‘Till by the Spirit of faith reveal’d, The Book is still unread, unknown, And opened by the Lamb alone.
With chapter 9, quote those who hold that Jesus’ death was not sacrificial—Borg? Use Lev passage on the blood as a preliminary quotation.
“If the dramatic conflict which culminated in the Cross had stood alone, it must necessarily have been categorized as tragedy [F. W. Dillistone, C. H. Dodd: Interpreter of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977), 87.]
JERUSALEM (Simon Sebag Montefiore, Jerusalem: The Biography [NewYork: Alfred A. Knopf, 2011])
Jerusalem today lives in a state of schizophrenic anxiety. Jews and Arabs dare not venture into each other’s neighborhoods; secular Jews avoid ultra-Orthodox who stone them for (531) not resting on the Sabbath or for wearing disrespectful clothing; messianic Jews test police resolve and tease Muslim anxiety by attempting to pray on the Temple Mount; and the Christian sects keep brawling. The faces of Jerusalemites are tense, their voices are angry and one feels that everyone, even those of all three faiths who are convinced that they are fulfilling a divine plan, is unsure of what tomorrow may bring (532).
The history of the negotiations since 1993, and the difference in spirit between noble words and distrustful, violent acts, suggest unwillingness on both sides to make the necessary compromises to share Jerusalem permanently. At the best of times, the reconciliation of the celestial, national and emotional in Jerusalem is a puzzle within a labyrinth: during the twentieth century, there were over forty plans for Jerusalem which all failed, and today there are at least thirteen different just for sharing the Temple Mount (536).
It is now one hour before dawn in Jerusalem. The Dome of the Rock is open: Muslims are praying. The Wall is always open: The Jews are praying. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is open: the Christians are praying in several languages. The sun is rising over Jerusalem, its (543) rays making the light Herodian stones of the Wall almost snowy—just as Josephus described it two thousand years ago—and then catching the glorious gold of the Dome of the Rock that glints back at the sun. The divine esplanade where Heaven and Earth meet, where God meets man, is still a realm beyond human cartography. Only the rays of the sun can do it and finally the light falls on the most exquisite and mysterious edifice in Jerusalem. Bathing and glowing in the sunlight, it earns it auric name. But the Golden Gate remains locked, until the coming of the Last Days (544).
Alice Jackson: Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem. When?
USED: Out of his eternal silence God spoke the Word
USED: Luke 24:45: “Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.”
Meet us here, Jesus, Lord; Walk with us, we urge You. Oh how slow we are to see; Open up your Scriptures.
Jesus loves me! this I know, for the Bible tells me so.
John 14:7, 9: “If you know me, you will know my Father also. . . . Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.”
Richard Rohr, Falling Upward : “Being totally received as we truly are is what we wait and long for all of our lives” (Quoted from Nicole, “Listening Well,” Christians Century (May 28, 2014), 13.
It seems that all Christian reflection, all theology worth the name, began as people realized that because of Jesus Christ they could talk to God in a different way. It was the new experience of Christian prayer that got people thinking.
Bonhoeffer DBWE 8
“Deep down we seem to feel that we are his already and each new day is a miracle” (On death, 51).
What Augustine said was indeed right: “The ear hears according to the disposition of the heart.” (51?).
Hans von Dohnanyi, D Bonhoeffer’s brother in law (Christine) to DB from prison: “I now read the Bible a lot; it is the only book that prevents my thoughts from drifting off all the time.” The same day, Good Friday, in a letter to his wife Christine: “The Bible is the only book I can stick to for any length of time” (DBWE 8:60). Karl and Paula Bonhoeffer in a letter (May 9, 1943) to their Son Dietrich in the Tegel Prison:
In normal life one is often not at all aware that we always receive infinitely more than we give, and that gratitude is what enriches life (Letter to parents, Karl and Paula, 9/13/43, 154.
Paul S. Minear
The New Testament . . . is not a riddle for you to solve nor a magic charm for you to use, but a message (187).
Read when you are alone, when you have time to think seriously about yourself, when you want to understand your own/life and death, when you reflect about the source and goal of that inner center which you call yourself (187-188).
First and last, the New Testament halts you with this claim: “God has a word for you” (189). The above are from Paul S. Minear, A Preface to the New Testament, reprinted in Georgia Harkness, The Dark Night of the Soul (New York, Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), , 187-189.
Forsyth PPJC
We do not indeed attain once for all, but we are apprehended once for all (257.
[The great reason why the preacher must return continually to the Bible is that the Bible is the greatest sermon in in the world.
It is one vast sermon. . . . It value is in its news more than in its style (11).
It is a crisis of spiritual action. It is preaching, I repeat. The object is not proof but life. The appeal is not to intelligence, but to the will. (14).
Christ did not come to bring a Bible but to bring a Gospel (15).
We can no longer believe in the infallibility of the Bible, but we must believe in its finality. That is the region of its inspiration. . . . For in theology there is no finality. . . . But the one need of religion is finality. And for Christianity that can only be had by an Incarnate Christ as preached in an inspired Bible. . . . The Apostles . . . spoke as men in whose experience there spoke still more the Christ who lived in them. . . . When they spoke, they were organs of Christ himself, and their truth has a value for all subsequent times which partakes of the authority of that revelation whom they interpreted (155).
There was a new vision, not simply a new point of view, because the eyes that saw it were the eyes of a new man (161). [On the apostolic writers of the New Testament.]
The apostles read God’s will in the fact of Christ, but it was from the height of faith to which that fact had raised them (161).
It is the whole Biblical Christ that is the truly and deeply historic Christ (169).
The authority in the Bible is more than the authority of the Bible; and it is the historic and present Christ as Saviour (179).
USED: Faith is man’s greatest moral act, as Grace is God’s (332).
He grew in the grace in which he always was, and in the knowledge of it (349).
It is God that is our salvation, and not the truth about God (354).
Forsyth, CoC
Do not think of God’s judgment as/an arbitrary infliction, but as the necessary reaction to sin in a holy God. There alone do you have the divine necessity of the cross in a sinful world—the moral necessity of Judgment (52-53). . . .It is on us according as we are in Him, yet not as a judgment, but as a grace. (54).
By holiness is . . . meant . . . the whole concrete righteousness of existence, self-sustained at white heat. For our God is a consuming fire (159).
The greatest human need is not only holy love, but holy love (168).
It is impossible to treat Christ adequately, except theologically and personally (169).
And theologically, for we find the key of Christ’s life in His wok, find his work to be the cross, and find the cross to be God’s atonement of Himself (169).
Can we really think of righteousness without judgment, of a universal righteousness without a universal judgment (171).
The holiness of God is a deeper revelation in the cross than His love; for it is what gives His love divine value. And it is meaningless without judgment. . . . He must either inflict punishment or assume it (205).
USED: Kathleen L. Housely:
If scholars were able to understand all things, then all things must be very small and probably not worth the effort (“Built on Failure,” Christian Century (May 14, 2014), 33).
Forsyth PPJS Chapter VI re-read for Hebrews. . Here is a marvelous instance of the “self-authenticating” character of divine inspiration.
than theirs.
F. Bruce..
B. Bruce “exhortation.”
Theology and counsel are interwoven throughout so as to give the whole the character of a “word of exhortation.”
R Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Cf. Rom 9-11.
.
preaching.” He writes that
Use Exodus 20:18-21 to define unbelief as the evasion, all attempts to shift one’s responsibility before God to something/one else. The Bible, the Church, the Pastor, the Pope!
Thomas Merton, The Seven Storey Mountain (?)
Sanctification: “We were never designed to lead purely natural lives, and therefore we were never destined in God’s plan for a purely natural beatitude. Our nature, which is a free gift of God, was given to us to be perfected and enhanced by another free gift that is not due it.
This free gift is ‘sanctifying grace.’ It perfects our nature with the gift of a life, an intellection, a love, a mode of existence infinitely above its own level. . . . What is ‘grace’? It is God’s own life, shared by us. God’s life is Love. Deus caritas est (169). . . . When a ray of light strikes a crystal, it gives a new quality to the crystal. And when God’s infinitely disinterested love plays upon a human soul, the same kind of thing takes place. And that is the life called sanctifying grace” (170). [Thomas Merton, The Seven Storey Mountain (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1948).]
Introduction
With H. T. Kuist’s structural chart before you, read the epistle at one sitting. By what topic sentences are the main sections of the epistle introduced? What continuity of theme do you note? What distinction of emphasis or perspective?
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has been perfected forever as high priest 1:1—7:28
Jesus Christ, the minister of the new covenant, perfects forever the sanctified 8:1-10:18
Such perfected access to God in Jesus his Son is an encouragement to draw near continually in faith, hope, and love 10:19-13:25
“The plan of Hebrews is characterized by two peculiarities: 1) the expositions begin at once, without an epistolary introduction; 2) contrary to most Pauline epistles, the exhortatory section does not come only at the conclusion of the ‘epistle,’ but the expositions are more than once interrupted by paraeneses (2:1-4; 3:7-11; 4:14-16; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-39; 12:1-13:17), which evidently are the actual goal of all the expositions” (Feine-Behm-Kuemmel).
Hortatory parts contribute to the effectiveness of the expository parts by: giving a breather in the closely knit argument, a chance for it to sink in; Making practical application of the point a higher end; Pointing out that doctrine is only of use to a higher end; Avoiding the peril of ignoring the connection between being and doing.
Define the central theme of the book. Where do you find this theme most explicitly stated?
4:14-16 See outline: The sufficiency and finality of the work of Jesus, the Son of God, as our Heavenly High Priest allows us confident and continuing access to the presence of God for our every need.
The chart sees the main sections of the epistle as 1:1-7:28, 8:1-10:18, and 10:19-13:25. Another possible division is 1:1-4:16, 5:1-6:20, 7:1-10:18, and 10:19-13:25. Which structure do you think is most valid? Why?
Pick one of the two structures and give descriptive headings for each division, the beginning of an expository outline. As we go through the epistle paragraph by paragraph continue to develop your outline which is to be submitted to the professor on request!
How would you describe the literary form of Hebrews?
13:22 “my word of exhortation” Cf. 2:1-4; 3:7-4:13; 4:14-16; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-29; 12:1-29; and the frequent imperatives in c. 13.
Filson: “the difficulty in identifying the literary form of Hebrews is that none of the terms we use to describe modern types of literary works fits exactly the form and nature of Hebrews” (16).
Oration? Sermon or homily? Biblical exposition? Epistle or letter? Exhortation?
“a tentative answer would be as follows: Hebrews is a written message, which sets forth vital aspects of the Christian gospel on the basis of Scripture (which to the writer was of course the Old Testament); it was sent from a distance to be read aloud to a Christian congregation assembled for worship, fellowship, and instruction; and it was the work of a leader who was known to these Christians and could speak to them concerning their current situation with a note of authority and urgent exhortation and keep pastoral concern for their total Christian life” (21).
Attridge: “The designation of Hebrews as an epistle has been defended, and there are some quite formal similarities between Hebrews and other New Testament epistles, such as the combination of exposition and exhortation. This generic classification, even if it were accepted on the basis of the postscript, would not be very meaningful since much can be cloaked in epistolary garb. The body of the text, which the epistolary postscript styles a ‘word of exhortation’ (. . .), is generally recognized to be a product of rhetorical art. As such it is clearly an epideictic [seen next page] oration, celebrating the significance of Christ and inculcating values that his followers ought to share. More specifically, the text is often identified as a sermon or homily. That judgment has been substantiated by formal parallels with Hellentistic-Jewish and early Christian texts that may be judged to be, or to be based upon, homilies” (14).
Puskas: “we outlined Hebrews as a form of deliberative persuasion, concerned with future issues of expedience. Hebrews contains a proem (1:1-4:12), a statement of the case (4:13-6:20), a epilogue summarizing the arguments (10:19-13:21), and an epistolary postscript (13:22-25)” [Charles B. Puskas, Jr., The Letters of Paul: An Introduction (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1995), 167]. Has a chapter on Hebrews.
Kennedy: Types of ancient rhetoric: “the species is judicial when the author is seeking to persuade the audience to make a judgment about events occurring in the past; it is deliberative when he seeks to persuade them to take some action in the future; it is epideictic when he seeks to persuade them to hold or reaffirm some point of view in the present, as when he celebrates or denounces some person or some quality” (19, see pp. 73ff.).
What can we know about the author, destination, date and situation of the epistle from its own text? List under each the verses that yield some information.
Read chapter 13. See Lindars
Hebrews 1:1 – 4:16 The presentation of the final revelation of God Jesus Christ as apostle and high priest
1:1-14 God’s unique Revelation in a Son
1:1-3 (4) Supercedes the revelation through the prophets
1:3-14 supercedes the revelation through angels
*1. What are the most obvious characteristics of the author’s style?
Appeal to OT – the familiar –7 times Use of comparison by contrast – prophets – Son – Angels Use of questions (5, 13, 14, 2:3) Use of imagery of throne (3, 8, 9, 13) Use of imagery in general (7, 10-12, 2:1) Appeal to the will (2:3)
Good homiletics!
*2. Describe the trend of the exposition in 1:1-14 (-2:4), i.e., into what two parts does this segment fall? To whom is the Son compared in each?
1:1-4: Topic sentence – asserts the authority of the OT revelation (prophets) and the superiority of the Son (cc. 1-7 or whole?)
1:5-14: First exposition developing the point made in vv. 1-4, proving from Scripture the Son’s superiority to angels.
2:1-4: Exhortation – how can this be neglected!
What does the author assume on the part of his/her readers? What do they believe and accept (cf. Gal. 3:19; Acts 7:53; Deut. 33:2; Josephus Antiquities XV.
His readers accept the authority of the Old Testament prophetic revelation and especially the authority of revelation through angels as its peak. They are convinced of the resultant greatness of Judaism and have accepted Jesus as the Jewish Messiah.
Verses 1-4 are one sentence in Greek (KJV, ASV). What is its irreducible core (simple subject and predicate)?
ASV (1901): “God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds; who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things b the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become by so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name then they.”
NRSV: “God . . . has spoken . . . by a Son.”
What seven points are made by the modifying phrases to this central statement? What contrasts do you observe between these phrases? Are there any phrases without a corresponding contrast? Which one, and how do you account for the omission?
“God . . . has spoken . . . by a Son” NRSV (v. 2) Position (v. 3) Being – Work (Vv. 3-14) Authority “He” hon “He” hos “sat down” “heir” “reflection” “created the worlds” “exact imprint” (activity) “upholds all things” “made purification” superior to angels in “name” (4-5) function (6) character (7-12) dignity (13-14)
Four contrasts:
Time – “long ago” “in these last days” Persons – “our ancestors” “us” Agents – “the prophets” “a Son” Mode – “in many and various ways” NO CONTRAST The personality of the Son
Westcott on “a Son”: “The absence of the article fixes attention upon the nature and not upon the personality of the mediator of the new revelation.”
Communication on the highest possible level – “An impersonal revelation of a person must of necessity be imperfect. A revelation of a person to be perfect must be personal” (H. T. Kuist).
Mode is the main contrast or 1:1-4
“in many and various ways” “in a Son” – Spoken once for all, communication of life Regal, “sat down” Authority, “the right hand”
Superior in position (2), Nature (3), Work (3), Authority (3-4)
In the four great contrasts of Hebrews, the superiority of Jesus Christ rests on the foundation of his Sonship.
1:1-3: Prophets 1:4-2:4 Angels 3:5-6 Moses 7:1-10:18 Aaron, the law, and the Levitical system What is meant by the expressions “reflection of God’s glory,” “the exact imprint of God’s very being,” and “sat down” (NRSV)? See the commentaries.
Apaugasma “radiance shining forth from the source of light” (Bruce, 48) so active as here or passive as in NRSV? “Radiance” in NASB
“The image, in whatever sense it may be taken, serves, like the following, to affirm the intimate relationship between the father and the pre-existent Son, through whom redemption is effected” (Attridge, 43).
Charakter “the exact imprint (impress) of God’s very being” (NRSV) – used of stamp on coins “to express once again the conviction that the Son is the fully adequate representation of the divine” (Attridge, 44). “exact representation” in NASB
Hupostasis “very being” (NASB “nature”) “that which stands beneath” 3:14, 11:1 (same or different meaning?) From this general sense comes the special senses of firmness, confidence, that in virtue of what a thing is what it is, the essence of any being. See further in Attridge, 44.
Ekathisen Psalm 110:1 (v. 13)
The LORD says to my Lord, “sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.”
Expresses the solemn seat of authority, Matthew 5:1; 19:28; 25:31. Angels always stood as did the priests.
“The enthronement of Ps. 110 was the primary text for the entire exposition, 1:1-12:29. Verse 3 set the stage for the rest of the document by this initial quotation” (Buchanan, 8).
*7. Why is 1:1-4 such an important sentence in the Epistle?
Prophet . . . Priest . . . King
“Thus the greatness of the Son of God receives sevenfold confirmation, and it appears, without being expressly emphasized, that he possesses in himself all the qualifications to be the mediator between God and the human race. He is the Prophet through whom God has spoken His final word; he is the Priest who has accomplished a perfect work of cleansing for His people’s sins; He is the King who sits enthroned in the place of chief honor alongside the Majesty on High” (Bruce, 50).
1:1-4: Topic sentence of 1:1-10:18: asserts the authority of Old Testament revelation and the superiority of the Son (revelation).
The basic question of the final revelation of God’s purpose and person finds its solution in “a Son” whose fitness as such is declared by his position, work, and authority. A fitting assertion for a great discussion!
See Wiley’s likeness to the Beautiful Gate of the temple, p. 37.
8. Into what parts does the exposition of verses 5(4)-14 fall? Define the contrast made between the Son and the angels in each part.
Jesus is superior to angels in
(1:4-5) “name”: Psalm 2:7; 2 Samuel 7:14
(1:6) function as one to be worshiped: Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX; Psalm 97:7
(1:7-12) character as the divine exalted creator in contrast to the servant character of angels: Psalm 10:4; 45:6; 7; 102:25-27
(1:13-14) dignity as the one to whom belongs the ultimate victory, triumph, and supremacy: Psalm 110:1 (cf. 1:3)
Verses 5 & 13 are an inclusio tying the two enthronement Psalms together (2 & 10). The passage begins (v. 5) and ends with a rhetorical question (14).
*9. Why should the author quote so freely from the Old Testament? Examine each quotation in its Old Testament context, the point made by the author in each case. Where else I the epistle is Psalm 110 quoted?
He regards its words as uttered by God, whoever speaks them in their original context. They therefore have divine authority.
Psalm 2:7 (5): A royal psalm, the LORD reigns, part of twofold (1 & 2) introduction to the Psalms. Came to be considered as messianic as did most royal psalms. 2 Samuel 7:14 (5): davidic covenant promise (12-14) Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX (6): from Moses prophetic song Psalms 97:7 (6): A royal psalm Psalms 104:4 (7): Hymn of praise to Yahweh Psalms 45: 6-7 (8-9): A royal psalm Psalms 102:25-27 (10-12): Individual lament with hymnic elements Psalms 110:1 (13-14): A royal psalm Psalm 110 is quoted/alluded to in 1:3, 13; 5:6; 6:20; 7:3, 11, 17, 21; 8:1: 10:12-13; 12:2
*10. How do verses 5-14 function in the chapter, i.e., what is the author trying to prove?
First exposition, the development of the point made in preceding paragraph: proves from Scripture the Son’s superiority to angels.
Do you believe in angels? Or angles? Harry Emerson Fosdick: “It is better to believe in angels than never to have felt the touch of angles’ wings!”
As to God ‘s providence, do you believe in the providential protection of angels or in “working the angels”?
2:1-4 Such Revelation Involves Corresponding Responsibility
*1. How does 2:1-4 relate to the whole of 1:1-2:4? Trace briefly the trend of the exposition to this point.
2:1-4 is an exhortation on the basis of what has been said – “God . . . has spoken” – greater than the prophets and the angels (i.e. the revelation through Moses) – “therefore we must pay greater attention to what we have heard . . .” Note the continuity in terms of “salvation” between 1:14 and 2:3.
Note the metaphor of a ship being carelessly allowed to drift past a harbor or haven because of neglecting to allow for the wind, the currents, or the tide.
On what points does the author base the genuineness of the gospel message?
Adequate Source – “declared at first through the Lord” Adequate Witnesses – “attested to us by those who heard him” Adequate Credentials – “by signs and wonders and various miracles Adequate Equipment – “By gifts of the Holy Spirit, distributed according to his will”
*3. What are the obvious characteristics of the author’s style in 1:1-2:4
Appeal to the will, 2:1-4 Appeal to the old Testament ( the familiar) 7 times Use of comparison by contrast Prophets – Son – angels Word – angels Worlds – Lord Use of questions, 1:5, 13, 14; 2:3 Use of imagery of throne all though, 1:3, 8, 9, 13 Use of imagery in general, 1:7, 10-12; 2:1
*4. What claims does 1:1-2:4 make for the superiority or finality of the Christian revelation?
Christianity is the ultimate revelation of God.
“Christianity for him is the religion of free, unrestricted access to God; the religion of a new, everlasting covenant, under which sin is completely extinguished, and can act no longer as a separating influence” (A. B. Bruce, 15). Rest of quote?
2:5-18 The Function of the Humiliation of the Son
2:5-9 is to fulfill the destiny of humankind 2:10-18 Is to perfect the Son as high priest
*1. What is the purpose of 2:5-18 in relation to the argument of 1:1-14, that is, how does it function?
It answers the objection: “if he is superior to angels, why the limitation of the incarnation and the humiliation of the cross?”
What is meant by the expression, “the coming world” (v. 5)?
“This points to the eschatological character of the ‘salvation’ in Jesus. Eternity has made itself known in time, introducing a supreme crisis in religious history. Those who lose their grip on the gospel . . . forget their share in the final salvation of God and in all that salvation means” (Manson, 51).
“inaugurated but not consummated”
“the new world-over inaugurated by the enthronement of Christ at the right hand of God, the world-order over which he reigns from the place of exaltation, the world of reality which replaces the preceding world of shadows” (Bruce, 71).
*3. From where does the author quote in verses 6-8 and what point does he make by it? Check “angels” (v. 7) in its Old Testament setting (Hebrew if possible). How do you handle what you have discovered?
Psalm 8: ‘elohim God (NRSV & NASB), divine beings? LXX “angels”
Humankind was created to have the world in subjection to it, but it is not yet thus. Genesis 1:26
4.In what three ways are “human beings” (lit. man) referred to in verses 6-9?
Verses 6-8: Corporate man “human beings” “mortal (Son of Man)” “them (He)” Verse 9: representative man “Jesus” Verse 9: individual man “everyone”
To what does the expression “the grace of God” (v. 9) refer and how does it relate to what follows (vv. 10-18)? What is the variant reading?
Necessary starting point for the argument of the next section –humiliation of the Son humanity of the Son
Choris theou see apparatus, Bruce, 70, n. 15, Attridge, 76f. Psalm 22:1 as quoted in Mt. 27:46; Mk. 15:34.
*6. Attempt to restate the argument in verse 5-9 in analytic form (three assertions).
Humankind, not angels, was destined to rule the world over. Humankind has not yet gained that supremacy. The fully human Jesus, the representative human, has won this supremacy.
7.Begin to take note of the author’s use of the “perfection” language in verse 10 (5:9, 14; 6:1; 7:11, 28; 9:9; 10:1, 14; 11:40; 12:2).
“The Greek word teleiosai means ‘to make adequate’ or ‘completely effective.’ Apart form these sufferings Christ would not have been completely effective in His role of representing and succoring moral man” (Hewitt, 70).
*8. In what various ways does the author speak of human beings (“man”) in verses 10-18, and how does this contribute to the meaning of the passage? Why should sufferings be introduced here at all?
Children [huious] (10), brothers and sister [adelphoi] (11, 12, 17), children [paidia] (13, 14), seed of Abraham (16), people [laou] (17).
These references lay stress on those whose lot the Son has shared. Sufferings are mentioned (10:18) because of the particular temptations or testings of the readers (cf. 10:32; 12:2).
9. Why does the author speak of sanctification in verse 11 and what does he man by it? What is the main point of the verse? Begin to note the author’s use (the theological function) of this terminology (9:13; 10:10, 14, 29; 12:14; 13:13).
Summary interpretive concept: All that God in Christ has done for us and in us!
“All of one stock” NEB Incarnate Son and human “sons” of God are on the same moral footing, the same relation to God.
Same as “justify” in Paul, primarily a matter of relation to God, a religious more than ethical term? How can one in the “wrong” become “right” with God? How can a “unholy” person have access to a “holy” God? A “right-making” process! A “holy-making” process!
*10. What point is made by each of the Old Testament quotations in verses 12 & 13.
Psalm 22:22: An individual lament, much quoted in the passion narrative – the establishment of the righteous kingdom of God through suffering?
Isaiah 8:17-18 LXX: an expression of faith by a man when all seem against him. Two aspects of the typical prophet he declares his personal faith in God in the midst of judgements, he stands forth with his children as representing the remnant.
Here we have two vibrant testimonies from a royal personage and from a prophet, and he calls them brothers and sisters.
What does “destroy” (katargese [Rom. 6:6]) mean in verse 14?
“rendered powerless” NASB “cause not to work”
*12. What is temptation (v. 18) and why is it introduced here?
The trial of faith caused by suffering:
The experience of the readers The perfecting of the High priest 2:10, 18, 4:15, 12:2
What is the main topic developed in verse 10-18? What points support it?
The perfecting of the Son as “the source of eternal salvation” (5:11) and as “a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God” . . . his identification with the needs of humankind.
10-13: His fitness to suffer with the children 11 –based on moral unity 12-13 –illustrated in Scripture 14-16: His actual participation in the lot of the children that though the experience if death he might free, not angels, but “the seed of Abraham” from slavery 17-18: Therefore he is a merciful and faithful high priest in regard to sin and temptation. 17 –“to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people” (NASB, “propitiation”) 18 –“he himself was tested by what he suffered.”
*14. Restate the argument of 2:5-18?
The moral history of the Son:
The Son’s relation to the lot of humankind
gar “Now” gar “Now”
The Son’s identification with the needs of humankind
10 gar NRSV did not translate 11 gar “For” 14 epei oun “Since, therefore” 16 gar “For” 17 hothen “Therefore”
[See questions 6 & 13 for subpoints]
*15. In the light of the first sentence of the Epistle, what has the author’s exposition in 1:5-2:4 and 2:5-18 developed, that is, who is the Son as he functions in relation to God and to humankind?
The Son is God’s final revealer The Son is man’s final redeemer
In relation to God – prophet and apostle In relation to man – high priest
3:1 – 4:13 Consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our Confession.
3:1-6 Who is superior to Moses as the builder of the house.
3:7-4:13 Who is superior to Joshua in the rest he affords.
*1. What is the general nature of the section (expository or hortatory)? How does it relate to what has preceded?
It is exhortation (mixed expository and hortatory) combining the thoughts of Apostle (c. 1) and High Priest (c.2) which have been developed. Under the Old Covenant these two functions were first held by Moses and Aaron. Both of these titles are now vested in the Son who is the Moses and Aaron of the new covenant. Moses (with Joshua) is considered in this section while Aaron and the Levitical system is left for cc. 5-10.
*2. What is the irreducible core of the first sentence (vv. 1-2, so Greek) and how is it completed in the remaining phraseology?
“Consider . . . Jesus”
“the apostle and high priest of our confession” “was faithful to the one who appointed him”
What is meant by “heavenly calling” and “house”?
“house” a family (‘church’), picking up an idea dropped in 2:16
“heavenly calling” a vocation, a household with a mission
*4. In 3:1-6 how are Jesus and Moses compared? How contrasted?
Alike in quality – “faithful” Distinct in position – “Jesus . . . a Son” (appointed as HP) “Moses . . . a servant”
“Jesus . . . builder . . . faithful over” “Moses . . . in all God’s house as a servant”
Why is Moses brought in at all? What is the main point of 3:1-6 and why is it appropriate here?
In the mind of the Jew, Moses held a place that was absolutely unique, he held three great functions:
1). He was the leader who delivered Israel from Egypt; 2). He was God’s spokesman to Israel at Sinai (Exodus cc. 19-24); “Torah – giver” 3). He pleaded with God for Israel when they sinned (Exodus 32:11-14).
It is the second function that matters most, the heart of his mediatoral work, Moses passed on God’s words to Israel (v. 5), while Jesus actually embodied God’s word (1:2).
The greatest thing in all the world for the Jew was the law. Moses and the law were one and the same thing. Thus the next logical step in the author’s argument has to do with the law, chapter 7.
The point of the paragraph is Christ’s superiority to Moses.
The pint of departure for the exhortation is “keep faith with god’s house by keeping faith with the Son” (v. 6).
What point is made by the quotation from Psalms 95 in 3:7-11, and what use does the author make of it in 3:12-19?
An illustration from the history of Israel. They did not enter – a warning!
Two homilies developed from the quotation: 3:12-19 on “do not harden your hearts” 4:1-13 on “Today, if you hear his voice”
“Do not harden your hearts” 3:12-19
12-13 the danger of resisting the right course of action 14-15 the necessity of holding fast hupostaseos = “confidence” cf. 11:1 the consequences to those who refuse to enter when the moment comes
verse 19 sums up the argument of this section made from psalm 95.
On verse 14: Attridge: “hold firm to the initial reality,” as in 11:1: “Faith is the reality of things hoped for, the proof of things unseen.”
Hypostasis: “that which stands under” a legal term in the papyri, M & M title deed. Church fathers used it for person, cf. 1:3.
A & G: substantial nature, essence, actual being, reality, Heb. 1:3 confidence, conviction, assurance, steadfastness Heb. 11:1; 3:14. (But see Attridge on 3:14: “if we hold firm to the initial reality until the end”!)
“the subjective, psychological sense of ‘assurance’ or ‘confidence.’ . . .The major difficulty is that hypostasis never seems to have this meaning in contemporary sources” (Attridge, 308).
*7 Take note of the frequency of the words “hear,” “today,” “heart,” and “rest.” How do they figure in the development of thought?
Hear 3:7, 15; 4:7 responsibility Today 3:7, 13, 15; 4:7 urgency Heart 3:8, 10, 12, 15; 4:7 personality, character, decision Rest 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3, 4, 5, goal 8, 9, 10, 11
8. How does the author relate “sin” and “unbelief”? See verses 12-13, 17-19.
Unbelief is sin and sin basically is unbelief (12:1). What are the implication? Cf. Sin in the Gospel of John. 16:19: “about sin, because they do not believe in me”
See Raymond Brown on John c. 5: “sin is the preference of self (over Jesus?).”
*9. What words or concepts qualify the word “rest” in 4:1-10? What points are made in the successive sentences? How does Psalm 95 relate?
4:1 a rest promised: “the promise of entering his rest is still open.”
4:2 a rest refused: “the message they heard. . . they were not united by faith.”
4:3 a rest still available: “we who have believed enter that rest”
4:4 a rest complete – typlified by creation: “and God rested on the seventh day from all his works”
The rest which God has provided for his people in his Son is none other in its last form that the rest that he himself enjoys.
An unlimited rest, for there were no limits of evening and morning to the seventh day.
