Part 120
(4:14-16; 7:25). The fact that he is 'faithful' serves as the starting-point of the homily on fidelity in the next chapter. Both attributes have a pastoral function. Christ's mercy grounds Christian hope; his fidelity inspires those facing difficulty (cf. 12:1-2). v. 18, the point that Christ, because tested, is able to aid, reappears at 4:14; 5:7-8; 12:1-2. It is clear that the 'perfection' of Christ, mentioned at 2:10, involves the qualities that make Christ the high priest that he is.
Christ Faithful and Merciful (3.-1-5:1 oj
(3:1—4:11) A Homily on Faith
(3:1—6) Moses and Jesus as Examples of Faith From 3:1 through 4:13 a homiletic reflection focuses on the need for continued fidelity. Prior to the citation of a text to be interpreted, a preface introduces the theme, contrasting two examples, Moses, the servant (3:5), and Christ, the Son (3:6). The contrast exalts Jesus, as do other comparisions of the first several chapters; yet it contains an ironic note. The exalted status of Son requires greater fidelity because with it comes greater testing, as ch. 12 will argue. The assumption that
1241 HEBREWS
that issues in a bold 'freedom of speech', manifested in prayer
God's children will be exposed to special testing is an explicit part of the homily that follows, v. i, the description of the addressees as 'partners' (Gk. metochoi) involves a term applied to the angelic 'companions' of the Son at 1:9. Etymologically it is related to the verb 'to share' (metechtiri), used for Christ's participation in human physical characteristics (2:10). His true companions are his 'brothers and sisters' (2:10—14) wh° 'share' in the Holy Spirit (6:4). Their participation in things 'heavenly' (cf 6:4; 8:5; 9:23; 11:16; 12:22) is not an irrefragable guarantee but is contingent on their response to the 'calling'. Hence the following exhortation is necessary. The description of Jesus as high priest continues the theme introduced at 2:17. The unusual epithet 'apostle' applies to Christ only here in the NT. It suggests the common notion of Jesus as 'one sent' from God; cf. Mkg:37; Mt 10:40; 15:24; Lkio:i6; Gal4:4; Jn3:i7, 34 and frequently. The title also evokes the image of the hero sent to release death's captives (2:10-16). The 'confession' (cf. 4:14;
(4:16; 10:19; f°r mis sense of the word, cf. i Jn 3:21; Eph 3:12) and in public confession (10:35; cfMk 8:32; Jn 7:13; Phil 1:20; Eph 6:19). The second, translated 'the pride that belong(s) to hope' by the NRSV, also connotes external behaviour. The homilist calls upon his addressees to 'boast' about their hopes, as did other early Christian leaders (Rom 5:2; 2 Cor 3:12; 11:30; 12:9; Jas i:g;4:i6). He will continually insist on the importance of hope (6:11; 7:19; 10:23; II:I)-
(3:7-11) The Text for a Homily: Psalm 95 The homilist now cites Ps 95:7—11, the final portion of a hymn praising YHWH's power and inviting the worshipper to attend to the divine command. The psalmist's application of the experience of the Exodus to his own day involves a typological use of Scripture common in the OT (cf. Isa 41:17; 42:9; 43:16—21; Hos 2:16—20), post-biblical Judaism (Sir 16:10; CD 3:7—9), and early Christianity (cf. Mk 6:34; Jn 6:30-1; i Cor 5:7; Acts 7:17-53). The Israelites of the Exodus generation, in fact, constituted a standard negative example that could be adapted to specific homiletic contexts, as at i Cor 10:1—22. v. 7, the notion that the Holy Spirit is the source of Scripture (also at 9:8; 10:15) is no doubt traditional; cf. Acts 28:25;] Ckm. 13:1; 16:2. The initial word of the citation, 'Today', calls for an actualization of the scriptural experience in the lives of the people of
10:23) may refer to fixed liturgical formulations but probably encompasses the general content of the community's faith, v. 2, Hebrews compares Moses and Jesus on the basis of Num 12:7, where YHWH confirms the position of Moses as leader of the Israelites when Aaron and Miriam had murmured against him. The original Hebrew affirmed that Moses was 'entrusted' with all of God's 'house', that he was, in effect, the chief steward of the people of Israel. The Greek translation can be understood as a statement about the faithfulness of Moses, v. 3, the homilist plays with the term 'house', drawing an analogy between a house and its builder and Moses and Jesus. The analogy is inexact; Jesus is not said to be the builder of Moses. Nor is he said to be the builder of the house, v. 4, lest there be any misunderstanding, the homilist indicates clearly that the builder of the house of which he speaks is God, earlier described as the Creator of all (2:10). Despite the clarification, the analogy associates Jesus, to whom divine titles can be applied (1:8,10), with the Creator, v. 5, the homilist cites again Num 12:7 in order to specify the distinction between Jesus and Moses. In Num, YHWH had contrasted other prophets to whom he communicated in visions and dreams with 'his servant' Moses, to whom he spoke face to face. Thus 'servant' was a title of honour, indicating the unique status of Moses. The notice indicating what the service involves, 'testimony to things that would be spoken', relegates Moses to a function analogous to that of the angels (1:14). v. 6, Hebrews recontextualizes the passage from Numbers by reflecting on the categories appropriate to a household. The homilist contrasts the title 'servant' to the designation 'Son', which Scripture had attested for Jesus (1:5). In the process he introduces the title 'Christ'. The contrast between children and servants, used by other early Christian authors (Gal 4:1-7; Jn 8:35), may be a rhetorical commonplace. The homilist embellishes the contrast by indicating the relationship of the Son to the household. Unlike a servant 'within' the household, the Son is 'over' it, a position appropriate to his exalted status (1:3,13; 2:7). The household itself is not, as Numbers originally suggested, the people of Israel, but 'we', the brothers and sisters whom Jesus leads to glory (2:10-13). Membership in the household is conditional on maintaining a strong identity with the people of God, expressed by two virtues. The term for the first, translated 'confidence' by the NRSV, connotes more than a subjective psychological state. It is a confident self-assurance
Israel. The homilist, following the psalmist's lead, applies the psalm's message to his addressees (4:7, n). v. 8, the psalmist recalls the rebellion of the Exodus generation at Meribah and Massah (Ex 17:7; Num 20:1—13; Deut 6:16; 9:22; 33:8). The Greek translates these place names etymologically as 'rebellion' and day 'of testing', v. 10, the traditional versification of Hebrews follows that of the original psalm, which associates the period of forty years with God's wrath against the Exodus generation (cf. 3:17). The divine displeasure was thus limited to that period. Our homilist inserts a particle 'therefore' that, in effect, repunctuates the psalm. He associates the 'forty years' with the period during which the Israelites tested God, as described in v. 9. v. n, divine oaths are of special significance; cf. 6:13-20; 7:20-2. The term 'rest' in the original psalm referred to the 'resting place' of the land of Canaan; the homilist will suggest another understanding at 4:1—11.
(3:12—4:11) Homiletic Exegesis: Let Us Enter God's Rest The application of the psalm develops in three balanced segments, 3:12-19; 4:1-5; 4:6-11, each of which features a verse from the psalm. The whole aims to show that the threat and the promise contained in the text apply to the situation of the addressees, v. 12, the summons to 'Take care' is common in the NT; cf. Mt 24:4; Acts 13:40; i Cor 10:18; Col. 2:8; Heb 12:25. Th£
danger against which the homilist warns involves fundamental attitudes and commitments. The translation 'unbelieving heart' puts the emphasis on belief. The phrase would be better rendered 'faithless heart', suggesting a concern with infidelity in a broader sense. The homilist specifies the danger by warning against 'turning away' from God. This warning involves a wordplay in the Greek between 'faithless' (apistias) and 'turn away' (apostenai). The example of the rebellion in the desert recorded in Num 14 inspires the connection. The description of God as 'living' is a traditional one (cf. Deut 5:26) that reappears at Heb 9:14; 10:31; 12:22. v. 13, the homilist sounds a more positive note, using a verb, 'to exhort one
HEBREWS 1242
nity, see 11:39—40. While members of the faithless desert generation were not so united, those who are faithful will share in the promised inheritance, v. 3, the next comment indicates who deserves to inheritthe divine rest, the 'we' ofthe homilist's own community. To reinforce that point, he cites the last verse ofthe psalm, contrasting the 'they' ofthe desert generation with the 'us' of his community. The problem remains of how the promise of a divine rest is available to contemporaries, particularly if the rest envisioned by Scripture is the 'resting place' or homeland of Canaan. The homilist hints at his solution by noting that the divine 'works' were 'finished at the foundation ofthe world', v. 4, the homilist now explains the relevance of the allusion to Genesis. With a comment that the Author of Scripture once spoke about the 'seventh day', the homilist cites Gen 2:2, which reports that God himself rested after completing the work of creation. For our homilist, this verse thus interprets the significance ofthe phrase 'my rest' in Ps 95:11. v. 5, lest there be any doubt about the connection, the homilist cites again the relevant verse of the psalm. His interpretation exemplifies the rabbinic technique gezera shewa, which draws together two passages linked by a common word. At its simplest, this technique interpreted an ambiguous word in one context by its clear meaning in another. The technique could also link passages whose themes or motifs might be mutually illuminating. Such is the use ofthe technique in this context. The homilist suggests that 'God's rest' mentioned in the psalm is not something earthly but is a place or state into which God himself entered at the time of creation. Hence, to focus on the land of Canaan as the resting place ofthe people of God is erroneous.
