Cernica, January 2010 Introduction Hebrews May Be

8/14/2019 Cernica, January 2010 Introduction Hebrews May Be

1/34

HebrewsCernica, January 2010

IntroductionHebrews may be characterized as a masterpiece of early Christian rhetorical homiletics,or in its own terms a word of exhortation (13:22), addressed to believers in Christ who

are in danger of becoming lax in their commitment. P46

is known as the second Chester Beatty Papyrus, and dates from about the year 200 AD. It contains all of Hebrews, whichit places after Romans in the Pauline letters. Among the uncials, most familiar to readerswill be Codex Sinaiticus ( a ), discovered on Mount Sinai, dating form the 4 th century, andcontaining the entire composition, and Codex Vaticanus (B), also from the 4 th century,which has all of the letter up to 9:14. Codex Ephraemi (C) is another 5 th century uncial,with a special character. It is often called Rescriptus (rewritten), because the manuscriptis a palimpsest: the text of the NT needed to be recovered from the sermons of ST.Ephraem, which had been written over it. Finally, Codex Claramontanus (D), is a 6 th

century manuscript containing only the Pauline letters including Hebrews. The LXX isreferred to in Hebrews rather than the MT.

AuthorshipHebrews was first received and read as a letter of the apostle Paul. This is indicated first by its inclusion among Pauls letters in Greek manuscripts. Hebrews appears after Romans in the earliest extant text of Paul (P 46). The earliest attested use of Hebrews alsosuggests a Pauline connection. In the late first or second century, 1Clement was sent formRome to Corinth to address local disturbances. The letter refers explicitly to Pauls FirstLetter to the Corinthians. Much more subtly, but unmistakably, 1Clement also makes useof the ideas and distinctive language of Hebrews (36:1-5). In Alexandria and other major Greek centers of Christianity, Hebrews found instant favor and was received as a Paulineletter, even though the great Origen expressed doubts concerning its authenticity. Origenfound the ideas but not the language to be Pauline, and after suggesting either Clement or

Luke as possible authors, confessed that only God knew (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.25.11-14). Origin himself makes frequent use of Hebrews and introduces his citations asScripture ( First Principles 2.6.4), Paul (4.1.24), the apostle ( Commentary on John20), more elaborately as Paul says in the Epistle to Hebrews ( John 6), and morecautiously as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews ( Letters to Africanus 9).

Acceptance in the Western churches was less rapid and wholehearted. Tertullianuses Heb 6:1-6, but thinks it was written by Barnabas, the associate of Paul ( On Modesty20). By the last half of the 4 th century, the canonicity of Hebrews is assured. Theauthority of Augustine and Jerome, who accepted the authenticity of the text while notingsome of the difficulties, carried the day, and from late antiquity onward Hebrews wassecure in both halves of the Christian world as a canonical work of Paul. The assumption

of Pauline authorship remained intact until the period of the Renaissance andReformation, when it became widely questioned.Several major considerations militate against Pauline authorship. The stylistic

factors speak against Paul, since not even a carefully composed work such as Romansmatches the careful structure and rich rhetorical embellishment. Second, contentualfactors seem to speak against Paul as author. It is inconceivable, says Attridge (2) thatPaul, who so emphatically affirms his status as an apostle and eyewitness of the risenChrist, could have put himself in the subordinate position of a secondhand recipient of

1


2/34

tradition as does our author at 2:3. Thirdly, the central theological perspectives andimagery such as Jesus, the High Priest is unique in the NT. At the same time, typicalPauline themes are lacking in Hebrews (righteousness by faith). A remnant of thetradition of Pauline authorship is found in the attempt to attribute the whole final chapter or the epistolary conclusion (13:22-25) to Paul.

In 403-4 John Chrysostom delivers 34 homilies on Hebrews. Chrysostom does notquestion Pauline authorship and places Hebrews during Pauls period of freedom after hisfirst imprisonment: Hebrews precedes 2 Tim chronologically ( Homilies on Hebrews,Argument 2; see also Koester 135-6). The language and literary from of Hebrewsindicates that the writer combined a high degree of competence in the Greek languageand Greco-Roman style of argumentation with knowledge of the OT and itsinterpretation. Candidates for authorship include individuals such as Barnabas, Luke,Apollos, Silvanus, the deacon Philip, and Priscilla and Aquila. The book of Actsdescribes Apollos as a native of Alexandrea . . . an eloquent man, well-versed in thescriptures (18:24).

Tertullian (ca. 155-220) suggested an alternative candidate to Paul, namely

Barnabas. He was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36) and Luke interprets his name tomean son of consolation ( ui`o.j paraklh,sewj ). He was influential in the communityat Antioch and for a time was a close collaborator with Paul. All of this could fit theauthor of Hebrews, but the break between Paul and Barnabas suggests other wise(Attridge, 3). This is the reason why Barnabas is as unlikely as Paul for being the author of Hebrews.

An alternative candidate, Apollos, initially proposed by Luther has attracted agood deal of support. He is described in Acts 18:24 as eloquent and powerful in thescriptures. Apollos was an Alexandrian, which would comport well with the HellenisticJewish traditions represented in Philo of Alexandria. However, too little is known of hisspecific teaching to allow a positive identification.

Priscilla and her husband Aquila, the Jewish-Christian missionary couple knownform Acts and Pauls letters, has many of the same qualifications as Apollos, but theauthors masculine singular self-reference at 11:32 ( evpilei,yei me ga.rdihgou,menon o` cro,noj ) would seem to preclude her, either alone or with her husband. Silas or Silvanus and others remain too shadowy figures to warrant theattribution. Reconstructions of the situation in the Lycus Valley does not provide the keyto unlock the mysteries of Hebrews and Epaphras, who is mentioned in Philemon andColossians ranks as Silas in probability. There are even more obscure candidates such asAristion (an elder mentioned by Papias), Timothy, the deacon Philip, and Mary, themother of Jesus (see Josphine Massyngbaerde Ford, The Mother of Jesus and theAuthorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, ExpTim 35 [1923-24]:375-6.) are even less

probable.Johnson (40) argues against Pauline authorship based on the following reasons:

first, the letter is not ascribed to Paul, but is anonymous. Second, it contains none of theautobiographical remarks that are so characteristic even of the disputed Pauline letters;the author speaks as one who received the good news from others. Third, the vocabularyit shares with Paul it also shares with the broader Christian tradition. Fourth, the manner of citing scripture is different from that of Paul. Fifth, the mode of argumentation in Hebis distinctive in character.

2


3/34

These reasoning lead scholars today to think of the author of Hebrews as aanonymous author. He being a male (11:32), well educated, having rhetorical training,some acquaintance with Greek philosophical categories, and extensive experience in theexegesis of Jewish scriptures in the LXX. Attridge (5-6) acknowledges that he was of Jewish ancestry and had at some point come to accept Jesus as the Messiah. The author

may have been in association with the Pauline school, taking into consideration thereference to Timothy in 13:23.DateSimilarly to the authorship, the lack of abundant external controls makes the dating of Heb uncertain. The remarks of the author that the addressees had been believers for sometime (5:12) would seem to suggest that at least several decades have elapsed since the

beginning of the Christian movement. On the lower scale, not many commentators woulddate Heb before 60 CE. A definite time is the death of Jesus, which is usually datedaround 31 CE. On the upper end the date is anchored by the use of Heb in 1Clement ,which is conventionally dated to 96 CE, but both, the dependence as well as the date of 1Clement have been challenged. However, nobody can deny the literary dependence of

36.2-6: who, being the brightness of his majesty, is by so much greater than angels as hehas inherited a more excellent name. . . . Who makes his angels spirits, and hisministers a flame of fire. . . . Sit on my right hand until I make your enemies afootstool of thy feet.

Many scholars argue that the date range can be more narrowly compressed andsuggest a date before 70 CE the year of the destruction of the temple during the JewishRevolt against Rome. The reference to the cultic activity in the present tense (cf. 7:27-28;8:3-5; 9:7-8, 25; 10:1-3, 8; 13:10-11) are, at least on the surface, more promising. Tworeasons against this argument: first, there are other writers who write after 70 CE and alsouse the present tense when describing the now defunct cult (Josephus Ant. 4.6.1-8 102-50 and others); second, Hebrews is not explicitly interested in the Herodian temple andcontemporary high priests, but in the Torah and the cultic system of the desert tabernaclethat it portrays. Another argument is often advanced to support a pre-70 date, namely thetext lacks any reference to the destruction of the temple, as is found in works such as

Barn. 16.4. If the Jerusalem temple had been destroyed, it is difficult to imagine that theargument would proceed as it does. One would think that some reference would naturally

be made, not to a covenant growing obsolete and a cult being ineffective, but rather to acovenant proven to be broken and a cult demonstrated by Gods action as a thing of the

past. However, arguments from silence are always questionable, but this one has certain plausibility to it even though it cannot be decisive. Likewise, the readers experienceharassment but not martyrdom, the engagement with the Jewish cult as a contemporary

phenomenon suggests a time early in the Christian movement. The date of thecomposition between 45, a little bit more than a decade after Christs death and before thedestruction of the temple.

