Hebrews Carnival January 2010

The month of January started off very slow with regard to posts on Hebrews, but there has been a sudden flurry of activity towards the end of the month. The following is a summary of the posts for the month:

Clifford Kvidahl muses whether Hebrews was in fact written to Gentiles and not to Jews because Hebrews lacks an exile theme.

William Varner reflects on the author's focus on "Jesus" in Hebrews.

Peter Head discusses a textual variant in Hebrews 3:2 and a scribal error/correction in Hebrews 3:7.

Kenneth Schenck has a post summarizing the Situation of Hebrews. Ken deals with the audience, destination, audience, and date of Hebrews.

Ken's post provoked a response by Doug Chaplin on Hebrews and the Temple's Destruction. He wonders whether Hebrews can be dated so soon after the destruction of the Temple since the author is so dispassionate about the temple.

Phillip Long, on the other hand, in discussing the Purpose of Hebrews, places the date in the early 60s before the Neronian persecution. He believes that Hebrews is dealing with the issue of why the recipients are struggling with the shame of suffering in a culture which did not see suffering as a virtue.

Phillip Long also reports that one can download the PDF sample of the Hebrews chapter from Faithful to the End: An Introduction to Hebrews through Revelation by Terry L. Wilder, J. Daryl Charles, and Kendell Easley. Naturally, I am putting the link on my electronic books page.

In another post, Phillip Long answers the question Why Does Hebrews Start with Angels?

Jim West has a review of the Life Application Bible Studies: Hebrews.

Rod Decker argues that the traditional view of τουτ' εστιν in Hebrews 10:20 is correct.

Finally, Alan Knox and Jeff of Scripture Zealot respond to Dave Black's comments on Hebrews 10:24-25.

Review of Cornerstone Biblical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles and Hebrews

Linda Belleville, Jon C. Laansma, and J. Ramsay Michaels. 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Hebrews. Vol. 17. Cornerstone Biblical Commentary. Carol Stream, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2009. Hardback, xiv + 478 pages.

First, I want to thank Christy Wong and Tyndale House Publishers for sending me a copy to review for my blog. Since this blog is primarily focused upon Hebrews, my main interest is in the Hebrews portion of the commentary, but since Tyndale has graciously given me this copy, I feel it is only fair to address the commentary on the Pastoral Epistles as well.

This commentary is volume 17 of a projected 18 volumes on the entire Old and New Testaments. Thus it stands in the tradition of other commentary series such as The Broadman Bible Commentary, The Beacon Bible Commentary, and The Expositor’s Bible Commentary in treating multiple books of the Bible in each volume. One should not expect, then, to get a comprehensive treatment of each book of the Bible. Persons looking for a more exhaustive treatment should turn to the more technical commentaries of other series (e.g., Anchor Bible, Hermeneia, New International Commentary, Word Biblical Commmentary). At the same time, though, the commentary gives a remarkably thorough overview for each passage.

The commentary series is based on Tyndale’s second edition of the New Living Translation, and like its translation seeks to be accessible to the average English reader. The commentary series is geared towards helping “teachers, pastors, students, and laypeople” understand the words and “theological truths” of Scripture (preface). The series is overtly evangelical, drawing from scholars from a wide variety of theological traditions. On a personal note, I notice three of my former professors at Asbury Theological Seminary are authoring commentaries in this series: Lawson Stone on Judges; David L. Thompson on Ezekiel; and M. Robert Mulholland on Revelation. But scholars from other traditions are well represented.

The format for each book of the Bible is the same. The commentary begins with a modest introduction which deals with the typical introductory issues (author, date, genre, audience etc.) and an outline of the book (the Pastoral Epistles are treated together). Of particular note is its attention to the major theological themes of each book. The commentary proper is divided into passages. Each section begins with the New Living Translation of each passage followed by notes and commentary. The notes deal with the Greek (or Hebrew in the case of the Old Testament) text underlying the English translation, or with textual or contextual matters. The Greek (or Hebrew) is transliterated and is cross-referenced with the Strong’s and Goodrick-Kohlenberger numbering systems. Thus a profitable use of the commentary does not require technical skills in the original languages. The commentary is not so much a verse-by-verse treatment, as it is a running exposition.

The commentary on 1 Timothy is authored by Linda Belleville, Professor of New Testament at Bethel College in Mishawaka, Indiana. Jon Laansma, Associate Professor of Ancient Languages and New Testament at Wheaton College wrote the commentary for 2 Timothy and Titus. Laansma, incidentally, published a major monograph largely dealing with Hebrews (“I Will Give You Rest”: The Rest Motif in the New Testament with Special Reference to Mt 11 and Heb 3-4) as well as a number of articles on Hebrews, so I was a little surprised to discover that he is not doing the commentary for Hebrews. Instead, that honor is given to J. Ramsey Michaels, Professor of Religious Studies Emeritus at Missouri State University in Springfield.

In the introduction to the Pastoral Epistles, the authors advocate for Pauline authorship. They are impressed by the external (the Patristic witnesses), as well as the internal support (the autobiographical comments) for Pauline authorship (3-5). They address several objections to Pauline authorship and refute each one in turn (4-9). For example, difference in vocabulary and style from other Pauline letters is attributed to the use of an amanuensis (6). Some of the distinctive ideas of the epistles which are usually deemed to be indicative of a second-century situation (i.e., a more-developed ecclesiology, emphasis on orthodoxy, opposition to false teaching similar to Gnosticism) are regarded as insufficiently advanced to posit such a late date for the epistles. Consequently, the authors place the writing of the epistles sometime in the mid-60s (9). The authors regard the epistles as genuine letters written by Paul to two younger colleagues to address a variety of pastoral issues such as opposition to false teaching and matters of church order.

The introduction addresses a number of major theological themes (God, Christ, Holy Spirit, salvation, righteousness, piety and wholesome teaching, heresy) in the Pastorals. The authors detect a “full-orbed Trinitarian understanding” in these epistles (18). Salvation is something that believers can obtain by God’s grace through faith in Christ Jesus (18-19). Righteousness has both a forensic meaning of declaring one “not guilty” and an ethical connotation of uprightness of character (19). The themes of godliness and wholesome teaching are distinctive emphases in the Pastorals (19-20). The Pastorals also have a particular concern for opposing false teachings which were syncretistic, ascetic, dualistic, and Jewish in character (20-21).

It will be impossible to treat the commentary in full, so I will highlight particular passages to give the reader a flavor of the commentators’ hermeneutical propensities. Regarding 1 Tim 1:10, Belleville states that arsenokoites refers to homosexuality. The word echoes the language of the LXX version of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (33). Homosexuality was abhorred in Judaism, and was generally regarded unfavorably even among Greeks and Romans (34).

