David A. deSilva. The Letter to the Hebrews in Social-Scientific Perspective. Cascade Companions. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2012. Pp. xv + 187.
First, I want to thank
James Stock of Wipf and Stock Publishers for a review copy of this book.
David deSilva, Trustees’
Distinguished Professor of New Testament and Greek at Ashland Theological
Seminary, is one of the most prolific writers on the book of Hebrews,
particularly from a social-scientific perspective. His dissertation was published as Despising
Shame: Honor Discourse and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews
(now in its second edition); he wrote a more popular presentation of his thesis
as Bearing Christ’s Reproach: The Challenge of Hebrews in an Honor Culture;
and he has written the Socio-Rhetorical Commentary for Eerdmans. In addition, he has written numerous other
articles, some from a social-scientific perspective, in various journals and
book chapters, so he is well-qualified to write this companion volume on the
social-scientific perspective in Hebrews.
This companion contains
five chapters and an introduction. The
introduction briefly justifies the enterprise of social-scientific
interpretation and introduces the chapters that follow.
In chapter 1 deSilva
examines the social profile of the author.
The author was well-educated and probably had some formal training in
rhetoric and oratory as evidenced by his mastery of rhetorical argumentation,
the employment of topics from deliberative and epideictic oratory, and the
implementation of stylistic devices in his work (pp. 3–9). In terms of cultural location, the author was
a Jewish Christian of diaspora origin.
He was an expert in the Jewish Scriptures, as demonstrated by his
frequent use of quotations from and allusions to the OT, and he was skilled in
Jewish modes of interpretation (pp. 9–10).
The author was also well-acculturated in the Greco-Roman environment as
he shares the same fundamental tenets regarding education and shows some
acquaintance with Greco-Roman philosophy (pp. 10–18).
Regarding his authority,
the author is not a personal witness of Jesus, nor is his authority the same as
the community’s founder(s). He is not a
leader from within the community, but he does support the local leadership. While the author often includes himself as
standing under the same message of Jesus and its obligations, the author often
distinguishes himself as standing over the community, from which stance he is
able to evaluate the behaviors of the community and to issue commands. The author appears to be a part of a circle
of people who have oversight over a wider region that includes many
congregations. His authority derives in
part from his ability to connect his exhortations to the authoritative
traditions of the community, that is, the OT and the teachings of Jesus. The audience accepts the authority of the
author based on the faithfulness of his message to these authoritative
traditions (pp. 23–28).
Chapter 2 explores the
social profile of the audience. While
there is some connection with Italy, it is unclear whether Hebrews was written
from or to Italy. DeSilva chooses to
remain agnostic about the destination of the writing (pp. 28–32). The title “to the Hebrews” is not original to
the work and has undue influence on reconstructing the social situation of the
audience. Arguments for the traditional
view of a Jewish Christian audience include the extensive use of the OT,
interest in the Jewish cult, and the ostensible issue of the audience’s desire
to return to Judaism, but the internal evidence is in fact indecisive for the
traditional view. The author’s
sophisticated Greek and the use of the LXX undermine the traditional view of
the audience. The topics of 6:1–2 and
the mention of Timothy, who was part of the mission to the Gentiles, may point
to a Gentile audience. Most likely, the
audience was a mixed congregation of Jews and Gentiles (pp. 33–36). The audience may not have been from the
lowest strata of society. They were
learned enough to understand the sophisticated Greek of the work and there is
evidence that some of them owned property worth confiscating and some had the
means for charitable work and hospitality.
The audience probably consisted of persons from all strata of society
(pp. 36–37).
DeSilva detects three
phases of the community’s history.
First, the author makes reference to the conversion of the audience or
the formation of the community (p. 37).
Second, the author hints at the process by which “the converts were
socialized into the worldview of the new group and forged into a new community”
(p. 38). The elementary teachings of
6:1–2 suggest a comprehensive socialization process which “heightened the
boundaries between the group and the larger society” (p. 45). The community began to receive opposition
from the larger society of which it was a part.
Their society tried to shame community members to abandon their values
and to return to the values of the society.
The community was subject to ridicule and shame, having their property
confiscated and some were imprisoned (pp. 45–50). Third, it appears that the present situation
of the audience was that many were wavering in their faith. Some were not attending the community
meetings and they were exhibiting spiritual immaturity. The problem does not seem to be a case of
deviant theology or of impending persecution.
The community was receiving significant societal pressure to conform and
because of the loss of property and esteem, many in the community were not
receiving the promised rewards and hence were reconsidering their commitment to
the community. The author’s agenda was
to motivate the audience to persevere in their commitment to the community (pp.
50–56). In a brief excursus deSilva
considers the date of Hebrews and concludes that it more naturally reads in a
pre-70 setting (pp. 56–58).
In the next three
chapters, deSilva considers the socio-rhetorical strategies of the author. Chapter 3 deals with the strategy of negating
the social pressure of shame. Honor and
shame conventions were used by the dominant culture in order to pressure
individuals to conform to the prevailing values of the culture. But they were also used by minority groups in
order to uphold the values of the group.
The author of Hebrews tries to counteract the pressures of the dominant
culture on the community by “holding up as praiseworthy models for imitation
precisely those people who chose a lower status in the world for the sake of
attaining greater and more lasting honor and advantages” (p. 63). The author sets forth Jesus as the foremost
example of faith/faithfulness: Jesus’
move to lower status began with the incarnation but found its ultimate
expression in the humiliation of crucifixion.
