The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (160 page)

²
Preparation for reading Hebrews involves, among other things, reading about the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites (esp. Numbers 13—14) and the OT sacrificial system and accessories (e.g., Exodus 25—30,35—40). L. T. Johnson,
Hebrews: A Commentary
, NTL (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 1.

³
In this decidedly Christological focus, the book of Hebrews has major soteriological and missiological implications in a pluralistic world that seeks to be inclusive while Scripture teaches that salvation is found only in Jesus and his once-for-all sacrifice. See C. W. Morgan and R. A. Peterson, ed.,
Faith Comes by Hearing: A Response to Inclusivism
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2008).

⁴
B. Lindars,
The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews
, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: University Press, 1991), 25. Lindars did not specify the other two theologians; one surmises that one of them is Paul.

⁵
But see D. A. Black, “Who Wrote Hebrews? The Internal and External Evidence Re-examined,”
Faith and Mission
18 (Spring 2002): 57-69.

⁶
Clement (as Paul's amanuensis) is supported by Eusebius,
Eccl. Hist.
3.38; Barnabas by the church father Tertullian and more recently E. Riggenbach,
Der Brief an die Hebräer: Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
, ed. T. Zahn (Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus, 1987 [1922]). Apollos was proposed by M. Luther, first in his Commentary on Genesis in 1545 (Luther's Works 8:178); as early as 1522, Luther qualified this opinion with “some say.” Luke is favored by D. Allen, “An Argument for the Lukan Authorship of Hebrews” (Ph.D. thesis; Univ. of Texas at Arlington, 1987). Silas was suggested by T. Hewitt,
The Epistle to the Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), 26—32. Priscilla is the choice of A. von Harnack, “Probabilia über die Addresse und den Verfasser des Hebräerbriefes,”
ZNW 1
(1900): 16—41; and R. Hoppins, “The Epistle to the Hebrews Is Priscilla's Letter,” in
A Feminist Companion to the Catholic Epistles and Hebrews
, ed. A. J. Levine with M. M. Robbins, Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings 8 (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 147—70. The suggestion of Philip is noted by J. Moffatt,
The Epistle to the Hebrews
, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1924), xx; cf. W. Ramsay,
Luke the Physician and Other Studies in the History of Religion
(New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1908), 301—8. D. A.Hagner (
Encountering the Book of Hebrews: An Exposition
, EBS [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002], 22) mentioned the suggestion of both Philip and Mary the mother of Jesus.

⁷
This was the judgment of Origen: “But who wrote the epistle, in truth God knows” (cited in Eusebius,
Eccl. Hist.
6.25.14).

⁸
The Eastern part of the church (represented by Alexandria) affirmed the Pauline authorship of Hebrews, while recognizing the difficulty of this position. The best example is Athanasius's festal letter (326) that refers to 14 letters of Paul (including Hebrews). The Western part of the church rejected Pauline authorship. This is represented by such luminaries as Irenaeus and Hippolytus (according to Photius), who are said to have rejected it, as well as its absence in the Muratorian Canon that is careful to mention 13 letters of Paul.

⁹
The oldest extant collection of Paul's letters (p46
;
c. 200) has Hebrews immediately after Romans.

¹⁰
Building on the 15 parallels noted by H. Windisch
(Hebräerbrief
[Tübingen: Mohr, 1913], 128), Hurst (
Hebrews
, 108) located at least 25 strong points of theological connection.

¹¹
Hurst,
Hebrews
, 124.

¹²
Cited in Eusebius,
Eccl. Hist.
6.25.

¹³
G. Guthrie (
Hebrews
, NIVAC [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998], 19) noted that there are 35 direct quotes, 34 clear allusions, 19 summaries of OT materials, and 13 times the author mentioned an OT name or topic, often without reference to a specific context. For the difficulty in assessing a strict number, see W. L. Lane
(Hebrews 1—8
, WBC 47A [Dallas: Word, 1991], cxvi), who located 31 quotations and 4 implicit quotations, 37 allusions, 19 summaries, and 13 references of namesor topics that are introduced without a reference. The exact form of the LXX employed by the author is also the subject of scholarly debate.

