requires the interpreter to understand Jewish homiletical style. The use of expository devices, the repetitive nature, and the appeal to comparisons are qualities that place this book in different genera of literature.  Remembering the nature and intention of the book, would explain this variant as well as the extended exposition and unusual use of Psalms 95.  (Gleason, 284, 2000)

The second change is ejkeivvh in LXX to tauth.  Attridge says the change is a scribal correction of the LXX, however, most biblical scholars agree that the reason for this change is to take this Psalms and apply it to his current generation with a sense of urgency.   By changing “that” to “this” the author can subtly preview the application he is intending to make.  He can immediately place in the mind of the hearer the parallels between the rebellion and their rebellion.  This minor editing change allows the author to emphasize his point, without changing the meaning of the original text in order to make contemporary application to the seriousness of the warning.  (Gleason, 283-284, 2000)

The third and most difficult variant is the presence and the position of dio in all manuscripts.  The word dio is not present in the LXX or the MT.  The author, placing dio after tesserakonta eth signifies he is beginning a new clause.  Therefore, while the forty years in the LXX refers to the anger of God, the forty years in the epistle refers to the Israelites testing God (Yeo, 5, 1991.  The purpose for the author using dio holds purpose and is intentional.  The Israelites had tested and seen God work for forty years in 3:9, whereas in 3:17 the author states that God was angry for forty years. Therefore, the amount of disobedience is equal to the wrath of God.  The author uses the experience under Moses to warn his hearers.  Although the author of Hebrews does not mention it, he may have seen special significance in the forty years.  There is evidence of a belief that God’s dealings with Israel (which began with a probationary period of forty years) would be rounded off at the end time by a probationary period of like duration.  If this epistle was written shortly after A.D. 70 it was nearly forty years since Jesus had accomplished his “exodus” at Jerusalem.  Believing that the end was near would provide even more urgency in the message to take heed so long as it is called “Today”. (Bruce, 99, 1990)

            A final characteristic used by the author is the use of typology.  He gives evidence of an actuality in the past, to explain the reality of the present.  He explains the spiritual conditions of the Israelites, the lack of trust, and the short sightedness of the Israelites to demonstrate an actuality of the present (Gleason, 285, 2000).  This typology is a great tool in the hands of the author to make a strong point, one in which the hearers can easily relate. The use of typology throughout this text, along with the authors homiletic style and Jewish hermeneutic is crucial to understand the periocope of rest in Hebrews. (Gleason, 284-303, 2000)

Use of Typology

Because of the authors intended parallels between the Israelites in the wilderness and the readers, the understanding of this intention provides an interpretive key to rest in Hebrews 3-4.  Some have supported the understanding that this is a warning to prevent believers from losing their salvation.  Goppelt explains that “Israel’s downfall in the rebellion, by which they forfeited salvation,” is used to “warn the church about possible loss of salvation”(Goppelt, 172-173, 1982).  On the other hand, others have propagated the belief that those in the wilderness never had been redeemed and “were never saved in the first place” (Grudem, 160-161, 1995). 

While these analytical arguments seek to define the point of justification, the author’s agenda is not to define this point, but rather to warn about disbelief.  While the Israelites started in the faith they did not remain firm, and thus consequently fell into unbelief and never entered rest.  His intention is to explain that rejection of Moses has consequences, but the rejection of Jesus has greater consequences (Bruce, 1990, 90).  In Psalms 95 David cited the unbelief and judgment of the wilderness to warn the people of his day.  Then the author of Hebrews uses the same Psalm to issue the same warning to the Jewish decedents of his day.

The Use of Psalms 95

Psalms 95, falls into two parts: the first (1-7) consists of a call to worship God, while the second (7-11), the part which the author quotes, is a call to flee disobedience.  This underlines the author’s intention.  His intention is not to explain the ins and outs of the wilderness generation, but rather call this congregation to real Christian living, to sanctification, and to enter the promised rest of God. (Bruce, 1990, 97)