Jesus “despised the shame” for the sake of obedience to God and he
looked forward to the reward that awaited him (pp. 66–70). Likewise, the witnesses of faith, such as
Abraham and Moses, embraced a lower status in the world’s eyes for the sake of
heavenly reward (pp. 71–79). The
exemplars of faith were used to reinforce the community’s own example of
faithfulness in the past (p. 83). The
author also adopts the strategy of reinterpreting the community’s experience of
shame at the hands of the dominant society so as to remove the disgrace of those
experiences (p. 85–92).
Chapter 4 covers the
second socio-rhetorical strategy of grace and reciprocity. The author of Hebrews employs the social
institution of reciprocal relationships, whether of patronage or friendship, in
order to reinforce the group’s worldview and to motivate individuals to adhere
to the group in the face of social pressures (p. 95). The patron-client relationships of society
are analogous to the divine-human relationship (p. 96). In general, patrons bestow a variety of
benefits, gifts, and privileges upon the client. The client, in turn, is expected to show
gratitude towards the patron. This
gratitude can take the form of giving honor to the patron through demeanor and
testimony about the patron’s goodness, seeking to be of service to the patron,
or to show loyalty even at one’s own expense (p. 109). DeSilva shows that the language of “grace” (χαρις) falls within the
socio-semantic field of patron-client relationships. “Grace” may refer to the bestowing of
benefits, the actual benefits received, or the proper response of a client to a
benefactor (pp. 101–6). The language of
“faith” or “trust” (πιστις)
is also used in patron-client relationships.
In general, it may refer to “the firmness, reliability, and faithfulness
of both parties in the patron-client relationship or the relationship of
‘friends’” (p. 111). DeSilva gives a
close reading of one passage, 6:1–8, that illustrates the social logic of
reciprocity (pp. 113–25). The
accumulation of participles in verses 4–5 enumerates the “multiple, valuable,
persistent” benefits that God bestows (p. 120).
The “falling away” of verse 6 then indicates that the beneficiary has
slight regard for the gifts God gives and hence brings insult and disgrace upon
God as benefactor (pp. 120–21). DeSilva
then gives a larger overview of reciprocity in the book of Hebrews as a whole
(pp. 126–37). God has granted many
benefits to the believer through his Son Jesus.
In return, believers should show gratitude towards God by bringing honor
to him and to Christ through public testimony, loyalty, and acts of
service. Negatively, the author attempts
to discourage ingratitude to God through the various warning passages sprinkled
throughout the discourse.
Chapter 5 turns to the
final socio-rhetorical strategy: reinforcing group identity and commitment. Since a person lives within a society with
competing values, a person must learn whose opinion to value and whose opinion
to discount with regard to honor and shame; this constitutes a person’s “court
of reputation” or “court of opinion” (p. 139).
Minority groups often try to establish an alternate court of opinion in
contrast to the larger society by appealing to God (or Nature), a higher court
of opinion whose judgments are of greater and more lasting value than the opinions
of the majority culture (p. 140). For
the author of Hebrews, of course, God and Christ are at the center of this
higher court of opinion, but this court of opinion is reinforced by the
community of believers, who give mutual encouragement to one another and
reinforce the loyalty and commitment of each member to the group. (pp.
143–46). The alternate court of opinion
is broadened in Hebrews to include the great cloud of witnesses who have gone
before the community (pp. 146–47).
The author employs a variety
of “commitment mechanisms” to assure loyalty to the community (pp. 149–61): 1)
Sacrifice & Investment: members surrender something in order to belong to
the group; it costs them something and so their membership in the group is
valued accordingly; 2) Renunciation: members give up competing external
relationships and commit to the individualistic exclusive attachments within
the group. For the audience of Hebrews,
it involves separation from non-Christians. The author accomplishes this
mechanism in part through the image of pilgrimage; 3) Communion: members
come into a meaningful relationship with the collective whole so as to
experience oneness with the group. The
author accomplishes this mechanism through the use of kinship and partnership
language; 4) Mortification: members exchange their former identity for one
defined and formulated by the group; members hence “die” to their former
identity; 5) Transcendence: members surrender to the higher meaning contained
in the group and submit to something beyond themselves.
Some of deSilva’s
presentation will of course be familiar to those who are acquainted with his
earlier works. However, some of the
material appears to be fresh. I recall
that deSilva presented some of this material in paper presentations at SBL
meetings. Chapter 5 appeared to be new
material to me. DeSilva writes in a very
readable manner. His judgments are
usually quite sound. His use of
socio-scientific categories to reconstruct the situation of the author and
audience of Hebrews is quite plausible.
He often adduces evidence from biblical and comparative material in a
quite convincing manner. This companion
serves as a good model for how to do socio-scientific interpretation of a NT
text.
It struck me as I was
reading through this work how relevant deSilva’s discussion is for our own contemporary
situation. Certainly, the Christian
community exists within a larger culture which is quite opposed to the values which
they hold. The larger culture frequently
tries to pressure the Christian community to conform to the values of the
larger society. Hence, just as in the
days of the book of Hebrews, so Christians today seek ways to counteract the
social pressures of the larger culture in order to maintain the values they
hold dear and to remain faithful to the God, whom they believe has formed the
community through Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment