Jewish Christian audience - especially one considering departing from Christianity - should not be easily overlooked. The comparison is not arbitrary, and neither is the declaration of Christ's supreme glory.
The point, however, is not so much to diminish the importance and significance of preeminent individuals such as Moses (Jesus, for example, constantly referred to Moses and Moses' authority as proof of the validity of His claims). Rather, major the point is to understand their importance and significance in relation to the Person and work of Jesus Christ "who fills all in all" (Ephesians 1:23). That is, Jesus Himself is the locus of understanding Moses and his ministry, and the subsequent covenant which God established with Israel through him. Turning again to the Gospels, we find that Jesus clearly did not diminish the persons of the Old Testament along with its laws, but Jesus always centered them around the supreme Person of Himself, the work He came to do, and the covenant that He inaugurated. For example, Jesus declared that He was greater than both King Solomon and the prophet Jonah (Luke 11:31-32). He also expressed His eternality when He claimed that He actually preceded the patriarch Abraham (John 8:58). Moreover, in another passage, we find God declaring in an audible voice the exclusive preeminence which Jesus held over and above Moses and Elijah:

Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John, and brought them up on a high mountain by themselves. And He was transfigured before them; and His garments became radiant and exceedingly white, as no launderer on earth can whiten them. Elijah appeared to them along with Moses; and they were talking with Jesus. Peter said to Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah." For he [Peter] did not know what to answer, for they [the disciples] became terrified. Then a cloud formed, overshadowing them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is My beloved Son, listen to Him!" All at once they looked around and saw no one with them anymore, except Jesus alone. (Mark 9:2-8)

Again, this is not to depreciate the value of any individual like Moses, but God helps us understand the proper value of any person by situating them in relation to Christ. Moses was indeed faithful in things pertaining to God's house, but Christ was more faithful still. Moses' disobedience was quite rare and not characteristic of his ministry, but Jesus "always do[es] the things that are pleasing to [the Father]" (Numbers 20:8-12; John 8:29). Moses was faithful "as a servant," Christ is faithful "as a Son" (Hebrews 3:5-6). Moses was a member of the house, Christ, being a Person of the Triune God, is its builder and architect. Moses served "for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later," Christ is the content of that speech which is the Christian Gospel (3:5). As Jesus said, "if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me" (John 5:46). Admitting the reality of Christ's supremacy does not negate Moses, but rather believes him. "If [we] do not believe [Moses'] writings, how will [we] believe [Jesus'] words?" (see John 5:47). Moses was "made perfect" by the same means as we who presently believe in Jesus, for Moses "consider[ed] the reproaches of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he was looking to the reward" (Hebrews 11:40, 26, emphasis added). Moses "endured, as seeing Him who is unseen" (11:26).
At this point, perhaps many of us who do not individually come from a Jewish background may struggle to grasp the relevance of this passage (and, thus, what follows, as well) to our own lives. The relevance and application, however, can be made manifest by considering three points. First, we might state the obvious that since Jesus was Jewish it ought to matter to us. If we consider the words of Christ in the Gospels, or the entirety of the New Testament, we can only understand the Gospel with greater fullness by understanding the significance of Moses and his writings. Still, as both Jesus and the New Testament writers urge us toward, we must interpret Moses (and others) in light of Jesus now that He has come. Second, Moses as a key figure of Judaism would be an example of what the readers would be left with if they rejected Christ and returned to their Jewish heritage, ignoring the reference to Him. As we are aware, Moses indeed pointed to Christ, but this group was potentially going back to Moses without considering the One to whom he directs them. The author makes clear that they are losing infinite worth by departing from Christ and, consequently, not really going back to Moses in the fullest and truest sense. For us, we might do well to contemplate the value of what we are left with if we reject Jesus, for who or what would be left to fill such an amazing void? The reality we must face is that there is no one and no thing left to turn to; only Christ has the "words of eternal life" (John 6:68). The third point is that, since Moses is one example of a shadow whose substance is Christ, we must consider what the consequence will be if we overemphasize the shadows and deemphasize the substance (e.g., the law or the Levitical system of worship in comparison to the New Covenant and the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ). This cannot be succinctly answered here, but is the focus of much to come in the epistle to the Hebrews. And, as we read in Hebrews 3:1, the way to rightly (re)orient ourselves is constant, we must "consider Jesus."