Called in verse 9 “a sabbath rest” (sabbatismos), a sabbath- keeping life, a ceasing, an eschatological designation, a pattern of the messianic age.
4:7 availability assured by David: “they shall not enter my rest.” See Psalm 95:7-11.
4:8 A Canaan rest: “If Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later about another day.”
4:9 unclaimed by Joshua: “So then, a sabbath rest still remains for the people of God; for those who enter God’s rest also cease from their labors as God did from his” (4:9-10).
“his rest continues still, and may be shared by those who respond to his overtures with faith and obedience” (Bruce, 106).
Morning after morning I try to study the sixth chapter of Saint John and it is too great. I cannot study it. I simple sit still and try to breathe.
Rest: Introduction: Big word in our culture, it gets bigger as one ages. Dad & I, Genesis 2, Joshua, the Psalms, Isaiah, Matthew 11
See Hymn 3 v, 3
*10. What does “sabbath rest” (4:9) mean in the light of the preceding context?
The rest of God is the divine goal that has been (1) promised, (2) refused, and (3) is still good. It is the blessing of the Christian salvation in the Son from the perspective of his finished work – as a painter or architect rejoices in finished work.
A creation rest: Genesis 2:2; John 5:17. A type of redemptive rest.
Use thoughts on Genesis 2:1-17. Seventh day defines the six (W. Harrelson) Hebrew text on `vad (v. 15). So the Christian rest!
A Canaan rest: Deuteronomy 1:34-36; 12:9; Joshua 23:1; Psalm 95:7b-11
A Sabbath rest: Exodus 20:8-11
what light is shed on the meaning of the expression “word of God” (v.12) by the language of speaking and hearing in chapters 1-4?
A spoken and heard word: 1:1-2 2:1-2 3:5 3:7, 15 4:2
Why should the expression “word of God” be used in 4:12-13 at all?
To the Jew, once a word was spoken (davar), it has an independent existence, and once spoken cannot be disregarded. The main thought in the description in the “word of God” is that of its essential nature as it enters into, permeates, transforms, every element in the human person.
Isaiah 55:11
“so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and succeed in the thing for which I sent it.”
What is the gist of 3:7 – 4:13 in a few sentences. Write a sentence summarizing each of 3:7-11; 3:12-13; 3:14-19; 4:1-11; 4:12-13.
3:7-11: the Holy Spirit warns from Scripture with the example of Israel’s failure, the generation of Israelites who left Egypt did not keep faith and thus did not enter the rest of God. “Today . . .”
3:12-13: The failure is that of the heart, “an evil, unbelieving heart” that disobeys, “hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” “Take care, brothers and sisters. . .”
3:14-19: Israel through unbelief refused to enter and died in the wilderness. “hold our first confidence [initial reality] firm to the end.”
4:1-11: the rest of God for his people is still open to us, available. “Let us therefore make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one may fall through such disobedience as theirs” (4:11).
4:12-13: For nothing escapes the penetrating judgement of the “word of God” of which disbelief is also disobedience (3:12, 18, 19; 4:11). See the Greek words used.
4:14-16 Thesis: The sufficiency and finality of the work of Jesus, the Son of God, as our Heavenly High Priest allows us confident (direct?) access to the presence of God for our every need.
*1. What notes sounded before in the Epistle are repeated here?
“high priest” 2:17 “passed through the heavens” 1:3ff. “Son of God” 1:2; 3:6 “our confession” 3:1 “hold fast” 3:6, 14 (2:3) “a high priest who (can) sympathize” 2:18 “tested” 2:18 “boldness” 3:6 “confidence” “grace” 2:9 “help” 2:16, 18
*2. How are exhortation and argument related in this paragraph and what points are made by each?
Since, then, we have let us hold fast a great high priest to our confession Jesus, the Son of God Who . . has been tested (v. 15 reason to be faithful) let us approach . . . with boldness the throne of grace so that we may receive mercy find grace to help in time of need
3. What all is involved in the designation, “Son of God”?
The full humanity and full deity (very man, very God) of our high priest, perfect sympathy with the plight of man and perfect access to the throne of God – thus perfectly adequate for the total need of humankind.
*4. How can it be said that Jesus “in every respect has been tested as we are yet without sin.”?
“Without sin” or “without sinning” That is, No sin in him, or he did not sin? Nature or deed? Both?
“Certainly means that He came out of all His trials sinless; it probably means more, viz. That sin in Him did not exist” (Davidson, 108).
“He was tempted as we are sharing our nature, yet with this exception, that there was no sin in Him to become the spring of trial . . . Christ assumed humanity under the conditions of life belonging to men fallen, though not with sinful promptings from within.” (Westcott, 107).
“Sympathy with the sinner in his trial does not depend on the experience of sin but on the experience of the strength of temptation to sin which only the sinless can know its full intensity, He who falls yields before the last strain” (Wescott, 59).
He who resists feel sit more than he who submits, he who completely resists, feels it in its fullest extremity.
“Christ’s sinlessness is not a quality for which Hebrews needs justification; it is assumed and affirmed as virtually self-evident. . . the accent in this verse is finally on the likeness of the suffering human Jesus to the addresses, an important element in Hebrew’s paraenetic program” (Attridge, 140f.).
Lindars, 63, n. 53: “The NT does not argue that Jesus was incapable of sin on account of his divine nature (which would be ruinous to Hebrews’ argument), nor need we suppose that he never did anything wrong throughout his human life. The point is that he was without sin in any respects which would have disqualified him for his God-given task of reconciling humanity and God.”
*5. What is the function of this paragraph in the structure of the Epistle? How does it prepare the way for what follows?
By pointing up clearly the main topic – the high – priesthood of Christ
By defining succinctly the main topic . . .
By integrating it with his climactic exhortation, “let us therefore approach the throne of grace. . .”
My outline: It is the thesis which the first section has been presenting, and now that it has been clearly stated on the general basis of the superiority of the Son in revelation over the old covenant, it will not be explored to demonstrate the superiority of the Son in his redemptive work as high priest over that of the old covenant.
Kuist’s breakdown could be outlined as follows:
Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has been perfected forever as high priest, 1:1-7:28
the Son presented as high priest, 1:1-4:16
so summary sentence of this section.
The Son perfected as high priest, 5:1-7:28
Jesus Christ, the minister of the new covenant, 8:1-10:18
Let us draw near in faith, hope, and love, 10:19-13:25
Passage sets the stage for the more detailed treatment of the high priesthood of jesus, qualifications and nature. See the two outlines.
A. B. Bruce: “The movement of thought is like that of the following [incoming] tide, which falls back upon itself, yet in each successive wave advances to a point beyond that reached by any previous one. Here for the third time Christ is designated a High Priest, and attributes are ascribed to Him as such which are to form the theme of the next great division of the Epistle. Wherein the Priestly Office of Christ is elaborately discussed.”
Hebrews 5:1 – 6:20 JESUS CHRIST A HIGH PRIEST AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK
5:1-10 The son is perfected as High Priest
5:1-4 The characteristics of a high priest
5:5-10 Jesus Christ is perfectly qualified to perform the function of a high priest.
Basic question: How can he be a priest when he did not belong to the Levitical priesthood?
*1. What characteristics of a high priest are mentioned in 5:1-4?
5:1: function – appointed on men’s behalf to deal with things concerning God 5:2-3: qualified by sympathy for human weakness 5:4: qualified by God’s calling to the task
Why should these aspects of a high priest be introduced here at all?
So that the author might go on to show how Christ fulfilled them.
*3. Since Jesus was not a priest how does the author show that he fulfilled the qualifications of priesthood?
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A HIGH PRIEST FULFILLED IN CHRIST
5:1 Function 5:9-10
5:2-3 Qualified by sympathy of 5:7-8 a common human experience
5:4 Qualified by the 5:5-6 distinctiveness of the divine call
4. What gifts and sacrifices for sin did the Old Testament priest offer? For what dins were they intended?
“The high priest’s duties are here said to be the presenting of his people’s gifts and sin offerings to God. ‘Gifts’ is the more comprehensive term; it would normally include ‘sacrifices’ but not coextensive with them. But ‘gifts and sacrifices’ appears to be used by our author as a general expression in the sense of our author as a general expression in the snese of ‘offerings’; here the particular class of offerings intended is indicated by the added words ‘for sins.’ And it emerges clearly in the course of his later argument that the particular sin offerings which he has in mind are those presented annually on the Day of Atonement; that was the occasion above all others on which the high priest in person was required to discharge the sacrificial function” (F. F. Bruce, 119).
“The purpose that every high priest serves related to God (. . .) and consists in making sacrificial offerings. The description of those offerings as ‘fits and sacrifice’ (. . .) is a fized expression for sacrifices generally. The prepositional phrase ‘for (. . .) sins’ thus qualifies the whole phrase and not simply the last term” (Attridge, 143).
Not the sins of the “high hand” (Numbers 15:22-31) but sins of “ignorance” or “sins unintentionally” (Leviticus 4:2, 13).
“The sin of ignorance is pardonable; the sin of presumption is not. Nevertheless we much note what the Jews meant by the sin of ignorance. They meant more than simply lack of knowledge. They included the sins committed when a man was swept away in a moment of impulse or anger or passion, when a man was mastered by some overmastering temptation, when a man repented in sorrow for something that he had done. By the sin of presumption they meant the cold, deliberate, calculated sin for which a man was not in the least sorry, the open-eyed disobedience to God, the time when a man, not detachment took his own way and disobeyed God. So, then, the priest existed to open the way for the sinner back to God – so long as the sinner waned to come back” (Barclay, DBS, 43f.).
How does this help us understand the meaning of Hebrews 10:26? “For if we willfully persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins. . .”
5.What is the function of the two Old Testament quotations in the author’s argument?
The voice of God proclaimed to Christ, “You are my Son, today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2:7 – messianic for early Christians). The same voice said, “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek: (Psalm 110:4 – also messianic). The first suggests Christ’s fitness for the office, and the second gives it a particular application – his appointment was the irrevocable oath of God. The how or manner!
He cannot be both of the line of David and of Levi, his priesthood is of another order entirely.
*6. How can it be said that “although he was a Son, “ the Christ “learned obedience through what he suffered”?
From “O Little Town of Bethlehem” the phrase “no crying he makes” is false!
John 20: “My father and your father” See also v. 2 on the disciple whom Jesus love.
This is not to say that Wesley and Watts agreed on all issues. See, for instance his letters to his brother Charles (June 8, 1870), and again in his letter to Joseph Benson (September 17, 1788), accusing Watts, in the latter letter, of Arianism. (WTJ Fall, 2008, 32, n 9.
