Sermon 02/01/04 am

Jim Huskey, Hebrews - Tone Set

We finished our look at the book of Romans and this morning we're

heading into some different territory, with a look another letter.

This letter is a little different from all the other letters of the

New Testament. For one thing, it's not addressed to a congregation,

as many of the letters are. It's also different in respect to the

fact that it's not addressed to an individual, as some of the letters

are. It is addressed to a specific group of people. It is addressed

to Jews, Hebrews, many of which were turning back to the law after

having become Christians. The book was written to try to stem the

tide of that exodus back toward the old law of Moses. We could sum up

the book in one word, the word "better". That theme is introduced very

early and is carried throughout the remainder of the book. Most of our

time this morning is going to center on the first two or three verses,

if we even have time to get that far.

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto

the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by

his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he

made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express

image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power,

when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of

the Majesty on high." Heb. 1:1-3.

We could preach for a long time from the things that are said in those

three verses just read. I want us to begin, however, and notice that

there was a time when God spoke by various means to mankind and

evidently in various ways. In the book of Numbers, chapter 12, we will

read. Now Miriam and Aaron had spoken against Moses. In verse 4 of

this 12th chapter we begin, "And the Lord spake suddenly unto Moses,

and unto Aaron, and unto Miriam, Come out ye three unto the tabernacle

of the congregation. And they three came out. And the Lord came down

in the pillar of the cloud, and stood in the door of the tabernacle,

and called Aaron and Miriam; and they both came forth. And he said,

Hear now my words; If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will

make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a

dream. My servant, Moses, is not so, who is faithful in all mine

house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not

in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold;

wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?"

Num. 12:4-8. God set forth in those verses the very same thing the

Hebrew said in the first verse of that book. There was a time when

God revealed his message to men in a multitude of ways, some by vision,

some by dream, but he said "...my servant Moses, is not so.." So he

spoke directly to Moses. That's what the Hebrew author pointed out.

This was a principle with which the Hebrews would be familiar. "God,

who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the

fathers by the prophets." Well, that's what God told Miriam and Aaron

when he called them to the door of the tabernacle. 'I've spoken in

various ways, I've revealed my message by dreams, by visions, and unto

Moses mouth to mouth, or face to face.'

"Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.." Now keep in mind

what we just read a coupe moments ago from the book of Numbers, that

God told Aaron and Miriam that '..my servant Moses is not so; I'm not

going to speak in dark speeches or in similitudes to him, but mouth

to mouth.' Turning to the book of Deuteronomy we find it to be a

book basically referred to as the second law because it repeats the law

of Moses given in Exodus. Moses gives several addresses to the nation

of Israel in this book. In chapter 18, verse 15, we begin, "The Lord

thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of

thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; according to all

that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the

assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God,

neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the

Lord said unto me, They have well spoke that which they have spoken.

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren like unto

thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them

all that I shall command him." Deut. 18:15-18.

"Hath in these last days spoken unto us BY HIS SON..." Moses said

God said he would raise up a prophet from among the Jews and he would

tell them all He commanded him. Well, let's see if we can put the

pieces together. Turn to the Gospel of John chapter 12. Jesus was

speaking and he said, beginning in verse 47, "And if any man hear my

words, and believe not, I judge him not; for I came not to judge the

world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth

not my words, hath one that judgeth him; the word that I have spoken,

the same shall judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken of

myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I

should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment

is life everlasting; whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father

said unto me, so I speak." John 12:47-50. Isn't that exactly what

Moses said he would do, that God would raise up from among them, from

their own brethren? Jesus was born of the tribe of Judah. God said

he would speak whatever He (God) commanded. Jesus very plainly said

"...he gave me a commandment, WHAT I should SAY, and WHAT I should

SPEAK." This is exactly what Moses prophesied would happen.

Let's take it one step further, this time turning to Matthew 17,

beginning in verse 1. "And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James,

and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,

and was transfigured before them; and his face did shine as the sun,

and his raiment was white as the light. And behold, there appeared unto

them Moses and Elias talking with him." (Now let me just inject

something right here. If we were reading Luke's account of this, we

would find that Luke told us what they were discussing. Have you ever

seen someone having a conversation and you just wished for all the

world you could know what they were discussing? Now a conversation

that was important enough to bring some men back from the dead must

have been pretty important. But do you know what they were discussing?

His demise which he should accomplish in Jerusalem. Did you get that?

His demise which he should ACCOMPLISH in Jerusalem. That bunch of nuts

that came out as a mob with sticks and swords and everything in the

garden and took him and his apostles, the ones that didn't run, they

must have thought they had really done something. They weren't in

control of that incident at all!!! When we have more time we'll read

John's account and I'll show you that they were not the ones in

control. Jesus was in control. All we have to do to prove that is to

know what happened when Peter grabbed a sword and started swinging it.

There are thirteen people gathered there and only two have swords.

Here comes a mob and one of that handful takes out a sword and starts

swinging. There wasn't a hair on the head of a single one of those

apostles harmed. Jesus told him to put up the sword and he did. But

if the mob had been in control of that situation those men would not

have lived to leave the garden on their own power. When they came out

and Jesus asked them 'whom do you seek', John tells us they said

'Jesus of Nazareth'. He said 'I am he; if you seek me, let these

go.' And John says they, that is the mob, fell backward to the ground.

Well, that's what they were talking about on the mount of

transfiguration when Moses and Elias appeared there, having been dead

for centuries. They were talking about Jesus' demise which he should

accomplish in Jerusalem.) "Then answered Peter, and said

unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here; if thou wilt, let us

make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one

for Elias. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed

them; and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my

beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; HEAR YE HIM. And when the

disciples heard it, they fell on their faces, and were sore afraid."

Matt. 17:1-6.

Now it's rather interesting, if we turn to the book of II Peter,

chapter 1, beginning with verse 16, we find, "For we have not followed

cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and

coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came

such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son,

in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we

heard, when we were with him in the holy mount." II Pet. 1:16-18.

Peter went on to talk about the revealed word of prophecy, that we

have a more sure word of prophecy.

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past

unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto

us by his Son..." You know, there are a lot of people who have the

concept that since we do not observe the sabbath and don't offer

animal sacrifices, use incense, burn candles, etc. that we don't

believe the Old Testament. Well, that couldn't be further from the

truth. It was the Old Testament that pointed out that there would come

a new prophet. When Peter, there on the mount of transfiguration,

said 'Lord, if thou wilt, let us build here three tabernacles', he

put Jesus first, then one for Moses and one for Elias. Had God not

spoken by Moses? Absolutely!!! Had God not prophesied by Elijah?

Absolutely!!! However, they fulfilled their purpose. Paul pointed out

in the Galatian letter that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us

to Christ. It served its purpose, but it was fulfilled. Jesus took

it out of the way and nailed it to his cross. Why? because it had

served its purpose. It had accomplished what it was intended to

accomplish. Now the fact that there are many things that are said

in the Old Testament that are made applicable in the New Testament

does not mean that we're still under the Old. Let me give you a

common-day illustration. Do you remember the Mayflower Charter or

Compact? You may not, but you probably read about it in history.

That was one of the first governing documents by which those who first

came to this nation were ordered. Now we are not under that document

any more; we're under the Constitution. But did you know that there

are many principles that are set forth in the Constitution that were

also in the Mayflower Compact and also in the Articles of Confederation

and other documents. Now, we realize that we're under the Constitution

today, that other document served its purpose and was laid aside.

That doesn't mean the things that were said in it were not true, were

not important. To the CONTRARY!!! They were!!!! The same principle

is true here, and the Hebrew author pointed that out. There was a

time when God spoke in different means to various prophets, but in

these last days he has spoken by his Son, just as Moses in the Old

Testament had prophesied he would. I think God nailed it down pretty

well on the mount of transfiguration when he not only said "This is

my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased" but when he said "..hear ye

him." What did that say? There was a time when they were to listen

to Moses, then later there would come a time when they would listen

to Elijah when various things were happening in the nation of Israel

that made his prophecy necessary. God is, however, pointing out very

directly to those three apostles, 'Now, you hear my Son, hear him,

listen to His word.'

"...whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made

the worlds." I'm a little disappointed that our governor has decided

to reject a proposal that was made with respect to some things taught

in science in our textbooks here in Georgia. Some had requested that

they change the definition basically used for the word "evolution" and

let it simply mean what the base word means, "an evolve or change",

as opposed to a system that some so-called scientists have adapted

that says man came here by accident and chance and that it's just all

a system of chance; there was no plan or design, it just happened.

Governor Purdue has decided NOT to agree to that change and to stay

with the modernistic, liberalistic theory that that's how man

actually made his appearance here on the earth, through the process of

evolution. That theory also suggests that the way this earth got here

was as a result of what is commonly known as the "big bang theory",

at least that's the one most of the evolutionists are holding to now.

There's no telling what they'll hold to tomorrow or the next day, or

the next day. You see, there's a reason for this. The thing that

disturbs me so much is that they talk about evolution being

scientific. The truth of the matter is, there is nothing, not one

single solitary thing about the theory of evolution as embraced that

is scientific. The word "science" means "to know". TO KNOW!!! The

very basis of the evolutionary process and theory is a series of

over 400 assumptions - "let us assume". Then they talk about the

Christian being unscientific when he begins with God !!!! One

assumption, and the evidence is all around that he exists !!!! The

evidence is NOT there for evolution. It is not there for the

teaching of that as a scientific process because something that is

proveable by the scientific process must, by definition, be

repeatable. Now think about that!!!! If it's proveable by the

scienfitic process, it must, by definition, be repeatable. Well,

why don't we have half men, half apes still walking around? When

did they cease? In all these little childrens' books that are written,

that could be a wonderful thing about our world, they talk about the

dinosaurs being here 75 million years ago or Carl Sagen and his

philosophy with his billions and billions of years ago. It's

interesting to me that not one of the science textbooks in our school

system, whether in high school or college, of which I'm aware, makes

mention of the fact that there are well over a hundred scientific

means of dating things that dates the age of our earth at somewhere

between 10,000 and 15,000 years old. Why don't they mention that?

They used such reasoning that is ridiculous. 'We found this fossil

in a fifteen-million-year-old rock.' Well how do you know. 'Because

we found a fifteen-million-year-old rock.' They date the fossil

because they say they found it in a rock that was fifteen million

years old. You ask them how they know the rock was fifteen million

years old. 'Well, we found a fifteen-million-year-old fossil in it.'

That's supposed to be scientific!!!!! What did you say? "..by whom

He also made the worlds." It still reads "In the beginning God

created the heaven and the earth." Gen. 1:1. They didn't evolve.

They didn't come about as a result of a big bang. God created them -

ex ni hilo, out of nothing !!!!! He created man, he created woman,

he didn't create an ameba which millions of years later evolved into

a man or a woman. He created them as they are, male and female.

So the Hebrew author began by stating his position and his basis upon

which everything else would be said in the book. He laid a very

inmportant foundation - we're to hear Jesus. As he pointed out "For

I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me

a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." Jno. 12:49.

Moses said there would come a time when men were to hear that prophet

and that time has come. The Hebrew author a little later will go back

to that very passage and make that point again. We'll see it again

as we go through the book of Hebrews.