The quotation begins with the adverb shvmeron.  The author uses this word in a rhetorical style that has a unique meaning.  He uses it to convey the meaning that even in David’s time there was a yearning to enter God’s rest.  The offer that “today” they could still enter God’s rest, hundreds of years after the wilderness generation, demonstrates that this rest was still available and had yet to be realized by many in David’s time (Attridge, 280, 1989).  This wilderness generation had failed to receive the promised land of God and they died in the wilderness.  The Psalm explains that the reason why they did not enter was because of their disobedience.  David explains that not only was the land not achieved, but rest for them was never realized.  The key to this Psalm is that the offer of rest still stands in David’s time.  If the offer of rest still stands, the implication is that the rest is not associated with entering into the Promised Land, but something much bigger (Hagner, 1983, 105).  David uses the example of the Israelites to warn his contemporaries to hear his voice and enter rest, and now the author of Hebrews uses the same warning for his contemporaries.  The author emphasizes that rest still has not been achieved.  He issues the same warning to open the eyes of the hearers to the reality that God’s rest still exists. (Carson, Moo, Moris, 1992, 402) 

Unbelief kept the Israelites from seeing rest.  They had seen God deliver them from the hand of the Egyptians, they had seen him provide in the desert, they had received the gift of the law, yet all these did not prevent them from dying in the wilderness or guarantee their safe arrival in Canaan.  David’s generation saw the power of God time and time again yet these experiences did not guarantee them rest.  These first century Christians had also seen the power of God and witnessed his redeeming work, yet one thing would keep them from realizing God’s promises, unbelief.  This is why, after explaining the short comings of two previous generations the author turns to the current generation at the beginning of Chapter four. (Guthrie, 1983, 110)

Do Not Forfeit What is Most Important

The author begins chapter four with the words, “let us fear , therefore”(Phobethomen oun).  The position of the verb gives it special emphasis.  This fear is not a general fear, but the fear that is specified toward God.  Continuing his diatribe from Psalms 95 he reminds them of the fear that God demands.  They are not to trivialize the seriousness of God.  They are to remember that God’s character demands holiness.  And holiness demands obedience (Owen, 203, 1960).  Psalms 95 now no longer is referring to the wilderness generation but rather to them.  His warning is not to fall short, realizing that the goal is not reached automatically.  They will do well to fear God, so that they do not neglect the awesome gift of rest.

As the author continues in verse two it is interesting to notice the parallels between the unbelieving generation and his contemporaries.  The Israelites had heard the good news in their day.  They knew about God’s promises to them through Old Testament texts such as Exodus 19:3-6; 23:20-33 and how the God of their fathers led them out of Egypt.  They knew about the promise to safely arrive in the Promised Land and make them a kingdom of priests and a holy nation to himself.  However this promise, like all covenant relationships, held a condition, they would receive, if, they obey his voice.  The reason why this message did them no good was because, although they started with ambition, they did not finish in faith.  Now this same principal is being applied to his current generation.  While they heard about Jesus, they knew about his great work, and even though they may have started in the right direction, if they did not finish in faith, it is profited them nothing.  If faith is genuine faith it will be persistent faith.  Hearing, good intentions, a great beginning, do no good unless combined with genuine faith.  (Bruce, 1964, 73)  Without remaining faithful, they can be assured of one thing, they too will fall short in the wilderness, and they too will miss the rest promised even to their generation.  But what is this rest that he speaks of?  What does the author mean when he speaks of this sabbatical rest throughout chapter four?

To Rest Now or Later

            Much has been written and speculated about exactly what is meant by rest in Hebrews.  There are at least four main interpretations of the theology of rest, two of which are modern interpretations.  The first is the Gnostic orientation.  The Gnostic orientation is one that employs the biblical term anapausi" as a major Gnostic category.  The word is even used to refer to God, or to Christ, or to the highest order of the heavenly world, the original world of the Gnostic.  The Gnostic’s purpose in life is to seek anapausi", which is mediated by the redeemer. (Attridge, 1989, 126)

            This interpretation is hard to accept because the author does not use Gnostic terms.  He does not have a dualistic nature of the heart, but rather a wholistic view and does not use the Gnostic categories or emphases.

            A second major interpretation is the Greek metaphysical understanding of anapausi" and ebdoma.  James Thompson observes that Philo and Clement skillfully exegeted biblical texts containing anapausi" and katapausi" to mean the immutability of God.  Philo and Clement also saw the number 7 to be the most peaceful number and to thus describe God.  Therefore they saw this rest as a symbol of resting in God, transcending this world, and being at peace.  They saw this as the ability of obtaining the stable and immutable nature of God. (Attridge, 1989, 127)

            This presentation also has some highly dualistic natures between creation and God.  Also, the highly allegorical interpretation does not do justice to the text and context of Psalms 95 nor Hebrews 4.  The overuse of symbolism and the use of a hermeneutic that reads into the text a specific interpretation has left this interpretation flat.

