While Hebrews 3:7-4:13 focused on what happens when we fail to head God's Word to us, 4:14-5:10 moves on to the positive side of the equation and the benefits of trusting God in faith, namely having an eternal high priest who stand before God on our behalf.

To make the point the author of Hebrews compares Jesus to the Old Testament priestly orders of Aaron and Melchizedek.

Christ is similar to both these orders in that, other priest were selected by God from among the people to be set apart as those who would stand before God and deal with sins on behalf of all the people. You get a taste of this in Exodus 28 & 29.

At the same time, there are some major differences between Christ and other priests. First, other priests would have to go through a long process of cleaning their own sins before they could stand before God on behalf of others. The best example of this would be the high priests preparation for Yom Kippur in Leviticus 16.

As chapter 4 opens the need to hold firm to the Word God has proclaimed continues as the author argues that just because a Word from God is delivered, it doesn't mean that the recipient receives the benefit of that Word.

Perhaps one of the best modern day examples of this is the Word of God that is spoken over a child in his or her baptism, and identifies the importance of having parents and Godparents who are committed to raising the child up in the faith. If that Word is delivered in baptism, but it is never spoken of again, the child will grow up not receiving the benefits of the promise because it is not being held onto by faith.

As verse 7 opens, the author of the Hebrews provides an example from Israel's past that describes what happens if God's people don't "hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope" from the end of verse 6.

He does this with a quote from Psalm 95 that again brings us back to Hebrews 1:1 and God speaking through the prophets and again through His Son. Psalm 95 links back to Exodus 17:1-7 where the people of Israel had witnessed God's actions and seen Him provide for them but they rebelled against God anyway. Psalm 95 and Hebrews 3:7-11 becomes an admonishment to not be like the people of Israel in those days.

With this setup of guarding the faith in mind, the author then exhorts those in the community to encourage one another in the faith. This is our first hint in Hebrews that community is central to the Christian faith.

Today marks the beginning of Lent, a season in the Church year that Christians have used for centuries to prepare their hearts for Easter.

In recent years, a popular way to engage in this preparation has been Lenten devotions. This year, I invite you to join me on an online Lenten journey at writingsfromthewilderness.com.

Together we'll explore wilderness themes like dust, hunger, heat, and thirst, linking these themes to our everyday lives and, ultimately Christ's death and resurrection for us.

Check out writingsfromthewilderness.com and let me know what you think.

Last night, Gregory braved the cold and showed up at our door. We grabbed some nachos and then began talking about different things that are going on in our lives. After a while we ended up on a conversation about a young woman he knows that was asking some faith related questions and he was trying to figure out how to best move forward.

There are two major approaches to apologetics (the defense of the Christian faith) today. One stems out of the enlightenment and runs purely on reason. The idea is to hammer out all of the scientific facts and universal truths so the person you're talking with only has the options of faith or denying reason.

The other approach, which is a result of ongoing questions about the ability of any one person or group to have a complete grasp on absolute truth, is a more philosophical one. Here the key word is "worldview" and the idea that each of us has a set of cognitive tools that we use to understand the world around us ... they help us interpret reality as we see it. The apologetic goal here is to share how a Christian worldview works in a way that is comprehensive in your own life (this creates a space to invite the other person to "try on" a Christian worldview).

Given my belief that the Spirit plays a greater role in conversion than reason, I'm very much a fan of philosophy in the realm of apologetics. This is the approach I've taken in the elemental life and the upcoming Lent devotions, Writings from the Wilderness. It's also much more in line with the style of Ravi Zacharias.

At the same time, I think logic and reason are helpful, especially with people who have science vs. faith issues, but it remains subservient to philosophy in apologetics, simply because the philosophical approach is going to be more conversational, less judgmental, and will display greater humility.

What do you think? What kinds of conversations do you engage in when people ask you about your faith?