Perhaps the most controversial passage in 1 Timothy is the instructions directed towards women in 2:9-15. Belleville points out that verse 9 does not deal with the question of women wearing sexually provocative clothing, but of the ostentatious display of wealth, which tended to draw attention away from the worship of God during public prayer (52-53). Verse 11 does not deal with the silencing of women or the command for them to submit to male authority. Rather, it speaks about the manner in which women were to learn. Paul was in fact allowing women to learn and be instructed, something that was not commonplace at that time (56-57). Verse 12, furthermore, does not prohibit women from teaching men, but addresses the manner in which some women were teaching. The infinitive authentein does not simply mean “to have authority over” but should rather be translated “to domineer” or “to have dominance over” men. Paul was forbidding women from teaching men in an overbearing or domineering way. Verses 13-14 are probably used as a corrective against the cult of Artemis which thrived at Ephesus. This cult believed that Artemis originated first out of her mother’s womb before helping her mother Leto give birth to her twin brother Apollo (61-62). Perhaps prompted by this cult, the women of Ephesus were probably trying to assert dominance over the men, and the men were reacting in an angry and disputatious manner; hence Paul was also trying to correct the behavior of the men in verse 8. The problematic verse 15 does not refer to childbearing in general. Instead, the subject of the sentence is the same as the previous two verses: Eve. The verse, alluding to Gen 3:15, should be rendered “she will be saved through the birth of the Child,” that is, Jesus Christ (62-63). Belleville explains, that “Even though Eve was created from partnership (Gen 2:23-24) and then botched it through nonpartnership (Gen 3:6-7), ultimately she fulfilled her creative purpose through the bearing of the Christ child (Gen 3:15)” (63).

In chapter 3 Paul turns to the subject of leadership in the church. The term episkopos is better rendered as “overseer” rather than “bishop” which connotes a more developed ecclesiology (66). The term diakonos was variously translated as “minister,” “deacon,” or “servant,” thus indicating that the ancient Christians did not make the kinds of distinctions between these roles as we do today (73). Belleville contends that gunaikas in 3:11 refers to “women deacons” and not to wives. The feminine form of “deacon” did not exist in the first century, so Paul had to resort to another term. These women shared the same qualifications as their male counterparts (75). In chapter 5 Paul makes reference to “elders,” presbuteroi, which possibly includes both both “overseers” and “deacons” (104). Belleville notes that the “diverse nomenclature cautions against dogmatism regarding a uniform church polity” (104-105).

Belleville’s commentary is sprinkled with numerous cross-references to other scriptures, particularly other Pauline writings, and she does a good job of situating the book within the historical and cultural context of the first-century world. One weakness, in my estimation (and this may be due to the page constraints of the commentary), is that she rarely explores the different interpretive options for any given passage, so that the inexperienced reader might think that the biblical text is more straightforward than it really is. Other interpreters have interpreted certain passages in different ways, but she rarely interacts with these other interpretations.

When we turn to Jon Laansma’s commentary, the reader may notice some immediate differences. First, Laansma provides more subheadings in his commentary which makes it easier for the reader to locate comments on specific verses. Second, Laansma tends to elaborate more at length in his commentary—each section is considerably longer. His style appears more verbose compared to Belleville’s more compact style (To illustrate: Belleville takes 99 pages to explicate 113 verses in 1 Timothy, while Laansma takes 95 pages to expound upon 83 verses in 2 Timothy and 76 pages for the 46 verses of Titus!). Laansma more often attempts to apply the biblical text to our current, contemporary situation.

On 2 Tim 3:1, Laansma explains that the expression “last days” is taken from the OT and “signals the breaking in of God’s hoped-for salvation in history” (184). This idea would take on a new perspective in Christianity. What is new is that there arose the belief in a two-fold coming of the Messiah. The “age to come” is ushered in at the first coming, but it continues to overlap with “the present age.” This period of history then is characterized by continual conflict between God and Satan. This passage is thus an anticipation of a future time but also a description of the present situation in which Paul and Timothy find themselves (184). The vice list that follows describes the kinds of people they inevitably would encounter.

In the famous passage on scripture (2 Tim 3:16-17), Laansma notes that Paul is referring to the OT here, but he may or may not have had some of the NT writings in mind. Nevertheless, “from the vantage point of broader theological understandings, his statement applies in principle to all canonical Scripture, including for us the New Testament” (197). To say that scripture is inspired or “God-breathed” is not to deny the role of human authors, but it is to affirm that God is responsible for all scripture and “it is therefore as true, reliable, authoritative, permanent, and powerful as is God himself” (198). Scripture is elevated above all other human literature. Laansma finds it highly ironic that modern interpreters have denied Pauline authorship of this letter and thus have largely marginalized and ignored it, and with it goes “this powerful statement on Scripture as a whole!” (198) When Paul tells Timothy to preach the “word of God” (4:2), he is telling him not only to preach the OT, but the good news of the gospel. Preaching the OT meant preaching Christ (202).

In Titus 2:3 women are instructed to “teach others what is good.” Laansma remarks that “the fact that Paul views them as able and qualified to teach places in doubt the assumption that he would have agreed that women are inherently more gullible and easily deceived . . . than men, as has been inferred by some from 1 Timothy 2:14” (263). When Paul commands that women were “to be submissive to their husbands” (2:5), Laansma acknowledges that patriarchy was the norm in the Greco-Roman world and for Christians to flagrantly violate this would have put them in a bad light (265). Paul may have been simply holding in regard the prevailing cultural norms. However, we live in an age in which egalitarianism is held in high regard and there is no reason for Christians to revert to living within a Greco-Roman patriarchal structure (265-266). The expressions found in the household codes may actually “allow us to come closer to the Christian ideal than was possible within Paul’s Roman world” (266).

In the introduction to Hebrews, Michaels notes that Hebrews’ position at the beginning of the Catholic letters have often led to a neglect of the study of this book, but a study of the book can be most rewarding (305). The early manuscript tradition has attributed the authorship of the book to no one other than Paul (305). The ending of Hebrews evokes the image of Paul as the author, and indeed he was widely regarded as the author for many centuries (306). Nevertheless, the writing style is so radically different from other Pauline letters, and its placement after the Pauline corpus raises serious doubts about Pauline authorship (306). The author never identifies himself as Paul does in his other letters, and the book begins more like a homily than a letter (307). It is likely that the author is a man, due to the masculine participle in 11:32, but otherwise we have no clue as to his identity. The reference to Timothy in chapter 13 makes it likely that it was an associate of Paul’s (308). Numerous candidates for authorship have been proposed (Luke, Barnabas, Silas, Apollos, Priscilla and/or Aquila, Titus etc.), but none have been decisively proven (308-309). Michaels says that no one knows enough to rule out Pauline authorship, and in light of the ending, Paul may be the “implied author.” Hence, he believes that the description “Deutero-Pauline” is fitting for the book of Hebrews (310).

Michaels proposes that Timothy himself may be the author of the book. The author expresses his desire to be restored to his audience, but he is currently hindered, suggesting that he may have been in prison at the time when he wrote this sermon (13:19). Paul may have had the responsibility of sending this sermon and he added the ending (13:22-25) only after Timothy had been released from prison. Michaels admits this is a speculative scenario, but he believes that it best explains the evidence of the ending (310-311). While I am not persuaded by this reconstruction, I suppose anything is possible.

Michaels is basically noncommittal about the date of Hebrews. If Paul was indeed the sender, then the date would have to be sometime in the early 60s. The lack of reference to the temple is not decisive for a pre- or post-70s date (311-312). As for genre, Hebrews is a sermon in letter form. It was meant to be communicated orally to a specific congregation. It evinces a strong emphasis on oral communication. Scripture is seen as still speaking today (312-314). As for audience, 13:24 is ambiguous; Hebrews could be written from or to Rome. The situation reflected in the book is consistent with the experience of Jewish Christians in Rome in the time of Claudius or Nero. Other writings of Roman origin (1 Clement and Shepherd of Hermas) show familiarity with Hebrews, thus suggesting a Roman destination. But early subscriptions added to the book indicate a Roman origin. One could imagine that Timothy was imprisoned in Rome and writing to fellow Christians in another destination (315). Familiarity with the OT and the Jewish cultus suggests an audience of Jewish Christians. While we cannot have complete certainty about the occasion of the book, Michaels surmises that the audience may have consisted of Gentile converts to Judaism or proselytes, who later expressed faith in Christ, but now were in danger of lapsing (316-317).

Michaels highlights two major themes in Hebrews. The first two chapters center around the theme of the Son’s superiority to the angels. The remainder of the book is dominated by the theme of Jesus being a merciful and faithful High Priest. The author interweaves exposition and exhortation throughout the book (318-320). Michaels points out some of the theological contributions of Hebrews to NT theology: 1) Jesus as Active Redeemer – Jesus was not a helpless victim, but took the initiative to make an offering of himself for sin (321); 2) Jesus and the End of Priestly Liturgy – Jesus’ work as High Priest has made the Jewish cultus of temple, priesthood, and sacrifice obsolete. Jesus inaugurates a new covenant (321); 3) The Divinity and Humanity of Jesus – Hebrews wrestles with Jesus’ dual nature more than any other book. Jesus’ experience of divinity and humanity qualifies him as the perfect High Priest; 4) The Christian Life as Pilgrimage – The Christian life is described as a journey to a heavenly destination. Our ultimate salvation does not come until the journey is completed (323-325).

Again, we will look at how Michaels deals with particular passages. I will highlight key or controversial passages so that the reader can get an idea of the kinds of exegetical decisions that Michaels makes.

In 1:3 the word apaugasma can be construed actively, “effulgence, radiance” or passively, “reflection, mirror image.” However, both in the notes and in the commentary Michaels only mentions the passive meaning, keeping the uninformed reader in the dark regarding other possible renderings of the passage. Michaels rejects the idea that Hebrews is associating Jesus with Divine Wisdom (329).

At 1:6, Michaels does deal with some of the interpretive options for oikoumene. Michaels does not believe that it refers to Jesus’ first coming into the world, nor does it refer to the future when Jesus is exalted to the right hand of God. Rather, it refers to a future time when Jesus will return at his second coming (333, 336).

Commenting on the quotation of Psalm 8 in chapter 2, Michaels believes that it refers to human beings (and not to Jesus, as some commentators do). The psalm is read as a promise that human beings will have dominion over the created order in “the future world” (2:5). This promise is fulfilled in Jesus, who is humanity’s representative (347-348). Compelled by the wording of 2:9, Michaels takes the phrase, “crowned with glory and honor,” to refer to Jesus’ incarnation and not to his exaltation—a thought, he believes, that is in accord with Psalm 8 (348). In a note, Michaels remarks that brachu ti (2:7, 9) can be construed as “a little” (as of degree) or “for a little while” (as of time). Michaels rejects the latter interpretation in favor of the former, believing that it is more in line with the biblical psalm. Michaels remarks that the “accent is on his full identification with those who are ‘a little lower than the angels,’ not on how long that identification might have lasted” (345). I myself prefer the temporal interpretation, but certainly Michaels interpretation cannot be ruled out.

In Hebrews 3-4 the author urges his readers to strive to enter God’s rest. Michaels explains that this rest “is not an earthly rest or place of refuge but a heavenly rest in the sense of eternal salvation or life with God after death” (360). Heb 4:10 actually refers to Jesus, the forerunner who enters into heaven before us. Entering God’s rest is the equivalent of entering heaven (4:14) or entering into God’s inner sanctuary (6:19-20), or into the most Holy Place (9:12; 10:20) (360). The rest that Hebrews speaks about is not a passive existence, but a Sabbath observance which is characterized as a joyful gathering towards the end of the book in chapter 12 (360-361).

Heb 5:7 speaks about Jesus offering prayers to God with loud cries and tears. This passage seems to refer to a specific occasion, but certainty cannot be ascertained. It may possibly allude to Gethsemane, or even Jesus’ cry of abandonment on the cross. If Jesus’ prayer was deliverance from death, it was not answered in the way he expected it. It likely does not mean that Jesus was delivered from the fear of death. Rather, it seems to indicate that Jesus was delivered from death via the resurrection. Michaels rejects the notion that Hebrews was unaware of Jesus’ resurrection. Resurrection language seems to be present in passages such as 13:20; 2:14-15; and 11:19 (367-368).

Regarding 6:1-2, Michaels comments that none of the six things listed are specifically distinctive of Christianity. He states that “All six are things Judaism and Christianity had in common, not things dividing Jew from Christian. Taken together, they suggest that at least some of the original readers of Hebrews were converts, whether directly from Greco-Roman paganism to Christianity, or first as proselytes to Judaism and then to a new kind of Judaism more receptive to such converts—the movement centered on Jesus as Messiah and Son of God” (373). Turning to the controversial passage of 6:4-6, Michaels states that verses 4-5 refer to those who have experienced Christianity in its fullness. In verse 6 Michaels rejects both the idea that is impossible for believers to fall away and the idea that those who “fall from grace” can return. He explains that “Neither sides’ optimism finds much support in Hebrews. If someone’s ‘enlightenment’ is ‘once for all’ . . . it is ‘impossible’ to go back and experience it again because that would be like asking Jesus to be crucified again . . . Conversion, like death—Jesus’ death or anyone else’s—is by definition ‘once’ (see 9:27). There is no second chance” (374). According to Michaels, salvation is not a “state of being” but a “one-way journey or pilgrimage”; there is no “stopping or turning back.” No one can absolutely say with any certainty whether someone is truly saved or lost; only the end will reveal who will be numbered among the saved (375-376).

In chapter 7 Michaels claims that Hebrews argues from silence to assert that Melchizedek “was no mortal man but an eternal being” (383). Michaels interestingly concludes that Hebrews views Melchizedek as a “ministering spirit or angel,” like the ones mentioned in 1:14; he is not to be identified as the preexistent Christ (384). I found this interpretation to be one of the most provocative claims in the commentary. Melchizedek is modeled after Christ and not vice versa. While Christ did have an earthly genealogy, Hebrews’ point is that “his identity as Son is not dependent on his physical birth or human ancestry (385).

At Heb 8:5 Michaels surmises that the reason why Hebrews chose to speak about the tabernacle, rather than the temple, was because the tabernacle was explicitly stated in Exod 25:40 to be modeled according to a heavenly archetype. He opines that “Quite possibly this one verse of Scripture (Exod 25:40) is the main reason the author of Hebrews fastens his attention on the Tabernacle in the desert rather than on the Temple in Jerusalem. No one ever claimed that God told Solomon, ‘Be sure that you make everything according to the pattern I have shown you,’ when he built the first Temple in Jerusalem” (391).

At 9:16-17 Michaels does not try to resolve the problem about the translation of diatheke, which could mean “covenant” or “testament, will.” Michaels seems to think it refers to a will, but even if the author did not have wills in mind, “he could easily have reached the same conclusion without it—that the ‘first covenant’ was a covenant of blood (9:18)” (406). The inaugural covenant ceremony of Exod 24 utilized blood.

Heb 9:23 includes the puzzling statement that the things in heaven must be purified. Michaels regards this purification of things in heaven as propitiation or the alleviating of God’s wrath: “Here the purification of ‘the real things in heaven’ by the blood of Christ signals the removal of whatever it is on God’s side that separates the sinner from God—specifically God’s wrath against sin” (411). Michaels does not explore other interpretive options for this passage.