             Modern interpretations fall into two views.  The first is the apocalyptic and futuristic expectation of rest realized in the second advent of Christ.  W.C. Kaiser and Oberholtzer suggest that Psalms 95 is used in a way that has eschatological overtones depicting the millennial King reigning over all (Yeo, 1991, 9).  O. Hofius, argues that rest must be understood as oriented to the end of the Christian journey (Yeo, 1991, 9).  P.E. Hughes says that the idea of a future rest fits with the pilgrimage motif of the book, with its emphasis on preserving to the end (Yeo, 1991, 10).  F.F. Bruce says “rest lies ahead as something yet to be attained” (Bruce, 1964, 71).  A second modern view is one that says that the rest is intended in this age.  G. Theissen supports this view noting that the first six days of creation have an end, but the seventh day has no end.  Theissen says for this reason, God’s sabbatical rest must not be limited to a time or place, but rather is a present reality (Theissen, 1969).  Both the futuristic view and present day view have valid points, and when analyzing the text it seems the author most assuredly is referring to a future rest, however, the author seems also to intend a present reality as he indicates that the rest is available “today”.  Several considerations must be taken under advisement before a proper interpretation can be reached.

            First, the author is using a gezara shawa (verbal analogy) by appealing to rest in Genesis 2:2 in order to explain the meaning of rest in Psalms 95.  By doing this he rules out the fact that rest is associated with the Promised Land.  It seems the author redefines the term anapausi" by associating it with sabbatismo" (Attridge, 1980, 282).  Attridge points out that the word hj*WnM= is used both for God’s resting place in the promised land (Deut. 12:9) and for God’s sanctuary (Ps 132:8, 14).  In other Old Testament passages, the resting place of people and the resting place of God are combined so that the resting place of God is also the resting place of God’s people (Deut 12:9,11; Chron 23:25, 2 Chron 6:4) (Attridge, 1980, 282).  The idea of rest in the Old Testament, which the author of Hebrews uses here, is the idea that where God is, there rest resides.  The writer never explains rest, but rather expects his hearers to understand that while some may have viewed rest as the presence in the land, the rest to which he is referring is a more perfect rest, the rest that exists in the presence of God.

            Second, this rest is not something that his readers should miss (4.1).  Some have understood this rest as not associated with salvific consequences.  Gleason states that missing this rest would allow one to encounter “more discipline”, “loss of rewards”, and “forfeit joy”.  Gleason continues by stating that “those warned by the author were genuinely redeemed” (Gleason, 2000, 302-303).  However, this interpretation does not coincide with the author’s urgency, nor what the author tells his hearers.  The author clearly is referring to what he believes is a lack of genuine saving faith among his hearers.  A faith that is saving now and will be saving at the eschaton is a faith that endures.  Lane points out that this idea of rest, although at first had an association with a place, as Jewish schools preached and debated this idea began to take on the idea of rest associated with participation in the kingdom present now and the kingdom to come.  It is probable that the hearers were already familiar with the association of rest, redemption and an eschatological rest.  The principle that unbelief excludes from the present rest and the eschatological rest to come, is surely what the author is referring (Lane, 1987, 98).

            Third, some in the community are in danger of rejecting God’s rest because of lack of faith (4.1-2).  The author wants to make clear that the ancient Isrealites seem to have fallen short of true faith because they did not combine what they heard with how they lived.  This community may have started out in the right direction, they may have been closely associated with living by faith, but unless they finished in faith, they never possessed faith.  Hearing the gospel is essential, but it is not enough.  Response is required.  The author warns his contemporaries that those that take lightly the word of salvation, do have something to fear.  The fear is one that some in this community lack.  They should fear falling short, because of their lack of fear in God.  God’s word has come to these, but with this word comes accountability and responsibility, responsibly to respond with faith to the word.  By responding in faith, fear of God comes naturally, and the fear of falling short subsides (Guthrie, 1998, 162).  Bruce states, “The practical implication is clear; it is not the hearing of the gospel by itself that brings final salvation, but its appropriation by faith; and if that faith is a genuine faith, it will be a persistent faith” (Bruce, 1964, 73).