As many scholars opt for a post-70 date, as do for a pre-70 date, based ontheological, typological, and literary affinities. Thus the high Christology, especially inthe exordium, and the parallels with the Lukan corpus, the Pastorals, and 1 Peter aretaken to be warrants for a dating in the 70s and 80s. It should be obvious that the highChristology of Heb does not prove anything with respect to dating, since our earliestChristian writer, Paul, has an equally high Christology. Hebrews lacks any sign of an

3


4/34

elaborate ecclesial structure: beyond the simple reference to the leaders (13:7, 17, 24).The only indication within the text of Heb that a date might be before the uppermost limitallowed by 1Clement is the reference to Timothy (13:23), on the presupposition that thisis Pauls companion. The most probable range of dates within which Heb. Was composedis thus 60 to 96 CE.

Symbolic World of HebrewsThe symbolic world of Heb is shaped by Greco-Roman culture in its language, rhetoric but it is equally formed by the world of Judaism, especially through the LXX and thesacrificial cult. Both these cultural realms are reshaped by the developing Christianmovement within which Heb stands.

1. Greco-Roman CultureHebrews shares the worldview of a specific stream with in Greek philosophy that isassociated with Plato (see. J. W. Thompson, The Beginnings of Christian Philosophy:The Epistle to the Hebrews [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998], 89-94.). By the firstcentury CE Platos classic metaphysical theories, as expressed for example in his

Republic 509D-512B and Timaeus 27C-29D, had been filtered through many schools and

had been appropriated by others. This view of reality draws a sharp distinction betweenthe phenomenal world, which is the realm of materiality, characterized by movement,change, and corruption always passing away, a world capable of being known only

partially and the nomenal world, characterized by changelessness and incorruptibility because it is spiritual in nature. Platonists regarded as more real the spiritual world of ideas. The material world of change and motion can be known only in part andimperfectly, through opinions. For Platonists, the noumenal realm is also better thanthe phenomenal realm. Hebrews shares the Platonic language that we find in Philo andalso much of the same outlook. Heaven and earth are not simply cosmological butontological: the realm which God dwells is more real and true that the realm of humanactivity. The worship of Jewish priests in the tent is but a copy and shadow of the trueworship (8:5). The law is a shadow rather than the real image of the good things tocome (10:1). Jesus enters the genuine tent in his resurrection (8:2), a sanctuary notmade by hands, a copy of the real things, but into heaven itself (9:24). In contrast to therepeated offerings of earthly priests through time, Jesus priestly act is one that is oncefor all because it takes place in the real of true being, namely heaven (9:26). Yet inHeb Platonism is also reworked, but in Philo Platonism remains static and ahistoric. Hebhas an acute sense of history, or perhaps more accurately, of eschatology. God spoke of old and now speaks decisively in his Son (1:1-2). The events of the past serve as types or examples for the present, which is greater and more real (4:11). Even more important,Hebrews appreciates rather than deprecates the physical. Only because Jesus had ahuman body could he be a priest (2:17; 10:5). Jesus opened the new living way to Godthrough the veil that is his flesh (10:20). Thus Hebrews softens the sharpness of Platonicdualism. Platonism in Heb is reshaped by engagement with scripture, and by theexperience of a historical human savior whose death and resurrection affected all human

bodies and earthly existence.2. Judaism

Hebrews has some 41 citations from the LXX: 14 from the Law (Gen. 6, Exod. 2 Deut.6), 1 from the historical book (1 Sam./1 Chron.), 7 from the prophets (Isa. 3, Jer. 2, Hab.1, Hag. 1) , and 19 from the Writings (1 from Prov., 18 from Ps.). Hebrews introduces

4


5/34

scriptural citations usually with: God spoke in the past (1:1). The expression is entirelyoral (exception 10:7 ge,graptai ). Scripture is not a collection of ancient texts, but thevoice of the living God: the word of God is living and more powerful (4:12). How doesHeb interpret scripture? Unlike Philo, Heb does not engage in allegorical interpretation,apart from the modest etymological exercise on Melchizedek in 7:2. Heb applies texts of

Scripture directly to Christ, on the assumption that the person of whom the text spokewas the Messiah. The cult of Israel is synecdoche (a part for the whole) for covenant. The body stands for the self, and blood stands for life (Lev 17:11). On another note, Heb usesseveral rabbinic principles of interpretation. At least two we will mention: the a fortioriargument, which is an argument from the lesser to the greater (2:2-4; 9:13-14; 10:28-29;12:25). The argument holds that if something is true for the lesser, it is even more true for the greater case. The other one is gezara shawa . This is an argument form verbal analogy.The presence of the same words (or cognates) in different passages of scripture allows averse form one historical context to be correlated with verses form other contexts (see1:5-13 based on Son, angels, and the pl. pronoun your). A complex example of thisuse is found in Heb 4:1-11 where the rest in the land is connected to the Sabbath rest.

Another manifestation of 1st

century Jewish life in which we find a set of convictionsremarkably similar to Hebrews is that of the Qumran community in which we find anew covenant (1QS 1:16-18 [Rule of the community]) and an interest in theMelchizedek figure (11 QMelch). There are however, equally important points of divergence: Hebrews rejects the laws of purity and diet about which Qumran was veryconcerned (1QS 1:11-12; 6:17-22); does not advocate a withdrawal from the godless or an absolute community of possessions (1QS 3:2; 5:2-3).

3. ChristianityHebrews resembles most obviously Paul, as in the conviction that Christ has given anaccess to God (Heb 4:16; 10:19-22; Rom 5:1; Eph 2:18), or in understanding of Jesusfaith as obedience (Heb 5:1-10; Rom 5:12-21). One should also consider the contrast

between milk for babies and solid food for adults (Heb 5:11-14; 1 Cor 3:3). Hebrewsalso resembles the Gospel of John: it begins with a preexistent Word and a Son throughwhom all things are created (Heb 1:2-5; John 1:1-18), and does not regard the flesh(Heb 2:14; 5:7; 10:20) as a attitude hostile to God but as a sign of human weakness andmortality (John 1:13-14; 3:6; 18:15). Perhaps most striking are the parallels between Heband 1 Pet, which calls also itself an exhortation. The emphasis in both on the death of Jesus in cultic terms as the sacrifice of an innocent victim (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet 1:19;2:22; 3:18), and the sprinkling of his blood (Heb 10:22; 12:24; 1 Pet 1:2), as well as inthe implied characterization of the church as a pilgrim people (Heb 11:8-16; 12:22;13:14; 1 Pet 1:1; 2:11). Hebrews calls for the standard Christian practices such as: prayer (13:15), hospitality (13:2), care for prisoners (10:34; 13:3), chaste sexual life (13:4),sharing possessions (13:16), avoiding love for money (13:5). Hebrews encouragesattendance at assemblies (10:25) and respect for leaders of the community (13:7, 17).Overall, Hebrews is not utterly idiosyncratic, but gives full attention to topics which are

play a central role in other Christian writings.Literary FormThe author characterizes his work in 13:22 as a brief word of exhortation, which is bestunderstood as a form of oral discourse or speech (see Acts 13:15, where Paul is invited togive a logos prakleseos at worship). Four stylistic features indicate Hebrews oral

5


6/34

character. First, the use of the 1 st person pl. (we/us/our), a technique that allows thespeaker to identify with the hearers while also asserting authority. Second is the wayreferences to speaking and hearing rather than writing and reading are used: . . . of which we speak (2:5); . . . even though we are speaking this way (6:9); Now the

point of what is being said . . . (8:1); And what more should I say? (11:32). Third is

the masterful alteration between exposition and exhortation, which allows the orator todrive the point home without loosing the hearers attention (exposition 1:1-14 andexhortation 2:1-4 etc.). The fourth characteristic is the manner in which themes areintroduced but only later developed, thus creating a wavelike, cumulative effect (Jesusfellowship with humans in 2:14-18 is made thematic in 5:1-10; his role as priest in 4:14or 5:1-10 is developed fully in 7:1-9:28).

Usually commentators follow one of three approaches to the structure of Hebrews. The simplest is the traditional topical approach focusing on the subjects beingdiscussed (the high priest hood of Christ 4:14-6:20; the order of Melchizedek 7:1-28;etc.). The second approach focuses on discourse analysis. The advantage of thisapproach is that it pays close attention to the Greek text. The disadvantage is its

overstatement of the chiastic role in Hebrews with the climax in Heb 8:1 and it misses thelinear and cumulative force of Hebrews argument. The third approach results fromscholars rediscovery of ancient rhetoric as described by Aristotle and Quintilian.Aristotle distinguished three forms of rhetoric: the forensic, which asks of the hearers a

judgment concerning past actions; the deliberative, which urges hearers to make adecision concerning future actions; and the epideictic, which asks readers to respond witha judgment of praise or blame for subject presented. Hebrews is clearly not forensic,since it neither prosecutes nor defends a case. In favor of epideictic is the pervasive useof honor and shame language, the use of comparison, and the encomium in praises of theheroes of faith in chapter 11. In favor of deliberative rhetoric, is the clear hortatory

purpose of the composition as a whole. Each exposition turns to exhortation. It is perhaps best to think of Hebrews as deliberative rhetoric with epideictic features.AddresseesWhere the audience was located, what its characteristics were, and what problems itfaced can only be determined on the basis of inferences from the work itself.DestinationIt is assumed in the light of Heb 10:32-34, that the author addresses a specificcommunity. The opinion of ancient commentators and some modern is that theaddressees were situated in Palestine (Chrysostom, PG [Patrologia graeca] 63.9-14;Jerome, De vir. illust. [De viris ilustibus] 5; Theodore of Mopsuestia, PG 66.952; as wellas Buchanan, 255-6; Hughes, 19). The alternative, first proposed by J. J. Wettstein isRome or some house church within the Roman community (Grsser, 151; Spicq 1. 232;Bruce, xxiv-xxv; Raymond E. Brown and John P. Meier, Antioch and Rome , 139-58).There have been other suggestions as well (Samaria, Antioch, Corinth, Cyprus, Ephesus,Colossae). One possible indication of destination is the remark in the postscript (13:24)sending the greetings of those from Italy ( oi` avpo. th/j VItali,aj ). This designationhas been understood to suggest that some individuals form Italy were sending greetings

back home, such as Aquila and Priscilla or that they might even send greetings tocollaborators anywhere in the Mediterranean. External evidence seem to indicate thatgreetings were send to Rome because Hebrews is attested in Rome in 1 Clement and the

6


7/34

affinities between Heb and 1 Pet., which was written from Babylon (5:13), a symbolicdesignation for Rome.Theories about the situation of the addresseesThe issue here is their ethnic identification. That they are Christians seems to be clear from the appeal to hold on to their confession. Highly debated is whether they were

Jewish Christian or Gentile Christian or a mixed community. Those who adopted primarily a Jewish Christian audience saw the dynamics in Heb as an attraction back toJudaism (relapse theory), the longing for the temple cult, the attraction of the audience toa safe status of religio licita enjoyed by Judaism etc. Little in the composition suggests

positive attraction from another source. The obvious candidate would be the shortwarning not to be drawn away by various and strange teachings (13:9), which is neither extensive nor highly specific. That the relapse theory has little support in the text itself isevident from the introduction of Christ as firstborn (1:6; a messianic term) without

justifying its use or talking about Christ without arguing his messiaship. Furthermore, if the audience would be in danger of relapsing they would neglect their Lord, but Heb 2:3warns not of neglecting the Lord, but the salvation declared through the Lord. The issue

in Heb 3-4 is the antithesis of unfaithfulness and obedience, not joining another community. Therefore external pressure by living too long without honor or esteem intheir society while deprived of the promised rewards and the waning commitment to thecommunities confessed faith, seem to best describe the situation of the audience.On the other hand, the scholars since the early 19 th century who argue for a Gentile or mixed audience have found factors at work such as persecution, the delay of the parousia,general fatigue, doubt, and a lassitude that naturally developed in a community grown tooaccustomed to its initial commitment.

It is recognized that the title pro.j `Ebrai,ouj , which was current already in 2 ndcentury Alexandria prior to any manuscript attestation of Heb., is an ancient conjectureabout the addressees. Similar scribal conjectures are found in the titular subscripts of

various MSS, and they obviously provide little reliable information about the intendedaudience of Heb. Obviously features in the text, such as its appeal to Jewish cultictraditions or sophisticated exegetical arguments do not necessarily indicate a JewishChristian audience. Other Jewish Christian authors, such as Paul, write to what areexclusively or predominantly Gentile communities, such as Galatia or Corinth, and arguewith Jewish techniques and themes. We can observe that the author puts the angels in

place subordinate to Christ (1:5-14; 2:2), much as Paul did in writing to the Galatians(Gal 3:19; 4:9) and to the Colossians (Col 1:16; 2:18). Likewise Heb puts Moses in his

place below Christ (Heb 3:2-6), as Paul did in writing to the Galatians (Gal 3:19) andCorinthians (2 Cor 3:7-18). From the response the author of Heb gives in his epistle itappears that he conceives the threat to the community in two categories: external pressureor persecution (10:36-12:13) and a waning commitment to the communitys confessedfaith. To the first he responds with his stern warnings and his exhortations to faithfuldiscipleship. To the second he proposes a renewed and deepened understanding of thecommunitys confession that will inspire covenant fidelity.

Hebrews has been addressed to a community of Christians who obviouslyunderwent at least a three phase development. The first phase encompassed the

proclamation by the ear witnesses of the Lords message and later conveyed it to theaudience of Hebrews. This proclamation of the message was accompanied by both signs

7


8/34

and miracles and the distribution of the Holy Spirit. Those who came to faith were thosewho were enlightened, led to repentance and faith, tasted of the heavenly gift and thegood word of God, followed by baptism and the laying on of hands. By the confession of their faith the community received its group identity and distinguished itself from theoutside world. The second phase was characterized by conflict with those outside the

community and solidarity among those inside the community. These phenomena helpedreaffirm the groups distinctive identity, while promoting support for one another. It canalso weaken the affiliation to the group. This seems to be, at least, partially the problemin the third phase of this groups history. While some members continued to care for theothers in the community some showed signs of malaise. The culmination of thesetendencies could be apostasy, according to the author. Therefore the sermon encourages

perseverance rather than shrinking back.Pursuing the profile of the audience it seems that a shift in approaching Hebrews

has taken place away from a Jewish readership to a Gentile one and back to a mixedaudience. In favor of a Jewish Christian readership speak the facts that the author moveseasily through the Old Testament Scripture and its rabbinic methods of interpretation

which presuppose that the audience must have been familiar with them to a certaindegree. In favor of a Gentile Christian readership speak phrases such as repentance fromdead works, faith toward God, and enlightenment, which were ways of expressingconversion from paganism to Christianity. Also the basic teachings mention in Heb 6:1-2are seen by proponents of this view as topics used by Jews in their proselytizing missionto Gentiles. The acquaintance with the LXX and rabbinic methods of interpretingscripture were due to the socializing process into the sect, according to scholars who

prefer this view. The best reasons seem to support a mixed ethnic background. This is theview adopted in this work. The author calls the ancestors fathers rather than our fathers.The epistle never mentions Jews or Christians, the Temple or circumcision, never makesnegative references to Jews or Gentiles, and refrains from divisive references to Jews or Gentiles. The important group to belong to is the

lao,jof God. If credibility is attributed

to R. Brown then all types of Christianity were a mixture of Jewish Christians and their Gentile converts.Hebrews, Judaism, and Early ChristianityCritics have tended to see Heb as a Christian heir of one or another Jewish tradition,either the highly assimilated, philosophically oriented Judaism of the Greek-speakingdiaspora represented by Philo of Alexandria at one end of the spectrum or the intenselyeschatological Judaism represented by the Qumran sectarians at the other. The extreme

positions claiming a direct and exclusive dependence of Heb on either Philo (see RonaldH. Williamson, Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews [Leiden: Brill,1970]) or the Essenes(see F.F. Bruce, To the Hebrews or To the Essenes? NTS 9 [1962-3]:217-32.) have

been refuted. Heb does not display the same elaborate allegorical exegetical techniques asPhilo. Neither doe the text display the same consistent philosophical interpretation of Jewish tradition as does Philo. At the same time there are undeniable parallels thatsuggest that Philo and our author are indebted to similar traditions of Greek-speaking and

thinking Judaism.Heb is rather very close to 1 Pet as mentioned before. The two texts self-described

exhortations (Heb 13:22; 1 Pet 5:12) share much of the imagery for describing thework of Christ. Both focus on Christ who was manifested (Heb 9:26; 1 Pet 1:20; 5:4),

8


9/34

at the end of days (Heb 1:2; 1 Pet 1:20). His once for all death is a central salvific event(Heb 7:27; 9:26; 10:12; 1 Pet 3:18) and that death is portrayed in cultic terms, as thesacrifice of a sinless victim (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet 1:19; 2:22; 3:18). The death of Christis not the end of his story and both texts highlight his exaltation, relying on Ps 110 (Heb1:3-4, 13; 4:14; 5:6; 8:1; 10:12; 1 Pet 3:21-22). The application of Christs sacrifice,

imaged as a sprinkling of blood (Heb 10:22; 12:24; 1 Pet 1:2) and connected with baptism (10:22; possibly 6:4; 1 Pet 3:20-21), removes sin (Heb 9:11-14, 23-26; 1 Pet1:20; 2:22-24), affects conscience (Heb 9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 1 Pet 2:19; 3:16, 21. 1 Pet doesnot speak of cleansing of conscience as does Heb), provides access to God (Heb 10:19-20; 1 Pet 3:18) and sanctifies (Heb 10:10, 29; 1 Pet 1:2; 2:22). For more connections

between Heb and 1 Pet see Attridge, 31. The large body of common traditions gives someindication of the 1 st century Christian milieu, with its rich store of images, out of whichthe two authors developed their exhortations.Theology of HebrewsThe character of the SonThe Christology of Hebrews can be summarized under three aspects: the pre-existence,

the humanity, and the exultation of the Son.The pre-existence of the Son is emphatically affirmed by the fact that he is said to be theagent through whom al things were created (1:2). He clearly existed before the materialcreation. Since the Son plays a part in creation shows that he performs the same functionwhich is elsewhere in Scripture attributed to God. In the course of the epistle there arefurther hints which agree with this concept of Christs pre-existence. In the writersapplication of Ps 8 in 2:9 there is the implication that Jesus was made to adopt a status lower than the angels which he did not naturally have. In 7:3 Melchizedek is made likethe Son of God, not vice versa, which must mean that Christ predated Melchizedek.When the author speaks of Christs pre-existence he is thinking of the Son as sharing thedivine nature. Such expressions as the reflection and very stamp (1:3) are sufficient toshow that.The humanity of Christ. To be a true representative the Son must become man. This isgrasped in 2:17 where the writer shows that the Son had to be made like his brethren inorder to fulfill the function of a merciful and faithful high priest. Some of the clearestreferences to the earthly life of Jesus outside the Gospels occur in this epistle. The agonyin Gethsemane seems to be directly alluded to in 5:17ff, where Jesus loud cries and tearsare mentioned. The ministry of Jesus is alluded to in 2:3. The hostility which he rousedagainst himself is mentioned in 12:3. Such events as the cross (12:2), the resurrection(13:20) and the ascension (1:3) are assume to be basic knowledge. The next question iswhether the Son of God became fallen man. The answer of the author is negative. Hetwice affirms the sinlessness of Jesus (4:15; 7:26), while at the same time he agrees thatJesus was tempted in all points as we are. This shows that sinlessness was not consideredto be the result of non-exposure to sin, but rather to be an evidence of a positive conquestover sin. Another aspect of the humanity of Jesus is his perfection. Being made perfectthrough suffering (2:10) raises problems, these are lessened if the idea of perfection isseen to consist in bringing a process to completion. The writer cannot conceive that thewhole plan of salvation could stand if Jesus had not suffered, and he sees this as part of the process of consummation. It was only because of his suffering/obedience that he has

become the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him.

