There has long been an attempt in certain segments of Christianity to make Jesus into the first Christian. Thomas Jefferson did it. He removed the portions of the New Testament that he did not like, especially those parts that taught the divinity of Christ and that showed him doing supernatural acts. A bit later see it in the Liberals, who denied Jesus’ deity and re-made him in their own image into a “do-gooder” and a teacher of morals. The Social Gospellers did the same. Dissatisfied with a Savior who saves sinners from the wrath to come, they made him into a this-wordly savior. Norman Shepherd, in the words of Cornel Venema, treats Christ as “little more than a model believer.”
Recently I ran across the claim that when Hebrews 2:10 and 12:2 describe Jesus as our archēgos (ἀρχηγός) it means, essentially, that Jesus was the first believer. Like Baxter and Shepherd, the idea being taught is that Jesus had faith and works and Christians have faith and works. The underlying conviction is that Jesus’ faith and works are essentially the same, in important respects, as our faith and works. This is, of course, classic moralism. It is the very thing that Machen opposed in the liberals. It is Pelagian and it is utterly confused about who Jesus was, what he did, and who we are and how we are saved. Further, it quite misunderstands Hebrews.
There is no question among orthodox Christians whether Christians must seek to imitate Christ. The questions are why and to what end? The orthodox Christian doctrine is that Jesus is the Savior and Christians are the saved. The orthodox Christian doctrine is that Jesus had, as Turretin put it, fides generalis (general faith) and we have fides specialis (special faith). The distinction grounded in the fact that Jesus did not believe God for salvation as we do. We Christians obey God out of gratitude for what Jesus did for us. Jesus obeyed his Father on our behalf, as our substitute. There is a great difference between these. See the linked essay that explains this distinction at length.
Nevertheless, despite the clarity of Scripture on this and the precision of the Reformed churches (in their confessions) and orthodox theologians on this, the urge to make Jesus into a “model believer” persists. In this instance it was implied that the pastor who wrote to the Hebrew Christians (i.e., who sent them a sermon) was teaching them that Jesus was a believer just as we are and we ought to imitate his faith and works.
The noun archēgos (ἀρχηγός) is difficult to translate. The Vulgate used auctor (author), which has been followed by some English translations. The Geneva Bible (1559) used “Prince.” The Authorized Version (1611) used “captain.” The Revised version and the 1901 American Standard Version used “author.” In the 1940s, the RSV used “pioneer” as does the NIV today. The HCSB uses “source.” The ESV uses “founder.” Obviously there is no consensus as to how to translate this noun. Part of the difficulty lies in the fact that the word had various senses or uses in the ancient world. E.g., In Acts 3:15 Luke used it to mean something like author. In Acts 5:31 it seems to mean something more like “prince.” In Aeschylus it seems to have this same sense. Aristotle, Plutarch, and others use it to mean “originator” or even “instigator.” <sup>1</sup>
What point is the pastor to the Hebrews trying to make? In the context of Hebrews 2, the pastor is arguing that Jesus is true man and true God. He, who is true God, voluntarily became man, humiliated himself, for our sakes. Because he completed the work the Father gave him to do for us, which he took on voluntarily from all eternity for us in the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis), the Father has, as it were, crowned him with glory. He is the one by whom and through whom all things exist. This is the same theology as the prologue to the gospel of John. It is he who has brought “many sons to glory.” It is he who is the archēgos (ἀρχηγός) of our salvation, who was made perfect through suffering. This is the teaching of Hebrews 5:8. Even though Jesus was the Son of God, as our incarnate Savior and also true man, he “learned obedience” through what he suffered. In Hebrews 2, it is our suffering Savior who sanctifies believers who themselves suffer for Christ. This is why he is not ashamed to call us brothers (2:11). He is consubstantial (of the very same nature) with us. We have a true human Savior is also true God. He really endured suffering for us. He understands when we suffer for him. He is the singer of Psalm 22, who proclaims God’s name and praises him to the congregation. He is the singer of Psalm 18:2 who has trusted his Father and Isaiah 8:18, “I and the children God has given me.” He has fulfilled the covenant of redemption. He believed his Father and obeyed the law for us, in our place, as our substitute. He has taken us with him, as it were, in the holy of holies in the heavenly tabernacle.
Hebrews 12:2 says the very same thing. Jesus is the archēgos (ἀρχηγός) and teleiōtēs (τελειωτής) or completer of our faith. We must and can run the race set before us because we have a Savior. He has already run the race for us as our representative. He endured for us. When we suffer for Christ, for the faith and when we scorned because we are Christians, we are not suffering in order to earn a place with God. Christ has already done that for us. We do not suffer as those who have not hope or help. We have a powerful Savior who suffered more than we do or will. We have a Savior who understands. He is greater than we and yet he did not place himself above such suffering. The Hebrew Christians were tempted to go back to the Synagogue, to go back to types and shadows in part because of the shame. Rather than scorning the shame, they needed to embrace it because Christ first embraced them. In both contexts, Hebrews 2 and 12 Jesus is the one who has already endured for us sinners what the Christians must now endure for his sake. In that light perhaps the RSV’s choice of “pioneer” has something to commend it but certainly he is our Prince, he is our Captain. Good princes and captains go before their troops do they not? Do they not lead them into battle? Troops are more willing and ready to follow someone who risks and bleeds just as they do. That seems to come close to what Hebrews is saying.
Jesus trusted his Father and yes he obeyed. We must also trust our Father and obey but we may not treat Jesus’ faith and works as if they are the same as ours or as if ours have the same function or are on the same order as his. He was not a sinner who needed to be saved by grace alone, through faith alone. We are such sinners. He was born sinless and righteous. He was born under the law for us. He was not qualifying himself to be a Savior. He was not putting his trust in someone else for salvation. We are. He was earning our salvation. We are trusting him for our salvation. We obey because we have been saved not in order to be saved.
Jesus was not the first Christian. He is the only Savior and we are his Christians who trust him and seek to imitate him because of his substitutionary work for us.
NOTES
- See BAGD, s.v., ἀρχηγός.
R. Scott Clark
R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.
More by R. Scott Clark ›
“Jesus trusted his Father and yes he obeyed. We must also trust our Father and obey but we may not treat Jesus’ faith and works as if they are the same as ours or as if ours have the same function or are on the same order as his. He was not a sinner who needed to be saved by grace alone, through faith alone. We are such sinners. We was born sinless and righteous. He was born under the law for us. He was not qualifying himself to be a Savior. He was not putting his trust in someone else for salvation. We are. He was earning our salvation. We are trusting him for our salvation. We obey because we have been saved not in order to be saved.
Jesus was not the first Christian. He is the only Savior and we are his Christians who trust him and seek to imitate him because of his substitutionary work for us.”
Amen. And right on.
In line 8 from the bottom – a misprint! HE not ‘we’ was born sinless!!
Thank you Denis!
Amen, Amen and Amen! This is Thanksgiving weekend in Canada. Thanks for reminding us of what we have, above all else, to be thankful for.
“We have a powerful Savior who suffered more than we do or will. We have a Savior who understands. He is greater than we and yet he did not place himself above such suffering. The Hebrew Christians were tempted to go back to the Synagogue, to go back to types and shadows in part because of the shame. Rather than scorning the shame, they needed to embrace it because Christ first embraced them. In both contexts, Hebrews 2 and 12 Jesus is the one who has already endured for us sinners what the Christians must now endure for his sake. In that light perhaps the RSV’s choice of “pioneer” has something to commend it but certainly he is our Prince, he is our Captain. Good princes and captains go before their troops do they not? Do they not lead them into battle? Troops are more willing and ready to follow someone who risks and bleeds just as they do. That seems to come close to what Hebrews is saying.”
Today I heard Dr. Joel Kim preaching about our place in Heaven that is now and not yet. Because our Good Prince and Mighty Captain, our Savior, the Lord Jesus suffered, fulfilling His Promise to redeem us, I trust Him to be with us in suffering. He is making us dependent on His Victory and the special rest He has prepared for us in Him.