             Forth, rest consists of resting in God (4.3-4; 10-11).  Verse four introduces us to the concept of sabbatical rest and this concept is continued in verses 10-11.  The rest in which God wants his believer’s to experience is “my rest”, that is God’s rest.  The rest promised by God is the rest of the Sabbath.  It is the rest from all earthly attempts to gain God’s approval and to rest in Christ.  The author seems to be playing on the notion that the Sabbath day is still occurring.  Since there is no record of the Sabbath ending, God is still resting (Cowdery, 1994, 285).  Does this mean that God is inactive?  Absolutely not.   God’s rest is a dynamic rest in the context of creation.  It is a redemptive rest, in which God is continually re-creating.  It is a rest he offers to all creation.  The rest that constantly responds to the voice of God, that finds security in the midst of persecution, stability in the midst of change, and peace in the midst of suffering (Yeo, 1991, 12).  It is not spiritual passivity that sits around waiting on God to act, but rather the rest in knowing that God is in control.  MacArthur puts it like this, “When God finished creation, He said, ‘It’s done.  I’ve made a wonderful world for man and woman.  I’ve given them everything earthly they need, including each other, for a complete and beautiful life.  Even more importantly, they have perfect, unbroken, unmarred, fellowship with Me. I can now rest; and they can rest in Me.’”(MacArthur, 1983, 88)  God completed his good work on the sixth day, and now rests in communion with the Godhead and with creation (Yeo, 1991, 12).  He is prepared to be worshipped by all creation, and invites his creation to experience that prefect rest that only He can give.  The idea of a continuing Sabbath is not a new interpretation.  According to Moffatt, the view that God’s rest and his offer of rest continues since creation is paralleled in the writings of Philo (Moffatt, 1924, 94-102). 

With that said, some translate this verse to mean that this rest is a rest only experienced in the age to come.  This idea of a future sabbatical rest in the age to come is developed from an early church interpretation of sabbatical rest.  In this interpretation the sabbatical rest is viewed as the seventh age of righteousness.  Barnabas writes:

Pay attention, children, to the meaning of the word: ‘He finished it in six days.’  It means that in 6,000 years the Lord will bring everything to completion.  For the ‘day’ with him is a thousand years, of which he himself bears me witness when he says: ‘Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years.’  Therefore, children, in six days that is in 6,000 years – everything will be brought to completion.  ‘And he rested the seventh day.’  This means: when his Son comes and brings to nought the period of the Lawless One and judges the ungodly and changes the sun and moon and stars, then he will rest properly on the seventh day… Finally he says to them: ‘Your new moons and your Sabbaths I cannot endure.’  See what he means: it is not your present Sabbaths that are acceptable, but the Sabbath that I have made, in which, when I have put everything to rest, I will make a beginning of the eighth day, that is the beginning of a new world. (Bruce, 1990, 106-107)

The idea that this rest should be associated with a coming millennium has been deeply defended, but this interpretation involves the importation into the book something that is foreign to it (Attridge, 1980, 283).  The best interpretation of “my rest” accepts the idea that is intended in Gen 2:2 and expounded on in Hebrews.  The author does not intend a systematic theology of eschatology in these few words but rather is highlighting the idea of perfect rest.  This perfect rest is the rest in God, which he invites all creation to experience.  The idea is that rest will be perfected at the parousia, but the author clearly seems to be stating that rest is offered and to be experienced now as he quotes, “Today if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts”.

            Fifth, rest still exists (4.6).  This is perhaps the greatest news to his hearers.  Many had viewed their opportunity to enter the rest of God as something that fell in the wilderness.  However, the author’s key point is that “while it is today” they should enter.  The author takes the word “today” and uses it to refer to the current age (Wescott, 1920, 94).  In other words, as long as there is time, as long as you have a chance, in the unknown time before the parousia, enter the rest.  He gives his readers no reason to blame previous generations for their failures, but forces them to analyze themselves and their relationship with God.  He is telling them that “today” is still available.  Today they can enter, and today they can find peace.

            Finally, from analyzing just what is said about rest in the beginning verses of chapter four, a better understanding of rest is achieved.  It seems that the answer to whether rest is intended for now, or is to be experienced later in the eschaton, is both.  Scholars have responded to eijsercovmeqa in a variety of ways.  Those who see this as a reality in the present tend to see this verb as a perfect verb.  However, if believers currently occupy the rest of which the author speaks he should have used a perfect tense for “enter” rendering the translation, “we who believe have entered”, meaning they are currently experiencing the rest.  It is unlikely that the author, who uses such precision in writing, would have been imprecise in this one incident.  “A better way of interpreting the verb as a ‘true present’ would be to highlight its progressive or continuous aspect, something as integral to the Greek ‘present’ as ‘time of action’” (DeSilva, 2000, 32).  This rendering allows the verse to have immediate impact and application to the hearers without violating the future aspect that the broader context demands.  Therefore, the verb should not be seen as simply referring to the immediate present, nor as a future present only referring to the eschaton, but rather as a reference to the complex process in which believers are even now engaged, but one which will be completed at the parousia (Attridge, 1989, 126).  Guthrie puts it like this, “The author’s challenge to the community stems from his understanding of salvation, which involves both events of inauguration and consummation as well as a process in between.” (Guthrie, 1998, 165).  In other words, this is intended to be an “already-not-yet” motif where genuine believers enter into God’s rest through belief, but they will experience the perfection of that rest as they endure to the end.  This rest is present only in the presence of God; it is something that every person should assure they are experiencing; it is something that is still available (while it is today) for entry; and something that will be perfected in the age to come.