9


10/34

The exaltation of Jesus. We see Jesus exalted in the opening verses of Heb as if, even before dwelling on the humanity of Christ, the author wants his readers/hearers to knowabout the exalted position of the Son. Our high priest is seated at the right hand of God(8:1; 12:2). He is described as heir of all things (1:2), which does not simply point to afuture inheritance, but indicates what he has already entered into. Another aspect of the

Son is the idea of the forerunner (6:20). The author shows that he has already gone intothe heavenly sanctuary.The Son as High PriestAlthough the theme is very important is not introduced at once, but gradually. The high

priest had to be like his brethren (2:17); he had to be merciful and faithful (2:17); he hadto make expiation for the sins of the people (2:17); above all he had to be able tosympathize with the people he represented (4:15). In 5:1ff the main qualification stressedis that Jesus was appointed by God, however, he lacks one essential qualification for eligibility to the Aaronic priesthood: he belongs to the tribe of Judah, not Levi. There wasno way of maintaining that Jesus was a high priest of the Levitical type. If he was to be ahigh priest at all it would have to be of a different kind, and the writer identifies that new

order of priesthood with Melchizedek. The aspects of the Melchizedek high priesthoodcan be summarized: first, it is different from Aarons. The difference does not simplyreside in its superiority, nor in the priestly functions, but in the order to which it belongs.The Melchizedek priesthood is a class of its own and rests on a different quality of life(the power of indestructible life, 7:15, 16). Second, Melchizedeks order is timeless. It isnot subject to the many limitations which affected the Aaronic priests. Third, the order of Melchizedek is royal. Genesis calls Melchizedek king of Salem, but our author adds hisinterpretation kin of peace. Unlike Aarons order, another order exists which is royal.Melchizedek provides a type for the royal priesthood of Christ. Fourth, Melchizedeksorder is changeless in strong contrast to the constantly changing personnel of the Aaronicorder. When on high priest died another was raised to take his place. Such change wasnot necessary with the order of Melchizedek.The Sons work as High PriestOn the Day of Atonement the high priest would take sacrificial blood as an atonement to

be sprinkled seven times on the mercy seat (Lev 16). The fact that the author goes indetails with regard to describing the holy of holies (9:1ff) shows that for him there was aclose connection between the Aaronic ritual and the self-offering of Christ. The Leviticalcultus was seen to be a copy and shadow (8:5) of the heavenly sanctuary. Not only thelocation of the offering was different, the offering itself was of a different kind. The high

priest, in an unprecedented way offers himself. It does not worry the writer that the OTanalogy breaks down. He shows that Christs blood can purify the conscience, which theLevitical offerings could not. Of paramount importance to the author is the effectivenessof the sacrifice, it was once for all (7:27; 9:12, 26; 10:10). There was never anyquestion of repetition. Heb 8:1-10:18 takes the space to show the superior sacrifice thatChrist made. The results are: first, we note the purification for sins, which appears notonly in the introduction (1:3), but recurs at other times (9:23; 10:2f). The old Leviticalorder could not remove sins (10:4), but he is convinced that what is lacking in the old isamply covered in the new through Christ. The cleansing theme reaches its climax in10:22 where the readers are exhorted to draw near to God because their hearts have beencleansed from an evil conscience (9:14). Second, stress is laid on the perfection theme.

10


11/34

Through Christs single offering he is said to have perfected for all time those who aresanctified (10:14). It should be noted that this feature of Christs work lends no supportto the theory of sinless perfection. The perfection theme in Heb runs parallel to Paulsdoctrine of justification, although approaching it from a different angle. Third, theconcept of sanctification needs further emphasis, for it occurs not only in 10:14 but also

in 2:11; 10:10, 29; 13:12. Sanctification is concerned with setting something apart for aholy purpose. This is the work of God through Christ. Although the offering of Christ isonce for all, his work o mans behalf is nevertheless continuing, as is also his work of intercession (4:15; 7:25).The Sons inauguration of the new covenantSince at the heart of the Christian memorial to Christs death, in the Lords Supper, thereis reference to the new covenant, the teaching of this epistle on the theme has specialsignificance. The writer states that the old is obsolete (8:13), there is some continuity

between the old and the new. The old, like the new, was ordained by God. It was Gods provision for his people. Immediately after mentioning the obsolete character of the oldcovenant, the writer goes on to speak with evident appreciation of the furniture of the

centre of worship under that covenant (9:1ff). The recipients of the new covenant had nogreater claims upon God than those of the old. The greater significance of the new did notrest in an agreement between God and a better people. It is superior entirely because ithas a better mediator. It is based on a more effective removal of sins. The quotation fromJer. 31:31-34 in Heb 8:2-12 draws attention to the inward character of the new covenant.Its results will be of a high ethical order. When Gods laws are written on human heartsthey will work out in human lives. This inward character marks out the new covenant asclearly superior to the old. It is within the context of the new covenant that the warningsagainst falling away (2:1-4; 6:1-8; 10:29) have relevance. They are intended to warnagainst the serious consequences of rejecting the gracious provisions of God. The author uses the concept of faith much in Heb. The statement in 11:1 that faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things, not seen, shows the main idea is a closeconnection between faith and hope. The great men/women of the past (chapter 11) wereforward-looking. The basis of their exploits was seen to be trust in God who would turntheir present distresses into ultimate victory.

The magnificent prayer which ends the epistle (13:20-21) mentions the nature of God (God of peace), the resurrection of Christ, the function of Christ (shepherd), the

blood of the covenant, and the practical application (that you may do what is pleasing inGods sight).COMMENTARYHeb 1. The first 4 verses of the text consist of a single constructed periodic sentence thatencapsulates many of the key themes that will develop in the following chapters. Thewhole Christology of Heb is based on the exalted Son and the sacrificial, priestly act bywhich atonement for sin was done. The contrast between eschatological and protologicalaspects of the Sons activity is described in vv. 2-3. Heb lacks any formal epistolaryelements, apart from the few closing remarks (13:22-25). It also lacks the greeting sandthanksgiving characteristic of Pauls letters (e.g., Rom 1:1-15; 1 Cor 1:1-9). Instead thiscomposition begins with a prologue or exordium, extended through 4 verses.

11


12/34

1:1 the alliteration and assonance in the opening verse is heard in Greek. The 2 initialadverbs are designed for rhetorical effect. The first suggests that Gods speech of old wasdisjointed, coming in multiple segments or portions. The second suggests the formaldiversity of Gods word. Gods speech through the prophets contained oracles and stories(Hos 12:10), sometimes it came directly (Moses Exod 33:11; Num 12:8), in visions or

dreams (Gen 46:2; Deut 13:1), in theophanies (Exod 19:17-25), and at other time in a stillsmall voice (1 Kgs 19:11-12). While the initial adverbs are not necessarily pejorative,they serve here to contrast the two phases of the divine address, to the disadvantage of theearlier. Since there is a clear contrast between the old and new way of communicating,there is no sense that the two phases stand in contradiction to one another. In each case itis the same God who speaks and the same message of salvation that he offers. Thus thoseof old were evangelized just as we have been (4:2; 11:40). Gods speech of old wasdirected to the fathers, the spiritual ancestors of the new covenant. The fathers saysnothing about the Jewish background of the author or his addressees.

1:2 The decisive address of God to humanity occurs at the end of these days ( evpV

evsca,tou tw/n h`merw/n tou,twn ). The phrase is used in an eschatological sense.Gods final address comes not through prophets but through a Son ( evn ui`w/| ). Theexpression without a definitive article does not imply that there are many sons whom Godcould have chosen as agents of revelation. Rather it emphasizes the quality, one who hasthe characteristics of a son, the exalted status of that final agent. The affirmation the Godmade ( e;qhken ) the Son heir of all things introduces the theme of inheritance thatwill also conclude the chapter. Drawing on this tradition of inheritance, the earlyChristians affirm that Christ through his resurrection and exaltation, was given aheavenly inheritance that his followers share (the kingdom of God 1 Cor 6:9-10; eternallife Mark 10:17; immortality 1 Cor 15:50; heavenly city Rev 21:2-7). The Son and heir isalso the protological agent through whom God created the universe (cf. 11:3 without

reference to Christ; John 1:3, 10). The protological function of the Son points to hiseschatological victory. The term for what God created through the Son, the world(tou.j aivw/naj ), is unique in early Christian texts which confirm Christs protologicalrole. It can be translated as ages and be understood as a reference to this and the age tocome. Christs inheritance is not over land, but of a participation in Gods rule over creation, the basileia tou Theou (Matt 25:34; 1 Cor 6:9-10).

1:3 Some scholars are taking this verse as a part of early Christian hymnologicaltradition. The first image that Christ is the radiance or passively the reflection of Gods glory derives from Wis 7:26, where Sophia is said to be the radiance of theAlmighty. In the context some people understand the radiance as reflection because

of the parallel image imprint. However, the parallelism might not be synonymous butantithetical. The Son is also the imprint or stamp that a seal makes on a suface(carakth.r ) of the divine reality. Christ is depicted her in terms similar to those used byPhilo of the Logos which, as the image ( eivkw,n ; Spec. leg. 1.81) of God, functions as aseal. The intent of Heb is to express the Sons fully adequate representation of the divine.The term fundamental reality ( u`po,stasij ) appears 3 times in Heb with slightlydifferent nuances (3:14; 11:1). The sense of the word obviously derived from the medicaluse of the term for a sediment that collects at the bottom of, and thus stands under

12


13/34

(u`po, + i`,stamai ), a solution. Eventually the term meant whatever underlies a realityor its essence. The Son, who is intimately linked with the Father bears all things notonly creating but also sustaining the universe. What God is, the Son is: they share thesame imprint of being. The Pres. Ptc. fe,rwn should be understood as an ongoingsustaining activity of the agent of creation. Christs sustaining activity take place

through his powerful word, lit. through the word of his power. The Gen. nounduna,mewj should be understood as a descriptive Gen. The Son who was theinstrument of Gods creative activity is also the instrument of his salvific will because itis he who has made purification for sins. The term which describes this salvifickaqarismo,j is used only once more in 2 Pet 1:9 for Christs atoning sacrifice. The Ptc.Aor. poihsa,menoj is not only temporal (when he made purification), but also causal(because he made purification he sat down). The use of the Ptc. Aor. indicates that the

purification was completed and preceded the Sons exaltation, but not the act of saving(Heb 7:25). After the creation and redemption act Christ is the one who set at the right(hand), beside the Majesty, a reverential periphrasis for God. Reference to Christsexaltation is made through allusion to Ps 110:1. While it is an exaggeration to say that all

of Heb is a midrash on Ps 110, this text is of vital importance for the concepts found inHeb. There is no mention of Christs resurrection. Apart from 13:20 the author ignoresresurrection probably because he saw resurrection and exaltation as a single event(Attridge, 46).

1:4 Christ is now depicted as superior to the angels. The assertion that Christ issuperior ( krei,ttwn ) involves one of Hebrews most characteristic adjective (6:9; 7:7,19, 22,; 8:6; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16, 35, 40; 12:24). The terminology recalls the rabbinic or Greek rhetoric of the comparative a fortiori argument. The language used for the Sonssuperiority become and inherit ( geno,menoj ; klhronome,w ) is odd. Theimplication that Christ became the Son at some point should not be pressed. Maybe the

focus is on the inauguration, the reason for the odd language. Christs special status ismanifested in a more excellent name. This should not be surprising since in the biblicaltradition names and their alteration have a special significance. The Sons inheritance of the more excellent name refers back to 1:2: the Son whom God appointed heir. The moreexcellent name is precisely his designation as Lord. In the Biblical tradition, the nameis more than an arbitrary designator; it evokes the identity of the one named (cf. Gen2:19-20; Exod 3:13-15). In the LXX the name hyrios is used to translate theTetragrammaton (YHWH). The progression of exaltation and giving Jesus a name aboveall other names is made clear by Paul in Phil 2:9-11.What follows is a catena of 7 scriptural quotations, mostly from Ps about the Son. Heblaunches into the synkrisis (comparison) between the Son and the angels. The first 3

passages address the Son as also the last three, only the middle one addresses the angels.Such collections of messianic proof texts probably circulated in early Christian circles.The explicit purpose of the catena is to demonstrate Christs superiority to the angels.Various attempts have been made to find the background. It has been suggested that thecommunity was involved in worship of angels (cf. Col 2:18). However, the lack of anyexplicit discussion of such a problem in the text makes the hypothesis unlikely.Somewhat more promising is the thesis that the author was dealing with an angelicchristology, which compromised his unique status and minimized his redemptive death.

13


14/34

Verses 3-4 form a chiastic structure: a. the Son inherits all things; b. the Son participatesin creation; c. the Son makes purification for sins and sits at Gods right hand; b. the Sonis the image of God and sustains all things; a. the Son inherits a name greater thanangels. As often in chiasm, the middle term c is central both spatially and thematically.

1:5 The catena begins with a rhetorical question, to which of the angels did he ever say,which introduces the first 2 texts. In their original contexts, they reflect the ideology of Israel kingship, according to which the monarch, upon his accession to the throne,entered into a special relationship with God, become his adopted son. The second passagecomes from Nathans prophecy of Yahwehs promise to David that he would besucceeded by his son and that his house would be established forever. Early Christianapplied the first text to Christ (Rev 12:5; 19:15). The second text (2 Sam 7:14) theyapplied to believers not Christ (Rev 21:7). For modern scholars the combination of traditions concerning Christs exaltation and his pre-existence in vv. 4-5 seemscontradictory. It seems that the author of Heb sees the exalted Christ and the

proclamation of Christ as Son not as a new status but as what Christ has been all along.

The predicate Nom. in v. 5 is replaced by eivj pate,ra (eivj + Acc.; 2x in v.5) in the NT due to Semitic influences.

1:6 God is said to introduce the firstborn ( to.n prwto,tokon Subst. Adj.) into theworld. This introduction could be the incarnation, the parousia or the exaltation of theSon to the right hand of God. The second assumption is based on the adverb again. Theadv. does not need to be taken temporal (when God once again introduces . . . ), but tolink scriptural texts together. Oikumene is often translated as world, inhabited world.But for that meaning, Heb uses kosmos (4:3; 9:26; 10:5; 11:7, 38). In only one other placedoes Heb use oikumene (2:5): it was not to angels that he subjected the world to come.It is reasonable to conclude that oikumene here means world not in the sense of

cosmos, but in the sense of the realm of the divine presence. If this is the case, then theintroduction of the Son refers once more to his enthronement after he had for a littlewhile been made lower than the angels. The Sons coming into the world refers herenot to his incarnation but to the exaltation of the Son to Gods right hand. The titlefirstborn is a messianic title (Col 1:15; Rev 1:5). The text applied to the Son is Ps 97:7slightly modified from the LXX (worship him all you his angels). proskune,w takesthe Dir. Obj. in the dative with a imperative of command. The basic point is: if the angels

pay the Son homage by the bending of the knee, they acknowledge his superiority tothem.

1:7 The text is form Ps 104:4. The MT reads who makest the winds thy messengers andthe flames of fire thy servants. The translator of the LXX may have had in mindtheophanies in which meteorological phenomena were taken to be transformed angels.The LXX interpretation fits the argument of the auctor. This reference is not addressed toChrist.

1:8 The next citation Ps 45:7,8 was originally composed as a wedding song for anIsraelite king. Heb 1:8 has 3 possibilities for Qeo,j : subj. (God is your throne), predicatenom. (your throne is God), and vocative (your throne, O God, is forever). The vocative is

14


15/34

the best option because (1) it is an overstatement to argue that if a writer wanted toaddress God he could have used the vocative Qee, , because no where in the NT is tisdone except in Matt 27:46. The articular nom. for vocative is almost universal choice. (2)This is especially the case in quoting from the LXX, for the LXX is equally reticent touse the vocative form, most likely since Hebrew lacked such a form. (3) The accentuation

in the Hebrew of Ps 45:7 suggests that there should be a pause between throne andGod. (4) This view take seriously the me,n de, construction in vv. 7-8, while theS-PN view does not.

1:9 The theme of the monarchs justice is continued in the next stitch of the psalm. If thelove of justice and hatred of iniquity are exemplified anywhere in Hebrews, it is in thesacrifice and death of Christ. Here we have another syntactical ambiguity. The subject of the sentence may be construed as God, to which your God stands as apposition.Alternatively, the first reference to God may be taken as a vocative, as in v. 8, thusyielding, O God, your God. There is no formal Trinitarian theology, perhapsbinitarian would be appropriate. The oil of gladness shows a descriptive Gen. (oil

characterized by gladness), or a Gen. of Product (oil produced by gladness). Also weencounter a double accusative ( se e;laion ) one being the person the other the thing.Israelite kings, like priests (Exod 29:7) and prophets (1 Kgs 19:16) were anointed as partof their installation into office. In applying the psalm to Christ the author must havethought of the exaltation since no tradition speaks of a formal anointing of Jesus. By hisanointing the Israelite king was made superior to his fellows ( me,tocoj ).

1:10 In this text a person in distress implores God for assistance, while calling to mindGods universal sovereignty using poetic language. Our author focuses not on thedescription of human suffering but on the affirmation of the divine majesty, which isunderstood to describe the position of Christ as creator and redeemer, who is sovereign

over all things. ku,rie is the most used vocative in the NT. The Predicate Nom. usedhere shows definiteness in the PN even though it is anarthrous (the works of your hand).

1:11 Here the contrast are delineated between Christ, who remains forever, and thecreation of whatever sort, which passes away. This contrast is emphasized by the Nom.

pron. su. . The decay of the heavens suggests an eschatological perspective.

1:12 The clothing imagery of the psalm continues. As a cloak the heavens will not bechanged, but removed. The citation ends with a forceful affirmation of the eternalsameness of the Son which will be echoed in Heb 13:8.

1:13 The catena ends as it began with a rhetorical question, asking whether God ever saidto an angel what God said to the Son. Ps 110:1 became the passage in early Christianityexpressing Christological convictions. It is found in one pericope of the Synoptic Gospelsin an argument over the Davidic filiation of the Messiah (Matt 22:41-45; Mark 12;35-37;Luke 20:41-44). In the imagery of Near Eastern monarchy the supremacy of the king isexpressed by enemies who will lie prostrated as a footstool. Although, this portion of the catena comports ill with the comparison between Christ and his angels, since there isno enmity between them. Not so with the 1/3 of the evil angels.

15


16/34

1:14 The catena concludes with a comment on the angels. While the Son is seated inmajesty, the angels are but ministering spirits. Their ministry is not seen as a cultic one inthe heavenly sanctuary, but as the service they perform on earth for the heirs of salvation. The heir motive was already present in the exordium. tou.j me,llontaj

klhronomei/n being about to inherit is an complementary infinitive. Why thecomparison with the angels? The reality of angels as spiritual messengers (Matt !:20-24;28:2 etc.) and mediators (Gal 3:19) must be acknowledged, they must also be regarded asof less dignity than the one who, because of his exaltation to Gods right hand is calledLord.

Heb 2 The first four verses of chap.2 contain the first of many exhortations, whichincrease in length and intensity in the later portions of the text (10:19-39; 12:1-13:19).This passage form an interlude since the material that follows continues the comparisonof Christ and the angels.

2:1 Because of the superiority of Christ compared to angels the Christians as well as theauthor ought to take head. The metaphor used pararuw/men flow or slip awayappears twice in the LXX (Isa 44:4 flowing water; Prov 3:21 do not neglect) andthere might be a hint to a nautical metaphor (Luther, WA [1931] 349) according to whichthe addressees ought not, as a ship, slip by the safe harbor of salvation. The Acc. of gen.Ref. is found in prose,cein h`ma/j . The we is an inclusive pl. rather than anepistolary pl. since the epistolary pl. uses the Nom.

2:2 The most striking feature of vs. 2 is the accumulation of juridical expressions(proved legally valid, every infringement and disobedience, received appropriate

punishment), which confirms that the message declared by the angels signifies the law

delivered at Sinai. There is no indication that angels were present at the giving of the lawin Exod 19 or 20. In Deut 33:2, a passage celebrating the theophany of Sinai, Mosesdeclares that God came with myriads of holy ones, and the LXX adds, angels werewith him at his right hand. Prior to the first century, the conviction spread that angels

played a mediatorial role in the transmission of the law. In the Maccabean period thisthough finds its expression in the Book of Jubilees (1:27; 2:1, 26-27). Stephen speaks of the angel who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai (Acts 7:38; cf. vs. 53), while Pauldescribes the law as ordained by angels through an intermediary (Gal 3:19; cf. John7:19). Both para,basij (transgression) and parakoh. (disobedience) involved adeliberate rejection of the divine will. The thought expressed is that under the oldcovenant every infringement of the Mosaic ordinances and each rejection of the will of

God expressed in the law received appropriate redress. The experience of Israel in thisregard (cf. 3:7-4:11) provided a sobering model for those who were prone to becomeunresponsive to Gods revelation in the Son. The author arrests the attention of hishearers and reminds them that careless dealing with Gods revelation under the oldcovenant brought appropriate punishment. The if clause introduces a real conditionalsentence ( eiv + ind. mood).

16


17/34

2:3 The apodosis of the conditional sentence is a rhetorical question involving an afortiori argument. The rhetorical question how shall we escape? (Deliberate Future)calls for the reply that no escape is possible (Ptc. is a conditional Ptc. if neglecting sucha great salvation). The inauguration of the message took place through the Lord ( tou/kuri,ou ). The term Son, which was so prominent in the first chapter, is for the

moment replaced by this other Christological title used in the psalm quotation in 1:10.The ministry of the Lord marked the first phase of Gods final revelation. It wassucceeded by a second, which consisted of confirming the word ( evbebaiw,qh ). Themessage of salvation was proclaimed to those who did not have the privilege of hearingthe Lord by those who had been witnesses to his word and deed.

2:4 The result of speaking and hearing was tradition. The accent, however, in vs. 4 fallsupon outward, tangible evidence, which served to validate the message delivered to thecommunity. The spoken word was complemented by the visible demonstration of thegospel. Gods witness is snot simply verbal, but encompasses also miracles. Sings andwonders is to be taken as a fixed expression. The original pagan word te,raj

wonders, which denoted something unnatural and monstrous was brought within thescope of Gods redemptive activity on behalf of Israel in the LXX (Exod 7:3; Deut 4:34; :22). The bestowal of the charismatic gifts ( merismo,j ) of the Holy Spirit also served toattest the message proclaimed. The distribution of the Holy Spirit according to his willechoes Pauls language in 1 Cor 12:11. Some of this manifestations have beenexperienced by the audience since the author calls this experience tasting of the power of the world to come. diameri,zw of Acts 2:3 is synonymous with merismo,j andseems to allude to Pentecost in Acts 2.

2:5 With vs. 5 Heb moves away from exhortation back to the exposition of Scripture.This time Ps 8:5-7 demonstrates that the world to come of this discourse deals is not

intended for angels but for humans. As pointed out in 1:6 the term oikoumene , especiallyin combination with mellousa to come, refers no to the empirical world, kosmos but tothe real the Son entered at his exaltation to Gods right hand, and in which those whofollow him to glory (2:10) are also to enter. This great salvation of which Hebrewsspeaks is not an issue of being rescued from worldly conditions; it means participating ina higher order or reality. In other words, the heritage of the new people of God lies not inthe present world but in the new creation inaugurated by the enthronement of the Son.

2:6-8 The citation comes from Ps 8:4-6. Between the MT and the LXX the only major difference is in the designation of the beings to whom the human being is subjected. The

psalmist speaks of gods, ( myhla ) which the LXX translated as angels a feature that

makes the text suitable to the current argument. The original psalm in both Hebrew andGreek praises the power and majesty of God. The psalmist contrasts that majesty with thelowliness of humanity, asking what is human being that God should remember him.Early Christian alluded to it in connection with the exaltation of Christ (Phil 3:21; Eph1:22; and 1 Cor 15:25-27). For Heb salvation is accomplished by the Son of Man,namely Jesus. Son of Man is a title used in the Gospels (Matt 13:41; 19:28; 24:27) andmaybe an allusion to the Dan 7:13. The crowning with glory and honor is a reference tothe enthronement of Jesus at Gods right hand (1:4), and the subjecting of all tings

17


18/34

beneath his feet a reference to the declaration of Ps 110:1: The Lord said to my lord, sitat my right hand until I place your enemies as a footstool for your feet (1:13). When Ps8 is read with reference to Jesus the phrase bracu, ti (vs. 7) can be taken in the temporalsense of for a while. The Son who never ceases to bear the world by his powerful word(1:3) has been lowered for a time below the angels, and is now crowned with glory and

honor by virtue of his exaltation to Gods right hand. For Heb the psalm is not ameditation on the lofty status of humankind in the created order, but an oracle thatdescribes the humiliation and exaltation of Jesus. Grammatically, the evn tw/| + Inf. =when (simultaneous action of the Inf. with the controlling verb) should result in for when he subjected all things to him, he left nothing

2:9 This vs. identifies the man and son of man mentioned in the psalm. This is thefirst mention of the name of Jesus in the composition. As in 3:1; 6:20; 7:22; 10:19; 12:2;12:24 and 13:12 the name appears without any title attached. Jesus is not portrayed as onewho is only a trifle inferior to the angels. He has shared fully in the fate of his brethren,assuming blood and flesh and the suffering they entail. His subjection is temporary,

since it was followed by his crowning. The manner in which Jesus was made lower than the angels is not due to his incarnation, but rather due to his suffering of death. Theincarnation of Jesus would not have lowered him below the angels, for the Son never ceases being the one who sustains the universe. But the Son has so entered the sphere of human existence that he embraced mortality, in contrast to the ministering spirits (1:14)who need not face death. The verb taste is used in the LXX in a literal sense of tastingfood (1 Sam 14:24; Job 34:3), and in the metaphorical sense of experience (Ps 33:8).The metaphor of tasting death is powerful and reminds us of Jesus drinking the cupof suffering (Matt 20:22; 26:27, 29). On another note, Jesus is said to give his life as aransom in exchange for many (Mark 10:45), to give his body in behalf of you (Luke22:20; 1 Cor 11:24), to pour out his blood in behalf of many (Mark 14:24). Hebrews

extends the others of whom Jesus died, to everyone.The following section vv. 10-18 continue on Christ as Gods word to the world and for the first time the theme of Christ as High Priest is mentioned. Verses 10 and 18 bracketthe passage. Vs. 10 speaks of the Sons suffering from Gods perspective in bringingmany children to his presence; vs. 18 speaks from the side of human experience of thecapacity of the Son to be a faithful and merciful priest because he was tested and sufferedlike other humans. The middle section talks about Jesus who gives help to the children of Abraham (16), how Jesus and humanity have the same origin (11), both have been tested(180, and both share blood and flesh and the terror of death (14-15).