another', related to the description of his own work at 13:22; cf. also 12:5. The conceit that the 'today' of the psalm is the present of the homilist reappears at 4:7. The description of the danger as the 'deceit of sin' is another traditional motif; cf. Rom 7:11; 2 Thess 2:10; and 2 Cor 11:3, which alludes to Gen 3:13. v. 14, the verse recalls emphases of the introduction to the homily. For the term 'partners', see 3:1. The homilist had insisted on the conditional character of the partnership with Christ at 3:6. As the virtues recommended at 3:6 involved active behaviour, so too the homilist here calls for something more than a subjective attitude. The noun translated 'confidence' by the NRSV could be translated 'resolution', the stance appropriate for soldiers confronting an enemy. The word is also the same as that used for the 'being' of God at 1:3 and may subtly call upon the addressees to hold fast to the divine reality which they have experienced in Christ; cf. 11:1. v. 15, the homilist cites again the first verse of the psalm. The connective 'as it is said' obscures the relationship of the citation to the immediate context. The phrase should be translated 'by saying' and refers to the way in which the addressees are called upon to exhort one another in v. 13. v. 16, the homilist probes the application of the text with a series of questions, each of which uses a phrase of the psalm, a technique frequently exemplified in Philo's exegesis (e.g. Quis Heres, 115, 260-1; Spec. Leg. 3.25). These questions direct attention to the details of the failure of the ancient Israelites. The response that 'all who left Egypt' were at fault may recall YHWH's comment to Moses at Num 14:22, although that comment had allowed some exceptions, v. 17, using the psalm's traditional association of forty years with the period ofwrath (cf. Num 14:33,34), the homilist asks again at whom the wrath was directed. That the bodies of the sinners fell in the desert alludes to Num 14:33 and conjures up an image of judgement, v. 18, at Num 14:43 Moses had addressed the Israelites as people 'disobedient to the Lord', v. 19, the series of questions concludes with an observation that draws the first portion of the homily to a climactic close. The translation of the NRSV, attributing the failure of the desert generation to 'unbelief, is too restrictive. As the allusions to Num 14 in the previous verses make clear, the problem is portrayed as disobedient 'infidelity'. Whatever the attitudes and behaviours of the addressees may have been, Hebrews portrays the danger confronting them in stark terms.
4:6, the homilist now moves into his final stage of explication ofthe scriptural text, summarizing the force ofthe argument thus far. 'Disobedience' prevented the original recipients ofthe divine promise from attaining it. The promise, therefore, remains open. v. 7, a citation ofthe first verse of the psalm introduces a historical argument reinforcing the point that the promise was not fulfilled by entry into Canaan. As tradition indicates, 'David' was the author ofthe psalm, v. 8, the homilist draws an inference. Since David was subsequent to Joshua, he could not have called for faithful attendance upon God's word, and the consequent receipt of the divine promise, if that promise had been fulfilled in Joshua's day. The evocation of Moses' successor, whose name is the same as that of Jesus, may suggest another comparison between the 'pioneer' (2:10) ofthe new covenant and a counterpart of old, but the comparison is not developed, v. 9, in drawing his conclusion that a promised rest remains available to his own community, the homilist returns to his gezera shewa argument in w. 4 and 5. The link between Ps 95:11 and Gen 2:2 suggested that the promised rest was connected with God's rest on the primordial sabbath. The specific term 'sabbath rest' appears here for the first time in Greek literature. It evokes not simply repose, but the joyous observance ofthe day characteristic of Jewish tradition, v. 10, nonetheless, entry into that state follows the cessation of labour. This portion of the homily suggests that the 'labours' confronting the addressees involve struggle against the temptation to rebel or go astray. Later portions of the homily will suggest that active external oppression (cf. 10:32—9; 12:1—4; J3:I3) is also involved, v. n, rest is finally to be achieved in the festive presence of
4:1, attention now shifts to the 'rest' promised in the last verse of the psalm. A warning continues the monitory tone of the last verse and introduces the notion that the 'rest' remains available in the present. The suggestion that the rest is 'promised' introduces a theme that recurs through the rest of the text (6:12, 15,17; 7:6; 8:6; 9:15; 10:36; 11:9, 13,17, 33, 39). v. 2, the homilist again emphasizes the continuity between the revelation of old and that of his own day, while highlighting the importance of a faithful response. The term 'good news'
(euaggelion) plays on the Greek word for 'promise' (epaggelia) in the previous verse. The 'good news' announces a message of hope for the fulfilment of God's promises. The phrase 'the message they heard' (lit. the word of hearing) recalls a Pauline phrase for the gospel (cf. i Thess 2:13). It emphasizes the notion of oral communication explicit in the psalm's opening verse. For the notion that members of God's people from the past may be 'united by faith' with the eschatological commu-
1243 HEBREWS
development of the theme with another hortatory comment, v. 14, as at 10:19, me homilist bases his exhortation on a statement of what his audience possesses. That Jesus is a 'high priest' appeared at 2:17, although the title's significance remains to be seen. That he has 'passed through the heavens' is implicit in the image of his exaltation (1:3, 13; 2:7—9; 9:I1)- The title 'Son of God', a fuller form of the title Son (1:5) reappears at 6:6; 7:3; 10:29. The juxtaposition of the name Jesus and this majestic title may be characteristic of liturgical formulas to which the homilist refers when he speaks of the community's 'confession'. For similar language, cf. Rom 1:4; i Thess 1:10; Acts 9:20; i Jn 1:7; 4:15; 5:5. The exhortation to 'hold fast' reinforces analogous calls in the preceding exhortation (3:6,14). v. 15, the homilist's pastoral sensitivity is evident in his balanced exhortations. In contrast to the threatening warning about the judgemental word of God, he now highlights the consoling thought of a 'sympathetic' heavenly figure. The claim that he has been 'tested' formed the last comment on the human experience of Jesus (2:17). A more graphic description of his testing will follow at 5:7-10. The similarity of Christ and his followers has one qualification, that he was 'without sin'. Such an affirmation, common in early Christian sources (cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Jn 7:18; 8:46; 14:30; i Jn 3:5,7; i Pet 1:19; 2:22; 3:18), here grounds the claim that Christ was a 'blameless' offering in his self-sacrificial death (cf. 9:14). v. 16, the call to 'approach', repeated at 10:22, is part of the author's exhortation to move in an appropriate direction, towards rest (4:11), perfection (6:1), and ultimately God. The cultic image of approaching the sanctuary in worship (cf. Ex 16:9; Lev 9:7; 21:17; 22:3J Num 10:3—4; J^:3) is commonly used for believers (cf. 7:25; 11:6; 12:18, 22). Although rooted in cult, the image applies to the whole covenant relationship with God. The specific goal of the believer's movement is the divine 'throne', previously mentioned at 1:8. The characterization 'of grace' highlights the quality of mercy on which the homilist now focuses. The summons to approach 'with boldness' (cf. 3:6) calls for confident self-expression before God, which Christ's human prayer also exemplifies (5:7). The combination of'mercy' and 'grace', common in Jewish and Christian texts (cf. Wis 3:9; 4:15; i Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; Titus 1:4; 2 Jn 3), offers a comprehensive definition of the 'help' available. The assistance from on high is 'timely' or 'in a time of need' (NRSV) as 2:18 had suggested, because the addressees are also being tested.
God, in that 'heavenly city' to which the faithful aim (11:13-16; 12:21—3; I3:I4)- The exhortation closes with a reference to the negative example of disobedience provided by the desert generation.
