:1309-10; Taylor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation

The term hades occurs 11 times in the NT (Matt. 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27,

Thus the English word "hell" derives from three Greek words, gehenna, hades, and tartarus. To understand the term Hades, one should un­derstand the other two terms.

See hell, intermediate state, gehenna.
For Further Reading: GMS, 662-65; Wiley, CT,
3:224-42, 363-75. norman N. bonner

HAGIOGRAPHA. This Greek word, meaning "sacred writings," refers to the third division of the Hebrew OT known as kethubhim. It is com­prised of a miscellaneous collection of books which were separately canonized, unlike the other two divisions, namely, the Law and the Prophets. These two sections achieved canon­ization corporately. In the Hebrew text of the OT, the hagiographa are grouped together as follows: (1) poetical books—Psalms, Proverbs, Job; (2) the five scrolls—Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamen­tations, Ecclesiastes, Esther; (3) history—Ezra, Nehemiah, 1 and 2 Chronicles; (4) a book of prophecy—Daniel. A different order is found in the English text because it follows the Greek text of the OT (LXX).

The tripartite division of the OT (cf. Luke 24:44) had been established by the middle of the second century b.C., as suggested by the prologue of Ecclesiasticus (written about 130 b.C.), which reads, "the law, the prophets, and the other books of our fathers." Josephus, writing about the end of the first century a.d., acknowledges this division of the books (Contra Apionem, 1, 38-41).

These writings contain some very old material, as in the case of Psalms and Proverbs in particu­lar. They are valuable because they give some in­sight into the process of canonization of the entire OT, even though settled conclusions can hardly be expected in this area of study.

See bible, apocrypha, pseudepigrapha.

For Further Reading: Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, 61-65; "Hagiographa," The Jewish Encyclope­dia; "Canon of Scripture," Sacramentum Mundi.

Willard H. Taylor

HALFWAY COVENANT. Historically, the Halfway Covenant refers to that compromise effort in Pu­ritan New England to incorporate unregenerate children of believers into the life of the church. The problem which evoked the covenant is as old as the Church (see Jesus' parable on the tares). The first generation of believers in New England were a "sifted" people, having demon­strated the vigor of their Christian faith in their emigration to America. There they formed "gath­ered" churches whose regenerate members con­trolled the life of church and community.

With the passing of the first generation and the decline of the initial spiritual fervor, the commu­nities became embroiled in disputes over church membership and the baptism of children. Second-generation children had been baptized as infants but did not possess awareness of sav­ing grace. These persons were not permitted to be full communicant members of the church, and they could not present their children for baptism.

In 1662 the Massachusetts Synod declared that baptism constituted church membership and granted the privilege to its recipients to have their own children brought within the "external covenant" through baptism. Full communicant membership was reserved for those attesting to regeneration. This Halfway Covenant was an ac­commodation to the changing perceptions of so­ciety. The consequence of this covenant was the gradual weakening of the church's spirituality. Later, Solomon Stoddard proposed that the Lord's Supper was a "converting ordinance" open to professing, if unconverted, Christians.

The larger issues of the covenant are amplified by Ernest Troeltsch's distinction between "sect" type and "church" type. A "sect," said Troeltsch, is by definition exclusive, insisting on clear evi­dence of conversion, while a "church" is inclu­sive, stressing a broad basis for membership. The "sect" emphasizes an identifiable crisis of regen­eration, while the "church" focuses more on a process abetted by instruction and nurture. Al­though arbitrary distinctions, they point up re­current tendencies in Protestantism. In the final analysis, attention must be given to the doctrine of the Church (ecclesiology). Evangelicals insist that the Church is the company of the faithful, i.e., those who possess saving faith. See church, denomination. For Further Reading: Sweet, The Story of Religion in America; Walker, History of the Congregationalists; Ahl-strom, A Religious History of the American People.

Before and after Christ, theologians and philo­sophers have reflected on the meaning of hap­piness. Aristotle (384-22 b.c.) spoke of a state of settled happiness or well-being, eudaemonia. The happiness of man, according to Aristotle, is to achieve the goal of that activity which is the function of man as such, "activity of soul accord­ing to virtue, and if there are several virtues, ac­cording to the best and most complete. And in a complete life." Thomas Aquinas (1225-74), the most important theologian of the Middle Ages, spoke of beatitudo, which involves a state of well-being brought about by the perfection of an indi­vidual's potentiality. John Wesley often used the word happiness as a synonym for true bless­edness which is not a temporary, superficial pleasantness, but a settled, unshakable aware­ness of God's presence and favor.

Although external well-being is not entirely excluded, Christian happiness or blessedness consists in the confidence of reconciliation with God through Christ our Lord, by grace through faith (Rom. 4:6-9). It issues from the funda­mental reality of God's redeeming love expressed in Christ, and consequently is a happiness from which nothing can separate us (8:35-39).

Therefore, for the Christian the word hap­piness refers to a much deeper and more constant reality than do such words as pleasant, enjoying oneself, or pleased. These refer primarily to moods that are highly contingent and to influences over which one may not have control.

Happiness is not the primary goal or end of the Christian's life, but the result or fruit of hav­ing first sought the kingdom of God and His righteousness. He is not happy who hungers and thirsts for happiness, but he who hungers and thirsts for righteousness and justice. He who fol­lows Christ in the way of the Cross will not al­ways make choices that, from the world's point of view, promote happiness; but, if he or she is striving to accomplish God's will, then happiness or blessedness may be expected now and in the world to come. The expectation and hope of eter­nal life is, in fact, a prominent source of hap­piness in the Scriptures. Even Jesus himself "for the joy set before Him endured the cross" (Heb. 12:2, nasb).

See peace, values, joy. holiness.

The fact that the Scriptures sometimes ascribe hardness of heart to God becomes an acute theo­logical problem (Exod. 7:13; John 12:40; Rom. 9:18), in view of the counterbalancing fact that the Scriptures also hold man accountable for his hardheartedness and everywhere warn him against it (Deut. 15:7; Ps. 95:8; Prov. 29:1; Mark 3:5; Rom. 2:5, et al.). Paul cites Pharaoh as the prime example of God's hardening; but a careful study shows that in this case we also find point­ers to the resolution of the paradox. For the Scriptures equally describe Pharaoh's hardness as self-chosen (Exod. 8:15; 9:7). God does not create evil character, but He respects the di­rection of one's choices, and intensifies the sharpness of the issues by engineering the cir­cumstances which compel open decision and commitment. He thus may be said to be indi­rectly effecting the hardening, in order that the moral lines be drawn tight, and God's moral ob­jectives be clear. God may therefore accelerate the hardness of sinners by surrounding them with inescapable demands for decision and ac­tion, thus bringing into bold relief the hardness which hitherto may have lain dormant.

Self-hardening against truth is fatal (Prov. 29:1; Rom. 2:5). It is a special peril of sinners be­ing awakened by the Holy Spirit. This is exemp­lified by the Jews in Ephesus. When exposed to the gospel, it is impossible to remain neutral; there will be either yielding or resistance. The statement "But when some were becoming hard­ened and disobedient" (Acts 19:9, nasb) implies an inward, cumulative process of choosing. In­ward resistance became hardness, hardness is­sued in disobedience and open, increasingly confirmed opposition. There comes a moment of "no return" in the process, when the soul is set in the concrete of its own mixing, and future change is unlikely if not impossible.

But the reversion to hardness is equally a peril

The presence of the Greek article tes, "the" sin, could be a reference to the carnal mind yet re­maining in these Hebrew believers (cf. 12:1). The entire Epistle bears witness to the tendency of unsanctified believers to drift into spiritual hard­ness. This tendency is even more graphically seen in the disciples before Pentecost. The over­whelming impact of the miraculous feeding of the 5,000 was soon dissipated, "for their heart was hardened" (Mark 6:52), so that they were as astonished at Christ walking on the water as if they had never seen a miracle before. A mark of this endemic proneness to hardness is spiritual dullness—"for they understood not" ("had not gained any insight," NASB). Another mark is a short memory (Mark 8:17-21). When there is hardness, truth does not penetrate, and the same lessons must be "learned" repeatedly.

Hardness of heart toward truth always be­comes hardness of heart toward people. This too the disciples manifested toward each other be­fore being cleansed by the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Later one of them could write: "But who­ever has the world's goods, and beholds his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?" (1 John 3:17, NASB).