2:10 The adjective many does not negate the for everyone of 2:9. The goal to whichGod is leading those many is important, namely glory. The Son has been crowned withglory and honor (Dar. of Mat., the material of Christs coronation) because he entered atthe right hand of God (1:3). Gods intention is to draw not only Jesus but all other humans into that same transcendent sphere those who are his many sons. Glory is heresynonymous with so great a salvation (2:3) and the world to come (12:5). How cansuffering be connected to God as appropriate? The language of perfection iswidespread in Hellenistic culture. In philosophy the term applies to those who

18


19/34

accomplished full moral maturity (Plato, Laws 653A). Religiously, such language appliesto those who have completed an entire series of initiations, as in the Mysteries (Philo,

Life of Moses 2.149). In the LXX the adjective perfect can be used of an unblemishedanimal (Exod 12:5) as well as for moral achievement (Gen 6:9, 1 Kgs 15:3). Christs

perfection is certainly not a development of his moral capabilities since he is sinless

(4:15; 7:26; 9:14). Neither is Christs perfection a cultic installation, although as a resultof Christs perfecting, he serves as the sanctified High Priest. Christs perfecting may beunderstood as a vocational process by which he is made complete or fit for his office. The

process involves, not a moral dimension, but an existential one, namely his suffering.Christ becomes the perfect model, who has learned obedience (5:8), and the perfectintercessor, merciful and faithful (2:17). Heb makes suffering an essential process of

perfection and anticipates the statement in 5:8-9. By implication, suffering is also themeans by which those whom the Son leads to Gods presence will also be perfected.

2:11 If vs. 10 talked about perfection through suffering then the comment in vs.11 suiteswell that both sanctifier and sanctified are from the same source. True sanctification

involves primarily the cleansing of conscience from sin (9:14). The ones beingsanctified are not animals or grain offerings, but human beings. This is made clear bythe insistence that sanctifier and sanctified are from one source. The priest is takenfrom among men for worship of God (5:1). The phrase evx e`no.j , out of one canrefer to a common creation by God or referring to a common human ancestor, namelyAbraham. Since the point about the Sons taking hold of Abrahams descendants will

bee made explicit in 2:16 that is the most obvious sense intended by the author (Johnson,97). For Attridge, the most likely identification of the one is God based (1) on thequotation of vs. 10 and (2) also the Theo centric context of the passage and (3) onemight be a reverential for God and (4) the one who sanctifies points to a divine function.The formulation he is not ashamed to call them brothers may contain an allusion to

Jesus warning (Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26). This affirmation provides the encouragementneeded by the audience of Heb. In a society of honor and shame God himself is notashamed to be called their God (11:16). The readers are in the position of beingashamed of their association with a crucified Messiah and by those being mistreated bythe same association they are contemplating to draw back (6:4-8; 10:32-39). The author will exhort them to bear the reproach that Jesus bore (13:13)

2:12-13 The first citation is from Ps 22:23. Originally the psalm, a prayer of supplication by a person in distress, was used extensively in the passion narratives (Matt 27:35, 39,43, 46). Likewise in the case of Isa 8:17-18, the emphasis is placed first on Jesus ownfaith toward God; I myself will trust in him and then on the children God has givenme sharing in the same response of faith. The point here is that the Son and his brothersare not merely linked ontologically but also morally: as he responds to God with faith, soshall they also.

2:l4-15 Using the term children from the Isa citation, the author sketches their condition as one in which they share in blood and flesh. Christs participation in bloodand flesh resulted in his death, whereby he achieved victory over the power of deathand the one who held sway over death, the devil. There is no indication that death is

19


20/34

metaphorized like in Paul, where the power of death is sin. ta. paidi,akekoinw,nhken a personal pl. neut. Subj. takes a sg. verb. The verb kekoinw,nhkento share in common here in the perfect, denotes a present and universal conditionconsequent on birth into the world. Jesus took a share of the same human frailty, the verbmete,scen in the Aor. expresses the incarnation, a particular event in the past, not a

universal condition. Through death the Son accomplishes two things: (1) a victory over cosmic forces; (2) in psychological terms a transformation of the human spirit. What isremarkable about the statement of destroying the power of death is the instrumental

phrase through death which matches the phrase through suffering (2:10). Jesus doesnot conquer death by avoiding it or commanding it to disappear, but by experiencing it inthe manner humans do. The verb avpalla,ssw in vs. 15 is used in the LXX and NTwith reference to healing (Acts 19:12). Here the brothers are healed from an emotion thatdistorts their existence, a fear of death that has made them subject to slavery all their lives. Philo forcefully states: Nothing is so calculated to enslave the mind as fearingdeath through a desire to live. ( Every Good Man is Free 22). The adjective e;nocoi ,being bound in combination with the substantive doulei,aj creates the phrase being

bound to slavery. tou/ zh/n = Subst. Inf.2:16 Here Christ shows his solidarity with his brethren. Vs. 16 concludes the synkrisis

between the Son and the angels. The assurance of divine help prepares for the climaticassertion in vs. 18 that Jesus is able to help those who are being tested. The phrase seedof Abraham encapsulates the specification of the many sons and daughters developedin vv. 12-13. The many children whom Christ leads to glory are, as elsewhere in earlyChristianity, the true heirs of the promise to Abraham (Luke 1:55; Gal 3:8-9, 29; 4:28-31;Rom 4:1-25; John 8:33). There is rabbinic evidence that this passage was applied withoutrestriction to all who come into the world ( t. Ber. 1.13/2; quoted in S-B 3.211).

2:17 As a consequence of this close association with the Son, it was incumbent(w;feilen ) for Christ to be completely likened ( o`moiwqh/nai ) to his brothers. Theemphatic all things ( kata. pa,nta ) indicates that the likeness is not superficial. It willlater be qualified only on the matter Christs sinlessness (4:15). His likeness to his

brothers must extend to the experience of the same testing and suffering that are theirs.The Son becomes like humans in the sense that he fully participates in their somaticcondition and emotional sensibilities (see Pauls language about Christ who emptiedhimself; Phil 2:7). The author depicts the Sons work as making expiation for the sins of the people ( i`la,skesqai ). In the LXX such expiation comes through the sprinkling of

blood on the hilasterion (mercy seat). In Hebrews, Christs sacrifice is always directed atremoving sin and its effects, not at propitiation God. Christs being made like his

brothers in every respect enables him to be merciful ( evleh,mwn ) and faithful(pisto.j ) as a priest ( avrciereu.j ). Here in Heb we find the first use of his characteristictitle for Jesus, High Priest.

2:18 Heb connects Christs capacity to provide such help to humans not simply to hisdivine sonship, but to his experiential knowledge of human testing and temptation(Compl. Infl. du,natai bohqh/sai ).

20


21/34

Hebrews portrait of Christ as a High Priest has not been created ex nihilo . In the pre-exilic period the high priest was subservient to the king, who could himself exercise

priestly functions (2 Sam 6:12-21; 24:25; 1 Kgs 3:4; 8:1-5). In the period of the Exile andthe restoration, the figure of the high priest begins to take on a more significant

dimension. For Ezekiel the heart of the restoration is the temple and its priesthood (Ezek 44-48). The political developments of the 2 nd century BCE were significant for thedevelopment of reflection on the high priest. When the Maccabees assumed leadership of the resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes the old high-priestly line of the Zadokites wasdisplaced. It is certainly clear that the two major high-priestly functions attributed toJesus, intercession (Rom 8:34; Matt 10:32; Acts 7:55-56; 1 John 2:1) and self-sacrifice(Rom 3:25; Gal 2:20; 1 John 2:2 etc.) are widely attested in early Christian texts.

Heb 3 The theme of faithfulness is carried over from 2:17, but it is not the point of contrast between Jesus and Moses. The contrast concerns the role of the two figures nottheir faithfulness. Moses was faithful as a servant within the household, and Jesus was

faithful as the Son who is over the entire household. Heb 3:6 marks the transition to thehearers as the Sons household (3:7-4:11) with regard to the need to hold on to theconfidence and the boast of hope.

3:1 The addressees are called brothers, as they were called by Christ in the preceding pericope. They are made holy by the sanctifier. Both noun and adjective are in thevocative case. The Christians are also participants of a salvation characterized by aheavenly calling. The audience is urged to consider ( katanoh,sate ) Jesus the apostleand high priest, epithets which recall elements from 2:17. There is a fine symmetry in thecombination apostle and high priest that goes beyond the obvious alliteration. As theapostle is sent from God to deliver the summons from God to humans (Matt 10:40; Mark

9:37; Luke 10:16; John 3:17; Gal 4:4), so the high priest is the one who responds fromthe side of the humans to God. The two terms are connected to each other by theGranville Sharp rule. The term o`mologi,a has a variety of meanings: contract,agreement, admission. Among Greek speaking Jews and Christians the term was used toexpress a profession of faith. Heb uses it for that which they confess (4:14; 10:23). Itrefers not only to the act of confession but also to the content of the confession.

3:2 What the addressees are called to consider is that quality of Jesus, his faithfulness asHigh Priest to the one who made him. The phrase tw/| poih,santi auvto.n is mostnaturally translated as the one who made him. Some scholars take it that Jesus in the

book of Heb was a human creature (Johnson), while others translate it as the one beingappointed to the priestly office. Jesus was faithful as was Moses, whose fidelity isattested by God himself (Num 12:7). Among human mediators, Moses is surely the mainfigure to whom Jesus must be compared.

3:3 The author wants to assert that Jesus is worthy of more glory than Moses, becauseJesus is a Son, and Moses is a servant (3:6). The points made here are dependant onancient cultural presuppositions. First, in an honor/shame context, the expressionsworthy, glory, and honor stand as markers of comparative status. Second, the free

21


22/34

born son even in a great household has more status than the most well-situated servant.Third, a contrast between Moses, who may have seen the Lords glory (Exod 33:18), andJesus, who is the Son is the radiance of [Gods] glory from the beginning (1:3). One of the comparatives is created by para, + Accusative.

