# The Book of Hebrews "Cloud of Witnesses"



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

bookslover said:


> ReformedReidian said:
> 
> 
> > ....but how many of us actually think departed saints and angels are in our congregation worshipping with us?
> ...



I am not a nominalist. I think words mean what words mean. I think words do refer to realities.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

MW said:


> bookslover said:
> 
> 
> > ReformedReidian said:
> ...



So the "witnesses" are not the saints but the lives about the saints? Are we supposed to imitate the elders or the elders' lives?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 24, 2015)

Moved discussion to a new thread. It's a good discussion but I just don't want it happening in that other thread.

Jacob: The "I'm not a nominalist" argument can be used for any number of things. Communion comes to mind with the RCC insistence that "words have meanings".

I think it's hard to make a hard and fast argument that there are Saints watching us from that verse.

I'm reminded of the scene from the Dead Poet's Society where they are looking at pictures of young men long since dead telling them to "Sieze the Day".

I'm just saying that Paul could have been using that sort of motivation.

The term for witnesses here is μάρτυς and it seems more likely that he's connecting the witness of their faith - one who has born witness of his faith - than using it as an idea that we're being watched by them right now. The context is one where he's demonstrating all these examples of faith and the following verse is all about how we should be like they were - believing. It seems that if Paul is giving us a theology of the importance of pressing on because we're under the gaze of dead saints and angels that the import of that would somehow be drawn out a little bit more. In context it seems like that idea is distracting from what Paul is getting at: press on in faith even as these heroes of the faith did.


----------



## earl40 (Aug 24, 2015)

If we are not to communicate with the dead,which we are not permitted to do in any way shape or form, then what would stop any of us to act differently infront of them if we believe they are watching us? Knowing how we are I believe it to be impossible to act any other way _if one believes_ dead men are watching.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 24, 2015)

It is in the end of ch.12 the author makes transition to the heavenly worship frame. The heavenlies do not "move" (unshakable as they are) nor do they attend to us, but we attend there ("ye have _come..._"). It is a spiritual attendance, which we must see by faith, not by sight. We do not observe it with the eye, and have no declaratory word that those who are locally there (as opposed to here below) observe us in the pew next to them, as it were.

We cannot legitimately make a rhetorical reversal, and reimpose upon a previous phrase (cloud of witnesses) the later context (general assembly/church of firstborn, and myriads of angels). We carry the previous expression, rightly understood _forward_. In our lives, our confession, and in our worship, we are adding our witness to the great cloud. We do get a foretaste of heaven, the limits are tested; but it is to increase our longing for shedding the present constraints until we are actually united in unmediated fellowship with Christ.

The angels (who are not counted in the witness v1) ascending and descending (Gen.28:12; Jn.1:51), will at times be present (locally) with one congregation or another, above or below; hence Paul in 1Cor.11:10, "...because of the angels." Men's souls are not sent down to earth on angelic missions, or to do the work of the church militant. There is no indication they see us even if we do not see them; not even one-way communication is indicated or encouraged in the Bible.


----------



## VictorBravo (Aug 24, 2015)

Following what Bruce said, the whole thrust of the Epistle is toward those who would be tempted, through persecution and hardship, to abandon the truth delivered to them. Chapter 11 outlines examples of all sorts of sinners who are commended for acts of faith. In the middle of this we are reminded that “without faith it is impossible to please him.” (11:6).

So his exhortation at the beginning of Chapter 12 is a direction for living life, not merely worship. 

The “witnesses” just described are all dead. But their examples are there as a heritage and an encouragement. And what is the purpose of these examples? To cause us to run the race with patience, “Looking unto Jesus.” (12:2).

So it’s not a description of our worship service, but rather a reminder that everything we do in life is part of the race, and we ought to be looking to Jesus at every point. The stadium we run in has a figurative crowd (the word nephos, “cloud” is often descriptive of the huge crowds at a sporting event) whose examples ought to cheer us on.