(4:12-13) Concluding Reflection: The Power of God's Word A brief poetic flourish reinforces the homiletic warning developed since 3:1. It focuses on the word of God that came to expression in the text of the psalm and in the homilist's exposition. It also draws to a close the theme of God's speech that runs through the first several chapters (cf. 1:1; 2:2,6,12). Church fathers and some modern commentators interpret this passage as a reference to Christ and the Word of God, a title used of Christ in Jn 1:1-14, but me passage does not have such a precise focus, v. 12, the homilist relies on traditional imagery as he personifies the word of God as something 'living and active'. God's word had often been seen as the instrument of divine creative (cf. Gen 1:3; Ps 33:9; Isa 55:11; Sir 42:15; Wis 9:1) and judgemental (Amos 1:2; Jer 7:1—3) activity. Such language invites personification, which could become elaborate, as at Wis 18:14—16, where the divine word is a warrior, bearing a sharp sword against the Egyptians. The comparison to a 'two-edged sword' is rooted in poetic comparison of the tongue to a sword (cf. Isa 49:2; Ps 57:4). The word issuing from the tongue could be similarly described. The Jewish exegete and philosopher Philo exploits the image extensively, interpreting various biblical swords as symbols of the divine Logos ('Word' or 'Reason'). Thus in DC Cherubim, 38, he finds the 'flaming sword' of Gen 3:4 as the word uniting God's goodness and royal power and, in Quis
Heres, 130-2, 234-6, he introduces the divine Logos as a cosmic principle accessible to the human reason through logical analysis. Christians used the image of the divine word as a sword in hortatory (Eph 6:17) and eschatological contexts (Rev 1:16; 2:12; 19:15). Hebrews emphasizes the judgemental function of the divine word and the one from whom it issues. Imagery of the innermost portions of the human person, both spiritual ('soul' and 'spirit') and physical
('joints' and 'marrow') suggest how penetrating the word can be. The two pairs are meant to be evocative, not precisely definitive of the components of the human self. The key point is that the word is critical or 'able to judge' the workings of the human heart, v. 13, the personification intensifies as the word become the Judge. That no creature is 'hidden' before God is a commonplace for Graeco-Roman philosophers (e.g. Epict. Diss. 2.14.11; Marc. Aur. Medit. 12.2), for Jews (Jer 11:20; i Enoch 9:5; Ep. Arist. 132-3; Sib. Or. 8.282-5; Phil°» Abr. 104; Cher. 96), and for early Christians (i Cor4:5; i Thess 2:4; Rom 8:27). The description of all as 'naked and laid bare' involves colourful language, used of a wrestling hold and of a sacrifice, where a victim's neck would be 'laid bare' to the priest's knife. The concluding remark that it is to this judge that we must 'render an account' involves one more verbal play on the Greek logos, which means both 'word' and 'account'. (4:14-16) Transitional Exhortation: Approach the Merciful High Priest Since the beginning of the exhortation at 3:1, our homilist worked with the theme of 'fidelity', exemplified by Jesus and called for in his followers. He now treats the second attribute accorded to Jesus at 2:17, mercy. He begins
(5:1-10) The Merciful Christ and the High Priests The reflection on the person and work of Christ concentrates on his status as the true and eternal High Priest. The theme, introduced at 2:17 and repeated at 4:15, now undergoes its first stage of development. Here the homilist compares Christ with ordinary earthly high priests, showing points of contact and hinting at the superiority of the heavenly high priest. The description of ordinary high priests (5:1—4) makes three general points about their function, their relationship to their followers, and their relationship to God. These points will be treated in inverse order in their application to Christ (5:5—10). v. i, high priests are intermediaries par excellence. Their central responsibility is to make 'gifts and sacrifices', a generic description of sacrifices (cf. 3 Kgdms 8:64; Ep. Arist. 234; Heb 8:3; 9:12). Our homilist characterizes these as having to do
HEBREWS 1244
(7:28). What is important for Hebrews is that Scripture attests Christ as both. v. 7, Hebrews now recounts part of the human experience of Jesus that made him capable of sympathy. The portrait of Jesus offering 'prayers and supplications' generically resembles the scene at Gethsemane (cf. Mt 26:36—46; Mk 14:32—43; Lk 22:40—6), but the details differ. The homilist may have been inspired by stories of various prayers of Jesus, including his cry on the cross (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34), but the overall pattern embodies traditional notions of the ideal prayer of the righteous. The content of the prayers is not explicit, but the one addressed 'who was able to save him from death', suggests that the prayer sought deliverance. The 'loud cries and tears', not part of Gethsemane accounts, derive from the Psalms (Ps 22:1—2, 24; 116:8) and recur in Jewish traditions (iQH 5:12; 2 Mace 11:6; 3 Mace 1:16; i Esd 5:62; Philo, Leg. All. 3.213; Quis Heres, 19). That Christ was heard 'because of his reverent submission' is part of the same portrait of a saint's prayer. The word for 'reverent submission' (Gk. eulabeia) appears in Philo's description of the prayer of Moses (Quis Heres, 22) and has connotations of the 'fear of the Lord' (Prov 1:7). That Christ 'was heard' does not indicate that he was spared death; the homilist clearly alludes to Christ's exaltation in which he was brought out of death; cf. 2:10; 13:20. v. 8, that Christ 'learned through... what he suffered' involves a common Greek proverb (cf. Aesch. Ag. 177; Hdt. 1.207) about experience as teacher. The Jewish proverbial notion that suffering can be a form of divine chastisement (cf. 12:4-11) may also be in the background, but the homilist has a hortatory goal. Christ can be sympathetic because of his suffering; he also serves as a model of obedience to the divine will; cf. 10:5—10; 12:1—3. v9> me final point of comparison between Christ and earthly high priests relates to the effect of their actions. Christ 'perfected' (cf. 2:10) is, in his exalted state, a 'cause of salvation'. The immediate context suggests Christ's exemplary role; chs. 8—10 will describe how his sacrifice achieves salvific effects. The note that salvation is for 'those who obey him' reinforces its conditional character (cf. 2:1—4; 3:^> J4)- vIO> a paraphrase of Ps 110:4, already cited at 5:4, concludes the section. The claim that the verse designates Christ a 'high priest' requires explanation, but the homilist dramatically delays his expository tour deforce.
with 'sin'. Although priests in Scripture were responsible for various offerings, including the daily sacrifice (Ex 29:38—46), and thanksgiving and purificatory sacrifices (Lev 2—7), Hebrews concentrates on the sacrifice unique to the high priest, the offering for sins on the Day of Atonement (Lev 16). Details of that ritual provide the material for the exposition in chs. 8— 10. v. 2, the second point of comparison, an idealized picture of a high priest, focuses on the theme of sympathy mentioned at 4:15. The ordinary high priest should 'deal gently' with sinners. The verb (metriopathein), unique in scripture, is carefully chosen. Not synonymous with 'sympathize' (4:15), its philosophical usage (cf. Diog. Laert. Lives of the Philosophers, 5.31; Plut. On Restraining Anger, 10 (Mor. 4580); Philo, Virt. 195; Abr. 257; Leg. All. 3.129) suggests a restraint of emotion, particularly of anger. Christ, as heavenly high priest, does that and more. The earthly high priest can restrain his anger because, like his fellows, he is 'subject to weakness'. Hebrews will develop this notion, with the qualification about Christ's sinlessness already enunciated (4:15). The characterization of the sinners as 'ignorant and wayward' reflects the stipulation that sin-offerings apply only to unwitting offences (Lev 4:2; 5:21—2; Num 15:22—31; Deut 17:12). This restriction parallels the exclusion of wilful sins from the pale of forgiveness (6:4— 8; 10:26-31; 12:17). v3> me requirement that the high priest sacrifice for himself and for the people pertains to the Day of Atonement; cf. Lev 9:7; 16:6—17. Th£ fact that ordinary high priests had to sacrifice for themselves contributes to the homilist's argument about Christ's superiority (7:27; 9:7). v. 4, the final point of comparison is that the high priest is not self-appointed, but 'called' by God. This stipulation applies to the first high priest of the biblical tradition, Aaron, appointed to the office by God (cf. Ex 28:1; Lev 8:1; Num 16-18). Aaron continues the list of biblical figures used as foils for Christ, but the contrast between Christ and him is not further developed.