3:4-5 The argument becomes murky because of the authors metaphorical use of house/household The term is clearly metaphorical: house=house of Israel= the peopleof Israel. But Heb reverses the metaphor by playing on the literal sense of house as a

building. Staying with the theme of honor, the author declares that the builder of the hosedeserves more glory than the house he builds. An architectural wonder is evidence for the

brilliance of the architect; when the building is praised, the designer is praised byimplication. God is the one who has built everything. Now we shift from the literal houseto house as metaphor for people/world created. What is the point? First, God is the sourceof all things, so all honor ultimately goes toe God. Second, the Son is a participant in thecreation of all things (through whom all things are created; 1:2). Here we find the highestand the lowest of Christologys combined. As Son of God, Jesus is over all the house

as its maker. Jesus is also faithful to the one who made him. Heb has nothing negativeto say about Moses, who will later be portrayed as one of the great heroes of faith (11:23-26). Even the term servant from Num 12:7 is a title of honor. One of the 12 Fut. Ptc.are found in vs. 5 tw/n lalhqhsome,nwn .

3:6 While Moses was faithful only as a servant, Christ was faithful as a Son. The fact thathe had the status of Son implies that he was not as Moses, simply in ( evn ) Godshouse, but over ( evpi. ) it. The title Christ is used for the first time in Heb. Theauthor follows the assertion that we are his house with the strong qualification, if indeed we hold on. The opposite of holding on is the neglect of such a great salvation(2:3). What should the audience hold on to? We are to hold to the confession of Jesus as

apostle and high priest. The term boldness ( parrhsi,an ) suggests the frankness of the philosopher in speech. Heb will later exhort readers to approach with parrhsi,a thethrone of grace (4:16) and will speak of the boldness with which they can enter thesanctuary by the blood of Jesus (10:19). Such boldness and confidence benefits thosefreed from that fear of death that held them captive to slavery all their lives (2:15).Similarly, the boasting fits within the framework of the honor/shame language. Hereboast does not mean the act of bragging (2 Cor 9:3) but rather the ground for such

boasting, namely the reality of which one is proud. If hope is the disposition that enables people to act with confidence rather than out of despair, then having hope be the basis or the substance of their boast and boldness makes good sense. The need to hold on thishope marks the transition to the lengthy exhortation that follows in 3:7-4:11.

The comparison of Moses and Jesus hinged on their both being exemplars of fidelity. Thehomilist now picks up that theme and develops on the infidelity of the people whomMoses led. In the process, allusion is made to Num 14 to interpret the failure of the desertgeneration as one of faithlessness. The passage begins with an extended citation from Ps95:7-11, introduced with a strong therefore. The warning concerns the danger of faithlessness, which the author explicitly identifies as the reason why the ancient

22


23/34

generation failed to enter the land of promise (3:19). The theme of faithfulness/unfaithfulness has this passed form Moses and Jesus to the people.

3:7-8 The text cited is the final portion of Ps 95, a hymn that praises the sovereign power of Yahweh and invites eh worshiper to adore God and to hear Gods voice. The appeal is

followed by the challenge of these verses to the Israelite community not to be like thedesert generation, who had hardened their hearts and no t attained the promised land of rest. The words of the psalm are attributed to the Holy Spirit. Similarly, in 10:1 Hebintroduces a citation form Jer 31:33 with the Holy Spirit testifies to us. The prologuetold us that God spoke in the past through the prophets. Obviously, the author includes inthe prophets all Scripture, but also the Psalms. At the same time Heb understands suchtexts as living words, because the speaking is in the present tense. The reason why Godshould be honored are given in Ps 94: God is named savior, great Lord, and king (vv. 1-3). The psalm also recounts the creative works of God (vv. 4-5), and calls Israel the

people of his pasture, the sheep of his hand (vs.7). The first part of the psalm sets up thesecond part, which summons the people to an obedience not demonstrated by their

ancestors in the wilderness. Heb uses the wilderness generation as a foil for those itsummons to obedient hearing. The testing in the wilderness has two aspects. Some textsspeak of the Lord putting the people to the test (Deut 4:34; 8:2; 13:3; 29:3). When theyrebelled, in turn, they were putting God to the test (Exod 17:2, 7; Deut 33:8). They hadhardened their hearts. The term sklhru,nw can refer to that which is difficult (Deut1:17; John 6:60), but is also used for a person who is obdurate or stubborn (Deut 31:27; 1Sam 25:3; 1 Kgs 12:13; Prov 4:27; Matt 25:24). The psalmist recalled the rebellion of ehdesert generation at Meribah and Massah (Exod 17:7). The subjunctive of prohibition isexpressed in vs. 8 with mh. sklhru,nhte .

3:9-11 In Hebrew the text indicates that the fathers tested God. The LXX understood the

object of the testing not to be God, but his works. The citations in Heb conform to further variations (they tested vs. prepositional phrase: in the testing; etc). The psalm says alsothe people were always wandering in heart (3:10). The avei. planw/ntai th/|kardi,a| disposition of the heart is one of wavering or lack of direction, with thetendency toward error (Gen 37:15). God responds to their rebellion with anger: I wasangry ( prosw,cqisa ) with this generation. That provocation moved God to take anoath. The oath referred to I Ps 95 is the one God swears in Num 14:21-22 (the older generation would not see Canaan, only those under 20 years of age).

3:12 The application of the scriptural text to the addressees begins with an appeal to thebrothers to sees to it that they do not follow the negative example of the exodus

generation. The author asks that the danger not affect any individual ( e;n tini u`mw/n )in the community. He then specifies the danger as one of a wicked heart characterized by unbelief ( kardi,a ponhra. avpisti,aj ; Descriptive Gen.). By the close associationwith disobedience in the following verses, it suggests that faithlessness involves notsimply passive disbelief, but active resistance to Gods will. Faithlessness is tantamountto and results in apostasy ( evn tw/| avposth/nai avpo. qeou/ zw/ntoj ). This

potential apostasy is basically abandonment of the living God. This is the first of 4times that Heb uses the expression the living God (9:14; 10:31; 12:22). To turn away

23


24/34

form the living God is to turn toward death (3:17). It was not the failure of the Israelitesto believe in God that prevented their entry, but their failure in loyalty and obedience.Heb states flatly in 3:19 that unbelief is the reason they did not enter the land.

3:13 This is a more positive admonition. The community should keep exhorting

(parakalei/te ) one another the same way the author does it in the discourse. Their mutual admonition should be a continuous practice of alertness and attentiveness carriedout every day, as long as it is called today. This exhortation should aim to prevent thehardening ( sklhrunqh/| ) in any of the members, caused by the deceit of sin(avpa,th| th/j a`marti,aj ).

3:14 The author says that the members (inclusive we) have become ( gego,namenInd. Perf.; suggests that they once were not such participants, but have entered into itthrough the Holy Spirit 6:4; Intensive Perf. with results in the present) sharers(me,tocoi ) in the Messiah. Heb reminds the readers that this status is conditional: if wehold fast to the end. The noun th.n avrch should be taken as the beginning. The

next noun th/j u`posta,sewj is more difficult to define. We defined it in 1:3 asfundamental reality. The parallel between this verse and 3:6, which emphasized themaintenance of hope, has often suggested that the term here is to be rendered asconfidence (Luther and other modern commentators: Bruce, Michel Hughes,Ellingworth, 225). Support for that was found in 11:1 where the noun is associated withhope. Attridge thinks that such meaning lacks clear evidence. In line with 1:3 and thelanguage of participation, the patristic interpretation of th/j u`posta,sewj assubstance is not to be rejected. What the addressees are told is to hold firm thatheavenly reality in which they participate through Christ.

3:15 The fresh quotation of the psalm makes clear that what was written in the psalm has

direct bearing upon their lives. The quote draws together the key words and concepts.

3:16-19 The questions pick up three aspects of the psalm quotation. Who were those whoeven though they heard nevertheless rebelled? The Ptc. avkou,santej addssomething to the scriptural citation: it is possible to hear and yet not to obey, to see andyet not to understand Gods ways. Thus there is need for vigilance. The answer to thequestion: all those who came out of Egypt with the help of Moses. The second question(vs. 17): Toward whom did God exhibit such long-term irritation? Against those whosinned, and their bodies fell in the desert (Num 14:29-32). In Heb 3:10 the 40 years wereconnected to the people seeing Gods deeds. Here, in contrast, Heb connects the 40 yearsto the anger of God. The third question (vs. 18) concerns those to whom God swore an

oath (Num 14:22) that they should not enter the land. The answer is: the disobedient(again in conformity with Num 14:43). Chapter 3 concludes in vs. 19 that the exodusgeneration was unable to enter because of unbelief. In light of the identification of therebellion as disobedience, it is clear that apistia is not just unbelief but faithlessness.

Excurse:Sabbath observance in Hebrews 4 and 10

24


25/34

The following two preliminary remarks should be made before one engages into thestudy of Sabbath observance in Heb 4 and 10.

First, the anonymous epistle to the Hebrews does not provide the reader with theidentity of the recipient. In favor of a Jewish Christian readership speak the facts that theauthor moves easily through the Old Testament Scripture and its rabbinic methods of

interpretation which presuppose that the audience must have been familiar with them to acertain degree. In favor of a Gentile Christian readership speak phrases such asrepentance from dead work, faith toward God, and enlightenment, (Heb 6:1, 4)which we

Cernica, January 2010 Introduction Hebrews May Be

Documents

Transcript of Cernica, January 2010 Introduction Hebrews May Be