The Failure in the Past

            After the author introduces the concept of rest to his audience, and the idea that this rest is still available, he continues by giving two examples of the failures of the past in verses 6-8.  There are three generations mentioned in these verses.  He mentions the failure of the wilderness generation.  He states simply that they did not enter rest because of disobedience.  He is not so much making a theological point in reference to the salvation of the wilderness generation as he is drawing on a historical truth to make a theological point about the current generation.  His simple point is that this generation failed because of disobedience. (Ellingworth, 1993, 250-251)

He follows this by stating that the rest was still available in David’s generation.  He proves his point by quoting David telling his generation that the promise of rest still exists.  If the rest was still available in David’s generation, the rest is not associated with land, but with God.  David emphatically wanted his generation to see that rest is not associated with where you are, but rather who you are (Brown, 1982, 83).  If one lives by faith, they can have rest and be assured of the rest to come.

The third generation spoken of is Joshua’s generation in verse 8.  Joshua’s generation entered into the land.  However, when they entered the land it was not quite what they expected.  Instead of peace and rest, they found war, discontent, and wandering.  The author pushes his point to the fullest showing through a quick history lesson that rest and location do not go hand in hand but rest and the presence of God does. (Guthrie, 1998, 155)

Verses 9-10 explain to his generation that rest is available.  If they can come to grips with the fact that rest exists in God, learn from the failures of the past, and realize that those failures are in the past, they can enter into God’s sabbatical rest.  It is up to them to realize, while it is “today”, that faith without sanctification is no faith.

Concluding Remarks

            As is typical with similar Jewish writings, namely that of gezara shawa, verses 11-13 conclude the section on rest and reiterate the author’s purpose.  Often scholars place verse 12 in a new paragraph marking the end of the exposition of Psalms 95 and related texts.  However, the rendering makes better sense structurally with verse 12-13 ending this section, rather than beginning a new. (Attridge, 1989, 126) 

Verse 11 explains the urgency needed to assure oneself of entering rest.  The writer wants his audience to examine themselves, to avoid the same punishment of the wilderness generation.  He clearly thinks there is a grave danger of history repeating itself.  It should be noted that the fall he speaks of in verse eleven should be translated fall after the same example.  The author is not referring to falling from salvation into disobedience, but rather falling into the same patterns of disobedience as those in the past.  He senses a lack of diligence, and self examination among this congregation.  Some in the community were no doubt assuming their salvation based on their association with the faith and the knowledge of Jesus Christ.  He wants to affirm in his concluding statement that knowledge alone, nor association with the faith alone bring assurance of rest, but only faith that leads to obedience.  Any other assumption will leave one falling short, never entering rest. (Gundry, 1981, 318)

            Verse 12 provides one of the most popularly quoted verses in the New Testament.  “The Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two edged sword”.  Many times this verse is quoted referring to how the Word can be used to defend oneself from the evil one, however, this verse placed in its context leaves one with a different understanding.  The emphasis here is not on the power the logos gives a believer, but rather the power of God’s logos on the believer.  He is not saying what the logos does for one, but rather what the logos does to one.  The emphasis is on God’s power of his word, namely the power to examine and discern. (Ellingworth, 1993, 261) 

First, the word is living and active.  It reflects the character of God himself, the source of all life.  The word is not a dead code, like many had viewed the law, but one that has constant application to life.  “A thing may be alive and dormant, but the nature of true life is that it springs into activity and challenges on every front those who fall short of its standards” (Guthrie, 1983, 118). 

