Friday, January 26<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 11:1-7: To begin his history of the heroes of faith, our author goes to Creation itself. More specifically, he commences his consideration of history by appealing to a principle transcendent to history, supported by an experience common throughout history—to wit, the strong sense that the concrete, physical world, the world subject to experiential verification, is not self-explanatory. To put this thesis in other words, the world around us testifies to a spiritual domain beyond itself, a spiritual domain on which the physical world is dependent for its very existence. In our author\u2019s own words; me ek phainom\u00e9non to blep\u00f3menon gegon\u00e9nai<\/i>—\u201cwhat is seen does not come from visible things.\u201d<\/p>\n
All the saints of old, he says, bore witness to this: en tavte gar emartyrethesan hoi presbyteroi<\/i>. This conviction of things unseen is the feature held in common by the sundry believers listed throughout the present chapter—from saints as learned as Moses (verse 24) o saints as simple as Samson (verse 32). They all lived their lives in the conviction that the present world presupposes a better one. This was true of the ancient patriarchs, who \u201clooked for a city that has foundation\u201d (verse 10), as well as those later saints who \u201cwere tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection\u201d (verse 35).<\/p>\n
Man\u2019s adherence to the world\u2019s invisible source, says our author, is called faith; specifically it is faith in God\u2019s creating word: \u201cby faith we know [nooumen<\/i>] the world were framed by the word of God [rh\u00e9mati Theou<\/i>].\u201d<\/p>\n
In speaking of the word of God in Creation, this author puts a great gulf between himself and Platonic philosophy, even when he uses words characteristic of Platonism (such as demiourgos<\/i> in verse 10). The single link between the invisible and visible world is the word (rhema<\/i>) of God. In making this assertion, the author of Hebrews relies entirely on the narrative in Genesis 1—Day by day during the first week of history, God spoke, and various creatures came into being. Over and over, the Lord said, \u201clet there be,\u201d and each time something visible—to blepomenon<\/i>—suddenly appeared.\u201d<\/p>\n
In speaking of faith in these terms, the author is describing, rather than defining, his subject. He especially relates it to hope, or, more accurately, to \u201cthings hope for\u201d (elpizom\u00e9non<\/i>). That is to say, it looks to the future and, especially, the end of history.<\/p>\n
Saturday, January 27<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 11:8-16: Among the numerous and varied characters of the Old Testament, Abraham is perhaps the one most mentioned as a model for the Christian life. This theme is prominent in the Epistle to the Romans, where Abraham, described as \u201cthe father of us all\u201d (4:16) is presented as the outstanding example of the life of faith (chapter 4 passim<\/i>). For St. Paul, Abraham\u2019s faith was manifest in his adherence to God\u2019s promises against all contrary evidence: \u201ccontrary to hope, in hope he believed, so that he became the father of many nations\u201d (4:18).<\/p>\n
The Epistle to the Hebrews, though not neglecting that aspect of the Abraham story (11:11-12), emphasizes two other aspects of Abraham\u2019s faith: his wandering and his response to the summons he received to offer Isaac in sacrifice.<\/p>\n
The former theme is considered in the present verses: \u201cBy faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country.\u201d This aspect of Abraham\u2019s faith is consistent with the theme of pilgrimage in the Epistle to the Hebrews: \u201cFor here we have no continuing city, but we seek the one to come\u201d (13:14). Indeed, with respect to all the Old Testament saints, we are told, \u201cthey were strangers and pilgrims on the earth\u201d (11:13).<\/p>\n
This was preeminently the situation of Abraham, who obeyed the Lord\u2019s command, \u201cGet out of your country, \/ From your family \/ And from your father\u2019s house, \/ To a land that I will show you\u201d (Genesis 12:1). In other words, Abraham will see that land only if he obeys the command of the Lord. \u201cI will<\/i> show you\u201d is in the future tense.<\/p>\n
In addition to the author of Hebrews, St. Stephen also emphasized this aspect of Abraham\u2019s faith: \u201cThe God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, and said to him, \u2018Get out of your country and from your relatives, and come to a land that I will show you\u2019\u201d (Acts 7:3).<\/p>\n