“And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Jesus Christ, in order that in the coming ages He might show the incomparable riches of His grace, expressed in His kindness to us in Jesus Christ. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith and it is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.” Eph. 2: 6-8 God’s redeemed are for His glory! My favorite book, after the bible, is John Calvin’s Sermons on Ephesians. Those sermons just let you linger and savor those amazing truths of Paul’s message to the Ephesians that are more wonderful than we could ever imagine, so the troubles and sufferings of this short life pale into insignificance in the light of God’s amazing grace.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve always found in Hebrews 1 and 2 a powerful message that the Lord is both God and man. The Psalm quotes in ch.1, from Psalms addressed to YHWH have always impressed me, and once, the JW’s asked if I’d be willing to talk with their district cervant when they were confounded by these quotes. So was the district servant! As for ch. 2, it clearly stresses Jesus’ sharing our humanity.
As for theological liberalism, it is a faith for nice, comfortable people who desire a nice, comfortable god.
Peter,
yes, I think Hebrews is teaching just as you say, that Christ has two natures. It does so deliberately and, I think, clearly.
Dr. Clark – this is off topic – but would you please write a thoughtful piece I can share about Andy Stanley’s book “Irresistible: Reclaiming the New that Jesus Unleashed for the World. ” There are so man of my friends who are clueless 🙁
Kathy at CURC/CO
Kathy,
I found your question intriguing, so I did short search. It seems like Andy Stanley is saying that our reason for believing Christ and accepting Him as Lord should be based on His resurrection, and promise that we too will be resurrected if we trust in Him, rather than on the fact that Christ is the fulfilment of the promises and prophecies of the entire Scripture. He says the OT is hard to understand, accept and believe but that should not be an impediment to believing in Christ since His resurrection and our promised resurrection, if we accept Him as Lord, provides irresistible reasons to believe. It seems to me this is just another application of rationalism that wants to make the Christian faith more reasonable and appealing, very much like the pragmatism of liberalism and theological modernism we have been discussing in the previous post. It is interesting that Andy Stanley has been accused of Marcionism because he says we should unhitch our faith from the OT because it has become an impediment or stumbling block. Interestingly. Jesus did not seem to think that His resurrection should be the basis for believing in Him, but rather that He was the fulfilment of the law and the prophets, of the Word of God, the Scriptures! That is what He preached to the disciples on the Emmaus road, and not that they should believe in Him just because He had been resurrected. Sadly, like all the other attempts that modernist theology has made to make the Scriptures more acceptable to our reason, Stanley ends up by diminishing their authority.
Dr. Clark,
Thank you for this helpful post. Could you give an explanation of these difficult statements in Hebrews?
1) “He became higher in rank” (1:4).
2) “He learned obedience through what He suffered” (5:8).
3) “He became the source” (5:9, with an emphasis on “became”).
LC,
Sorry to delay. I’ve been really busy.
Why do you think that they are difficult? What is it about them that makes them difficult?
Hebrews affirms that Jesus is the summom bonum, He is the disclosure of God’s Word. Because he identified with us by becoming truly man, so that He would be our Mediator. He learned obedience, and suffered according to His human nature. Through His humanity, He became fully qualified to be our Mediator as our human representative, our second Adam that fulfilled all righteousness and suffered the death curse on our behalf, thus He became the source of eternal salvation for all those who trust in Him.
Thank you, Angela. That helps.
Dr. Clark, Heb. 1:4 is tricky for me because “He became higher in rank” seems to imply that He was not previously higher in rank. That is the tricky part.
Thank you, and sorry for my delay.
I think what you must always remember here is that Hebrews is proclaiming that Christ is the One! He is the One who is both God and man! He became truly a man so that he could be our representative, as the new Adam, so that he could be our righteousness and our sacrifice to atone for our sin. As a true man, which He needed to be in order to be our representative and to have intimate fellowship with us, in union with the Godhead, He learned, developed, and became of higher rank than even the angels, and therefore of greater authority. In His true human nature that he BECAME through the incarnation, and as a normal human, He developed and grew into His role as the Son of Man, the manifestation of all of God’s promises in the Word. So He is the highest authority.