Vii. Concluding Exhortation And Prayer (13:1-21)
VII. CONCLUDING EXHORTATION AND PRAYER (13:1-21)
Our author's argument has now been rounded off, and if his work had been a written homily and nothing more, there would have been no need for anything further. What follows in ch. 13 resembles the usual assortment of ethical and practical admonition and personal information with which New Testament epistles tend to close. Why this document should end like an epistle although it does not begin like one is a general problem of introduction.' Most probably ch. 13 is an integral part of the text of the document, and there is no good reason in either internal or external evidence why it should be regarded as in some way a separate composition. Other views have been advanced from time to time, suggesting, for example, that ch. 13 or part of it was written in deliberate imitation of Paul's epistolary style in order to secure acceptance for the whole work as a Pauline epistle,2 or that it was written by Paul himself as a "letter of commendation" to validate the author's thesis,3 or that it was a fragment of a Pauline letter accidentally and mistakenly tacked on to a work with which it really had nothing to do.4 These theories can be given no higher status than that of curiosities of literary criticism. The reversion in vv. 10-16 to the main theme of the epistle is sufficient evidence, if evidence were required, of the integrity of ch. 13 with the foregoing chapters.
A. ETHICAL INJUNCTIONS (13:1-6)
1 Let brotherly love endure.
3 Remember those. who are imprisoned, as though you shared their imprisonment; remember those who are ill-treated because you yourselves are also in the body.
4 Let marriage be honorably esteemed among all; let the marriage bed be kept unpolluted,6 for God will judge fornicators and adulterers.
5 Let your way of life be free from the love of money. Be content7 with the things which are available, for God himself has said, "I will never abandon you; I will never forsake you. "8
6 So we in turn may have courage and say,9
Like Paul and the other writers of New Testament epistles, our author is alive to the ethical implications of Christian doctrine. He does not systematize his ethical injunctions as some of them doll (his readers had probably been well grounded already in the early catechesis of Christian didache), but he urges upon them certain Christian virtues which he presumably knew it was desirable to emphasize in their present situation-brotherly love, hospitality, help to those in need, chastity, and contentment.
1 Brotherly love was a virtue highly esteemed in antiquity. The Byzantine anthologist Stobaeus gathers together a number of quotations from ancient authors under the caption: "That brotherly love and a proper disposition towards one's kinsfolk is an excellent thing, and that it is necessary." In the biblical area the classic passage is Ps. 133:1, "Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!" The word used here (philadelphia) appears in the Pauline writings and in both the Petrine epistles; and the grace of brotherly love itself, whatever terms be used, is inculcated throughout the New Testament. "Concerning love of the brothers,"12 writes Paul to the Thessalonians, "you have no need to have any one write to you: for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another; and indeed you do it ..." (1 Thess. 4:9f.). Such brotherly love is no mere sentiment; it can be a very costly thing, as John emphasizes: "By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. But if any one has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?" (1 John 3:16f.). If a weakening of faith and resolution among the recipients of this epistle led to a weakening of the bonds which united them to their fellow-Christians, this would add urgency to the plea that brotherly love should continue among them. Some specific forms of brotherly love are enjoined in the following verses.
2 Strangers, and especially strangers belonging to the Christian brotherhood, must be shown hospitality. Among Jews and Gentiles alike hospitality to strangers ranked high as a virtue; it was, indeed, a religious obligation. Among the Greeks, strangers were under the special protection of Zeus, in his role as Zeus Xenios, "Zeus the patron of strangers." On occasion, indeed, Zeus or one of the other gods was believed to have assumed the disguise of a wayfarer and brought great blessing to those who treated him hospitably, not realizing whom they were entertaining.13 Among the Jews Abraham was regarded as outstanding for his hospitality as for his other virtues;14 a true son of Abraham must be hospitable too. In the New Testament hospitality is incumbent on all Christians,15 and Christian leaders in particular are required to be hospitable (1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:8). Christians traveling from one place to another on business would be especially appreciative of hospitality from fellow-Christians. Inns throughout the Roman Empire were places of doubtful repute, and indeed of positive danger, as the reader of Petronius and Apuleius is well aware, and would provide very uncongenial company for Christians.
The opportunity of free board and lodging might tempt some unscrupulous characters to masquerade as Christians. Proteus Peregrinus in Lucian's satire comes to mind;16 and the necessity of some rough-and-ready rule of thumb for detecting impostors is implied in the Didache: "Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord, but he must not stay more than one day, or two if it is absolutely necessary; if he stays three days, he is a false prophet. And when an apostle leaves you, let him take nothing but a loaf, until he reaches further lodging for the night; if he asks for money, he is a false prophet."17 Some Christians who had been deceived by such impostors might be chary of offering hospitality too readily next time they were asked for it, but here they are encouraged with the remark that some who have given hospitality to passing strangers found that they were entertaining "angels unawares." Those who are given to hospitality find that such happy experiences far outweigh the unhappy ones.
The reference is no doubt primarily to Abraham's experience when he entertained "three men" so hospitably by the terebinth of Mamre,18 and found that one of them was no other than Yahweh,19 who promised Abraham and Sarah that they would have a son the following year. When Yahweh stayed to speak with Abraham, his two angelic companions went on to Sodom and were entertained there in the house of Lot, to whom they brought deliverance from the catastrophe which overwhelmed the city the next day.20 The incidents of Gideon21 and Manoah,22 and Tobit23 at a later date, may also have been in our author's mind. He is not necessarily encouraging his readers to expect that those whom they entertain will turn out to be supernatural beings traveling incognito; he is assuring them that some of their visitors will prove to be true messengers of God to them, bringing a greater blessing than they receive.
3 The community addressed in this epistle had already, in earlier days, shown practical sympathy with their imprisoned friends.24 Here they are urged to go on remembering this Christian duty. Lucian no doubt gives a fairly accurate account of Christian practice in this regard when he describes how Proteus Peregrinus, during his period of association with the Christians, was imprisoned: the Christians "left no stone unturned in their endeavor to procure his release. When this proved impossible, they looked after his wants in all other matters with untiring solicitude and devotion. From earliest dawn old women ('widows,' they are called25) and orphan children might be seen waiting about the prison-doors; while the officers of the church, by bribing the jailors, were able to spend the night inside with him. Meals were brought in, and they went through their sacred formulas."26 This picture, satirical as it is in intention, can be duplicated many times over from other records of the concern which Christians showed for those who were in prison or otherwise suffering for their faith, ignoring the personal risks involved.27
In saying, "Remember those who are imprisoned, as though you shared their imprisonment," our author need not imply that his readers have themselves suffered imprisonment (this might be true of some, but not of all); we need see no more in his words than a specific application of the Pauline principle that if "one member suffers, all suffer together" (1 Cor. 12:26).28 A capacity for putting oneself in another's place and exercising imaginative sympathy is part of true charity. This same imaginative sympathy should be extended to all who are ill-treated;29 those who are themselves "in the body" are in a position to imagine how they would feel if the same ill-treatment were meted out to them. The phrase "in the body" should not be interpreted to mean "in the body of Christ (as fellow-members)."30
4 The injunction to honor the marriage union and abstain from sexual sin may also be brought under the general heading of brotherly love; chastity is not opposed to charity, but is part of it. Here is no exaltation of celibacy as something inherently superior to marriage;31 the marriage union is divinely ordained, and its sacred precincts must not be polluted by the in trusion of a third party, of either sex. Fornication and adultery are not synonymous in the New Testament: adultery32 implies unfaithfulness by either party to the marriage vow, while the word translated "fornication"33 covers a wide range of sexual irregularities, including unions within bounds prohibited by law.34 Our author agrees with other New Testament writers that those who are guilty of such practices incur the judgment of God. "Let no one deceive you with empty words," says Paul; "for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the children of disobedience"35 (Eph. 5:6; cf. Col. 3:5f.).
5-6 When Paul speaks like this, he includes among "these things" unchastity and covetousness. Covetousness, indeed, in its New Testament connotation can refer to illicit sexual desire as well as to love of money.36 It was therefore a natural transition of thought for our author to pass from his injunction about chastity to his plea to his readers not to live for money. Here too he is in line with the pervasive teaching of the New Testament. Our Lord warned his hearers that they could not serve God and Mammon,37 and that "a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions" (Luke 12:15). We forget this warning every time we ask how much a person is worth, when we really mean how much he owns. The adjective which our author uses here, meaning "free from the love of money,"38 occurs in one other place in the New Testament, where it is laid down that a "bishop" or leader in a Christian church must be "no lover of money" (1 Tim: 3:3); "for the love of money39 is a root of all evils; it is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs" (1 Tim. 6:10).
The chief pang which pierces the heart of the lover of money is gnawing anxiety. The greedy person can never be happy, but the opposite of covetousness is contentment. Here too there is a close affinity between this passage and 1 Timothy: "There is great gain in godliness with contentment;40 for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world; but if we have food and clothing, with these we shall be content" (1 Tim. 6:6-8). Behind both documents lies our Lord's teaching: "Do not be anxious, saying, `What shall we eat?' or `What shall we drink?' or `What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well" (Matt. 6:31-33). "Be content with what you have," says our author. But the carefree contentment of which he speaks is not an irresponsible improvidence; it springs from an intelligent trust in God and acceptance of his promises. If to each one of his people God gives the assurance, "I will never leave you or desert you" (NEB), their reasonable response may well be made in the words of the psalmist: "With Yahweh on my side I do not fear: what can man do to me?" (Ps. 118:6).
B. EXAMPLES TO FOLLOW (13:7-8)
7 Remember your guides, those who declared the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their manner of life, and imitate their faith.
8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, yes, and for ever.
7 Three times in this chapter mention is made of their guides or leaders.41 In v. 17 they are told to obey them; in v. 24 they are asked to convey the writer's greetings to them; here they are exhorted to remember them. In vv. 17 and 24 the reference plainly is to leaders who are still alive and active; here the reference seems rather to be to those who led them in earlier days but have now completed their service; the whole course of their lives, from start to finish, now lies before their disciples and followers for review and imitation. By precept and example they showed the right path to tread; being dead they yet speak, and the record of their faith is still alive in the memory of those who knew them. In ch. 11 the faith of men and women of earlier generations is pre sented for emulation, but there is something in the vivid recollection of a life that we have seen which cannot be conveyed by a record that has come to us only by reading or hearing. Those who planted this community of Christians and fostered it by the ministry of the word of God42 and the example of faith had run the race unwavering to the end; what they had done their followers could also do. It is not necessary to suppose that they had suffered martyrdom;43 but like the heroes of ch. 11 they "died in faith."
8 Yet they died; they lived on in the memory of those who had known them, but they were no longer available for consultation and wise guidance as they had once been. Jesus Christ, by contrast, was always available, unchanging from year to year, "the same yesterday and today and for ever." In 1:12 the words of Ps. 102:27 (LXX 101:28) were applied to him: "thou art the same, and thy years have no end." These words, we saw, in their original context were addressed to the God of Israel; but this is not the only instance in which we find such a spontaneous transition of reference from the Father to the Son. "I am He," says God to his people in Isa. 48:12; "I am the first and I am the last"44-language which in the New Testament is taken over and applied to Jesus without any sense of incongruity.45 Yesterday Jesus "offered up entreaties and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death" (Heb. 5:7); today he represents his people in the presence of God, a high priest who has a fellow-feeling with them in their weakness, because he "endured trial in all respects like" themselves, "while remaining free from sin" (4:15); for ever he lives, this same Jesus, "to intercede for them" (7:25). His help, his grace, his power, his guidance are permanently at his people's disposal; why then should they lose heart? Others serve their generation by the will of God and pass on; "but this one, because he continues `for ever,' has a priesthood which is untransferable" (7:24). He never needs to be replaced, and nothing can be added to his perfect work.
C. THE TRUE CHRISTIAN SACRIFICES (13:9-16)
9 Do not be carried away46 by all sorts of strange teaching. It is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by food regulations, which have never brought any advantage to those who follow them.47
11 Those animals whose blood is carried into the holy place by the high priest as a sin offering49 have their bodies burned outside the camp.
12 Therefore Jesus for his part suffered outside the gate50 in order to sanctify the people by means of his own blood.
13 Let us then go out to him, outside the camp, 51 bearing the stigma which attaches to him.
14 We have no permanent city here; we look for the city which is to come.
15 Through Jesus, then, 52 let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of lips53 which acknowledge his name.
16 But do not forget to do deeds of kindness or to share what you have with others; it is sacrifices like these that give pleasure to God.