“First, as God incarnate, he assumed sinful flesh, as Paul says in Romans 8:3. He took on human nature’s damaged state and through his body became intimately acquainted with the complexity and messiness of fallen existence.” (Jennifer McBride, “The witness of sinners, Christian Century [December 11, 2013], 32]).
See Hunter’s discussion of Forsyth’s take on kenosis and plērōsis: “As Christ’s personal history enlarged and ripened by every experience, and as he was always found equal to every moral crisis, the latent Godhead became more and more mighty as his life’s interior. . . . He worked out the salvation he was, and moved by his history to that supernatural world in which he moved by his nature. And the life culminated in the perfection of his own soul and of the salvation in the cross, the resurrection and his glory.” Hunter was working from PPJC.
So Hambrick and Lodahl on Hebrews 5, Wesley, and Maddox, WTJ ?
Gethsemane context (5:7): “We know the sense in which the words are true of us; we learn to be obedient because of the unpleasant consequences which follow disobedience. It was not so with him. As we are told later (10:7), he announced his dedication to the doing of God’s will at his coming into the world. He se out of God’s will at his coming into the world. He set out from the start on the path of obedience to God, and learned by the sufferings which came his way in consequence just what obedience to God involved in practice in the conditions of human life on earth” (f. F. Bruce, 1313).
A proverbial word play, emathen af honepathen.
See Attridge: the effect of the motif here is primarily paraenetic. Although Hebrews does not use hortatory language at this point, a concern for the audience is transparent. Jesus is presented as one who ‘learns obedience’ (. . .) in the midst of suffering because that is what the addresses are called upon to do. Hence, speculation on the senses in which Jesus may be said to learn obedience can be misdirected” (153).
See Barclay, DBS, 46.
What is the meaning of “having been made perfect” (cf. 2:10)?
“To the Greek a thing was teleios if it perfectly carried out the purpose for which it was made and designed. When he used the word he was not thinking in terms of abstract and metaphysical perfection; he was thinking in terms of function” (Barclay, DBS, 46).
See F. F. Bruce, 132.
*8. Sum up the exposition in 5:1-10 in several sequential sentences.
The characteristic of a high-priest fulfilled in Christ.
The characteristics of a high priest, as manifest in the Aaronic Priesthood, 5:1-4
Function – one appointed on behalf of men to deal with things concerning God, 5:1
Qualified by his sympathy for human weakness, 5:2-3
Qualified by God’s calling to the task, 5:4
The perfect qualification of Christ to fill the role of High Priest, 5:5-10.
Christ qualified by Messianic appointed which included the office of priest in the manner of Melchizedek, 5:5-6
Christ qualified by divine discipline through which he experienced the depth of human weakness, 5:7-8
The perfected function of Christ as high priest proclaimed in the eternal efficacy of his work, 5:9-10.
5:11 – 6:20 Let Us Go On To Maturity.
5:11-14 The reason for failure 6:1-8 The necessity for going on 6:9-20 The ground for certain hope, 6:9-20
Identify the parts by title (5:11-14; 6:1-8; 6:9-12; 6:13-20).
5:11-14 Warning: the reason for failure 6:1-8 Warning: the necessity for going on 6:9-20 Encouragement: the ground for certain hope their character the character of God 13-20 the character of God
Where and what is the mood change in this section? How does the psychology of this order make for the effectiveness of the appeal?
At verse 9, from warning to encouragement, from negative to positive motivation. The shift itself can make for a powerful impact on one’s mood, one’s receptivity – relief!
5:11-6:20
5:11 About (peri) “it” or “him” 5:12 For (gar) 5:13 For (gar) Warning
6:1 Therefore (dio) 4 For (gar) 7 (gar) NASB For 9 Even though (de)
Encouragement 13 When (gar) of course (gar)
Note the illustrations: “teachers” “infants” “unskilled” “trained” gegumnasmena “ground . . . rain . . . crop” “Abraham . . . oath” “anchor” “shrine . . . curtain”
*3. What marks of spiritual immaturity and maturity are indicated in 5:11-14? Why should they be introduced at this point?
Immaturity “dull in understanding” (akoais) “need . . .basic elements . . . milk” “unskilled in the word or righteousness) (apeiros), inexperienced in, unacquainted with)
Maturity “solid food” “mature” (teleion perfect) “faculties have been trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.”
The rebuke, 5:11-14, is for the failure to mature due to misuse of time, due to failure to exercise (gegumnasmena)
The writer recognizes the difficulty of the task of developing the nature of the high priesthood of Christ in the face of the backward condition of his readers. So he expostulates with them over their condition. He is going to talk about solid food.
4. (In 6:1 NRSV “perfection” is translated “maturity” in NASB). What is the connection of 6:1-3 with the preceding paragraph? IS it exhortation, resolution, or both? Why?
The context is his concern over their inability to handle his teaching about the significance of Christ – their lack of spiritual insight, motivation, and maturity. He exhorts them in terms of what they should be. “Their particular condition of immaturity is such that only an appreciation of what is involved in Christ’s high priesthood will cure it.” (Bruce, 138).
Resolution: He is going to deal with them in term of what they should be.
6:1-2 refer to those things that have to do with the beginnings of faith (Christ’s own teaching? Attridge).
The context is that of the author’s teaching natural meaning of opening clause of v. 1 “again” suggests the act of a teacher “we will do this” v. 3 difficulty of adding exhortation to vv. 4-8.
Attridge on perfection here: “once again, our author is involved in his characteristically subtle wordplay. The movement to Christian maturity has as its first stage the appropriation of the ‘solid food’ or ‘exercise’ of his own instruction. This instruction involves a demonstration of how Christ, as the perfected High Priest, in turn perfects his followers. That perfection has a realized dimension expressed by the term ‘sanctification’ (10:10), which consists I n the forgiveness and access to God that Christ’s death provides. At the same time it has an unrealized or future dimension insofar as Christians are called upon perfection of heavenly glory (2:10; 6:20). The mature Christian is expected not only to ‘ingest’ the solid food but also to follow Christ on the path to final perfection, whatever the cost” (163).
See Wiley, 179-193.
6:1-3: A resolution: Maturity demands progress 6:4-6: A warning: Maturity negates going back 6:7-8 An illustration: Maturity demands the right use of divine blessing.
What point is the author making in 6:4-6? What do you make of the change from the five verbs in the aorist tense (“have . . . been enlightened” “have tasted” “have shared in “ “have fallen away””) to three verbs in the present tense (“to restore” “are crucifying again” “are holding him up to contempt”)? [The verbs are listed in the order of the Greek text.]
There is no future in returning to the past! [You can’t go home again! The past is never there (Ranch, O. J.). We are exiles, longing for a new homecoming. Brueggemann, OTT, 77] Note the element of continuity in the warnings thus far (2:1-4 –4:13).
A difficult passage, key is seen in three things apostasy is in view (previous warnings, 2:1-4, 3:1 – 4:13) repentance is defined in terms of the Jewish prerequisite to the messianic age, 12:16-17; Acts 3:19ff. Change form five aorists to three presents puts stress on the continual attitude.
You cannot have it both ways!
Apostasy is the natural moral result of such a continuity of attitude, no arbitrary act of God. Similar to the sin against the Holy Spirit, Mark 3:20-30, Acts 5:1-11, 1 John 5:14-17, the sin of the high hand, & Romans 1:28.
Remember, the function of the passage is “warning”!
What point is made by the illustration drawn from nature in 6:7-8?
This moral law has its analogy in nature. The wrong use of divine blessing brings judgement.
On Optimism/hope see DBWE 8:, 50-51,
What contribution is made by the illustration form Abraham’s experience? What is meant by “oath” in 6:16-18 and what does it have to do with the Christian’s hope?
6:13-14: God, when he made a promise, backed up his promise by his oath, therefore like Abraham, endure (argument from Hebrew grammar, the infinitive absolute).
6:16-20: This dual certitude, God’s word backed by his oath, is now fulfilled in Jesus our high priest.
Point is in 6:13: “promise . . . swear”
God, being unable to appeal to (swear by) a greater than himself, brought in himself as a surety.
God has put himself on the line in terms of the Christian hope – integrity, holiness. Two “unchangeable (immutable)” things are his promise and his oath!
*8. Summarize the main points of 5:11-6:20 in propositions.
5:11-14 Christian nurture means growing to maturity – food and exercise.
6:1-3 Growth to maturity involves making steady progress.
6:4-6 The necessity of progress negates going back.
6:7-8 Maturity demands the right use of divine blessing.
6:9-10 Your past performance is a ground of hope.
6:11-12 Full assurance of hope demands a steadfast faith.
6:13-15 God, when he made a promise, backs up his promise by his oath, therefore like Abraham, endure.
6:16-20 This dual certitude, God’s word backed by his oath, is now fulfilled in Jesus our high priest.
9. How different would the force of the epistle be if 5:11-6:20 were omitted?
None in terms of argument, but much in terms of the effectiveness of the argument and the value of the book.
Kuist: it shows the difference between a speech and talking to people. It adds a mood.
The psychology of 6:9-20 includes
Use of words of endearment Appeal to past performance Direct address Citation of Abraham God’s deeds are as good as his word
Summarizing 5:11-6:20
A pause in the argument, personal appeal Vitality – one must grow in order to hold fast Versatility of illustrations Marks of good psychology
The Ground for certain hope is
Their character 6:7-12 The character of God 6:13-20
Hebrews 7:1 – 10:18 Jesus Christ the Mediator Of the new covenant in his high-priestly office
A. 7:1-28 The Qualifications of Jesus as High Priest
7:1-3 The significance of the Melchizedek priesthood
7:4-10 The superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood
7:11-25 The superiority of Jesus’ priesthood
7:26-28 The significance of Jesus’ priesthood
Kuist: A chapter distinguished by inherent authority, that needs to be interpreted on its own terms.
Lindars: Read argument begins at chapter 7 and continues without a break though 10:18.
1. Paragraphing the chapter as follows: 7:1-3, 4-10, 11-14, 15-19, 20-22, 23-25, 26-28, observe the progress of the author’s argument.
7:1-3 The significance of the Melchizedek priesthood was royal, non-official, and perpetual, blessed Abraham and received tithes from him.
7:4-10 The superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood: The Levitical priesthood paid tithes through Abraham to Melchizedek thus demonstrating the superiority of his priesthood.
7:11-25 The superiority of Jesus’ priesthood:
Thus the Levitical priesthood and the law were merely provisional, 7:11-14.
Jesus’ priesthood is not based on heredity, but on the inherent power of an indestructible life, like the pattern of Melchizedek, 7:15-19.
Jesus’ priesthood is confirmed by the divine oath, 7:20-22.
Jesus’ priesthood is single and permanent, 7:23-25.
7:26-28 The significance of Jesus’ priesthood: Jesus Christ is appointed by an oath high priest as a Son made perfect forever.
*2. What is the core of the sentence which comprises 7:1-3? What are its contributory parts?
Check the Greek: melchisedek . . . menei
“This . . . Melchizedek . . . remains a priest forever”
Use both Greek and English to show subordinate nature of the rest of the sentence.
*3. What marks distinguish Melchizedek as a priest?
Royal: King of Salem (shalom) Non-official: No lineage or appointment Perpetual: “remains a priest forever” – so his distinctiveness See article in Hess, ed, Oath, etc. & Genesis lesson on Genesis cg. 14.
4. How do Psalm 110 and Genesis 14:17-20 throw light on 7:1-3?
A messianic designation plus an historical reference. Psalm 110:4 is the author’s text. Chapter 7 is exposition.
The author uses Melchizedek as a picture, a portrait of Christ, not as an historical character who is literally described in 1:3. Note the rhetoric, cf. Attridge, 189.
Melchizedek is an illustration (or argument form silence) of the perpetual priesthood of Christ in fulfillment of messianic prophecy. F. F. Bruce Writes:
The words which follow present an outstanding example of the argument from silence in a typological setting. When Melchizedek is described as having “neither father nor mother, without a genealogy,” and having “neither beginning of days nor end of life,” it is not suggested that he was a biological anomaly, or an angel in human guise. Historically Melchizedek appears to have belonged to a dynasty of priest-kings in which he had both predecessors and successors. If this point had been put to our author, he would have agreed at once, no doubt; but this consideration was foreign to his purpose. The important consideration was the account given of Melchizedek in holy writ; to him the silences of Scripture were as much due to divine inspiration as were its statements. In the only recorded which Scripture provides of Melchizedek – gen. 14:18-20 – nothing is said of his parentage, nothing is said of his ancestry of progeny, nothing is said of his birth, nothing is said of his death. He appears as a living man, king of Salem and priest of God Most High; and as such he disappears. In all this – in the silences as well as in the statements – he is a fitting type of Christ; in fact, the record by the things it says of him and by the things it does not say has assimilated him to the Son of God (159-160).
5. In 7:3 what do the expressions “resembling” and “remains . . . forever” (NRSV) mean? No beginning, no end
Continually (10:1, 12-14), the point of the rest of this chapter. Why necessary? Their continuing consciousness of sin after baptism. See Lindars, 59f.
Bruce continues: It is the eternal being of the Son of God that is here in view; not his human life. Our author has no docetic view of Christ; he knows that “our Lord has sprung from Judah” (v. 14). But in his eternal being the Son of God has really, as Melchizedek has typically, “neither beginning of days not end of life”; and more especially now, exalted at the fight hand of God he “remains a priest in perpetuity.” Melchizedek remains a priest continually for the duration of his appearance in the biblical narrative; but in the antitype Christ remains a priest continually without qualification. And it is not the type which determines the antitype, but the antitype which determines the type; Jesus is not portrayed after the pattern of Melchizedek, nut Melchizedek is “made conformable to the Son of God” (160).
Similarly the earthly sanctuary is a copy of the heavenly sanctuary in which Christ discharges his high-priestly ministry, and not vise-versa, 8:2, 5.
6. What evidence does the author give of Melchizedek’s greatness in 7:4-7?
“The superior greatness of Melchizedek appears in two important respects: he accepted tithes from Abraham and bestowed his blessing on Abraham” (Bruce, 162).
*7. What contrasts does the author draw between Melchizekek and the Levitical priesthood in 7:8-10?
“mortal . . . he lives”
On “One might even say” (9): “The author seems to admit the artificiality of his playful exegesis with his qualifying remark, ‘so to speak’ (hos epos epein), a common literary phrase outside the New Testament. The hesitation may be due, in part at least, to the fact that, by analogous logic, Jesus too could be said to have paid a tithe to Melchizedek” (Attridge, 197).
So to speak “Levi, the ancestor of that priestly tribe and the embodiment of its corporate personality, may be said himself to have paid tithes to Melchizededk (thus conceding the superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood) in the person of his ancestor Abraham. Levi was Abraham’s great-grandson, and was yet unborn when Abraham met Mechizedek; but an ancestor is regarded in biblical thought as continuing within himself all his descendants” (Bruce, 164).
Kuise illustration: American revolution was fought by our foregathers – we were there! Deut. 5:3: “Not with our ancestors did the LORD make this covenant, but with us, who are all of us here alive today.”
8. What was the relation of the law to the Aaronic priesthood? How does the “change in priesthood” affect the law in 7:11-14?
Linked together: “the Levitical priesthood – for the people received the law under this priesthood? (7:11)
“under” (NRSV) is ep autes = “on the basis of” (NASB)
If one is inferior (the law), so is the other (the priesthood). Both are provisional: “if perfection had been attainable. . .”
“If God had intended the Aaronic priesthood to inaugurate the age of perfection, the time when men and women would enjoy unimpeded access to him, why should he have conferred on the Messiah a priestly dignity of his own – different from Aaron’s and by implication superior to Aaron’s?” (Bruce, 165).
See “Excursus: Hebrews, Paul, and the Law” in Attridge, 204f.
9. In 7:15-19 what contrasts are drawn, and to what aspect of the Melechizedek priesthood do they point?
“a legal requirement requiring physical descent” (7:16)
versus
“the power of an indestructible life” (7:16)
hereditory inferior to inherent power
Barclay: “Now herein is one vast and most significant difference form the Aaronic and the levitical priesthood. An ordinary priest had first and foremost to produce his pedigree. The one qualification without which not even the best man in the world could become a priest was unbroken descent from Aaron, absolutely pure Jewish blood. The first essential was a genealogy, and Melchizedek had none. The argument therefore is the at the priesthood of Christ, was unique in that they depend, not on any legal enactment, not on any matter of genealogy and parentage and descent, but entirely on the personal quality of the priest. The priest himself has in him a quality of life which makes him a priest quite independently of any legal enactment and any genealogical register” (Bible Guides, 71-72).
10. How does 7:20-22 show that the priesthood of Christ is an abiding priesthood?
“confirmed with an oath” (7:20-21; cf. 5:5), thus an appeal to integrity
“What he has said about God’s oath to Abraham in 6:13ff is equally true about God’s oath here. The bare word of God is assurance enough, but God, ‘desiring to show even more clearly . . . how unchanging was his purpose, guaranteed it by oath’ (6:17 NEB)” (Bruce, 170).
“Jesus” in final position – weight of argument falls here: “Accordingly Jesus has also become the guarantee of a better covenant” [ kata tosouto {kai} kreittonos diathekes gegonen egguous Iesous ] (7:22).
11. What is the main point of 7:23-25, and what is its relation to the argument?
“many . . . he” (one) successable – untransferable
“many in number because they were prevented by death from continuing” (7:23)
“he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever” (7:24)
“Consequently he is able for all time ( eis to panteles, mg., “completely”) to save those who approach God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them” (7:25).
KJV: “to the uttermost” so “From the guttermost to the uttermost!”
12. How does 7:26-28 summarize the argument for the Melchizedek order of priesthood? How is this relation to the thought of chapters 1-7?
Jesus: “Such a high priest”
By the personal work of his life, not by claim to descent,
By virtue of his character, not by the power of an office,
By the energy of his life, not by the validity of life.
“holy, blameless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. . . he . . . once for all . . .offered himself.”
The perfect offering, the priest and sacrifice are now one!
*13. How does 7:28 culminate the argument of chapters 1-7?
LAW OATH
“high priests” (men) “a Son” “subject to weakness” “made perfect” (11, 19) “later than law” “forever” (successable)
7:1-3 The significance of the Melchizedek priesthood: Melchizedek whose priesthood was royal, non-official, and perpetual, blessed Abraham and received tithes from him.
7:4-10 The superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood: The Levitical priesthood paid tithes though Abraham to Melchizedek thus demonstrating the superiority of his priesthood.
7:11-25 The unique superiority of the Son’s priesthood
Thus the Levitical priesthood and the law were merely provisional, 7:11-14.
Jesus’ priesthood is not based on heredity, but on the inherent power of an indestructible life, like the pattern of Melchizedek, 7:15-19.
Jesus; priesthood is confirmed by the divine oath, 7:20-22.
Jesus’ priesthood is single and permanent in contrast to the many who died, 7:23-25.
7:26-28 The significance of Jesus’ priesthood: Jesus Christ is appointed by an oath high priest as a Son made prefect forever.
Huion eis ton aiona teteleiomenon: “That emphatic final word brings to a conclusion the development of this theme. In this chapter even more clearly than in the previous references to the subject, Christ’s perfection is seen to be intimately connected with his exaltation, his installation in the realm of the eternal. The perfect sense of the participle is surely significant. Christ’s exaltation is permanent and absolute. He has thereby attained a status that is of enduring relevance. It is with perspective introduced by this chapter that the exposition of Christ’s sacrificial act will now unfold” (Attridge, 215).
*14. What is your estimate of the validity of the argument of chapter 7?
B. 8:1 –10:18 The High-priestly function of Christ as mediator of the new covenant
8:1-13 Christ is minister in the heavenly sanctuary of a better covenant
9:1-10 The old testament figure
9:11-10:18 The New testament fulfillment
Perspective of 8:1 –10:18
“such a high priest” (1, 7:1-28) “who is seated” (1, 1:1-4)
“we have” (1) . . . . . . . . “a minister” (2, 8:1-10:18)
offering (9:1-10)
(4, 5) scene – earth (9:1-10) heaven (9:11-12)
(6, 7) a ministry (9:15-10:18)
the mediator of a better covenant, enacted through better promises
Jeremiah’s prophecy
8:1-13
*1. What are the most obvious structural features of this segment? Give topics to 8:1-5 and 8:6-13.
8:1 topic sentence 8:3-7 subpoints 8:8-12 quotation form Jeremiah 8:13 concluding statement
Summary: Chief thought:
The high-priestly function of Christ Minister in the new sanctuary (8:1-5)
The place of the execution of his high-priestly function
Mediator of the new covenant (8:6-13)
The corresponding better covenant foretold by Jeremiah
2. What is the core of the first sentence (8:1-2), and how is this core amplified in the other parts of the sentence?
“we have such a high priest”
“one who is seated” “a minister in the sanctuary”
State the main points of 8:3-7. How are they related to the main topic of 8:1-13?