¹⁴
L. Gaston,
No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance of the Fall of Jerusalem in the Synoptic Gospels
, NovTSup 23 (Leiden: Brill, 1970), 467; and T. Zahn,
Introduction to the New Testament
, trans. J. M. Trout et al. (New York: Scribner's, 1909), 315—23. Zahn based his arguments on the interpretation of Heb 3:7—4:11, “Your fathers tested me, tried me, and saw my works for 40 years,” as the years 30—70.

¹⁵
R. E. Brown,
An Introduction to the New Testament
, ABRL (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 696-97.

¹⁶
Johnson,
Hebrews
, 39.

¹⁷
See esp.
1 Clem.
36:2—5.

¹⁸
See D. A. Carson and D. J. Moo,
An Introduction to the New Testament
, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 605.

¹⁹
Lane,
Hebrews
, lxiii. So also Brown,
Introduction to the New Testament, 696.

²⁰
G. A. Barton, “The Date of the Epistle to the Hebrews,” JBL 57 (1938): 199-200. Barton noted nine different verbs used “to describe the performance of parts of the ritual and in every instance he employs the present tense.” The verbs are in
9:6 eiseimi
(“to enter”); in
9:7
and 9
prosphero
(“to offer”); in 9:22
katharizo
(“to cleanse”) and
ginomai
(“to become”); in 9:25
eiserchomai
(“to enter”); in 10:1 and 8
prosphero
(“to offer”); and in 13:11
Katakaio
(“to burn”).

²¹
Lane (
Hebrews
, lxiii) cited Josephus (
Ant.
4.224—57);
1 Clem.
41:2;
Barn.
7—8; and
Diogn.
3.

²²
B. Lindars, “Hebrews and the Second Temple,” in
Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple Presented to Ernst Bammel
, ed. W. Horbury (Sheffield: JSOT, 1991), 416.

²³
It is, of course, true that presumably the first recipients of Hebrews knew who the author was, but the point of Origen's remark (which still obtains today) is that this knowledge of the author was soon lost in subsequent generations.

²⁴
Twentieth-century scholars include Moffatt,
Epistle to the Hebrews
, xvi—xvii; H. Windisch,
Der Hebräerbrief
, HNT (Tübingen: Mohr, 1931), 31; and E. Käsemann,
The Wandering People of God: An Investigation of the Letter to the Hebrews
(Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984). More recently, there is a growing number who deny a Jewish audience: D. A. deSilva,
An Introduction to the New Testament
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005), 778; id.,
Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Epistle “to the Hebrews”
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 2—7; B. D. Ehrman,
The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings
, 2d ed. (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2000), 378; H. W. Attridge,
Hebrews
, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 10—13. deSilva
(Introduction
, 777) suggested that the title “to the Hebrews” was added as a “canonical 'response' to the parent religion that had rejected them.” But in response—to borrow a phrase from Moffatt (
Hebrews
, xvii), referring to the suggestion that Barnabas wrote the letter—it may be said: “But all this is guessing in the dark about a guess in the dark.” A. C. Mitchell
{Hebrews
, SacPag 13 [Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2007], 12) and C. R. Koester (
Hebrews
, AB 36 [New York: Doubleday, 2001], 48) hold the recipients of the letter to be of indeterminate social background.

²⁵
Most who disagree begin with the assumption that the title was added after the recipients had been lost to history. Then the argument from silence is made that the writer never called them Jews or mentioned the temple in Jerusalem (not completely true; see 8:9). Further supposed evidence is that the author used the LXX (i.e., a Greek Bible) and that Gentile Christians were indeed interested in the OT (e.g., Moffatt,
Hebrews
, xvi). Ehrman (
New Testament
, 378) also argued that the letter was written to Gentiles, for the only explicit reason that the foundational matters at 6:1—2 (faith in God, resurrection, eternal judgment) were already adhered to by Jews.

²⁶
See P. E. Hughes, A
Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 10—15.

²⁷
C. Spicq,
L'Épître aux HÉbreux
(Paris: J. Gabalda, 1952), 1:226—31; D. Allen, “Argument for the Lucan Authorship of Hebrews,” 29.

²⁸
P. J. Achtemeier, J. B. Green, and M. M. Thompson,
Introducing the New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 471.

²⁹
Guthrie,
Hebrews
, 20—21.

³⁰
Suetonius (
Claudius, 25.4)
stated that “[Claudius] banished from Rome all the Jews, who were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus,” which suggests that a disturbance over Christ among the synagogues had spilled out into the streets of Rome.

³¹
The same scenario would also obtain if the author were writing to a Greek-speaking church in Palestine. These converts certainly existed in Palestine (see Acts 6—7), and a retreat to Judaism would have provided them with an escape from Jewish persecution and ridicule.

³²
See the discussion under Destination above.

³³
W. Lane, “Hebrews,” in
Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments
, ed. R. P. Martin and P. H. Davids (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997), 453.

³⁴
On the structural implications of these injunctions, see the discussion under “Literary Plan” below.

³⁵
Mitchell,
Hebrews
, 13.

³⁶
In this regard, only 1 John is similar in its opening. James is the exact opposite, opening like a letter but ending differently.

³⁷
Most recently, see A. J. M. Wedderburn, “The ‘Letter’ to the Hebrews and Its Thirteenth Chapter,”
NTS
50 (2004): 390-405.

³⁸
E.g., H. Thyen,
Der Stil der Jüdisch-Hellenistischen Homilie
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955). The same phrase, “word of exhortation,” is used in 1 Macc 10:24 and 2 Macc 15:11 without reference to an actual sermon.

³⁹
L. Wills, “The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity,”
HTR
77 (1984): 277-99; and G. Gelardini, “Hebrews, an Ancient Synagogue Homily for Tisha be-Av: Its Function, Its Basis, Its Theological Interpretation,” in
Hebrews: Contemporary Methods, New Insights
, ed. H. W. Attridge (Boston: Brill, 2005), 107—27.

⁴⁰
The following comes from Johnson,
Hebrews
, 10.

⁴¹
E.g., 2:5; 5:11;
6:9;
8:1; 9:5; 11:32. The only exception is 13:22, where the author used the verb translated “to write a letter”
(epesteila)
, though even this is not a real exception since 13:22 is part of the epistolary framework provided for the body of the document.

⁴²
Lane,
Hebrews
, lxxiv.

⁴³
Johnson,
Hebrews
, 10.

⁴⁴
See F. F. Bruce,
The Epistle to the Hebrews
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984).

⁴⁵
Lane,
Hebrews
, xc.

⁴⁶
Scholars who follow this pattern are Attridge,
Hebrews
, xx; Lane,
Hebrews;
and, to a lesser extent, P. Ellingworth,
The Epistle to the Hebrews
, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 58.

⁴⁷
E.g., Koester,
Hebrews
, 84-85.

⁴⁸
C. L. Westfall,
A Discourse Analysis of the Letter to the Hebrews: The Relationship Between Form and Meaning
, Library of New Testament Studies, Studies in New Testament Greek 11 (New York: T&T Clark, 2005), 6—7.

⁴⁹
W. G. Kümmel,
Introduction to the New Testament
, rev. ed., trans. H. C. Kee (Nashville: Abingdon, 1975), 390.

⁵⁰
W. Nauck, “Zum Aufbau des Hebräerbriefes,”
in Judentum Urchristentum Kirche: Festschrift für Joachim Jeremias
, ed. J. Jeremias and W. Eltester (Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1960), cited in Westfall,
Discourse Analysis
, 12—13.

⁵¹
E.g., in English A. Vanhoye,
Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews
, Subsidia Biblica 12 (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1989); G. H. Guthrie,
The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis
(New York: Brill, 1994); and Westfall,
Discourse Analysis.

⁵²
Westfall,
Discourse Analysis
, 297, to whom the following paragraph is indebted.

⁵³
Hb.
haraz.
See Lane,
Hebrews
, cxxii.

⁵⁴
Hb.
qal wahomer.
Ibid., cxx.

⁵⁵
Westfall,
Discourse Analysis
, 142.

⁵⁶
Learning obedience and attaining to perfection do not imply any imperfection on Jesus' part; instead, the reference implies that Jesus had completed his course to be installed as high priest. The term
teleioo
(“to perfect”) was used in the LXX to describe the installation of a priest (e.g., Exod 29:9,33).

⁵⁷
Melchizedek actually drops off the scene at 7:17, having served the purpose of demonstrating that the OT made allowance for a priest not after Aaron's lineage.