This feature of Abraham\u2019s faith—his obedient wandering to pursue the future—corresponded very much to the experience of the early Christians. They, too, had no clear idea where they were going—at least in respect to their future in this world. Like Abraham, they were content to follow God\u2019s leadership wherever He would guide them. From a human perspective, they were just as vulnerable as any pilgrims in this world. This was especially the case, one suspects, as the social ties between the Church and the Jews began to be severed. What did the future hold? Those early Christians really had no idea, so Abraham became their model, \u201cdwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; for he waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sunday, January 28<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 11:17-29: Readers of Genesis 22—from Sirach to Kierkegaard—have pondered long what thoughts may have intruded themselves into the struggling mind of Abraham when the Lord required him to offer his son Isaac in sacrifice.<\/p>\n
Perhaps the most insuperable problem was one of logic: How did Abraham reconcile in his thought the imminent loss of his son with the Lord\u2019s earlier promise that this same son would be the father of many people? Just how could he resolve the contradiction between God\u2019s promise, which he completely believed, and God\u2019s command, which he was completely resolved to obey?<\/p>\n
In fact, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in the earliest Christian commentary on this story, explicitly cited God\u2019s earlier promise\u2014\u201cin Isaac your seed shall be called\u201d\u2014in the context of the command that Isaac was to be sacrificed (Hebrews 11:18). How was it possible to reconcile God\u2019s promise with God\u2019s command? Abraham had three days to think about it.<\/p>\n
The author of Hebrews reflected that Abraham, in order to resolve that contradiction, must have introduced into his reasoning process one further consideration\u2014to wit, God\u2019s power: \u201cHe reasoned that God . . . was able\u201d—logisamenos hoti . . . dynatos ho Theos<\/i>.<\/p>\n
The wording of this argument is quite precise. In speaking of God, the author of Hebrews uses the adjective dynatos<\/i> instead of the verb dynatei<\/i> (\u201cis able\u201d instead of \u201ccould\u201d). In spite of several standard English translations, there is no explicit object (\u201chim\u201d) in this clause. The author thereby indicated he was thinking of more than the saving of Isaac; he had in mind an abiding quality of God—His power.<\/p>\n
Abraham had already experienced God\u2019s power in the conception of Isaac, when he and Sarah, for all practical purposes, were as good as dead: \u201cAnd not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah\u2019s womb\u201d (Romans 4:19).<\/p>\n
In other words, Abraham reasoned that God\u2019s power had already overcome the forces of death in the very circumstances of Isaac\u2019s conception. And if God had overcome death once, He was always able. Thus, with regard to Isaac, says Hebrews, Abraham \u201cconsidered that God is able [dynatos<\/i>] to raise from the dead.\u201d<\/p>\n
For the author of Hebrews, the mind of ancient Abraham raced ahead in prophecy to the doctrine of the resurrection\u2014it was an experienced inference from what he already knew of God. From the very temptation he endured, Abraham arrived at a new understanding of God\u2014namely, that He is powerful to raise the dead to life. This was a true prophetic revelation granted to the struggling mind of His servant.<\/p>\n
Monday, January 29<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 11:30-40: This summary of the \u201cgreat cloud of witnesses\u201d may be described as centered on the author\u2019s reference to what he calls \u201ca better resurrection.\u201d In the context, the comparative adjective, \u201cbetter,\u201d distinguishes this resurrection from the dead from earlier biblical stories in which, as he says, \u201cwomen received their dead raised to life again.\u201d Those earlier stories include those accounts in which Elijah and Elisha raised to life the deceased sons of the widow of Zarephath and the Shunammite woman.<\/p>\n
These true resurrections from the dead may be compared with Jesus\u2019 resurrections of Lazarus, the son of the widow of Nain, and the daughter of Jairus. These were true resurrections, genuine victories of life over death, and Holy Scripture uses the same word—anastasis<\/i>—to describe them.<\/p>\n
For all that, however, those resurrections were not complete, because those who were raised were still obliged to face death once again. When our author speaks, therefore, of a \u201cbetter resurrection,\u201d he has in mind that definitive victory over death, which was Israel\u2019s most precious hope. \u201cOthers were tortured,\u201d he tells us, \u201cnot accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection.\u201d<\/p>\n
There are three points to be made about this better resurrection:<\/p>\n
First, it represents the final and completed stage of Old Testament hope. The author of Hebrews refers here to those late Old Testament martyrs, who confessed the resurrection from the dead even as they were being tortured to death.