9 The reminder that "Jesus Christ is the same" links what precedes it with what follows it. Because "Jesus Christ is the same," says our author, "do not be swept off your course by all sorts of outlandish teachings;54 it is good that our souls should gain their strength from the grace of God, and not from scruples about what we eat, which have never done any good to those who were governed by them" (NEB). The language here suggests something more than a relapsing into orthodox Judaism; it reminds us of Paul's appeal to the Colossian Christians not to let anyone sit in judgment on them in respect of food or drink, because things like these disappeared in the very act of being used; regulations and prohibitions regarding such evanescent things provided no spiritual support or defense.55 "Food will not commend us to God," says Paul elsewhere. "We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do" (1 Cor. 8:8). Our author makes the same point. It is by divine grace,56 and not by rules about food, that the heart-that is to say, the spiritual life-is nourished; rules about food, imposed by external authority, have never helped people to maintain a closer walk with God. (Voluntary fasting, in the spirit of our Lord's instruction in Matt. 6:16-18, is quite a different matter; but that is not the subject here.) The strange teaching which laid such insistence on food was probably some form of syncretistic gnosis, perhaps with Essene or quasiEssene affinities.57 This kind of thing was so widespread at the time that the vague allusion to it here (vague to modem readers, not to the original readers, who probably understood the allusion perfectly) provides no clue to the destination of the epistle. It was current in Asia Minor, we know; but even to the Roman Christians58 Paul judged it necessary to point out that "the kingdom of God is not food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit"59 (Rom. 14:17). To put such indifferent matters in a place of central religious importance would diminish the sovereignty of Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and today and forever.
Since the word translated "food" is the same as that used in 9:10,60 where "matters of food and drink and various ablutions" are listed among the "material ordinances imposed until the time of the new order," it is possible that a reference to sacrificial meals of some kind is included here. In any case, food regulations of all kinds, whether positive or negative, are catalogued by our author among those external ordinances which Christianity has rendered null and void.
10-11 In fact, the whole principle of attaching religious value to material food was inconsonant with the essence of Christianity. The sacrifice of Christ was the antitype of the sacrifice offered on the great Day of Atonement, and the flesh of the animals slaughtered in the course of that ritual was not eaten; their bodies were "carried forth outside the camp" and there completely burned6t (Lev. 16:27). There were other sin offerings in which this was not done; when the blood was not presented to God in the holy of holies, the flesh was eaten by the priests in the sanctuary.62 But since the blood of the bullock which made atonement for Aaron and his family, and of the goat which made atonement for the people, was carried into the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement, their bodies were incinerated. In other words, "those who carry out the worship in the tent" 53 have no permission to eat from the altar which typically foreshadows the sacrifice of Christ. But the sacrifice of Christ is a better sacrifice, not only because the spiritual antitype is superior to the material type, but also because those who enter the heavenly sanctuary "by Jesus' blood" (10:19) know that the one who became their perfect sin offering is permanently available as the source of their spiritual nourishment and refreshment, as they feed on him in their hearts by faith.64
The word "altar" is used by metonymy for "sacrifice"-"as when, e.g., we say that a man keeps a good table, meaning thereby good food."65 Our author, who insists throughout that Christians have something better than an earthly sanctuary and animal sacrifices, certainly does not suggest that they have a material altar. It has, indeed, been thought by some commentators that by "we" in "we have an altar" he means "we Hebrews" and not "we Christians."66 In that case the reference would be simply to the Levitical sacrifice prescribed for the Day of Atonement, as though he wished to say: "There is a sacrifice prescribed in the Levitical ritual which those who minister in the tabernacle have no right to eat." But "we have" here must surely have the same force as "we have" in 8:1, "we have such a high priest" ("this is the kind of high priest we have").67
Christians had none of the visible apparatus which in those days was habitually associated with religion and worship-no sacred buildings, no altars, no sacrificing priest. Their pagan neighbors thought they had no God, and called them atheists; their Jewish neighbors, too, might criticize them for having no visible means of spiritual support. So Archbishop Laud, when he came to Scotland in attendance on King Charles I in 1633, found that its benighted inhabitants had "no religion at all that I could see-which grieved me much."68 The way in which Irenaeus expounds the nature of true Christian sacrifices suggests that he knew of people who said: "You Christians have no real religion, for you have no sacrifices."69 If there were people in the first century who said, "You Christians have no altar," our author replies: "We have an altar-and a better one than the Jews had under the Levitical order." The Christian altar was the sacrifice of Christ, the benefits of which were eternally accessible to them. Material food, even if it was called sacred, perished with the using;7° in this new and spiritual order into which they had been introduced by faith, Christ was perpetually available, "the same yesterday, and today, yes, and for ever."
What connection is there between this passage and the Eucharist? No direct connection at all. It is remarkable how our author avoids mentioning the Eucharist when he has every opportunity to do so; for example, it would have been easy for him to derive some eucharistic significance from the bread and wine which Melchizedek brought to Abraham when he met him "returning from the slaughter of the kings" (7:1); but he does not even mention the bread and wine (cf. p. 157 with n. 10). His failure to mention them, let alone discern some Christian meaning in them, can scarcely be accidental. If we had any independent knowledge of the community addressed, it might give us some clue to the omission of eucharistic references from his argument. It has, indeed, been suspected that they treated the Eucharist as a sacred mea171 rather after the Essene or Qumranic fashion,72 and did not appreciate that "the Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner," and that "the means whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith."73 But this suspicion can be nothing more than a tentative inference from the general tenor of the epistle.