In a very small way, it is like what happens to me from time to time. My dad died years ago. Sometimes when I’m facing a difficulty and am tempted to shirk, I think, “how would Dad have handled this?” It spurs me on, even though my dad had lots of flaws. How much more, then should the example of persecuted saints spur us on in times of trouble?

And then, in Chapter 12, the strongest witness of all is presented: Jesus, who endured the angry taunts and oppositions of sinners, who “despised the shame,” looking down upon it with contempt in contrast to the “joy set before him.” He is the example of all examples, having endured such things.

So whatever troubles we face in our “race” are relatively small in comparison, and in that we can be encouraged to press on.

As Bruce noted, it is later in chapter 12 that worship is discussed. The whole sequence is a progressive exhortation to hold fast because the kingdom that we receive cannot be shaken.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

Contra_Mundum said:


> It is in the end of ch.12 the author makes transition to the heavenly worship frame. The heavenlies do not "move" (unshakable as they are) nor do they attend to us, but we attend there ("ye have _come..._"). It is a spiritual attendance, which we must see by faith, not by sight. We do not observe it with the eye, and have no declaratory word that those who are locally there (as opposed to here below) observe us in the pew next to them, as it were.
> 
> We cannot legitimately make a rhetorical reversal, and reimpose upon a previous phrase (cloud of witnesses) the later context (general assembly/church of firstborn, and myriads of angels). We carry the previous expression, rightly understood _forward_. In our lives, our confession, and in our worship, we are adding our witness to the great cloud. We do get a foretaste of heaven, the limits are tested; but it is to increase our longing for shedding the present constraints until we are actually united in unmediated fellowship with Christ.
> 
> The angels (who are not counted in the witness v1) ascending and descending (Gen.28:12; Jn.1:51), will at times be present (locally) with one congregation or another, above or below; hence Paul in 1Cor.11:10, "...because of the angels." Men's souls are not sent down to earth on angelic missions, or to do the work of the church militant. There is no indication they see us even if we do not see them; not even one-way communication is indicated or encouraged in the Bible.



I agree with all of that, so I ask my question again: do we really believe we are surrounded by angels and departed saints or not? Saying "We go to the heavenly Jerusalem" doesn't change the point. Further, what does the word "spiritual" even mean? Of course it is spiritual. Angels by definition are immaterial beings. They do not have material extension.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

> Jacob: The "I'm not a nominalist" argument can be used for any number of things. Communion comes to mind with the RCC insistence that "words have meanings".
> 
> I think it's hard to make a hard and fast argument that there are Saints watching us from that verse



But if the saints are in the heavenly Jerusalem and we _go_ to the heavenly Jerusalem, then it's hard to see how they aren't watching us.

As to the words have meaning: I can argue that Rome is cheating because they mean "become" instead of is/being (which is a big conceptually fallacy). And yes, if the text says (directly or indirectly) that we are with angels and saints, then I take that to be the meaning.

And I would also stand with the Book of Common Prayer and other liturgies that say "And with angels and archangels..."


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 24, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> But if the saints are in the heavenly Jerusalem and we go to the heavenly Jerusalem, then it's hard to see how they aren't watching us



Are _*you*_ able to see _*them*_, with eyes of head, or only of heart? Do you think them capable of perceiving each (of us) one's individual, mystical presence, while we cannot likewise? And is their (each one's) attention in that worship setting directed anywhere else than to Jesus? I can be subliminally aware of the crowd I'm engaged with, and have some appreciation for it, while having my focus on the center of attention.

There's no reason to think (certainly not from the text) the saints in glory have "eyes" on us.

The angels, we are told in Scripture, are looking at us (even if we don't see them), they come literally near us, they hover about us. But we shouldn't assume that our incorporeal part (soul/spirit) is "angelic" or possessed of similar attributes and permissions, especially shorn of its body. We know too little about the heavenly state.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

Contra_Mundum said:


> ReformedReidian said:
> 
> 
> > But if the saints are in the heavenly Jerusalem and we go to the heavenly Jerusalem, then it's hard to see how they aren't watching us
> ...



As a general rule, we don't physically see immaterial intelligences. I do think they can manifest themselves, but this is by manipulating our senses rather than assuming corporeal hypostases. CS Lewis does a good job on this in _Perelandra_



> But we shouldn't assume that our incorporeal part (soul/spirit) is "angelic" or possessed of similar attributes and permissions, especially shorn of its body. We know too little about the heavenly state.



I don't remember arguing this.


----------



## MW (Aug 24, 2015)

All this speculation is made on the mere assumption that a word must be taken in its most wooden fashion. No evidence has been provided from the context for taking it in such a way. The context expressly indicates the opposite, namely, that it is the elders' testimony to faith which witnesses to us.

Created immaterial intelligences are bound within a particular time and space. Human lives which have "departed" this world become bound to another sphere of existence. Scripture expressly declares they cease to have personal influence on the affairs of this life. They return to God to be judged for the life they have lived in this world. Their influence only remains in the moral sphere, in the exercise of "memory." Prov 10:7, "The memory of the just is blessed: but the name of the wicked shall rot."


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 24, 2015)

> Created immaterial intelligences are bound within a particular time and space



Not if they primarily exist within eternity. Unless we are saying they exist within another, albeit created, dimension of time. I'm not committed to that interpretation of string theory, but I am not ruling it out. It's not my argument, though.



> The context expressly indicates the opposite, namely, that it is the elders' testimony to faith which witnesses to us



Are we surrounded by testimonies or the spirits of just men made perfect, or both? I say both.


----------



## MW (Aug 24, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> Not if they primarily exist within eternity.



Attributing to them the divine perfection of eternity is probably the only way to justify the adoration of them as omnipresent beings, but Scripture expressly forbids it when it tells us to flee from idolatry. There is only one God.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 25, 2015)

MW said:


> ReformedReidian said:
> 
> 
> > Not if they primarily exist within eternity.
> ...



I said they exist within the realm of eternity (or God's dimension of reality), not that they have the attribute of eternity.

Unless you want to say they exist within our three dimensional space-time world, which is not how the church has understood angels.


----------



## MW (Aug 25, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> I said they exist within the realm of eternity (or God's dimension of reality), not that they have the attribute of eternity.



If they exist with "God's dimension of reality" they have become divine. That which God communicates to His creatures is commensurate with their creaturely limitations. He never promises to make them "gods." He only blesses them as creatures subject to His dominion.



ReformedReidian said:


> Unless you want to say they exist within our three dimensional space-time world, which is not how the church has understood angels.



Yes, they exist within a three-dimensional reality, but not in this world; they now live and move and have their being in a place that is removed from this world. To use the language of David, "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." And David himself in the Psalms laments being removed from this world where he will no longer be of service to his fellow men in the cause of God.


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell (Aug 26, 2015)

It is said of Abel in the passage under examination, "he being dead yet speaketh". This is not a conscious witness that Abel himself continues to speak--it is his faithful actions, and that unto martyrdom, recorded infallibly in Scripture, that continue to speak, continue to bear witness. It is in this sense that the writer begins in chapter 12, with being compassed about with these witnesses--those who are dead, yet continue to speak in what they have done. In their present capacity they can be no witnesses at all--it is in the sense in which they lived and died that they witness.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

> Yes, they exist within a three-dimensional reality, but not in this world; they now live and move and have their being in a place that is removed from this world.



Then they don't exist in our three-dimensional reality. Otherwise I agree with your statement.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

Rev. Todd Ruddell said:


> It is said of Abel in the passage under examination, "he being dead yet speaketh". This is not a conscious witness that Abel himself continues to speak--it is his faithful actions, and that unto martyrdom, recorded infallibly in Scripture, that continue to speak, continue to bear witness. It is in this sense that the writer begins in chapter 12, with being compassed about with these witnesses--those who are dead, yet continue to speak in what they have done. In their present capacity they can be no witnesses at all--it is in the sense in which they lived and died that they witness.



I never said departed saints "speak to us." I simply said they are there.


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell (Aug 26, 2015)

Understood Mr. Reformed Redian. I am merely pointing out that the Apostle does not require the word "witnesses" in chapter 12 to be the people themselves, but their surviving testimony. If Abel speaks being dead, it is his testimony that speaks. Therefore the witnesses that surround us are those very testimonies.


----------



## timfost (Aug 26, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> > Yes, they exist within a three-dimensional reality, but not in this world; they now live and move and have their being in a place that is removed from this world.
> 
> 
> 
> Then they don't exist in our three-dimensional reality. Otherwise I agree with your statement.



It seems nonsensical to argue what "reality" the angels experience. I've never seen an angel, not do the scriptures tell me what those in heaven look like or how they experience the world/realm of their existence. Those who have looked into heaven in scripture and lived to tell about it didn't have adequate words to express it.

In terms of the OP, I don't believe we can make an argument that the souls of the saints are there physically. This seems to be outside of the flow of the passage as has been clearly shown.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

timfost said:


> ReformedReidian said:
> 
> 
> > > Yes, they exist within a three-dimensional reality, but not in this world; they now live and move and have their being in a place that is removed from this world.
> ...



What lapse of logic did I make? Where was my syntax ambiguous?



> I've never seen an angel, not do the scriptures tell me what those in heaven look like or how they experience the world/realm of their existence.



The text says we are surrounded by the spirits of just men made perfect (I know that isn't the same as angels, but it provided a segue).



> Those who have looked into heaven in scripture and lived to tell about it didn't have adequate words to express it.



My argument doesn't hinge on what they look like.



> In terms of the OP, I don't believe we can make an argument that the souls of the saints are there physically.



Of course they aren't there physically. That's the whole point of being a soul and not a body.



> This seems to be outside of the flow of the passage as has been clearly shown.



I disagree.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

Rev. Todd Ruddell said:


> Understood Mr. Reformed Redian. I am merely pointing out that the Apostle does not require the word "witnesses" in chapter 12 to be the people themselves, but their surviving testimony. If Abel speaks being dead, it is his testimony that speaks. Therefore the witnesses that surround us are those very testimonies.



My only concern is that the end of the chapter mentions "spirits of just men made perfect," which is not the same thing as being surrounded by testimonies.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 26, 2015)

Jacob - have you actually studied the word that is translated "witness" in this verse? I ask because I see a lot of assumptions being made about the word. If the verse was translated: "Since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of martyrs..." I think that there would be far fewer people assuming that these are spoken of as "witnesses" because they are "seeing" what we're doing. I don't see any reason, in the context, to see how that meaning ought to be taken in this context.


----------



## timfost (Aug 26, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> What lapse of logic did I make? Where was my syntax ambiguous?



I was only commenting on saying that it is or isn't a 3D reality. The comment was not in favor of either position. The number of presuppositions necessary to make such claims is simply speculative. When Balaam did not see the angel, his senses were either darkened or perception of the angel was outside of His ability to perceive due to the limitation of His senses. We don't know and there seems to be no good reason to speculate.



> The text says we are surrounded by the spirits of just men made perfect (I know that isn't the same as angels, but it provided a segue).



Yes, but the others have demonstrated the context of this passage does not necessarily justify a literal presence besides their testimony. Perhaps there is, but to speculate based on this context seems eisegetical. Would I be justified to argue that Paul broke the eighth commandment since he robbed churches (2 Cor. 11:18)?

Perhaps you see something that the rest of us don't?


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

> Yes, but the others have demonstrated the context of this passage does not necessarily justify a literal presence besides their testimony.


Let's flesh that out. A "testimony" includes but is not limited to a set of propositions. So which does it make more sense to say,

P1: We are surrounded by the spirits of just men made perfect

OR

P2: We are surrounded by sets of propositions


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Jacob - have you actually studied the word that is translated "witness" in this verse? I ask because I see a lot of assumptions being made about the word. If the verse was translated: "Since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of martyrs..." I think that there would be far fewer people assuming that these are spoken of as "witnesses" because they are "seeing" what we're doing. I don't see any reason, in the context, to see how that meaning ought to be taken in this context.



My argument doesn't hinge on "witnesses." I've also included "spirits of just men made perfect." I grant--but do not endorse--that your reading is logically plausible. I am simply adding another premise--a premise found in the text.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 26, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> Semper Fidelis said:
> 
> 
> > Jacob - have you actually studied the word that is translated "witness" in this verse? I ask because I see a lot of assumptions being made about the word. If the verse was translated: "Since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of martyrs..." I think that there would be far fewer people assuming that these are spoken of as "witnesses" because they are "seeing" what we're doing. I don't see any reason, in the context, to see how that meaning ought to be taken in this context.
> ...



Jacob,

I've re-read what you wrote. Can you point me to where you've made an exegetical "argument" for your case. You've mostly responded to others and have spoken vaguely but I don't see a necessary exegetical case that points to what you're getting at. I actually am having a hard time understanding what it is you're arguing for.

The author's point in the latter part of Hebrews (as it was earlier)is to get believers to understand that the things that they can still "touch and feel and see" with their physical senses are of inferior quality because the entire OT worship has been supplanted by that which is much greater. In contrast to the earthly temple, they have access to the heavenly tabernacle (of which the earthly is simply a type) through the veil of Christ's flesh. Theologically, when we say that we are spiritually lifted to such things it is speaking of the Spirits work in uniting us to Christ and the ministry of heavenly worship. We can argue all we want about nominalism but work needs to be done to show how the author is speaking and the points he is making. Even the idea that we enter into the heavenly sanctuary through the veil of Christ's flesh is not intended to communicate that Christ's flesh is some kind of veil but there is a spiritual reality that we're participating in through our vital union with Him.

I guess what I'm driving at is that if you want to argue that we Christians don't really believe something about Heb 11:2 (which is how this thread started) then demonstrate the necessary consequences of the text (or some theological point made elsewhere) to establish the point. I actually find the whole issue of whether the saints in heaven "see us" to be a sideshow to the author's point in general.


----------



## RamistThomist (Aug 26, 2015)

I haven't had a chance to do an exegetical argument yet. I had to clear some misunderstandings. And a lot of my argument is simply restating what the ancient church believed about immaterial realities, forms, etc.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 26, 2015)

Jacob,

The ancient Church was also fond of some dubious interpretational methods. If something can't be argued from the text and simply depends upon early Church views then that seems to put the cart before the horse. At the very least, if one is going to appeal to those early beliefs it is not enough to state them as premises but to establish the legitimacy of those premises exegetically as well.


----------



## Rev. Todd Ruddell (Aug 27, 2015)

ReformedReidian said:


> Rev. Todd Ruddell said:
> 
> 
> > Understood Mr. Reformed Redian. I am merely pointing out that the Apostle does not require the word "witnesses" in chapter 12 to be the people themselves, but their surviving testimony. If Abel speaks being dead, it is his testimony that speaks. Therefore the witnesses that surround us are those very testimonies.
> ...



Thank you for that clarification. However, you have not shown the connection between "the spirits of just men made perfect" and the testimony or witnesses mentioned in 12.1. It is not said of "the spirits of just men made perfect" that they are the witnesses of chapter 12.1, only that there is some kind of union and communion that exists between present day believers and those who have gone before us into glory. In that same sense we have also come to the innumerable company of angels, etc. Further, in that this section you have called upon for support for your position comes substantially after the statement of 12.1, and the testimony of the faithful immediately before, it would be difficult to prefer the later passage as the referent of the "witnesses", especially seeing that nothing is said about those later in chapter 12 being witnesses.


----------