8:3 the offering of the high priest at the heart of his ministry
8:4-5 the heavenly scene of his ministry: “not on earth”
8:6-7 “a more excellent ministry” mediating “a better covenant which has been enacted through better promises”
where is the heavenly sanctuary? What does the new high priest offer? What is the point of referring to a “heavenly sanctuary”? One which endures!
What is a covenant? What Old Testament covenant is referred to in 8:8-13? Why is the idea of covenant introduced here?
A covenant is an agreement for fellowship. In the Old Testament it refers to a God-graced relationship with accompanying requirements. In the background is the covenant God made through Moses with Israel at Sinai (Exodus cc. 19-20, cf. 20:18-21) on which the priesthood is based and which it I turn seeks to effect in the life of the nation.
Here the reference is to Jeremiah who spoke his prophecy of a new covenant first after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B. C.
Now inaugurated by the sacrifice of Christ. Lindars. 80.
The idea of covenant is brought in as the point of contrast between the ministries of the levitical priesthood and that of Christ.
Under what circumstances did Jeremiah speak (Jeremiah 31:31-34) and why are his words appropriate here?
“In its original context, this pericope forms part of a lengthy series of oracles, Jeremiah 30-33, which offers hope to the Israelites of the exilic period that Yahweh will restore them to their homeland.” (Attridge, 225).
Here the reference is to Jeremiah who spoke his prophecy of a new covenant first after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B. C., proof of the fact that the old covenant was broken [not by Yahweh!] and about to disappear. Now the prophecy of a new covenant is spoken again on the eye of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A. D., an event that brought the old covenant to a formal end.
But the Sinai covenant was a grace covenant accompanied by the experienced presence of god (Exodus 19:1-20:21), so why the need of a “new” covenant?
What basic characteristics of the New Covenant are mentioned in 8:8-13?
“the text fleshes out what the ‘better promises’ mentioned in 8:6 entail” (Attridge, 226).
Inward written on the heart (10)
Universal they shall all know me (11), not just priests and prophets
Spiritual forgiveness, restoring fellowship with God so that they shall know and obey him
*7. What is the contribution made by 8:1-13 to the argument of the epistle?
Introduces the theme of ministry, the theme of the final exposition, 9:1-10:18
Relates the “more excellent ministry” to the new covenant
Summarizes what is expanded in 9:1-10:18 – See chart at beginning of this section.
“Nor is he telling his readers a new point of doctrine which they have not heard before. It is something that they know already, but have not appreciated in its full significance” – The Mystery of Christ! Lindars, 80f.
9:1 – 10:18
Note the paragraphing of 9:1 –10:18, the main topics treated, and their relation to each other.
9:1-10 The ministry of the Levitical Priesthood
-place, 1-5 -function, 6-7 preparing for contrast -result, 8-10 with following. . .
9:11-10:18 The Melchizedeck ministry of Christ as mediator of a/the new covenant
9:11-14 Summarily stated 9:15-28 The death of Christ has ratified a better covenant 10:1-18 The self-offering of Christ a better sacrifice t that can sanctify forever
Why recognize a new segment beginning at 10:19?
Because of the transition from argument to exhortation
*3. What are the contrasting points regarding the ministry of the covenant between the Old Testament figure (9:1-10) and the New Testament fulfillment (9:11-10:18) in (1) scene, (2) offering, (3) value, & (4) efficacy?
The argument is based on the annual ceremony of the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16, “an astute move, “for the day of Atonement is not explicitly used in connection with the sacrificial death of Jesus elsewhere in the New Testament” (Lindars, 84).
“earthly sanctuary” (1-5) SCENE “the greater and perfect tent” (11, 24; 10:12)
“continually . . . not OFFERING “one for all . . with his own blood” (12, 15-22) without . . . blood (6-7)
“the way into the sanctuary VALUE “he entered into the place obtaining eternal has not yet been disclosed” (8) redemption” (12)
“cannot perfect the EFFICACY “purify our conscience from dead works to conscience of the worship the living God” (14) worshipper” (9)
“conscience” = to know together
“Sacrifices of the old order are unable to perfect the ‘conscience’ (suneidesin), a term rare in the LXX but common in the Hellenistic world. Growing out of classical uses of th verbal expression suneidenai heauto, for ‘consciousness’ or ‘awareness,’ the noun came to be used in both moral and non-moral senses for particularly the awareness of transgressions or the faculty for such awareness. It appears in Greco-Jewish into Christian use, and it is particularly prominent in Paul. For Hebrews the perfection of conscience, which involves primarily its ‘cleansing’ form the burden of guilt, is the way in which Jeremiah’s prophecy of a new covenant written on the heart is fulfilled” (Attridge, 242).
Lindars, 88: “It is here that he speaks of the consciousness of sin for the first time, which according to my interpretation is the crucial issue. . . It does not denote a moral law within the mind, telling one what one ought or ought not to do. It is rather knowledge within oneself of the moral status of one’s own actions, whether good or bad, usually the latter.”
4. What is the core of the sentence in 9:11-12 and what points are made by the rest of the sentence in relation to the core?
“Christ . . . entered”
Christos eiselthen
Paragenomenos oude di’ . . . dia de
Huramenos
*5. What points are developed in 9:13-14 by the argument “how much more”?
The superior efficacy of Christ’s blood is based generally on the considerations that his sacrifice was
Voluntary, not by constraint as in the case of the animal sacrifices of the law;
Rational, and not animal (personal in character);
Spontaneous, not in obedience to a direct commandment (cf. John 10:1ff.).
Moral (spiritual), an offering of Himself by the action of the highest power in Himself, whereby he stood in connections with God, and not a mere mechanical performance of a prescribed rite (above from Westcott, 261). Cf. 10:1ff.
9:11-14:
The timeless note: “eternal” The redemptive note: “obtaining” The personal note: “his own blood” The effective note: “purify to worship the living God”
6. What is meant by covenant” (9:15) and “will” or “testament” (9:16-17)?
The same Greek word, a double use understandable to the Greek reader, but awkward for us.
The law operates on three levels (analogy of marriage)
Status Ceremonial License and ceremony
Actions Moral Begin to live together
Motive/will Spiritual Cannot live to themselves in-laws, children, neighbors, who makes decisions so tension!
Old economy gave status and almost impossible standard of action
7. What is meant by “blood” in 9:18-22? See Forsyth’s chapter on the meaning of “blood” (CoC),
God’s instructions to Noah after the flood: “Only, you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Genesis 9:4; cf. 9:1-6; Deuteronomy 12:23)
As applied in the sacrificial system: “for the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you for making atonement for your lives on the altar; for, as life, it is the blood that makes atonement”
See systematic overhead, and Dunning, 382. Get!
See Exodus 24:3-8; Leviticus 9:1-24; Romans 3:21-26; 1 John 1:7; 2:2.
Kuist speaks of the “liberation of life for another purpose. Cites Genesis 4:10; Leviticus 16:10
Death releases blood for sacrificial purposes, blood cannot be manufactured, only given.
Sprinkled blood is the work of the priest.
Christ does both of the above.
8. How do the illustrations from secular law (9:16-17) and ritual law (9:18-22) show that Christ’s earth as mediator qualifies him as minister?
9:16-17 A will is in force at the death of the testator—a pure gratuity
9:18-22 The shedding of blood is necessary for a cleansed conscience – forgiveness
Role of blood in atonement in OT sacrificial system. Q #7.
9. How does 9:23-28 illustrate the essential character of the new ministry? Three parts: 23-24, 25-26, 27-28.
9:23-24 A better sacrifice in that he has entered into heaven itself 9”now to appear in the presence eof God on our behalf”).
9:25-26 A better sacrifice in that it was offered only once (“once for all at the end of the age ot remove sin by the sacrifice of himself”).
9:27-28 A better sacrifice in that sin never needs to be dealt with again (“Christ . . will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save”).
These characteristics of the sacrifice are likewise those of the ministry based upon it. See technical discussion in Attridge.
10. What points are made in 9:15 that have been expanded in terms of the goal, means, and provisions for failure in the Old and New Covenants?
Goal = covenant (will, 16-17)
Means = death (sprinkling of the blood, 18-22)
Provision for failure = transgressions under the old covenant (better sacrifieces, 23 Real, 24 Single, 25-26 Final, 27-28)
11. How has the author demonstrated the validity of the New Ministry in 9:15-28?
The validity of the new ministry is in the death of the mediator
9:15 topic sentence 9:16-17 illustrated by secular law – covenant now in force 9:18-22 illustrated by ritual law – blood cleanses the conscience 9:23-28 established on better sacrifices
Blood offered and sprinkled = the communication of life
Because Christ gave his life for mankind, he could communicate it (life) to mankind.
12. How does 10:1-18 demonstrated the validity of the New Ministry in 9:15-28?
10:1-4 The sacrifices prescribed by the law are inherently ineffective (Why?).
10:5-10 The will of God is not fulfilled in these, but in the sacrifice of Christ (See use of Psalm. 40:6-8 LXX). Hebrew: “you have given me an open ear.” LXX perfectly fits his purpose.
“In the case of Jesus the theory of the moral value of obedience provides precisely the answer which Hebrews needs. Hebrew now seizes this to place the coping-stone on his argument [10:5-10]” (Lindars, 99).
On 10:1-10: “The writer now caps his argument by giving his deepest reason for the superiority of Christ’s sacrifice – its quality of complete obedience to God . . . The heart of Christ’s offering is thus his obedience: the proper human attitude to God, as the Psalmist saw. It is an adquate remedy for sin because it is on the same level – human, inward, the right relationship to God” (Davies, 93, 95f.).
NASB: “By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (10:10).
Obedience is sin’s proper remedy for sin, the perfect “sacrifice for sins” (10:12).
10:1-10 are “related to what precedes . . . as the completion of the argument of the central exposition of Hebrews” (Attridge, 268).
10:11-14 Having completed his self-offering Christ entered into his present majesty.
10:15-18 This ministry is in fulfillment of the prophecy given by the Holy Spirit.
“After the climatic conclusion of the preceding paragraph Hebrews now provides a resume of the exposition of Christ’s priestly act, knitting together the principles that have governed the discussion since 8:1. The paragraph thus does not suggest any new insights, but, through its repetition of what are by now familiar themes, it reinforces the basic message of the central section of the text” (Attridge, 279).