\nSuch were the seven brothers and their mother, whose passing is recorded in the 2nd Book of Maccabees. One of those brothers used his last breath to declare to his tormentor, \u201cYou, most wicked man, destroy us from this present life: but the King of the world will raise us up, who die for his laws, in the resurrection of eternal life.\u201d One by one, these seven brothers endured torment and went to their deaths in the same hope of the resurrection from the dead. Finally, their mother, having witnessed her first six sons slain in this way, exhorted her youngest: \u201cSo you will not fear this tormentor, but being made a worthy partner with your brothers, receive death, that in that mercy I may receive you again with your brethren\u201d (7:9, 29).<\/p>\n
It was this hope of the final resurrection that sustained the people of the Old Covenant in their hour of peril, during the persecution by Antiochus IV Epiphanes. It was of those Israelites that the author of Hebrews wrote: \u201cAnd these all, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.\u201d This \u201csomething better\u201d is what our author calls a \u201cbetter resurrection.\u201d<\/p>\n
Second, this \u201cbetter resurrection,\u201d the final and highest hope of the Old Covenant, is the major and defining thesis of the New. St. Paul made this claim before the Sanhedrin itself: \u201cI worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets. I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a resurrection\u201d (Acts 24:14-15). Paul finished his defense by declaring, \u201cConcerning the resurrection of the dead I am being judged by you this day.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Resurrection is the core substance of the “good news.” It is not just one of the things<\/i> that Christians believe, but the heart and kernel of the evangelion<\/i>. For this reason the earliest, shortest version of the Creed asserted simply, “Jesus is Lord,” an assertion explained in the first apostolic sermon: “This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. . . . Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:32,36). Peter preached this message to the Jews<\/i>, because it addressed a specifically Jewish hope. \u201cLet the whole house of Israel<\/i> know,\u201d he said. What God accomplished in the resurrection of Jesus was the fulfillment of a specifically Jewish<\/i> hope.<\/p>\n
The Apostle Paul, in his sermon at the synagogue at Antioch in Pisidia, proclaimed the same Gospel of the Resurrection: “And we declare to you glad tidings (evangelion<\/i>)–that promise which was made to the fathers. God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus” (Acts 13:31-32). Paul proclaimed this message in a synagogue<\/i>, where he spoke of a \u201cpromise which was made to the fathers.\u201d This promise made to the saints of the Old Testament, he announced, \u201cGod has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus.\u201d<\/p>\n
Third, the better resurrection—the raising of Jesus—accomplished what the Old Testament Law could not: man\u2019s justification. In fact, the first time the noun “justification” appears in the New Testament, Paul proclaims that Jesus “was raised for our justification<\/i>” (Romans 4:25). He had earlier written, “For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!” (1 Corinthians 15:17) No Resurrection, no justification.<\/p>\n
It is through Jesus’ resurrection, then, that we are begotten as children of God. St. Peter wrote, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten<\/i> us again to a living hope through the resurrection<\/i> of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Peter 1:3).<\/p>\n
Tuesday, January 30<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 12:1-11: Even in advance of the darkness of the Passion, the celebration of Palm Sunday gives Christians a vision of the glory that will follow the Cross. They are not expected to step into the dark corridor without knowing where that corridor will lead.<\/p>\n
Jesus Himself knew exactly where He was going when He began Holy Week and the Way of the Cross. Indeed, it was his vision that strengthened Him to walk that path. He, \u201cfor the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame.\u201d He did not suffer the Cross for the sake of the Cross, but because of that final joy.<\/p>\n
Christians, likewise, are not called to endure for the sake of endurance, but for the sake of glory. In this, they are to be modeled on Jesus: \u201clet us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus.\u201d Several translations (Phillips, NIV, NEB, NAB) render this last expression as \u201cour eyes fixed on Jesus,\u201d which perhaps better catches the sense of aphorontes<\/i>. We are, in fact, dealing with a fixation.<\/p>\n
In the Christian life, very much depends of where we look, where we direct our attention. Recall Peter\u2019s attempt to walk on water: \u201cAnd when Peter had come down out of the boat, he walked on the water to go to Jesus. But when he saw that the wind was boisterous, he was afraid\u201d (Matthew 14:29-30).<\/p>\n
This fixation is a function of concentration: \u201cConsider<\/i> Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls.\u201d The opening verb here (the only place in the New Testament) is the imperative form of analogizomai<\/i>, which refers to critical, discursive thought—the labor of the mind.<\/p>\n
In fact, one sees in this verb the same root found in the English \u201canalogy.\u201d This is all the more curious inasmuch as our author proceeds immediately to provide an analogy: \u201cIt is for discipline that you endure. God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not discipline?\u201d<\/p>\n