Another perplexing passage is Heb 10:20 which appears to equate the veil with Jesus’ flesh. Michaels explains that there is a wordplay on the preposition dia: “The reader is invited to enter the Most Holy Place ‘through’ the curtain as through a door, as Jesus opened the way to the Most Holy Place ‘through’ (that is, ‘by means of’) the sacrificial offering of his flesh (see 10:10) on the cross” (420). He sees a parallel of this passage with Mark 15:37-39 in which the rending of the temple veil follows immediately upon Jesus’ death.

In the warning passage beginning at 10:26, Michaels interprets the deliberate sin as the “rejection of the sacrifice itself” (422). He explains that “Since God provided an offering and that offering is disdained or repudiated, there is nothing more that God can, or will, do. The very finality which guarantees assurance to those who trust in Christ’s sacrifice seals forever the fate of those who reject it” (422). Michaels reiterates what he stated earlier regarding chapter 6: salvation is not assured to the believer until the very end (423).

Esau, in 12:16-17, is an example of unbelief, not apostasy. Rather than exhibiting the signs of a Christian life, Esau was simply an “immoral” and “godless” person in giving away his birthright (12:16). Esau’s repentance failed to obtain his father’s blessing. It was not a second repentance of one who had been enlightened and then fell away, but a first repentance. However, the point of the illustration is not so much Esau’s repentance as it was his choosing the “seen” things over the “unseen” things, the temporary over the eternal. Esau is not an example to be followed (453-454).

Michaels does a better job of exploring different interpretive options and then explaining why he chose the option he does, but at certain key passages, as noted above, he neglects to explore differing interpretations. He also glosses over the fact that many of the quotations in Hebrews differ from the Hebrew OT. To be fair, the page constraints of the commentary probably prevented him from addressing these issues.

In summary, I think the commentary is well-suited for its targeted audience. Pastors, Sunday school teachers, students, laypersons will find the commentary useful for getting a basic introduction to the books of the Bible and a thorough overview of each passage. Scholars will find that the commentary comes up short in adequately dealing with critical issues or exploring interpretive options for various passages. Scholars will also find the bibliographies highly inadequate. The commentary will be more amenable to “conservative” readers than for more “liberal” readers who might reject Pauline authorship for the Pastoral Epistles, for example. On a final note the book is a nicely bound hardcover book. After working my way through most of the commentary, the binding is still very much intact. Although I am one who takes great care in the handling of my books, this has not prevented other books that I use from having bindings that separate from the book. This has not been the case with this book. So, the purchaser can be assured that he or she will be acquiring a quality product for a relatively inexpensive price.

Images of P46 on Hebrews

Images of various papyri, along with transcriptions and other pertinent information are readily available online. The following is a listing of pages for P46 on Hebrews taken from the University of Michigan's Advanced Papyrological Information System:

3570 - Rom 16:23 - Heb 1:7
3561 - Heb 1:7 - 2:3
3564 - Heb 2:3-11
3562 - Heb 2:11 - 3:3
3565 - Heb 3:3-13
3571 - Heb 3:13 - 4:4
3572 - Heb 4:4-14
3573 - Heb 4:14 - 5:7
3574 - Heb 5:8 - 6:4
3575 - Heb 6:4-13
3576 - Heb 6:13 - 7:2
3577 - Heb 7:2-11
3578 - Heb 7:11-20
3579 - Heb 7:20-28
3580 - Heb 7:28 - 8:8
3581 - Heb 9:10-16
3582 - Heb 9:18-26

Kevin Scull has a full listing on his blog.

Images with a full transcription can also be found at the Universitat Munster Institut fur neutestamentliche Textforschung's New Testament Virtual Manuscript Room.
HT: Ulrich Schmid

New Cynthia Westfall Article

Cynthia Long Westfall has a new article in the Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism, "Blessed Be the Ties that Bind: Semantic Domains and Cohesive Chains in Hebrews 1.1-2.4 and 12.5-8."

Review of Gelardini's “Verhärtet eure Herzen nicht”

Carl Mosser has written a very critical review of Gabriella Gelardini's monograph “Verhärtet eure Herzen nicht”: Der Hebräer, eine Synagogenhomilie zu Tischa be-Aw in the Brill Biblical Interpretation Series.

Gelardini identifies Hebrews as a synagogue homily preached on Tisha b'Av (the Ninth of Av), the day commemorating the destruction of the first and second Jerusalem temples. Mosser, however, detects numerous flaws in Gelardini's thesis.

Hebrews Carnival December 2009

Now that I am back from my vacation and have caught up with my mail, food shopping etc., I am able to post the December Carnival on Hebrews. It was a relatively slow month for Hebrews posts:

Matt Evans gives his Translation of Hebrews 1:1-4.

Clifford Kvidahl has begun a series on Moses as Israel's First High Priest.

Greg Carey has some reflections on Richard Bauckham's edited volume, The Epistle the the Hebrews and Christian Theology in Reading Hebrews Theologically.

Charles Savelle furnishes a quote from Ben Witherington's The Indelible Image on the intertwining of Theology and Ethics in Hebrews.

New Books Added

The following books have been added to the Electronic Books page, bringing the total to over 240 titles:

Bensley, Robert Lubbock. The Ḥarḳlean Version of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Chap. XI.28-XIII.25: Now Edited for the First Time with Introduction and Notes on this Version of the Epistle. 1889.

Clergyman, A. What is the Sanctuary and the True Tabernacle, which the Lord Pitched and Not Man, and Whereof Christ Is the Minister? or, An Analysis and Brief Exposition of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, by a clergyman. 1858.

Creyghton, Johannes. De sendbrief des apostels Pauli tot den Hebreen: ontleedet en kortelijk verklaart. 1699.

Fricke, F. R. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 1863.

Gordon, Elizabeth Anna. The Glories of Christ, as set forth in the Epistle to the Hebrews. 1879.

Govett, Robert. Christ Superior to Angels, Moses, and Aaron: A Comment on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 1884.

Grass, Karl Konrad. Ist "der Brief an die Hebräer" an Heidenchristen gerichtet?: aus Gedankengang und Inhalt des Briefes beantwortet. 1892.

Keil, Carl Friedrich. Commentar über den Brief an die Hebräer. 1885.

Klee, Heinrich. Auslegung des Briefes an die Hebräer. 1833.

Knowles, Edward Hadarezer. Note on the Epistle to the Hebrews, with Analysis and Brief Paraphrase. 1861.

Kurtz, Johann Heinrich. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 1869.

Ménégoz, Eugène. La théologie de l'Epître aux Hébreux. 1894.

Moll, Karl Bernhard. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 1861.

Newton, Adelaide Leaper. The Epistle to the Hebrews compared with the Old Testament. 1867.

Parry, Thomas. The Apostleship and Priesthood of Christ: Being a Practical Exposition of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews: In a Series of Lectures with an Appendix, Containing a Tabular Analysis of the Epistle, &c. 1834.

Porter, Samuel Judson. The Epistle to the Hebrews. 1919.

Stein, Karl Wilhelm. Der Brief an die Hebräer theoretisch-practisch erklärt. 1838.

Stier, Rudolf. Der Brief an die Hebräer: In sechs und dreissig Betrachtungen. 1842.

Storr, Gottlob Christian. Pauli Brief an die Hebräer. 1809.

Tena, Ludovicus. Commentaria et disputationes in Epistolam divi Pauli ad Hebraeos. 1661.

Vermaten, Gulielmus. Ontleeding en korte verklaaring van Paulus Brief aan de Hebreen .... 1722.

Weiss. Bernhard. Der Brief an die Hebräer. Volume 13 of Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament. 1897.