12 The fact that the bodies of the animals sacrificed on the Day of Atonement were burned outside the camp suggests a parallel to the fact that Jesus was crucified outside one of the city gates of Jerusalem.75 The parallel may seem inexact, since the animals of the sin offering were actually slaughtered within the camp; our author may, however, have also in mind the fact that the red heifer, which was a kind of sin offering, was slaughtered outside the camp.76 Jesus died77 in order to "sanctify the people"-bring them to God as worshipers purified in conscience-by means of his blood, the willing sacrifice of his life.78 And the practical implication of his dying "outside the gate" is made plain in the exhortation which follows.
13 "Let us then go to him outside the camp, bearing the stigma that he bore" (NEB). Jesus was led outside Jerusalem to be crucified, and this is regarded as a token of his rejection by all that Jerusalem represented. To have his messianic claims rejected by the leaders of the people was in itself a stigma; to be cast out and crucified added to that stigma. But, as Moses in his day "considered the stigma that rests on God's Anointed greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt" (11:26, NEB), so the call came now to the people of Christ to consider that same stigma greater wealth than anything they could hope to gain by declining to burn their boats and commit themselves unreservedly to him. Our author may have recalled an Old Testament occasion when, according to the Septuagint version he knew, God was rejected in the camp of Israel and manifested his presence outside. For, after the incident of the golden calf, "Moses took his tent and pitched it outside the camp, far off from the camp, and it was called `The Tent of Testimony'; and so it was, that everyone who sought the Lord would go out to the tent which was outside the camp."79 Now, in the person of Jesus, God had again been rejected in the camp; his presence was therefore to be enjoyed outside the camp, where Jesus was, and everyone who sought him must go out and approach him through Jesus. In this context the "camp" stands for the established fellowship and ordinances of Judaism. To abandon them, with all their sacred associations inherited from remote antiquity, was a hard thing, but it was a necessary thing. They had been accustomed to think of the "camp" and all that was inside it as sacred, while everything outside it was profane and unclean.80 Were they to leave its sacred precincts and venture on to unhallowed ground?81 Yes, because in Jesus the old values had been reversed. What was formerly sacred was now unhallowed, because Jesus had been expelled from it; what was formerly unhallowed was now sacred, because Jesus was there. "Let us then go outside the camp" might be a hard exhortation; "Let us then go to him" should not be hard for any Christian; to whom else should they go? True, to be associated with him meant bearing the stigma he bore; it meant taking up the cross and following him; it meant leaving the shelter of their collegia licita82 for a fellowship which invited the hostile attention of imperial law; but if, like Moses, they "kept their eyes fixed on the reward," they would see that the stigma carried eternal glory with it.83' There, "outside the camp," stood Jesus, calling them to follow him. Inside they felt secure; they knew where they were amid its familiar installations; they were psychologically insulated from the world outside. But Jesus claimed the world outside for himself. Other Jewish Christians, Hellenists like themselves, had taken the initiative in evangelizing the Gentile world. The future lay not with the "camp" but with the Gentile mission;84 let them exchange the imagined security of their old associations for the new venture to which Jesus was leading his followers out. Time and again in the history of the people of God a similar call has come when a new advance must be made into the unknown and unfamiliar, to occupy fresh territory under the leadership of Jesus. There is nothing static about him or his cause; to stand still is to fall behind him.
14 Moreover, the old securities to which their hearts clung were themselves insecure; the old order was about to crash. By responding to the call to go out, they would be the gainers; they would be leaving a "city" which was doomed to pass away for "the city which has the (true) foundations, of which God is the architect and builder"86 (11:10). At present, the heavenly city was yet to come; but by faith those who went forth to Christ were already enrolled in its register of burgesses. Every earthly institution belongs to "the things that are shaken" (12:27); in none of them can the human heart find permanent rest. "The city of God remaineth."
15 Were they told that they had no sacrifices and no altar? But of course they still had sacrifices to offer, even if there remained no more sacrifice for sin. The sacrifice of thanksgiving had once been accompanied by an animal sacrifice in the temple-it was a form of peace offering, according to Lev. 7:12.87 Animal sacrifices had been rendered forever obsolete by the sacrifice of Christ, but the sacrifice of thanksgiving might still be offered to God, and indeed should be offered to him by all who appreciated the perfect sacrifice of Christ.88 No longer in association with animal sacrifices, but through Jesus, the sacrifice of praise was acceptable to God. The dissociation of this sacrifice from animal sacrifices had already been adumbrated in an Asaphite psalm:
The sacrifice of praise is further described as "the fruit of lips which acknowledge his name," in language borrowed from the Septuagint version of Hos. 14:2 (MT, LXX 14:3). In the Masoretic text of that passage the sacrifice of praise is a substitute for animal sacrifices; so the ERV/ARV translate it: "so will we render as bullocks the offering of our lips."90 In this spirit the Qumran Rule of the Community declares that when the prescriptions of the community are carried out in Israel, "to obtain favor for the land apart from the flesh of burnt-offerings and the fat of sacrifice, then the oblation of the lips according to right judgment shall be as a sweet savor of righteousness, and the perfection of one's ways as an acceptable free will offering."91 At Qumran, however, this did not involve a total repudiation of animal sacrifices on principle. Similarly, while Philo provides parallels to this insistence on the sacrificial value of thanksgiving and deeds of piety, and holds that sacrifice is acceptable only if it is the expression of true heart-devotion, he does not suggest that the sacrificial ritual itself can be dispensed with.92 Our author's treatment of the sacrificial ritual as antiquated is due to his understanding of the finality and perpetual efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ.93
16 To the sacrifice of praise is added the sacrifice of kind and loving action.94 "Never forget to show kindness and to share what you have with others; for such are the sacrifices which God approves" (NEB). Here we have the proper ritual of Christianity. James expresses the same thing when he says: "That kind of religion which is without stain or fault in the sight of God our Father is this: to go to the help of orphans and widows in their distress and keep oneself untarnished by the world"95 (Jas. 1:27, NEB). To the same effect, too, is Peter's exhortation to those who come to Christ, the chief cornerstone, to be themselves as "living stones, ... built into a spiritual house,96 to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 2:5), as is also Paul's plea to the Roman Christians to present their bodies "a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship" (Rom. 12:1). Christianity is sacrificial through and through; it is founded on the one self-offering of Christ, and the offering of his people's praise and property, of their service and their lives, is caught up into the perfection of his acceptable sacrifice, and is accepted in him.
D. SUBMISSION TO GUIDES (13:17)
17 Obey your guides97 and submit98 to them: they keep watch over your souls in the knowledge that they must render an account of their service.99 Help them to do this with joy and not with sighing: that would not do you any good.100
17 The guides referred to here are probably the successors of those whose memory they are exhorted to cherish in v. 7. Our author evidently has as much confidence in the present leaders as in their predecessors. Perhaps they were leaders in the wider city church from whose fellowship and jurisdiction the group addressed in the epistle was tempted to withdraw. At any rate, the leaders carried a weighty responsibility; they were accountable for the spiritual well-being of those placed in their care. No wonder they lost sleep'°' over this responsibility-for the "watching" could well involve this as well as general vigilance-if some of their flock were in danger of straying beyond their control. The readers are invited to cooperate with their leaders, to make their responsible task easier for them, so that they could discharge it joyfully and not with sorrow.102 The idea is on the same lines as Paul's exhortation to the Philippian Christians to lead such lives in this world "that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain"103 (Phil. 2:16).
There would always be a tendency throughout the churches for visitors who came purveying new and esoteric doctrines to be regarded as much more attractive and interesting personalities than the rather humdrum local leaders, who never taught anything new, but were content with the conservative line of apostolic tradition. Nevertheless it was those local leaders, and not the purveyors of strange teaching, who had a real concern for the welfare of the church and a sense of their accountability to God in this respect. If the discharge of their responsibility and the ultimate rendering of their account were made a burden to them, the resultant disadvantage would fall on those who were led as well as on the leaders.
E. REQUEST FOR PRAYER (13:18-19)
18 Pray104 for us: we are convinced105 that we have a clear conscience, as we desire to behave honorably in all things.
19 I beg you the more earnestly106 to do this, so that I may be restored to you the more quickly.
18 The terms of our author's request for prayer for himself107 may suggest that he himself occupied, or had occupied, some position of responsibility in regard to his readers. But what this position might be we can only surmise. The good conscience108 of which he speaks is probably the fruit of a sense of duty done, a responsibility well discharged. Like Paul he could say: "our conscience assures us that in our dealings with our fellow-men, and above all in our dealings with you, our conduct has been governed by a devout and godly sincerity, by the grace of God and not by worldly wisdom.... In order that our service may not be brought into discredit, we avoid giving offence in anything" (2 Cor. 2:12; 6:3, NEB).
19 He had hoped to renew his former personal association with them, but had not been able to do so thus far; however, he hopes that the way for a reunion will soon be opened up, and he invites them to redouble their prayers for him to this end. It is difficult to be sure how much should be read between the lines of this petition. Does he suspect a certain spirit of resentment against him for some reason or other-perhaps because he has been so long away? Is there an element of personal apologia in his request for prayer and his protestation of conscientious and honorable behavior? And what was the nature of the restraint which prevented him from coming to see them sooner? Some have thought of imprisonment; but in that case he might have said so explicitly. His reference to Timothy's release in v. 23 has been thought to suggest that he himself is not in custody, but a contrary inference has also been drawn.
F. PRAYER AND DOXOLOGY (13:20-21)
20 Now may the God of peace, who by the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, 109 the great shepherd of the sheep,
21 fit you to do his will in everything that is good,110 as he brings to in us112 whatever gives him pleasure, through Jesus Christ; to whom be the glory for ever and ever. 113 Amen.
20, 21 This prayer has the general structure of a in the third person, consisting of (a) the invocation ("Now may the God of peace"), (b) an adjective clause setting forth the ground on which the following petition is based ("who ... brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus . . ."), (c) the main petition ("fit you to do his will in everything that is good"), (d) a subsidiary petition ("as he brings to pass in us whatever gives him pleasure"), (e) a pleading of the mediatorial merit of Christ ("through Jesus Christ"), (D a doxology ("to whom be the glory for ever and ever"), and (g) the "Amen."
That God is invoked as "the God of peace"115 may suggest that the community was troubled by disunity, which needed to be healed if the pleasure of God was to be wrought out in their midst. It is true that in the Old Testament "peace" has the fuller sense of well-being and salvation, but the Greek sense of the word would come more readily to our author's mind than the Hebrew sense.
This is the only place in the epistle where the title "shepherd" is given to Jesus; but it is a title which comprehends the other roles which are here assigned to him. Indeed, Markus Barth goes so far as to say, in a study of our author's use of the Old Testament, that for him "exegesis is the endeavor to help people in need by telling them what the Bible says of their shepherd Jesus Christ."116 The form of the title is derived from the Septuagint version of Isa. 63:11: "Where is he who brought up out of the sea the shepherd of the sheep?" The words in their original context refer to Moses-or, if the plural "shepherds" be read, to Moses and Aaron, in the sense of Ps. 77:20, "Thou didst lead thy people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron." Here they are applied to Jesus as the second Moses, who was brought up not from the sea but from the realm of the dead.117 (In the Exodus typology of the New Testament the "sea of reeds" which Israel crossed on the way out of Egypt is a token of the death and resurrection of Christ into which his people are baptized.)
Jesus was brought up from death "by the blood of the eternal covenant" (AV/KJV, RSV, NEB); that is to say, his resurrection is the demonstration that his sacrifice of himself has been accepted by God and the new covenant established on the basis of that sacrifice. The phrase "the blood of the eternal covenant" echoes 9:20, where Moses speaks of "the blood of the covenant" confirmed by God with Israel on the basis of the But now a better sacrifice has been offered, and the new covenant ratified thereby is superior to the older one in this respect among others, that it endures forever. (There may also be an echo here of Zech. 9:11, where God promises Zion that he will release her captives from the waterless pit "because of the blood of my covenant with you"; if so, it is but a verbal echo, but one may think of the role of the shepherd in the following chapters, Zech. 11:4-17; 13:7.)
The prayer, then, is that the people addressed may be spiritually equipped120 for every form of good work, and thus fulfil God's will as he operates in them "both to will and to work for his good pleasure," as Paul would put it (Phil. 2:13).
The adjective clause which concludes this prayer ("to whom be the glory for ever and ever") is probably to be taken as an ascription of glory to God, the subject of the sentence (as is suggested by the punctuation of the RSV), rather than as referring to "Jesus Christ" as its immediate antecedent. Our author has already made it plain in v. 15 that it is through Christ that glory is to be given to God.
A. PERSONAL NOTES (13:22-23)
22 Now, my brothers, please put up121 with my word of exhortation; I am sending you this letter in few words.
23 You should know122 that our123 brother Timothy has been set free; I shall see you with him if he comes fairly soon.
22 The "word of exhortation" 124 refers to the whole of the preceding epistle. In Acts 13:15, where the rulers of the synagogue at Pisidian Antioch send a message to Paul and Barnabas inviting them to pass on any "word of exhortation" which they may have for the assembled company, the phrase clearly denotes a homily; it is thus a very suitable description for this epistle, which is a homily in written form, with some personal remarks added at the end. But could a document of this length be appropriately spoken of as written "in few words"?125 It might be a long letter, but not a long homily; it can be read aloud within one hour. At one point the writer has said "there is much that we have to say" (Heb. 5:11); but at another point he indicates that he could have said much more (9:5b). Even if we regard it as a letter, it is not as long as Romans and 1 Corinthians. There is no need to suppose that the "word of exhortation" might be confined to the concluding admonitions of 13:1-19; these are so brief that no writer would think it necessary to ask his readers to bear with them126 (the added remark about "few words" makes it clear that it is the length of the exhortation, not its content, that our author thinks the readers might begin to find wearisome).
23 Timothy is almost certainly Paul's friend of that name. We have no other account of his imprisonment. (It is just possible to argue that "set free" means not "released from prison" but "sent away on some commission";127 but it is very unlikely that the verb, used absolutely as it is here, has this latter meaning.) The place of his imprisonment was at some distance from the author's residence at the time, yet nearer to the author than to his readers, since he has news of Timothy's release before his readers are likely to know of it, and if Timothy joins him where he is they can travel together to visit them. Timothy was with Paul when Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon were written; that is to say (in the opinion of the present commentator), he was with him in Rome. In 2 Tim. 4:9-13 Paul seems to summon Timothy from Ephesus to Rome, but this is uncertain, as is the chronological setting of these verses. i28
B. FINAL GREETINGS AND BENEDICTION (13:24-25)
24 Greet all129 your guides, and all (God's) holy people. Those who are from Italy send you their greetings.
24 They have already been exhorted to obey their leaders; now they are asked to convey the writer's greetings to them, and to all their fellow-believers-that is, we may take it, to members of other house churches than their own in the city-wide fellowship to which they belonged.
"Those from Italy" who send their greetings are probably, as the RSV puts it, "those who come from Italy."131 In that case our author is writing outside Italy to a community in Italy, and sending greetings home from a group of Italian friends who are with him at the time. But contemporary usage does not exclude the possibility that people in Italy are referred t0132-"those who are in Italy and send their greetings with mine from Italy," as A. Nairne suggests.133 As far as translation goes, it is best to render the ambiguous Greek by an ambiguous English phrase; so the NEB says: "Greetings to you from our Italian friends!"
25 The benediction is identical with that of Tit. 3:15.134 The final "Amen" is textually doubtful and therefore omitted from our translation.
Christians are Christians by virtue of certain acts of God which took place at a definite time in the past, but these acts of God have released a dynamic force which will never allow Christians to stick fast at any point short of that divine rest which in this life is always a goal to be aimed at and never a stage which has been reached. The faith once for all delivered to the saints is not something which can be caught and tamed; it continually leads the saints forth to new ventures in the cause of Christ, as God calls afresh. It was Abraham's firm faith in the unchanging God that made him so ready to go forth at God's bidding, not knowing whither he might be led. To stay at the point to which some revered teacher of the past has brought us, out of a mistaken sense of loyalty to him; to continue to follow a certain pattern of religious activity or attitude just because it was good enough for our fathers and grandfathers-these and the like are temptations which make the message of Hebrews a necessary and salutary one for us to listen to. Every fresh movement of the Spirit of God tends to become stereotyped in the next generation, and what we have heard with our ears, what our fathers have told us, becomes a tenacious tradition encroaching on the allegiance which ought to be accorded only to the living and active word of God. As Christians survey the world today, they see very much land waiting to be possessed in the name of Christ; but to take possession of it calls for a generous measure of that forward-looking faith which is so earnestly urged upon the readers of this epistle. Those first readers were living at a time when the old, cherished order was breaking up. Attachment to venerable traditions could avail them nothing in this situation; only attachment to the unchanging and onwardmoving Christ could carry them forward and enable them to face a new order with confidence and power. So, in a day when everything that can be shaken is being shaken before our eyes and even beneath our feet, let us in our turn give thanks for the unshakable kingdom which we have inherited, which endures forever when everything else to which men and women may pin their hopes disappears and leaves not a wrack behind.
INDEXES
CHIEF SUBJECTS