Old New
“every priest stands” “Christ. . sat down” performing his duties waiting “offering” “offered” “again and again” “for all time” “the same sacrifices” “a single sacrifice for sins”
See my exegesis of 10:11-18 in Biblical resources for Holiness preaching, volume 2, 165-176, which will be shared in relation to Q14 below.
*13. Summarize the priestly argument of 8:1 – 10:18 in five topics or sentences: 8:1-6; 8:7-13; 9:1-14; 9:15-28; 10:1-18.
The high priestly ministry of Christ, the mediator of a new covenant
8:1-6 Introduced 8:7-13 Based on a new covenant 9:1-14 Contrasted with the old ministry 9:15-28 The validity of the new ministry 10:1-18 The efficacy of the new ministry
*14. Define the use made of the “perfection” and “sanctification” terminology in 10:1-18? Where else so far has the language been used?
2:11; 9:9, 13-14 (12:10, 14; 13:12)
10:1, 10 (provisional), 14 (applied, cf. 11:40; 12:23)
Read (xerox) excerpts from the study on 10:11-18 in Biblical Resources for Holiness Preaching, volume 2, 165-176.
Title: “A perfected Relationship”
Introduction: The provision for establishing a relation of fellowship with God is abundantly present in the work of God in Christ. It is –
I. Perfect in it’s provision -- by one offering One sacrifice for sins (v. 12; cf. v. 11) Forgiveness of these things (v. 18) The Holy Spirit . . . the covenant . . . My laws Upon the heart, . . . upon their mind I will write them (vv. 15-16)
Perfect in It’s Permanence –for all time One sacrifice for all time (v. 12; cf. v. 11) Sat down . . . until . . . (vv.12-13; cf. v. 11) I will remember no more (v. 17; cf. v. 18)
Conclusion: This privilege is yours, the grace-privilege of a relationship with God that in Christ is “perfect in its provision and perfect in its permanence.” “Let us draw near” (4:16; 10:22) and possess by faith what is truly yours!
*15. When viewed in terms of the biblical perspective, what contributions are made by Hebrews 8:1 – 10:18 to Christian faith?
It is seen as the fulfilling and final redemptive act of God;
Its finality is enforced by the presentation of its spirituality
In foundation --based on a new covenant; In means --the personal offering of Christ; In result --Christ himself perfects as long as the need of mankind endures.
Hebrews 10:19-13:25 POSSESSING SUCH ACCESS TO GOD IN JESUS CHRIST EXERCISE FAITH, HOPE, AND LOVE
10:19-39 Their privileges, Perils, and Prospects
10:19-25 Privileges and responsibility 10:26-31 Perils of apostasy 10:32-39 Prospect of past experience
“Hebrews has finished his exposition of the sacrifice of Christ” (7:1-10:18). “it is quite complex and uses ideas which have not previously been employed in the basic Christian teaching. But this does not mean that the argument is finished. There is still the practical side to be explained” (Lindars, 101).
What features distinguish this passage from what precedes and follows?
A change from argument to exhortation preceding A change from exhortation to exposition following
The author to the Hebrews is “one of the deepest theologians in the New Testament. . . He does not think merely for the pleasure of thinking, or for the thrill of academic and intellectual satisfaction. He thinks only that he may more forcibly appeal to men to enter into the presence of Go” (Barclay, Daily Bible Studies, 133).
With 10:19 final exhortation based on the total argument now begins –three moods
Assurance 10:19-25 Warning 10:26-31 Encouragement 10:32-39
All stress the note of urgency
Identify the essential statement of 10:19-25 (one sentence in Greek). What questions are answered by the remainder of the paragraph?
“Let us approach. . . faith” “Let us hold fast . . . hope” “Let us consider . . . love”
Factual basis of privilege and responsibility 22 How we approach the sanctuary 23 Why we can hold fast The way we conduct ourselves
10:26-31 What if we don’t? 10:32-39 Can we endure?
Four practical things to do in vv. 23-25 (Lindars, 104f.)
*3. Note the points previously made in the epistle that are reflected in 10:19-25. What use is made of them? What blessings and duties are emphasized? Why?
Theological points of main argument, 1:1-4; 2:5-18; 3:14—5:10; 7:1-10:18
Exhortation of 4:14-16
Exhortation of 3:1 (6) 4:13
Cf. 3:13; 4:7; 6:9-12
Exhortation to faith an life
Blessings Duties
Blessings and duties, privilege and responsibility go together in a truly biblical faith – they are inherently one for the biblical person.
*4. How is the meaning of 10:26-27 made clear by its preceding and following context? Note the verb tenses used.
10:19-25 Assurance: the folly of it, no basis in reality, in the privileges of grace
10:32-39 Encouragement: no necessity for it in the past experience of the readers
10:26 “Willfully persist” present participle “No longer remains” present middle
10:29 Greek aorists
Structure comparison with 3:14-4:13 and 6:4-6
Principle 3:14 6:4-6 10:26-27 Elaboration 3:15-4:11 6:7-8a 10:28-30 Warning 4:12-13 6:8b 10:31 (brief and terrible)
In 10:26-31 why should these particular aspects of God’s character mentioned be stressed at this stage of the exposition?
[Check C H Dodd on Romans, - a fearful thing to fall out of the hands of the living God.]
Deuteronomy 32:35-36: The character of God implies the certainty of retribution. The argument is from the lesser to the greater – From the God of the Old Testament to the superior revelation in the Son of God.
How does the development of 10:26-39 compare with that of 5:11-6:20?
5:11-6:20 10:26-39
indictment warning warning encouragement encouragement
What activities of faith or unbelief are enumerated in 10:19-39? Why?
22 “Let us approach” 23 “Let us hold fast” 24 “Let us consider” “Not neglecting to meet together” “We willfully persist in sin” 29 “Spurned the Son of God” “profaned the blood of the covenant” “Outraged the Spirit of grace” 32 “recall those earlier days” “you endured” 34 “you had compassion” “Cheerfully accepted the plundering” 36 “you have done the will of God” 38 “live by faith” “shrinks back” 39 “shrink back” “who have faith”
Why? To motivate – note the balance
what use is made of the Old Testament in 10:19-39, and with what effect?
What contribution is made by this segment to the argument of the epistle?
11:1 – 40
*1. What renderings of 11:1 are found in the English (or other) translations? What does the verse mean? How does the rest of the chapter relate to it?
*2. What verbs in chapter 11 reflect how faith works ?
what characteristics of Old Testament heroes are cited as evidence of faith?
what qualities of spiritual leadership are emphasized?
What is the meaning of 11:39-40?
How does chapter 11 fit into the argument of the epistle?
12:1-29
*1. What connections has the argument of chapter 12 with the close of chapter 0? With the close of chapter 11?
What points are made in 12:1-13 to define and encourage endurance:
What appeal is made in verse 3 and how is it sustained in verse 4? Why is the quotation from Proverbs 3:11-12 appropriate here, and what use is made of it in advancing the argument in 12:5-13? What points are introduced by contrast in 12:9-10? What general principle is added in verse 11? What is the conclusion of the whole in 12:12-13?
3. Interpret 12:14-15. What safeguard is suggested for the readers?
4. Why is Esau introduced in 12:16-17 and what peril is warned against? How does it relate to 12:14-15?
5. In 12:18-24 for what do the two mountains stand and how are they contrasted?
6.What is the nature and appropriateness of the warnings in 12:25-29?
What aspects of God’s character are emphasized in 12:25-29? With what effect?
By holiness is . . . meant . . . the whole concrete righteousness of existence, self-sustained at white heat. For our God is a consuming fire (Forsyth, CoC, 159).
13:1-25
On 13:10, see Phoebe Palmer’s use in Heath WTJ (Fall 2006).
On 13:8 see PT Forsyth, PPMM, 26.
What points are made in 13:1-6? What use is made of the two Old Testament quotations in 13:5-6?
*2. What is meant by “grace” and “food” in verse 9, and by “We have an altar” in verse 10? How is this point developed in 13:11-16?
3.List the other significant items in concluding the chapter. Why are they significant?
*4. What relation has the benediction in 13:20-20 to the argument of the epistle? Explain.
The Whole
Reflect on the literary structure and content of the theological argument of Hebrews.
Reflect on the nature and psychology of the warning passages in Hebrews.
Reflect on the relation between the two above in the author’s presentation. What are the implications for the contemporary witness task of the Christian, whether it is personal , teaching ministry, or pulpit proclamation?
*4. What one thing will you most of all take with you from your study of Hebrews this semester? Charles Wesley, Short Hymns o Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures (Bristol: Farley, 1792), 1.324. http://www.divinity.duke.edu/Wesleyan/texts/cw_published_verse.html. a two volume work with an editorial introduction by Randy Maddox. Henri J. M. Nouwen, The Way of the Heart: Desert: Spirituality and Contemporary Ministry (New York: Random House Inc., 1983), 49. Chorus of the Hymn “Emmaus Road” by Brenton Prigge.(2005) sung in the Classic service May 4, 2014. Rowan Willilams, “Insights from Origen on prayer: In the place of Jesus,” Christian Century (August 6, 2014), 20. DBWE 8:76. The exact phrase could not be found in Augustine, but the terminology alludes to Augustine figures of speech. P. T. Forsyth, Positive Preaching and the Modern Mind (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980 [reprint from1907 edition by A. C. Armstrong and Son]), 10. P. T. Forsyth, The Cruciality of the Cross (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1909. Pagination is Forgotten Books, 2012. W. T Purkiser, Hebrews, James, Peter, Beacon Bible Expositions, volume 11 (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1974), 17. H. Orton Wiley, The Epistle to the Hebrews, ed. Morris A. Weigelt (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, 1984, 1959), 27. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990, rev. ed), 50. A. B. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews the first apology for Christianity: an exegetical study (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark< 1899), 14. Bruce introduces this with “Never loses sight of his readers and their perilous condition, but contrives to mingle argument and exhortation, theoretical and practical matter, so as to be at every point in contact with their hearts and consciences as well as their intellect.” A. B. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews the first apology for Christianity: an exegetical study (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1899), 14. Bruce introduces this with “Never loses sight of his readers and their perilous condition, but contrives to mingle argument and exhortation, theoretical and practical matter, so as to be at every point in contact with their hearts and consciences as well as their intellect.” T. W. Manson, On Paul and John, Studies in Biblical Theology No. 38, ed., Matthew Black (London: SCM Press1963), 160. Sangster, Power in Preaching, 34. Thomas Merton, The Sign of Jonas (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1953), 226.
PAGE 1 5.2.18 DATE \@ "MM/dd/yy"11/15/14 Hebrews Working Document sdfc c&g