5:5-6, taking the points of comparison in inverse order, the homilist begins by noting how Christ was called to office. He does so by construing two verses from the Psalms as divine speech to the Son. The first, Ps 2:7, is familiar from Heb 1:3. The second, Ps 110:4, derives from a text, the first verse of which was cited at Heb 1:13. While Ps 110:1 was associated with Christ's exaltation, the current verse appears here for the first time in early Christian literature. The verse originally attributed priestly status to an Israelite king. Its allusion to the 'order of Melchizedek' may have been an attempt by Davidic poets to effect reconciliation with ancient Canaanite traditions in Jerusalem. For our homilist the phrase presents an opportunity, for the attribution of priestly status to the addressee does not, in itself, affirm that the addressee, in his construal the Messiah, can be entitled 'high priest'. Ch. 7 will show how 'priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek' is really a superior, because heavenly and eternal, form of high priesthood. For the moment, the juxtaposition of the two verses permits the linking of two central Christological titles, Son and High Priest. That connection causes difficulties for readers seeking a systematic Christology. Yet the homilist is unconcerned with the chronological relationship between the designations of Christ as Son and High Priest. It is clear that, for him, Christ is the Son eternally (1:3), and that he becomes High Priest at the point where he is 'perfected' or exalted
The Priestly Work of Christ (5:11-10:18)
(5:11-6:20) Transitional Admonition The interlude falls into three sections, two (5:11-6:3; 6:4-12) of direct exhortation and one (6:13—20) offering scriptural assurance about the reliability of God's promises. 5:11, an apology for the difficulty of the material is a common rhetorical device. Apology turns quickly to criticism of the addressees, accused of being 'dull in understanding'. The same term, meaning 'sluggish', concludes the exhortation at 6:12, but on a more optimistic note. Hence the accusation is clearly a rhetorical move, designed to challenge not condemn the addressees. 5:12, the challenging tone continues with the suggestion that the addressees are spiritually underdeveloped, needing to learn their elementary catechism. The 'oracles of God' are Israel's Scriptures (Acts 7:38; Rom 3:2; i Pet 4:11). The contrasting images of'milk' and 'solid food' commonly represent educational levels (e.g. i Cor 2:6-8; 3:18-23; Philo, Agr. 9; Epict. Dis. 2.16.39). 5:I3> me
HEBREWS
halves of the exhortation. Such imagery is common in Scripture (Isa 5:1—2; 28:23—9; Ezek 19:10—14), in the parables of Jesus (Mk 4:3-9; Mt 13:1-9; Lk 8:4-8), and in other Jewish homilies (e.g. Philo, Quis Heres, 204). 'Ground that drinks up the rain' recalls the promised land (Deut 11:11). The human counterpart of that image has yet to be described, v. 8, the desolate briar patch recalls the land of the garden of Eden, cursed after the fall (Gen 3:17-18). The fiery destiny of such land may involve ordinary agricultural practice, but the image of burning evokes eschatological fire; cf. Mt 13:30, 42; 25:41; Rev 20:14. Th£ image of consuming fire reappears at 12:29. v. 9, an address to the recipients as 'beloved' begins the expression of encouragement. Underlying the positive remarks is the traditional triad of faith, hope, and love (cf. i Thess 1:13; i Cor 13:3; Col 1:4-5), taken in inverse order. For another use of the triad, see 10:22-4. vIO> confidence for the future is based on past experience of the community's loving behaviour. The expression resembles flattering remarks addressed by Christian leaders to their congregations (cf. i Thess 1:2; Rev 2:19; Ign. Rom. proem), v. n, for the full assurance of hope, cf. 10:22. 'To the very end' recalls the warning of 3:14. v. 12, to follow the homilist's advice will prevent the addressees from becoming 'sluggish' (cf. 5:11). The opposite condition is a combination of fidelity and patience. The latter term, appearing only here in Hebrews, connotes more stalwart perseverance than passive patience. It will find echoes in later calls for endurance (10:32—6; 12:2). Such virtues will have their reward, expressed once again in terms of 'inheriting the promise'; cf. 1:14; 4:1, 8.
homilist exploits the educational referents of the image. Those who imbibe educational pabulum are at the elementary level, concentrating on grammar and rhetoric, not the 'word of righteousness', i.e. moral philosophy. In this context such secular language evokes another order of'righteousness' (dikaiosyne), that provided by the heavenly high priest, who 'loves righteousness' (1:9). 5:14, play on the imagery continues. The contrast between milk and solid food parallels the contrast between the infant and the 'mature' person, who can tolerate solid food. Adults are also those who exercise, and the phrase 'trained by practice' evokes both the gymnasium and the common application of athletic imagery to the moral life (e.g. i Tim 4:7; 2 Pet 2:14; Heb 12:11; Philo, Conf. Ling. 181; Agr. 42). The final phrase, 'distinguishing good from evil', reinforces the secular referent of the imagery, but, for Hebrews, to make such a distinction is ultimately to follow Christ (12:1-2). Hence to be 'mature' (teleios) is more than a matter of physical and intellectual maturation. 6:1, a verbal play on the connotations of the language emerges in the call to press on to 'perfection' (tdeiates). The summons suggests, as does the underlying moralizing image, that perfection is in the hands of the addressees. It later becomes clear that their moral efforts depend upon the perfecting that Christ's sacrifice affords (10:14). Th£ homilist calls for an understanding of that reality and a life lived in the light of Christ's example (12:1—2). He will not rehearse the basics of Christian belief and practice, v. 2, the 'instruction about baptisms' may involve the distinction between Christian initiation and other similar rites, as at Acts 18:25; I9:3~5F°r
the ritual 'laying on of hands', see Acts 8:17; 19:6. v. 3, a pious aside makes a conventional appeal to God's will; cf i Cor 16:7, and, for similar appeals, Rom 1:10; i Cor 4:19; Acts 18:21; Jas4:i5. 6:4, the homilist declares four things to be 'impossible'; cf. 6:18; 10:4; 11:6. This solemn declaration begins a stern warning, soon to be balanced by a more encouraging message. The belief that it is impossible to restore apostates resembles other early Christian expressions of rigorism, such as the notion of the unforgivable sin (Mt 12:32; Mk 3:29; Lk 12:10) or the 'mortal sin' of i Jn 5:16. The homilist does not indicate whether the grounds for this judgement, repeated in a slightly different form at 10:26—31 and 12:15—17, involve divine unwillingness to accept repentance or a subjective inability of apostates to repent. It appears to be a matter of definition; those who put themselves outside the pale of salvation cannot be retrieved. Various images define belonging to the Christian community. To be 'enlightened' is a common Christian image for reception of the gospel; cf. i Cor 4:5; Eph 1:18; 2 Tim 1:10; Jn 1:9 i; Pet 2:9; Jas 1:17. The image has not yet become an equivalent for baptism. To have 'tasted the heavenly gift' could allude to the eucharist (cf. Acts 20:11) but is more likely to be a general reference to all that is involved in salvation. For similar gifts, see Acts 2:38; 10:45; R°m 5:I5J 2 Cor 9:15; Eph 3:7. v. 5, the 'powers of the age to come' recalls the description of the confirmation of God's word (2:4). v. 6, the heart of the belief about apostates comes to expression. In rejecting the one whose death brings salvation, they join those who disgracefully executed him. The solemn designation of Christ as Son of God reinforces the heinousness of apostasy, v. 7, a vivid agricultural image, contrasting two types of soil, links the two
6:13, the final portion of the chapter develops the notion of the promise and suggests as a reason to be assured of it the divine oath that guarantees it. The homilist reflects on the oath that God swore to Abraham at Gen 22:16-17. Th£ pericope anticipates a reflection (7:20—5) on the divine oath mentioned at Ps 110:4. Th£ remark that God 'swore by himself is based on Gen 22:16, a verse that caught the attention of other Jewish interpreters such as Philo (Sacr. 91-4; Leg. All. 3.2037). 6:14, the content of the oath derives from Gen 22:17. Hebrews thus focuses on one element of the divine promise to Abraham, that he would be the father of a great nation (Gen 12:2-3; Z5:5; I7:5)> and ignores the correlative promise of land (Gen 12:7; 13:4). 6:15, the description of Abraham's action repeats the language of 6:12. Abraham's endurance involved his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, an episode used at 11:17-19 to illustrate Abraham's faith. 6:16, the human act of swearing helps explain the significance of God's oath. Philo offers a similar analysis about the supportive function of oaths (Somn. 1.12) and suggests that the divine oath was designed to help human beings accept God's promises (Abr. 273). 6:17, that God's purposes are 'unchangeable' is a common affirmation of Scripture (Num 23:19; i Sam 15:29; Ps 89:35; Isa 40:8; Jer 4:28) and of later Jewish authors (Philo, Deus Imm.). 6:18, the 'two unchangeable things' are apparently God's word and the confirming oath. A pastoral application of the reflection now develops. It is not immediately clear on what word and oath the addressees should rely. The following chapter (7:20-2) indicates that the relevant oath is found in Ps 110:4, confirming Christ's priesthood 'after the order of Melchizedek'. The homilist probably considers Ps 2:7, cited most recently at 5:5 in connection with Ps 110:4, as the basic divine word. The
HEBREWS 1246
angel (Hippol. Haer. 7.26; the Nag Hammadi tractate Melchizedek; Pistis Sophia 1:25—6). None of these traditions is explicit here, but they form the background to the use of Melchizedek to explain the significance of Christ.
description of Christians as those 'who have taken refuge', could be translated even more graphically as 'who have fled for refuge'. The language hints at the image of wandering sojourners that will develop in ch. n. The image of 'flight' towards God, based on Plato, Theaetetus, I76A-B, is common in Hellenistic religious philosophy. For a Jewish use, cf. Philo, Fug. 63. The homilist orients flight not to the transcendent world but towards an eschatological 'hope'. 6:19, the image of the anchor, unknown to the biblical tradition prior to Hebrews, is common in Greek literature (e.g. Find. Odesl. 6.101; Plato, Leg. 12.9610; Philo, Sacr. go) as a symbol of stability and security. The imagery shifts abruptly from stability to movement, from the nautical to the sacral. The language of movement derives not from the image of the anchor but from its referent, the heavenly high priest and his movement into the divine realm. The 'inner shrine' is the most sacred part of the tabernacle, separated by a special curtain from the external portion of the tabernacle; cf. Ex 26:31—3; 40:3; Mt 27:51. 6:20, the reference to the 'curtain' and the action of Jesus as high priest anticipates the treatment of the high priests in chs. 810. Only the high priest could enter the innermost sanctuary and only on the Day of Atonement. Jesus has made that move as a 'forerunner'. The epithet, recalling the description of Jesus as 'pioneer' (2:10), emphasizes that his experience grounds his followers' hopes. The concluding phrase reiterates the key verse, Ps 110:4, mat warrants considering Christ a high priest.
v. 4, reflection on Melchizedek's superiority to the levitical priests begins with the phrase that Abraham gave a tithe to Melchizedek (Gen 14:20). v. 5, Num 18:21—32 stipulates that Israelites had to give a tithe to the priests, who were of the tribe of Levi and thus ultimately descended from the patriarch, v. 6, that Abraham, with no physical relationship to Melchizedek, gave him a tithe suggests a hierarchy: Melchizedek > Abraham > levitical priests > Israelites. That Melchizedek blessed Abraham constitutes the second point for comment. The mention of 'the promises' continues a subordinate theme from 6:13-15. v. 7, despite the apodictic remark that the greater blesses the less, numerous examples attest the opposite (Job 31:20; 2 Sam 14:22; i Kings 1:47). The principle is clearly an ad hoc formulation, v. 8, the mortal Levites stand in stark contrast to the other recipient of a tithe, Melchizedek. The restrained formulation, 'it is testified that he lives', alluding to the fact that Scripture does not record Melchizedek's death (v. 3), does not explain Melchizedek's immortality, w. 9—10, the relationship of givers and recipients of tithes confirms the hierarchical relationship between Melchizedek and the Levites. The introductory remark, 'one might even say' recognizes the argument's playful quality.
v. n, the exegesis turns to the effectiveness of the priestly action. 'Perfection', the goal of the addressees (6:1), begins, as will later be apparent (9:14; 10:14), wrth me forgiveness of sins and ability to participate in the covenant community. If the Levites had produced such perfection, Ps 110:4 would not have predicted another priesthood. A parenthetical comment connects the priesthood with the law. v. 12, although the parenthesis seems to be a casual aside, the connection is significant. If the priestly basis of the law is eliminated, then the law itself becomes invalid. For the quasi-logical language of'necessity', cf. 8:3; 9:16, 23. v. 13, only members of the tribe of Levi could serve as priests (Ex 28:1—4; Num 1:47—54). vJ4> as a descendant of David (Mti:i; 9:27; 15:22; Mk 10:47; Lki-32; Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8; Rev 22:16), Jesus, reverently styled 'our Lord' (cf. 2:3; 13:20), was of the tribe of'Judah'. Hence, he could not have been a priest according to the stipulations of the law.
(7:1-28) Scriptural Reflection: Christ and Melchizedek The long and difficult' (NRSV: 'much...that is hard') (cf. 5:11) discourse begins. The first stage, ch. 7, explores the implications of the insight that Ps 110:4 can aPply to Christ. The homilist's strategy is to interpret the only scriptural passage other than Ps no where the figure of Melchizedek appears, w. i—2, Gen 14:17—20 describes the encounter between Abraham and Melchizedek after Abraham had defeated a coalition of five kings and rescued his kinsman Lot. Abraham first meets the king of Sodom when Melchizedek of Salem abruptly appears, blesses Abraham, and in return receives a tithe of his spoils. Phrases selected from the passage convey the essential points deserving comment, v. 2b, interpretation begins with etymologies, which are technically incorrect. Melchizedek's name is an ancient theophoric formation meaning 'Zedek [a Canaanite deity] is my king'. Similarly 'Salem' is not the equivalent of the Hebrew word for 'peace' (shalom). Nonetheless, the etymologies 'king of righteousness' and 'king of peace' were current among first-century Jewish interpreters (Philo, Leg. All. 3.79; Jos. J. W. 6.438). Apart from their evocation of traditional Messianic attributes, the etymologies play no further role in the chapter, v. 3, Scripture's silence implies attributes of Melchizedekthat make him resemble the 'Son of God'. In the absence of any record of Melchizedek's ancestry, birth, or death, he can be described as a 'priest forever'.
v. 15, what is 'even more obvious' is that old priestly order and its law have been changed, v. 16, the opposition between Levites and the order of Melchizedek is framed in terms of a dichotomy between the 'physical', better translated 'carnal', and 'life'. That life is 'indestructible' because it is eternal (v. 3). A distinction between flesh and spirit underlies the opposition, and the 'spirit' will surface at 9:14, but Hebrews is careful not to express the significance of Christ in static, metaphysical terms. The spirit is ultimately embodied; cf. 10:1-10. v. 17, Scripture's silence testified to Melchizedek's life. The words of Ps 110:4, understood as addressed to the
Speculation on Melchizedek was rife in the period. The Qumran sectarians thought of him as an angelic judge (nQMelch). Philo uses him to symbolize the divine Word (Leg. All. 3.7982). An elaborate legend about Melchizedek, probably dating to the late first century, appears in 2 Enoch. Later rabbis identified Melchizedek with the archangel Michael ('Abot R. Nat. [A] 34). Gnostic Christians knew of Melchizedek as an
Son, attest the eternality of his priesthood, w. 18—19, a
summary of the argument focuses not on priesthood but on law. In contrast with the weakness of the priestly-legal system stands, not the effective reality of the new priest, but the hope that he inspires. The homilist thus continues the theme articulated at 6:19. The cultic image of'approach-
1247 HEBREWS
earthly and heavenly, new and old, interior and external. The organization of the material resembles the homiletic pattern of chs. 3-4. The introduction to this homily, extending to 8:7, indicates the main point of the argument and introduces two of the oppositions on which the subsequent exegesis depends, v. i, the chapter begins with another allusion to the key Ps 110:1 and its image of the exalted one (cf 1:3, 13; 4:14). v. 2, designation of Christ as a 'minister' (Idtourgos) uses a common term for priests. The place where this minister serves is the 'true' cultic site. Much of the next two chapters explains what it means to be the true place of worship. Here the two terms 'sanctuary' and 'tabernacle' suggest further developments. The latter term is the technical designation of the tent of the Exodus. It is that structure, not the Davidic or Herodian temple, that is in view. While 'sanctuary' could be a synonym, the homilist's later usage suggests that the term refers to the innermost part of the tabernacle. The distinguishing feature of this whole complex is that God, not human beings, set it up. The homilist begins to play with the widespread notion of a heavenly temple or sanctuary. Based upon ancient notions of a heavenly plan for the earthly temple (Ex 25:40; i Chr 28:19), Jewish interpreters developed the belief in a heavenly temple or divine palace (i Enoch, 14:10-20; T. Levi, 3:2-4; Wis 9:8; 2 Apoc. Bar. 4:5; b. Hag. I2b; Gen. Rab. 55.7). The book of Revelation (3:12; 7:15; 15:5, etc.) relies heavily on the notion. Similar ideas appear in Greek sources (Ps.-Plato, Epin. 9831—848; Sen. Ben. 7.7.3; Herad. Ep. 4), although the cosmos is usually the 'true' temple, the inner portion of which is heaven itself. Hellenistic Jewish interpreters such as Philo could use both images (cosmos as true temple: Spec. Leg. 1.66; heaven, i.e. the noetic world, as true temple: Vit. Mas. 2.74). v. 3, what priests do is as important as where they do it. For priests offering 'gifts and sacrifices', cf. 5:1. Christ's offering is nothing other than himself (7:27; 9:12—14). v. 4, that Christ could not be a conventional priest was clear from 7:14. v. 5, Ex 25:40 mentions the heavenly pattern shown to Moses. Description of what was copied from that plan as a 'shadow' recalls Plato's famous 'Myth of the Cave' (Resp. 7-5I5A—B). The 'shadows' in the phenomenal world are far removed from the reality of the noetic world (cf. Philo, Ebr. 132-3; Vit. Mas. 2.74). The homilist continues to utilize Platonic terminology in the opposition between heaven and earth, but he will finally resist Platonic metaphysics. The other term used of the earthly place of worship, translated 'sketch' by the NRSV, may intimate some of his hesitation. The word more commonly means 'outline' or 'prefiguration', although it does mean 'copy' in the LXX (Ezek 42:15, and Aquila's version of Ezek 8:10 and
ing' God has been (4:16) and will be (7:25; 10:22) used of Christian life. Christ's 'approach' guarantees access for his followers.
v. 20, relying on the demonstrated significance of divine oaths (6:13-18), the homilist focuses on the first half of Ps 110:4, where God 'confirmed' his promise of priestly status 'with an oath', a phenomenon not attested for other priests, v. 21, Ps 110:4 is cited, v. 22, the surprising inference introduces the theme of a new covenant, anticipating chs. 8-10. Christ's role as guarantor or 'surety' parallels functions accorded to quasi-divine intermediaries such as Philo's Logos (Quis Heres, 205-6). The divinely assured status of the heavenly high priest gives his followers their assurance.
v. 23, a new argument, based on the opposition between multiplicity and unity, contrasts levitical priests and Christ. The fact that priests of old replaced one another in succession was implicit in the notion of ancestry (7:3, 5, 8). The natural inference is that they were 'many in number', v. 24, Christ, by contrast, 'continues forever'. The Greek verb (meneiri) had applied to Melchizedek at v. 3. The motif surfaces at the beginning (1:11-12) and end (13:8) of the homily, v. 25, the earlier affirmation (5:9) that Christ as priest is a 'source of salvation', is now connected with his intercessory activity. The traditional notion that the exalted Christ is a heavenly intercessor (Rom 8:34; Jn 17:9; i Jn 2:1) is connected with Christ's priesthood here and at Heb 9:24.
v. 26, the chapter concludes with a rhetorically elaborate celebration of the heavenly status of Christ. The note that it is 'fitting' for there to be such a high priest resembles the claim that Christ had to be perfected through suffering (2:10); both are part of the divine plan of salvation. The attributes of Christ are traditional. For his holiness, see the application of Ps 16:10 to him at Acts 2:27; 13:35. For his sinlessness, see 4:15. v. 27, the contrast between Christ and ordinary high priests again relies on the opposition between multiplicity and unity, but the precise referent of the priestly sacrifices 'day after day' is unclear. The distinction between an offering for the priest's sins and one for the people reflects the ritual of the Day of Atonement (Lev 16:11, 16), not the daily offering. The Torah required the tamid, animals sacrificed twice daily, morning and evening (Ex 29:38-42; Num 28:3-8), accompanied by a meal offering (Ex 29:40—1; Lev 6:14—23; Num 28:5). High priests could, but were not required to, make these offerings. Although the Torah does not differentiate the functions of the two types of offering, Philo (Quis Heres, 174) suggests that the meal-offerings were for the priests, the animals for the people. Hebrews apparently knows that tradition. The notion that Christ died 'once for all' in an act of selfsacrifice is traditional (Rom 6:10; i Pet 3:18); Hebrews will focus on it (9:12, 25—8; 10:10). v. 28, a neat antithesis summarizes the comparison of the chapter, concluding with a solemn affirmation about the eternal status of the heavenly high priest.
Dan 4:17). In this context it surely has that meaning, although in ch. 10 the homilist will shift from a horizontal to temporal dichotomy and he may now be preparing the way. v. 6, that Jesus is a 'mediator' of a new covenant recalls the claim that he is a guarantor (7:22) who serves an intercessory role (7:25). The notion of a 'new covenant' anticipates the quotation in w. 8—12. The qualitative distinction between the covenants rests on the 'promises' that they contain. Although much is contained in the theme of'promise' (4:1; 11:13-16, 39-40; 12:224), the distinctive element here is the effective forgiveness of sins (8:12; 9:14, 26—8; 10:16—18). v. 7, a contra-factual argument, analogous to the point (7:11) about the new priest men-
(8:1-10:18) Scriptural Reflection: Christ's Sacrifice and the New Covenant
(8:1^7) The Work of the Heavenly High Priest From 8:1 through 10:18 the homilist develops an integrated exposition, focused on Jer 31:31—4. Ch. 7 treated the personal status of the Son. These chapters examine his work, using the antitheses of
HEBREWS 1248
the 'mercy seat', see Ex 25:17—22; 37:6—9. The latter is the cover of the ark that was the focal point of the rites of the Day of Atonement. Paul refers to it at Rom 3:25. The kind of discussion 'in detail' to be avoided appears in the elaborate allegories of the tabernacle's cosmic significance among Jewish interpreters (Philo, Vit. Mos. 2.97—100; Cher.).
tioned in Ps no, introduces the dichotomy between new and old.
(8:8—13) Jer 3l:3I—4: The Text for a Homily v. 8, the introductory comment attributes the oracle to an unnamed speaker. The NRSV, not inappropriately, specifies God as the author of the message. The text of Jeremiah itself claims 'the Lord' as speaker. In its original context Jer 31:31—4 (LXX 38:31—4, to which the citation conforms closely) is part of a series of oracles (chs. 30-3) offering hope to the Israelites of the exilic period that YHWH would restore them to their homeland. At that time, God would re-establish his relationship with them and renew their hearts and minds. Later Jewish groups, such as the sectarians at Qumran, understood the ideal of a 'new covenant' to refer to their own eschatological community (CD 6:19; 8:21; 10:12). Although they did not elsewhere cite this text, early Christians used the notion (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20; i Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:^)- The citation will help the homilistto specify what the 'better promises' of 8:6 entail, v. 10, the distinction between a covenant of external observance and one of internal, heartfelt adherence adds a third dichotomy to the antitheses between heaven and earth, old and new. Repetition of the verse at 10:16 indicates its thematic significance, v. 12, from the exordium (1:3) onwards, the homilist stressed the significance of the forgiveness of sins effected by Christ. The conclusion of the citation indicates that under the new covenant such forgiveness will be a reality. Again, repetition of the verse at 10:17 underlines its significance, v. 13, ominous language, using terminology for an 'obsolete' law, reinforces the negative tone of 8:7 and recalls the need for a change in law (7:11). (9:1-10) The Earthly Sanctuary The homilist begins to contrast old and new covenants by reviewing the structure and rituals of the tabernacle, v. i, announcing the theme of the section, the first verse casts the 'earthly' or 'worldly' sanctuary in a negative light, v. 2, Hebrews relies on several OTpassages: YHWH's instructions forthe tabernacle (Ex 25:1—31:11); Bezalel's construction of the tabernacle (36:1—39:43); YHWH's authorization to set it up (40:1-15); and the account of the compliance by Moses (40:16-38). The 'first' tent is the outer portion of the whole tabernacle. For the 'lampstand', see Ex 25:31—9; 37:17—24; 40:4; for the 'table', Ex 25:23—8; 37:10—15; forthe 'bread', Ex 25:30140:23; Mti2:4. Most MSS record the standard designation of the outer portion of the tabernacle as 'the Holy Place'. Some MSS, however, including P46, the oldest witness to Hebrews, reverse the standard designation and call this space the 'Holy of Holies'. The homilist may have inverted the normal designation to emphasize the multiplicity of the external tabernacle. Although odd, the terminology of 'Holy Place' for the inner sanctuary is consistent; cf. 9:12. v. 3, the 'curtain' has already appeared (6:19) as the boundary of the space accessible to the high priest, v. 4, for the 'altar of incense', see Ex 30:1—10; 37:25—8; 40:5. According to the Pentateuchal accounts it should be in the outer sanctuary, but 2 Mace 2:4-8 closely associates this altar and the ark and 2 Apoc. Bar. 6:7 depicts an angel removing both from the inner sanctuary. For the 'ark of the covenant', Ex 25:10—15; 37:1—5; 40:3; for the 'manna', Ex 16:33—4; f°r 'Aaron's rod', the budding of which determined his selection as priest, Num 17:1-11; for the 'tablets of the covenant', Ex 25:16. v. 5, for the 'cherubim', and
v. 6, the 'ritual duties' of priests in the outer tabernacle included trimming lamps (Ex 27:20-1) and setting 'showbread' on the table (Lev 24:5—9). The note that the priests 'go continually' into the sacred space does not reflect contemporary practice, but describes what Scripture requires, v. 7, the 'once a year' Day of Atonement on the tenth day of the seventh month (Lev 16:29-31) involves an elaborate ritual, performed only by the high priest. He first sacrifices a bull for himself and his household (Lev 16:6, n), then a he-goat forthe people; another animal not mentioned here, the scapegoat, is expelled into the desert. The high priest enters the inner sanctuary to sprinkle the ark twice, first with the bull's blood, then with a goat's blood (Lev 16:14-15). The non-biblical restriction of the sacrifice's effect to sins committed 'unintentionally' conforms to Jewish tradition (m. Yoma, 8.9; t. Yoma, 5.60). v. 8, the homilist explores the ritual's deeper meaning. As at 3:7, the inspiration of the 'Holy Spirit' highlights the contemporary application of Scripture, v. 9, the antecedent of 'this' is ambiguous but is most likely the 'first tabernacle' of v. 6. The translation of the NRSV suggests that the 'present time' is a time of unfulfilment, the time 'during which' (kath' hen) ineffective sacrifices are being offered. The translation thus makes the subordinate clause temporal, defining the 'present'. It should, instead, be rendered as a relative clause, translated 'according to which', and construed as modifying the 'symbol', i.e. the tabernacle. For our author, the 'present time' is not dominated by the old cult, but by Christ's sacrifice. The tabernacle prefigures inadequately what is now effectively present through Christ's sacrifice, which affects the human heart. Scripture has no word for 'conscience' (syntidesis), which is common in the Hellenistic world. It appears in Jewish (Wis 17:10; Jos. Ant. 16.100) and early Christian literature (e.g. Rom 2:15; i Cor 4:4; i Pet 2:14; i Clem. 1.3). v. 10, the homilist criticizes the superficiality of levitical sacrifices. The language refers in a general way to the system of purity laws covering 'food' (Lev n; Deut 14) and 'baptisms' or washings (Lev 15; Num 19); 'drinks' are not mentioned in the Pentateuch. For a similar denigration of cultic externalism, see 13:9. The 'time of correction' is not a future hope, but the present era of the new covenant.
(9:11-14) The Ritual of the Heavenly Sanctuary Attention shifts to the present, defined by the moment when 'Christ came' as High Priest in an act symbolized by the yearly ritual. The fact that his priesthood involves 'things that have come' reinforces the positive view of 'the present' suggested by the previous verses. The 'greater and more perfect tent' has been understood in various metaphorical senses, but our homilist is quite restrained. He simply evokes the image of passage through the heavens associated with Christ's exaltation (2:10; 4:14) and suggests that the passage involves the true (8:2) tent that God pitched. That something 'not made with hands' is superior to a manufactured product is a commonplace of Jewish (Isa 46:6; Philo, Vit. Mos. 2.74—6), pagan (Plut. De
1249 HEBREWS
ceremony at Ex 24:3—8 foreshadows Christ's death, v. 19, reading of 'every commandment' was the first act in the establishment of the Sinai covenant (Ex 24:7). The remark that the reading was 'according to the law' embellishes Scripture but reinforces the connection between cultic act and law; cf. 7:11. Details from various rituals are conflated. The blood of 'calves' was part of the Mosaic ritual. The phrase 'and goats', omitted by some ancient MSS, evokes the Day of Atonement, as v. 12. Water and hyssop pertain to the ritual of the red heifer (Num 19:8,18, 20). All three elements appear in the purification oflepers (Lev 14:2-6). v. 20, the citation of Ex 24:8, firmly, if artificially, connecting blood and covenant, resembles the words of institution of the eucharist (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20; i Cor 11:24—5). The homilist does not develop such an allusion, v. 21, consecration of the Mosaic tabernacle involved anointing (Ex 40:9), not sprinkling with blood; the verse may allude to the installation of Aaronid priests (Lev 8:15, 19, 26). v. 22, the connection of blood and forgiveness appears in a common Jewish maxim; cf. b. Yoma, 53; b. Menah. 9^0; b. Zebah. 6a. (9:23-8) The New Heavenly Sacrifice Balancing 9:11-14, a new description of Christ's 'heavenly' action incorporates the image of ritual purification developed in the previous verses, v. 23, the contrast between heavenly reality and earthly copy (NRSV: sketch) repeats the language of 8:4, although it is clear from 9:14 that the true 'heavenly things' are human consciences. The homilist thus takes a cosmic image to symbolize a personal reality, v. 24, the description of Christ's entry into heaven (cf. 4:14; 8:1-2; 9:11-12) uses decidedly Platonic language ('copy', 'true one', 'heaven itself). As at 7:25, the intercessory role of the heavenly high priest, who 'appears in the presence of God', comes to the fore. v. 25, a renewed contrast between Christ and ordinary high priests emphasizes the multiplicity of the latter (cf. 9:7) and the distance between them and their offering (cf. 9:12). v. 26, a reductio ad absurdum articulates the contrast between Christ and ordinary high priests. Had he been merely one of them, his sacrifice would have been unceasingly repeated. The insistence on the 'once for all' character of Christ's sacrifice (7:27; 9:12; 10:10) continues the Platonizing dichotomy between the phenomenal, earthly 'many' and the stable, heavenly 'one'. The unique character of Christ's act, however, derives from its eschatological position 'at the end of the age', v. 27, that it is 'appointed for mortals to die'is a Greek proverb; cf. 4 Mace 8:11. The notion of a post-mortem judgement, distinct from the final general judgement (Dan 7:26; Mt 25:31-46; 2 Thess 2:12; Rev 20:12) is traditional in Greek sources (Plato, Resp. 10.6148— 6210; Plut. DC Fac. 27—30). v. 28, the application of Christ's sacrifice to 'the sins of many' evokes Isa 53:12; cf. Mk 10:45; Rom 5:19. Early Christians expected His coming a 'second time'; cf. Mk 13:24—7; Acts 1:10—n; i Cor 15:23—4; Rev 1:7.
Tranq. Anim. 20 (4770-0), Ps.-Heracl. Ep. 4), and Christian (Mk 14; 58; Acts 7:48) sources. The designation as 'not of this creation' confirms the tent's heavenly (8:5) status, v. 12, the homilist operates with the notion of a heavenly archetype for the earthly sanctuary. Christ's 'once for all', or absolutely singular (cf 7:27) passage through the heavens (4:14) involved entry into an exalted supernal realm, the 'Holy Place' equivalent to the earthly inner sanctuary; cf. w. 2-3. For the 'blood of goats and calves' cf. v. 7. The claim that Christ's self-sacrifice brought 'redemption', or purchase out of bondage, is traditional. Cf. Lk 1:68; 2:38 for the same noun. For the notion, see Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45; Titus 2:14; i Pet 1:18; Acts 7:35. v. 13, an a fortiori argument concludes the comparison between old and new rituals of atonement. Disparaging references to Pentateuchal rites constitute the weaker end of the analogy. To the elements of the ritual of the Day of Atonement, 'blood of goats and bulls', the homilist adds an allusion to the unrelated 'ashes of a heifer', used in purification rituals. Cf. Num 19. v. 14, the stronger pole of the analogy is Christ's death, assumed, with many early Christians, to be a cleansing, sacrificial act; cf. Acts 15:9; Eph 5:26; Titus 2:14; i Pet 3:21; i Jn 1:7, 9. The 'blood' shed in that death is of far greater value than animals' blood since it belongs to the Son; cf. 10:4. It is only by virtue of the 'eternal Spirit' that blood can be sprinkled in the
'true' or 'heavenly' sanctuary. The homilist's quasi-Platonic dichotomy (8:5) renders comprehensible the intimate connection of'heavenly' and 'spiritual'. It also makes some sense of the mythological notions of a passage through the heavens and a sprinkling of blood in that sphere. Ambiguity remains about the role of the spirit and the character of the connection between spirit and blood. The 'eternal Spirit' could be the divine spirit that raises Christ's act to a transcendent plane, or his own spirit, by virtue of which he attains the divine realm. Tension within this motif will remain until ch. 10. Christ's cleansing sacrifice is spiritual because it affects 'conscience', cf. v. 9. 'Dead works' are sins (6:1) that contrast with works of love (10:24). 'Worship' involves prayer (13:15), but also the 'sacrifices' of good works (10:24; I3:^)-
(9:15-22) The New Covenant To connect the motifs at work, the homilist resorts to a play on words possible in Greek, where the meaning of diatheke can range from 'contract' or 'treaty' to 'will' or 'testament'. For a similar wordplay, see Gal 3:15-18. v. 15, Christ as 'mediator' appeared at 8:6. For the common designation of Christians as 'called', see Rom 1:6; i Cor 1:2; Jude i; Rev 17:14. The addressees had been named 'partners in a heavenly calling' at 3:1. Ordinary legal usage dictates that the promise of an 'inheritance' (1:14; 6:17) implies the death of a testator. The death in the case of this testament/covenant 'redeems' the heirs from their transgressions, as already noted in v. 12. v. 16, legal language describes the requirements for a testament to be enforced; the death of the testator must be 'established' or formally registered, v. 17, further technical language, 'to take effect', to be 'in force', continues to re-emphasize the point that a testament presupposes death, something not required for 'covenants', v. 18, the fact that there is a discrepancy between the social and legal presuppositions of testaments and covenants prompts the observation that the inauguration of the first covenant required bloodshed. The sacrifice concluding the ratification
(10:1—10) The True Sacrifice The final stage of the exposition of Jer 31 indicates that Christ inaugurated the new and interior covenant by an act of conformity to God's will. v. i, for the old as 'shadow' see 8:5. The contrast between a shadow and the 'true form' (eikori) may derive from Plato's discussion of language (Cm. 439A). The homilist playfully exploits the potential of the categories: the 'true form' that causes the shadow is ultimately shown to be the 'body' of Christ (v. 10). The
HEBREWS 1250
that the process is a continuing one. 'Sanctification' within the community of the new covenant is thus distinct from the 'perfecting' that enables participation in that community, v. 15, the solemn introduction underscores the importance of the following citation. For another ascription of Scripture to the Spirit, see 3:7. v. 16, a slightly modified quotation of Jer 31:33, previously cited at 8:10, emphasizes that the new covenant involves 'hearts and minds', v. 17, Jer 31:34/7, cited at 8:12, is enhanced with the phrase 'and their lawless deeds', which emphasizes the effective remission of sin essential to the new covenant.
ineffectiveness of the law and its cult was already stressed at 7:11,19. v. 2, the homilist argues that the purification effected by the old sacrifices was only skin deep (cf 9:13); had they been truly and decisively effective, they would not need to be repeated, v. 3, the function of the old sacrifice to remind sinners of their acts may be an extension of Num 5:15. The recollection of sins in the old covenant contrasts with the forgetfulness of sin in the new (8:12; 10:17). v4> me apodictic denial of the effectiveness of sacrifice radicalizes such prophetic critiques of cultic formalism as i Sam 15:22; Ps 50:8—15, 51:16—19; Isa 1:12—17; Jer 7^21—6; Hos 6:6. 'Bulls and goats' alludes again to the Day of Atonement; cf. 9:12-13. w. 5-6, as at 2:12-13 verses from a psalm express Christ's intentions. The homilist recontextualizes the psalm as an utterance of Christ upon entering 'the world', where the decisive 'heavenly' sacrifice really occurs. Hebrews cites Ps 40:6-8, in its Greek form. The original psalm praised YHWH for his benefactions, promised obedience, and asked for assistance. The homilist focuses on the promise, contrasting heartfelt obedience and external cult. The phrase 'a body you have prepared for me', the Greek translation of the Hebrew 'you have given me an open ear', serves the homilist well. v. 7, the parenthetical remark in the original psalm about the 'scroll of the book' probably referred to the 'law of the king' (Deut 17:14-20); the king thus accepts the responsibility for abiding by the law. Hebrews probably understands the remark to allude to the whole OT, assumed to be written about Christ, v. 8, exegesis of the psalm focuses on the contrast between external cult and heartfelt obedience. The homilist begins by collecting all the allusions to rejected cultic acts. v. 9, after highlighting the psalm's profession of willingness to obey, the homilist draws a sweeping conclusion. The solemn submission to God's will, taken to be the inaugural act of the new covenant, supplants the whole cultic system, v. 10, that Christ's death conformed to God's will is commonplace; cf. Gal 1:4; Eph 1:5—11; i Pet 3:17. For God's will that believers be sanctified, see i Thess 4:3. Christ's act of obedience made God's will his own. The Gethsemane story (Mt 26:42; Lk 22:42) and the fourth gospel (Jn 4:34; 5:30; 6:38—40; 19:30) express similar claims about Christ's obedience. Hebrews makes that obedience decisive for establishing the new covenant. That Christ's act of obedience took place in a sacrificed 'body' is significant. The homilist finally resolves the tensions between metaphysical vocabulary and historical narrative by insisting on the locus ofthe 'real' and 'true' in Christ's embodied act. Christ's obedient disposition unites heaven and earth. Significantly the composite name 'Jesus Christ' appears for the first time; cf. 13:8.
Exhortation to Faithful Endurance (io:ic)-i2:i^)
(10:19-24) Transitional Admonition: Hold Fast to the Faith An exhortation to live as members ofthe new covenant recalls many previous exhortations, while stressing faith (v. 22), hope (v. 23), and love (v. 24). For the traditional triad, see i Cor 13:13. v. 19, for Christian 'confidence', or better, 'boldness', see 3:6; 4:16. All Christians can now go where only the high priests of old could go, into God's presence. The blood of Jesus, because it cleanses conscience and inaugurates a new covenant (9:14-22), makes such entry possible, v. 20, the 'way' designates the Christian movement in Acts 9:2; 18:25; 24:I4It is 'new' because available only in the new covenant and 'living', like God's word, 4:12, Christ, 7:25, and God, 10:31, because it derives from those vital realities. The 'curtain' (cf. 6:19; 9:3, 7) marks the boundary to God's presence; only those who are 'perfected' may enter. A parenthetical comment emphasizes that approach to God is made possible by Christ's flesh, offered in his bodily sacrifice (10:10). Syntax is ambiguous, but the phrase probably defines the 'way'rather than the'curtain', v. 21, a similar remark about Christians having a 'high priest' appeared at 4:14. His position over the 'house of God' reflects 3:6. v. 22, the addressees were earlier summoned to 'approach' (4:16). That hearts have been 'sprinkled clean' recalls 9:13—14 and may evoke Ezek 36:25-6. 'Washing' with 'pure water' clearly alludes to baptism, v. 23, for maintaining the 'confession', see 3:1-6. Scripture (Deut 7:9; Ps 145:13) affirms that God is faithful. That God's promises are secure has been a constant theme; cf. 4:1; 6:12-17; 8:6; 9:15. v. 24, the call to 'provoke one another' reflects the Greek notions of the moral life as contest; cf. Xen. Mem. 3.3.13; Isoc. Con. Dem. 46; Pliny, Ep. 3.7. The summons to 'good deeds' is frequent in early Christian exhortation, e.g. Mt 5:16; 26:10; Jn 10:32; i Pet 2:12; Rom 12:17. For more such deeds, see 13:1-6. v. 25, the reference to the behaviour of'some' indicates part ofthe perceived problem that Hebrews addresses. The prophetic warning about the coming 'Day' of the Lord (cf. Isa 2:12; Joel 1:15; 3:14; Am 5:18; 8:9; Zeph 1:14; Zech 14:1) became a part of early Christian expectation (cf. Mt 10:15; J Cor I:^> 3:I3> 5:5> 2 Cor I:I4J J Thess 5:2, 4; 2 Thess 2:2; 2 Pet 3:10; i Jn 4:17). The ominous tone introduces the following warning. (10:24-39) Warning and Encouragement As in previous exhortations, the homilist balances threat (w. 24-31) with encouragement (w. 32—9). v. 26, the emphasis on wilful persistence in sin recalls the Pentateuchal distinction between high-handed and inadvertent sins; cf. Num 15:25-31 and Heb 9:7. The denial of a new 'sacrifice for sins' echoes
(10:11—18) Summation The homilist weaves together the themes ofthe last several chapters, v. n, the weakness ofthe old cultic system is by now familiar; cf. 7:11,19; 9:9-10; 10:14. v. 12, the notion of Christ's session from Ps 110:1, last mentioned at 8:1, re-emphasizes the finality of his priestly act. v. 13, citation of Ps no:ifc, last mentioned at 1:13, points to the culmination of the salvific process. An eschatological horizon dominates the final chapters of Hebrews, v. 14, for the notion of'perfection', see 2:10. It is now clear that, applied to believers, 'perfection' means the cleansing of conscience effected by Christ's sacrifice. Worshippers so perfected are still 'being sanctified'. The present tense ofthe verb implies
1251 HEBREWS
rhetorical ornamentation. Most obvious in English is anaphora, or initial repetition of the phrase 'by faith' extending up till v. 31. After an introduction the chapter falls into four major sections treating successive segments of Israel's history. The whole celebrates individuals and groups who exemplify desired attitudes and virtues, trust in God's promises and faithful endurance in the face of persecution.
the warning about the impossibility of repentance for apostasy (6:4—8). v. 27, the image of a 'fury of fire' characterizes judgement scenes; cf. 2 Apoc. Bar. 48:39—40; 2 Thess 1:7—8; Rev 11:5; 20:14. F°r God as 'consuming fire' see 12:29. v-