These reflections touch the very purpose of the Epistle to the Hebrews: to encourage Christians who had become despondent because of the difficulties attendant on the life of faith. The author endeavors to fix their attention on those considerations that provide strength for the struggle. His model, in this respect, is Jesus Himself, who \u201cendured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.\u201d<\/p>\n
Wednesday, January 31<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 12:12-17: This text contains the New Testament\u2019s only criticism of Esau, who is described here as a “profane person . . . who for one morsel of food sold his birthright” (Hebrews 12:16).<\/p>\n
Esau is introduced in Hebrews, I believe, because he represents the danger that the author most fears—namely, apostasy, or the abandonment of the inheritance of the saints. Esau was a man who forsook his inheritance and, as Hebrews insists, was unable to get it back: \u201cFor you know that afterward, when he wanted to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place for repentance [metanoia<\/i>], though he sought it diligently with tears.\u201d<\/p>\n
This inability of Esau to repent follows the thought of our author in chapter 6, where he says that for those Christians who apostatize \u201cit is impossible . . . to renew them again to repentance [metanoia<\/i>].\u201d These are the only two chapters in which Hebrews uses the word metanoia<\/i>, in both cases to insist on the difficulty of repenting after apostasy.<\/p>\n
In fact, Esau\u2019s inability to repent is one of the more notable features about the man. Esau had no real sense of the relative worth of things. He could not repent, because he did not truly grasp the value of what he had abandoned. Because he had cheaply sold something material, he assumed that he could just as cheaply purchase something spiritual. Embracing the principle that man lives by bread alone, he nonetheless fancied that a higher benediction was still available to him, pretty much at the same price. Having lost his birthright for a bowl of soup, he planned to gain his blessing with a plate of venison.<\/p>\n
Esau is described as bebelos<\/i>, translated traditionally as \u201cprofane\u201d (KJV) or \u201cirreligious\u201d(RSV). He never developed the habit of reflecting on the moral nature of what he was doing. Esau, as we see in the instance of the bowl of soup, thought only of the present moment. Obeying the impulse of the moment, he neglected both the past and the future.<\/p>\n
Hence, Esau was slow to learn that the future is very much tied to the past. Some blessings—and among them the very best—are inseparable from birthrights, so that the reckless squandering of the one renders unlikely the acquisition of the other. Those, therefore, who contemn the past, have little chance for a future. Esau stepped outside of salvation history, and he had only himself to blame.<\/p>\n
Thursday, February 1<\/b><\/p>\n
Hebrews 12:18-29: The author of Hebrews outlines a contrast between two mountains: Sinai and Zion—the mountain of the Law and the mountain of the Temple, or the covenant with Moses and the covenant with David.<\/p>\n
A similar contrast between these two mountains—Sinai and Zion—was made by St. Paul, much to the same effect: \u201cFor these are two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar\u2014for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children\u2014but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all\u201d (Galatians 4:24-26).<\/p>\n
In both texts—Galatians and Hebrews—there is a contrast between the bondage of the Law and the boldness of the Christian. With respect to this contrast, St. Paul writes, \u201cyou are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God\u201d (Galatians 4:7). In both cases, we observe, Mount Zion is called the heavenly Jerusalem: According to Galatians, \u201cthe Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.\u201d According to Hebrews, \u201cyou have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.\u201d<\/p>\n
One suspects that this contrast between Mount Sinai and Mount Zion may have been a rhetorical trope in early Christian preaching. This suggestion would explain why we find it in both Galatians and Hebrews, in spite of the great differences between these two works. This contrast is used in both places and adapted to the theme of each work.<\/p>\n
Here in Hebrews, the two mountains are contrasted with respect to what we may call \u201ccomfort\u201d: Mount Sinai provokes fear and trembling, whereas Mount Zion inspires boldness, or parresia<\/i>. In Hebrews, this word describes the spirit in which believers have access to God.<\/p>\n
Thus, we read earlier of Christ as \u201cas a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the parresia<\/i> and the rejoicing of a firm hope\u201d (3:6). Or again, \u201cLet us therefore come with parresia<\/i> to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need\u201d (4:16). There is an irony in this verse: We might imagine that the way to obtain mercy is not to demonstrate too much boldness. On the contrary, says Hebrews, boldness is the path to mercy!<\/p>\n
Mount Sinai inspired a sense of awe and fear, even to the point of cringing. The author of Hebrews will have no cringing Christians. They are to approach God\u2019s presence in a bold and confident spirit. He wrote earlier, \u201cTherefore, brethren, having parresia<\/i> to enter the Holy of Holies by the blood of Jesus . . . let us draw near with a true heart in the full certainty of faith\u201d (10:19,22). In this text we observe that Christian boldness comes from Christian \u201ccertainty\u201d—plerophoria<\/i>.<\/p>\n
Indeed, for the author of Hebrew, this Christian boldness is a thing to be protected. We must labor not to lose it: \u201cTherefore do not cast away your confidence, which has great reward\u201d (10:35).<\/p>\n
This boldness of Christians pertains especially to worship, as we see in the present text. Indeed, this consideration points to a major difference between Mount Sinai and Mount Zion: the former was as remembered the place where the Torah was given—where the \u201claw was laid down\u201d—whereas Mount Zion was the place of Israel\u2019s worship.<\/p>\n
In the present text, therefore, the author of Hebrews describes the components of Christian worship: \u201cBut you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks more eloquently than that of Abel\u201d (verses 22-24).<\/p>\n
Friday, February 2<\/strong><\/p>\n Luke 2:22-40: Since the presentation of our Lord in the temple is an account found only in the Gospel of Luke (2:22-40), it seems reasonable to look at that narrative through the lens of Luke himself.<\/p>\n It is not hard to do. This is the story, after all, of the Messiah’s first visit to the temple in Jerusalem, a site that Luke makes a foundation stone of his literary structure. Indeed, he begins and ends his Gospel in the temple (1:5-9; 24:52-53).<\/p>\n Moreover, near the end of Jesus’ first visit to the temple, Luke remarks that the prophetess Anna “spoke of Him to all those who looked for the redemption in Jerusalem” (2:38). The real “redemption in Jerusalem” takes place, of course, in the last pages of Luke, describing the sufferings, death, and resurrection of Jesus. These are the events included in what Luke’s original Greek text calls Jesus’ exodos<\/i>, “which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem” (9:31).<\/p>\n Luke’s story takes for granted the full significance of the temple. He presumes that the reader is familiar with the Lord’s assumption of “residence” there shortly after its completion (1 Kings 8), His departure from it at the time of its destruction (Ezekiel 10), and His return there when the temple was rebuilt (Haggai 2:1-9; Zechariah 8-9).<\/p>\n Luke especially presumes the prophecy of the Messiah’s coming appearance at the temple, an oracle found near the end of the last prophetic book of the Hebrew Scriptures: “And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight. Behold, He is coming, says the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 3:1).<\/p>\n According to that same prophecy, the purpose of the Messiah’s coming to the temple was to purify its priesthood: “He will purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer to the Lord an offering in righteousness” (3:3).<\/p>\n It was those very priests, however, who failed to recognize the Messiah’s arrival. On His final recorded visit to the temple, in fact, Luke tells us that “the chief priests and the scribes, together with the elders, confronted Him” (20:1). Their confrontation came in response to the purging of the temple in the scene immediately preceding (19:45-48).<\/p>\n Those sons of Levi wanted nothing to do with any purging. They had no use for what Malachi called the “refiner’s fire” and “launderers’ soap” (3:2). What, then, resulted from their confrontation with the Messiah? Luke tells us, “the chief priests and the scribes that very hour sought to lay hands on Him” (20:19). The temple was the site where this messianic drama was decided. It is surely significant, therefore, that Luke, in describing Jesus’ words about Jerusalem’s coming destruction, places that prophecy in the temple itself (21:20-24; contrast Matthew 24:3; Mark 13:3).<\/p>\n Such is the full literary context of Luke’s story of the presentation of the infant Jesus in the temple. It is a prophetic preparation for the redemptive events that will culminate at the end of the Gospel. The Lord is met by Simeon, an elderly man whom Luke describes with references to the Holy Spirit in three successive verses (2:25-27). Cast in the role of a prophet by these references, the inspired Simeon, after a canticle of praise, prophesies the drama that will ensue in the temple toward the end of the Gospel: “Behold, this Child is destined for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that will be spoken against” (2:34).<\/p>\n It was “in that instant” that Simeon was joined by “Anna, a prophetess,” who spoke of this Messiah “to all those who looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (2:36-38). This too, as we have seen, was a prophecy of the Lord’s death and resurrection, for those things brought about that “redemption in Jerusalem.”<\/p>\n Such, at the beginning of Luke, is the small company that welcomes the Messiah on His first visit to the temple. Upon these two old people comes an outpouring of the Holy Spirit, much as Luke describes in the beginning of Acts. Here too the Spirit descends upon a son and a daughter, a manservant and a maidservant, and they prophesy (Acts 2:17-18). Israel is well represented by these two figures who foster in their hearts the ardor of ancient hopes. But Simeon and Anna, even as they gave thanks to God for the Messiah’s arrival (2:28-29,38), dimly foretell the drama that will later unfold in the courts of the temple.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Friday, January 26 Hebrews 11:1-7: To begin his history of the heroes of faith, our author goes to Creation itself. More specifically, he commences his consideration of history by appealing to a principle transcendent to history, supported by an experience common throughout history—to wit, the strong sense that the concrete, physical world, the world subject … Continue reading January 26 – February 2, 2018<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1226"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1226"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1227,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1226\/revisions\/1227"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.touchstonemag.com\/daily_reflections\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}