Wette, Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de. Kurze Erklärung der Briefe an Titus, Timotheus und die Hebräer. 3d ed. Edited by Wilhelm Moeller. 1867

Update: 3 volumes of Jean Mestrezat's sermons have been added, completing the set and bringing the total number of volumes to 252.

New Neotestamentica Article Added

The following article has been added to the electronic articles page:

Kalengyo, Edison Muhindo. "'Cloud of Witnesses' in Hebrews 12:1 and Ganda Ancestors: An Incarnational Reflection." Neotestamentica 43.1 (2009): 49-68.

Dissertations in Italian

I just came across these dissertations on Hebrews in Italian:

MICHELE CICCARELLI, La sofferenza di Cristo nell'Epistola agli Ebrei: Analisi di una duplice dimensione della sofferenza: soffrire-consoffrire con gli uomini e soffrire-offrire a Dio (Associazione Biblica Italiana, Supplementi alla Rivista Biblica 49; Bologna: Dehoniane, 2008). Pp. 370.

This volume is based on his 2005 doctoral dissertation at the Pontifical Biblical Institute under the direction of Albert Vanhoye. Casimir Bernas reviews this volume in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 71 (2009): 397-398. He summarizes the thesis as follows: the author "expounds themes of the Epistle to the Hebrews dealing with the solidarity of Christ and Christians in their roles of priest and victim: Christ's sufferings are a share in the sufferings of human beings, who in turn are able to offer themselves to God as mediators in the manner of Christ. Their sufferings, like those of Christ (their model and head), have redemptive value" (397).


FILIPPO URSO, "Imparò L'Obbedienza dalle Cose Che Patì " Eb 5,8: Il valore educativo della sofferenza in Gesù e nei cristiani nella Lettera agli Ebrei (Tesi Gregoriana: Serie Teologia 119; Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2005). Pp. 509.

This volume is based on the author's 2004 doctoral dissertation at the Gregorian University also directed by Albert Vanhoye. According to Edward L. Bode in his review in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 68 (2006): 350-352, it "explores the educational value of suffering for Jesus and Christians in the Letter to the Hebrews" (350).

Urso also has this book based on his dissertation: La sofferenza educatrice nella Lettera agli Ebrei.

FULVIO DI GIOVAMBATTISTA, Il Giorno dell'Espiazione nella lettera agli Ebrei (Tesi Gregoriana, Serie Teologia 61; Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2000). Pp. 223.

This work is based on the author's 2000 dissertation at the Pontifical Gregorian University under the direction of R. Neudecker and S. Brodeur. It explores the Day of Atonement as the background to Hebrews. Sean P. Kealy reviews the book in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 63 (2001): 740-741.

FRANCO MANZI, Melchisedek e l'angelologia nell'Epistola agli Ebrei e a Qumran, AnBib 136. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1997. Pp. xviii + 434.

This book is based on the author's 1996 dissertation at the Pontifical Biblical Institute, directed by Albert Vanhoye. Casimir Bernas reviews the book in Journal of Biblical Literature 118 (1999): 368-370. He says that "Manzi investigates possible literary and theological influences of Melchizedek-ideology at at Qumran upon the letter to the Hebrews" (368). It is also reviewed by George J. Brooke in Catholic Biblical Quarterly 60 (1998): 770-771.

New Book on Philonic Hermeneutics and Hebrews

Eisenbrauns has announced the publication of a new book related to Hebrews:

Stefan Nordgaard Svendsen. Allegory Transformed: The Appropriation of Philonic Hermeneutics in the Letter to the Hebrews. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, Reihe 2. Mohr Siebeck, 2009.

Here is the description from the Eisenbrauns site:

"Scholars have long discussed whether the writer of Hebrews might have been influenced by Philo of Alexandria. In spite of any disagreement, though, academics have almost universally concurred that even if bits and pieces of Philo’s thinking should have filtered through to Hebrews, Philo and Hebrews certainly differed with respect to their biblical hermeneutics. Philo, the philosopher, read the Old Testament allegorically, whereas the Christian author of Hebrews committed himself only to typological exegesis. Stefan Nordgaard Svendsen challenges this consensus, arguing that the writer of Hebrews not only employed Philo’s allegorical method, but also developed his own readings of Scripture through critical rereadings of Philo’s exegetical results. This study sheds new light on the intellectual framework of Hebrews as well as on the letter’s purpose and rhetorical strategies."

I have added this book to the "New Books" link under Resources, as well as updated that page.

Proposal for SWCRS Accepted

Soon after I returned from SBL I got the news that my paper proposal for the Southwest Commission on Religious Studies was accepted. Two other papers will be presented in the same session. All of the pertinent information is below:

Saturday Afternoon, March 13 (4:00-5:30)

SBL: New Testament I

Theme: Hebrews

Presiding: James Thompson, Abilene Christian University

4:00 Brian Small, Baylor University

Scripture as Prosopopoeia in Hebrews

4:30 Jason Whitlark, Baylor University

The Eternal City and Its King: Roman Imperial Discourse and Hebrews

5:00 D. Jeffrey Bingham, Dallas Theological Seminary

Irenaeus and Hebrews

Newest Acquisitions

Since returning from the SBL meeting in New Orleans I have been busy with grading papers etc for the two classes I am teaching at Baylor, so I have not had much time to post anything.

While at SBL I made two new acquisitions:

Cynthia Long Westfall, A Discourse Analysis of the Letter to the Hebrews: The Relationship between Form and Meaning.
-At $50 it was the cheapest I had ever seen it, new or used, so I bit the bullet and bought it.

Jason A. Whitlark, Enabling Fidelity to God: Perseverance in Hebrews in Light of the Reciprocity Systems of the Ancient Mediterranean World.

Today, when I arrived home after getting some needed shopping done, I found a nice parcel from Germany with these two volumes:

Wendelini Steinbach, Opera Exegetica Quae Supersunt Omnia: Volumen II: Commentarii in Epistolam ad Hebraeos Pars Prima.

----------, Opera Exegetica Quae Supersunt Omnia: Volumen III: Commentarii in Epistolam ad Hebraeos Pars Altera.
-These two books contain Steinbach's lectures on Hebrews in 1516-1517. The volumes are edited by Helmut Feld. Even though I purchased them "used" the books look to be new; they are in beautiful condition.

November 2009 Hebrews Carnival

Here are the posts on Hebrews for the month of November:

Stuart Mizelle argues that we should retain the traditional title, "The Epistle to the Hebrews."

Peter Leithart believes that Hebrews 5:7-10 gives an alternative account of Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane. Jesus is delivered from death, but only through death. But do these verses really describe the Gethsemane incident?

Peter Lopez has posted his study notes on Hebrews 8 and reports on Week 7 of his Bible study.

Kenneth Schenck resumes his explanatory notes with Hebrews 11:1-7.

Μετοχος του Χριστου believes that "champion" is the best way to render αρχηγος in Hebrews 12:2.

Rod Decker announces a new commentary series, the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary. The list of commentaries is here. For our purposes here, I note that Buist Fanning is slated to write the volume for Hebrews.

Matthew Montonini announces the forthcoming commentary by Peter T. O'Brien in the Pillar Commentary series. Clifford Kvidahl also takes note of it here.

Clifford Kvidahl also reviews Matthew Thiessen's article "Hebrews and the End of the Exodus."

George has a review of the Hebrews, Life Application Bible Studies (NLT).

On a lighter note (or is that darker?), Hebrews 12:1-2 is now appearing on Tim Tebow's eye black.

New Article Added

The following article will be added to my Electronic Articles page:

Cortez, Felix H. "'Seeing that you do not refuse the one who is speaking': Hearing God Preach and Obedience in the Letter to the Hebrews." Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 19 (2008): 98-108.

The article is available in doc or pdf forms.

HT: Charles Savelle

SBL Paper Online

If you are attending the Hebrews session at SBL, Marius Heemstra's paper, "Letter to the Hebrews: Jewish Christians and the fiscus Judaicus" is available at the Hebrews Group site. I don't know if the other papers will be posted before the conference, but it is worth checking before you go. Also, the papers are sometimes posted after the conference is over.

New Article Added

The following article will be added to my electronic articles page:

Joslin, Barry. "'Son of Man' or 'Human Beings'?: Hebrews 2:5-9 and a Response to Craig Blomberg." Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 14.2 (Fall 2009): 41-50.

HT: Charles Savelle

Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, Volume 17

I want to thank Christy Wong and Tyndale House Publishers for sending me a copy of volume 17 of their Cornerstone Biblical Commentary on 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy & Titus, and Hebrews by Linda Belleville, Jon C. Laansma, and J. Ramsey Michaels respectively. I will be reviewing this volume on this blog in the near future.

Hebrews and Hermeneutics

This post is in response to a inquiry by Andrew Bourne. I reposted the last post and so I am not able to publish the comments. Andrew wrote:

"Brian I am sorry to ask a question away from the particular subject. I am a MA in Theology student in the UK. I am preparing to do my 12,000 word dissertation and wish to do on `Hebrews and Hermeneutics`. I am aware of G Hughes monograph and in process of getting hold of it. Preliminary discussion with my possible supervisor is which to emphasise `Hebrews` or `Hermeneutics` which I am exploring. I would be very grateful for any advice with your apparent expertise in this letter. I look forward for your reply, if you feel unable do not worry. Thanks for your Blog site I find it very useful"

This is a rather broad question. What aspect of hermeneutics do you want to focus on? I know of at least two other books on hermeneutics:

Dale F. Leschert. Hermeneutical Foundations of Hebrews: A Study in the Validity of the Epistle's Interpretation of Some Core Citations from the Psalms. Edwin Mellen Press, 1994.

Herbert W. Bateman, IV. Early Jewish Hermeneutics and Hebrews 1:5-13: The Impact of Early Jewish Exegesis on the Interpretation of a Significant New Testament Passage. Peter Lang, 1997.

Perhaps these two books, along with Hughes', may help to focus your own investigation.

Hebrews at the SBL Annual Meeting in New Orleans

Here are the papers on Hebrews to be delivered at the annual meeting of the SBL in New Orleans:

21-307

---

Bible Translation
11/21/2009
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Studio 3 - MR

Chang-Wook Jung, Chongshin University
Translation of Two Conjunctions, One Aorist Participle and One Present Verb, in Hebrews 4:3

The sentence in Hebrews 4:3 presents some interesting features concerning the translation. First, the usage and meaning of the two conjunctions ga,r and kai,toi in this verse, where five conjunctions appear, require an explanation. Some English versions (NIV, NJB) and Korean translations do not interpret the first conjunction as indicating a causal sense. It is also noteworthy that the second conjunction may mean either ‘although’ or ‘and yet’ and the punctuation problem emerges with the meaning ‘and yet’- period (NIV, NIB; cf. Luther’s German Version) or comma (NAB). Second, the translation of the participial phrase oi` pisteu,santej also draws our attention. While most English versions translate the phrase as ‘who have believed’, other versions like NJB and NLT understand it as ‘who have faith’ or ‘who believe’ (cf. Luther’s German Bible). The peculiarity of the Greek verb ‘believe’ needs to be investigated. Finally, the function of the present tense for the verb e;rcomai has to be decided in this verse, since the present tense may point to future as well as present action. This study will demonstrate that the careful look at grammatical features as well as translation theories is even today necessary to translate the Bible appropriately.

21-335

---

Syriac Literature and Interpretations of Sacred Texts
11/21/2009
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Balcony N - MR

Theme: Codicology, Poetics, Performance

Gaby Abou Samra, Lebanese University (Beirut)

Biblical Syriac Texts in a Fifteenth-Century Maronite Manuscript

This paper offers an examination of New Testament texts (Matthew, Acts, Hebrews) contained in a Maronite manuscript, dated to 1468. The paper first presents and comments upon the Syriac texts of the NT materials and their translation into Arabic (Karshuni). It then discusses aspects of the translation from Syriac into Arabic. Linguistic observations will be joined by comparisons of the textual material to the Peshitta text and other Bible translations in the Syriac tradition

22-217

---

Greek Bible
11/22/2009
1:00 PM to 3:00 PM
Room: La Galerie 4 - MR

John W. Taylor, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

From Proof to Text: Mapping Hebrews' Messianic Exploration of the Psalms

Older scholarship stressed the use within the early Christian community, including Hebrews, of a common pool of messianic proof texts, taken largely from the Psalms. But a feature of Hebrews’ use of the Greek Bible is how messianic resources are also found in places not frequented by other New Testament writers, both within recognized messianic Psalms, and in other texts altogether. A growing body of work has shown that the author of Hebrews not only reads scriptures with careful regard to their context, but also finds links to other passages on the basis of a network of thematic and linguistic parallels, often stimulated by the Greek translation which is used. This paper attempts to map the reading strategy of Hebrews, and suggests that the author has moved from proof text to context, and from familiar messianic passages to the unfamiliar, in an exploratory and creative process which is driven by both verbal connections and theological convictions.

22-218a

---

Hebrews
11/22/2009
1:00 PM to 4:00 PM
Room: Napoleon B1 - SH

Theme: Reading the Book of Hebrews in its Jewish Context

Gabriella Gelardini, University of Basel, Presiding

Hananel Mack, Bar-Ilan University
Echoes of the Judeo-Christian Polemic in the Biblical Commentaries of the Sages

The sages did not interpret the Bible in a sequential fashion, in the manner of the medieval rabbinic scholars. Instead, in their halakhic and aggadic literature they primarily left us a non-sequential array of commentaries on the verses of the Bible. Many of these commentaries reflected the reality of their lives, including the religious polemic with the Christian world, particularly in the third and fourth centuries C.E. in Palestine. Sermons against the Jews appear already in the New Testament, and later, in the writings of the Church Fathers, such as Justin Martyr, Origen, Jerome. We will discuss several examples of anti-Christian components in the commentaries of the sages as well as a number of practices relating to prayer and the synagogue service which should be understood against the background of the religious conflict between Jews and Christians in the early centuries. Based on the verse “Write thou these words” (Exod. 34:27), the sages learned that the words of the Bible should be written out, but the words of the Oral Law should not. They thus underscored the distinction between the Bible, which is in written format and familiar to one and all, and the Oral Law, which belongs solely to the Jews. The sages understood the words of Balaam, “God is not a man, that he should lie” (Num. 23:19) as pointing to the clear distinction between God and man: should a man come and say, I am God, that man is lying! They interpreted the verse in the Song of Songs “Look not upon me, that I am swarthy” (1:6) as the words of the Jewish nation to the world, which explain the hatred towards the Jewish people. The verse “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts” (Isa. 6:3) was interpreted by the sages as referring to the holiness of God who is in the heavens, on earth and in the future, thus rejecting the Christian interpretation that the verse is referring to the Trinity. The important place of the verse “Hear, O Israel… the Lord is One” (Deut. 6:4) in Jewish liturgy was apparently intended to emphasize the oneness of God and thus negate the Christian Trinity. In addition, the reading of chapters of the Prophets in the synagogue, Haftara's (Heb.: Haftarot), reflects a distancing from chapters which the Christians regarded as the foundation stones of their faith.

Joshua Garroway, Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion
A New Sort of a Priest for a New Sort of People: Reconfiguring Descent in Hebrews and Romans

This study proposes that Hebrews in its primary socio-historical context was an interpretation of Paul's epistle to the Romans, designed to clarify aspects of that epistle for a readership devoted to its content. As others already have suggested, internal and external evidence bespeak a relationship between the two texts. According to this study, the grist for Hebrews‚ mill is Paul's claim, in Rom 3:21ff., that Christ's death as a hilasterion not only offers atonement apart from the Law for those who believe, but also enables such believers, most of whom are gentiles, to become the genuine descendants of Abraham and consequently to inherit the promises stored up for those of such status. The latter is a theme to which Paul will famously return in Romans 9-11. The link between faith in Christ's sacrifice and reconfigured Abrahamic descent and inheritance is hardly transparent, however. Hebrews, I will argue, clarifies and enhances this link through its identification of Christ as a self-sacrificing High Priest after the order of Melchizedek. On the one hand, this identification underscores the novelty of Christ's sacrifice and its ability to mediate a new covenant and a new (and superior) mode of atonement; on the other hand, it provides the prototype for the reconfiguration of descent experienced by believers, for just as Christ reckons his priestly status through an alternative to the old covenant and the fleshly descent of the Levites, so the people he serves in the new covenant reckons its descent from Abraham, and its pursuant claim to the promises, in non-fleshly terms. Hebrews, then, advances Paul's assertion that the genuine „descendants of Abraham" (Heb 2:16) and the „heirs of the promise" (Heb 6.17) are those who have hope in Christ's unique and unprecedented sacrifice, not those whose descent is reckoned through flesh and the Law.

Carl Mosser, Eastern University
Halakhic Controversy and Hebrews 13

New Testament scholars have found the study of first-century Jewish halakha beneficial for understanding the canonical gospels and the letters of Paul. Hebrews has not received similar treatment. However, the author of Hebrews warns his readers against diverse teachings related to meats or foods that "have not benefited those who walk" (hoi peripatountes) (Heb. 13:9). This phrase suggests that the teachings in view are halakhic in nature (halak = walk). Furthermore, 13:11-13 employs the terminology of “camp” and “outside the camp.” In the Qumran scrolls and early rabbinic literature these same terms are technical halakhic designations utilized in discussions about purity and sacrifice. References in the surrounding context to the Levitical “altar” (13:10), the "sacrifice of praise" (13:15), and "sacrifices pleasing to God" (13:16) strongly suggest that Hebrews 13 is likewise concerned with halakha. This paper shows how first-century halakhic disputes shed light on two important aspects of Hebrews 13:9-16. First, the sacrificial language in the passage appears to reference the activity of the Jerusalem cult and halakhic innovations regarding the shared sacrifices eaten by worshipers. The author addresses his readers’ concerns by redefining the most prominent of the shared sacrifices, the thank offering, commonly identified as the “sacrifice of praise” in Greek Jewish texts. Second, first-century halakhic controversy about the precise scope of “camp” and “outside the camp” helps us to firmly identify the referents of these terms in Hebrews and rules out many of the explanations commentators have offered. The “camp” is Jerusalem; “outside the camp” is outside Jerusalem. These two insights testify to the value of paying closer attention to the Jewish context of Hebrews than has been common in recent decades. If sound, they also have significant implications for the social setting and location of the recipients.

Marius Heemstra, University of Groningen
Epistle to the Hebrews: Jewish Christians and the Fiscus Judaicus

The Epistle to the Hebrews has often been called enigmatic and has caused a lot of debate among scholars. In this paper I will try and answer some of the most important questions that have not been fully answered until now: (1) when was this document written, (2) to whom was it addressed (who were the ‘Hebrews’), (3) how could the information about past and possible future persecutions in Hebrews be interpreted and (4) why had some people recently given up the habit of attending the community meetings? The combination of these answers should also present a consistent explanation for this document in the context of early Christianity. It will be argued that this document was written to Jewish Christians (indeed ‘Hebrews’), some of whom had been persecuted under Domitian as tax-evaders of the Jewish tax. For this purpose accused persons had been exposed in public for the inspection of their genitals to find out whether they were circumcised. Conviction would lead to the confiscation of their property. Both elements, the confiscations and the public examination of genitals (theatrizomenoi!), can be found in Hebrews 10.32-34 and in Suetonius, Domit. 12.1-2, as will be made clear. Furthermore a date will be suggested as well: the year 96, after Nerva’s reform of the Fiscus Judaicus. Nerva probably introduced the notion that the Jewish tax only needed to be paid by Jews who followed their ancestral customs. Jewish Christians (who under Domitian had been prosecuted as Jews for 'dissimulata origine imposita genti tributa non pependissent') were thus formally exempted from the tax and this exemption had one huge consequence: it formally led to the loss of their legal status as Jews under Roman law. This could have led to Jewish Christians returning to the synagogue, which the author of Hebrews wants to prevent.

Discussion (30 min)

23-120

---

Greco-Roman Religions
11/23/2009
9:00 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: Balcony J - MR

Theme: Hybridization and Creolization in the Greek and Roman Worlds

George H. van Kooten, University of Groningen

Competition between Heracles and Christ

Many scholars take a wrong view on the uniqueness of Christianity in the ancient world. According to Mitchell, among others, ‘Faith in Christ the redeeming god, which was at the core of Christian self-definition, was extraordinary by pagan and Jewish standard’ (2007:233). This is, however, not the case and for that reason gives a wrong perception of the success of Christianity in the ancient world. This can be demonstrated by an extensive comparison between Christ and the concept of the immortals, who started off as half-god, half-human and gained immortality (Talbert 1975). Particularly a comparison with Heracles will be drawn whose deeds, according to philosophers such as Seneca and Epictetus, were accomplished ‘pro salute gentium’, for the salvation and well-being of mankind. Already the pagan philosopher Celsus gives insight into the competition between Christ and Heracles when he asks why Christians are not satisfied with Heracles (Celsus apud Origen, Against Celsus 7.53). This competition was very important in the first three centuries CE. The Christian author of Hebrews modelled Christ on the figure of Heracles (Aune 1990), whereas Heracles, in turn, ‘became paganism’s last, desperate choice to head off the appeal of Christianity’ (Galinsky 1972:106; cf. Simon 1955). A sustained analysis of the similarities and competitive dissimilarities between Christ and Heracles will reveal why actually Christianity did appeal to the pagan world, not by way of simple opposition and proclamation, but through a process of hybridization in which mutual encounters and reciprocal negotiations took place. In this paper I shall suggest that the appeal of Christianity had probably to do with the unambiguous morality of Christ, compared with the moral ambiguity of the Heracles figure even in pagan sources.

23-239

---

Society for Pentecostal Studies
11/23/2009
1:00 PM to 3:30 PM
Room: Napoleon D2 - SH

Theme: Prophecy and Eschatology in the New Testament

Scott D. Mackie, Logos Evangelical Church

Eschatological Experience in the Epistle to the Hebrews

Hebrews quite possibly possesses the most developed, realized eschatology in the NT. The author everywhere assumes the community’s familiarity with the supernatural; he even wagers the success of his “word of exhortation” on it. Thus his calls to persevere, warnings against “falling away,” and promises of imminent vindication are all based on appeals to the community’s eschatological experiences (2:1-4; 3:14; 4:1-3; 6:4-6; 10:10-39; 12:22-29). These experiences include: “signs, wonders, and miracles,” heavenly “rest,” “partaking” of the Spirit and Christ, “tasting the powers of the age to come,” enlightenment, and a profound psychological cleansing. Perhaps the most remarkable occurrences of realized eschatology, the author’s exhortations to “draw near” and enter the heavenly sanctuary, have been largely overlooked or misinterpreted (4:14-16; 6:18-20; 10:19-23; 12:22-24). Though typically viewed as a denoting prayer or worship, these calls to enter the heavenly sanctuary are in fact essential to the author’s hortatory effort, and therefore must represent real and substantial access to the heavenly realm. They have as their goal the community’s participation in a divine adoption ceremony, which includes: (1) a dramatic enactment of the Son’s exaltation (chapters 1 & 2); (2) the Son’s conferral of family membership on the community (2:12-13; 10:24-25); (3) and their reciprocal confession of Jesus as the Son of God (4:14-16; 10:19-23). Hebrews is also notable for its emphasis on visuality. Besides numerous ekphrastic descriptions of the heavenly sanctuary and Jesus’ sacral actions, the author exhorts the community to both “see” the exalted Jesus (2:9; 9:24-28) and their involvement in the aforementioned divine adoption ceremony (2:13; 10:24-25). This visual program ultimately serves a hortatory purpose, reversing the recipients’ waning commitment by helping them “see” in Jesus that their steadfastness in suffering will surely issue in exaltation (2:6-10). Like Moses, they will “persevere by seeing him who is invisible” (11:27).

Jeffrey S. Lamp, Oral Roberts University

"He Has Prepared a City for Them" (Hebrews 11:8-16): Escapist Eschatology or Ecological Expedience?

In Heb 11:8-16, the author commends Abraham for his faith, citing the example of Abraham’s setting out from his home country to an unknown land in obedience to the command of God. The author notes that Abraham settled for a time in the land that had been given him in the promise of God, but that he did so as a stranger and alien upon the earth (v. 9). The focus of the author is not on Abraham or his posterity receiving the promised land, but is rather on an eschatological interpretation of the promised homeland that is aimed at exhorting the readers of the letter-sermon to keep their eyes fixed on the eternal reward of perseverance. Thus the example of Abraham is but one of many in ch. 11 that urges the readers to look beyond their present circumstances to the eschatological promise of eternal life. Frequently, however, this passage among others is used to justify an escapist eschatology that minimizes attention on the present order and its afflictions in favor of a rather singular focus on the world to come. If indeed believers are strangers and foreigners upon the earth, living as those just passing through, with eyes fixed on the eternal city God has prepared for them, then believers may be justified to pay little attention to a homeland not their own. This paper will attempt to put the passage into proper perspective by placing its teaching into the larger context of what the NT (Hebrews included) has to say about the place of creation in God’s redemptive scheme. The conclusion will affirm the integrity of Heb 11:8-16 within its own rhetorical context while maintaining the larger biblical picture of the believer’s responsibility to care for creation in light of its eschatological redemption.

23-314

---

Ecological Hermeneutics
11/23/2009
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Studio 3 - MR

Jeffrey S. Lamp, Oral Roberts University
The Promise of God's Rest (Hebews 4:1-11): Joshua, Jesus, Sabbath, and the Care of the Land

Hebrews 4:1-11 continues the rhetorical strategy of the letter by asserting the superiority of the Son to another key figure of the old covenant, Joshua. Specifically, the author asserts that the Israelites of Joshua’s day failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience, so that the promise of rest ostensibly given in terms of the land ultimately lay unfulfilled. The author contends that in the Son, the promise of entering God’s rest remains open to the present day, and that this rest is superior to that available through Joshua because it is connected with the Sabbath rest enjoyed by God since the conclusion of the works of creation. What the author of Hebrews has effectively done is both to spiritualize and eschatologize the promise of Joshua’s rest embodied in the land such that in Jesus the promise of rest is currently realized, to be realized in full in the eschaton. This is in keeping with the author’s anthropological and christological agendas throughout the letter. However, the voice of earth, in this context specifically the land, is heard through one of the scriptural citations proffered by the author in support of his argument (v. 4). The appeal to the establishment of Sabbath at the end of God’s creative work in Gen 2:2-3 allows for the voice of the land to assert for itself a place in the enjoyment of God’s rest, both in the present and in the eschaton. The land will appeal to traditions in the Hebrew Bible that demonstrate God’s concern for the land in terms of Sabbath observance. The resulting reading will be one that tempers the rhetorical concerns of the author, in which a denigration of the actual land is implied, with a call to expand the scope of God’s promised rest to include all creation.

23-334

---

Sacrifice, Cult, and Atonement
11/23/2009
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Rhythms Ballroom 1 - SH

Theme: Topics in the Study of Sacrifice and Atonement

Wolfgang Kraus, University of the Saarland
Why Must the Heavenly Things have better Sacrifices?: Hebrews 9:23 and the Line of Argumentation in Hebrews.

According to Hebr 9:23 the sketches of the heavenly things have to be purified by blood rites at the earthly temple. The heavenly things themselves need better sacrifices. There is no consensus in today's commentaries about the understanding of this verse. The paper tries to show that Hebr 9:23-25 aims at a consecration/inauguration of the heavenly sanctuary. This is proven by analysing the passage itself and putting it into the line of argumentation in the letter to the Hebr as a whole, especially by showing the close relation of Hebr 9:23ff to Hebr 7:26-28 and 10:19-22, i.e. the heavenly ministry of Jesus, the High Priest in the order of Melchisedek

24-106

---

Book of Acts
11/24/2009
9:00 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: Studio 4 - MR

Kenneth L. Schenck, Indiana Wesleyan University
Acts and the Temple: Possible Insights from Hebrews

William Manson suggested over fifty years ago that the author of Hebrews was a Hellenist of the same sort as Stephen had been. We might now more appropriately reverse his suggestion. The author of Acts, writing after the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, portrayed Stephen similarly to a certain segment of Christian Judaism in his own day, a segment typified by the author of Hebrews. Several scholars have recently explored the possibility that Hebrews might be more of a “coping strategy” in the wake of Jerusalem and the temple’s destruction, rather than a polemic against the temple per se. If this interpretation is correct, it might have implications for our understanding of Acts 7, as well as of the author of Acts’ own understanding of the temple in general. This paper makes some suggestions as to what those implications might be. For one, this understanding of Hebrews potentially provides a via media between those, on the one hand, who see no word against the temple in Stephen’s speech (e.g., those in Acts 16:13 are false witnesses) and those who highlight some of its inflammatory language (e.g., cheiropoietos in 7:48). If Stephen is meant to resemble the author of Hebrews, we might take him to recognize the transitory and anticipatory nature of the Jerusalem temple, while not opposing it as a holy place per se, particularly at that point in time. His words ironically echo God’s judgment on the temple leadership and the foolhardiness of those who participated in the Jewish War, while not opposing the sanctuary itself. Meanwhile, we have no clear indication on the author of Acts’ own part from which to argue that he or she saw no role for a rebuilt temple in the future, particularly after the “times of the Gentiles” would be fulfilled.