Next, it is sharper that any two edged sword.  God’s word leaves one exposed.  Nothing can be hidden from it.  The idea that the word separates soul and spirit, joints and marrow, is to say that it penetrates to the depths.  It cuts to the core of each person.  When one’s life is laid beside his word, who he has become is revealed.  While one can hide and fool man, God’s word reveals truth. (Kistemaker, 1984, 129)

            Finally, verse 13 concludes this section reiterating in a more general statement what was said in verse 12 of the all encompassing power of God.  Every creature is said to be open (literally naked) before God.  In addition, it is said to be laid bare (tetrachlismevna).  This is the only time this word is used in the New Testament and it means literally ‘to bend back the neck’ (as in wrestling); but has a secondary meaning ‘to lay bare’.  It as if no one can hide his eyes from God, but each face is exposed, his head is pushed back to be in the full view of God.  The fact that nothing can be concealed from God, makes all the more pressing the need for a perfect high priest.  The power of God, the knowledge of him, and the penetrating word should make one yearn to persevere in the faith knowing that perfect rest lies ahead. (Guthrie, 1983, 118)

Contemporary Wandering

            This word by the author of Hebrews was needed.  He had seen the failure of past generations and he had fear that this generation also had tendencies to wander.  However, not only did his generation need the word of warning, this current generation needs the warning.  Today’s fast paced culture finds one hurrying from one place to the next, from one appointment to another and resists the idea of a spiritual life.  This leads for many to a life of upside down priorities where the things of the world replace the things of God.  It leads to a life in desperate need of genuine rest.  The author of Hebrews writes to many so called believers and he reintroduces the concept of living by faith.  Today many so called believers need to be reintroduced to a life of faith.

            Faith is personal.  Hebrews warns that faith is not simply belief in historical fact.  It is not the understanding that Jesus lived and died, for even the wilderness generation saw God act, but they did not combine what they knew with faith.  The author of Hebrews is concerned that his followers not only know the history of their faith, know about Jesus’ life and death, but that they live their life in relationship with him.  He wants his followers to know true rest and not a mere imitation of it. (Guthrie, 1998, 166) 

            Faith is active.  It is not merely being in church once a week, nor is it something that takes lightly the principles of God.  It is life transforming.  It changes one’s priorities and purpose in life.  Hebrews speaks of this as obedience to the Word of God.  There seems propagation of a belief in modern churches that mere association with a church is sufficient, that one can be justified without being sanctified.  Nothing could be farther from the truth, according to the author of Hebrews.  He sees no separation and no rest without full surrender to the will of God.  No justification without evidence of sanctification, no faith without evidence of fruit. (Guthrie, 1998, 167)

            Faith sees God as He is.  To fear God is to respect his reverence, to view him in all of his holiness.  There was, and is, a tendency to trivialize the matters of God.  The author intends in this homily to make clear, that there is need of fear.  There is need for each to assure that he is striving to enter rest and not merely playing with the principles of God.  Donald McCullough records in his book The Trivialization of God:

                        Visit a church on a Sunday morning – almost any will do – and you will likely find a congregation comfortably relating to a deity who fits nicely within precise doctrinal positions, or who lends almighty support to social crusades, or who conforms to individual spiritual experiences.  But you will not likely find much awe or sense of mystery.  The only sweaty palms will be those of the preacher unsure whether the sermon will go over; the only shaking knees will be those of the soloist about to sing the offertory.

                        …reverence and awe have often been replaced by a yawn of familiarity.  The consuming fire has been domesticated into a candle flame, adding a bit of religious atmosphere, perhaps, but no heat, no blinding light, no power for purification.

                        When the true story gets told, whether in the partial light of historical perspective or in the perfect light of eternity, it may well be revealed that the worst sin of the church at the end of the twentieth century has been the trivialization of God.  (McCullough, 1995, 13)

This trivialization of God becomes apparent when the word is allowed to become the sword that is intended.  It cuts through the religious rhetoric, ritual, and tradition and lays bare truth.  The life of man is exposed, and who they are comes apparent when in the presence of his logos. 

            There is a need for rest in this world.  People are hungering for peace.  The good news is that rest is still available.  God’s rest is open for all those that seek him.  The rest that God gives his people is freedom.  He offers freedom to walk out of the wilderness and into a new life with purpose and a sense of fulfillment.  While many have claimed to know of rest, the faithful experience it.  It is not a rest in which all of one’s problems disappear, but a rest where one recognizes that God is in control, that he is working through the ways of this world to fulfill his will.  It is a rest that gives a glimpse of a greater more perfect rest, the rest with God.  This rest is the rest that all yearn for, but only some will achieve.  So let not the warning ring hollow to this generation, “Today if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts,” but enter his rest.