The most devastating havoc of hardhearted-ness is in the home. It was because of their hard­ness of heart, Jesus said, that Moses permitted a certificate of divorce (Matt. 19:8). Nothing could expose more openly and glaringly the callous cruelty of hardheartedness than such a conces­sion. The implication is that their hearts were so stony and unfeeling that a legal divorce was a lesser evil than the cruelty or even death which the wife might otherwise be forced to suffer. Herein do we see the absolute depths of human depravity and selfishness. The feelings of tender­ness and care which properly belong to true manliness and humanity are destroyed.

The havoc of sin in hardening the hearts of people makes Ezek. 36:26 the very kernel of the gospel: "Moreover I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will re­move the heart of stone."

See SIN, ORIGINAL SIN, CARNAL MIND.

The Krishna Consciousness movement is a di­vision of Vishnuite Hinduism, which occurred when Caitanya, a 16th-century devotee, pro­claimed that Krishna, a ruler of 3000 B.C., for­merly thought to be a manifestation of Vishnu, was the uncreated supreme transcendental per­sonality of Godhead and that the great gods Brahma, Shiva, and Vishnu were manifestations of Krishna. In contrast with Vedantic Hinduism and Buddhism, where salvation is escape to nothingness, Caitanya taught that salvation is the ecstatic union of each soul, which is always feminine, in loving embrace with Krishna, the heavenly spouse. Krishna, as the transcendental lover, is pictured as having lived in playful sexual union with not only his wives, but all women, married or unmarried, including the 108 Gopis or milkmaids. Ecstasy, expressed by crying, sing­ing, and dancing, is induced by chanting, "Hare Krishna." All activity occurs in strict regimen­tation toward Krishna consciousness. As in other religions where religious ecstasy is induced through sexual symbols, love for one's spouse rivals love for Krishna. Thus, sexual union is lim­ited to once a month within strict Krishna con­sciousness.

See CULTS, OCCULT (OCCULTISM), NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS.

For Further Reading: Boa, Cults, World Religions, and
You, 178-87; Ellwood, Religious and Spiritual Groups in
America, 239-45; Means, The Mystical Maze, 146-58;
Zaehner, Hinduism, 144-46. DAVID L. CUBIE

HATE, HATRED. To hate is to have a strong aver­sion, springing up from a sense of fear, anger, or duty, attended by ill will.



2
HEAD, HEADSHIP—HEAL, HEALING

48

Hatred is used of God hating evil (Prov. 6:16), and of the wicked hating the light (John 3:20). When directed toward persons, hatred is a fruit of the flesh (Gal. 5:20).

God is declared to hate all sinful thoughts and deeds—a holy feeling known also by all righ­teous persons. The Hebrews used love to express strong affection, and hate (mised) to express a lesser affection (cf. Rom. 9:13). Jesus said, "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, . . . yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26). Thus, a follower of Christ is to hate his own life, or be willing to lay it down for Jesus' sake. He is to hate father and mother not in the sense of ill will (which is for­bidden), but in the sense of depriving them of first place.

Jesus promised that the world would hate the believer because it hated Him and because be­lievers are separated from the world (John 15:18-20). Hate, especially that of one's brother, is an attribute of darkness (1 John 2:9-11). "He that [hateth] his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen" (4:20,

In the NT the overcoming of hatred is brought about by God's love, revealed in Jesus Christ. The infinite love of God exhibited in Jesus Christ con­quers the emotion of hatred. Hatred is the basis for evil deeds and all wickedness, and is the mark of the world. God's love for the world is displayed by the Church in its evangelistic pas­sion and social responsibility.

Christian ethics is the exact opposite of hea­then ethics. Christians are to love their enemies, that is, to do good to them that persecute them and use them despitefully (Matt. 5:43-45). Love is the permeating principle of Christian ethics.

See love, anger, malice, seven deadly sins.

Christ is the Head of creation, for He is called the Head of all principality and power (Col. 2:10). To Him every knee shall bow (Phil. 2:10), and eventually all things shall be brought to­gether in Him (Eph. 1:10).

He is the Head of the Church. In 1 Cor. 12:12-27 and Eph. 4:15-16 the symbol of head and body shows the interdependence of mem­bers of the Body (Church) and the dependence of all upon the Head (Christ).

The word "head" also applies in the social or­der. Christ is the Head of the man, and the man is the head of the wife. This order is based on the order of creation (1 Cor. 11:3, 8). However, the headship of the man is not to be a despotic, harsh, or unnatural rule. Eph. 5:22-33 expands the subject by likening the relationship of hus­band and wife to that of Christ and the Church, and Christ's love is the pattern for the husband's love.

The word "head" is used in a theological sense to denote the relationship of Adam to the human race. Although the word is not so used in Scrip­ture, Rom. 5:19 and 1 Cor. 15:22 assert the fact that through Adam sin and death came upon all men. No attempt is made to explain the method, but the emphasis is that Christ has made full provision to undo all which man inherits from Adam. Many attempts have been made to ex­plain the fact of the racial inheritance of sin and death. For this purpose, terms such as federal head or federal headship have been used. Wiley discusses various theories advanced regarding this subject.

See chain of command, marriage, body life, church government.

The fact that medical science was not highly developed in biblical times would make divine healing particularly significant. At any rate, Jesus exercised His power in this way rather freely. Kelsey states that 41 instances of physical and mental healing are recorded in the Gospels. The miracles Jesus performed were motivated by compassion and were often spontaneous in na­ture. But they were not without "sign" value—

249

i.e., they were confirmation of His deity—a fac­tor which John's Gospel emphasizes. He often performed His miracles by the spoken word, but He also on occasion used supplementary means such as laying His hands on the sufferer, making clay to anoint a blind man's eyes, etc. Some cures were accomplished when He was not even present (e.g., the nobleman's son). Furthermore, the healing was frequently conditioned on the faith of the recipient (Matt. 9:29; Mark 10:52; Luke 17:19), though not always.

Jesus' ministry was to the whole man, and rarely did He heal the body without dealing with the sins of the individual. Indeed in some cases the latter came first (Matt. 9:2-7). This does not imply that sickness is necessarily the result of sin or that sickness is a form of divine punishment. It could be one of God's ways to develop such virtues as patience and courage (cf. 2 Cor. 12:9).

Jesus' instructions to the Twelve and to the Seventy when they were sent out included heal­ing, and, according to Acts, miracles of healing were a part of the experience of the Early Church. It was subsequently practiced among the early fathers (Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Ori­gen) but only rarely thereafter until more recent times. Paul lists healing among the gifts of the Spirit and practiced it himself on behalf of oth­ers. Some have noted that Luke travelled with him on much of his journeys, presumably to help relieve his own physical problems (perhaps his "thorn in the flesh," from which Paul three times asked God for deliverance, 2 Cor. 12:8-9).

This "gift of healing" has been exploited by some so-called faith healers in recent years to the disillusionment of many. Their claim is that "healing is in the Atonement," basing this on Isa. 53:5 ("with his stripes we are healed") and 1 Pet. 2:24, and that physical sickness is an oppression of Satan. The claim is a tenuous one at best and on the basis of the best exegesis untenable. The unfortunate use of psychological gimmickry to accomplish "miracles" has clouded the genuine manifestation of God's healing power. There is ample evidence that miracles of healing do take place today and that in response to faith there can be divine intervention.

See faith healing, miracle, gifts of the spirit.

Directory: sites -> default -> files -> publications
publications -> Table of Content forward introduction
publications -> Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies Georgia Institute of Technology
publications -> Housing Counseling Research in Chicago
publications -> Communicating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Audiences
publications -> New Brunswick Info Sheet on First Nations Child Welfare
publications -> Paap’s Electronic Newsletter 14 November 2008 Volume 11 Number 22 towards ‘smart’ subsidies in agriculture: lessons from recent experience in malawi
publications -> Information support of pedagogical process for the children experiencing difficulties with acquisition of preschool educational programs
publications -> Asus’ ZenFone ar has Google’s augmentted and virtual reality baked in — but not combined
publications -> School Readiness and Early Grade Success Consultation Memo Atlanta, ga

Download 6.66 Mb.

Share with your friends: