You Are My Son: The Family of God in the Epistle to the Hebrews 9780567659200, 9780567654182, 9780567665010

The author of Hebrews calls God 'Father' only twice in his sermon. This fact could account for scholarship

191 16 2MB

English Pages [226] Year 2014

Polecaj historie

Divine Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews: The Son as God 9780567700964, 9780567700988, 9780567700971

Nick Brennan investigates the depiction of the Son in his divine nature in the Epistle to the Hebrews; despite little at

364 84 38MB Read more

Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews 9780800660215

b/w version of the original upload

1,141 63 49MB Read more

Son, Sacrifice, and Great Shepherd: Studies on the Epistle to the Hebrews 3161591895, 9783161591891

Over the last few decades scholarly interest in the Epistle to the Hebrews has experienced something of a renaissance. T

308 51 6MB Read more

The Concept of Canon in the Reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews 9780567701343, 9780567701367, 9780567701350

David Young argues that the reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews in early Christianity was influenced by a number of

287 93 24MB Read more

The Paradox of Sonship: Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews 083084886X, 9780830848867

What does the epistle to the Hebrews mean when it calls Jesus "Son"? Is "Son" a title that denotes h

339 14 2MB Read more

Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews 978-0800660215

571 71 189MB Read more

The Paradox of Sonship: Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews 083084886X, 9780830848867

What does the epistle to the Hebrews mean when it calls Jesus "Son"? Is "Son" a title that denotes h

519 101 4MB Read more

Eschatology and Exhortation in the Epistle to the Hebrews [Bilingual ed.] 3161492153, 9783161492150

Scott D. Mackie analyzes the interface of eschatology and exhortation in Hebrews, paying special attention to the manner

331 80 1MB Read more

Solidarity Perfected: Beneficent Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews 3110205548, 9783110205541

This monograph examines the concept of Jesus’ perfection in the Epistle to the Hebrews in relation to the broader theolo

233 96 686KB Read more

Priscilla's Letter: Finding the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews 9781935448440

The name of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews was lost early in its story: Tracking down every clue, and developi

158 44 5MB Read more

You Are My Son: The Family of God in the Epistle to the Hebrews
9780567659200, 9780567654182, 9780567665010

Author / Uploaded
Amy L.B. Peeler

Citation preview

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A monograph may be the product of one individual, but its completion �� Goodacre and the entire staff of the Library of New Testament Studies Series for providing a place to share my work. I am also grateful to Princeton Theological Seminary, and my teachers and colleagues, including Carla Works, Judy Stack Nelson, Kara Lyons Pardue, Brittany Wilson, Matthew Novenson, and especially Laura Sweat, for shaping me as a New Testament scholar. I am deeply thankful for the assistance of my advisor, J. Ross Wagner. From the beginning, he helped me �nd the valuable among my many ideas and then prompted me to articulate them with a clear voice. A special thanks is also due to the mentors who began me on the journey of Biblical Studies in college: C. Mack Roark, Bobby Kelly, Kevin Hall, and Todd Ream, and to my colleagues at Indiana Wesleyan University, David Riggs, Sara Scheunemann, Lisa Toland, Rusty Hawkins, Todd Ream, and Charles Bressler (for his editing skills!) and Wheaton College, for encouragement along the way. Ellen Richard, and especially Mike Kibbe for his painstaking editing, deserve special thanks for their tireless work as my teaching assistants. I have treasured my opportunity to dialogue with other Hebrews scholars along the way, among them Gabriella Gelardini, Eric Mason, Ken Schenck, David Mof�tt, Kevin McCruden and all the members of the Hebrews group at SBL. I hope my work contributes to our vital conversations. Finally, I hope this volume, interested as it is in the family of God, shows my thankfulness to the family and friends who have supported my work along the way, including my parents, Perry and Pam Beverage, inlaws, Claude and Linda Peeler, pastors, Doug Hoglund, Jim Warnock, Claudia Nalven, Mark Tuscan; and best friends, Courtney and Blake Connelly, John and Amanda Drury, Dawn and Kevin Orr, and Emily Norman. I sketched the proposal for this dissertation in the �nal weeks before the birth of my daughter, Kate, defended it a few days before the birth of my son, Maxson, and prepared it for publication while expecting my son,

x

Acknowledgments

Kindred. The decision to focus on familial themes in Hebrews did not arise out of my experience of becoming a mother, but it was certainly enriched by it. Finally, to my husband Lance, this project is as much your labor as mine; for while I wrote, you read, edited, encouraged, prayed, worked, cleaned, gardened, played music, and cared for the kids. You have been, and remain, my greatest gift on earth. To you, and our sweet children, I dedicate this study. May the delights we experience as a family continue forevermore in the household of God.

1

INTRODUCTION I. The Family of God The �rst words of the Epistle to the Hebrews declare: God, after speaking, spoke ( ��, Heb. 1.1). The artfully crafted beginning of the sermon1 ��2 con�rms that this epistle has 1 The genre classi�� questions; see Harold W. Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), p.13; F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (rev. ed.; NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), p.3; B. F. Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (3rd ed.; London: Macmillan, 1928), pp.xxix�xxx; James W. Thompson, Hebrews (Paideia; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), p.3; William Wrede, Das literarische Rätsel des Hebräerbrief (FRLANT, 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1906). Its lack of an epistolary prescript, its inclusion of an epistolary postscript, and its focus upon the importance of speech and hearing all result in a debate about its classi�cation. The text itself says that it is a �� , a word of exhortation (13.22). The epistolary and oral features of the document lead me to af�rm those who argue that it was delivered to this congregation as a letter, but read as a sermon; see Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews (NIGTC; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993), p.62; Luke Timothy Johnson, Hebrews: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), p.10; Craig R. Koester, Hebrews (AB, 36; New York: Doubleday, 2001), p.81; and William L. Lane, Hebrews (2 vols.; WBC, 47; Dallas: Word, 1991), p.1:lxxiv. 2 The ethnic makeup of the audience also remains disputed. A group of commentators assumes the references to Jewish scriptures and cult suggests a Jewish audience (St. John Chrysostom, Hom. Hebr. Argument1 [NPNF 14:363]; Bruce, Hebrews, pp.xxiii�xxx; George Wesley Buchanan, To the Hebrews: Translation, Comment, and Conclusions [AB, 36; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1972], pp.246� 67; Graham Hughes, Hebrews and Hermeneutics: The Epistle to the Hebrews as a New Testament Example of Biblical Interpretation [SNTSMS, 36; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979], pp.26�51; Johnson, Hebrews, p.33; Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews [NTC; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984], p.17; William R. G. Loader, Sohn und Hoherpriester: Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zur Christologie des Hebräerbriefes [WMANT, 53; Neukirchen�Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1981], pp.251�6��The Letter to the Hebrews [PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010], p.13). Others argue that the text could just as easily re�ect a Gentile or mixed audience who has been introduced

2

You Are My Son

much to say about God because God has much to say. God speaks twenty-three citations in Hebrews. 3 In addition to these, the author �� 4 With the pervasive theme of �� 5 the author conveys a theological truth to his to Jewish customs (Herbert Braun, An die Hebräer (HNT, 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984], p.2; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.22; Erich Grässer, An die Hebräer [3 vols.; EKKNT, 17; Zurich: Benziger, 1990�97], p.1:148�9; James Moffatt, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews [ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1924; repr. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963], pp.xvi�xvii; Ceslas Spicq, �� [2 vols.; EBib; Paris: Lecoffre, 1952�53], pp.1:222�23). 3 Heb. 1.5, 6, 7, 8-9, 10-12, 13; 3.9-11; 4.3, 5, 7; 5.5, 7; 6.14; 7.17, 21; 8.5, 8-12; 10.30, 37-38; 11.18; 12.5-6, 26; 13.5. 4 Heb. 1.1, 2; 2.4; 3.16; 4.2, 6, 12-13; 5.4, 10, 12; 6.5, 13, 15, 17; 7.6, 11, 28; 8.6, 13; 9.15; 11.2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 17, 39; 12.19, 20, 25. 5 �� -Gottes-�� gy in �Weist nicht ab den Sprechenden!� Wort Gottes und Paraklese im Hebräerbrief (PadTS, 41; Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 2004). In addition to Lewicki, David Wider also asserts that �� in Theozentrik und Bekenntnis: Untersuchungen zur Theologie des Redens Gottes im Hebräerbrief (BZNW, 87; �� Smillie (�Living and Active: The Word of God in the Book of Hebrews� [Ph.D. diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2000]). As a sampling of the importance of this theme, consider these statements. William L. Van�� of the whole epistle can be summed up under the heading, �In Praise of the God Who Speaks� ��Hebrews: A �Doxology� of the Word�� Mid-America Journal of Theology 16 [2005]: pp.13�2�� has preoccupied [the author of Hebrews] more deeply than any other�has been that of saying how we may conceive the Word of God�as being subject to historical ��Hebrews and Hermeneutics, p.�� most commentators would agree that a major ��f his Word�� (The New Covenant in Hebrews [JSNTSup, 44; Shef�eld: JSOT, 1990], p.12). William Lane, in his two-�� the importance of listening to the voice of God in Scripture and in the act of C��Hebrews, p.1:��mentary, the theme of speech forms its structure: h�� endurance (Heb. 1.1�4.13); discovering certainty and con�dence in the word for the mature (Heb. 4.14�10.31); on not refusing the one who is speaking (Heb. 10.32� �� claim that �God has spoken in these days by a Son� �� Hebrews, p.20). Harold �� opment of this conceit [that �readers and hearers of scripture can listen to God speaking�] resides the most creative theological work of 1

Introduction

3

audience: God is not distant, but involves himself with humanity by speaking to them.6 This af�rmation, however, does not exhaust the theological implica�� The author proclaims something more precise than the fact that God speaks to this audience; he also speci�es �� (Heb. 1.2). In this appeal to familial language, the author evokes God as a Father in light of the relationship with Jesus his Son. The author thus af�rms that God is a relational God who engages Jesus and his human creation through speech, but by asserting that God establishes a familial relationship, the author depicts a particularly intimate and loving God. The familial theme introduced by the phrase �� continues to appear at key junctures in the letter. The �rst time God speaks in Hebrews, he declares his paternal identity in relationship with his Son (Heb. 1.5-6). ��kian priesthood (Heb. 5.5-6), God rearticulates this paternal relationship with Jesus. In ��rst explicit address to the author and his audience,7 God himself declares their status as his �� (Heb. 12.5-6). These examples indicate �� and hence portrays Jesus and then the audience as the family God establishes. In addition to these s�� throughout the sermon gives evidence of the pervasiveness of the familial theme. The author uses the word �� for God at two pivotal points in his argument (Heb. 1.5 and 12.9). Moreover, because the author de��Fatherhood �� the beginning of the sermon, every mention of Jesus as �� hereafter invokes this relationship (1.2, 5, 8; 3.6; 4.14; 5.5, 8; 6.6; 7.3, 28; 10.29). 8 ��God in Hebrews: Urging Children to Heavenly Glory�� in The Forgotten God: Perspectives in Biblical Theology: Essays in Honor of Paul J. Achtemeier on the Occasion of His Seventy-�fth Birthday [A. Andrew Das and Frank J. Matera, eds; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002], pp.197�210 [204]). 6 Lewicki argues that the author is trying to counter a view of God as distant (�Weist nicht ab den Sprechenden!�, p.14). 7 The only time the author includes a dative pronoun to specify that God is speaking to the audience directly occurs in Heb. 12.5. See my argument in Chapter 4 that this proverb is best interpreted as the speech of God. 8 �� Pamela Eisenbaum �� since the author almost always portrays God as the speaker, ��onship to Jesus ��Father and Son: The Christology of Hebrews in Patrilineal Perspective�� in Feminist Companion to the Catholic 1

4

You Are My Son

In addition to the word ��, the author alludes to the Father/Son �� -9; 5.9; 13.21).9 Moreover, their relationship also provides the context in which God perfects Jesus (2.10; 5.5-9; 7.28) as a father teaches and trains his son. Likewise, the author describes the relationship he and his readers have with God in precisely the sam�� (2.10; 12.58),10 �� , 2.13-�� (��, 3.6), and siblings of Jesus (��, 2.11-12, 17; 3.1, 12; 10.19; ��, 12.5-11) as they look forward to their inheritance as sons (1.14; 6.17; 9.15; 11.40; 12.11, 22-24, 28). There has been to date no concentrated treatment of the theological, Christological, and ecclesiological implications of the pervasive familial theme in Hebrews.11 This prevalent and vital theme of the letter deserves Epistles and Hebrews [A.-J. Levine and M. M. Robbins, eds; London: T&T Clark International, 2004], pp.127�4��Son� �� God himself� ��Son� is a reminder that God stands behind the honor of this person�� (Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Epistle �to the Hebrews� [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000], pp.85�6). 9 �� sonship and his role a��p.141). I build upon �� as both the Son of God and also the son of man. 10 ��xclusive use of ��. In Chapter 4, I argue that this language is intentional, meant to re�� the audience. 11 Many interpreters refer to the familial theme in Hebrews. Most prevalent is recognition of the importance of Jesus as Son in Hebrews. Early in the twentieth �� lial status: ��-Bezeichnung umschliesst sich ihm der ganze Reichtum der Person wie ��Der Sohn und die Söhne: Eine exegetische Studie zu Hebräer 2,5-18 [BFChTh Jahrgang, 8, Heft 5+6; Güttersloh (C. Bertelsmann), 1904], p.116). ��he ��Hebrews, p.1:�� question, the major christological category or terminology in Hebrews and the term ��Son��Letters and Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary on Hebrews, James and Jude [Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2007], p.59). James D. G. Dunn notes the importance of ��Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation [2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: 1

Introduction

5

concentrated attention in order to answer this question: What purposes �� the three primary persons of the sermon: God, Jesus, and the humans in Eerdmans, 1989], pp.51�� most fundamental category is that of the Son of God who shares eternally the unique identity of his Father�� (Jesus and the God of Israel: God Cruci�ed and Other ��(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008], p.236). Victor C. P�� High Priest] are vital for the Christology of the letter, the primary title is �Son� �� (Hebrews [ANTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 1997], p.38). Similarly Donald Hagner ��e Son of God as Unique High Priest: The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews�� in Contours of Christology in the New Testament [R. N. Longenecker, ed.; McMaster New Testament Studies; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005], p.248). Ellingworth emphasizes what ��: �� Hebrews, p.66). Pamela Eisenbaum, citing comparisons with the Pauline corpus, argues for the preva�� places much greater emphasis o�� p.135). In addition to recognizing the importance of this title, I call attention to the relational nature of this term, namely, how its use also conveys truths about the Father of the Son. Despite these widespread af�rmations of the familial theme, only one other ��Sonship and Salvation: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews (London: Epworth, 1921). He also af��key is to be found, in my judgment, in �� Hence, as it has become apparent to me, the subject of the Epistle is, above all else, Sonship and Salvation, the latter being explicable only in terms of the fo�� Lidgett, Sonship and Salvation, p.7). This largely forgotten work � among the major commentaries of Hebrews, Lidgett is included in the bibliography of Bruce, Ellingworth, Lane, and Spicq, yet he is never cited in any of these texts � provides a conversation partner who, at times, provides support for my interpretations and, at others, provides ideas to challenge. The major distinction between our projects is the weight given to ��e Fatherhood of God] throughout the Epistle, but [it] is only explicitly stated towards the ��Lidgett, Sonship and Salvation, p.13). Similarly on p.93: �� says nothing expressly about the Fatherhood of God, the whole of the Epistle turns upon Sonship�� This project argues that the author explicitly presents the Fatherhood �� continually throughout the letter. Therefore, I aim to explicate consistently, along with the Christology and soteriology of the letter, its theology as well. 1

6

You Are My Son

relationship with them, the author and his audience. First, by portraying �� character. God exercises his sovereignty and magnanimity as a Father, sharing aspects of his divine identity with his children. God also exercises his soteriological will as a Father, disciplining his children through suffering so that they might become perfect. Second, by portraying Jesus as the Son,12 the author highlights both his sovereignty and his obedience. Because he is the Son of God, he has been elevated over all: the prophets, the angels, Moses, and the priests. As the Son of God who became a son of man, 13 he shows himself to be perfectly obedient to his Father even in the face of death. Consequently, God instates this obedient son as the resurrected and exalted heir of all things, through this process Jesus provides the ultimate example of a son of God. �� audience members their identity and hope as children of God. Because God perfects his Son Jesus through the process of suffering, death, and resurrection, he is able to rescue the audience members from slavery to the fear of death (2.15), cleanse them from sin (1.3; 2.17; 3.13, 17; 5.1; 8.12; 9.26; 10.12, 17), and bestow upon them the status and bene�ts �� so �� the qualities of ��nature.14 �� 12 ��Sohn und Hoherpriester, pp.7�141). Loader analyzes the relevant texts in Hebrews pertaining ��he audience. His primary interest, however, lies in �� and at times seemingly oppositional � Christological statements. On the other hand, my project investigates not what lies behind the assertions of sonship, but rather how those assertions �� 13 �� with his reference to Ps. 8.4 in Heb. 2.6. 14 ��lial status �� about Heb. 2.5ff with the title �The Son and the Sons� he captured with it in an accurate ��Das wandernde Gottesvolk: Eine Untersuchung zum Hebräerbrief [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1959], p.�� through the concluding exhortations, he calls their attention to the Son� Remaining connected to the community gives them �noble birth� as children of God� (Perseverance, pp.58�� is the Son of God. Hebrews explicitly �� in 4.14. The opening lines show that divine sonship was understood to include 1

Introduction

7

ability to endure with the knowledge that they are part of the inheritance God has promised and Jesus has already secured. 15 The example of the relationship between God and Jesus gives them direction and hope; the �� The familial relationship forms one of the foundation stones upon which this author constructs his homily. In addition to highlighting the fact �� h which these realities came to be. God expresses his Fatherhood by calling his �� together with his creative power, divinity, and glory (1.1�5)� The royal connotations of the title �Son of God� imply that believers have a �confession of hope� of inheriting a share in his kingdom (10.32-3��Hebrews, pp.126�7). Patrick �� brother of all the faithful and explores the implications of this idea for those fortu��Brotherly Love and the Christology of Hebrews�� JBL 122.2 [2003], pp.335�51). In his commentary, Attridge �� right hand� (v. 3d), a ��Hebrews, p.40). ��short story of God in Hebrews �� windows on that story opened by Hebrews there emerges a picture of a God passionately involved not only with a single Son but with many children destined ultimately ��p.202). I seek to show how this connection functions on two levels. Jesus is both example of the perfect Son and the one who makes sonship possible for others. In other words, the audience learns from him how to attain their inheritance and learns that they are his inheritance. Jesus serves as both the model and means of their familial relationship with God. 15 ��ial imagery in his monograph, Eschatology and Exhortation in the Epistle to the Hebrews (WUNT, 2/223; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007). Much of this discussion �� NTS 53 (2007), pp.114� 29. For Mackie, the �� which begins with the �� Eschatology and Exhortation, pp.216�17). I also seek to show how the familial reality came to be for the audience, and consequently, why the readers can trust the surety of this status. See also the essay �Brotherly Love and the High Priest Christology of Hebrews�� where Patrick Gray shows the correspondence �� r�� De fraterno amore 478A�4�� which Jesus acts as the guardian of his siblings. 1

8

You Are My Son

Son to suffer so that Jesus can be elevated to his own right hand where, ultimately, he will inherit all things. By virtue of this process, the author and his audience become m�� faith that their present experiences con�rm their ultimate eternal �� theology and Christology of the letter, and, in so doing, constructs the identity of the audience, legitimizes their present experience, and supports them in their endurance. Because God is Father and Jesus is Son, the author argues, the audience can be con�� children and in the promised future that status entails. II. Outline of the Project In order to present just how the author develops his argument about the Fatherhood of God, the sonship of Jesus, and the identity of the community, the structure of this book largely follows that of the sermon itself. The �rst chapter treats Hebrews 1, analyzing the establishment of the Father/Son relationship between God and Jesus in v. 5 and then tracing the implications of that relationship in the �rst sentence (Heb. 1.1-4) and in the catena of scriptural quotations that follow (Heb. 1.5-13). This relationship de�nes God as a Father for the entire sermon and provides �� heir. The second chapter of the book moves to the second chapter of Hebrews to eluci�� Jesus and the establishment of humanity as children of God. God the Father perfects the Son as heir by means of his suffering unto death. In doing so, God establishes the means by which the Son secures his inheritance, an inheritance that includes the audience of Hebrews as children of God. The third chapter unpacks the familial theme in the cultic sections of �� him and through which God his Father perfects him. He is quali�ed to serve as high priest because he has been called, prepared, and exalted by his Father. Serving as a high priest forever, he makes possible the inheritance of salvation for his brothers and sisters and aids them on their journey to attain it. This priestly provision and assistance leads to the possession of his own all-encompassing inheritance.

1

Introduction

9

�� of God, predominately as this is developed in Hebrews 12 and 13. In these chapters, the author begins with the present implications for the ��lial identity. They too must endure discipline, and in doing �� consideration because it utilizes terms associated with the paternal character and actions of God and it calls for the attribution of glory to Christ. In so doing, it acts as a �nal af�rmation of the posses�� inheritance and, as such, it assures the audience that they will attain their plac�� At the �� ). This relationship proclaims the identity of God and the identity of all those who hear his voice. God is the Father who disciplines his children so that they can attain the blessing of being in his presence. Jesus is the �� tance. As that exalted Son, he enables the recipients of Hebrews, as children of the Father and siblings of the Son, likewise to endure suffering and so receive their promised inheritance because they have him as their example and assurance. The �rst words of God in Hebrews, albeit succinct, reverberate throughout the letter and provide dominant themes for the �� theology, Christology, and exhortation.

1

Chapter 1

��Y SON�� THE APPOINTED HEIR OF ALL THINGS

In the �rst chapter of Hebrews Jesus remains unnamed, but his identity is without question: he is the Son of God. 1 Equally important, that means that God is his Father. This chapter traces the construction of this relationship throughout Hebrews 1. Arranged into three sections, the �rst ��-�� proclamation of the relationship in 1.5, and the �nal portion examines ��-13. In this analysis, I argue that the two citations in 1.5 anchor the �� the Father and Son relationship between God and Jesus. The proclamation made by God ��ist in vv. 2-4. Moreover, because the author continues to evoke this relationship throughout the rest of the chapter in his introductions to the citations, it provides the basis for that which is attributed to Christ in vv. 6, 8-13. As the author sketches the contours of this familial relationship, he ��tionship with God distinguishes him from the angels (1.4) and, even ��everything (1.2, 13; 2.8). Interlaced with this Christology, the opening section of the letter also introduces a fatherly portrayal of God. Sovereign in his ability to grant such an inheritance to his Son, God is generously paternal in his willingness to do so. This chapter serves the overarching argument of my thesis in two respects. First, it demonstrates that the author maintains focus upon the familial relationship between God and Jesus throughout the �rst chapter of his sermon. He clearly does so in v. 5, but his utilization of familial language and themes throughout the chapter shows that this is not simply a theme he replicates from a citation, but one that he integrates into the �� appeal to the Father/Son relationship shapes vital elements of the identity 1 Through the use of the word �� or other familial terms (��, ��, ��, ��ughout the letter (Heb. 1.2, 4, 5, 6, 8; 2.11; 3.2, 6; 4.14; 5.5; 6.6; 7.3, 28; 10.29).

1. ��

11

of God and the identity of Christ. 2 In the �rst chapter of Hebrews, the �� exalted status through the paternal/�lial relationship that exists between them. I. The Description o��-4 The opening sentence of the sermon contains an eloquent description of ��3 ��lations in the days of old, and then narrows in on the one through whom �� conception of the God who speaks through this particular medium. In other words, read through the lens of the familial relationship, Heb. 1.1-4 shows the supremacy of the Son and the paternal generosity of the Father. A. God Spoke Through a Son The parallel structure of the opening clauses, �� // �� , which contrast the timing, address�� s��cation highlights that ��who he is. The other medium through which God has spoken � the prophets � 2 ��Cruci�ed God: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Disbury Lectures; Cumbria, UK: Paternoster, 1998) and also the expanded version of the same work, Jesus and the God of Israel, informs my use of ��who �� what God is or what divinity ��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.7). Identity cuts through the division of function ��functions�, if we have to use that �� Jesus and the God of Israel, p.235). With respect to Hebrews, I am using the term to indicate that, in the �� (CD II/1, §28). The relationships in which God is involved and the ways in which God acts in those relationships reveal who God is. There is no indication in Hebrews that the being of �� 3 �� . Harold W. Attridge notes the use of alliteration and particularly the use of �� in ��Hebrews, pp.36�7 nn. 17�18). 1

12

You Are My Son

�� for this to happen, one must perform the actions of a prophet, namely, ��-21; Amos 7.14-15; Jer. 1.1-19). Conversely, the status of sonship requires no �� 4 A basic contrast exists �� the prophets are de�ned by what they do, and the Son is de�ned solely by his relationship to God. By focusing on his �lial identity, the author has signi�ed that this one �� stands in a close relationship to God. This relationship differs signi�cantly from the prophets.5 They held a close connection to God, but to be �� 6 It follows that if the prophets were worthy of honor and r�� Son is that much more worthy of honor and respect. 7 Similarly, if the 4 In the following sections, I argue that the temporal language of vv. 4 and 5 does not indicate that Jesus had to make puri�cation for sins �rst before he became �� More broadly, I refer here to the meaning of the term within the biological familial metaphor, where a son born to a father does nothing in order to become a son. This is true even in Greece and Rome whose cultures included the exposure of infants. Those who were not exposed, but allowed to live and of�cially to join the family, did nothing of their own action to gain this clemency. It was solely the decision of the father (see John Boswell, The Kindness of Strangers: The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe from Late Antiquity to the Renaissance [New York: Pantheon, 1988], esp. pp.57�� scriptures, as it is in the context of the citations that follow, the �� he is born (2 Sam. 7.14; 12.24). David also, to whom Psalm 2 and Psalm 88 ( LXX) �� . 16). Whether by birth or by election, the conferral of the status of son is not conditional upon any action of the one named son. 5 Cf. Alan C. Mitchell, Hebrews (SP, 13; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1989), p.37); Thompson, Hebrews, p.37. 6 ��scriptures, a prophet is one to whom and through whom God speaks (Num. 12.6; Deut. 18.18, 19; Judg. 6.8; 1 Sam. 3.21; 1 Kgs 13.20; 2 Kgs 17.13; 21.10; 2 Chr. 12.5; Ezra 9.11; Amos 3.7; Hab. 1.1; Hag. 1.3; Zech. 1.1; 7.7; Jer. 7.25; 25.4) and one to whom God gives his Spirit (Num. 11.25, 29; 1 Sam. 10.6. 10; 19.23; Joel 2.28). Moses is held up as a prophet who knew the Lord face to face and is unparalleled by any other (Deut. 34.10). Yet, as the author of Hebrews will make clear (Heb. 3.1-6), no prophet � not even Moses � �� 7. With support from citations of Ben Sira, Dio Chrysostom, and Rhetorica ad Herrenium��-�� whether one was born into low or ��Son� carries a message �� (Perseverance, p.85). 1

1. ��

13

�� family of God serves as an even more a trustworthy witness.8 Second, the different persons through whom God speaks also set up a comparison between the images of God revealed in that speech. As one who speaks ��, God acts as the divine Lord who inspires prophetic speech.9 Speaking through the prophets, God de�� as a God who communicates with his people. God continues to be a God who addresses humanity when God speaks through his Son. At the same time, in addition to revealing an action of God � the fact that God communicates with humanity � �� aspect of the character of the God who speaks. To speak �� through a Son � opens the possibility that God is speaking as a Father.10 God is speaking through one who is a Son. This Son God has appointed as heir, and he participated with God in creation. He re�� In other words, his participatio��ection of �� rst citation makes this association explicit, but the narrative of the �rst four verses lays the groundwork. �� reveals his paternal identity to his addressees. Hence, in addition to directing the attention of his hearers to the identity of the one through whom God now speaks and his derivative superiority, the author also provides his audience with a conception of God as a Father. �� In addition to appearing �� onto which all the other descriptions of him in the opening period are attached. If some of the pronouns of the �rst period were replaced with their referent, Heb. 1.2-4 would read as follows: He appointed the Son heir of all things. Through the Son, God made the ages; the Son is the radiance of his glory and the imprint of his being. The Son bears all 8. A similar comparison is evident in the authors of the Synoptics in the parable of the wicked tenants (Mt. 21.33-46; Mk 12.1-12; Lk. 20.9-19). There, the son is the ultimate representative of the owner in comparison with the slaves, who serve as representatives of the prophets (Mt. 23.29-31, 34, 37). 9. God can speak as a Father through the prophets (Isa. 1.4; Jer. 3.19; 38.9, 20 [LXX]; Hos. 11�� paternal character the way the �lial spokesman does. 10 As J. Scott Lidgett states��-revelation being �lial, ��Sonship and Salvation, p.255). 1

14

You Are My Son

things by the word of his power. The Son made puri�cation for sins. The Son sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on High. The Son is much better than the angels to the degree that he has inherited a better name. The narrative that runs through Heb. 1.2-�� 11 as Son, Jesus reigns supreme. As such, it also proclaims that God, the Father of the Son, includes Jesus in his qualities that are his as God. �� lial status.12 As �� 13 As be�ts such a Father, 11 �� the statements about the Son in vv. 1-4 �t together. Although I am not arguing for a strict sequential progression from one element to the next, the elements do convey a story about the Son before, during, and after his priestly act. This use of the term follows that of Richard Hays in his book The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1�4:11 (2nd ed.; BRS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), p.6. Kenneth L. Schenck maintains that although the surface structure of Hebrews is an argument, the sermon evokes a particular narrative (Understanding the Book of Hebrews: The Story Behind the Sermon [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003], p.5 and Cosmology and Eschatology in Hebrews: The Settings of the Sacri�ce [SNTSMS, 143; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007], p.13). Richard Bauckham refers to Heb. 1.2b-��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.237). Moreover, if diegesis or narratio is, as George Kennedy transl�� leading through� ��Aristotle: On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse [New York: Oxford University Press, 1991], p.268), then these verses qualify as a narratio of important elements. Who Jesus is, what he has done, and what he has inherited are key facts for the entire sermon. 12 �� does not, unless (as in Heb 9:16f) the context so speci�es, imply the transmission of property by a testator, but more generally the idea of taking permanent possession (cf. �� in parallel to �� in Ps 2:8), especially of somethi��[T]h�� Hebrews, pp.94�5). It does not follow that taking a permanent possession given by God eliminates the option that God is also portrayed as a Father entrusting his possessions to his Son as an inheritance. Moreover, if �� who do employ �� to discuss the transmission of goods (Isocrates, Ep.1.44; Plato, Leg. 923c; Epicurus, Frag. 217). Contrary to Ellingworth, Werner Foerster �� circles around the concept of inheritance and never moves v�� TDNT 3:768). In this instance in Hebrews, the context does so specify the bestowal of possessions from a Father to a Son. The proximity of inheritance and sonship in both v. 2 and vv. 4-5 as also in Psalm 2 (see discussion below), in my view, empha�� between sonship and inheritance in Gal. 4.7. 13 Attridge draws attention to the use of �� in this phrase that is also found in Ps. 88.28 (LXX), where God appoints the King as his �rstborn, a verse to which the author alludes with his use of �� in v. 6 (Hebrews, p.39 n. 62). 1

1. ��

15

God appoints his Son as heir of all things, thereby giving Jesus an unparalleled authority � nothing is outside of his ownership. In addition, the assertion that Jesus inherits all things suggests either that there are no �� preeminent heir to whom God has elected to give everything that is his.14 �� Son is shared with no other. Depicting Jesus as the heir of all things is one striking �� unequaled by anyone save God.15 With the statement that God appointed Jesus as heir of all things, the �� The giving of this unmatched inheritance is also a way of af�rming 14 The standard in Greek law was that property passed from father to son and was evenly divided among sons (Isaeus, On the Estate of Philoctemon 25 [Forster, LCL]). In Athens, the father was not allowed to leave his property to others if he had legitimate sons (Isaeus, On the Estate of Philoctemon 28, 59��Patria Potestas�� CQ 17 [1967], pp.113�22). Roman law dictated the same except that ��Institutes 2.13.5). Philo gives evidence of this standard of inheritance, namely, that fathers pass their property on to their children (Congr. 23; Mos. 2.243; Spec�� s��-17; Prov. 13.22; Ezek. 46.18), most often his sons, but not always, as depicted in Job 42.15 where Job includes his daughters in his testament (see also the exceptions in the story of the daughters of Zelophehad in Num. 36.1-12 and in Josh. 17.3-6 that prove the rule). Some texts speak of special rights for the �rstborn (Gen. 25.31-34; Deut. 21.17). Normally, if there is more than one child, each child receives some portion of the inheritance (Gen. 21.10; Deut. 21.17; Num. 26.55). In the case of Abraham and Isaac, even though Abraham had other legitimate children through �� children get gifts (Gen. 25.6). Even compared with this instance, the inheritance of Jesus is still more comprehensive. Because he inherits all things, there is nothing left � even gifts � to give to any other child. As the second chapter of Hebrews makes clear, there are other children of God (2.10). Nevertheless, I argue that their �� Cons�� comes with it only through him. 15 DeSilva highlights the honor associated with descent in Greek speeches, �� Hebrews, in presenting Jesus �rst of all as �Son�, is explicitly concerned with estab��Despising Shame: Honor Discourse and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews [SBLDS, 152; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995], �� is of such a high honor that the Jews charge Jesus with making himself equal with God (Jn 5.18). 1

16

You Are My Son

��ything is at his disposal to bequeath as he wishes. Hence, God and Father become mutually interpreting identi�cations. God is a powerful Father who can give all things to his Son because he is God, and God chooses to give all that is his to the Son because he is a Father. A human testator cared a great deal to whom he would pass on his possessions,16 but most often these possessions were only passed on when he could no longer own them himself.17 God, on the other hand, is under no mortal necessity to pass on his dominion. Instead, he has chosen to give all things to his Son without relinquishing his position as sovereign. Conse�� his Son as heir of all things implies that God is sharing his ownership of everything with his Son forever. In addition to giving his Son all things, God chose to include his Son in the act of creating those things as well. �Through whom also�� the author says, �God made the ages� (1.2c). God involved his Son in his activity of creating space and time. 18 With this phrase, the author involves Jesus in one of the activities � creation � that de�nes God (Gen. 1�2; Pss. 101.26-27 [LXX]; 103 [LXX]; Isa. 45.18). Similar to the statement about Jesus as an heir, this element of the story contributes to �� his (divine) act of creating all things. This statement also serves as a temporal benchmark for their relationship by indicating that the Son was there with his Father at least at the time of creation. In the words of Athanasius, �Therefore, the Father is eternal, also the Son is eternal, for by Him the ages have come� (Ad Serap. 2.2.7).

16 �� inherit our possessions, and there is nothing that we arrange with more scrupulous ��Ben. 4.11.5 [Basore, LCL]). 17 The normal point of transference was upon the death of the testator (Isaeus, On the Estate of Philoctemon 34; James C. Walters, ��Paul in the Greco-Roman World [J. Paul Sampley, ed.; New York: Trinity, 2003], pp.42�76; Jane F. Gardner, Family and Familia in Roman Law and Life [Oxford: Clarendon, 1998], pp.212�13; Edward Champlin, Final Judgments: Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 B.C.�A.D. 250 [Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991], p.1). The author of Hebrews asserts this reality in 9.16-17. 18 This is the wide semantic �eld of the term �� (Demosthenes, Epitaph. 2.7; Diodorus Siculus 3.8.5; Philo, Spec. 1.170; Wis. 13.9; Mt. 12.32; 13.32; Rom. 12.2; 1 Cor. 1.20; 7.33). 1

1. ��

17

�� 19 The familial theme serves this imagery well. Just as a son often looks like his father, so too does Jesus show forth the image of God. 20 To see the Son is to get a glimpse of his Father. Here, the author continues to add to the ��ection of God himself. This statement also increases his trustworthiness as a messenger of God. The Son allows the audience to hear what God says, and he is also the medium who allows them to see what God looks like.21 He is the one through whom God has chosen to show forth his glory and his nature.22 The Son of God also upholds all things. This element of the story suggests that, ��heir apparent, Jesus is, in some way, sustaining all things. He does so through ��. The words of Jesus are always words of response to his Father. As the remainder of �� as heir and priest forever in the line of Melchizedek (Heb. 5.5-6; 7.16-17, 21), is brought to its ful�llment by the words of Jesus that embrace �� 12-13; 10.5-8). Therefore, following upon his powerful word of response, he secures eternal forgiveness for humankind �� right hand where everything is subjected to him (1.13; 2.8; 8.1; 10.12). Thus the Son is the sustainer of all things by his word that is a response to the word of his Father. In other words, he is the sustainer of all things by virtue of their conversation.

19 �� is the term for the image engraved on stamps and seals (Euripides, El. 559; Plato, Pol. 289b; Diodorus Siculus 17.66.2) and also takes on the metaphorical meaning of what is characteristic of a person (Herodotus, Hist. 1.116; Plato, Phaedr. 263b; Josephus, Ant. 13.12.1). 20 Writers also use �� to describe the likeness that parents � especially mothers � impress on their children, for example, in 4 Macc. 15.4. DeSilva highlights the connotation of family resemblance as well (Perseverance, p.89). 21 Daniel J. Treier notes the appeal to multiple senses in Heb. 12.18-�� Acts, Hearing Hearts, and Other Senses: The Doctrine of Scripture Practiced in ��The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology [R. Bauckham, D. Driver, and T. Hart, eds; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009], pp.337�52 [346]). Although the appeal to hearing is most prominent, allusions to other senses occur throughout the letter (1.8-9; 6.5; 8.5; 12.2). 22 �� (Letter 38 [Deferrari, LCL]). 1

18

You Are My Son

The masculine pronoun of this phrase is ambiguous; therefore, it is also possible to view this phrase as the word of �� power. In other �� interpretation �ts well in the context of this section for several reasons. First, in this sentence the author has already referred twice to the speech of God. While at this point he could be introducing the importance of �� speech retains the previous focus upon God as speaker. Second, inter�� this phrase with that of the last. Previously, the author asserted that Jesus was the imprint �� v. 3a and v. 3b have the same antecedent. Third, in Hebrews 11, the only other time that ��is used in connection with the things of creation, it �� is a belief held by himself and his audience (11.3). Hebrews 1.3b is an appeal to the same belief. Here also God is involved with his creation through his word, doing so in concert with his Son. Fourth, if this is a reference to the word of �� power, it preserves a progression in the participial phrases that begins with the action of God and ends with the action of Christ. In this fourth phrase, Christ bears all things, but if the ��ful word. Finally, and most bene�cial for the familial interpretation of �� between God and his Son established in the previous phrases. Asserting that Christ bears all things increases his position of honor and authority the author has already �rmly established. Being enabled to do so by �� God his Father.23 With the next phrase of this narrative, �� , the author introduces the work of Christ with regard to sin, a topic that will become the focus of much of the letter. At this point, it is ��Son who makes puri�cation for 23 Bernhard Weiss, who argues for the same referent of the pronouns in 1.3a �� Der Brief an die Hebräer [KEK; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1897], pp.45�6). Attridge dismisses this interpretation (Hebrews, p.45), and this dismissal is appropriate if the alignment of the pronouns in vv. 3 and 4 provides the only support. The other four reasons put forth here increase the persuasiveness of this interpretation. �� -existent Son as a personal being just as he does the Father. This observation adds support for the argument that appears below. 1

1. ��

19

sin. The author associates his honori�c status with an experience that is, as later portions of the sermon reveal, quite shameful (Heb. 12.2). This is �� cation. After he performed the deed of puri�� side. He is not in the position of a servant standing around a throne, but in the position of a sovereign, seated on the right hand of the majesty on high.24 This is the �rst allusion to Ps. 110.1, quoted at the conclusion of the catena (1.13), and invoked again several times throughout the letter.25 By proclaiming that Christ sits here, the author has proclaimed that �� No one could take this seat, unless, of course, the majestic one himself allowed it. God, as might be expected of a father, allows his Son a place of honor right next to him. They are enthroned together as Father and Son. The �nal phrase of this period reiterates the theme of the preceding narrative, namely that the identity of the one through whom God is now spea�� than the angels as he has inherited a more exce�� (1.3d). In this phrase, the author indicates that his high position corresponds directly to the name he has inherited. The author has already estab�� a son means that �� name is passed to the son.26 Because Jesus has inherited the name of his 24 To sit upon a throne is the right of the king (Deut. 17.18; 1 Sam. 2.8; 3 Kgdms 1.13; 2.12; Ps. 121.5 [ LXX]). The same royal imagery is also applied to God (Joel 3.2; Rev. 3.21). The right hand is a position of honor (Gen. 48.14; Ps. 110.1) ��od. 15.6, 12; Deut. 33.12; Ps. 18.35). The author draws a comparison between the seated position of Christ and the standing position of the other priests in Heb. 10.11-12. 25 The author quotes from this psalm in Heb. 1.13; 5.6; 7.17, 21. There are allusions to it in Heb. 1.3; 5.10; 6.20; 7.3, 11, 15; 8.1; 10.12; 12.2. George Wesley Buchanan argues that Hebrews is a midrash on this text (Hebrews, p.xix). While it is certainly important, this argument gives this psalm more weight than is warranted by the vastly varied scripture references throughout the letter. 26 �� s�� phrase becomes part of his name (Gen. 11.31; Exod. 6.25; 33.11; Deut. 32.44; 1 Sam. 20.31; 2 Sam. 21.7, etc). In Aramaic, a son could be known by the same name as his father by the addition of the particle bar (i.e., Bartimaeus in Mk 10.46). ��rst name for use in public life. The use of the patronymic continued into the Roman and ��Names, Personal, ��, 1

20

You Are My Son

Father, he is superior to the same degree that the name of his Father is superior to all other names.27 At this point the author also introduces a ��cally in relation to the angels.28 �� a claim no angel can make (1.6-13). ��Son, God his Father has appointed Jesus heir of all things, implanted in him the re�ection of his own glory and character, involved him in the creation of all things, and empowered the word of OCD 1022�4). In the Roman system the of�� father followed by �lius. Unof�cially, a Roman used three names, the second of ��gens or family group. Most of these ��Names, Personal, ��, OCD 1024�6). 27 See the �nal section of the chapter for my argument for the precise name he inherits. 28 Several scholars of Hebrews have seen in this comparison a possible polemic against some kind of veneration of angels (Bruce, Hebrews, p.9; Darrell D. Hannah, Michael and Christ; Michael Traditions and Angel Christology in Early Christianity [WUNT, 2/109; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999], pp.137�9; Randall C. Gleason, ��NTS 49 (2003), pp.90�107; Moffatt, Hebrews, p.7; Hugh Monte�ore, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews [BNTC; London: Adam & Charles Black, 1964], p.35; Hans Windisch, Der Hebräerbrief [HNT, 14; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1931], pp.14�15). Loren T. Stuckenbruck articulates the position carefully. For him, underlying Hebrews 1�2 �� Zeitgeist in which the �uid ideas about angels and preeminent heavenly �gures, however metaphorically conceived, were perceived as a threat to a belief in a surpassing exaltation of Christ. The author of Hebrews takes �� Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John [WUNT, 2/70; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995], p.139). Others see it as that which lays the groundwork for the comparison between the covenant mediated by angels and that mediated by Christ (Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.104; Kenneth L. Schen��JBL 120 [2001], pp.469�85; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:52). Bauckham argues that the angels ��logical status. To be above the angels is to be God, to be below the angels is to be ��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.241; for a similar argument, see also Johnson, Hebrews, p.84). Ernst Käsemann had much the same opinion in his reaction against �� pointed toward an underlying heresy with angels (Das wandernde Gottesvolk, p.60). David Mof�tt suggests that the stark difference between Jesus and the angels is their nature: Jesus is human while angels are spirit (Atonement and the Logic of the Resurrection [NovTSup, 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011], pp.47�53). In the rest of the letter, there seems to be no concern with angel worship; �� spirituality make good sense for the reason of their appearance in chs. 1 and 2. 1

1. ��

21

the Son so that it sustains all things and grants him access to the seat of �� because God has treated him as a magnanimous Father would treat a Son � he is superior.29 At the same time, the author tells his audience that the glorious and powerful God created all times and places, and reigns majestically over the universe. It is the God supreme who has chosen to speak with his �� come through one whom God determined to be heir of all things, through whom God created, and to whom God imparted his glorious character. Because he is Father, God shares his identity and actions with another. Up to this point familial imagery has provided the lens through which this narrative has been interpreted. Each element has contributed to the knowledge of the excellence of the Son and the generosity of his Father, both of which are expressed in the context of the relationship between them. There is, however, another lens through which this section of the letter has often been read, namely the close correspondence between the �� scriptures and in the Hellenistic Jewish literature of the Second Temple period.30 II. The Son a��and Word: Hebrews 1.1-4 Almost every description attributed to Christ in Heb. 1.1-4 mimics �� same terminology. As Hebrews describes Jesus as the one through whom God made the ages, others portray G�� means through which God created the world. In Proverbs, Wisdom was with God when he created the sky and the earth (8.26-29) and it is Wisdom that �ts these things together (8.30). According to Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom fashioned all things (Wis. 7.21; 8.6c) and served God in his making of humanity (Wis. 9.2). About the Logos, Philo states, ��

29 �� argument that is based on Old Testament quotations and concerns the superiority of Christ to the angels. That superiority depends on t��Son of God�, p.250). 30 See especially L. K. K. Dey, The Intermediary World and Patterns of Perfection in Philo and Hebrews [SBLDS, 25; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975], pp.7�20. For an extensive comparison with Philo, see Sp�� (Hébreux, pp.1:39�91). 1

22

You Are My Son

�� Spec. 1.81, Colson).31 Moreover, as Hebrews describes Jesus as ��Logos re�ects aspects of God. Wisdom of Solomon extols wisdom as the �� led glory of the Almighty� [T]he radiance (��) of eternal light and spotless mirror of the working of God ��-26). Philo refers to the eternal word as the impress (��) of the seal of God (Plant. 18)32 and the image (��) of God himself (Fug. 101). For Philo it is not the Son, but ��the everlasting Word of the eternal God is the very sure and staunch prop of the Whole. [This one, ��], who extending Himself from the midst to its utmost bounds and from its extremities to the midst again, keeps up through all its length �� (Plant. 8-9, Colson and Whitaker, LCL). As the author of Hebrews begins to do in Heb. 1.3, Philo applies high priesthood to the Logos (Somn. 1.215). Finally, as Hebrews concludes that the Son sits next to God on his throne (1.3d), Wisdom is said to have received the same place of honor (Wis. 9.4, 10). These parallels even extend to the language of parentage. Some describe Wisdom as the one whom God begat (e.g., Prov. 8.25). Philo describes the Logos �� begat Him constituted His Word such a Bond of the Universe as nothing ��Plant. 9, Colson and Whitaker) and says that the Logos is ��Agr. 51, Colson and Whitaker).33 Although this literature never unequivocally refers to Wisdom or Word �� 34 Philo does indicate that those who esteem 31 �� Migr. Abr�� word of God, through which it [the universe] was f��Cher. 127, Colson and Whitaker, LCL). 32 �� seal � a device employed in the act of communication � is not equal to being the representation of the essence (��) of God. 33 See also Somn. 1.215 and Conf. 146. 34 By way of comparison, in Sirach, the inheritance of personi�ed Wisdom is limited to Israel and does not include all things (Sir. 24.8, 12). Contra Dey who sees in Plant. 62�64, 69, Fug. 102, and Somn. 1.159 a re�� Intermediary World, p.137). In this section of De Plantatione, the inheritance of the whole world, and even of the Lord of all, is the portion that comes along with Wisdom to the Levites, those who represent the pure mind (Plant. 64). In Fug. 102, Philo is comparing the one who is �� 1

1. ��

23

Wisdom inherit all things, including God himself (Somn. 1.175; Mos. 1.155; Plant. 69).35 The close and pervasive correspondence demands the conclusion that in his portrayal of Christ the author of Hebrews used �� 36 ��nds parallels in statements about the other regional gods and the deities of the philosophical schools.37 Nevertheless, scholars generally agree that when these Jewish authors utilized this imagery, they did not allow it to compromise their commitment to �� of the one God.38 Whitaker, LCL). Again, a certain person is in view as the inerrant one who inherits God himself. Finally, in Somn�� (Colson and Whitaker, LCL) who has the Lord as his inheritance. The Logos is not in view. 35 This includes Moses (Mos. 1.155) and the Levites (Plant. 69). 36 See Attridge, Hebrews, p.40; Bruce, Hebrews, pp.47�8; Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (T. L. Kingsbury, trans.�� Foreign Theological Library, 4/20; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1872�78], pp.48�9; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.99; DeSilva, Perseverance, pp.87�8; Grässer, An die Hebräer, p.1:60; Johnson, Hebrews, pp.69�70; Sidney G. Sowers, The Hermeneutics of Philo and Hebrews: A Comparison of the Interpretation of the Old Testament in Philo Judeaus and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Basel Studies of Theology, 1; Zurich: EVZ, 1965), pp.66�7; Spicq, Hébreux, pp.2:6�7; Ronald Williamson, Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews (Leiden: Brill, 1970), p.493; Witherington, Letters and Homilies, p.102. 37 James D. G. Dunn refers to in�uence from the cult of the Mesopotamian goddess of love, Ishtar-Astarte, the Isis cult, and Stoic and Platonic thought (Christology in the Making, p.169). Dunn mentions particularly Plutarch, Is. Os. 53 and Apuleius, Metamorphoses 11.5. 38 ��it is very unlikely that pre-Christian Judaism ever understood �� really becomes more than a personi�� speaking about God himself, of expressing �� and his people without compromising his trans�� Christology in the Making, pp.176, 230). Kenneth ��sdom and Word] were commonplaces of the Jewish wisdom tradition which were never meant to imply real, personal beings but rather personi�� logos for Philo is a vehicle for sometimes complex personi�cations of God and the creation in relation to one another, rather than an ��His Appointment: Creation and E�� JSNT 66 [1997], pp.91�117 [108 and 110]). Similarly, about Wisdom and Word, 1

24

You Are My Son

�� the same, namely, ascribing divinity to the Son. On this point too there is a general consensus. Commentators extol the �rst chapter of Hebrews as an example of one of the �highest Christologies� in the New Testament.39 This section of the letter asserts the close likeness between the Son and ��-existence; he was with God prior to the moment of creation.40 ��-divine entities occupying some ambiguous status between the one God and the rest of reality. They �� Jesus and the God of Israel, p.17). Yet Bauckham disagrees with Dunn on whether these �� Jesus and the God of Israel, p.17). ��not been demonstrated that Hebrew thought was already contemplating such distinctions ��Christology in the Making, p.174). To the contrary, Bauck�� the unique identity of the one God. If so, they are not abandoning or in any way compromising their Jewish monotheism. The Second Temple Jewish understanding of the divine uniqueness does not de�ne it as unitariness and does not make ��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.17). It is not the task of this investigation to take a position on whether or not these Jewish authors thought of distinctions within God, but to take up the question whether or not this is the direction in which the author of Hebrews is moving. Others argue that Wisdom and Word represent a departure from monotheism in Judaism; �� a Misused Word in Jew��JJS 42 (1991), pp.1�15 and Margaret Barker, �� God (London: SPCK, 1992). 39 �� high Christology. A high Christology is one that �� disclosure found its ultimate expression in Jesus of Nazareth, who was the Son of God incar��Hebrews, �� overwhelm��Jesus and the God of Israel�� to be the �rst of the NT writings to have embraced the speci�c thought of a pre��Christology in the Making, p.55). So also Witherington, �� rms a high or divine Christology among all the New T��Letters and Homilies, p.106). See also Attridge, Hebrews, p.25; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.71; and Hagner, �� tion with the terminolog�� reveals how Hebrews eludes easy categorization of its Christology in terms of �high� and �low��Hebrews, p.50). 40 ��rmed the pre��H�� the heir of all things, is the one through whom God created the world, and upholds 1

1. ��

25

At this point, however, scholarship diverges into two notable trajecto�� inclusion in divinity and his pre-existence, it does not do so in a personal way. Dunn, for example, quali�es his statement that Hebrews is one of the �rst to propose a pre-�� certainly go beyond our evidence to conclude that the author [of Hebrews] �� personal pre-existence��41 ��-existent �� all this it suggests that the element of �� think of as ascribing pre-existence to the Son of God has to be set within the context of his indebtedness to Platonic idealism and interpreted with cross-reference to the way in which Philo treats the Logos��42 Kenneth Schenck reaches a similar conclusion, albeit proffered with great caution.43 �� exists as a function of God, whether it be as his wisdom or in some other way��44 ��tence to the Son �� the universe by his word of power (1:1�3). These three expressions place the Son at ��Hebrews, p.50). Some earlier scholars arrived �� theme of his Christology is given by the author: the Son pre-existed with the F��The Pre-existence of Christ in the New Testament [Nashville: Abingdon, 1968], p.129). Robert G. Hamerton-�� known that the opening verses proclaim the pre-existence of Christ in terms of the Wisdom ��Pre-Existence, Wisdom, and The Son of Man: A Study in the Idea of Pre-existence in the New Testament [SNTSMS, 21; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973], p.243). 41 Dunn, Christology in the Making, pp.55�6. G. B. Caird espouses a similar �� speaks of the eternal Word or Wisdom of God in terms which compel us to regard it ��cation? A Patristic Debate A�� The Glory of Christ in the New Testament: Studies in Christology in Memory of George Bradford Caird [L. D. Hurst and N. T. Wright, eds; Oxford: Clarendon, 1987], pp.281�89 [281]). 42 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.54. 43 �� the verses in Hebrews ��H�� 44 ��H�� hor only considered Christ to be the creator of the world in a �gurative way � �� 1

26

You Are My Son Heb. 1.3 in particular alerts us to the possibility that wisdom and logos ��cally. Immediately following the statement in 1.2 concerning Christ as �� images appropriate to both wisdom and logos. If this is in fact the origin or nature of this language, then the possibility presents itself that these verses have nuances or subtleties that should be taken into account in the �� 45

�� only in one direction, namely in the direction of assigning a personal preexistence to Christ. The reasons he puts forth for his certainty that Christ �� -4 a depiction of the personal pre-existence of Christ is that the author is drawing from Wisdom and Logos language. For both Dunn and Schenck, since Hebrews uses the same terminology, it does so to convey the same �� and purpose in the mind of God��46 But why must shared language result in shared meaning? To say that Hebrews uses language employed elsewhere for Wisdom and Word does not prove that it uses that language in the same way. It needs to be recognized that in the opening sentence the author of Hebrews is not drawing from Wisdom/Word descriptions alone. He brackets his Sophia and Logos-like statements about Christ with an �� things.47 In these phrases it is much more likely that the author is drawing from Psalm 2, from which he quotes in 1.5. In the Psalm, God gives the nations and the ends of the earth as an inheritance to the King (Ps. 2.8). Even if it is assumed along with Dunn and Schenck that Hebrews is borrowing traditions and is using those traditions with the same meanings as those which appear in their sources, Heb. 1.1-4 offer multiple �� pre-existence. Hebrews utilizes Wisdom/Word texts where the referent is a function of God. At the same time, he also uses royal texts, where the referent � the heir � is not an aspect of God but is a person. Parallels to the language of Heb. 1.2-4 are, at most, ambiguous. It is not clear whether the impersonal traditions should trump the personal, or vice-versa. 45 Schenck, ��H�� 46 Schenck, ��H�� 47 Wisdom does inherit Israel in Sir. 24.8, 12. See n. 34 for a counter argument �� 1

1. ��

27

�� authors have other dif�culties with the idea of a personally pre-existent Christ. Because Hebrews does not refer to Christ as the Creator each time the author discusses the creative activity of God (2.10; 3.4; 11.3), Schenck sees further con�rmation that the author does not clearly describe the personal pre-existence of Christ in Hebrews.48 It seems unnecessary, however, to ask the author of Hebrews to mention both Christ and God every time he speaks of creation in order to prove that he believes Christ was personally involved in creation. According to 1.3, Hebrews views creation as an action of God carried out in concert with his Son. 49 The �� action (2.10; 3.4; 11.3) does not negate what the text establishes in the �rst chapter. �� creator is not the main point of the quotation��50 �� point of 1:10-�� all the salient points of a quotation are meant to be extracted from ��51 For him, the citations in 1.7, 10 are about the permanence of �� 52 It is not clear, however, why 1.10-12 must only emphasize one point � permanence � to �� ite only the portion of the text that was relevant and eliminate the portion cited in v. 10?53 48 �� equate Christ with the creative wisdom of God come from Heb 1:3, which is an allusion to Wis 7:26, and Heb 2:10, which actually speaks of God as the creator in �� than Christ (cf. 2:1�� 49 Chrysostom views the phrase �� as applicable to both the Father and the Son, applied to the Son in 1:3 and the Father in 2:10. He concludes that it is not an ��Hom. Hebr. 4.4, Gardiner [NPNF1 14:384]). 50 Schenck, ��H�� 51 Schenck, �� 52 Schenck, �� 53 �� treatment of 1:10-12 (on pp. 475�6) is very unsatisfactory. His comment that �one cannot assume that all the salient points of a quotation are meant to be extracted �� (476) missed the precise character of the kind of Jewish exegesis Hebrews employs and the meticulous composition of this catena in 1

28

You Are My Son

�� lack thereof) of God provides support for his idea that the author of Hebrews thought of the connection between God and the (pre-existent) Son not as a personal relationship �� 54 �� seems to avoid speaking of God as the Father of the Son (only in the quotation from II Sam. 7.14 in Heb. 1.5)��55 For Dunn, this avoidance �� the Son in this section.56 �� is not enough to assert that God is his Father because other authors use the �� status as Son is not enough to indicate that the relationship between him and God is a personal one. If, however, Hebrews is not silent on the �� but instead emphatically portrays God as a Father, such a portrayal suggests that the author is doing something different with the language utilized elsewhere of Sophia and Logos�� paternal identity implies a corresponding �lial identity.57 This familial emphasis opens the possibility that God is involved in a relationship with a person � distinct from himself � whom he has proclaimed to be his Son. �� the personal agent of creation, he chose his text very badly, and modi�ed its opening ��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.240). 54 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.55. Conversely, Angela Rascher notes �� als Vater durch Jesus ist im Hebr allerdings nicht zu �nden, nur der Sohn wird als Sohn von Gott angesprochen. Die Bezeichnung, �Vater� für Gott spielt im Hebr ��Schriftauslegung und Christologie im Hebräerbrief [BZNW, 153; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007], p.46). Even so, she goes on to cite, in a footnote, the three instances that the author of Hebrews designates God as Father. 55 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.54. 56 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.55. 57 Witheringto�� idea or a personi�cation of wisdom; he is talking about a preincarnate person, indeed ��Letters and Homilies�� Gott und Sohn kann im Hebr als die der zwei gleichberechtigten göttlichen Personen �� (Schriftauslegung, p.85). Dunn, incidentally, adopts this inter�� -existent Logos was indeed a divine personal ��Christology in the Making, pp.243�4). 1

1. ��

29

�� re�ection� of his glory and the �representation of his substance� might �learn� obedience and be �perfected��.58 His reading of the correlation between Hebrews ��Wisdom and Word begs this question. I would agree that it certainly seems opaque, if not nonsensical, if the author is asserting that an aspect of God � �� has to learn something. If, however, he one who was with him in eternity past is his Son, then, as the divine and human son, he can both re�ect the nature of his father, yet still be able to learn through obedience. In this reading, the two assertions are no longer logically inconsistent. 59 Hebrews 1.5 cannot be easily dismissed. It constitutes that emphatic portrayal of God and Christ in the relationship of Father and Son, a ��-4. �� use of both the wisdom and royal traditions and con�rms that the lens of a familial relationship is the one best suited to view the narrative of the One through whom God is now speaking. The �rst sentence of this sermon portrays the One through whom God is now speaking in a place of unparalleled honor, trustworthiness, and authority. He has dealt with sins. He is supreme over all things, things that he was involved in creating and is involved in sustaining, because God has appointed him as heir �� e. All of his honor and power stems �� Son. As the Father God, the Sovereign God has given to the one who shows forth his glory and re�ects his character in everything so that he might share his dominion over all things with the one who has inherited his name. The author now yields his sermon to God to pronounce that name and in so doing to pronounce his own name: Father. III. The Relationship Announced: Hebrews 1.5 The pair of citations (Ps. 2.7 and 2 Sam. 7.14/1 Chr. 17.13) 60 appearing in Heb. 1.5 serves to emphasize the Father and the Son in relation to one 58 Schenck, ��H�� 59 This is one of the primary topics of investigation in the second chapter. 60 It is dif�cult to declare de�nitively the source for the second citation because the wording of the citation in Heb. 1.5b appears both in 2 Sam. 7.14 and in 1 Chr. 17.13. In each case, the Lord, through Nathan, makes a promise to establish the �� r forever. In the version in 2 Samuel, the cited sentence is ��

1

30

You Are My Son

another.61 �� these citations, his selection of them, and the arrangement of the citations themselves. A. The Introduction to the Citations (Heb. 1.5a): Spoken By God �� in the opening verses and, for the �rst of many times, allows God to speak for himself. The author frames these citations as a conversation: God spoke to someone (�� ). The readers know who the �� rst speech builds off the comparison in v. 4. The introduction thereby indicates to the readers that the citations will inform them about the person being addressed: that person, the Son, is different from and better than the angels because God has made proclamations to his Son that he never made to angels. The superiority of the Son, however, is not the only effect of these citations. Because the author has set up this speech as a conversation � as his mercy. The version in 1 Chronicles lacks any note about possible unrighteous acts of the king. Ellingworth suggests that 1 Chr. 17.13 �ts the context of Hebrews ��Hebrews, p.114). The bene�� this text as the referent is that the author of Hebrews could think of the entire speech ��-15) as that which could apply to Jesus. On the other hand, if the Chronicler could drop the reference to sin when taking over 1 Samuel, so could the author of Hebrews. Hence, it is dif�cult to make a �rm decision on the source text for this citation. See Gert J. Steyn, A Quest for the Assumed LXX Vorlage of the Explicit Quotations in Hebrews (FRLANT, 235; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), pp.49�52. 61 Those who highlight this relationship inc�� 2 Sam vii speaks of a reciprocal relation be�� (Hebrews�� Hebrews [IBC; Louisville: John Knox, 1997], p.17; and �� LXX texts that highlight the ��Hebrews, p.51). Spicq indicates what this text says about �� af�rmation de la �liation divine du Christ, mais elle souligne surtout la continuité de �� comprendre au moins que Dieu a promis le secours de sa providence paternelle à son Fils devenu homme (cf. Jo. VIII, 29; XVI, 32)��une af�� (Hébreux, pp.2:16�� göttlicher Sohnschaft ��Gott spricht in der ��An die Hebräer, pp.1:72, 73). About the relationship, he notes its eternal endurance: �Für den Heb heisst das: Es geht darum, dass das VaterSohn-Verhältnis irrever��An die Hebräer, pp.1:75, 76). 1

1. ��

31

�� he alerts his readers that through these citations they are also going to learn something about the one speaking. Hence, even if the content said nothing about God, the citations would still disclose something about the character, or ethos, of God simply because God is speaking them. In the ancient world, there was a widespread understanding that speech disclosed character.62 By introducing �� conversation between two persons. As such, the dual emphasis upon both the addressee and the addressor provides evidence of the relationship between God and the one to whom God is speaking. B. Quasi-Prosopopographic Exegesis In order to highlight the way in which the author of Hebrews places emphasis upon both God and the Son in Heb. 1.5, it is helpful to attend to the rhetorical �� serves as evidence for the opening sentence of Hebrews: that God is a God who speaks. By quoting scripture in this way, as that which is spoken by God, the author is doing something that is distinct from his own repetition of a written text. The author does not use scripture to 62 The rhetorical handbooks discuss the ways in which those who wrote and delivered speeches might best construct a trustworthy and appealing character. Aristotle was a very early proponent that a speech itself could convey character. Previous to Aristotle, rhetoricians like Anaximenes of Lampsacus and Isocrates saw �� cient Rhetorical ��Rhetoric, Ethic, and Moral Persuasion: Essays from the 2002 Heidelberg Conference [Thomas H. Olbricht and Anders Eriksson, eds; New York: T&T Clark International, 2005], pp.73�87, esp. pp.76�7; and George Kennedy, A New History of Classical Rhetoric [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994], p.48). About ethos �� this should result from the speech, not from a previous opinion that the speaker is a ��[C]haracter is almost, so to speak, the controlling factor in ��Rhet. 1.2.4 [Kennedy]). Similarly, Cicero, in his De Oratore (ca. 55 BCE��so much is done by good taste and style in speaking, that the �� thought and diction, and the employment besides of a delivery that is unruf�ed and eloquent of good nature, the speakers are made to appear upright, well-bred and ��De or. 2.184 [Sutton]). Finally, Quintilian, a teacher of rhetoric from the �rst century CE, ��Inst. 6.2.13 [Russell]). In the ancient world, rhetoricians recognized the power of the spoken word to convey character and assumed that a speaker could elicit a certain impression of his character based on the words of his oration. 1

32

You Are My Son

support his own speech by loosely reformulating its basic ideas in his own words or appealing to its written statements, but rather introduces God himself to speak.63 As Koester notes, �� was unconventional rhetorically and signi�cant theologically. Some speeches opened with an appeal that God or the gods might help the speaker, but Heb. 1.1-4 identi�es God as the speaker�so that listeners �� ections about God but with ��ptures.�64 �� rst sentence. In Heb. 1.5, the author �nds warrant to make this claim � that God speaks these scriptures � from the citations themselves. In their original contexts these are all words spoken by God. 65 �� speech to him in the Psalm (Ps. 2.7a), and Nathan relays to David the ��efore, like the king or Nathan, �� speech � it is important to note that he does the same thing as the king or �� 66 by not repeating their introductions 63 Eisenbaum highlights the peculiarity of this feature ��]ne of the most striking facts about Hebrews is that the author never uses �as it is written�, an introduction which we �nd frequently in nearly all other ancient exegetes, �� [W]hat makes Hebrews unique in its presentation of biblical citations is an unrelenting consistency in the use of saying verbs (while totally avoiding any reference to scripture being written) and the lack of acknow��The Jewish Heroes of Christian History: Hebrews 11 in Literary Context [SBLDS, 156; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997], pp.97�8). For more a more typical emphasis in the NT on scripture as written see, e.g., Mt. 2.5-6; 4.4-10; 11.10; Mk 1.2; 7.6; 9.12; 12.10; Lk. 3.4; 20.17; 24.27; Jn 2.17; 6.45; 12.14-16; Acts 7.42; 13.33; 15.15-16; Rom. 1.17; 8.36; 9.33; 11.8, 26; 1 Cor. 1.19; 2.9; 2 Cor. 8.15; Gal. 3.13; 4.27; 1 Pet. 1.16; Rev. 1�3. Philo, Conf. 160. 64 Craig Koester, ��n��CBQ 64 (2002), pp.103��tion will stand as ��Jewish Heroes, p.131). 65 Eisenbaum also notes the propensity of the author to quote direct speech. �� such as Moses is the actual spear), the oracular utterings of the prophets, or the ��Jewish Heroes, p.92). 66 Consider a forwarded email in which the text indents and color adjustments � indicating to the recipient that this is indeed a forward � are removed and the text 1

1. ��

33

��, Ps. 2.7; ��, 2 Sam. 7.5). Hebrews silences the human medium in these texts and allows the audience to hear God speaking directly. ��scriptural presentation resembles a feature of rhetoric termed ethopoeia or prosopopoeia,67 an invented �rst-��. With this tool, the orator can relay the words of another person � living or dead, general or speci�c � or the speech of a thing � a country, the sea, a quality, or, as Quintilian notes, the gods from heaven.68 The ancients �� speech.69 Presenting the scriptures as the spoken word of God rather than as written documents contributes to the oral makeup of the sermon and adds to its effectiveness.70 Nevertheless, Hebrews avoids precisely replicating this tool. The way ��prosopopoeia �� with Hebrews. One of the most important aspects of properly utilizing prosopopoeia was the creation of �tting words, convincingly aligning of the forward is presented as an original composition. Thanks are due to J. Ross Wagner for drawing my attention to this helpful parallel. 67 There is some disagreement in terminology among the ancient writers as to what counts as ethopoeia, what counts as prosopopoeia, and where they overlap. ��ne the term Prosopopoeia to cases where we invent both the person and the words; they prefer imaginary conversations between historical characters to be called Dialogues, which some Latin writers have translated sermocinatio [ethopoiia]. I follow the now established usage in calling them both by the same name, for we cannot of course imagine a speech except as the speech of a ��Inst. 9.2.31�32, Russell). Theon also includes the speech of people, both general characters and speci�c historical �gures, under prosopopoeia (Exercises 8). The later progymnasmata distinguish ethopoeia, the speech of people, from eidolopoeia, the speech of dead people, and prosopopoeia, the speech of inanimate things (Hermogenes, Preliminary Exercises 9; Aphthonius the Sophist, Preliminary Exercises 11). 68 Quintilian, Inst. 9.2.31. Dio Chrysostom does just this at the close of the Olympic Oration when he imagines what the words of Zeus might be on such an occasion and proceeds to vocalize them (Or. 85). 69 ��cation makes the passage much more lively ��Eloc. 266 [Innes]). Similarly, �� (Inst. 9.2.29 [Russell]). 70 Johnson, Hebrews, pp.45�6; Eisenbaum, Jewish Heroes, p.109; Hughes, Hebrews and Hermeneutics, p.49; Thompson, Hebrews, p.20; Witherington, Letters and Homilies, p.36. 1

34

You Are My Son

them with the character of the speaker and the nature of the situation. 71 Quintilian, for example, teaches that [the inner thoughts] are credible only if we imagine them saying what it is not absurd for them to have thought!� But great powers of eloquence are needed for this, since things which are false or in their nature unbelievable must either strike the hearer with special force, because they surpass the truth, or else be taken as empty nothings because they are not true. (Inst. 9.2.30, 33 [Russell])

In his progymnasmata, Theon instructs, [w]ords are attributed that are suitable to the speaker� First of all, then, one should have in mind what the personality of the speaker is like, and �� place, the social status of the speaker; also the general subject which the projected speeches are going to discuss. Then one is ready to try to say appropriate words. (Exercises 8 [Kennedy])

��cantly differs from other examples. The author of Hebrews does not have to concern himself with this issue because he does not create ex nihilo any of the speeches of God. In his sermon, God only speaks the words that have already been recorded in Israel��. To put it differently, �� most instances in his letter God speaks them. 72 In Heb. 1.5, the author �� already spoken them in scripture. Accordingly, he can now present them ��nity. The words are trustworthy �� like the author and the recipients � who accept the authority of the script�� self-revelation.73 71 See similarly Theon, Exercises 8; Hermogenes, Preliminary Exercises 9. As a negative example, Dionysiu��tting for the Athenians and Melians (Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Thuc. 39�41). 72 See n. 3 in the Introduction for examples of citations placed in the mouth of God. Compare this with the less frequent speeches of other persona. David, for example, is only noted as the voice behind a quoted psalm in Heb. 4.7. Jesus speaks the scripture in 2.12, 13; 10.5-8. The Holy Spirit is the speaker in 3.7-11, 15; 4.4; 10.15-17. Moses speaks in 9.20 and 12.21. The author attributes the quote in 2.6 to a nondescript ��, and the audience gives voice to the citation in 13.6. 73 At several points the author introduces scripture as that which both he and his readers know (10.30; 12.17). Luke Timothy Johnson argues that the author of ��ive and thorough reader of the LXX, whose liberal use of citation and allusion suggest a con�dence that the composi�� 1

1. ��

35

�� second important way. Namely, the author of Hebrews does not engage in the suppositional nature of prosopopoeia, conveyed by the question, �� 74 With this tool, Cicero, in a way, brings Appius Claudius Caecus back to life to testify in front of the audience (Cael. 33-��s voice, Cicero makes his presence almost palpable, thereby making his presentation more vivid than if he had conveyed the speech in his own words. Yet, there is little reason to believe that either Cicero or anyone in his audience was confused by the dramatic moment. No one believed that Caecus had come back to life and possessed Cicero and was, in actuality, speaking to the audience. When the orator reads the citations in Hebrews, however, he does not suggest things that God might say to his audience were God present and able to speak. Instead, the sermon acts as the vehicle through which God does speak (1.2, 5-13; 3.7-11, 15; 4.7; 8.8-12; 10.15-17, 30, 37-38; 12.56, 26; 13.5).75 The author declares that God has spoken to this audience, �� (Hebrews��tions of the time, we can safely assume that, for the author of Hebrews, [the citations] are all ��Jewish Heroes�� settled body of literature at this time; but by quoting from the Law (e.g., 8.20/Exod. 24.8), prophets (e.g., 8.8-12/Jer. 31.31-34), historical books (1.5/2 Sam. 7.14, and writings (e.g., the various psalms in 1.5-13; and 12.5-6/Prov. 3.11), the author of Hebrews is appealing to what a wide range of �rst-century Jews would consider authoritative and what would later become canon. For a discussion of the complexity of the issue of what was authoritative and to whom, see George W. E. Nickelsburg, Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity, Continuity, and Transformation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), pp.9�21. 74 ��s example of prosopopoeia�� Eloc. 265 [Innes]). The same hypothetical situation is described by the Rhetorica ad Herennium�� if this invincible city should now give utterance to her voice, would she not speak as �� here before you, would he not use this language?�� Cicero, Inv. 1.99�100 (Hubbell, LCL]), Dio Chrysostom, Or. 55; 85 (Cohoon, LCL). Aphthonius titles his exercise in ethopoeia�� Words Niobe Might Say When Her Children Lie De��Preliminary Exercises 11 [Kennedy]). 75 According to �� p.�� on is fanciful or selfaggran�� 1

36

You Are My Son

and then proceeds � through the vehicle of the numerous citations in the sermon � �� Because he is not creating a dramatic moment, but rather functioning as the vehicle through which God is speaking, his technique does something quantitatively and qualitatively different from other orators who use prosopopoeia.76 The author of Hebrews cites scripture as that which God speaks. In so doing, he mimics prosopopoeia by presenting a portion of scripture in �� eve the same striking dramatic effect as would any other orator. Moreover, because he selects from the vast scriptures of Israel words for God to speak, his citations, like prosopopoeia, construct a particular perception of God for his audience, a particular ethos of God. However, because he does not construct these words and because he �� to hear, it might be �tting to describe his method of citation as quasiprosopographical exegesis.77 He achieves a similar effect, but employs different suppositions. The point for the present argument is that Hebrews presents these scriptures in such a way that God is evoked as a speaker before the auditors. By using rhetorically informed exegesis to convey what God has said, the author directs the attention of the audience to the two participants of this conversation: the addressee of these words and the One

speaking is often expressed in the scriptures themselves (Gen. 21.12; Exod. 25.1; Deut. 32.20; Josh. 1.1; 2 Sam. 7.4/1 Chr. 17.3; Pss. 2.7; 94.7 LXX; 109.1 LXX; Jer. 38.31 LXX; Hag. 1.1). 76 Paul does something similar in Romans 9�11 and 15 when he presents the speech of God and Jesus in the �rst person. Paul, like the author of Hebrews, introduces these texts as the speech of God (Rom. 9.9, 15, 25; 10.21; 11.4), but more often introduces them as written documents (Rom. 9.13, 17, 33; 11.26; 15.9) or names the human medium (Rom. 9.25; 10.19, 20). This comparison serves to �� use of �rst person speech for God, see Hans Hübner, Gottes Ich und Israel: Zum Schriftgebrauch des Paulus in Römer 9�11 (FRLANT, 136; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984). Similarly Mark begins his Gospel with the speech of God, but does so by introducing it as that which is written by Isaiah the prophet (Mk 1.1� 3). These comparisons show how the author of Hebrews is distinguished by his emp�� 77 �� , Christian, and Jewish exegetes account for dif�cult texts spoken by esteemed �gures (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature; New Orleans, November 22, 2009). 1

1. ��

37

who speaks them. By so doing, the author appeals to the authority of God and displays his character. As the following section will explore, the character God displays is that of a Father. C. The Selection of These Citations The author further highlights the relationship between God and Jesus, speci�cally the familial relationship between them, in his selection of two texts, Ps. 2.778 ��vis-à-vis the one he declares as his Son. In their original contexts God speaks the words of the citations to the King of Israel. By applying these texts to Jesus, the author is asserting that Jesus is the true King of Israel, the only �� 79 Hebrews is not alone in �nding in these verses a reference to someone �� scriptures also appealed to these citations to express their hope in a future descendant of David. The prophets looked forward to the coming ��.1-5; Jer. 23.5-8; Ezek. 34.23-24; 37.24-25; Mic. 5.2-5). Similarly, the Psalms of Solomon �� descendent (Pss. Sol. 17.4) and call on God to raise up the son of David to rule over Israel (17.21). Qumran scroll 4QFlor quotes the second �� will deliver Israel (4QFlor III, 11). Moreover, Hebrews is not alone in the New Testament in �nding in these texts a reference speci�cally to Jesus. For example, Luke quotes the �rst citation, Ps. 2.7, in Acts 13.33, and two of the Gospel writers allude to it in the baptismal narratives (Mt. 3.17; Lk. 3.22). 80 Finally, 2 Sam. 7.14 is cited in 2 Cor. 6.18 and Rev. 21.7. 81 78 This citation might have also been attractive to the author because of other resonances it provides with the rest of the letter. As many commentators note, the next verse says that God will give the king the nations as an inheritance (�� 4. Note also the mention of Zion (v. 6; Heb. 12.22), the staff of the king (��, v. 9; Heb. 1.8), the instruction (��) of the Lord (v. 12; Heb. 12.5-11), and the proclamation of blessing to those who trust in the Lord (v. 12; Heb. 11.6). 79 Pss. 2.7; 88.28 LXX; 109.3 LXX; 2 Sam. 7.14; 1 Chr. 17.13; 22.10; 28.6. Meye Thompson, The Promise of the Father: Jesus and God in the New Testament (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000), p.47. 80 ��You are my Son; �� 4.25-26; Rev. 2.26; 12.5; and 19.15. 81 These authors utilize this text, however, as a reference to the people of God, not the King of Israel. 1

38

You Are My Son

Concerning this double citation in v. 5, Harold Attridge notes that ��were already joined to serve as messianic proof texts at ��82 �� utilizing these two texts for messianic proof as had already been done. Hugh Monte�ore is less circumspect and �� had done his own research into the Old Testament, some explanation of his selection would have been likely. These testimonia seem to have been taken from an existing catena of Old Testament proof texts��83 George Brooke offers a more careful analysis in The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.84 �� verses of Psalms 1 and 2 [in 4Q174] function merely as incipit phrases, �� 85 Without arguing for any kind of literary dependence of the author of Hebrews upon the Qumran ��86 The author of �� locates him squarely within the messianic milieu of �rst-century Judaism. Like others � most similarly the author of 4Q174 � he discusses both Psalm 2 and 2 Samuel 7 in ��citation of these texts is still worth noting because his appeal to these two precise texts (Ps. 2.7 and 2 Sam. 7.14) appears unparalleled. While other authors cite one or the other, and while the text from Qumran appeals to both chapters, no other extant text cites both verses together. As far as we are aware, these two texts were not already joined as a messianic proof text unit ready at hand for the author of Hebrews to cite. Precisely at this point the author of Hebrews shows his own creativity by joining citations of these two texts. Consequently, because there is no evidence that these

82 Attridge, Hebrews�� e Dead Sea Scrolls (4QFlor 3:1019) and their association was probably a traditional bit of Messianic proof-�� , in The Psalms in the New Testament [S. Moyise and M. J. J. Menken, eds; New York: T&T Clark, 2004], pp.197�212 [199]); see also Steyn, Assumed LXX Vorlage, pp.29�31. Whereas Monte�ore goes so far as to suggest that these verses existed together in an earlier written form (Hebrews, p.43), George Brooke offers, more reservedly, that the authors of both Hebrews and 4QFlor �� (Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), p.77. 83 Attridge, Hebrews, p.43. 84 Brooke, Dead Sea Scrolls. 85 Brooke, Dead Sea Scrolls, p.76. 86 Brooke, Dead Sea Scrolls, p.77. 1

1. ��

39

are a widespread pair of proof texts, his selection of these two texts reveals his own interests and goals for the letter. He did, it seems, do his own research into the Old Testament. By citing these two texts, the author is able to discuss (or, more appropriately, to have God declare) Jesus as the Son of God in such a way that �� a small group of texts in which God designates himself as the Father of the king (Pss. 2.7; 88.28 LXX; 109.3 LXX; 2 Sam. 7.14; 1 Chr. 17.13; 22.10; 28.6). He cites two of these and alludes to a third (Ps. 88.28 LXX) in the introduction to the quotation in Heb. 1.6 (�� ).87 This verse is similar to the other quotations in that God designates the king as his child. Finally, there is a possible echo to Ps. 109.3 (��) in v. 3 where Ps. 109.1 is invoked. Consequently, the author has selected what is a minority theme from ��88 as the departure point of his sermon. In this way he is like the other �rst-century authors who found messianic material in these rare texts. The author highlights the gravity of this theme for his sermon by appealing to a wide swath of texts where �� son and by doing so in the space of only three verses at the beginning of his address. �� 7.14 and his allusions to Ps. 88.28 LXX and Ps. 109.3 LXX reveals more about his intent in selecting these texts. He cites the texts that include an equal balance between the Father and the Son. The allusions to Ps. 88.28 and Ps. 109.3 LXX buttress the familial theme of the �rst chapter, but �� as a Father as

87 Psalm 88.28 LXX is the only ��nates one person as his ��. 88 The scriptures of Israel give evidence of a relatively infrequent yet rich understanding of God as their Father. Gen. 15.7-8; 48.15; Exod. 4.22-23; 15.17; Num. 18.20, 21, 24, 26; Deut. 1.31-32; 8.5; 10.9; 12.12; 14.1; 18.2; 32.5-6, 10, 11, 18-20; 2 Sam. 7.14; 1 Chr. 17.13; 22.10; 28.6; 29.10 [ LXX only]; Pss. 2.7; 36.9, 22, 29 LXX; 67.6 LXX; 68.36 LXX; 72.15 LXX; 88.27-28 LXX; 102.13 LXX; 104.44 LXX; 118.111 LXX; Prov. 3.12; Hos. 1.10; 11.1; Mal. 1.6; 2.10; 3.17; Isa. 1.2, 4; 30.1, 9; 34.17; 43.6; 45.10-11; 46.3; 49.8; 50.1; 53.12; 57.13; 60.21; 61.7; 63.8, 16; 64.8 LXX; Jer. 3.4, 14, 19, 22; 4.22; 38.9, 20 LXX; Lam. 5.2-3; Ezek. 36.12; 44.28. �� passages that present God as Father [in the Old Testament]. The relative infrequency of the term �Father� for God does contrast sharply with the regular use of the term in ��Promise of the Father, p.47). 1

40

You Are My Son

�� word ��, a term included in the two other citations, suggesting that the author intended to have God articulate the identity of the one through whom he is now speaking with the term ��. This verse, where God says �� 28 LXX lacks a clear and equal reference to God as a Father. Obviously, unlike 2 Sam. 7.14 it lacks the word ��, but even in comparison with Ps 2.7, �� in Psalm 88 does not highlight the metaphor of parenthood the same way �� does. It includes the idea of sonship, but lacks the parallel of fatherhood. The citations depict God not only presenting Jesus as Son, but himself as Father as well. They emphasize the relationship in which Jesus stands with God, and hence, the identity imparted to each in the context of that relationship. D. The Content of the Citations These citations emphasize the relationship between God and Jesus by maintaining a balanced focus on the two on both macro- and microlevels. Looking at the two citations as a unit shows that the author has created a chiastic pattern (see diagram below). 89 Psalm 2.7a emphasizes the Son, while Ps. 2.7b highlights the role of the Father in begetting the Son. Conversely, 2 Sam. 7.14a lifts up the Father, while 7.14b focuses upon the Son. By setting these citations next to one another, the author has created a Son/Father: Father/Son pattern that gives as much weight to �� sonship.90 With these texts, the author has God assert explicitly � twice � that upon declaring this one to be his Son, God has declared himself to be a Father.91 On the level of the individual phrases, each of the four lines of the two citations contains a reference to both the Father and the Son. In the �rst line, the ��n of the speaker. In the second 89 Lane notes the chiasm as well (Hebrews, p.1:25). 90 Hence, �� P. �� this back-up citation [2 Sam 7.14] is included �� and Theology in the Old Testament Citations of Heb 1:5�� Bib 66 [1985], pp.504�33 [507]). 91 �� seiner Verbindung mit Gott. Und das, was er tut, kann er nur tun und vollbringen, weil er, �Sohn� ��Der Hebräerbreif als Appell [Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1989], p.79). 1

1. ��

41

line, it is the speaker � God � who begets him. In the third, God declares himself to be a Father to this one, and, �nally, in the last, the Son takes this �lial position in relation to the speaker. The chart below shows this balance in each line and in the chiastic pattern of the two citations together.92 A �� B �� B1 �� A1 ��

With these citations, the author reiterates that the titles �Son� and �Father� mean nothing in isolation. To be Son or Father necessarily implies that one is related to the other in a familial way. 93 E. Hebrews 1.5 as the Interpretive Lens for Hebrews 1.1-4 In Heb. 1.5, God declares that Jesus is his Son. By selecting citations that emphasize both the fatherhood of God and the sonship of Christ, by introducing these citations as a conversation that places emphasis upon both the speaker and the addressee, and by placing them so that they create a balanced pattern between the Father and Son, the author has articulated not only the supremacy of the Son, but more fundamentally, the paternal/�lial relationship between God and Jesus. These citations speak equally of the Son and the Father because they proclaim the relationship between them. The relational nature of Heb. 1.5 elucidates what comes before it. In the �rst four verses of Hebrews, the author uses imagery associated with ��es so in concert with allusions to the Son as heir, which evokes scriptures about the King, �� Above, I suggested that there is no way to decide � based upon the �rst four verses alone � whether the impersonal traditions should trump the personal, or rather the �� 94 I counter that the 92 The lines that focus upon the Son are shaded. The words that refer to the Son are underlined, while the words that refer to the Father are in italics. 93 Similarly Origen states, ��, Princ. �� have a Son in order to be what he is, and the Son as Son must have a Father in order �� The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius [OTM; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994], p.69). 94 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.55. 1

42

You Are My Son

way in which the author uses �� as the Son with whom God the Father is involved in a relationship tips the balance created by his use of royal and wisdom traditions in Heb. 1.1-4. Hebrews uses the language of Word ��heir. The texts ��Wisdom �� fatherly nature for God, but Hebrews does not leave this role as an impli�� the �� of Hebrews 1 is not an aspect or a function, but a person. God could not have a dialogic and truly paternal relationship with an aspect of himself. In some other texts, Sophia and Logos may be designated as the �rstborn of God, but God never speaks to them directly to declare his paternal relationship with them. Hence, the Son is a person who re�ects �� alongside God bearing all things.95 Even in the midst of the congruence between the lang�� Word, the familial relationship articulated so carefully in Heb. 1.5 pro�� in the opening verses of Hebrews. F. The Temporal Setting of the Citation Another dif�culty remains for seeing the personal relationship announced in Heb. 1.5 re�ected back to Heb. 1.1-4. Interpreters have read 1.5 as that �� exaltation after his death, not as that which is a re�� eternal relationship with Christ. The interpretation asserts: After Jesus made puri�� he became (��) better than the angels because at that point he inherited the name Son. God speaks the citations of Heb. 1.5 at this moment. This citation can establish a paternal/�lial relationship between �� nd exaltation. Jesus 95 Origen arrives at this conclusion about the use of Wisdom language for ��sonal when we call Him the wisdom of God; or suppose, for example, that we understand Him to be, not a living being endowed with wisdom, but something which makes men wise, giving itself to, and implanting itself in, the minds of those who are made capable of receivin��(Princ. I.2.2 [Widdicombe]). Directly previous to this statement, he states that the scriptures name Christ as both wisdom and �rst-�� Fatherhood, p.67 n.10). See also Com. Jn. I.34.151, 243. 1

1. ��

43

became the Son upon his exaltation, but was only proleptically so before this point.96 �� author of Hebrews has no place in his thinking for pre-existence as an ontological concept. His essentially human Jesus attains to perfection, to preeminence, and even to eternity� [T]he right [to the highest place that heaven affords] was guaranteed by the place he held in the eternal purpose of God��97 Caird appeals to Heb. 1.4 to say [Jesus] had to become superior to the angels and to inherit the loftier name (1.4). It was because of his death that he entered upon his heavenly glory, through suffering that he attained perfection as �� salvation (2.9-10)� [The author of Hebrews] explored to the uttermost what it ��.98

��manity to glory.99 Jesus ful�� 100 then 96 Käsemann, Das wandernde Gottesvolk, p.99; cf. Attridge, Hebrews, p.25; Bruce, Hebrews, p.13; Moffatt, Hebrews, p.9; Albert Vanhoye, Situation du Christ: Épître aux Hébreux 1 et 2 (LD, 58; Paris: Cerf, 1969), p.139; Westcott, Hebrews, p.21. 97 G. B. Caird, ��B��The New Testament Age: Essays in Honor of Bo Reicke (William C. Weinrich, ed.; 2 vols.; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1984), pp.73�81 (81). 98 ��B��7. He supports this reading with more assertions than proof. He begins to challenge the traditional interpretation � that �� by asserting that in �� the Son� �� p.74). Yet this is precisely the issue in question, not the assumption from which one can embark. �� interest was not in a uniquely privileged, divine being who becomes man; it is in a human �� [eds], Glory of Christ, pp.151�64, here 163). He is right to say that in Hebrews 1 the author has in view the humanity of Jesus. This is most apparent ��cation for sins. Nevertheless, the compilation of these statements � the declaration that the Son is heir of all things, God, Lord, and Creator � �� rom a divine person. The second chapter of Hebrews, where Jesus is made lower than the angels (2.7-9) and is made like his brothers and sisters (2.17) suggests that there was a time when he was not human. 99 Caird, ��B�� 100 Caird, ��B��9. 1

44

You Are My Son

�� appointed to the rank of heir of the whole universe. 101 Caird bases this conclusion on the temporal indications in v. 4. Granting that God proclaims this name (Heb. 1.5) � the name which makes the Son better than the angels � ��102 it remains plausible to interpret this announcement not as the establishment of ��ment of that fact. In this way, these words are a �tting proclamation when one who is already a son inhabits his throne. The Rulers of Rome provide examples of this kind of proclamation. Gaius Octavius Thurinus was adopted by his uncle Julius Ceasar in 44 BCE and was appointed as his heir in his will (Dio 45.1.2; 45.3.1). When the Senate dei�ed his adopted father in 42, he had the right to be Divi �lius, son of the god. Throughout his life, he continually invoked his �� ing from 17 BCE to 11 CE.103 He was obviously not being adopted over and over again, but was asserting the status to which he had been adopted. In the same way, when Tiberius began his reign (14 CE), his status as the son of Augustus was announced before the Senate. Suetonius records, �� The will began thus: �since a cruel fate has bereft me of my sons Gaius and Lucius, be Tiberius Caesar heir to two-thirds of my estate� ��Life of Tiberius 23; Tacitus, Annals 1.8 [Moore]). It was important for Tiberius to present his status as heir in the words of Augustus himself to show that he was the rightful successor to the throne. He had become the son of Augustus ten years earlier (4 CE), but the audience was reminded of

101 Caird, ��B�� 102 As the author uses the term later in the letter, the semantic range of �� comprises not only one speci�c day, but a reference to continuing time (3.7, 13, 15; 4.7). Philo used the word in the same manner (Fug. 57). Many interpreters treat �� past. Supported by Augustine (Exposition on the Psalms; NPNF1 8.2); Athanasius (C. Ar. 2.23, 57); Aquinas (Ad Heb. 49); Bauckham (Jesus and the God of Israel, p.251); Kistemaker (Exposition, p.37); Moffatt (Hebrews, p.9). Scott D. Mackie, citing Aquila, H. I. Lee (��-Consciousness and Early Christian Exegesis of Messianic Psalms [WUNT, 2/192; Tübingen: �� to see in the exaltation a �con�rmation of his existing position and status, rather than conferral of a new status��Eschatology and Exhortation, p.213). 103 M. G. L. Cooley, ed., The Age of Augustus (London: London Association of Classical Teachers, 2003), pp.203, 208. 1

1. ��

45

this when he became emperor. The proclamation of his position as ��s heir when Tiberius started to reign was not a proclamation that he had at that moment been adopted, but a reminder that he had been previously adopted and was now coming into his inheritance, the position of power as emperor. The �rst natural born son to inherit the imperial role after his father was Titus. The historians make no mention of a restatement of his position as son of Vespasian upon his accession to the throne (79 CE). This could be because he had been ruling with his father since Vespasian had become emperor in 69, and there was little question of his right to rule and, hence, no need for the reading of the will on this point. Nevertheless, his position as son of Vespasian was highlighted on the arch erected �� of Rome to the divine Titus Vespasianus Augustus son of the divine Vespasian��104 ��s moment of triumph, which was commemorated in stone, the arch reminded viewers of his excellence, his divinity, and his ancestry. This example illustrates a pattern: at the moment of a succession or victory, it was �tting praise of the ruler to restate � not establish � his familial ties. This sam�� appointed King of Israel, David stands before the assembly and reminds them that God has chosen him to be his son and that God will be a Father to him (1 Chr. 28.6). David declares these words not to establish �� already happened (2 Sam. 7.14). Solomon now takes on the vocation for which his sonship was a prerequisite, and, �� son is restated � as a repor�� when he takes on his role as k�� seat next to God as G�� the moment that he has completed his act of puri�cation and taken his position of honor.105 The proclamation in Heb. 1.5 does not necessitate

104 James T. Ch�� in Fighting Words and Images: Representing War Across the Disciplines (Elena V. Baraban, Stephen Jaeger, and Adam Muller, eds; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012), pp.209�32 [222]). 105 �� that Schenck is hesitant to attribute a personally pre-existent sonship of Christ to Hebrews. 1

46

You Are My Son

�� that fact. No time exists when the Son was not appointed as heir. Yet, it is after he makes puri�cation for sins that he comes into possession of his inheritance.106 G. The Character of the Son and of the Father Through the citations in Heb. 1.5, the author has contributed to his portrayal of each member of that relationship. They act as evidence of the superiority of the one to whom God is speaking by asserting that this �� In the �rst sentence, the author has asserted these things in his own words � that �� but by reiterating these facts through the medium of scripture, the author increases their force. Moreover, because he presents these scriptures as the very words of God, the authority of his assertions about the Son are unassailable. If the �� articulation of this status of sonship attributes to Jesus great honor, how much more adulatory of Jesus it is when God himself ��lial status was important enough to include double scriptural support. By using words his readers view as authoritative and sacred and by presenting them as being spoken by God himself, the author compellingly proclaims this one in the superior position as the Son of God. The honors embedded in these citations serve his stated point that �� simply that Jesus carries the name Son that makes him superior because in certain places in ��

106 �� heir of all things in protology is the One who became superior to the angels and who �� -4 [and Similar Passages]�, in Christology, Hermeneutics, and Hebrews: Pro�les from the History of Interpretation [Jon C. Laansma and Daniel J. Treier, eds; LNTS, 423; London: T&T Clark, 2012), p.161. But precisely here, a problem announces itself. How can the Son already be the Son in protology if he only enters into the fullness of his sonship (i.e., receives his inheritance and his name) in his eschatological enthronement? The �� citation of Psalm 8 supports this interpretation. Jesus is crowned with glory and honor, and all things are subjected to him after he is lowered below the angels through the suffering of death (Heb. 2.8-9). See the discussion in the following chapter.

1

1. ��

47

��.107 The angels may be known as the sons of God, but God never �� Instead, 107 Gen. 6.2, 4; Deut. 32.43 (a possible source of the third citation of the catena in Heb. 1.6); Pss. 28.1; 88.7. When thinking of sons, particularly sons of God, could a �rst-century audience have thought of angels? And when thinking of angels could they have thought of them as sons of God? Numerous translators of the Hebrew Bible certainly did so. Deuteronomy 32 provides two salient examples. In Deut. 32.8, 4QDeutj provides evidence of the reading �� in the last phrase. It is this version that best explains most Greek manuscripts� translation of �� . Hence, these Greek translators saw the sons of God as the angels in charge over nations, an idea represented also in Jub. 15.31-32, Philo (Post. 89, 91-92), and Origen (Hom. Num. 11.5 [GCS 30, p.86). Deut. 32.43 and Odes 2.43 present the possibility that those who read these texts could have seen the sons of God as parallel to the angels of God because of the format of Hebrew poetry. The trend continues outside Deuteronomy. Three times in the book of Job the translators from Hebrew to Greek opted to use ��for �� . In the �rst two references the beings come to present themselves before the Lord. In the last, they shout and sing at the time of creation, a moment the author of Jubilees also thought included the participation of angels (Jub. 2.1-��ery furnace, the fourth being who appears has the appearance of a son of God, which the Old Greek translates as an ��. In Dan. 3.28 Nebuchadnezzar attributes the deliverance of the young men to an angel. So both the original story of Daniel and the translators of 3.25 interpreted this son of God as an angel. Finally, three Psalms translate sons as angels. The Aramaic translation of Ps. 29.1 has the psalmist call upon the bands of angels as �� , who bring to the Lord glory and might. In Ps. 82.6, the syrohexapla reads the sons of the most high who judge Israel as angels. Psalm 89 asks who among the divine sons can be like the Lord (89.7). For they, the holy ones (89.6, 8) praise the wonders and the faithfulness of God. The Syriac and targums took these divine sons to be angels. In other instances, interpreters see a correspondence between �� and angels. In the fantastic passage in Genesis 6 the narrator describes a time when the sons of God (�� ) noticed the daughters of men, took them as wives, and bore children with them. The Septuagint translates the phrase woodenly, the �� perform these actions, but for many early interpreters, this was an account of malicious angels. First Enoch, the earliest re�ection on this passage, uses the term angels to ��le the daughters of men (1 En. 6.2; 10.7, 8). When re�ecting upon the Genesis passage, it places both terms next to �� heaven into parallel with watchers, another term it uses mostly for fallen angels (1 En. 13.8; 14.3). Much literature of the second temple period opted for the same translation (Jub. 4.15; 5.1; 1 En. 6�7; 39.1; T. Reub. 5.6; 2 Bar. 51.3; 56.12-16; 2 En. 18.4; Gen. Apoc. (1Qap Genar) 2.1. In Questiones et solutions in Genesin, when he discusses the giants of Genesis 6, Philo states that Moses in describing the �� God accompanied with women and begat sons that proved unjust� (Ant. 1.3.1.73). Simeon, a Rabbi, encouraged people not to think of the angels of Genesis 6 as angels 1

48

You Are My Son

�� the singular �� which God never does on behalf of the angels � God ��, but also about the relationship that ��n to God, and the relationship in which he participates with God makes him superior to the angels. The citations also assert that God has chosen to establish himself as his Father, which shows his intention to be an intimately relational God forever.108 Both the citations themselves and the way in which they are presented establish this. Most obviously, God shows himself to be relational by speaking with another. The author has already declared (an indication that some did) because he was troubled by their ability to sin (Brendan Byrne, Sons of God, Seed of Abraham: A Study of the Idea of the Sonship of God of All Christians in Paul Against the Jewish Background [Analecta biblica 83; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1979], p.76). While other interpretive options appeared later, �� angels� view [was] the only contender into the �� DOTP 794�5). Outside the Genesis 6 reference, Philo refers to the �� of Exodus 23 as ��rstborn son (Agr. 51). For those who want to be sons of God, they should ��rstborn (Conf. 146). The Prayer of Joseph, a possibly Alexandrian �rst-century apocryphal work quoted by Origen who says it is in use among the Hebrews, describes Jacob as an angel who is the �rstborn and the chief among the sons of God. In The History of the Rechabites, the Greek text of the narrative of Zosimus describes a person seeing a being who looks like an angel and he thinks he is the son of God (5.4) (W. A. Craigie, ANF 10, pp.220�4). The connection continues on in the writings of the rabbis, where there is some evidence of sons and angels. In addition to referring to the angelic court as the family of God, some rabbis argued that the son of God name given to both angels and Israel, but the angels lost it through sin (Byrne, Sons of God, Seed of Abraham, p.76). This brief account is but a sample of other extensive surveys of this literature, like that of Brendan Byrne, who concluded that the terminology sons of god for angels would have been fully acceptable (Sons of God, Seed of Abraham, p.2; Gert J. ��o��, HvTSt 59.4 [2003], pp.1107�26). At the very least, this survey suggests enough of a connection that if the author of Hebrews wanted to distinguish the name of Jesus from the angels, the term Son on its own would not be a clear way to do so. 108 Many commentaries focus upon the Son of these citations but fail to observe �� a good example of a focus on the Son to the exclusion of the Father. He categorizes both citations by their meaning for the Son, �� is asserted in three connexions, in its foundation (�� ); in its continuance (�� ); and in its �nal manifestation (�� Hebrews, p.19). 1

1. ��

49

that the God who speaks does not engage in divine monologues, 109 but instead speaks to others � to the ancestors and to us (Heb. 1.1-�� rst words bear this out. They are a dialogue, a direct address to another. Hence, the dialogue captured in the citations and then highlighted by the ��em �� 110 of this passage, and decrease the likelihood that God is conversing with an aspect of himself. Second, and more importantly, the very words that God speaks are about the establishment of a relationship. He engages in a conversation with Jesus, demonstrating that a familial relationship has been established. As was made clear by others in antiquity who used paternal themes to portray the divine, to say that God is a Father invokes ideas of intimacy and care.111 The �rst thing God says establishes God as a

109 This challenges any ideas associated with a distant and non-involved God. Tomasz Lewicki sees an aloof and alien God as one of the main problems among the ��, p.14). 110 Dunn, Christology in the Making, p.55. 111 �� literature of the Second Temple period carries on many of the same emphases. God is proclaimed as Father in relationship to members of Israel (Tob. 13.4; Apoc. Mos. 36.1; 43.4; 3. Macc. 7.6; T. Jud. 24.2, 3; T. Ab. 6.6; 20.12, 13; Jub. 1.25; 19.29). Jews and others recognize that the Israelites were the children of God (Esth. 16.16 LXX; Sir. 36.17; Wis. 5.5; 12.19, 21; 16.10, 21; 18.4, 13; 19.6; 1 En. 62.11; 3 Macc. 6.28; Pss. Sol. 17.27; Sib. Or. 3.702; 5.202; T. Mos. 10.3). The familial relationship is utilized in the themes of Is��. 4.��Apoc. Ezek. 2.1). This trajectory of describing God as Father continues into rabbinic literature. A prayer of Rabbi Akiba dated to the second century proclaims, �� we have no king but you; Our Father our King �� (��25b; �� [J. J. Petuchowski and M. Brocke, eds; New York: Seabury, 1978], pp.21�44 [39]). Among the Greeks and Romans this was a frequent way to refer to the divine. It �� dge �� (Or. 12.22 [Cohoon, LCL]) and by speaking in the voice of Pheidias, the artist who �� mild and majestic god in pleasing guise, the Giver of our material and our physical life and of all our blessings, the common Father and Saviour and Guardian of ��Or. �� s kinship with humanity is evident to everyone (Or. 12.27). Through the words of Pheidias, ��ce to images of the gods as similar to 1

50

You Are My Son

Father � not a King or a Judge, but a Father. By beginning here, the �� else he says about God.112 In the second citation, the future tense of the verbs could indicate that this relationship has no endpoint. God has begotten this one as his Son, but he also promises that Jesus will continue to be his Son and he will continue to be his Father. God involves himself in this relationship for the future because the paternal identity will aptly describe God as long as this relationship exists. Consequently, with the last line of these citations the author introduces the theme of God as one who makes promises, a theme invoked throughout the letter (1.13; 4.1; 6.12-13, 15, 17; 7.6; 8.6; 9.15; 10.23, 36; 11.9, 11, 13, 17, 33, 39; 12.26). God has promised to ��thiness will be proven in its continuance. the desire of infants that long to be close to their parents (Or. 12.61). According to him, the fatherhood imagery of �� (Or. 12.75). Several authors comment on the bene�ts of thinking of the gods in a parental way. Augustine quotes Varro who says that fear of the gods is the stance of the superstitious man, whereas the one who reverences them like parents is the religious man (Augustine, City of God 6.9 [NPNF1 2:117]). Epictetus re�ects on the bene�t of thinking of oneself as a child of the god in several of his discourses (Diatr.1.3, 1.9). Those who do so are able to live better because they know that they come from something more than brute �� soul, as he ought, to this doctrine, that we are all primarily begotten of God, and that God is the father of man as well as of gods, I think that he will entertain no ignoble or mean thought about himself. Yet, if Caesar adopts you no one will be able to endure your conceit, but if you know that you are a son of Zeus, will you not be ��[T]o have God as our maker, and father, and guardian, � shall this not suf��Diatr. 1.3.1�2; 1.9.7�8 [Oldfather]). For writers like Dio Chrysostom and Epictetus, this language conveyed the gentleness and compassion of the god. If Zeus is father, his children should live with the conviction that the god knows them, cares for them, and expects them to live a life �� (Congr. 177 [Colson and Whitaker, LCL]). On the other hand, the paternal nature of God can also entail a severe dimension. This is certainly true of Zeus who, although he is still called father, elicits great fear (Homer, Il. 1.533-35; 14.414-18). Seneca views the deity as a severe father, whose discipline shapes his children into virtuous people (Ep.1.5). Severity, particularly in the use of discipline, applies as well to the fatherly God of Israel. I discuss this ��acter in the third chapter. 112 Aristotle referred to the opening section as the one in which the speaker establishes the theme of the speech and his own credibility (Rhet. 3.14). 1

1. ��

51

Finally, with these citations, the author has also revealed why God is relational. These citations depict God as one who enters into a relationship because God has chosen to do so. In Hebrews, God can be known as Father �rst and foremost not because someone has named him as such � not even Jesus � but because God has made and declared himself �� By selecting citations that emphasize the relationship between Father and the Son, by setting them so that they create a balanced pattern �� speech, the author begins to shape his picture of God by declaring the unparalleled superiority of the Son. IV. The Name and Its Inheritance: Hebrews 1.6-13 As Heb. 1.5 provides the lens for reading Heb. 1.1-4, it also provides the groundwork for the remaining citations of the chapter. Regarding the ��any interpreters assert ��Son�113 � �� at the moment of his exaltation. Such an assertion, however, is logically troublesome. One can �� Instead, a person who is a son inherits the name of his father. Bauckham cogently argues that �the Son is the one who inherits the name from his Father, not what he inherits. What he inherits must be something that belongs to his Father, whereas �Son� ��114 If Heb. 1.5 is not the articulation of the name Jesus inherits, then it cannot be support for the interpr�� only upon ��tity based �� is the pronouncement of the relational reality on which the Name that Jesus does inherit is based. In the remaining citations, God pronounces that inherited name and the inheritance of all things (1.2) that will come along with it.115 113 Attridge, Hebrews, p.47; Bruce, Hebrews, p.50; DeSilva, Perseverance, p.92; Grässer, An die Hebräer, p.1:66; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:17; Mackie, Eschatology and Exhortation, p.227; Spicq, Hebréux, p.2:11; Thompson, Hebrews, p.41. 114 Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel, p.239. 115 �� t, wird durch die Zitatenreihe in Hebr 1,5-��Schriftauslegung, p.100).

1

52

You Are My Son

In the remainder of Hebrews 1, God speaks �ve more citations, four of which portray roles God bestows to his Son. These citations say nothing explicit about God being a Father or his dialogue partner being a Son. Instead of diminishing the prominence of this theme, however, the absence of any explicit familial language in the rest of the citations brings into sharp relief the hand of the author. 116 It is the author himself who keeps the familial theme in focus with his introductions: �� in v. 6 and �� in v. 8. With the use of these terms, the author portrays these statements as those which God the Father makes to his Son. Consequently, by keeping this relationship in focus, the author has God pronounce to his Son the unparalleled honors that come with the name he inherits. A. The Angels Worship the Firstborn: Deuteronomy 32.43 LXX In the third citation of the catena, the author retains the familial focus with the use of the term ��. By af��lial relationship to God, the author also reiterates the royal and cultic aspects that he �� s�� is Ps. 88.28 (LXX), a text in which the king is described as the Son of God. This introduction functions as further evidence that the One through whom God is speaking, is, in fact, the Davidic descendent to whom God promised his eternal covenant. In addition, �� is associated with the priestly class.117 In certain traditions, the Levites are set aside for God as the redemption of all the �rstborn children who �� Son, it also suggests his dual role as King and Priest. Finally, this term is the �rst indication that there are other children of God. If Jesus is the �rstborn, he is preeminent��118 116 �� using very little of his own language, the task of ascertaining his intention is especially dif��The Beginnings of Christian Philosophy: The Epistle to the Hebrews [CBQMS, 13; Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1982], �� ions to his citations in providing new context to specify their ��The Use of the Old Testament in Hebrews [WUNT, 2/260; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009], p.154). It is important to pay close attention to the a�� quotations into his portrayal of God and Christ and the relationship between them. 117 Num. 3.12-13, 41, 45; 8.16-18. 118 Other early Christian writers use �� to refer to Jesus and his place as the �rstborn who will be followed by others (Rom. 8.29; Col. 1.15, 18; Rev. 1.5). Similarly, in Hebrews 12, the audience comes to the mountain of God where there

1

1. ��

53

The temporal setting of this declaration, uttered �� , is widely debated.119 The author uses this term again in ch. 2, where the �� is the coming (��) realm �� that which God did not subject to angels, but which he did subject to the one who was both crowned with glory and honor and made lower than the angels � one who, he notes in v. 8, is Jesus.120 That passage in ch. 2 suggests that the �� mentioned in Heb. 1.6 is the realm where ��ment in Heb. 1.6 comes after Jesus has made puri�cation for sins and sat down. God now invites him to begin taking possession of that which ��cisely how Chrysostom interprets this introduction, saying, ��ut Paul names it as a Coming in, from the metaphor of those who come to an inheritance and receive any portion or possession��(Hom. Heb. 3.1 [Gardiner]). The citation itself121 provides further ��superiority over the angels (the assertion in v. 4) because God commands them to prostrate themselves in worship before the �rstborn. The Son becomes the object of their worship. By having God command worship for the is an assembly of the �rstborn ones (12.23). Hence, this introduction provides the �rst hint of the link between the sonship of Jesus and the �lial status of those who trust in him. 119 For example, Attridge (Hebrews, p.56), Monte�ore (Hebrews, p.45), and Spicq (Hebréux, p.2:17) see this as a reference to the incarnation. DeSilva (Hebrews, p.97), Loader (Sohn und Hoherpriester, pp.23�5), David Peterson (Hebrews and �� [SNTSMS, 47; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982], p.214 n.19), and Vanhoye (Situation, pp.152�7) are among those who place it at the exaltation. Finally, Käsemann (Das wandernde Gottesvolk, pp.98�101), Otto Michel (Der Brief an die Hebräer [8th ed.; KEK, 13; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1949], p.113), and Westcott (Hebrews, p.37) interpret it as taking place at the parousia. See David Mof�� (Atonement and Resurrection, pp.53�118). 120 For support of the Christological reading of the Psalm in Hebrews, see the argument in Chapter 2. 121 No extant Vorlage preserves the precise citation found in Hebrews. The �� es the closest reading to �� de�nite article before �� (��). If this is a quotation from Deut. 32.43 as preserved in Vaticanus (�� ), then the author makes only one change, from �� to ��; but if this is from Ps. 96.7 (��), he makes four changes: the addition of ��, the form of the verb from second to third 1

54

You Are My Son

�rstborn, the author has attributed yet another solely divine prerogative to the Son. In Jewish thought and practice of the �rst century, worship belonged only to God.122 This attribution of divine characteristics is con�rmed by the context of Deuteronomy 32, 123 which has portrayed God as the object of the worship of the people of Israel. 124 Moreover, the ��ngels �� but about them. He refers to them in the third person, rather than addressing them in the second person. God has no conversation with the angels as he does with the Son.

person, the elimination of the article, and substituting �� for ��. Moreover, there are no other quotations from Psalm 96 in Hebrews, whereas the author quotes from Deuteronomy 32 � the Song of Moses � in 10.30. See David Allen, Deuteronomy and Exhortation in Hebrews (WUNT, 2/238; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), pp.44�57. 122 Bauckham does make reference to a few instances of apparent angel �� treated angels in a way that they would themselves have regarded as comparable, even in degree, with the worship of God. Occasional prayer to angels should not be �� (Jesus and the God of Israel, pp.11�13). Larry W. Hurtado ��ce, and otherwise gave what they intended as worship of a divine �gure. For this, we have in fact a good deal of evidence that devout Jews were quite scrupulous in restricting �� (Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003], p.34). 123 �� for the author. In addition to his quotation from v. 43, he also quotes from vv. 35-36 (Heb. 10.30). Moreover, this chapter contains numerous themes echoed in Hebrews (God is not �� [Deut. 32.4//Heb. 6.10]; God leading his people [Deut. 32.12// Heb. 2.10]; the sin of unfaithfulness [Deut. 32.20//Heb. 3.19]; God as a consuming �� eternal existence [Deut. 32.40//Heb. 4.9�10]; Moses viewing the land of promise from a distance [Deut. 32.52//Heb. 11.13]). It also includes several instances of a �� (Deut. 32.5, 6, 10-11, 18, 19, 20). See also Allen, Deuteronomy and Exhortation, pp.57�8. 124 Based upon the version of Deuteronomy 32 found at Qumran, Hurst presents the possibility that the author of Hebrews thought of the �� . He does not �nally embrace the anthropological interpretation of Deuteronomy, how�� xt until George Caird pointed out the dif�culty of such an interpretation in light of the larger context of �� 1

1. ��

55

The auth��-prosopographic exegesis is even more striking here. In contrast to v. 5 where the author selects ��scriptures, here the author puts into the mouth of God texts that were in their original context spoken by someone else. Through this scripture, the author brings forth not a human �� spoken word, the author is crafting a particular understanding of God for �� author profoundly contributes to his portrayal of the nature of the relationship between God and his Son, and hence the character of God displayed in that relationship. By his command, God shares the worship due to him with his Son. B. The Angels as Spirits and Flames: Psalm 103.4 LXX In the following citation, the author highlights again the difference between the Son and the angels when God directs toward the angels a portion of Psalm 103 [LXX]��125 ��speaks about himself when he refers to the one who makes winds and �re his messengers and servants. The ontological difference between angels and the Son is clear: the Son is begotten, while angels are created. This lays the foundation for a contrast with the enduring nature of the Son (Heb. 1.11-12). The difference takes on an �� tion of the word in 1.14 (angels are surely ministering spirits not ministering winds). As Mof�tt arg��esh and blood distinguishes him from the spiritual nature of the angels. 126 In addition, because this is third person rather than �rst person speech � because it is a description and not a dialogue � it acts as further emphasis upon the contrasting nature between the Son and the angels. As was the case in Heb. 1.6, God never speaks to the angels but only about them. C. The Worthy King: Psalm 44.7-8 ��riginal addressee, his Son. The author takes this citation from Psalm 44 � recorded in the Sitz im Leben of a royal wedding � where the psalmist extols the greatness of the king and his bride. The author of Hebrews has cast it as 125 Like Psalm 109 quoted in Heb. 1.10-12, Ps. 103.2 and 6 portray creation as a garment (��). 126 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, pp.141�2.

1

56

You Are My Son

��scepter. Several elements that had been under the surface of the discourse in Hebrews now become explicit. The author has hinted at a royal Christology by identifying Jesus as ��, and implied as much with the citations in v. 5 and the allusion to Ps. 89.28 in v. 6, all of which are ��by his anointing and subsequent possession of a throne, scepter, and kingdom.127 Moreover, this citation casts Jesus as a worthy king who loves righteousness and hates lawlessness and has a right to this eternal throne ��on.128 Finally, with this citation, the author adds yet another divine quali�cation to the Son: an eternal reign.129 God declares that his throne lasts forever.130 There will be no end to his throne and, consequently, no end to his reign. D. The Unchanging Creator: Psalm 101.26-28 LXX In the next citation, also addressed to the Son by the simple conjunction of ��, the text cited in Hebrews has �� at the beginning of the line, 127 �� prophet anointed by the Lord in Isaiah 61. 128 The last line of the citation could also be further support that Jesus is better than the angels if they are the companions (��) that his anointing places him above (Lane, Hebrews, p.1:30; Attridge sees this as the primary referent, although he does not exclude others [Hebrews, p.60]). However, every other time the author employs this word, it speaks of the human followers of Christ (3.1, 14; 6.4; 12.8 [see Athanasius, C. Ar. 1.46; Koester, Hebrews, p.195; Johnson, Hebrews, p.80]). If humans are the referent, then it is possible to see Christ as anointed with the oil of gladness in the midst of his human companions. �� with the accusative could ��, BDAG, 757). In Heb. 11.12, the author cites Gen. 22.17 where �� is used with the accusative in this way. More often �� is used with the accusative to convey that one thing is superior to another. In all these instances (Heb. 1.4; 2.7, 9; 3.3; 9.23; 11.4; 12.24) save one (11.11), however, there is a comparative word to show that �� should be translated as indicating a comparison. If this is an anointing in the midst of his companions, this text foreshadows his priestly anointing that takes place among humanity (12.3) and, though excruciating, includes an element of joy (Heb. 12.2). See Amy L. B. Peeler, ��, Koinonia 20 (2008), pp.12�26. 129 These texts describe God as eternal: Exod. 15.18; Deut. 32.40; Pss. 9.7; 10.16; 29.10; 92.8; 102.12; Wis. 3.8; Sir. 39.20; Isa. 48.12; Lam. 5.19; 2 Macc. 1.25; Sib. Or. frg. 1.16; T. Mos. 10.7. 130 �� important theme of �� 1

1. ��

57

thereby highlighting the direct address of the citation. 131 This is a citation from the last stanza of Psalm 101, a Psalm of deliverance voiced by one who is af�icted.132 In this psalm, God hears the groaning of the prisoners and sets them free from those who put them to death (101.20; see Heb. 2.15 and 5.7), with the result that the psalmist praises his name (101.21; see Heb. 2.12). As the Lord, the Son is involved in creation, laying the foundations of the earth and creating the heavens with his hands. This phrase provides scriptural support for the assertion in 1.2 that it was through the Son that the ages were made. There is a subtle shift here, however, for the Son ��.2 is now the actor. The psalm elevates the Son to the same role as that held by God; 133 both he and God are the creators. In addition to the elevated status of the Son, this quote also works to highlight the enduring nature of the Son. While creation will be destroyed, grow old, be rolled up and changed, the Lord will remain (��), stay the same (��), and never see his years end (��). Because the angels are associated with creation, this verse sharply contrasts him with their temporality. With this address to his Son, God makes clear that his Son possesses an eternal nature. He was there with God at creation and will remain with God forever (cf. 13.8). 131 Some mss of the Greek Old Testament also have �� at the beginning of the line (A, Graeco-Latinum Veronense, Purpureum Turicense). Bauckham notes that the �� (Jesus Christ) at the same beginning with which Genesis begins, the primordial eternity before the creation of the heavens and the earth, for which the pre-existent ��Jesus and the God of Israel, p.243). 132 �� -12 and the Septuagint ��ZNW 3 [1902], pp.280�5; C. D. F. Moule, The Birth of the New Testament [BNTC, 1; London: Adam & Charles Black, 1962], pp.77�8; Bruce, Hebrews, pp.61�2; Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalms Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews [Amsterdam: Wed. G. Van Soest N.V., 1961], pp.79�80) see a messianic address by God in the text of the Greek Psalm itself, due to the addition of the �� and the vocative ��. This conjecture is possible, but not certain (see Attridge, Hebrews, p.60 n.122). Whether this ascription is warranted by the Greek version or not, the author still ascribes a name associated with God to Christ and God-like qualities of creation and eternality. 133 �� thing which sets God apart from all other reality, Bauckham lists Isa. 40.26, 28; 42.5; 45.12, 18; 48.13; 51.16; Neh. 9.6; Hos. 13.4 LXX; 2 Macc. 1.24; Sir. 43.33; Bel. 5; Jub. 12.3-5; Sib. Or. 3.20-35; 8.375-76; Sib. Or. frg. 1.5-6; frg. 3; frg. 5; 2 En. 47.3-4; 66.4; Apoc. Ab. 7.10; Pseudo-Sophocles; Jos. Asen. 12.1-2; T. Job 2.4 (Jesus and the God of Israel, p.9 n.8). 1

58

You Are My Son

E. The Invitation: Psalm 109.1 LXX The conclusion of the catena mirrors its beginning: a rhetorical question suggesting that a certain statement by God was never addressed to an angel. This last statement of God in ch. 1 is the �rst explicit citation of Ps. 110.��ment. In this psalm, the writer is reporting the speech of YHWH to his lord. In the gospels, Jesus himself raises the question of how the Messiah can be the son of Davi��t. 22.43-44; Mk 12.36; Lk. 20.42). The conclusion, made explicit in Acts 2.34, is that Jesus is the Lord who is at the right hand of God. The author of Hebrews reads this psalm with the same referent for the identity of ��ord�� The author �nds warrant for doing so in the context of the psalm itself. First, like the previous citation, this psalm is also spoken to the ��.134 �� is addressed to the Son comes in v. 3. There��I begot you from the womb before the morning star��135 The author, who makes great use of vv. 1 and 4, surely could not have missed the familial resonances of v. 3 in the LXX.136 God and the one to whom God is speaking are related by ��he case with Ps. 2.7, this is the Father�� This psalm functions as divinely articulated scriptural support for 1.3c, and brings to a climax �� excellence of the Son who sits at the very right hand of God. Moreover, �� made the session of Christ at the right hand of the majesty on high into a reality. Finally, it is a promise from God himself that nothing will challenge the superiority of the Son: he will reign supreme over all, even over his enemies. With these citations the author has asserted � through the speech of God himself � that worship, an eternal throne �� kingdom, the role of creator of all things, eternity, and eventual complete 134 This title is part of the introduc�� of God himself. Hence, in maintaining these citations as the direct speech of God to the Son, the author leaves the name �� unexpressed here. 135 John Collins argues that the Greek presupposes a Hebrew reading wherein the psalm speaks of the divine birth of the King; see Adela Yarbro and John J. Collins, King and Messiah as Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), pp.17� 19. For further discussion of this verse, see below, p.117 n.30. 136 In addition to this resonance in v. 3, this psalm, like Psalm 2 and Psalm 44, refers to the rod of the king (v. 2) and portrays God saying that this lord rules among the holy ones (Heb. 2.11) in brightness (Heb. 1.3).

1

1. ��

59

sovereignty belong to the Son. By portraying him as the eternal CreatorKing worthy of the worship of the angels, the author has portrayed God attributing to his Son his own divine attributes. F. The Inherited Name T�� status. Those things that God proclaims as belonging to his Son are bound up with the names with which God addresses his Son. The Father addresses the Son with two names in vv. 6-13, the only two vocatives of the chapter. First, in the citation of Psalm 44, the author boldly positions God addressing the Son as ��.137 Second, in the citation of Psalm 101, God addresses the Son with the name ��. As the heir of his Father, Jesus inherits the names by which his Father is known, �� and ��. Like his Father, he is God. Because he is ��, he has a just, righteous, and eternal throne. Like his Father, he is Lord. Because he is ��, he is the creator and will endure forever. If Jesus inherits both of these names, why does the author say that Jesus has inherited an �� in the singular? I suggest that the author sees these names as a unit. Not God and Lord, but Lord God, �� , a designation for God in ��scriptures (Gen. 2�4; Exod. 34.14; Lev. 8.35; Josh. 7.19; Judg. 4.23). 138 137 The psalm itself presents this ambiguity. It is a psalm addressed to a king, and the �ow of the psalm seems to indicate that the human author is addressing the king as �� in v. 7 (Attridge appeals to grammatical precedent and Jewish interpretations to show that the author of Hebrews stands in a line of tradition which reads �� as a vocative [Hebrews, p.58; see also Collins and Collins, King and Messiah, pp.56�7]). In the last stanza (Heb. 1.9), the vocative use of �� is not as clear. Both instances of �� Hebrews, p.10; Westcott, Hebrews, p.27). It could also be possible that the son is called �� here again, either reading the �rst �� , Hebrews, pp.59�60; Braun, An die Hebräer, p.40; DeSilva, Perseverance, p.99; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.124; Michel, Hebräer, p.118; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:20); or reading the �rst �� as a �� Hurst agrees that the Son is addressed as �� here, but sees this address connected �� divinization of the king as has been claimed for surrounding cultures. The author could rightfully see Christ as the inheritor of the royal title �God� precisely because, �� correct about the function of this verse in the LXX, but because the author of Hebrews presents this citation as the speech of God, the divine address becomes quite interesting. It is God, not another human, that is calling another person ��. 138 Bauckham reaches a similar conclusion, �� excellent than those of angels must be the Hebrew divine name, the Tetragrammaton�

1

60

You Are My Son

�� this name that is different from (��) the names they possess. The angels, while sometimes ��, are never gods or lords. Jesus is superior to the angels because he has inherited a superior name, not �� but �� and ��. �� continues to construct a particular image of God his Father. 139 �� speeches reiterate his supreme power. God has the power to command his angels. God chooses whom to anoint as king. 140 God will subdue all enemies under the feet of his Son in the end. God permits his Son to �� crafting of the citation from Deuteronomy 32 portrays God commanding not the worship of himself, but directing the angels to give their worship to the �rstborn. In so doing, God presents himself as sovereign over the angels and yet including his Son as co-object of their worship. The same is true of v. 8. It is God who proclaims to his Son that he is to reign forever. Only God could guarantee an eternal reign, and it is as a Father that he does so for his Son. In vv. 10-12, the author shows that God shares his divine role with the Son, this time the role of creator. Finally, in v. 13, God has again shared his authority by raising the Son to the favored position at his right hand and will use his power to make his Son

(Jesus and the God of Israel�� of this movement, and in an emphatic position as the �nal word of the exordium, stands a name; but it is a name which we do not know. Son? This seems natural in view of the next verse where God addresses the Son (though �� there is as much title as name). Is it, then, the tetragrammaton. This would accord with what has �� dentally excellent, not speci�able, in�nitely regressive, bearer of the name beyond �� Re�� and Hart [eds], Epistle to the Hebrews, pp.69�94 [93]). For a similar argument, see Long, Hebrews, p.44�5. 139 �� describing the Son as one who reigns with uprightness and justice, God is thereby shown to be a just and wise Father who exalts his worthy Son to the eternal throne. In addition, the author depicts God in the joyful context of anointing with the oil of gladness. God instigates a celebration at the installment of his Son to his throne, thereby showing himself to be a God who initiates joyous occasions. 140 This is clear from v. 9 (��, but is put into even �� the Son. 1

1. ��

61

�� has opened himself up to share both the rights and responsibilities of his status as God. Hence, the author highlights both the sovereign power and graciousness of God as a Father to his Son. God shares everything that is his with the Son because he shares his identity with his Son. God has bequeathed to his Son his own name �� and, in so doing, has granted to him all that comes with being the Lord God. V. Conclusion The familial relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son �gures prominently throughout the �rst chapter of Hebrews. The author highlights this relationship most clearly in the �rst citations (Heb. 1.5). By selecting, arranging, and introducing Psalm 2 and 2 Sam. 7.14 in the way that he does, the author af�rms that God is related to Jesus as a Father to a Son. Once the familial emphasis of Heb. 1.5 becomes clear, it is also evident that this relationship forms the backdrop for the description of the Son in vv. 1-4 as well. There, the author combines the two motifs of sapiential and Davidic Christology into the framework of a ��nouncements �� relationship through the catena in vv. 6-13 and shows that as the Father grants his name to his Son, God also grants to him all the rights and responsibilities that come with that inherited name. Because God is in relationship with one whom he has designated as his Son and in that relationship has invited him to share in the creation, sustenance, and governance of all things, the author has constructed a Christology asserting that the one who has the name and attributes of his Father is God. God speaks to the Son in psalms that were originally addressed to God. He directs the worship of his angels to the Son. He promises his Son that he will remain the same forever. He addresses him by the name ��. This exalted Christology is a relational Christology, attaining its height because of its integral and inseparable relation��his relationship with God � from the realit�� Son. The familial relationship between God and Jesus conveys a particular theological and Christological point that maintains a delicate �� his name is Lord God � but he is not another god alongside the God of Israel; he is ��God and the one through whom he is speaking are both God, 1

62

You Are My Son

both Lord, both reign, and both create. Nevertheless, despite all of these designations of dignity, the Father/Son relationship retains a distinction between the two. Jesus is not another God, but is God because he is the Son of God.141 The �rst thing the author states about him � that he is the heir of all things � aptly sums up the rest of the chapter. Through the chapter it becomes clear that all things include speci�cally the worship of angels, �� promise that everything will be subjected under his feet. He has inherited all things because of who he is, the Son of the Lord God. Because God the Father has allowed his Son to inherit his name, he has granted to him the unparalleled authority, majesty, trustworthiness, and excellency that comes with it. �� has appointed his Son, ��, as heir of all things. In constructing such an exalted Christology, the author has also built a paternal theology in which God � without compromising his supremacy � has involved another in his actions and attributes because he has given his name to his Son as an inheritance. Not surprising for one versed in ��acy and power. God made the ages. All things are at his discretion to give to his Son. He commands the angels, establishes an eternal king, and subdues enemies. He is the majesty on high. The author is also grounded in his tradition in his portrayal of this powerful God as a relational God. The very �rst thing the author of Hebrews says in his sermon is that God is a God who speaks, and that God has opened himself to interact with others. The author con�rms this portrayal with the �rst words of God that proclaim he has established himself in a familial relationship of Father and Son. Moreover, he will maintain this relationship with his Son at his right hand until the consummation of all things. In this relationship, he chooses to use his supremacy to give an unsurpassed inheritance to his Son and to guarantee that he will receive it in full. By crafting words addressed to ��s Son, the author shows that as his Father, God shares those things that are his particular possessions � the worship of the angels, a hand in creation, an eternal reign � with his Son. The ��s�� portrays God as a magnanimous Father.

141 Origen highlights the distinction captured by Father/Son language (Dial. 2). �� distinct, subsisting realities; it is logically impossible in using them not to distin��Fatherhood, p.87).

1

1. ��

63

The sonship of Jesus af�rms both his excellency and his differentiation from God. At the same time, the Fatherhood of God expresses both his sovereignty and his inclusion of another in his glory. The identities of both God and Jesus the author constructs through the presentation of their familial relationship set the framework for the theological, Christological, and ecclesiological vision for the remainder of the letter. That God is this kind of Father � powerful and magnanimous � and that Jesus is this kind of Son � eternal and sovereign � provide the groundwork for �� Father who perfects through suffering and Jesus is his obedient Son. Both aspects of their relationship allow the author to declare that he and his congregation are also �� of God.

1

Chapter 2

�� SON�� THE SUFFERING HEIR OF GOD�S CHILDREN

�� (Heb. 2.1). With this particular statement interpreters of the New Testament mark out the beginning of a new chapter in the sermon to the Hebrews.1 It is here, after the �rst exhortation to the audience (2.1-4),2 1 ��4 as the second subsection of the �rst main head��2, �� Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews [SubBi, 12; Rome: Ponti�cio Instituto Biblico, 1989], p.��-linguistic analysis of the Epistle treats 2.1-4 as the �rst warning of the exhortation section, 2.5-9 as a subpoint to the catena of the �rst chapter, and 2.10-18 as the second point in the �rst ��The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis [NovTSup, 73; New York: Brill, 1994], p.144). ��-4 as the �nal subcategory of the �rst section, and 2.5-18 � ��ed with Humanity to �� as the second section (A Discourse Analysis of the Letter to the Hebrews: The Relationship Between Form and Meaning [LNTS, 297; London: T&T Clark, 2005], pp.93, 100). 2 In 1.14 the author describes humanity as those who are about to inherit salvation (��). This nomenclature retains the familial theme so pervasive throughout the �� heirs suggests that they too �� purview of the sermon again when the author extols the necessity for all of them � his readers and himself � to pay attention to what they have heard (2.1). They have heard about the salvation that will be inherited, and the author is concerned that they might ignore it (2.3). He also indicates that they are familiar with this salvation on more than just an auditory level. His primary concern is that they not drift away (��) from the salvation about which they have heard (2.1). The danger of moving away from it implies that they are in some way now attached to the salvation that was proclaimed to them. Eric Mason argues that the author is warning his �� the annual meeting of the Midwest Region of the SBL, Bourbonnais, IL, 12

2. ��

65

that the author shifts his attention from �� to his temporary inferiority below them (2.7a, 9a). Although hints of this ��cation �� 1.3c), it is not until this section that the driving concern of the author turns to the human experience of Jesus. Having �rmly established the familial relationship between God and Jesus and the exalted nature of Christ based in that relationship, the second chapter �eshes out that which is penultimate to the events of ch. 1 by tracing the path Jesus took on the way to his exalted position.3 Despite this change in emphasis, the Father/Son relationship between God and Jesus remains essential for reading this portion of Hebrews as �� will become human and will experience death. This chapter contends that these events ��lial status as is his exaltation. The �lial nature of this journey is evident in two ways. First, Jesus experiences this journey in the context of the familial relationship in which he participates with God: God the Father calls Jesus the Son to take his place as his heir after he experienced death. Second, the author is as concerned with the inheritance of Jesus the Son in these verses as he is in the �rst chapter. The difference in this section is that the author preaches not that God has appointed Jesus as heir of all things, but how Jesus has attained this position and what is included in his inheritance �� Son. �� and because it does so, he must suffer death to take his place as heir of all things. I argue these two points as I treat each section of Heb. 2.6-16 �� February 2011]). Their present attachment to this salvation makes them members of �� cates early on that those whom the sermon addresses are children of God. Therefore, his exhortation that they hold fast to what they have heard � namely the message �� is an exhortation that they hold fast so that they might attain their inheritance. 3 U��, pp.103�23) and L. D. ��64), who see the work of Hebrews 1 as preparatory for the main point expressed in ch. 2, I see ch. 1 laying the ��then �� equally important for the argument of the author, but the movement from exaltation to humiliation captures the depths of what God and Jesus accomplished for humanity in his humiliation that a move in the opposite direction could not have. By beginning �� more apparent. 1

66

You Are My Son

conveyed through the lens of the familial relationship between God and his many ��. The arguments of this chapter contribute to my overarching thesis in three ways. First, I show that the author continues his emphasis upon the ��Fatherhood (2.10, 11), the references to the inheritance of Jesus (2.8), and the familial language of sons (2.10), brothers (2.11, 12, 17), and children (2.13, 14) con�rm that the author has not relegated familial imagery to the �rst chapter. Second, because he maintains this emphasis, the actions of God and Jesus depi�� of their character. Jesus is the Son who trusts his Father to the point of death because God the Father wills his Son to suffer so that he might be perfected. Finally, this chapter introduces the identity of the audience of Hebrews � the family of God � and the inheritance of salvation to which they can look forward because they are included in the inheritance of Jesus. As Heb. 1.2 says, God has appointed his Son Jesus heir of all things. Hebrews 2 describes how this appointment is realized in the relationship between the Father and the Son by describing the vital role �� temporary inferiority in the cosmic hierarchy plays in the journey to his exalted position. Jesus the Son of God becomes a son of man in order to �� I. The Son of Man Inherits All Things Through the Suffering of Death: Hebrews 2.6-9 Psalm 8.5-7 LXX �� humanity. In it, he �nds scriptural af�� cally includes the human experience of death. The author also draws out of this Psalm �� heir of all things and the implications of this process for humanity. A. The Inheritance of Jesus: Psalm 8.7 �� humiliation in the second chapter, his citation of Psalm 8 and especially his �� heir. This psalm extols the God-given glory of all humanity. Praise comes forth out of the mouths of babes and infants (v. 3) 4 for the God 4 The characterization of the ones who praise God as children resonates with the familial descriptions of Jesus and the audience throughout Hebrews. 1

2. ��

67

who founded the great expanse of the heavens and the stars. In light of the majesty of God, the p�� this small portion of his creation, God set the place of men and women just below that of the angels,5 and bestows on them glory and honor. Finally, in accord with the Genesis narrative (Gen. 1.26, 28), the psalmist declares that God has placed people as sovereign over the things of the earth, including beasts, birds, and sea creatures. The Psalm begins and ends with praise to the Lord in light of his great goodness toward the sons and daughters of men. The author of Hebrews cites vv. 5-7 and 8b of this psalm. His citation ends with the p�� God has subjected all things under the feet of humanity (�� ). When the author discusses the psalm in the next few verses, he begins by emphasizing the last line of his citation.6 For the author of Hebrews, ��all things. The author states that when God subjected all things, God left nothing (��) that is not subjected (��) to him. Nothing is outside of the sovereignty of this ��. To prepare for this point, the author of Hebrews has not cited Ps. 8.8-9, lines that delineate �� as various types of animals. The psalm, by specifying ��, limits the meaning of ��. These lines circumscribe the dominion of the son of man to earthly things. By not articulating these lines, the author of H�� than that described in the original psalm.7 In light of his comments that 5 ��scriptures (Job 38.7; Pss. 96.7 LXX; 137.1 LXX; Dan. 2.11; 3.92 LXX), the translators of the Hebrew Vorlage use �� for �� or ��. Through linguistic means, this choice conveys the high place angels hold in the universe. 6 �� ship Between the Son of Man in Hebrews 2.6 and 2.9 and the Implications for English Translation�� in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in Its Ancient Contexts [Richard Bauckham et al., eds; LNTS, 387; London: T&T Clark, 2008], pp.88�99 [95]). 7 So also notes Albert Pietersma: �� ] to include the entire creation, therefore departing from the Greek of Psalm 8, and possibly from the Hebrew as well. The appointment of the risen Christ, by God, thus comprises al�� -Production and Text-�� Die Septuaginta � Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 20.�23. Juli 2006 [M. Karrer, W. Kraus, and M. Meiser, eds; WUNT, 219; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008], pp.485�501 [494]). 1

68

You Are My Son

�� God subjecting not just animals but actually everything. �� and subsequent reiteration � of Ps. 8.7b establishes a connection with the �rst chapter of Hebrews. The words of the last line, ��, echo the language and the theme of the previously cited scripture text in Heb. 1.13. There, in the words of Ps. 109.1 LXX�� enemies under his feet (��). 8 Both psalms depict God placing something under the feet of another. The similarity of Ps. 8.7b to Ps. 109.1 makes Psalm 8 a �tting text to ��rstborn Son.9 Some commentators exclude any reference to Jesus in the citation of Ps. 8.7.10 For example, Victor C. P�tzner writes: ��hat the psalm quotation must be read as �rst referring to humanity becomes clear in the initial comment on the text in verse 8b. God made no exceptions in giving humans universal dominion.�11 Blomberg agrees and clari�es what he thinks the author ��nce humans were given dominion over every inch of this planet��12 If this is the point the author wished to make, it would serve his argument well to quote Ps. 8.8-9. By not doing so, the comments of the ��all things� encompasses much more than the earth alone. Although it is not a royal psalm, 13 �� citation and explanation of it cast it as a reference to the inheritance of �� While similar, these two psalm texts are not synonymous. In Psalm 8, God subjects not just enemies, but all things (��). The completely ��thereby establishes a link with the ��rst assertion about the Son in Heb. 1.2. In this verse, the author states that the Son is the one whom God has appointed as heir of all 8 Other books in the New Testament establish a connection between Psalms 8 and 109 LXX in referring to Jesus (1 Cor. 15.25-27; Phil. 3.21; Eph. 1.20-22). 9 Authors who see a Christological interpretation of this line include Attridge (Hebrews, p.72); Braun (An die Hebräer, p.56); Bruce (Hebrews, p.74); DeSilva (Perseverance, p.110), Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.152); George Guthrie and Russell ��6 in Hebrews 2:5�� JETS 49.2 [2006], pp.235�46); Johnson (Hebrews, p.91); Spicq (Hébreux, p.2:32); Windisch (Hebräerbrief, p.20). 10 Moffatt, Hebrews, p.24; Monte�ore, Hebrews, pp.57�8. 11 P�tzner, Hebrews, p.62. 12 Blomberg, �� 13 Psalm 8 is classi�ed as a hymn of praise and more speci�cally as a psalm of creation (Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1�50 [WBC, 19; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004], p.106). 1

2. ��

69

things (��). By adding emphasis to the statement of Ps. 8.7b that God subjects all things under his feet, the author evokes both the last and the �rst statements about the Son in Hebrews 1. Ps. 109.1/Heb. 1.13 �� Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies under your feet

Ps. 8.7/Heb. 2.8

�� You subjected all things under his feet

Heb. 1.2 �� Whom he appointed heir of all things

��all things. For the author of Hebrews, this sovereignty precisely describes the inheritance God grants to his Son (��, Heb. 1.2). Consequently, in Ps. 8.7b, the author �nds a s�� s unparalleled inheritance and ��In other words, for the author, Palm 8 depicts �� as heir of everything that rightfully belongs to him �� The resonance of Ps. 8.7b with Heb. 1.2 and Heb. 1.13/Ps. 109.1 LXX also illuminates the temporal quali�cation the author adds to the last line of the citation. Immediately after his assertion that nothing is left in rebellion against ��.8b) �� sovereignty is not yet perceivable (�� the timing is not as settled as the psalm text suggests. Such an admission is not due to the faulty perception of the audience, but comes because ��ot yet a full reality. ��cation regarding the time when all things will be subjected to Jesus aligns with his previous statements about �� (1.2). An heir is usually14 one who looks forward to the possession of his inheritance.15 �� his enemies (1.13; cf. 10.13), with God commanding him to sit at the right hand until (��) the time that God subjects his enemies. Interestingly, Psalm 109 exerts 14 In a few examples, �� indicates someone who already possesses the things in question: Plutarch, Cic. 41.3 (1.881f); Judg. 18.17; Mic. 1.13 (W. Foerster, ��, TDNT 3.767�85). 15 Mt. 21.38/Mk 12.7/Lk. 20.14; Rom. 4.13; Gal. 3.29; 4.1; Tit. 3.7; Heb. 6.17; �� ll things�, a designation with a �� Perseverance, p.87). So also Johnson about this ��Hebrews, p.67). 1

70

You Are My Son

in�uence on the way in which the author is reading Psalm 8. A time will certainly come when God will subject all things to his Son, but that time has not yet arrived from the temporal perspective of the author and his audience.16 The author reads a three-stage movement in the Psalm.17 First, interpreters of Hebrews largely agree that the author interprets the two complementary phrases of Ps. 8.6 � which in the psalm describe the present state of humanity � as a narrative of the journey Jesus experiences from humiliation to exaltation. 18 Although the author and his readers see a Jesus who has been made lower than the angels (Heb. 2.9), he certainly retains that lowered state no longer. As the previous chapter of Hebrews forcefully argued, Jesus is now elevated above the angels. The author plays upon the dual meaning of the phrase ��, which can function either as an indicator of degree or as an indicator of time. 19 Jesus was lowered below the angels for a time but is now exalted above them, where he has been crowned with glory and honor. Second, the author makes a similar temporal distinction between the citation in Heb. 2.7b and Heb. 2.8a.20 The psalm is correct as portraying God subjecting all ��cation is that this event has not yet been fully consum��we do not yet see all thin�� (Heb. 2.8c). Therefore, Jesus was lowered below the angels, is now crowned with glory and honor, and looks forward to the time when he will possess the inheritance promised by his Father. By emphasizing the totality and futurity of the events depicted in Ps. 8.7b, the author presents this psalm text as an af�rmation of the great hope that God the Father avows that Jesus, the Son, will one day take full possession of all things, his promised inheritance. 16 ��hings is yet to ��Hebrews, p.72). 17 So also James Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in Light of the Aqedah (AnBib, 94; Rome: Ponti�cal Biblical Institute, 1981), p.162. 18 Attridge, Hebrews, p.72; Bruce, Hebrews, p.72; John Calvin, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews (W. B. Johnston, trans.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), p.56; DeSilva, Perseverance, p.109; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.151; Grässer, An die Hebräer, p.1:121; Johnson, Hebrews, p.90; Mitchell, Hebrews, p.66, Moffatt, Hebrews, p.23; and Westcott, Hebrews, pp.43, 45. 19 ��, LSJ, p.328. 20 �� already having had the earth in subjection to itself, however brie��ut We See ��p.94). In his treatment of v. 6, the author shows that he is not bound to the time line laid out in the psalm. He interprets it in such a way that it aligns with the experience of Jesus described in his comments that follow. 1

2. ��

71

B. The Inheritance of the �� In light of ch. 1, it comes as no surprise that the author would again ��Next to God, the Son reigns, awaiting the time when all things � which are �� and heir � are subjected under his feet. The ��alm 8, however, offers an interesting counterpoint to the same themes in the ��na of citations. Jesus is still the �� who will inherit all things. The great difference in this section of Hebrews is that the author portrays Jesus in this position of sovereignty not simply as the �� but more precisely as the �� .21 Ascribing these lines of the psalm � �� ; (Ps. 8.5) � to the Son of God described in Hebrews 1 is not without controversy. Some commentators on Hebrews interpret these lines anthropologically to the exclusion of any reference to Jesus. Moffatt, for example, clearly represents this line ��he application to the messiah of words like those quoted ��st as the ideal or representative Man��22 This argument sits ill with the statement appearing a few verses later where the author portrays Jesus as a human being. Here, the author declares that Jesus took on �esh and blood (v. 14) and that he was made like his siblings in all ways (v. 17). Moreover, he is a representative man due to the fact that he has tasted death for all (2.9). The author was under no compulsion to cite v. 5 of the psalm. Consequently, without any break or shift between Heb. 2.6 and 2.7, reading the citation as a continuous description of Jesus, who by

21 If the aut�� ExpTim 86 [1975], pp.328�32), he does not employ it explicitly in his explanation of Psalm 8 or elsewhere in the letter. Without appealing to the gospel tradition, Mof�tt highlights messianic connections to the Son of Man present in intertestamental literature (Atonement and Resurrection, pp.125�7). �� , for the author to the Hebrews, could then describe Je��Hebrews, p.74; Grässer, An die Hebräer, p.118; Johnson, Hebrews, p.90; Koester, Hebrews, p.215; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:47; Mitchell, Hebrews, p.65) and also his messianism. This psalm provides the bene��ith familial language. 22 Moffatt, Hebrews, p.�� rst line of the quotation is the hardest of all to �t into a Christological view�� p.93�4), and Monte�� rst citation of Psalm viii Jesus is not mentioned nor do the words refer to him� [O]ur writer does not apply ��Hebrews, p.57). 1

72

You Are My Son

being lowered below the angels, became a human being achieves a coherence for the argument.23 If the author is appealing to this psalm to describe the humanity of Jesus, then it follows that Jesus takes his place as the Sovereign under whom God will subject (1.13) his inheritance of all things (1.2) as an ��. The contribution of Psalm 8 to the sermon is that �� as a human being. David Mof�tt argues this point persuasively in his book, Atonement and the Logic of Resurrection in the Epistle to the Hebrews.24 Surveying literature produced by different groups in the Second Temple period, Mof�� the inheritance of a renewed, incorruptible �� that will come to the faithful of Israel. 25 Although some Jewish texts that re�ect upon Psalm 8 emphasize the lowliness of humanity in comparison with the angels,26 others highlight the glory of humanity reigning over the creation. The author of 4 Ezra makes a connection between Psalm 8 and in��placed Adam as ruler over all the works �� [Metzger]). The author then suggests that as those who have come from Adam, the chosen people should be in possession of the created world. Such, however, is not the case. Instead, the nations rule over them. The author points out this dissonance to the ��ut we your people, whom you have called your �rst-born, only begotten, zealous for you, and most dear, have been given into their hands. If the world has indeed been created for us, why do we not possess our w��58-59 [Metzger]). The angel sent by God replies that Israel will inherit the coming world. Mof�tt ��the unseen city of Zion/Jerusalem is the heavenly reality ��ealed when God transfo��27

23 �� even truer when appli��Hebrews, p.90). Also in support of a reference to Jesus in this line are Attridge (Hebrews, p.73; ��p.205), Braun (Hebräer, p.54), DeSilva (Perseverance, p.109), Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.152), Loader (Sohn und Hoherpriester, p.37), Michel (Hebräer, p.71), Spicq (Hébreux, p.2:31), and Windisch (Hebräerbrief, p.20). 24 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, pp.118�41. 25 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.82. 26 3 En. 5.10; Pesiq. Rab. 34a; b. Sanh. 38b. 27 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.102. 1

2. ��

73

In another likely allusion to Psalm 8, 2 Baruch �� that the coming world is for the righteous ones, and it is a crown of great glory (15.1-��inherit this time of which it is spoken, and to them is the heritage of the promised time� For the coming world ��8-15 [Klijn]). At this point their excellence will be greater even than the angels (51.11-12). Similarly, the Dead Sea Scrolls include hope for the restoration of the ��all the inheritance of Adam�28 wherein the vindication ��blessings of peace and everlasting life �� at inheritance [extends] beyond the borders of the land to encompass the entire world��29 So also in Jubilees, the Lord promises to Israel that they ��rule in all the nations as they have desired. And after this, all of the earth will be gathered together and they will inheri��-19 [Wintermute]). From several citations in the Life of Adam and Eve, Mof�tt concludes, � �a�� 3:10 is intended to be identi�ed with the inheritance God plans to give hi��30 In light of these texts, Mof��the promise God made to Abraham regarding the land is taken ultimately to be a promise to inherit the world as it will be in the coming age��31 Mof�tt argues that the author of Hebrews, similar to his contemporaries surveyed above, appeals to Ps��to demonstrate that the �� to come�is not subjected to the angels, but to the human beings who are about to inherit it (1:14; 2:5). The man called Jesus is the �rst human being to have obtained this inheritance.�32 Along with others,33 Mof�tt offers a �tting critique to those who read the citation of Psalm 8 exclusively in the direction of anthropology or �� he attempt to draw a sharp distinction between the anthropological and the Christological interpretations of the use of Ps 8 in Heb 2 looks, therefore, like a false dichotomy� Christology and anthropology are inextricably intertwined.�34 This psalm is about both

28 1QS 4.23a; 4Q171 3.2a. 29 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.89. 30 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.109. 31 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.117. 32 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.129. 33 DeSilva, Perseverance, pp.108�12; Koester, Hebrews, p.221; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:48; Schenck, Setting of the Sacri�ce, pp.54�9. 34 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.128. 1

74

You Are My Son

Jesus and humanity because Jesus is a human being. Th��ment of Psalm 8 reveals that when he speaks of the Son, the title refers to more than just his divine quali�cations. Indeed�� who became a son of man and remained so when he was seated at the ��35 C. Because of the Suffering of Death Hebrews af�rms that Jesus is the heir of all things. In ch. 1, the author emphasizes that as the Son of God, Jesus has been promised an inheritance including all that has been created by both him and his Father. In ch. 2, the author appeals to Psalm 8, in accord with other Jewish traditions, to argue that as an �� Jesus has taken the place God intended for all humanity as the heir of all things. Because Jesus is both the divine Son and the human Son, he is the heir of all things. According to the argument of ch. 2, however, his dual sonship is not all that is required in order for him to take full possession of his comprehensive inheritance. One more critical quali�cation for his placement ��is needed. The author of Hebrews asserts that Jesus took his place as heir of all things because he suffered, and particularly because he suffered ��thus features as one more vital element tha�� right hand. When the author speci�es the identity of the speci�c son of man in question in Psalm 8 � Jesus is named for the �rst time � the author also articulates the means through which this son of man came to be crowned with glory and honor: the suffering of death (��, Heb. 2.9). ��duction to this text (2.5) and the reference to angels in the psalm, this phrase illuminates both his humiliation below the angels and his exaltation above them.36 First, the humiliation reached its nadir in his experience of death. His participation in mortality provides the incontrovertible evidence that Jesus was placed below the angels.37 Angels were created beings (as Heb. 1.7 asserts), but as spirits, they were not subject to the same limited time on earth as humanity. 38 His suffering of death shows 35 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, pp.138�42. 36 Attridge also �� Hebrews, p.73). 37 ��so completely entered into the sphere of human existence as to embrace mortality, in co�� Hebrews, p.91). 38 Luke 20.36 preserves a tradition that angels were not subject to death. �� 1

2. ��

75

that he was an �� all the way through to the experience of mortality itself. Second, the phrase also provides the reason why Jesus �� lowered below the angels for a time, crowned with glory and honor, because of the suffering of death (2.9)��39 By setting the phrase this way, �� and honor.40 ��f the psalm, �� glory and honor is dire�� inheritance � all things � under his feet. This connection results from the absence of Ps. 8.7a, �� (�You have set h��).41 By not citing Ps. 8.7a,42 an immediate link exists �� for they are like the angels�� First Enoch contains a similar sentiment. Enoch is �� spiritual, the living ones, [possessing] eternal life� Indeed you, formerly you were spiritual (havin�� and become equal to the angels, for angels � those unbodied and blessed souls � are ��Sacr. 1.5 [Colson and Whitaker, LCL]). 39 �� exalted status is that such status is dependent upon what happens to Jesus as a human being, in the pre-eminently human event of his death (Hebrews, p.75; cf. Lane, Hebrews, p.1:49). 40 The same pattern is evident in Heb. 1.3-4. Before Jesus sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high, he made puri�cation for sins. In the center section of the letter, the author will show how making puri�cation was part of the sacri�cial �� 41 The mss of Hebrews that include this line are easily explained as adjustments to the LXX. The more dif�cult reading that lacks this line, preserved in P46 B Dc K L et al., is preferable (Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament [2nd ed.; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994], p.594). 42 This line makes the same assertion as the phrase in Ps. 8.7b. In both, God �� -Production�� pp.493�4). It is vv. 8 and 9 � not v. 7 � that circumscribe the dominion of this man to earthly things). Moreover, the author has already associated the Son with the �� in the citation of Ps. 101.26 LXX in the �rst chapter (Heb. 1.10). Koester also asserts the similarity between Ps. 8.7a and b and �� may have been accidental, or the author may have abbreviated the text to focus on what was most important for interpretation� (Hebrews, p.�� inheritance, all things which God subjects. 1

76

You Are My Son

�� states that Jesus is crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, the phrase also suggests as well that the suffering of death �� Only after he tastes mortality does ��on take his pla�� God subjects all things under the feet of Jesus because he is the Son of God who became a son of man to the point of death. It should not be missed, however, that he can take his exalted place as a human who has encountered death because of the action of God. It is God who appoints him to this position and God who subjects all things under his feet, but God is also involved in the journey to his exalted position as well. The ��ith his citation of Psalm 8. Psalm 8 is an address to God and thereby attributes to him the actions �� with glory and honor, and you subjected all things under his feet.� The author clearly established in the �rst chapter that it was God who exalted Jesus, and here, through the lines of the psalm, he adds that it was also �� experience and the condition for his exaltation, the psalm implies that God, as the agent of the humiliation and exaltation, is involved in the �� honorable heir. In v. 9, the author con�rms this implication in his own words. It is by the grace of God43 that Jesus tastes death. God humbles Jesus and gives him the grace to journey through death. This is the way in which God bestows the gift of inheritance on his Son, the heir. One �nal phrase must be noted before proceeding to the next pericope: ��. Jesu�� journey through death to his exalted position as heir of all things (��) radically alters how all people (��) stand in the face of death. The next section of Hebrews 2 places more emphasis upon �� instating Jesus as his heir and the bene�ts afforded to humanity that stem from his instatement.

43 The variant of v. 9, ��, supported primarily by the Church Fathers along with minuscules 0243 and 1739 and mss of the Vulgate and Syriac versions, lacks the widespread support of ��. Metzger suggests that it was either a scribal lapse or a marginal gloss referring to 1 Cor. 15.27 (Textual Commentary, p.594). Internally, the variant makes little sense in the context of both the continuous action of God in vv. 6-9 and also the argument of the following verse (2.10), that it was God who perfected Jesus through suffering. 1

2. ��

77

II. It Was Fitting: Hebrews 2.10 Hebrews 2.10 reiterates the same elements that appear in the preceding pericope. First, through his suffering, Jesus is changed. Second, it is God �� suffering directly affects many others. Consequently, these two portions of Hebrews 2 � the citation of/comments on Psalm 8 in vv. 6-8 and Heb. 2.10 � are mutually interpreting. Together, they contribute to �� perspective on how �� paternal relationship with Jesus impacts humanity. ��ath allows him to be the heir of ��. A. The Action of God The author states explicitly �� (2.10). God,44 whom the author describes as the one for whom (�� ) and through whom (��) all things exist,45 uses suffering (��) to perfect Jesus. The instrumental phrase �� suggests that because death is one form of suffering Jesus experienced (��, 2.9), death is included in the sufferings (��) mentioned here.46 This verse acts as con�rmation, following the suggestion of the psalm and the �� 44 The pronoun �� is not as explicit as the noun �� would be, leading several patristic interpreters to argue that the author is referring to the Logos (Athanasius, Inc. 10.3 [NPNF2 4:41]; Theodore of Mopsuestia, Comm. Hebr. [PG66.957]; Theodoret of Cyr, Comm. Hebrews [PG82.693]). On the other hand, the prepositional phrases and the reference to the grace of God that is instrumental in �� a��so also Attridge, Hebrews, p.82; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.159; Johnson, Hebrews, p.95; Koester, Hebrews, p.227; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:55; Martin Luther, �� Epistle to the Hebrews 1517��, in Luther: Early Theological Works [James Atkinson, ed. and trans.; LCC; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1962], pp.19� 250 [56]; Michel, Hebräer, p.78; Mitchell, Hebrews, p.72; Spicq, Hébreux, p.1:37). 45 �� over creation occurs frequently in Hellenistic literature. See Ps.-Aristotle, De mundo 397b; Marcus Aurelius, Med. 4.23; Aelius Aristides, Or. 45.14; Philo, Spec. 1.208; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 1.3; Rom. 11.36; 1 Cor. 8.6; Col. 1.16. 46 De�ned more broadly in v. 10, the pathos of Jesus is not focused on death, as it is in v. 9, but is expanded by the use of a plural noun to include the death �� d (2:10, 18), ��Hebrews, p.103). In support as well are DeSilva (Perseverance, p.114) and Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.161). 1

78

You Are My Son

�� happened to Jesus; his death took pla�� direction. God utilized this experience of suffering to perfect (��) Jesus. Whereas in the psalm the author ��cation and crowning following upon an allusion to his humiliation and death, in v. 10 the author emphasizes the perfection that follows upon �� B. Perfected as the Heir For centuries, the perfecting of Jesus has been a crux interpretum of the Epistle to the Hebrews.47 The previous chapter cited Kenneth Schenck�� statement of ��one might still ask in what way the wisdom of God, the �� .48 �� exaltation/vocational establishment49 as the ultimate high priest provide a 47 DeSilva, Perseverance, p.194; Thompson, Hebrews, p.66. Texts like these �� The Captain of Our Salvation: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Hebrews [BGBE, 15; J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck): Tübingen, 1973], p.96). Athanasius countered their interpretations by arguing that the Word, and not God, was the subject of perfection of the �� (Inc. 10.3 [NPNF2 4:41]). Gregory Nazianzen, on the other hand, interprets the dif�culties Christ experienced in learning outlined in 5.7-�� (Theo. Or. 4.6 [NPNF2 7:311]). John R. Walters gives voice to the problem for con�� and inappropriate with respect to Christ because it af�rms he had to learn obedience from what he suffered, and he had to be perfected� And it is at this point that our own sensibilities cause us to take a logical wrong turn. The processes of learning obedience and being perfected n��Perfection in New Testament Theology: Ethics and Eschatology in Relational Dynamic [MBPS, 25; Lewiston: Mellen Biblical, 1996], p.109). David Peterson presents a history of interpretation of the issue of perfection in Hebrews ranging from J. Kögel (1905) to L. K. K. Dey (1975) (Hebrews and Perfection, pp.1�20). To these, John M. Scholer adds more recent works (Proleptic Priests: Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews [JSNTSup, 14; Shef�eld: JSOT, 1991], pp.185�6), and in 2008, Kevin B. McCruden published another monograph-length study of the issue, arguing that �� bene�cence toward humanity (Solidarity Perfected: Bene�cent Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews [BZNW, 159; New York: W. de Gruyter, 2008]). 48 ��H��p.106. 49 Various nuances exist, of course, between these positions. J. Kögel argued ��cation, a state from which he would then lead �� im Hebräerbrief im 1

2. ��

79

helpful way forward. He has been perfected not in the sense that he was personally imperfect,50 but in the sense that now, after suffering, he is �t to exercise perfectly his role. I argue in what follows that attention to the familial dynamics of Hebrews shows that by being perfected, Jesus is also made �� verses. First, as noted, the author describes God as the one for whom (�� ) and through whom (��) all things exist. Because this description refers to the sovereignty of God over all creation, it also establishes a ��51 As the one through whom all things exist, God is the creator of that which he has promised to his Son as an inheritance (1.2). As the one for whom all things exist, God involves his �� sovereignty thus evokes the sovereignty Jesus shares as his Son and heir. �� Theologische Studien: Martin Kähler zum 6. Januar 1905 dargebracht [ed. Friedrich Giesebrecht; Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1905], pp.35�68). He is followed by the similar proposals of Koester (Hebrews, p.124), James Kurianal (Jesus Our High Priest: Ps 110, 4 as the Sub-structure of Heb 5,1�7, 28 [EurHoch, 23/693; Frankfurt: Lang, 2000], pp.219� 33), Lane (Hebrews, p.1:195), Lidgett (Sonship and Salvation, pp.148�9), and ��r��WTJ 39 [1976], pp.60�71). Mof��ed to enter heaven (Atonement and Resurrection, pp.195�8). David Peterson has championed the vocational interpretation wherein Jesus is quali�ed to be the ultimate high priest through obedience in Hebrews and Perfection. Attridge proposes a similar interpretation (Hebrews, p.86), and Lane includes it in his sequence of possible interpretations as well (Hebrews, p.1:57). In the same trajectory, Thomas G. Long states, �� (Hebrews, p.41). Despite different emphases, all these interpretations make a connection between Jesus being made perfect and his taking his place of honor and �� 50 Arguments for viewing the perfection of Jesus as the moral/ethical development of his humanity include those by Oscar Cullmann (The Christology of the New Testament [Shirley C. Guthrie and Charles A. M. Hall, trans; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964], pp.92�3); ��ZNW 10 [1909], pp.251�60); Moffatt (Hebrews, p.67); Hughes, Hebrews, p.187); Westcott (Hebrews, p.49); �� NTS 6 [1959�60], pp.159�67). These theories are not easily �� 7.26), which implies that Jesus committed neither sins of commission nor of omission (see McCruden, Solidarity Perfected, pp.19�20). 51 Ellingworth also sees the connection back to vv. 8-�� echoes �� in v. 8, and thus indirectly refers to the quotation from ��Hebrews, p.159). 1

80

You Are My Son

Second, a parallel between 2.9 and 2.10 informs the meaning of �� perfected. In the former, his suffering results in his being crowned with �� will be subjected. The suffering of Jesus establishes a connection between two results of his suffering: namely, his perfection and his �� v. 9

v. 10

Suffering �� through the suffering of death �� through sufferings

�� crowning with glory and honor subjecting all things �� to perfect

Hebrews 2.10 provides a way to understand how the author can employ the verb �� with respect to Jesus. For Jesus to be perfected does not mean that he was imperfect or immature. The connections with the previous pericope (2.6-9) suggest that when God perfects Jesus, God made Jesus �t to be his heir. C. God Leads Many �� to Salvation �� tting (��). Other writers describe what is �tting for God to do,52 but the statement by the author of Hebrews is distinguished by claiming that it is �tting to associate God with suffering. 53 Several interpreters of Hebrews explain this daring move by showing that the author bases �� salvi�� 54 The author makes the connection ��vation evident with two phrases: �� (�� ) �� ). 52 Plutarch, Is. Os. 78 (383A); Def. orac. 29 (426 B); Aristobulus (Eusebius, Praep. ev. 13.12.7�8); Philo (Leg. all. 1.48; Aet. mund. 41); Josephus (Ap. 2.168). 53 �� context is a rather bold move, since in Greek and Greco-�� Hebrews, p.82). So also Moffatt: ��Hebrews, p.29). 54 Attridge, Hebrews, p.82; see similarly Koester (Hebrews, p.235), Lane (Hebrews, p.1:��Hebrews, p.103), and Westcott (Hebrews, p.48). 1

2. ��

81

1. Leading Many Sons and Daughters God perfects Jesus through suffering in concert with leading many sons and daughters (��) to glory. This af�rmation is more precise, however, than a general soteriological comment. In addition to portraying the blessed state to which they are journeying, it also highlights the �lial status of those who reap the bene�� The familial connection �� those whom God is leading as ��. �� of �� conveys something important that is lost in inclusive translations. 55 The author does not employ the gender-neutral �� as he does in the following verses (2.13-14). Instead, he uses ��, surely not to imply that only men ��ory, but because it draws a connection between them and the Son (��) through whom God has spoken. Therefore, as it was true with the Son, so also it is true for the many ��. By the designa�� 56 the author is asserting that the God who created all things has chosen to involve himself with humanity as their Father. Second, the author displays the familial relationship between God and �� (��) them. This word is used in passages describing a parent leading children57 and God as a Father leading his children. 58 More importantly, however, in two other instances in Hebrews, the author uses this word to ��) the �rstborn (1.6) into the inhabited realm. In ch. 13, he led (��) the great shepherd of the sheep up from the dead (13.20). God performs the same action with respect to his Son and to humanity. Finally, God leads them into glory, a term almost exclusively related to Jesus elsewhere in Hebrews. Glory is that which Jesus emanates (1.3), that which God has bestowed on Jesus (2.7, 9; 5.5), and that which is due to Jesus (3.3; 13.21). Moreover, in each of these instances Jesus takes on the quality of glory as the Son, thereby suggesting that the many children come into glory by virtue of their �lial relationship to God as well. Moreover, as the �� 55 For example, the Geneva Bible, NAB, NLB, and NRSV translate �� as �children�. The Message paraphrase moves even farther from the imagery with the �� 56 It is interesting to speculate how the female members of this audience might have responded to being designated as �� and as heirs, particularly in a culture where it was the norm for sons to inherit th��above, p.15 n. 14). 57 Gen. 46.7; Exod. 2.10; 1 Macc. 6.15; Philo, Leg. 3.84. 58 Jer. 3.14; 38.9; Rom. 8.14. 1

82

You Are My Son

have faith in God are moving toward his Sabbath rest (4.9-10), his holy place (6.19), his eternal city (11.10, 16; 12.22), and his mountain (12.22), �� functions as another description of the realm in which God dwells.59 The author also associates glory (��) with God (1.3) and his presence (9.5). God is leading these people into a realm that characterizes God himself. Just as God established a relationship with the Son in such a way that he commands the Son to sit at his right hand, so too he establishes a relationship with humanity that is directed toward bringing his children to the realm of his glorious presence. 2. The Captain of Their Salvation The second phrase that conveys the salvi�c implications for humanity of �� the author describes Jesus as the �� children. An ��, generally denoting a leader,60 is often a founder or author in the sense of one who establishes something. 61 It may also refer to a leader in the sense of one who blazes a trail ahead of his followers.62 Hence, in addition to the idea that Jesus establishes their salvation, this title also indicates that Jesus is the forerunner of the group God is leading on the path toward glory.63 For those attuned to the LXX, it would have been dif�cult to miss the association between Jesus the �� and his namesake, ��, one of the pioneering spies from Num. 13.2-3 and 16, whom the author mentions in 4.8. If Hebrews encompasses all aspects of the �� s�� dual Joshuanic function, both the captain of the NC [i.e., New Covenant] 59 �� presence and power, but other humans as well�� Hebrews, p.96). Attridge (Hebrews, p.83), Braun, Hebräer, p.59), DeSilva (Perseverance, p.114), and Koester (Hebrews, p.228) espouse a similar interpretation. 60 Exod. 6.14; Num. 10.4; 16.2; 25.4; Deut. 33.21; 1 Chr. 5.24; 1 Esdr. 5.1; Neh. 2.9; Isa. 3.6. See Gerhard Delling, �� TDNT 1:487�8. 61 Plato, Tim. 96B; Isocrates, Paneg. 4.61; Diodorus Sciculus 15.81.2; 16.3.5; Josephus, Ant. 7.207. 62 Polybius, Hist. 2.40.2; referring to Heracles (Dio Chrysostom, Or. 33.47; Heraclitus, All. 34.8; Aelius Aristides, Or. 40.14); Num. 14.4 (this reference includes Joshua as an ��); Judg. 5.2; Jdt. 14.2; 1 Macc. 9.61. 63 �� ful�lls the function of various guides ��Hebrews, p.�� in Hebrews may have kept alive the Hellenistic metaphor of a pioneer opening a path ��Hebrews, p.161). 1

2. ��

83

community and the one who likewise discharges their salvation inheri��64 �� phrase also highlights the �lial status of those who are being saved. These �lial overtones of salvation are established at the end of the �rst chapter. There, the author asserts that in comparison to Jesus who is seated at �� to humanity.65 In retaining the theme of family that is so pervasive throughout the �rst chapter, the author portrays humanity as heirs. The angels minister to those who are about to inherit (��) salvation. Following on the ��Jesus as the Son whom God appointed heir (1.2), their66 ��dren.67 Consequently, when the author designates Jesus as the author of salvation he is, at the same time, referring to the inheritance o�� many sons and daughters. Moreover, since Jesus is the �� of �� many sons and daughters (��), the author draws forth another emphasis of the term ��: the head of a family (Exod. 6.14; Num. 13.3; 1 Chr. 5.24; 26.26; 1 Esdr. 5.1; Neh. 7.70, 71). As the perfect heir, he becomes the one leading (�� ) ��. His leadership �� sons and daughters. God thus perfects Jesus as his heir through suffer��many �� to glory. Consequently, this verse suggests that when Jesus is established �� D. The Character of a Father ��se of ��, �� suffering is �tting both because of what it achieves for humanity and also 64 Allen, Deuteronomy and Exhortation, p.172. 65 A tradition of angelic service on behalf of humanity is re�ected in the scriptures of Israel (Ps. 90.11; Tob. 5.1-16; T. Levi 3.5), Philo (Gig. 12, 16; Deus 158; Somn. 1.141), the New Testament (Mt. 4.11; 26.53; Mk 1.13), and Rabbinic writings (Mek. 3.98, 105). 66 See the discussion of Heb. 1.14�2.4 in n. 2 above. 67 ��is the ��Sonship and Salvation, p.117). This verse provides ��t of highlight�� heirs, it resonates better with the theme of the letter to say that the audience should stay faithful to their Father, rather than to their ��Perseverance, p.103). 1

84

You Are My Son

�� 68 I argue th�� perfecting Jesus as his heir so that humanity might be saved and led into �� Father and as such leads Jesus to his glorious position as the heir of God, so also he is their Father. And, as such, he leads them on a journey to �� children into their inheritance. �� many sons and daughters into their inheritance might not be so bold after all. It is �tting for God to act in this way because he is a Father who ��c action, however, �� of suffering is also appropriate to his role as a Father. There is a tradition, to which the author of Hebrews will allude in ch. 12, that asserts it is well within the purview of God to be associated with suffering. Such a purview is appropriate to God because God does so as a Father. In Heb. 2.10, the author only begins to draw the connection between suffering �� Hence, in this discussion of the suffering of Jes�� fatherly actions in securing a �� III. Behold the Children Whom God Has Given to Me! Hebrews 2.11-13 The preceding exegesis of Heb. 2.10 made three points. First: God perfects Jesus as his heir. Second: God, as a Father, is leading his many sons and daughters to their own inheritance of salvation. These two arguments point to the paternal actions of God and are connected by the third point: in perfecting Jesus as his heir, �� many sons and daughters. The next section supports ��rst speech in Hebrews (2.11-13), wherein he reiterates his humanity, his mortality, and his subsequent ��

68 Alan Mitchell, �� and Rhetorical Propriety in Hebrews ��CBQ 54 (1992), pp.681�701 (694). 1

2. ��

85

Like his Father, Jesus speaks ��scriptures. Jesus responds to God69 through these three citations � so divided by the ��.70 Through this method, the author constructs for Jesus � just as he did for God in the �rst chapter � a particular ethos through his utilization of quasi-prosopographic exegesis. The ��mility through an af�rmation of his humanity, his trust with an allusion to his death, and his mediatorial role by his con�dent declaration that he possesses �� A. Jesus is Brother to Humanity: Psalm 21.23 LXX �� rst speech is a citation from Ps. 21.23 LXX.71 It con�rms his complete participation in humanity, and its context serves as an allusion to his death. With this citation, Jesus establishes himself as a messenger72

69 ��9); Lewicki (�� , pp.38�47), Mackie (Eschatology and Exhortation, pp.217�19), Rascher (Schriftauslegung�� Faithfulness and Fear, Stumbling and Salvation: Receptions of LXX Isaiah 8:11-�� in The Word Leaps the Gap: Essays on Scripture and Theology in Honor of Richard B. Hays [J. R. Wagner, C. K. Rowe, and A. K. Grieb, eds; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008], pp.76�106 [99]) are among those who call attention to the dialogic nature of the two opening chapters of Hebrews. 70 The division into three separate citations serves to emphasize three distinct points (Attridge, Hebrews, p.90; Bruce, Hebrews, p.38; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.��p.99 n. 79). In my analysis, these points are ��s brothers and sisters, his act of trusting God while there, preeminently in his death, and his subsequent possession of them. 71 Like other authors of New Testament documents (Mt. 27.46; Mk 14.34; 15.34; Lk. 23.46; Jn 12.27; Rom. 15.9, 11; 2 Cor. 4.13-14), the author of Hebrews hears the voice of Christ in the Psalms. For an analysis of this convention in early �� The Future of Christology: Essays in Honor of Leander E. Keck (A. J. Malherbe and W. A. Meeks, eds; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), pp.122�36. 72 The psalm uses the verb �� whereas the author of Hebrews uses ��. Commentators largely agree that this was the change of the author, not the re�ection of a different Greek Vorlage (Attridge, Hebrews, p.90; Delitzsch, Hebrews, p.1:123; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.168; Radu Gheorghita, The Role of the Septuagint in Hebrews: An Investigation of Its In�uence with Special Consideration to the Use of Hab 2:3-4 in Heb 10:37-38 [WUNT, 2/160; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003], p.62; Johnson, Hebrews, p.98; Koester, Hebrews, p.230; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:59). This alteration could arise from the in�uence of the other psalm Jesus speaks in the sermon. Ps. 39.6, the verse that comes directly before those spoken by Jesus in Heb. 10.5-�� 1

86

You Are My Son

��73 to his siblings. This citation provides scriptural support �� that places him in a sibling relationship with those who are being sancti�ed (��, 2.11). His lack of shame arises from the fact that they are all from one source (��). Little disagreement exists among interpreters that those being sancti�ed are the many sons of v. 10 and that the one who sancti�es is the author of salvation, Jesus. 74 The bare identi�er ��, on the other hand, has elicited a number of possible interpretations. Ellingworth summarizes the two options: �� or a masculine noun designating God, Adam, Abraham, or �an unspeci�ed ��.75 Mof�tt suggests that the ambiguity, emphasized by the numerous interpretations attributed to it, might be the design of the author.76 This hunch �ts well within the complexity present in these verses. On ��rmation of his brotherhood with those who are being sancti�ed points to the humanity he shares with them. Psalm 8 declares that God lowered him to the state of humanity; with Psalm 21, Jesus himself declares his embrace of this position. Human beings are his siblings because he has become their brother; he too is a son of man. Hence, the statement that they are all from one source at least points to the reality that they are all children of humanity. 77 proclaimed (��) and spoken of the creations, the marvels, and the thoughts of God. This change could be evidence that the author associated the two Psalm speeches of Jesus. 73 Jesus is proclaiming ��. In the words of the psalm, Jesus is speak�� name is the reiteration of the identity of God and the majesty associated with his name. At the same time, because the author has declared that Jesus has inherited �� associated with the name Jesus also bears as his Son. Even here, in the midst a strong af�� 74 Attridge, Hebrews, p.88; Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Chrysostom Baer, trans.; South Bend, IN�� Braun, Hebräer, p.60; Chrysostom, Hebrews 4.5 (NPNF1 14, p.384); Grässer, In die Hebräer, pp.134�5; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.63; Koester, Hebrews, p.229; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:58; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:40; Weiss, Hebräer, p.79. 75 Hebrews, pp.164�5. The last category should also include those who postulate a Gnostic background (Attridge, Hebrews, p.89 n. 115). 76 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.131. 77 Mof�� Atonement and Resurrection, pp.131�2). He goes on to argue 1

2. ��

87

�� of the assembly (��) supports the point that his fraternal designation is a reference to his humanity. Two contextual clues suggest that the assembly in question is the earthly assembly of believers. 78 First, ��he human experience. He is an �� (2.6), lowered below the angels (2.7, 9), who shares in �esh and blood (2.14), and was made like his siblings in all things (2.17). In light of this consistent emphasis, it is �� words also describe his earthly experience amid his siblings. Second, this setting is supported by the resonance of this citation with Heb. 2.3.79 In both places, Jesus is a messenger of God, proclaiming a great salvation (2.3) and the name of God (2.12), respectively. Because in 2.3 the author is discussing the message Jesus delivered during his earthly ministry (the word of the Lord which was passed down to the author and his audience by those who heard Jesus), it is likely that in his next reference to Jesus as a messenger of God, the author is describing the proclamation of the same message.80 In Ps. 21.23, the author sees Jesus proclaiming his for a speci�c reference to Adam (pp.132�41). In light of the Adamic interpretations of Psalm 8, this speci�c reference might well have occurred to the hearers of Hebrews. My concern is to show the way in which it points to the humanity of Jesus, whether that be from Adam or from the common nature of humanity. Ellingworth �� identi��esh and blood�, v. 14) and its sufferings (v. 10) ��Hebrews, p.165). 78 �� should not ��Hebrews, p.90). He differentiates this connotation from the �� mentioned in 12.23 that points to the heavenly assembly (Hebrews, p.90 n. 130), contra Lane who locates this proclamation (Heb. 2.12) at the parousia (Hebrews, p.1:�� praise is not excluded here, the �� with humanity, his trust in God, and his possession of his brothers and sisters. A similar triad � humanity, death, possession of children � in the passages around this �� must �� time line in the �� forth from the mouth of the earthly Jesus, though perhaps the last one is to be seen as spoken by the exalted Lord. The trust saying especially seems to re�ect the Sitz im Leben ��Letters and Homilies, p.155 n. 234). 79 ��start� (��) of this salva��Hebrews, p.99). 80 Attridge also sees this statement, like Heb. 10.5-8, pointing to the incarnation of Jesus (Hebrews, p.90). 1

88

You Are My Son

willingness to be humbled to the nature and sphere of humanity. He is not ashamed to call human beings his siblings because he became a human dwelling among humans. The context of the �rst quotation (Ps. 21.23 LXX) puts into sharper �� me. Both Matthew and Mark place the lament of this Psalm on the lips of Jesus at his passion (Ps. 22.2 LXX in Mt. 27.46 and Mk 15.34). The author of Hebrews, who has already shown himself to be a creative reader of widely cited texts, quotes from the �rst lines of the exuberant section of praise rather than from the lament. In a section infused with discussions of the suffering and death of Christ (2.9, 10, 15), however, the quotation establishes, at least for those familiar with the psalm in its entirety, a �� Radu Gheorghita argues, ��ven though the Author does not quote from the �rst part of the psalm as do the Evangelists, it is indisputable that the writer associates this psalm with the Passion of Christ��81 Despite ��con�� this association has been disputed. 82 It is impossible to know if the author intended to elicit a connection with the tradition � presented by the Evangelists � that Jesus quoted from Psalm 21 LXX upon the cross. Nevertheless, for those familiar with the psalm this statement would have been heard in light of the suffering described in its beginning portion. Consequently, the suffering described there (i.e., �� , �and into th�� Ps. 21.16 LXX) �� of death, described in the previous verses (Heb. 2.9, 10). 83 Hence, the citation of Ps. 21.23 LXX, which the author places upon the lips of Jesus, reiterates that he became a son of man and, for those aware of the entire psalm, also points to the suffering of death he experienced in that state. 84 81 Gheorghita, Role of the Septuagint, p.63. Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.167), ��His People: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Hebrews 2.5��VE 6 [1969], pp.54�71), Johnson (Hebrews, p.99), and Westcott (Hebrews, p.52) also see connections with this citation and the suffering of Jesus. 82 For example, Attridge asserts with equal con�� however, allude to the passion simply by quoting this psalm�� (Hebrews, p.90). 83 In addition to the proclamation of his willingness to become human and the possible references to his death, this statement also reveals the attitude Jesus displays in the circumstances of his humility and death. When he is lowered below the angels �� name and sing his praises. The author is beginning to show Jesus as the example of how to respond with con�dence to the suffering one experiences as a child of God. 84 �� is that Jesus became a brother of humanity and was not ashamed to address them in this manner. An explicit citation of Ps. 21.2 LXX is not necessary for two reasons. First, in much of the second 1

2. ��

89

B. The Trust of Jesus: Isaiah 8.17 LXX The brief citation from Isaiah 8 portrays Jesus as a model of faithfulness and provides an allusion to the moment in which he expressed his faithfulness most pointedly: his death. In this statement, Jesus promises � �� 85 � that he will be one who trusts in God. If Isaiah 8 is the source of the citation,86 then the speaker in Isaiah 8 � similar to the psalmist of Psalm 21 � chooses to trust in God in the midst of incredibly dif�cult circumstances. Others are disregardin��Isa. 8.16),87 and God himself has �turned away his face from the house of Jacob� (Isa. 8.17). Even in these trying circumstances, he takes his stand of trust. �� 88 Subsequently, the author refers to Jesus as one who is faithful (2.17; 3.2), and even as the ultimate example of faith (12.2). The author intends that chapter � both before and after this citation � the author describes the suffering and the death of Jesus. His suffering remains on the minds of the audience even if Jesus does not articulate it here. Moreover, in these citations Jesus displays an attitude of con�dent trust in God, thus providing a model for the audience of the way in which they should respond to God in the midst of their own dif�culties (13.6). The author would not be able to convey this attitude through the cry of dereliction. 85 None of the possible three references contain the pronoun. Its presence could be the re��LXX text (Attridge, Hebrews, p.90 n. 33) or his own addition in order to bring this verse into parallel with the following citation (Lane, Hebrews, p.58). 86 The brevity of the second citation results in several possible scriptural locations from where it might come (Isa�� location in Isaiah 8 leads most interpreters to argue for Isaiah 8 as the second state��scriptural locale as well (Attridge, Hebrews, p.90; Braun, Hebräer, p.63; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.168; Gheorghita, Role of the Septuagint, p.64; Koester, Hebrews, p.231; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:59; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:42). Gheorghita highlights how the differences in the Septuagint reading of this text, which �obscure the relationship between certain words, their referents and antecedents� made it attractive to a number of Christian interpreters (Role of the Septuagint, pp.64�5). Similarly, Wagner calls attention to the way in which the third person speaker (�� ), who could be identi�ed as the ��, distinct from ��, may have suggested �� p.103). 87 This is the reading of the LXX (�� ). For a discussion ��), but not the MT (�� of the interpretive quality of LXX Isaiah, see J. Ross ��fying �Updated� Prophecies in Old Greek (OG) Isaiah: Isaiah 8:11�� JBL 126 (2007), pp.251�69. 88 This is not, of course, only a mental assent. Jesus demonstrates his belief in ��i]n this anonymous �� 1

90

You Are My Son

�� faith in God (3.1; 4.3, 11; 10.23; 12.2).89 Hence, �� of Jesus as an exemplar for his human siblings is appropriate because his attitude is one that he displays as a human. Jesus, like all of his brothers and sisters, must adopt a stance of trust made evident by a pledge of abiding faith in God.90 Consequently, the second citation spoken by Jesus reverberates with the preceding theme of Hebrews 2 that emphasized ��once again af�rmed in his bold declaration of trust in God. The second statement, in which Jesus proclaims his trust in God, also points toward the moment in which he expressed his trust most emphatically. Although the author never again uses the verb �� in reference to Jesus, he does describe Jesus as being faithful (��) to God (2.17; 3.2).91 The statement that Jesus lived without sin (4.16) also implies that Jesus was always faithful toward God. In these statements it is clear that, for the author, �� serves as the supreme expression of his faithfulness. The author makes this association with the cultic language he applies to Jesus. In 2.17, Jesus is faithful as a high priest. Similarly in 3.2, Jesus is faithful as the one sent by God (��) and as the high priest (��). It is in this priestly role that he makes atonement for the sins of the people (2.17). The later portions of the ��nal high priest in this atoning act necessitates his own death (7.27; 9.14; 10.10). In Heb. 5.7, following the �� author portrays Jesus displaying his trust in God by praying to the one who is able to save him from death. Stating the connection between faith and death explicitly in 12.2, the author declares Jesus to be the perfecter before God. What is more, Christ is set forth in the letter as the example of one who lived a faithful life and died a faithful death� ��Christos as Pistos: The Faith[fullness] �� . [eds], A Cloud of Witnesses, pp.40�50 [49]). 89 �� an allusion to that which above all is ��children, their faithful reliance upon God. The citation thus alludes to the theme of faith or �delity that will become ��Hebrews, p.�� p.��, pp.101, 104). 90 �� merely linked ontologically but also morally: as he responds to God in faith, so shall they � or so they should!� (Hebrews, p.99). Moffatt (Hebrews, p.33) and Vanhoye (Situation du Christ, p.344) also see a reference to the humanity of Christ. 91 �� Father, cf. v. 17 (��); 3.1-6; 12.2�� (Hebrews, p.169). 1

2. ��

91

of faith in light of the fact that he endured the cross. The latter references �� as a faithfulness expressed in death � suggest that Jesus shows his greatest trust in God when he dies. The context of Hebrews 2 supports this interpretation, where before and after this verse the author mentions the death of Jesus (2.9, 14). Moreover, an allusion to ��hich describes the impending death of the psalmist. All of these factors strongly suggest ��tained throughout life, but most emphatically in his death. By highlighting his attitude in the face of death, this citation evokes a recollection of the event of his death as well. ��LXX In the �nal citation, the focus widens back from Jesus to include again the brothers and sisters of Jesus. It af�rms that after Jesus becomes �� Employing the term ��, �� the reference to the �� of his �rst statement.92 This term �ts into the familial theme running throughout the letter thus far by portraying humanity as children (as does 2.10, 11, 12, 14, 17). Children, though, of whom? In Isaiah 8, the children belong to the speaker. The beginning of the chapter describes the birth of the prophe�� son who is to be named �� (�� king of Assyria will receive the strength and wealth of Damascus and Samaria (8.4). Therefore, the children of Isa. 8.18, who are signs and portents (��), are most naturally understood as the children of the speaker. In Hebrews, however, the previous references to the sibling relationship between Jesus and humanity suggest that they are not his own offspring, but his brothers and sisters. Read in light of Heb. 2.6-8 � along with the anthropological interpretation of �� Isa. 8.18 describes the relationship between him and his fellow sons and daughters of humanity. 93

92 ��ls of a close familial bond with human beings now frame the central af�� p.99). 93 Similarly Mof��n light of the ongoing contrast between the Son and the angels in the context, this latter declaration is probably to be thought of ��cation with humanity�� (Atonement and Resurrection, p.124). 1

92

You Are My Son

Read in light of Heb. 2.10, however, the �� mentioned here takes on another relational connection as well. There, the author depicts humanity as �� God and their own. Since both children (2.13b) and sons (2.10) describe humanity, then the ��, in addition to being sons and daughters of humanity, are also the many sons and daughters of God. As noted above, Jesus and his brothers are from one source (��) by virtue of their humanity. It is also the case that they are from one source (��) due to their relationship to God. The argument from proximity suggests that it is a viable option to view ��as a signi�er for God, the agent who perfects in the previous verse.94 If v. 10 favors reading �� as God, v. 11b grants even more precision. The fact that they are all �� is the reason why Jesus is not ashamed to address those he is sanctifying with the name ��. If their derivation from a singular source results in the relationship of brotherhood, then that implies that it is the relationship of parentage that creates brotherhood. The author declares something even �� 95 God is now the source of Jesus and those he sancti�es in the sense that he is the Father of them all.96 By becoming their brother and experiencing death, Jesus ensures that the children of humanity are also sons and daughters of God. By becoming a �� of man and trusting God in death, Jesus establishes the identity of the many �� of hum��. Moreover, he also establishes the future they anticipate. The relationship between Jesus and the �� portrayed in this statement is one of ownership. Jesus describes these children as people who have been given to him. Patrick Gray helpfully points to the Roman system of tutela impuberum as a way to understand this fraternal stewardship. He ��tutor, often an old brother, became responsible for the care of minor children and their inheritance until they reached the age of ��atural duty to take care of his younger siblings. Jesus, then, is pictured as the guardian of the audience.�97 94 So also, Attridge, Hebrews, pp.88�9. 95 Johnson, Hebrews, p.97. 96 Aquinas (Hebrews, 2.3.130), Braun (Hebräer, p.60), Chrysostom (Hebrews, 4.5 [NPNF1 14:384]), DeSilva (Perseverance, p.�� p.339), Koester (Hebrews, p.229), Lane (Hebrews, p.1:58), Spicq (Hébreux, p.2:41), ��p.100), Westcott (Hebrews, p.50), and Windisch (Hebräer, p.22) reach this conclusion. 97 Patrick Gray, Godly Fear: The Epistle to the Hebrews and Greco-Roman Critiques of Superstition [SBLABS, 16; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003], p.126 n. 50. This argument also appe��p.340. 1

2. ��

93

�� present here. Neverthel�� Isa. 8.18 and the Roman system of tutela impuberum suggests that when �� guardianship over them will cease. The context of this statement, how�� children. First, these children are given to him by God. This divine giving establishes a connection with the other gifts of God to Jesus that the author has already mentioned in the sermon. Whereas in Heb. 1.2 God appointed his Son as heir of all things and in Heb. 2.8 God subjects all things under the feet of the Son, here God gives to his Son ��. ��ther gifts, so too are the children an enduring possession. Because Hebrews asserts that God gives to his Son all things and the children, it suggests that the children are a part of all things that God gives to his Son as an inheritance � a point that �nds support in the ��-��tion that he possesses these children follows an assertion of his own humanity and an allusion to his death. This movement follows the pat�� heir was predicated upon his becoming human and suffering death. It is �� articulation of scripture captures the same ideas.98 Because he trusted God in the midst of his brothers and sisters, he can declare that God has given the children to him. The sections of Hebrews surveyed thus far � Heb. 2.6-9, 10, 12-13 � share a constellation of themes. Jesus is depicted as the Son � both the Son of God (2.11) and a son of man (Heb. 2.6, 11) � and, in both respects, he is a brother to humanity (2.12). 99 In this state, he experiences the 98 �� (Hebrews, p.166). 99 �� which Patrick Gray draws attention. Jesus do�� ideal brother. Nevertheless, Jesus is not just an older brother who, to the best of his ability, downplays the disparity between his fortune and that of his human brothers �� p.342). Instead, he is the Son of God who fully became a son of man. In this act of unparalleled humbleness, Jesus frees his siblings from the devil who not only slanders them before God in the �nal judgment, similar �� p.348) but who also held them in slavery to the fear of death throughout their lives (��, 2.15). The �� anything described in his writings.

1

94

You Are My Son

suffering of death (2.9, 10, 12), and, subsequently, he is elevated to a ��-9), God also establishes him as the �� of salvation and gives his children to Jesus (2.13). These sections reiterate the theme that God the Father through suffering perfects his Son as heir of all things, including �� IV. Inheritance in the Scriptures In his appeal to Psalm 8, Psalm 21, and Isaiah 8, the author portrays ��, he ��scriptures from which the author has cited throughout Hebrews 1 and 2 contain �� takes possession of people � including the people of God � in his role as Sovereign.100 A. The House of David: 2 Samuel 7 Second Samuel 7, cited as the speech of God in order to articulate the relationship that exists between God and Jesus, and, consequently, why Jesus is superior to the angels (Heb. 1.5), includes the images of kingship, sonship, inheritance, and possession of people. At the outset of this chapter, the narration portrays King David sitting in his house in domination of all his enemies whom the Lord has given to him as an inheritance (��; 2 Sam. 7.1). In light of his great prosperity, David is troubled that he lives in a house of cedar while the ark of God dwells in a ��rms ��le, Israel (�� ; 2 Sam. 7.8), that his enemies have been destroyed, that his 100 One of the other texts cited in Hebrews 1, Deut. 32.43, is worthy of mention �� (t��ment [10.30/Deut. 32.35, 36]) to show that when God leads his Son into the ��, he instructs his angels to worship his Son (1.6). Previous to this line, the song describes the Most High distributing the nations � �� among the angels of God. The people of Jacob became the allotment �� (v. 9). Because the author � through the voice of God � uses this text to portray an �� children of God. For a reader who, through his Christological lens, is able to make a distinction between the Most High (��) and the Lord (as evidenced in Heb. 1.3 and 1.10), it is possible to see God giving the people of Israel to the Lord (i.e. the Son) as his inheritance. 1

2. ��

95

name is great, and that he has been given rest. Despite God�� rejection of �� ; 2 Sam. 7.5), God promises that David will build a house for him (7.�� offspring, his royal heir (7.12). �� will prepare (��) his kingdom, and it will be an eternal throne (�� ; 2 Sam. 7.12-13, repeated in v. 16). Second, he will be the one ��, that is, the temple. Third, as the author of Hebrews cites, God promises to be a Father to him and ��will be a son of God (7.14). Finally, along with his kingdom and his throne, his house will be �rmly established (��) by God forever (7.16). When David praises God for these wonderful promises to his house (7.18, 19), he recalls the story of when God redeemed the people of Israel. God prepared (��) his people Israel for himself; God established them as a people forever (��); and God became a God to them (�� ). Hence, the text gives evidence of a ��heir �� establishment of the people of Israel. 7.12-14 God prepared a kingdom �� 7.24

�� God prepared a people

This included an eternal throne

God establishes a relationship with the King (Father/Son) �� A forever people

God establishes a relationship with the people (God/People)

This correspondence suggests that when God promised an eternal throne �� an intention for him to ��, Israel. Because Isra�� forever, and David, the leader of Israel, is praying that his house, meaning his heir, would be granted sovereignty forever, the prayer draws a �� descendents. The play on w�� Solomon will be the one responsible for building the house of God, but �� 1

96

You Are My Son

family of Israel.101 �� who is also proclai�� . 7.14) � have inherited �� last forever. B. The Enemies of God and the People of God ��eople is that when the king takes his place of sovereignty, God subdues his enemies. The author of Hebrews includes this theme of the royal narrative when he cites Ps. 109.1 (Heb. 1.13; 10.13). Psalm 2, the text cited with 2 Sam. 7.14, includes this theme as well. In that psalm, the �� /Son relationship �� holy mountain (Ps. 2.6). After God declares that the king is his son, God promises to give to the king a bountiful inheritance. The ends of the earth will be his possession, and the nations will be his (Ps. 2.�� Son is established as king, he will inherit all the earth, including the nations. The relationship of the king with his subjects, however, is harsh. He shepherds them (��) with an iron rod (Ps. 2.9a), and shatters them like a potter would shatter a vessel (Ps. 2.9b). His relationship with the people of the nations he inherits resembles Ps. 109.1 LXX, where God places the enemies of the king under his feet. In a similar way, Psalm 44, cited as the words of God spoken to his Son proclaiming his eternal kingdom and his name, �� (1.8-9), highlights the dominance of the Son over his enemies. In this psalm, addressed ��the psalmist praises �� arrows that are sharp in the hearts of his enemies (44.6 LXX). In the midst of this acclamation, the psalmist also declares that people shall fall under the king (�� ). Although it is most likely that the author is citing Isaiah 8 in Heb. 2.13, 2 Samuel 22 is another possibility,102 a song of David praising God for subjecting people under his feet. The content of his song is the great salvation God has granted to his king and the mercy he has shown to his anointed (��) forever (��; v. 50). When God hears the cry (��, cf. Heb. 5.7) of this one who is trusting in him (v. 3) and 101 The statement in 1 Chr. 28.21 also �� of Israel when David assures Solomon that everything, including the priests, Levites, skilled craftsman, the rulers, and all the people are his to command. 102 ��Isa. 8.17 in mind here, �� p.101 n. 84).

1

2. ��

97

delivers him, God makes him the head of nations (v. 44), and his enemies ��mist confesses God among the nations and sings his name (v. 50; cf. Heb. 2.12). The subjugation of enemies may not the only and �nal meaning of these psalms. As Psalm 2 continues, it offers another path to the kings of the earth. If they continue to stand against the Lord and his anointed (Ps. 2.�� however, they are willing to be instructed (��; 2.10) and seize upon instruction (��; 2.�� By serving the Lord with fear, they can rejoice in him, albeit with trembling. Blessing � rather than wrath � comes to all those who trust (�� ) in the Lord (��). Psalm �� inheriting the nations, including those who are given the option to trust in the Lord through submitting to discipline. Similarly, in Psalm 44, the author uses the term �peoples� (��) to describe those who fell under the king. At the end of the psalm, however, the psalmist declares that the peoples (��) will confess the king forever and ever (44.18). Finally, in 2 Samuel 22, in addition to his enemies, God places a people subject to David (v. 44). While these people are still cast in a negative light,103 they are described as the people who are under him (��) and whom God disciplines (��; v. 48). Because the author of Hebrews describes the discipline of the Lord as a distinguishing feature of the children of God (12.5-11), he might have viewed this verse in such a way that it portrays the k�� In eleven out of the thirteen texts to which the author appeals in chs. 1 and 2,104 the ruler takes possession of a people. These people include the enemies of the king and also those people who come to trust in and praise the Lord. For those familiar with these Psalms, this current �ows through the argument at the beginning of Hebrews. The story in these �� 103 They are placed in parallel with foreign sons who lie (v. 45) and the enemies of the king (v. 49). 104 This theme is not apparent in Psalms 96 and 103. Texts that include this theme are 2 Samuel 7 and 22; Deuteronomy 32; and Psalms 2, 21 (discussed below), 44, 101 (discussed below), and 109. Psalm 8 does not exactly �t the pattern because people are not speci�� of the psalm. Isaiah 8 does not align neatly with the pattern because the person in question who is given possession of the �� is not a ruler. Nevertheless, because the author understands Jesus to speak this text, it becomes the description of the �� 1

98

You Are My Son

heir and is himself the Lord, as a part of his complete sovereignty inherits the people of God when he tak�� all the qualities afforded to him as Son � qualify him to be the heir of all things. As the Son of God, God his Father has appointed him heir of all things. As a son of man, God elevates him to his intended position as heir of all things. As his royal Son, God places into his possession the children of God. The familial relationship between God and Jesus is the ground from which ��e arises. Because God �� perfected heir of all things. Because of their relationship, humans can take their place as the children of God and look forward to their inheritance of salvation because they are the inheritance of Jesus. V. Rescue from Death Through Death: Hebrews 2.14-16 �� and daughters, Jesus the Son has to experience death. That argument seems counter-intuitive in light of Hebrews 1. Why would Jesus, the Son of God, who is exalted over all things including the angels have to suffer � even suffer death � in order to be made perfect as heir of all ��e not already perfect in this way? If he is human, has God not already subjected all things under his feet (2.8)? If he is royal, are not the ends of the earth and the nations promised to him as his inheritance (Ps. 2.8)? Most incredibly, if he is the Son, who is God (1.8), should not all things already belong to him? The recurring idea throughout ch. 2 � �� includes humanity � provides the answer to these dif�cult questions. It is because Jesus inherits humanity that he must suffer death in order to be �t perfectly and completely to be heir of all things. Hebrews 2.14-16 provides a reason why his death is a necessary prerequisite for his estab�� gures prominently in this section of Hebrews 2 as it has in the others. The author begins by stating that because the children of God partake of �esh and blood, so also Jesus shares in �esh and blood with them (2.14). That which was implied by Psalm 8 and articulated by Jesus in Heb. 2.12-13, the author now states unequivocally in his own words. Jesus shares in the tangible realities of human existence. By sharing in �esh and blood, he also embraces �esh and blood to their natural end, death. As in 2.9, the author claims that Jesus embraces the entire human condition all the way to its mortal end. 1

2. ��

99

�� esh and blood to the effects of his death (�� the human condition and his subsequent death affect the dire situation in which all humanity �� situation is bleak. Women and men are enslaved (��) and subject to the fear of death (��).105 Here, the author is appealing to a widespread topos, appearing ��scriptures106 and Greco-Roman literature.107 This slavery is not just a condition of the aged, who are closer to death, but applies to all humanity throughout their lives (��).108 Even more oppressive is the fact that this slavery is not limited to the natural sphere and therefore solely a psychological condition. Instead, Hebrews 2 asserts that it is a supernatural reality: the devil holds the power of death.109 Because humanity is enslaved to the fear of death, they are bound to the devil � �� proprietor � through this fear.110 In view of this oppressive situation, the author proclaims that Jesus, through his death, brought about a fundamental change for humanity. First, through death, he rendered the devil ineffective. 111 Consequently, 105 I ��. �� when it ��is followed by a dative, in this case �� (cf. Mt. 5.21, 22). Therefore, �� is completed by �� (Hebrews, p.35). It provides ��Hebrews, p.174). Nevertheless, it is not completely persuasive because �� is so far from ��. Whatever reading is adopted, the meaning is largely clear. Those who are rescued by Christ are freed from the slavery that the fear of death brings. 106 Pss. 6.6; 17.5; Hos. 13.14; Sir. 41.1-4. 107 E.g. Euripides, Orest. 1522; Lucretius, De rer. nat. 1.102-26; Lucian, Peregr. 23, 33; Plutarch, Mor. 34B; 106D; Cicero, Letters to Atticus 9.2a; Tusc.1; Seneca, Ep. 24; 30.17; Epictetus, Diatr. 1.17.25; 1.27.7-10; 2.18.30; 4.7.15�17; Dio Chrysostom, Or. 6.42; Philo, Omn. prob. lib. 22; Leg. 17. See Gray, Godly Fear, p.112. 108 Patrick Gray suggests that the thought of death brings fear because it is followed by judgment and it holds in it demonic power (Godly Fear, p.113). 109 An idea found in other literature as well: Wis. 2.24; Jo. Asen. 12.9; Jub. 49.2; Ezekiel the Tragedian in Epiphanius, Pan. 64.29.6; Jn 8.44; 1 Pet. 5.8. 110 �� does not specify from what or from whom people are liberated, though v. 14 would strongly suggest the ��Hebrews, p.174). 111 Since the devil is a supernatural and even angelic being in some literature (Job 1.6-12; 2.1-10; 2 En. 31.3; L.A.E. �� be one of the several reasons the author emphasized his supremacy over the angels in the �rst chapter of Hebrews. For an emphatic argument of this point, see Georg �� Angels: The 1

100

You Are My Son

�� power of death that cast a shadow over the entire lifetime of humanity (2.15). Because Jesus became human and died, he is able to rescue humanity from their slavery to fear. They are no longer the slaves of the devil. In the following verse, the author af�rms the transference of posses�� slaves of the devil and becomes instead the possession of Christ. The author states this by saying that Jesus took hold of the seed of Abraham. The most basic picture here is that Jesus takes the descendents of Abraham into his grasp and possession.112 It also connotes the imagery of �� 113 By participating in human nature to its ultimate end (2.14-15), he wrested humanity from their overlord the Devil and brought them into the grasp of Christ. On this point, two other psalms quoted by the author in the �rst two chapters serve as interesting intertexts. First, Hebrews appeals to Psalm 101 �� nature (Heb. 1.10-12). Prior to the verses cited (Ps. 101.26-28), the psalmist notes that the Lord heard the groaning of the prisoners and rescued the sons of those who had been put to death (v. 21). The result is that when peoples and kingdoms are gathered together to serve the Lord, the name of the Lord and his praise are declared in Zion and in Jerusalem (vv. 22-23). The Lord thus wins a people for himself by rescuing sons who are in bondage and who have faced death. In the end, they serve him and praise his name. Psalm 21 LXX, which the author cites the text as that which Jesus speaks concerning his a��. 2.12), also resonates with the themes of family and deliverance. In the closing lines of the psalm, the psalmist claims that his offspring will Concept of Celestial Beings � Origins, Development and Reception (F. V. Reiterer, T. Nicklas, and K. Schöp�in, eds; Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature, Yearbook 2007; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2007), pp.357�76. 112 �� , basically means �� The picture of Christ, the ��, taking hold of his followers on the way to glory is in perfect conformity with the imagery of the ��Hebrews, p.94). 113 Johnson points to Jer. 31.32, cited in Heb. 8.9, as an example of this use of the word (Hebrews, p.102). Attridge suggests that this sense is too speci�c, but it is not clear why �help� would not be a viable interpretation of the term in the example he provides, Sir. 4.11 (Hebrews, p.94 n. 176). Moreover, Koester points out the context of the verb in which Christ takes hold of people to rescue them (2.15) and to help them in their testing (2.18) (Hebrews, p.232). 1

2. ��

101

serve the Lord. Because the Lord acted, presumably by delivering the psalmist (v. 21), a people yet to be born will proclaim the righteousness �� family of Israel (v. 24) � including the family of the psalmist himself, his seed � serving and praising the Lord. If the author heard the voice of Jesus in the psalm, it is possible to hear ��, not as the speak�� his possession (�� ; Heb. 2.16). The speaker declares that his seed will serve and praise the Lord who is King of all the nations because God delivered him. �� to the fear of death. Attridge states: Hebrews does not explain pr�� human beings from such fear [of death]. This is, in part, due to the fact that liberation was a �xed part of the underlying tradition and no explanation of it was felt to be required. Insofar as the Christological exposition of the text does implicitly provide one, it consists of two elements. On the �� an example of endurance. On the other hand, his exaltation de�nitely con�rms his victory and provides an access to God that renders death and the fear it inspires irrelevant. 114

Attridge is correct to highlight the exemplary elem�� to which the author will appeal in ch. 12 (vv. 3-�� over death that provides access to God (Heb. 10.19-20). Nevertheless, it is this second element that points toward the precise explanation of how ��h frees from fear. Humanity is free from the fear of death ��-defeating death has changed their status. They are no longer slaves of death, and therefore of the Devil, but now are the possession, the inheritance, of Jesus, the Son. Those in his possession are the children of God. Hence, they no longer have to fear death, but can look forward to the inheritance that �� lishes them as �� who are heirs of salvation, and as such Death and the fear of it no longer have dominion over them. If Jesus is to be the heir of all things including humanity, he has to rescue them from the grasp of the Devil, the proprietor of death. Jesus accomplishes this rescue through his own death.

1

114 Attridge, Hebrews, pp.93�4.

102

You Are My Son

VI. Conclusion In Hebrews 2, the author establishes several points. After Jesus suffers ��-9). After this event, he is perfected as the �� of G�� (2.10). As Jesus trusts God, he is entrusted with the �� children (2.12-13; 3.1-6). In the act of dying, Jesus completes the �rst step necessary for his rescue of humanity from the Devil (2.14-16). The narrative traced here provides an answer to a question posed by Bruce ��How can the Son already be the Son in protology if He only enters into the fullness of His Sonship (i.e. receives His inheritance and His name) in His eschatological enthronement?�115 It is true that God grants to Jesus all things as his inheritance; but in order to take possession of the human component � since humanity is bound to death � Jesus must win his inheritance through dying. �� Jesus does what is necessary to attain his inheritance. These assertions are distinguishable manifestations of the same theme: the process by which Jesus attains his inheritance and the content of it. Blomberg, in support of his purely anthropological reading of Psalm 8 in ��it would be odd if Hebrews chose to begin �� exalted nature of Christ�.116 The conclusion of this investigation is that it is not odd for the author to begin the second expositional section with Psalm �� experience but is, in fact, the outcome of it. To begin with Psalm 8 in a description of the exalted status of Jesus is certainly not odd because the exalted nature of Christ as heir of all things is dependent on his becoming human and dying. It makes sense �� could only come about through suffering death because in death he rescues that portion of his inheritance � namely humanity � which was estranged from God.117 Humanity is bound in slavery to the fear of death, whose power is held by the Devil. Therefore, in order for Jesus to take possession of the entire inheritance that God has promised him, including humanity, Jesus is lowered below the angels to become an �� and die. Through this process he defeats death and the devil and takes possession of humanity. He removes them from their slavery and reinstates 115 ��p.161. 116 �� p.93. 117 A vitally important part of his rescue of humanity is the cleansing of sin he achieves through his priestly act of death. The cultic aspect of his death is the focus of the following chapter.

1

2. ��

103

them as children of God on the way to their own inheritance in the glorious presence of God. When God crowns Jesus after Jesus experiences death, God establishes Jesus as the rightful heir that he is and humanity as his rightful inheritance. The author of Hebrews argued in the �rst part of his sermon that Jesus always existed as the Son of God, and the close corollary is also true: �� things (1.2b). Because his inheritance came under the sway of another, he had to do something, namely, defeat death, to win his inheritance back. Hence when he took his seat at the right hand of God, having become perfect, his perfection included his reinstatement as the heir of God, always heir, but now having completed the process by which his inheritance could return to his control. The second chapter of Hebrews serves as a hinge between what comes before and after it. First, it is a necessary complement to the �rst chapter. The preceding investigation of Hebrews 1 explicated the exalted position of Jesus and argued that he inhabited that position because of the �lial relationship in which he is joined to God. The second chapter continues to refer to that exalted position, but describes the process that preceded �� This chapter shows that when God the Father exalts his Son he does so by humbling him and subjecting him to the process by which he becomes perfect. Consequently, the second chapter grants further insight into the character of both the Son and the Father. The Son is willing to be humbled to �� and sisters. He consistently displays an attitude of trust in God. Most impressively, he is willing to die in order to win humanity back into the �� and therefore is displaying the template of the perfect child of God. At the same time, he a�� God: he is a Father who uses suffering for the purpose of perfecting his children. Chapter 2, however, provides only the introduction to this �� Fatherhood. It lays the groundwork for th�� Second, ch. 2 foreshadows later themes in that here the author intro�� relationship between God and Jesus. The daughters and sons are key components of the inheritance over which Jesus is appointed; they, like Jesus, are the children of God. This identity and the future it promises shape �� for them in the following chapters. 1

104

You Are My Son

In order to continue to address the divine characterizations and the implications for the audience in the Father/Son relationship between God �� Son became heir of all things, so he is also active in the process by which his Son becomes high priest. Similarly, the author continues to show the faithfulness of Jesus in the enactment of his priestly role. The way in which their relationship works itself out in his priestly mission has profound implications for the audience, namely, how they can attain their ��

1

Chapter 3

�MY SON, YOU ARE PRIEST�: THE FILIAL CONTEXT OF THE CULTIC MOTIF IN HEBREWS

The two previous chapters sought to show the vital relationship between ��lial status and his inheritance. Because he is the Son of God, God the Father has appointed him as heir of all things. Because he became a son of man and passed through death, his inheritance is all-encompassing, in particular it includes humanity who had been enslaved to death. �� In the penultimate verse of Hebrews 2 � �� the author succinctly states two recurring themes �� in all ways (Heb. 2.17).1 In the preceding verses, the author sketches out ��esh and blood (2.14), and they anticipate death with fear (2.15). Consequently, his participation in �esh and blood and his facing of the reality of death make it evident that Jesus became completely human, and, in �� Jesus to the state of humanity (2.8-9) and in perfecting him through death (2.10), the passive of �� is best read as a divine passive. 2 It is God 1 �� becoming like his siblings suggests that reading �� in light of the incarnation, which many patristic interpreters did (e.g., Ambrose [De Fide 3.11.86 (NPNF2 10:255)]; Chrysostom [Hom. Hebr. 5.1 (NPNF1 14:388)]), �ts well within the context of the passage (Philip E. Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977], pp.117�19; Johnson, Hebrews, p.102; Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.131). This nuance of the word does not appear in other literature. Therefore, this meaning is suggested by the context, not bound in the word itself. 2 This reading �nds support, for example, in Lane (Hebrews, p.1.64), Michel (Hebräer, p.87), Long (Hebrews, pp.60�1), and Vanhoye (Situation du Christ, p.368).

106

You Are My Son

who made Jesus like his brothers and sisters in all ways. Because the �� Jesus, in taking hold of the seed of Abraham (2.16), rescued them (2.15). In addition to summarizing preceding themes of the chapter, v. 17 points forward as well. The same prominent theme � �� results in a previously unarticulated identity of Jesus:3 because he was made like his brothers and sisters in all ways, he became a merciful and faithful high priest (2.17). 4 �� priesthood becomes a dominant theme in the central section of the letter (4.14�10.25), and remains close at hand even in the closing section (12.2, 24; 13.12). �� Jesus is both high priest (3.1) and Son (3.6) over the �� of God, a term used for the tabernacle/temple5 but employed in Hebrews predominantly as a reference to a family/household (3.2, 5, 6; 8.8, 10; 11.7). The author employs both cultic and �lial titles again in 4.14, and in 5.6 connects ��ration of his status as Son. In ch. 7, the absence of any mention of Melchi��Son of God (7.3). At the close of ch. 7, unlike the law that appoints weak men, the word of the oath appoints, strikingly, not a perfected ��, but a perfected �� as high priest (7.28). In the summarizing statement of 8.1, Jesus is the high priest who is in the place God has invited him to sit as his royal Son. So also in 3 ��p�� interpreters agree they represent two dominant Christological foci. Loader (Sohn und Hoherpriester) divides his analysis of the letter according to this schema, and Mikeal �� surface �� EQ 60 [1988], pp.195�216). So ��LXX] serves to li�� Hebrews, p.�� (Hebrews, p.67). 4 No other author of the New Testament attributes to Jesus the title of ��, or even �� of the uniqueness of this theme are found in Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.67), Johnson (Hebrews, p.49), Koester (Hebrews, p.109), Lane (Hebrews, p.1:cxl�cxli), Spicq (Hébreux, p.1:301), and Witherington (Letters and Homilies, p.59). 5 E.g., Exod. 23.19; 34.26; Deut. 23.19; Judg. 18.31; 2 Sam. 12.20; 1 Kgs 5.17, 19; 8.17, 20; 1 Chr. 6.33; 9.11, 13, 26. 1

3. ��

107

ch. 10, Jesus is the priest who, after presenting his one offering, is seated �� a portion of his inheritance � under his feet (10.13). Finally, the author asserts that �� the author discusses the priesthood of Jesus, he does so with continuing �� nal high priest. By highlighting the familial theme throughout the cultic sections of the letter, this investigation contributes to my overall thesis in several ways. First, and most obviously, the author builds the divine Father/Son relationship into t�� Second, because he consistently appeals to this relationship, the actions of the Father and the Son in the cultic context contribute to the characterization of their Fatherhood and sonship. In these sections, the author �� both exaltation and training. In so doing, the author also continues to �� vocation serves to strengthen the faith of the audience, speci�cally because it is through his priestly offering and intercession that Jesus secures his inheritance. Because the Son has performed and continues to perform his priestly role, the audience can trust that he will take full �� inheritance) will attain their inheritance and dwell in the household of God. �� Jesus, the Son of God�� succinctly articulates the two dominant themes of ��6 Jesus is Son and Priest. Interpreters cannot help but to acknowledge the presence of these identities, but have not yet reached an interpretive consensus concerning their relationship. Is it the case � as Deborah Rooke argues � �� whether he liked it or not, because of the sonship granted to him by the ��7 or, conversely � as David Mof�tt states � �� priest seems therefore to be distinct from � i.e. not predicated upon � his ��8 Moreover, Mof�� distinct from his priesthood but also that the proclamation of Jesus as

6 See above, p.106 n.3. 7 Deborah Rooke, ��ections on the Interpretation of the ��Biblica 81 (2000), pp.81�94 (83). 8 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.202. 1

108

You Are My Son

Son � and therefore, as king � con�icts with the assertion of his priesthood for audience members who know and respect the Mosaic law. 9 In other words, does the genealogy of Jesus automatically entail his priesthood or does it con�ict with his priesthood? Is Jesus priest because he is Son or in spite of the fact that he is Son? ��y because �� to humanity; he is Son of God and son of man. Similarly, in calling Jesus priest, the author locates Jesus in relationship to different priestly orders. He shares similarities with the Levitical priests (4.14�5.7) but stands in the priestly order of Melchizedek (5.6; 6.20; 7.17, 21). Knowing which �lial relationship and which priestly order is in play in each instance determines the particular relationship between the two identities. On the one hand, I agree with Mof�� 10 His high priesthood is not automatic to his sonship; he must become quali�ed for this cultic role. On the other hand, I disagree with Mof�tt that the author �� status as �� Levitical priesthood, but also recognizes that it serves as a quali�cation for the Melchizedekian one. That is to say, in my opinion the author of Hebrews does not view the two dominant roles of Christ running along �� sonship and priesthood as reciprocal identities both located within and existing because of the paternal actions of God. How does the author show the identities of Christ embedded in the Fatherhood of God? Initially, he shows that it is God the Father who calls Jesus to the priesthood. Then, as a compliment to that call, he empha��cation to stand in the line of Melchizedek. Next, the author appeals to the pedagogy and inheritance of Jesus as means of quali�� priestly actions secure the possession of his inheritance. All four moves �� as high priest. 9 See especially Mof�� Reassessing the Appeal to the Heavenly Realm in the L��, in Problems in Translating Texts About Jesus: Proceedings from the International Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting 2008 (Mishael Caspi and John T. Greene, eds; Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 2011), pp.195�232. 10 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.201.

1

3. ��

109

I. A Son Over His House: Hebrews 3.1-6 Hebrews 3.1-6 provides a �tting place to begin the investigation of the ��thood. Most obviously, the author employs both titles in this pericope. In Heb. 3.1-��lial faithfulness (��, 3.6) to God as apostle and high priest (3.1) results ��vation, the opening sentences of ch. 3 exhibit a multidirectional quality. �� in these experiences, this passage points back to Hebrews 2, where the author portrayed Jesus as the Son of God who secured his inheritance by ��son of man. By reiterating that Jesus is high priest, it also points forward to the remainder of the letter where the author frequently describes Jesus as a cultic/mediatorial �gure.11 As this passage points both back and forward, it continues to describe the dynamics of the relationship between God and Jesus as Father and Son. In doing so, it also establishes the implications of those interactions for humanity, including the readers of the letter themselves. Hence, this passage serves as a microcosm of much of the argument of �� human and defeat death, takes possession of his place as Son and heir ��usehold. �� In this second exhortation of the letter, the author urges his audience to consider (��) Jesus, whom he names with two titles that �� a �ne symmetry in the combination apostolos kai archiereus that goes beyond the obvious alliteration. As the aposotolos is sent by God to deliver the summons from God to humans through the proclamation of the good news, so the archiereus is preeminently the one who responds from the side of humans to God.�12 As the terms work ��iator (Heb. 8.6; 9.25; 12.24), they �� human experience. 11 Albert Vanhoye links the opening of ch. 3 to the verses that precede it through the repetition of ��. He also sees this pericope as the opening of the second part of the letter, comprising 3.1�5.10 (Structure and Message, p.24). I argue �� connect this pericope with a broader spectrum of the letter than simply 2.17�5.10. 12 Attridge, Hebrews, p.107. 1

110

You Are My Son

��)13 portrays Jesus as �� (Heb. 2.3, 12),14 it also serves as a reference to his humanity: when God sent him, Jesus came as an embodied human being.15 In ch. 2, the author argued that God lowered Jesus below the angels to become an �� (2.7, 9) and made him like his brothers and sisters in every way (2.17). 16 The author urges the audience not to forget that Jesus is the apostle, the one whom God sent. That description of Jesus implies an important corollary: when he was sent, it was as a human. ��tinguishing feature of Hebrews �rst appears at the end of ch. 2. Here, the �� nd faithful high priest is �� (2.17). Consequently, when the author refers to Jesus again as the high �� humanity. By ascribing these titles to Jesus, the author thereby reiterates his human nature. As both apostle and high priest, Jesus is faithful to the One who appointed (��) him to these roles.17 �� vocation of apostle and, ultimately, high priest are the vocations for

13 The direct attribution of this title to Jesus is unique in the New Testament. There is a possible allusion to Jesus as an apostle in Lk. 11.49. It is not unusual, however, for Jesus to be described (often by himself) as the one sent from God (Mt. 10.40; 21.37; 23.34, 37; Mk 9.37; 12.6; Lk. 4.43; 9.48; 10.16; 13.34; Jn 3.17, 34; 5.36, 38; 6.29, 57; 7.29; 8.42; 10.36; 17.3, 8, 18, 21, 23, 25; 20.21; Gal. 4.4; 1 Jn 4.9, 10, 14). Justin Martyr uses this word in reference to Jesus (1 Apol. 12.9; 63.10 [ANF p.1:166, 184]), which supports the argument that this title might be traditional (Attridge, Hebrews, p.107 n. 36). 14 So also Attridge, Hebrews, p.107. 15 Similarly, Koester states: �� by taking on blood and �� Hebrews, p.249). Ellingworth sees this title as a possible allusion to the incarnation, but makes this connection dependent upon 1.6 referring to the incarnation as well (Hebrews, p.199). It is not clear to me that the meaning of 3.1 must depend on the interpretation of 1.6. Chapter 2 is suf�cient to establish that when Jesus was sent from God, he was sent as a human being, even if 1.6 refers to his exaltation over the coming realm. 16 This is reiterated in ch. 10 where Jesus, on coming into the world (10.5), states that God prepared a body for him (Ps. 40.7-9). 17 His appointment includes both his high priesthood and his apostleship. So also Johnson (Hebrews, p.107) and Lane (Hebrews, p.1:76). Contra Attridge (Hebrews, p.108) and Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.202), who presume the author limits this appointment to the priestly of�ce. 1

3. ��

111

which he is made human.18 Chrysostom understands this verse precisely in this way. He states: [b]eing about to place Him [Jesus] before Moses in comparison�he begins from the �esh [from His Human nature]� �� he says, �� made [Him] what? �Apostle and High Priest�. He is not speaking at all in this place of his Essence, nor of His Godhead; but so far concerning human dignities (Hom Heb. 5.4 [Gardiner]).19

Consequently, interpreters need not make a sharp division between interpreting �� 20 because the phrase incorporates both his appointment to a vocation and his being made human. To be faithful as an apostle and high priest is for Jesus to be faithful as a human being. He �� brothers and sisters. In addition to signaling his entrance into the human condition, the �� explication of his death. At this point in the letter, the author has twice ��he removal of sins (1.3; 2.17). It will not be until the center section of the letter, however, that he clearly ��ce consists of his own body and blood (7.27; 9.12, 14, 15; 10.10; 12.24; 13.12). Nevertheless, the mention of his priesthood includes death and the manipulation of blood. In light of the references to his death in ch. 2 and the association between his experience of all things human � including death � and his priesthood in 2.17, a reference to Jesus as priest brings with it an allusion to his death. This connection between his priesthood and his death would not be obvious based upon the model of Jewish sacri�ce � the priest was not required to kill himself � but the associations between death, blood, �� unexpected combination of the two. The author waits to make the connection explicit, but even here he begins to argue that by accepting �� 18 ��to poiesanti auton is most naturally translated �� [F]or Hebrews, the human Jesus is surely a creature � this is precisely the point that the author has just been arguing (2:10��Hebrews, p.107). 19 Similarly argued by Athanasius (C. Ar. 2.9 [NPNF2 4:353]; Dion. 11 [NPNF2 4:181]) and Ambrose (De Fide 3.11.82�86 [NPNF2 10:244]). 20 As stated by Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.202) and Hughes (Hebrews, p.130). 1

112

You Are My Son

the duties of his priesthood, including dying so that he could offer his own body and blood. �� tting comparison to Moses: Jesus is faithful just as Moses was faithful. 21 Through the citation of Num. 12.7, the author of Hebrews alludes to the story from Numbers 12 where the Lord chides Aaron and Miriam for speaking against Moses. The Lord declares to them that Moses, in comparison with all the other �� (Num. 12.8). Nevertheless, even in light of these quali�cations, the author of Hebrews asserts that Jesus is worthy of more glory than Moses. �� glorious. Jesus is not more faithful than Moses. Rather, the difference between them is that while Moses is faithful as a servant, Jesus is faithful as a son. At this point in the �� evokes the glory Jesus possesses as Son of the Lord God (ch. 1) and the honor and glory he came to possess when he became a son of man (ch. 2). Moses, on the other hand, is never speci�cally designated as a �� of God. By default he possesses the glory included in being a descendent of Adam, but he is not equal to the glory afforded to Jesus as man and God, both of which are included in his status as ��. �� Moses was a faithful servant to the Lord (Num. 12.6-8),22 Jesus was a faithful Son to God his Father. It was his Father who appointed him to 21 ��gure so determinative in the history that no theologian who is in any way the heir of Judaism can avoid coming to �� Moses in the Letter to the Hebrews [SBLDS, 42; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979], p.2). Similarly Johnson states, ��ors, then, Moses is surely the main �gure to whom Jesus must be compared; Deut 34:10 declares con�� Hebrews, p.108). Finally, Cynthia Long Westfall ��ndividual and leader who functions as a type of ��6: Approach or ��, in Christian�Jewish Relations Through the Centuries [JSNTSup, 192; S. E. Porter and W. R. Pearson, eds; Shef�eld: Shef�eld Academic, 2000], pp.175� 201, here 201). John Lierman catalogues evidence from a variety of literature where authors assign Moses the titles of apostle, high priest, and servant. He suggests that in Heb. 3.1-�� or perhaps the conception of Moses �� (The New Testament Moses: Christian Perceptions of Moses and Israel in the Setting of Jewish Religion [WUNT, 2/173; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004], p.76). 22 Moses also appears as the servant of the Lord in Exod. 4.10; 14.31; Num. 11.11; Deut. 34.5; Josh. 1.1, 13, 15; 8.31, 33; 9.24; et al.; 1 Kgs 8.53, 56; 18.12; 2 Chr. 1.3; 24.6, 9. 1

3. ��

113

the role of apostle. In other words, it was his Father who called him to become human. Likewise, his Father appointed him to the priesthood, meaning that it was his Father who called him to sacri�ce himself. Therefore, since it was God who appointed him to these roles, it was God who willed that he become human and die so that he could be a faithful apostle and high priest. As in ch. 2, Jesus thus lived out his mediatorial roles as a faithful Son in response to the will of his Father. B. The Son Over the Children �� it (��). In v. 4, the author states the seemingly obvious fact that every house has a builder. For a letter concerned with earthly and heavenly structures and cities � things built by human and divine hands23 � this comment is not irrelevant. Instead, it allows the author to make a corresponding statement about God. Just as every house has a builder, so too do all things have a builder and, in fact, God is the one who builds all �� the sovereign creator (Heb. 1.2; 2.10).24 Moreover, the statement in v. 4 �� this theological aside also establishes a connection to the inheritance of Jesus. By describing God as the builder of all things, the author reminds his readers of the inheritance Jesus will ultimately and fully possess. It is ��), because as the Son of God and son of man, this is his promised inheritance. 25 That the author again refers to Jesus as �� here makes the association between ��re plausible. The author crafts Heb. 3.6 to sound like a variation on the theme of Heb. 1.2: Jesus is �� as the author asserted throughout ch. 2. From the expanse of all things, �� 23 Heb. 8.2; 9.11, 23; 11.10, 16; 12.22. 24 ��eignty as fashioner of everything out of nothing is a common place as seen in, e.g., Isa. 40.28; 45.7; Wis. 9.2; 11.17; 13.4; 2 Macc. 7.28; 4 Macc. 12.21; Eusebius, Praep. ev. 15.6.6. 25 ��he cosmic level intimates the full signi�� (Hebrews, p.110). 1

114

You Are My Son

audience to whom he is writing (��). With this speci�cation, the author has shifted from a discussion of structures to a discussion of households.26 �� familial tones of the initial address in 3.1. In what could be read as a typical address in literature of the New Testament, the author proclaims that the readers themselves are �� . They are the siblings whose �esh and blood Jesus shared and of whom he is not ashamed (2.11, 14, 17). Moreover, they are holy (��) ones who are being sancti�ed (2.11) and who share the same parentage � both human and divine � as Jesus. As holy brothers and sisters of Jesus, they are the ones who have been rescued from slavery to the fear of death and who are now journeying toward the inheritance of their salvation as �� of God. By de�� author locates this group of people within the inheritance of Jesus. As ��s. In line with ch. 2 and �� audience of Hebrews themselves. The author follows his description of ��fulness as a Son to his Father in becoming human and dying �� apostle, as a high priest, and as the steward over his inheritance, including the children of God. Hence, the themes of ch. 2 appear again. God has granted to the audience of Hebrews the honor of being his children �� C. The Character of the Father and the Son ��ts vital facts about the character of God and of Jesus. The author highlights �� He also reaf�rms the message of Hebrews 1 by showing that God gives all that he has built � all things including the readers � to his Son. God does so, however, after Jesus has shown himself faithful to God in the roles of apostle and high priest. God the Father calls Jesus to become human and to die before he places him over all things, and Jesus executes these roles with exemplary faithfulness. This paragraph also provides the audience with another glimpse of �� he plays in 26 Both meanings are widely attested for ��: as a house (e.g., Lk. 11.17; Acts 16.34; 1 Cor. 11.34; Rom. 16.5; Josephus, Ant. 4.74), and as a household (Gen. 42.12; Lk. 10.5; 1 Cor. 1.16; 1 Tim. 3.4, 12; Hermas, Vis. 1.1.9; Sim. 7.2). 1

3. ��

115

making the readers his children. The earlier assertions that every �� is built by someone and that God is the builder of all things highlight that because the readers are in fact the �� of God, then it can be none other than God himself who constructed them to be his household. The author is not discussing building materials but people, not God only as a builder of the framework but also as the One who gathers the members of a household, a Father. Hebrews 3.1-6 reinforces the themes of the preceding chapters. Jesus takes on humanity and dies in response to the appointment of his Father. Because he does so, God places him as heir of all things. For humanity, �� included in the inheritance of Jesus. By articulating that Jesus is faithful as a high priest, the author also points forward in this section to the rest of the letter where all these themes come to particular expression in the priesthood of Jesus. II. The Call of the Father Following the �rst extended exhortation (3.7�4.13), the author of �� clear, �rst of all, that God the Father appoints Jesus to the priesthood. His citation of Ps. 109.4 LXX, his prefacing of that citation with Ps. 2.7 LXX, and his appeal to honor and glory demonstrate the paternal instiga�� A. Honor and Glory Hebrews 5.5 picks up where Heb. 3.6 left off, continuing to emphasize ��n, however, that between these verses intervenes an entire section of Hebrews � almost two chapters � in which there is no explicit mention of either the sonship of Jesus or of the Fatherhood of God. Because of this arrangement, it is not obvious that the �rst part of the sermon and its familial subject matter set the theme for the �fth chapter of Hebrews as well. Nevertheless, the author signals his return to the same subject by making linguistic connections to the opening section of Hebrews. Before ��s speech of the psalm texts, the author states that Christ did not take this honor (��) for himself (Heb. 5.4) and that he did not glorify (��) himself (Heb. 5.5). The previous time these two terms appear ��n over the house of God gives him more glory (��) than Moses, just as the builder of the house has 1

116

You Are My Son

more honor (��) than the structure itself. God, as the builder of all things (3.4), has great honor. Because the author depicts God building a household, his honor is associated with his role as the Father of that ��. Similarly, the glory that Jesus receives is that of a Son over a servant (3.6). These connections show that the author associates glory ��ory as a Son. This association is also present in 2.7-9, the other occurrence in the letter of both terms (�� and �� and honor is directly linked to his appointment as heir of all things (2.8).27 When the author asserts that Jesus did not honor or glorify himself, it follows that it was God who did so, the author having already �� familial relationship with Jesus. 28 B. The Royal Appointment: Psalm 109.4 LXX Psalm 109 LXX emphasizes the �lial status of its addressee in two ways. First, it addresses the king. The prescript denotes that it pertains to David, and the content of the psalm describes the powerful rule of the addressee. Because the king of Israel was thought of as the son of God,29 27 See the argument above, pp.68�70. 28 This is an af�� is a vitally important concept in Hebrews (see his overview of this theme in the letter on in Despising Shame, pp.5�6; cf. his Perseverance in Gratitude, pp.58�69). At the �� discussion of honor. The author never associates G�� imparts to his Son (see Despising Shame, pp.264�7). 29 ��scriptures, it is only the king who is singled out and explicitly calle��king as the Son and heir of God (2.7-8). The psalms extol David as the �rstborn (Ps. 88.28 LXX) and the one begotten of God (Ps. 109.3 LXX). In the historical books, God makes a promise through Nathan to David that he wil�� 22.10; 28.6). Israel was not alone in ascribing a familial relationship to God and the king. The Egyptian king Thutmose III recounts when Amon-Re addressed him as his son. The same claim is made for Amen-hotep III as well (James B. Pritchard [ed.], Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament [3rd ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969], pp.374�5). Canaanite literature and art depict the king as the son of El (Dahood, Psalms I, pp.11�12). Despite this correspondence, it does not seem that Israel made a similar move in deifying the king. The literature of Israel ascribed to the k�� intimate involvement with the people of Israel through the representative person of their king. Nevertheless, they did not elevate this position of honor to one in which 1

3. ��

117

this psalm �ts in with the royal sonship motif. God is appointing the king, his Son, to the priesthood. Second, in Ps. 109.3 LXX, the Lord ��30 While the mention of a womb suggests that God might be serving an assisting �� rst person assertion, �� Hebrews 5 in which Ps. 2.7 appears (��). The entirety of the psalm, and particularly its third verse, suggests that God appoints one whom he has established as his Son to the eternal priesthood in the order of Melchizedek. C. The Reiteration of the Familial Relationship: Psalm 2.7 LXX Most importantly, before introducing Ps. 110.4, the author has God articulate another citation that he has already presented as the speech of God in the �rst chapter. Psalm 109.1 LXX would have worked well here for several reasons. First, the author quoted this citation in the �rst chapter and placed it as the �nal climactic citation of the catena. 31 Second, as a widely used psalm it is likely that this verse would have provided a safe ground for agreement from his listeners. 32 Finally, and most obviously, Psalm 109 is the psalm from which the second citation was drawn. If the hearers agreed with the author that God had commanded Christ to sit at his right hand, it would not have been a dif�cult jump to agree that God also called Christ to be a priest because this call was preserved in the same psalm in the same conversation with the same ��.33 This, however, is not the move the author makes. Instead, he chooses ��ment of Jesus to the priesthood with a quotation the King was equated with God. The king did not become another Deity equal to the Lord God (Roland De Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions [Biblical Resource Series; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997], p.113; Sigmund Mowinckel, The �� [BRS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004], p.58). 30 This reading is unique to the LXX. The MT seems to highlight the youth of the addressee, although the precise meaning of the Hebrew is quite dif�cult to ascertain (William P. ��-��JBL 117 [1998], pp.93�6). 31 Johnson, Hebrews, p.81; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:��Hebrews, p.65. 32 ��ed with Christ � as was common in early Christianity � it is but a small step to identify Christ as the ��Hebrews, p.109). 33 �� the exalted Jesus, then Ps 110:4 also applies to him: You are a priest forever accord��Hebrews, p.298). 1

118

You Are My Son

from Ps. 2.7. The appeal to this particular psalm is understandable because Psalm 2 shares important similarities with Psalm 109. Primarily, the author has already established in the �rst chapter that they both �� chosen ruler of his people. Finally, both Psalm 2 and Psalm 109 are psalms in which God speaks directly to the king. Moreover, God speaks to him as his Son.34 Psalm 2 and Psalm 109, in both their original contexts and in their presentation in Hebrews, record words between God and his Son, the King. In these ways, Psalm 2 is a �tting preface to Psalm 109. By quoting from Psalm 2 rather than from an earlier verse of Psalm 109, the author makes his starting point a verse in which God explicitly and clearly establishes the paternal/�lial relationship between himself and Jesus. Thus, God who speaks Ps. 109.4 has just articulated his status as a Father. Prefacing Psalm 109 with the possibly unexpected choice of Psalm 2 highlights the Father/Son relational context for the priestly call of Jesus.35 �� conversation with Jesus has been in Hebrews up to this point � the speech of a Father to his Son. III. The Word of the Oath Appoints a Son: Hebrews 7.1-10, 28 �� 5, the author adds the complement that it is Jesus the Son who serves as priest in the next section of the letter. He does so by repeating the oaths God speaks to Jesus (5.6, 10; 6.20; 7.11, 17, 21), a member of the tribe of Judah, the tribe from which Da��ing genealogy in his presentation of the story of Melchizedek (7.1-10), and concluding this section with the assertion that God appoints a Son as high priest (7.28). A. The Oath As noted above, Jesus becomes high priest because God said so. God �� LXX; Heb. 5.6). As the author emphasizes the 34 Of the other royal psalms, only Psalm 131 and Ps. 89.5 share this feature. 35 �� stands the claim, it insists on the fundamental impo�� p.200). 1

3. ��

119

�� order, he presen��twice more (7.17, 21), noting that the Aaronic priests can appeal to no such divine oath (7.20b). The oath spoken by God provides one of the foundational planks upon which the �� midst of this �� importance of oaths through a brief excursus on oaths in 6.13-18 in which he aims to demonstrate the faithfulness of God. When God made a promise to Abraham, he swore according o himself because there is nothing greater upon which he could have sworn. It is no surprise, then, that Abraham obtained the promises (6.15) because God had promised and sworn, both acts founded upon and demonstrating his trustworthy character. Therefore: just as Abraham saw the promises of God ful�lled, so too will Jesus. When the author invokes this oath multiple times does he also call forth its background as a psalm spoken to the descendant of David?36 His consistent appeal to the �rst verse of the psalm,37 a verse other early believers frequently interpreted as applying to Jesus, the Messiah, the Son of David,38 �� likely. Moreover, because he acknowledges his awareness (and his ��Jesus arose from the tribe of Judah (7.14) � in �� in between the �rst and second appearance of the oath, his knowledge of the genealogy of the 36 �� LXX understands the ��[110],1�3 in the Septuagint: Its TranslationCritical, Tradition-Historical, and ��, in Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception [Dirk J. Human and Gert J. Steyn, eds; LHBOTS, 527; New York: T&T Clark, 2010], pp.241�59 [248]). Don Juel, summarizing the �ndings of ��in the �rst century the verses in question could be read as part of the constellation of biblical passages referring to the one coming from the line of David. Extant Jewish tradition permits us to say at least that much. The �Son of David� passage in the Synoptics presumes that the scribes understood the psalm �� , in Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early Christianity [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988], pp.135�50 [141]). 37 The author quotes from Ps. 110.1 in Heb. 1.13 and alludes to it in Heb. 1.3; 8.1; 10.12; 12.2. 38 Quotations of Psalm 110 appear in the Gospels (Mt. 22.44; Mk 15.9; Lk. 20.42), Acts 2.34, and 1 Cor. 15.25. Allusions to it appear in other letters as well (Rom. 8.34; Eph. 1.20; Col. 3.1). For an analysis of this text by early believers in Jesus, see David M. Hay, Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity (SBLMS, 18; Nashville: Abingdon, 1973), and ��ht Hand�. 1

120

You Are My Son

�� messianic connotations of this verse. Jesus is quali�ed for this priesthood because God says so in an oath that was interpreted as spoken to a son of �� sonship, particularly his status as a son of Judah, makes him a �tting addressee of Psalm 110. B. Melchizedek At the beginning of ch. 7, the author turns his attention to the only other ��-20. Through the retelling of this story, the author establishes, among other things, that Melchizedek the priest stands outside the priestly line of Levi. �� differences between Melchizedek on the one hand and the Levitical priests on the other. He designates Abraham as the patriarch and the priests as the sons of Levi (7.4). They have come out of the loins of Abraham and therefore those from whom they extract a tithe are their brothers (7.5). Abraham is the one who has the promise (7.6), which in 6.13 is a promise related to his status as a father, the promise that he will be blessed and multiplied. It can be said that Levi pays a tithe to Melchizedek because he was in the loins of his father (7.10). Conversely, Melchizedek is the one who does not share the same genealogy as that of the priests (7.6). In fact, there is no mention of the ancestry of this King of Righteousness and King of Peace, leading the author to conclude that Melchizedek has no mother, no father, and no genealogy (Heb. 7.3). �� greatness of Melchizedek over the Levitical priests. The Levites have the great honor of claiming Abraham the patriarch � the one to whom God made his enduring promise � as their father. This great honor is a �� Abraham, residing in the loins of their father, they play the same role that he does in the story, namely, the position of the inferior one. The Levitical priests take the place of inferiority � as evidenced by their act of paying the tithe and by being blessed � because they, as descendants, participate in the actions of their father Abraham. The fact that Melchizedek blessed Abraham while Abraham gave Melchizedek a tithe (Heb. 7.2, 6) demonstrates that Melchizedek is superior to Abraham (7.7). And since Levi is a participant in that bless�� 10). 1

3. ��

121

For the author of Hebrews, the story in Genesis 14 of �� act of blessing and reception of the tithe displays his greatness (��, 7.4). If these acts are the evidence of his superiority, what is the cause? In other words, what factor distinguishes him from and elevates him above the other priests? The author foreshadows his following argument (7.23-25) by asserting twice that Melchizedek lives eternally and the other priests do not. He has no end of life, allowing him to abide forever as priest (7.3); in contrast with the priests who die, he lives (7.8). Mof�tt �� being without father, without mother, that is, without a genealogy and without beginning or end of days � is not a priest because of his lineage (he has none, cf. 7.6), but because he ��, 7.8)�.39 While I agree that it is life that distinguishes Melchizedek from priests who die, I counter that Melchizedek is this kind of abiding priest because of his lack of human lineage. In other words, the author of Hebrews �� extension into eternity future corresponds to his extension into eternity past. He has no human ancestry because he lacks father, mother, and, consequently, any genealogical record, and he has no human ancestry, and no end of life, because he is similar to the Son of God. By using this �lial title and by attending to genealogical issues throughout this section, the author suggests in this passage that the greatness of Melchizedek, evident in the story in Genesis, arises from his likeness to the Son of God. In other words, he is immortally great because his lack of human ancestry shows him to be similar to the one who has a divine ancestry. Lest I attribute too much greatness to Melchizedek � I do not think the author of Hebrews imagines the priest from Genesis as another Son of God alongside Jesus � let me assert that he plays primarily a literary role.40 The author notices that he stands outside the Levitical line, and in

39 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.202. 40 �� connection. He dispenses and recon�� lessing on Abraham, receives �� Thus the pastor is able to discern in the unique role played by this character a foreshadowing �� a literal encounter between Abraham and Melchizedek and his concomitant assumption of Melchize�� una�� The Epistle to the Hebrews [NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012], p.306).

1

122

You Are My Son

this outside place, he is the greater one. What is true of Melchizedek � that he is superior to the Levitical priests � is also true of Jesus because Jesus is a priest in his order. When the author maps this exchange in Genesis onto the characters with whom he is most concerned � Jesus and other priests � Jesus stands in the place of Melchizedek as the Levitical priests stand in the place of Abraham. As the Son of God, Jesus also stands also outside the Levitical ancestry just as Melchizedek does. His status as Son of God, outside the Levitical line, puts him in the superior position, just like Melchizedek. In this liminal place outside the boundaries of genealogy, particularly the correct genealogy, Jesus cannot be a priest according to the law (7.11, 12, 16), in other words, according to the words of Moses (7.14). Hence, this is certainly a dif�� thood. The author acknowledges that Jesus could not serve on earth (8.4). If the audience of Hebrews, like the Qumran community41 or the authors of the Testament of Judah,42 did not believe that a king should also be a priest, they would also have had a hard time accepting that Jesus, outside the Levitical line, outside the prescription of the law, could be a priest. While the author acknowledges this in 7.13-�� lineage functions for him not only as a dif�culty to overcome, but also as a blessing to celebrate. Being outside the line of Aaron excludes Jesus from the Levitical priesthood (7.16). The way in which the author contrasts this priesthood with that of Melchizedek reveals which order he thinks more valuable. As opposed to a system built on descent, 43 the order of Melchizedek arises from indestructible life. Moreover, the Levitical priesthood performs functions that, while instructive, have proven to be weak and ineffective (7.18, 19). This system has become �� (7.18).44 �� 41 1QS 9.11. James H. Charlesworth et al. (eds), Rule of the Community and Related Documents (vol. 1 of The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations; PTSDSSP, 1; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1994), p.40. 42 T. Jud. 21.1-5. See Mof�� Priest�� p.198. 43 The adjective �� also carries the negative connotation of being external, impermanent, and corruptible. Harold Attridge cites evidence from Paul (Rom. 7.14; 1 Cor. 3.1; 2 Cor. 3.3), Ps. Democritus (C,7 [FVS II.228.25]), Sib. Or. (frg. 1.1), and Philo (Sacr. 63) for these connotations of the term (Hebrews, p.202). 44 Mof�tt argues that the nulli�cation of the law means that it does not apply to �� understand this phrase to indicate that the law has been abrogated presently on earth (Attridge, Hebrews, p.203). �� line of Levi keeps him outside of a system that is not the ultimate reality, whether or not it continues to function on earth. 1

3. ��

123

�� order of Melchizedek, whose descent comes from God rather than Levi, disquali�es him from a priesthood that ser�� but that ultimately proved insuf�cient to bring internal and permanent cleansing. This placement outside the Levitical line like Melchizedek makes him inadequate for an inadequate priesthood, and as the author of Hebrews sees the salvi�c plan of God developing, that cannot be a bad thing. C. The Oath Appoints a Son The �nal contrast between Jesus and other priests in 7.28 provides the �� than complicates his standing as priest in the order of Melchizedek. In the concluding verse of ch. 7, the author presents a comparison between Jesus and the other high priests delineated in the chart below: Levitical Priests Law appoints as high priests Men who have weakness

Jesus word of the oath that comes after the law [appoints as the high priest] Son who has been perfected

Whereas the law appoints to the priesthood men, the word of the oath �� appoints a Son. The other priests are, of course, sons, namely sons of Abraham and Levi as the author has just belabored. Similarly, this Son is also an ��, as the author has boldly proclaimed in chs. 2 and 4. To state the contrast in this way � a Son vs. men � highlights that Jesus is a Son in a way the other high priests are not. �� have argued, his identity as Son of God puts him outside the line of Levi in a way foreshadowed by the character of Melchizedek in the story of Genesis 14. At the same time, Jesus is also a son of Judah, putting him inside the lineage of the addressee of the oath of Ps. 109.4. These two sonships create a logical problem. Is he inside the line of Abraham or not? The author, in my o��onship as Son of God and son of man � so fully developed and articulated in the �rst two chapters � in his reference to Jesus as the Son whom the oath appoints in 7.28. The word of the oath appoints a son who has been perfected forever (7.28). In other words, in order for Jesus to be the rightful recipient of this oath, he had to remain forever and he had to be a son. Mof�� 1

124

You Are My Son

��od provide an instructive and helpful parallel. In order to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek, in order for the word of the oath to apply to him, he argues, Jesus must possess eternal, abiding, forever life. 45 Similarly, in order for him to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek, in order for the oath to apply to him, he must be a son � a son of Judah to whom the oath is spoken and a Son of God who stands outside the Levitical line. Jesus stands outside the Levitical order and inside the Melchiz�� son of man. He could not be this �nal high priest were he not this Son. IV. The Experience of the Son ��lial identity as integral to his priesthood, he does not present his priesthood as a vocation automatically entailed in his identity as Son. Instead, he shows how Jesus is quali�ed to become the �nal high priest because he experiences all his �lial role entails. Jesus meets some of the basic requirements for the priesthood, namely being taken from among men and having something to offer to God (5.1), because God the Father trains him unto perfection. By calling him to experience the human condition, including its suffering even to the point of death, God ensures that Jesus is quali�ed to become high priest. He also meets the requirements for his eternal priesthood because he has been perfected by his Father, and thereby performs his �� Son and experiences both the suffering and the exaltation that is entailed in this relationship, he becomes quali�ed to be the high priest that he is. A. Suffering �� the groundwork for one of the most dramatic �� humanity in ch. 5,46 �� humanity and death � willed by God his Father � work toward his installment as high priest. As mentioned, the close of ch. 2 portrays Jesus participating in the human condition, including suffering and death. 45 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.208. 46 About v. �� in Bauckham, Driver, and Hart [eds], Hebrews, pp.37�68 [64]). 1

3. ��

125

�� author asserts that he suffered in the midst of temptation. In other words, in that which he suffered, he was being tested. 47 Because of the connection between suffering and testing in 2.18, and because it is God who submits his Son to suffering (2.10), it is best to view God as the agent of �� as well.48 �� does with Abraham in 11.17, by presenting him with the opportunity to experience death. Consequently, because he was tested by God his Father and obeyed by experiencing the fullness of humanity in death, he is the great high priest that he is. A similar theme appears when the author returns to his discussion of the priesthood at the end of ch. 4. The second statement about their great high priest is that he has been tested in every way (�� , 4.15). This portrayal of Jesus the high priest evokes his participation in every aspect of humanity (2.17), including the testing experienced in suffering (2.18). Because his testing is related to what he suffered (2.18), and his suffering culminates in his human experience of ��tions and extends even farther. The difference between his testing and theirs is that he has faced the test of death. 49 His true sympathy for them arises from his total human journey.50 The great high priest to whom the author and his audience appeal is able to sympathize (��) with their weaknesses, not because he himself is weak, but because he is strong. He was tested in the full range of human experience, including death, yet he did not succumb to sin. In other words, his experience of human nature � taking on �esh and blood and dying � allowed him to become the merciful high priest.

47 �� Hebrews, p.96). 48 Koester, Hebrews, p.242. 49 According to the author, his audience has not yet faced this particular test (1.4). 50 The other priests, on the other hand, moderate (��) toward those who are ignorant and deceived. In literature contemporary with Hebrews (Attridge lists Philo, Leg. all. 3.129, 132-34; Spec. leg. 3.96; Plutarch, Frat. amor. 18 (489C); Coh. ir. 10 (458C); Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. rom. 8.61; Ep. Arist. 256; Josephus, Ant. 12.3.2 §128, [Hebrews, p.143]), �� is typically used as an indication of moderating the emotion of anger. The comparison indicates a difference of degree between human priests and Christ in their compassion. Christ does not just moderate his feeling toward those who are ignorant � he actively sympathizes with them (so also Attridge, Hebrews, pp.143�4). 1

126

You Are My Son

Verse 7 locates the actions of Chr�� days of his �esh��51 This phrase refers to the time when Jesus participated with humanity in �esh and blood (2.14). In this state of humility, Jesus offers up prayers and supplications to God, the One who has the power to save him from death (��). �� places his trust in God (as made evident by continuing to direct his requests to God). Nevertheless, a striking difference exists between �� and proclaiming his trust (2.12-13). Here, he is offering up his requests ��.52 While contemporary readers may interpret this as vulnerability or even weakness, for Jewish readers of the �rst century the picture of Jesus in v. 7 is of a person praying boldly and sincerely.53 God honored this honest attitude of trust: Jesus was heard because of his reverence.54 As those who know the message of salvation (2.3-4), the 51 This is widely accepted. For example, Johnson, Hebrews, p.145; Lane, Hebrews, p.1:109, Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, pp.190�1. 52 In his discussion of Esau, the author includes the note about his tears (�� ) to indicate the seriousness with which he sought a place for repentance (12.17). These two terms (�� and �� 3 Macc. 1.16). 53 Attridge calls attention to this phrase as evidence of piety in Jewish sources. He cites Pss. 21.24; 114.8; 1 Esdr. 5.62; 2 Macc. 11.6; 3 Macc. 5.7, 25; 1QH 5.12; Philo, Det. pot. ins. 92; Leg. all. 3.213; Quaest. in Gen. 4.233; Rer. div. her. 19 (Hebrews, pp.150�1 nn.171, 172). In 3 Macc. 5.7, Jewish prisoners direct their tearful cries toward God their father. 54 �� conveys the idea of healthy ��Godly Fear, p.205). An alternative is to interpret this phrase, �� was �� died without the concomitant fear of death (supported by Buchanan, Hebrews, p.98; Monte�ore, Hebrews, pp.98�9; Windisch, Hebräer, p.43). The other uses of �� in Hebrews (11.7; 12.28), however, indicate that when the author uses the word, he does so in reference not to fear in general, but to a fear of God, or reverence. This de�nition �ts well in this context as a description of the reverence Jesus showed in his prayers �� (4.15) would be severely limited were his experience of death free of any fear. Consequently, he is heard and delivered not, of course, from his reverence of God, but because of it, another possible translation of �� (as in, for example, Mk 2.4; Lk. 19.3; Acts 22.11). The interpretation that Jesus was heard because of his reverence �nds support in Attridge (Hebrews, p.152), Braun (An die Hebräer, p.152), Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.291), Johnson, (Hebrews, p.146), Koester, (Hebrews, 1

3. ��

127

audience is aware that God did certainly rescue him from death (13.20). At the same time, they are also aware that God did not rescue him before death. The author has set up a classical question of theodicy. If God is powerful and good, will he not prevent death from happening, especially to his Son?55 �� Verse 8 begins with ��: �� and �� use of �� here must be interpreted in light of the �� of 5.5. Jesus is not �� exceptional tone of the �rst phrase of v. 8 make sense. Even though Jesus was �� own Son who re�� participated with God in creation, and would reign with God forever � even though this was all true � through what he suffered he learned what it meant to obey his Father.56 �� perfected (��). In line with the passive surveyed in previous sections, the passive employed here suggests that God is the one who perfected Jesus. Because Jesus obeyed the one to whom he was praying, he was perfected by him. Moreover, since he experienced these things as ��as his Father used suffering and death to perfect him. P�� priesthood. Having learned �lial obedience through what he suffered, he was appointed high priest by God according to the order of Melchizedek (�� ). ��and resurrection, in other words the process by which he becomes perfect. Perfection, priesthood, and sonship coalesce again in Heb. 7.28 and �� There, the author argues that the law appoints men who have weakness, p.289), Lane (Hebrews, p.1:109), Thompson (Hebrews, p.111), and Witherington (Letters and Homilies, p.200). Martin Luther describes the interaction in this way, ��e that in spite of our sin he would listen to his Son [pleading] on our behalf. Consequently, set off against our own sin, which would otherwise cause God to deny us everything, is the love which he could ��, p.114). 55 This �� seems that He was not heard,��for himself, since the chalice did not pass from Him, ��Hebrews, 5.1.257). 56 �� t Jesus is not an ordinary son, who might indeed be expected to learn from suffering (12.4-11), but ��Hebrews, p.152). 1

128

You Are My Son

whereas the word of the oath appoints a Son who has been perfected.57 �� and 5 suggests that the suffering of Jesus was not limited to but culminated in death. The author interrupts his discussion of the perfecting of Jesus in the Melchizedekian priesthood (5.9; 7.28) and argues that perfection results from training (5.11-14). Because suffering is the means through which perfection comes, the law of the Levitical priesthood provides no avenue toward perfection for the priest himself (cf. 7.19). On the other hand, �� who offered himself. Jesus has obediently endured to the end � to death itself � the suffering to which his God appointed him (5.8; 12.2). By taking on this role, Jesus learned to obey God through what he suffered, and through his ultimate act of obedience became the perfected one. �� Father allows him to meet the requirements for priesthood. 58 B. Exaltation Jesus becomes quali�ed for the priesthood because of the suffering he experiences that was willed by his Father. To be the ultimate and eternal high priest, however, he must also receive the reward that comes from his Father: the inherited blessing of exaltation. This particular �lial distinction from the other high priests appears in �� namely, that Jesus has passed through the heavens (4.14). This declaration recalls the ��1.3, 13; 2.8). The Levitical priests serve on earth (8.5; 9.6-10), but Jesus has passed through the �� place (6.20), and taken his seat on the right hand of God (1.3, 13; 8.1; 10.12), serving �� 7 reiterates the same idea. By referring to Jesus as the one who has been perfected (Heb. 7.28), in addition to referring to the process that quali�ed him to be high priest, the author also evokes the status he holds in his �� priesthood in the very presence of God in heaven. As the perfected Son of God, he administers his priestly duties at the throne of God. In other 57 See the chart above, p.123. 58 �� Christ attains �� Hebrews, p.87).

1

3. ��

129

words, Jesus is perfected through the process of suffering and death he endures. He is perfected through sufferings (2.10), and then becomes the cause of eternal salvation and the priest (5.9). He reigns as the son who has already been perfected (7.28). It is the end result of this process. 59 But what does it mean for Hebrews to say that Jesus is perfect? What does the state of perfection entail for him? The author of Hebrews associates perfection with the state of those who are in the presence of God. The spirits made perfect are those who dwell with God on Mount Zion (12.23). The law could perfect nothing, and so instead, God introduced a better hope that would allow access to God (7.19). In other words, for Jesus to be perfect is to be allowed to sit in the presence of God. 60 What God has done for Jesus, therefore, is what Jesus is doing for those who believe in him. He is perfecting them so that they too can draw near to God (something the law could never enable). They can be in ��Jesus has dealt with the two problems that separated them from God, sin and death. He has puri�ed their sins and conquered death, granting them sancti�cation and life, the qualities needed to dwell in the presence of God. If perfection is equated with the ability to be in the presence of God, then Jesus, of course, possessed perfection when he reigned with God even before the moment of creation.61 Hence, it might even be non-sensical to speak of the perfection of God, since this should be assumed. That points to the fact that the arrival at perfection relates to his incarnation. The difference is that post-incarnation, passion, resurrection, and ascension Jesus has that same perfection as a son of man as well. He has opened up the way and serves as the pioneer so that others can achieve the same freedom from sin and death, the same perfection, so that they too can dwell in the presence of God forever. His perfection, then, is his session in the presence of God, 59 So also Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.196. 60 �� picture of Hebrews unfolds, this glori��s prie��Hebrews, p.87). Mof�tt �� Perfection is therefore closely bound up with the puri�� (Atonement and Resurrection, pp.199�200). 61 I agree with Mof�tt that Jesus could not be a priest before his death, but, in ��fore his life and death on earth Jesus was not ��Atonement and Resurrection, p.�� as priest, but is broader than that, as Mof�tt himself later states. Hence, if perfection is equated with access to the presence of God, this quality was possessed by Jesus before his life and death on earth. 1

130

You Are My Son

where he serves as priest and reigns as Son awaiting the ultimate subjection of his rightful inheritance, now won back from the control of death and the Devil.62 In 4.14 ��, even ��, is a multidimensional title. The Son of God is the one who became a son of man, experienced death, and �� Jesus is perfected as priest through the suffering and exaltation willed by his Father. That which �� presence forever. Because he is the Son who has become the great high priest, he has experienced every aspect of the human condition and can sympathize. Even more impressive, he can do so from the powerful �� V. The Inheritance Secured by the Priest The sovereign place that belongs to Jesus as Son where he sits as high �� t his priestly acts are the means by which he secures his inheritance, a promised inheritance of all things, �� service supports the attainment of his inheritance in two ways. First, his priestly offe�� namely eternal salvation. Second, through his priestly intercession he aids his brothers and sisters so that they can attain their inheritance. By establishing the possibility of salvation and leading his brothers and �� human portion of his own inheritance. A. The Eternal Inheritance The �� all things is that he es��tance of salvation. Early in the letter, the author portrays human�� salvation in terms of inheritance.63 Men and women who look forward to 62 Peterson reaches a similar conclusion: �� destine��Hebrews and Perfection, p.67). 63 �� 1

3. ��

131

salvation anticipate inheriting this salvation (1.14). In ch. 5, the author �� obedience from what he suffers, he becomes perfect. In this perfect state, he becomes the cause (��) of salvation for those who are obedient to him. In other words, when Jesus is perfected, he establishes the inheritance of the audience. What is this inheritance of salvation and how does Jesus make it a reality? First, Jesus can provide the eternal inheritance of salvation because his priestly offering, similar to the sacri�ces of the old covenant,64 removes sin. As a high priest, God appoints him, like those before him, to offer gifts and sacri�ces for sin (5.1). The author employs the language of puri�cation (1.3), atonement (2.17), redemption (9.12), sancti�cation (10.10; 13.12), and perfection (10.14) to convey what Jesus achieves with his offering. Beyond �� achieves eternal and internal cleansing. First, when he offers his singular sacri�ce, he secures eternal redemption (�� , 9.12). In �� (Exod. 6.6; Deut. 7.8; 13.5; Mic. 6.4). In Hebrews, this redemption implies redemption from the enslavement to the fear of death (2.15), and, consequently, this serves as a variation on the recurrent theme of eternal salvation (1.14; 2.10; 5.9; 7.25).65 It is in ch. 9 that the author discusses the second contrast in earnest. �� Covenant, the �rst covenant (9.1) has a perpetual system to deal with sin. The priests serve the outer tent continually, and the high priest enters the inner tent once a year (Heb. 9.6-7). Nevertheless, even this frequent service is ineffective. The author asserts that these gifts and sacri�ces are not able to perfect the consciences of the one who worships in this way. Instead, they are acts of justi�cation affecting only the �esh (9.10). ��, in Grace Unlimited [Clark H. Pinnock, ed.; Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1975], pp.143�66 [155]). Craig Koester draws attention to the close �� and its inheritance of salvation: �� Salvation in the New Testament: Perspectives on Soteriology [Jan G. Van der Watt, ed.; Boston: Brill, 2005], pp.361�87). 64 For example, Exod. 29.46; Lev. 4�5; 9�10; Num. 7. 65 Attridge, Hebrews, p.249 n. 65; Johnson, Hebrews, p.237. 1

132

You Are My Son

In great contrast to the offerings that are not able to cleanse the conscience, the priestly service that Christ renders in which he offers his own blood in the greater and more perfect tent affects precisely this internal puri�cation (9.14). The author consequently draws a close connec��ew Covenant. Because Jesus puri�es the conscience, he brings about the covenant of which Jeremiah spoke. Now, in addition to God forgetting sins, God can also inscribe his laws on the inner parts of his people (10.16-17). The author portrays this thorough removal of sin as an inheritance. Hebrews 9.15-17, in discussing the effectiveness of a covenant/testament66 �� inheritance of eternal salvation was not available until a death occurred (9.15). In other words, while the testator lives, the covenant is not in force (��). The death that made this salvation possible is the death of Jesus because it resulted in the redemption of the transgressions committed under the �rst covenant. Just as his death released humanity from the power of the devil (2.14), so also it released humanity from the chains of transgression. When he has dealt with sin, those called by God are able to receive the promise of their eternal inheritance (�� , 9.15), or in the words of 5.8, to receive their eternal salvation. The author has now made clear that the inheritance to which they look forward is a salvation from both death and sin. Salvation in Hebrews, however, is not only a negative concept, a �� At the close of ch. 9, the author says that Christ was offered once to remove the sins of many. Having done so, he will appear a second time to bring salvation to those who are eagerly awaiting him (9.28). He removed sin; therefore, he can now bring salvation. Hence, those who will inherit salvation are both delivered from the consequences of death and sin and anticipate participation in the presence of God. �� prescribed by the law, the author emphasizes that he brings a better hope that allows nearness to God (7.19). It is Jesus, as the abiding priest who never dies, who is able to save unto the utmost67 those who approach God 66 �� requires� (Hebrews, p.255). 67 The phrase �� can indicate both qualitative and quantitative completeness. Both meanings capture what the author portrays about salvation through Jesus (Attridge, Hebrews, p.210; Koester, Hebrews, p.�� Hebrews, p.274). 1

3. ��

133

through him (7.25). His blood and �esh allow entrance to the holy place �� the inheritors of the promises (6.17). To be with God is their inheritance of salvation. By establishing his brothers� �� presence, Jesus opens the door for the �nal consummation of his own inheritance.68 The author describes the destination toward which the �� Zion where God dwells (12.22-24) � all of which connect their salvation with entrance into the presence of God. The author also shows that in these places Jesus reigns over those who dwell there: 69 he is the leader of those who are being led into glory (2.10), he is set over the house of God (3.6), and he is the mediator who allows entrance to the mountain (12.24). Because their salvation consists in being cleansed from sin and �� shows that when humanity comes into its inheritance of salvation, Jesus takes possession of his own inheritance. B. Intercession The audience of Hebrews, however, has not yet attained their inheritance of salvation; they do not yet dwell in the presence of God. Therefore, in order to attain his own inheritance, Jesus aids his brothers and sisters on their journey to God through his priestly intercession. The word for interces�� priestly service on behalf of his brothers and sisters �gures prominently throughout Hebrews. This aspect of his priestly ministry �� initial designation of Jesus as high priest (2.17-18). The suffering he experienced associated with his testing allows him to give aid (��) to his brothers and sisters who are also tested so that they will not give 68 Similarly Patrick Gray concl��ing an inheritance for his siblings� [The audience members] owe their promised inheritance to his of�ces in both senses of the word, that is, his assistance as well as ��d high priest. Apart from the mediation of their devoted sibling, Hebrews describes no other way by which the readers will receive �� p.348). 69 �� means that the readers, like the Son, will experience a life that transcends the �� (Heb 1:9��p.369). 1

134

You Are My Son

up in the pursuit of attaining their inheritance. Note also 4.15-16: because Jesus has been tempted in every way, he is able to sympathize �� the author to encourage his readers to approach the throne of grace with boldness. Becaus�� struggles, they have an advocate in heaven who can provide them with grace and help in their times of need. He can assist them so that they will not be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin (3.13) and fall short of �� In ch. 6, the author encourages them to imitate those who inherited the ��rm anchor for their souls. Moreover, those promises are closely related to the person of Jesus.70 He is the one who has gone inside the veil to serve as priest (6.19-20). Therefore, the priestly service he performs there helps them hold fast to the promises of their inheritance. In 7.25, the author relates ��l priest and his ability to save his followers completely and eternally to his continual intercession. Since he lives forever, he is always able to intercede for his brothers and sisters (7.25). In other words, he is there to assist them until they reach their �nal goal: �� they reach their inheritance of salvation. The end of ch. 9 captures the triple impact of Jesus th�� work. At the time of the author and his readers, Jesus has purchased forgiveness for sin (9.26). When Jesus enters into heaven, the true tent, �� of God (9.24). There, his one offering removes sin (9.26). He will appear again, and at that time his purpose will be for salvation from the continuing reality of sin and death and for entrance into the eternal dwelling with God. That inheritance of salvation will be revealed to those who, �� By establishing their inheritance of salvation and continually living to aid them on their journey to their attaining salvation, Jesus the Son, in his priestly role, provides the means through which he will attain his own inheritance. 70 �� The analogy established between Christ and the anchor of hope is certainly intentional and signi��Hebrews, pp.182, 184). Similarly Johnson states: �� (Hebrews, p.171).

1

3. ��

135

VI. The Will of God: Hebrews 10.1-23 Hebrews 10 summarizes the points the author discusses throughout the center section of the letter. Jesus becomes human and dies by following the will of his Father. In so doing, he becomes quali�ed to be the �� children. The �� by presenting the faithfulness that characterizes Jesus the Son and the eternal salvation this faithfulness �� sons. This chapter marks a return to the assertion that the sacri�ces prescribed by the law are not effective (cf. 7.18-19; 8.7; 9.10, 13). In this section, the author articulates scriptural proof for his claim that it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to remove sins (Heb. 10.4). Psalm 39 LXX asserts that God did not desire nor was he pleased by sacri�ces, offerings, and whole burnt offerings. The mode �� presentation of this citation is to yield this portion of his sermon, for the second time, to the words spoken by Jesus. The author situates this quotation when Jesus comes into the world, strongly suggesting a reference to the incarnation.71 �� disregard for sacri�ce, God prepared a body for Jesus.72 The next phrase presents a complementary idea, with a focus upon the work of Jesus. �� 73 The alternating structure of the ��llment ��ce; God did not desire (��This �� God did desire. God willed that his Son take on a body and �� body God had prepared for him, and then, even more important, he acted out his intent.74 71 Attridge, Hebrews, p.273; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.500; Grässer, Hebräer, p.2:214�15; Koester, Hebrews, p.432; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:304. 72 �� Psalm 40.7 in the MT reads: �� in �� 73 ��LXX with the absence of the �nal verb of v. 9, ��. In so doing, the author makes �� the in�nitive complement of �� 74 �� enough, just as it would not be enough for us, unless we also proved it by our acts; ��Or. Bas. 4.6 [NPNF2 7:311]). 1

136

You Are My Son

After he presented this singularly effective offering (��), he �� to wait for the subjugation of his enemies (10.12-13). Through the citation and explication of Psalm 40, the author appeals once again to the perfecting and consequent perfection of Jesus. This priest al�� body � after he became human, died, and ever-living presented that offering to God � �� tions for the author and his audience. First, through this divinely willed offering, they are sancti�� of Hebrews become those who are being sancti�ed, and Jesus becomes the sancti�er (2.10). Because he offered up his own body, they can take on the mantle of the holy brothers and sisters (3.1). Unlike the blood of animals that sancti�es only the �esh (9.13), his body sancti�es the entire person. Second, the means of his perfection is the means of their perfection as well. In his one offering, they are perfected (��). Previous to this point in the letter, the author speaks of perfection as only that which has been impossible for humanity. The law of sacri�ce perfects nothing (7.19), including the conscience (9.9) and those who �� impossibility. His one offering achieves that which humanity could not attain in the law: perfection. Moreover, because his one offering was for sins forever (��) � unlike other priests who present sacri�ces daily (v. 11) � he has achieved perfection forever (��). With this temporal indicator, the author evokes a connection with the ��nheri�� reality. This awesome ef��cond citation of Jeremiah 38. In this condensed version, the author limits the citation to the proclamation of the com�� give�� sins (9.14) but also no need ever to offer any other sacri�ce for future sins as well. His one offering for sins forever negates any further need for sacri�ce. Eternal perfection is now a reality because of his offering. By bringing forgiveness for all sin and by sanctifying the author and ��ce. In 1

3. ��

137

�� to Jesus, he is the great �� his �esh. They now can boldly go inside the veil because their high priest ��0.21; cf. 3.6). Through his priestly work, they are sancti�ed members of this household and heirs of God. In ch. 10, the audience hears � from Jesus himself � his intention to offer himself up. ��t his Son �� thereby secure his own inheritance of all things. VII. Conclusion At the beginning of his treatment of the priesthood of Jesus (4.14), the author proclaims that Jesus, the Son of God, is high priest. He is called to the priesthood by his Father. The preceding arguments �nd a fellow �� a high-��ests upon His unique relationship to God, and in a very real way,�upon this unique relationship being that of Sonship.�75 Jesus is high priest by virtue ��lial priority in three ways. First, he emphasizes that the oath of God that appoints the �nal and eternal high priest comes from God the Father to Jesus his Son. Hebrews 5.5-6 emphasizes the familial relationship between God and Jesus by citing Ps. 109.4, connecting this call to the honor and glory that belong to �� 2.7. Jesus can be priest because he is Son of God become a son of man, outside the line of Levi and in the order of Melchizedek. Before he assumes this post, he faces death and, in doing so obediently, he is per�� the same process by which Jesus is able to become high priest. Because priests represent humanity to God, in order for Jesus to be a priest he had to be human. In addition to this basic, but important, requirement, his participation in humanity provides him with the means for the second requirement of priesthood: that he has something to offer to God (5.1b). In ch. 8, the author states again that the purpose of appointing high priests is so that they can offer gifts and sacri�ces. Therefore, since Jesus is a high priest, it is necessary that he also have something to offer (8.3). At the end of ch. 7, the author speci�es the content of that offering:

1

75

Lidgett, Sonship and Salvation, p.34.

138

You Are My Son

unlike the previous high priests who had to offer sacri�ces for themselves and for others often, Jesus offered the sacri�ce of himself once ��ce for sins (1.3) that he offers to God is himself (9.14, 25). This consists of offering his own blood (9.12; 10.19; 12.24; 13.12) and his own �esh (10.19). Jesus accomplishes sancti�cation by offering the body he has taken on (10.10, 14). The anomaly in his situation is that Jesus meets the requirement for the priesthood in unexpected ways. He becomes human, and then he offers himself as a sacri�ce. The process by which he is perfected is the same process by which he is quali�ed to become a high priest. Jesus endures this process as a faithful and obedient Son because this is the path of suffering his Father willed for him. Having been perfected, Jesus takes his place at the right hand of God. �� tabernacle not built by hands (9.11). As priest, he is higher than the �� to enact his priestly service in the very throne room of God in heaven because this is the place where he has been invited to sit by God his Father. He has access to God and this makes his priestly service exceedingly better than that of any previous high priest. �� priesthood and inheritance in two ways. First, his priesthood secures the �� presentation of his body to God sancti�es them, and establishes their ��words, he makes the New Covenant, wherein their sins are forgiven and they are drawn into the people and family of God, a reality. Second, his intercession before the face of God aids them on their journey. In this realm, he is the only priest who is able to intercede forever so that he can save forever all those who are approaching God through him, thereby opening the way for his �nal eternal possession of all things. As the Son of God in the line of Melchizedek, Jesus is appointed to the priesthood as a Son by his Father. He is the Son who has suffered in the act of giving himself in death and thereby has become perfected. By portraying the suffering Jesus experiences in preparation for his priesthood as the will of God his Father, the author displays the character of both the Son and the Father. He continues to paint Jesus as the ultimate example of an obedient and faithful Son. The previous chapter sought to show the ways in which the author depicted the humble and faithful character of Jesus in his willingness to become human and to trust God 1

3. ��

139

even to the point of death. The author continues to refer to these actions throughout the letter as he discusses the way in which Jesus is perfected and is quali�ed to serve as high priest. When he is established as high priest, he also reigns sovereignly over those whose inheritance of salvation he has established. God his Father prepared him for the priesthood through suffering so that he might establish the inheritance of salvation for many others and subsequently attain his own inheritance of all things. Jesus could not be the ultimate heir were he not to secure his inheritance in his role as high priest, and Jesus would not have been high priest were it not for the call, suffering, and exaltation he experienced in relationship with God his Father. �� and priest is also one important way the author constructs the nature of God as Father. When the author describes these events, he portrays the character of Jesus in response to actions of God. When the author describes the suffering of Jesus � that he takes on a human body and dies � God is the One who wills this process. In addition to portraying God as a Father who grants to his Son an unparalleled inheritance, the author shows that God the Father uses suffering to perfect even his �rstborn Son so that he might be the perfect heir and high priest. If the Father used suffering to perfect even his sinless Son, the audience should expect no less in their interactions with God. Consider�� which the author lays the groundwork for his exhortation in ch. 12 to which I turn in the following chapter. The dynamics of �� relationship with Jesus show the audience the kind of children they should be in light of the Father to whom they belong.

1

Chapter 4

��Y SON�� THE ASSEMBLY OF THE FIRSTBORN

�� his Son, Jesus. When he appoints him as his heir, God the Father guarantees that his Son will possess all things. When he perfects his Son through suffering, God the Father prepares the way for Jesus to take his ��high priest. Threads run throughout the letter indicating that the audience is privileged to stand in the same relationship with God. They are the many �� whom God is leading to glory (2.10), the siblings of Jesus (2.11, 17; 3.1), and the children of God (2.13, 14). They are about to inherit salvation (1.14), are the heirs of the promise (6.17), and look forward to receiving their eternal inheritance (9.15). These threads come together with greatest vibrancy in the twelfth chapter. Therefore, this chapter ��ntity of God, Jesus, and the audience throughout the letter culminates at its close to undergird and propel his exhortations to faithfulness �� of the New Covenant �ts with his proclamation that he and his listeners are children of God. This provides an entry point for the more explicit and extensive declarations of familial standing in the �nal sections of the letter. Treatment of these explicit declarations begins with the �� bold proclamation in Hebrews 12 that he and his audience are the sons and daughters of God. He makes this proclamation in two ways. First, he cites Prov. 3.11-�� Second, in his analysis of the proverb that follows, he shows how his �� prised ��. �� hand encourages the audience that they too will attain their reward if they

4. ��

141

endure the discipline that they are presently experiencing. God declares them to be his children and their experience of dif�culties and hope, resembling those of Jesus the Son, con�rms that they all share the same Father. Unlike Jesus, however, they have not yet �nished the race. The third section of the chapter, therefore, analyzes the admonitions and warnings that follow the citation and interpretation of Prov. 3.11-12. The author presents ways they can endure their �lial training, and delineates attitudes they should avoid so as not to forfeit the race of faith they are running (12.1-2). The warnings the author has issued throughout the letter1 �� the author shows the great consequences they would face if they squandered their birthright and consequently lost their promised inheritance. Despite their intensity, these admonitions and warnings are not the ��nal word. The fourth section of the chapter turns to the assurances the author issues at the close of his sermon concerning the blessed future awaiting his congregation. First, the author follows the warning about Esau with a glimpse of the inheritance that awaits his readers as �� of God. He locates his audience at the edge of the mountain of God at the top of which the �� are celebrating. In light of that which lies ahead, the author exhorts them not to resist God who is speaking. By adhering to the one who speaks to them in his Son (��, 1.2), they will continue to have before them the model of their own �lial relationship with God and the reward that comes to those who abide in it. His next assurance is even grander. By keeping their eyes focused and their ears attuned to the familial relationship between God and Jesus, �� heir of all things.2 They have nothing to fear because in addition to the fact that God is their helper (13.6), God is also the One who raised Jesus 1 The author has asserted that his audience should pay attention to what they have heard, lest they drift away (2.1). They should not harden their hearts like the wilderness generation (3.8�4.11). The author warns that it is impossible to renew to repentance those who fall away (6.6). Moreover, if his audience continues willfully sinning, he asserts that there will no longer remain a sacri�ce for their sins (10.26). 2 My argument that Jesus provides both the model and the means for the audience to be the children of God �nds support in the writings of the early Church Fathers. Peter Widdicombe concludes that, ��Son relation is the means by which creation is brought into being and it is also both the means and the model for the subsequent restoration of that creation to the knowledge of God, a �� (The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius [Oxford Theological Monographs; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994], p.63. 1

142

You Are My Son

�� the reigning, glorious Lord and heir � a status promised by his Father and ��cial death, victory over death, and living intercession � �� run boldly toward their inheritance with the knowledge that they are a part of that inheritance of Jesus Christ, the reigning Son of God. I. The New Covenant The New Covenant, a powerful image in Hebrews, 3 also supports the �� inheritance of salvation that comes with it. In Heb. 8.1, the author arrives at an important summary point in the sermon. The chief point of the things he has discussed, the author notes, is that he and his readers have a high priest. He describes this high priest in several ways, reiterating the ��ip and his priesthood. He begins with the fact that he has taken his seat at the right hand (�� [Ps. 109.1 LXX; cf. Heb. 1.13]). Because they have a �� sins, is awaiting his inheritance of all things (including all people) as he leads them to their inheritance of salvation. The ful�� has another implication for humanity � it inaugurates the New Covenant tha�� LXX/Heb. 8.10).4 The author asserts this connection twice in his lead up to his lengthy citation of the New Covenant passage. First, since Jesus has become priest forever, he has likewise become the guarantee (��) of �� excellent priestly ministry is related to his role as mediator of a better covenant. This covenant has been given its legal force (��) by better promises � i.e., �� forever and thus make possible this better covenant for all time. 5 At the 3 See Lehne, New Covenant. 4 This linking between priesthood and covenant is unique in the New Testament, as Attridge notes (Hebrews, p.220). 5 Luke Timothy Johns�� oath made in the psalm to the messiah king like Melchizedek that his priesthood ��Hebrews, p.203; contra Attridge who sees the better promises as those aspects of the New Covenant delineated in the citation [Hebrews, p.226]). Because the promise mentioned in 8.6 provides the basis for the Covenant and �� 1

4. ��

143

��) suggests that not just the promise of the priesthood is in view, but also the promise of sonship (Heb. 1.5; 5.5), the fountainhead from which the priestly promise springs. The New Covenant has four distinguishing features, each of which ��dren and heirs of God. First, this is an internal covenant in which God places his laws into the minds of the covenant participants and writes them upon their hearts (Heb. 8.10). Earlier in this chapter of Jeremiah from which the quotation comes, the author describes the one who has G�� LXX). Hence, Jeremiah establishes a connection between the internal �� this covenant establishes God as the God of these people and they as his people. The statement �� is a common covenant formula appearing throughout Jeremiah (7.23; 11.4; 24.7; 38.1; 39.38) and other prophets (Zech. 8.8; Ezek. 11.20; 14.11; 36.28; 37.23; cf. Jub. 1.24-25). Nevertheless, its appearance in Hebrews resonates clearly with Go�� Heb. 1.5. Hebrews 8.10e Hebrews 1.5c

��

��

��

Hebrews 8.10f Hebrews 1.5d

��

��

��

The close similarity suggests the possibility that the same relationship pertains between God and his covenant people as that which exists between God and Jesus: the relationship of father and child. This is supported by the fact that earlier in Jeremiah 38 LXX God expresses �� became a Father to Israel and Ephraim is my �� Third, this covenant eliminates the need for introduction to God because best to view the promises of 8.6 as, primaril�� be a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek (contra Paul Ellingworth, who sug�� Hebrews, p.411]). It is true that the author does not again refer to Melchi�� 10, before the second citation of Jeremiah 38 (Heb. 10.16-17). 1

144

You Are My Son

everyone, from the least to the greatest, will know God (Jer. 38.34; Heb. 8.11). The comprehensiveness of the extent of this knowledge � God is known by all (��) � invokes the inheritance of Jesus by which he brings all things, including all people, under his domain and therefore the �� eternal forgetfulness of the sins of the covenant members (Heb. 8.12). In �� For those attuned to the connections within the letter and/or the connections within the larger context of Jeremiah 38, the New Covenant citation solidi�� II. ��of Hebrews as �� of God As the implications of the New Covenant passage show, in accordance ��scriptures6 and other believers in Jesus,7 the author of Hebrews declares the members of his audience to be members of the family of God. He articulates this status most thoroughly through citing of Prov. 3.11-12 and highlighting the similarities his audience ��rstborn Son. A. The Proverb Hebrews 12.4-11 centers on a citation from Proverbs 3. These verses 8 ��res where the discipline of God

6 Among the scriptures of Israel, Exod. 4.22-23; Deut. 32.6; Isa. 63.16; 64.8; Jer. 3.19; 31.9; Hos. 11.1-3, and Mal. 2.10 declare the paternal/�lial relationship between God and Israel most explicitly. 7 The New Testament documents are much more proli�c in their use of Fatherlanguage �� s�� teaching on prayer (Mt. 6.9; Lk. 11.2) and the greetings in the Pauline letters (Rom. 1.7; 1 Cor. 1.3; 2 Cor. 1.2-3; Gal. 1.1; Eph. 1.2; Phil. 1.2; Col. 1.2; 1 Thess. 1.1; 2 Thess. 1.2; 1 Tim. 1.2; 2 Tim. 1.2; Phlm. 3). 8 This proverb, like this section of the epistle, begins with an exhortation against forgetting (Prov. 3.1; Heb. 12.5 ��). In addition, both include a promise of peace (Prov. 3.2, 17, 23; Heb. 12.11) and healing (Prov. 3.8, 22; Heb. 12.13) to those who heed the instruction given. Other similarities between this chapter of Proverbs and the letter as a whole include examples of trust (��) �� wisdom (Prov. 3.5, 23) and in God (Heb. 2.13); drawing near (��) to wisdom (Prov. 3.15) and to God (Heb. 7.19); the steadfastness (��) of wisdom (Prov. 3.18) and the anchor of hope (Heb. 6.19); the inheritance of glory that comes to the wise (Prov. 3.35) and to those whom God is saving (Heb. 1.14; 2.10). These 1

4. ��

145

is related to his role as a Father.9 ��tion widespread in the �rst-century world, wherein the educative role of fathers was superimposed on God.10 Proverbs 3.11-12 asserts that the Lord disciplines and punishes his children.11 The proverb begins with a pair of exhortations for the similarities show the resonance of the Epistle with much of Proverbs 3, the primary difference being that this section of Hebrews lacks the emphasis on the wisdom of God�although, as discussed, the author uses language resonant with wisdom literature in his discussion of the Son in Hebrews 1 (see above, pp.21�24). 9 �� your heart that as a certain man disciplines his son so also the Lord your God will discipline you). This verse from Deuteronomy does not �t as well within �� argument for two primary reasons. First, the lack of the vocative �� makes it less �� happen in the future, whereas Proverbs �� present �� use of ��. Second Samuel 7.14 includes the same idea with different terminology. God promises that he will punish (�� ) the heir of David if he is unjust. 10 To which the author of Hebrews appeals (Heb. 12.9-10). See also Deut. 8.5; 21.18; Prov. 13.24; 19.18; 23.13; 29.17; Wis. 11.10; Sir. 7.23; 30.2, 13; Seneca, Ben. 5.5.2-3; 24.1-2. 11 The same assertion appears in the Psalms of Solomon�� righteous as a beloved Son, and his discipline is as of the �� (Ps. Sol. 13.9), ��rstborn only son to turn away an obedient soul ��Ps. Sol��f his people is also evident in �� sts to see whether or not they would keep his commandments. Similarly, they needed to know that once they went into the land, God would discipline them as any father would (Deut. 8.2-�� they knew how the ungodly, being judged with anger were being tortured. For on the other hand, these you tested warning as a father, but those you examined, condemning as ��-�� came now boldly to the multitude, and informed them that God was moved at their abuse of him, and would in�ict punishment upon them, not indeed such as they deserved for their sins, but such as parents in�ict on their children, in order to their �� (Ant. 3.311 [Whiston]). ��ere the author asserts that which the Jews of his time are experiencing (dated to 100 CE) is the ��rst, because 1

146

You Are My Son

��, outlining the appropriate �� (��) the discipline of the Lord, nor should they faint (��) when his reproof comes. This scripture warns against both a negative attitude and an apathetic response. The motivations for their actions are grounded �� discipline � those who experience his discipline are those he loves, the sons and daughters he has received. �� audience. Through the citation of this Proverb, his introduction to it (12.5a), and his emendation of it (12.5b), the author reminds his audience of who they are: the ��. Their identity helps them to understand why they are experiencing dif�culties, and provides one key to unlocking the con�dence they need to grasp the reward when they �nish their race. 1. The Introduction: An Appeal Spoken to You as Sons Beginning with his introduction to the citation, the author emphasizes the relationship depicted in Prov. 3.11-12. The author presents this citation like all others in this letter as a spoken word. In this instance he uses a form of ��) to introduce a scripture that is directed toward

he af�icted them as his enemies because they sinned. Therefore, they were once ��2 Bar. 13.9-10, Klijn). Similarly in the Dead �� my �� (4Q504 3.5-7 [Wise]). Philo re�� le from �� so excellent a thing, that they turn our acknowledgement of God into kinship with Him, for what relation can be closer than that of a father to a son, or a son to a ��Congr. 177 [Colson and Whitaker, LCL]; See also Opif. 156 where God the Father of all �ttingly punishes Eve and the serpent). The educative role of the divine Father also appears in non-Jewish Greco-Roman literature. In De providentia, Seneca ��-glorious parent, being no mild taskmaster of virtues, rears, as strict fathers do, with much severity�� and �� [Basore]). About Heracles, Ep��s own son, ��Diatr. 3.26.31). Hence, the author of �� what God, as a Father, properly does. 1

4. ��

147

his audience.12 ��s�� (��). In so doing, he makes the addressees clear, but does not explicitly name the speaker. Notwithstanding, the context of the citation and the entirety of the letter itself suggest that the author envisions God speaking this scripture to the audience. Based upon statistics alone, the fact that God speaks the majority of the scriptural citations in the letter favors God as the speaker of this citation.13 On the other hand, because Prov. 3.11-12 is not introduced explicitly as the speech of God, this citation could be part of the minority group of scriptures spoken by someone other than God. In this case, a possible candidate is the human speaker of the text in its ��modus operandi does not favor this option. In the few instances where a human speaks a citation, indicated either by the content of the citation itself or by the context in which it appears in Hebrews (9.20; 12.21), the author mentions the human speaker explicitly (�� in both 9.20 and 12.21). Conversely, in every instance except one (Heb. 6.14), where God is speaking, the author allows context alone to determine this. In other words, when God speaks, the author does not normally name God explicitly in the introd�� assumption is that God speaks the scriptures of Israel. 14 If he wants to highlight the human speaker of the citation, he does so explicitly. The absence of a mention of Solomon, or even an unnamed ��, decreases the likelihood that the author of Hebrews envisions a human speaker of this citation. 12 The author uses �� in some form more than any other word to introduce scriptural citations as speech (Heb. 1.5, 6, 7, 13; 2.6, 12; 3.7; 4.3, 7; 5.6; 6.14; 7.21; 8.8, 9; 9.20; 10.5, 30; 12.5, 26, 31; 13.5). �� is used twice (5.5; 11.18). �� and �� each appear once (7.17 and 8.5 respectively). 13 As stated previously, God speaks the citations in Heb. 1.5, 6, 7, 8-9, 10-12, 13; 3.9-11; 4.3, 5; 5.5, 7; 6.14; 7.17, 21; 8.5, 8-12; 10.30, 37-38; 11.18; 12.26; 13.5. By way of comparison, Jesus speaks the scriptures in Heb. 2.12, 13 and 10.5-8. The author highlights the Holy Spirit as the speaker in Heb. 3.7-11, 15; 4.4, 7; and 10.1617. Moses voices Heb. 9.20 and Heb. 12.21, and the author attributes the verse in Heb. 2.6 to a nondescript ��. Finally, he puts Heb. 13.6 on the lips of himself and his readers. This delineation shows that God speaks close to twice the citations (21) as all the other speakers combined (13). The number of verses spoken also represents the propensity of the author to present scriptural �� speaks 30 of the verses in Hebrews, while the speeches of the other speakers add up to 21 verses. 14 This is true even in ch. 1, where God is clearly the speaker (1.1), but in the introductions to the citations the author does not mention ��in 1.5, 6, 7, 8, 10, or 13. 1

148

You Are My Son

The second point in favor of reading this citation as the speech of God is that it is introduced as a text that is spoken to the audience members as sons and daughters. Since the author states that it is addressed to them as sons, he implies that the one speaking this citation is their Father. Designating them in this way draws upon the �lial identity the author utilized for his readers throughout the letter. Previous to this point, the author of Hebrews depicts the audience as sons and daughters of God (2.10; 3.6). Moreover, the �lial status of the addressees in relation to God is the emphasis of the explanation that follows (Heb. 12.7, 9). Because the letter consistently portrays them as the children of God, that strongly suggests that God is the Father who is speaking to them. One hurdle to the interpretation that God speaks these verses from Proverbs is that the citation itself speaks about God in the third person (the discipline of the Lord, when you are reproved by him, the Lord disciplines, he whips every son whom he receives). On the other hand, this poses no problem for the author in several previous instances. For example, in the �rst chapter of Hebrews, this phenomenon occurs twice. �� all my �� d refers to himself as God when he calls the angels, ��. Likewise in his speech to his Son in �� the author presents two different verses as the speech of God. Firstperson speech appears in the former, but the verse uses third-person �� Lord will judge his �� which is in its context the word of Moses � right �� citations suggests that the author has no dif�culty with casting thirdperson speech about God as the speech of God himself. Because this scripture is spoken and because it is spoken to those who are designated as children, it is most likely that God the Father speaks this citation to the audience as his sons and daughters. 15 15 �� de Günther Bornkamm, ��Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche: Festschrift für Joachim Jeremias (Walter Eltester, ed.; BZNW, 26; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1960), pp.188�98 [196]); A. B. Davidson (The Epistle to the Hebrews [Handbooks for Bible Classes and Private Students; Grand Rapids. Zondervan, 1950], p.136); Johnson (Hebrews, p.320); Kistemaker (Hebrews, p.374); Koester (Hebrews, p.526); Lane (Hebrews, p.2:420); ��NTS 26 [1980], pp.363�79); Peterson (Hebrews and Perfection, p.173); and Weiss (Hebräer, p.3:321). 1

4. ��

149

2. ��My �� The way in which the author cites the proverb also puts emphasis on the �lial position of the addressees, and, consequently, the paternal identity of God. While the opening of this verse in Hebrew, � ��, � would be �� 16 the majority of Greek witnesses to Proverbs include only �� before the command against taking lightly the discipline of the Lord.17 The textual witness of Hebrews, however, �� after ��.18 Beginning with �� gives to the whole citation a more personal tone.19 To preface a command with �� adds a more intimate dimension to the command, and this intimacy is compounded by calling the addressee my son. Moreover, the inclusion of this �rst-person pronoun puts emphasis on the speaker. Beginning with this pronoun frames the entire speech with the voice of God conveyed through �rst-person speech.20 In addition to an increased presence of the speaker, the appearance of the �� with the presence of �� alone. The addressee is not just any son, but belongs to the speaker as son. The pronoun �� brings emphasis on �� Father of the addressees. 16 The presence of the pronominal suf�x in the MT indicates that the author of Hebrews could be citing from a Hebrew Vorlage (Attridge rejects this outright [Hebrews, p.367]) or an unattested Greek textual variant that re�ects this Hebrew reading. 17 The exceptions are mss 23, Clement of Alexandria, Chrysostom, and Theodoret. Ellingworth suggests that these are assimilations to the text of Hebrews (Hebrews, p.368). 18 Some mss of Hebrews eliminate the ��, including D* 81 614 630 and 1241s. This elimination is best explained by an adjustment to the majority LXX reading. Most commentators view the �� as an addition by the author (Attridge, Hebrews, p.361; Delitzsch, Hebrews, p.2:312; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.648; Lane, Hebrews, 2:420; Spicq, Hébreux, p.2:392; Steyn, Quest, p.338 n.73;Witherington, Hebrews, James and Jude, p.330). Thi�� quotes Prov. 3.11-12 in a discussion about bene�cial af�iction, he does not include the �� (Congr. 177). 19 Delitzsch refers to the addition of �� -�� (Hebrews, p.2:312). Lane (Hebrews, p.�� p.320), Mitchell (Hebrews, p.271), and Spicq (Hebréux, p.2:392) also highlight the personal tone supplied by this pronoun. 20 The author achieves a similar effect in 10.30 when �rst person speech precedes and therefore sets the tone for how the third person speech about God is heard as the speech of God himself. 1

150

You Are My Son

In addition to a focus on the speaker and an increased closeness, strikingly, the presence of this pronoun brings the citation of Proverbs into parallel with the �rst citation of the letter. With the addition of ��, the citation in Heb. 12.5 begins with the same two words as the citation in Heb. 1.5: �� and ��.21 This correspondence suggests that, if this is the emendation of the author, his addition of the �rst-person posses�� 22 To the contrary, the �� both his �rstborn Son and his many sons and daughters. In his �rst speech to each in the letter, God addresses both Jesus and the congrega��23 �� the Father of Jesus and has spoken to him as such, he is your Father and can speak with the sam�� The author places great emphasis on the father/child relationship described in the verses from Proverbs through his introduction to the citation and his particular quotation of it.24 In addition to being the content of the �rst and �nal phrases of the proverb (�� ), the familial relation between God and the addressees is the departure point of the citation as well (��). Hence, the entire quota�� children. The author ampli�es the familial theme of the Proverb by �� speech to his �rstborn Son. This citation, much like the catena of the �rst chapter, becomes in the hands of the author a vehicle through which God displays his paternal character, but in this case that character is directed toward the audience. ��h, the author contributes to the portrayal of God as a relational God, and speci�cally in a relationship that establishes him as a Father. Furthermore, read as the speech of God, this citation shows that it is God who established the audience of Hebrews as 21 The only difference is that in Heb. 12.5 the �� is in the vocative case. 22 Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.648. Attridge makes a similar remark (Hebrews, p.361). 23 The author asserts that God is speaking to the audience in the very �rst verse of the sermon (1.1), and God speaks about their fathers through the Holy Spirit in 3.9, and also God talks about his righteous one in 10.38, but it is not until 12.5 that God addresses the audience directly. 24 As stated above, it is impossible to determine if the author added the �� or was simply using a translation that more closely resembled the MT. Whatever the case, I do not think the similarity between his quotation in 1.5 and 12.5 was lost on him. 1

4. ��

151

his children and himself as their Father. Just as he did with Jesus, God makes this familial relationship a reality through his word � calling them �� and through his act � receiving them. Hebrews 12.5-6 solidi�es �� in the establishment of his relationship with them. B. The Similarities Shared by the �� of God: The �� of the Lord In his comments on the citation, the author highlights the �� of God the Father. In doing so, he draws on an argument that has run throughout the letter: Jesus has experienced suffering, and through this suffering he �� cult circumstances of the audience and the reward to which they look forward �� God, then they should not be surprised that they experience the same paternal discipline as they look forward to a similarly joyful reward. �� is a broad term indicating guidance. It can take the form of training for the purpose of shaping the immature25 or reproof for the purpose of correcting the errant.26 Because the two lines of the prov�� are coupled with phrases describing �� reproof/correction (��), the citation itself connotes an idea of punitive correction. 27 On the other hand, the context into which the author places the citation presents the non-punitive element of ��. Clayton Croy, in his monograph Endurance in Suffering, highlights the athletic imagery of the passage, the fact that the readers are chided for no speci�c sins, and the example of the faithful Israelites (including Jesus) who endure dif�cult circumstances�� punitive educative discipline. In other words, Hebrews emphasizes that �� is not retrospective (punishing an error of the audience)

25 This is the case in Prov. 4.1; 8.10; Acts 7.22; 22.3; 2 Tim. 3.16; Sir. 1.27; 50.27; Wis. 1.5; 3.11; Josephus, Vita 196, 359; Philo, Leg. 3.167, 244. 26 �� is used this way in Prov. 5.12; 22.5; Lk. 23.16, 22; 1 Cor. 11.32; 2 Cor. 6.9; 1 Tim. 1.20; 2 Tim. 2.25; Sir. 33.25; Philo, Leg. 2.90. 27 Clayton Croy (Endurance in Suffering: Hebrews 12.1�13 in Its Rhetorical, Religious, and Philosophical Context [SNTSMS, 98; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998], p.89), DeSilva (Perseverance in Gratitude, p.449), Charles H. Talbert (Learning Through Suffering: The Educational Value of Suffering in the New Testament and in Its Milieu [Zacchaeus Studies: New Testament; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1991], p.71), and Thompson (Hebrews, p.254) are some who highlight the punitive nature of the quotation. 1

152

You Are My Son

but prospective (instilling maturity so that they might �nish the race).28 Croy concludes that the �� of God of which the author is speaking is �� warnin��s accusation that they had regressed in their spiritual understanding, and the exhortation in 12.1 to get rid of �� the immediate context [of Hebrews] as it is in the quotation of Prov. 3.11-��29 Westfall is correct to point out that the author harshly criticizes his audience in the �fth chapter, accusing them of becoming lazy (��) and in need of being taught that which they themselves should be teaching (5.11-12), and suggesting that because they are stymied in their growth, they are in need of correction. Nevertheless, the author follows this accusation with the encouragement that just as they are presently ministering to the saints, they should show the same haste toward the certainty of hope until the end (6.11). If they do so, they will not become lazy (��). As is the case �� softens his harsh word with an assurance. Therefore, some ambiguity exists as to whether or not he views his audience as lazy. On the one hand, he does think they should be teachers by now rather than remain in need of basic instruction (5.12). On the other hand, although he expresses a concern about their laziness, he does not think them too immature to discuss the dif�cult word about Melchizedek he introduces �� nds only partial support in the text.30 Moreover, even if the author does think that his audience is truly lazy, the best remedy for that laziness might not be whipping but exercise. In other words, training might be the best pedagogical solution, rather than correction. �� equally ambiguous. It could be that the author envisions his addressees entangled in sin and needing to let go of it; if so, it would be the sole reference to such present entanglement with sin in the letter. On the other 28 This summary of his main arguments appears on pp.2�3. Other recent commentators on Hebrews also adopt this interpretation of ��, including DeSilva (Perseverance in Gratitude, p.447), Johnson (Hebrews, p.319�20), Thompson (Hebrews, pp.251�2), and Witherington (Hebrews, James, and Jude, p.330). 29 Cynthia Long Westfall, Review of C. N. Croy, Endurance in Suffering, JSNT 76 (1999), pp.121�2. 30 �� -elle ��, NRTh 96 [1974], pp.1054�66 [1057]). 1

4. ��

153

hand, several commentators argue that the singular reference to sin indicates sin in general rather than a list of speci�c sins. Peterson states, �� simple moralism or call to asceticism. Our writer is concerned with sin itself, rather than with speci��31 If the author is concerned that his listeners put off sin itself, then this exhortation falls in line with the pattern established in the rest of the letter. The possibility does exist that they could be deceived by sin (3.13) or that they could continue willfully in sin (10.26). These are, it must be noted, possibilities not yet realized. They should be vigilant to put off the sin that lurks in their path and continue to struggle against it (12.4). ��tive understanding of �� is unconvincing. The warnings in the letter �� committed the act under discussion. They must pay attention to what they have heard because they have not yet drifted away (2.1). He is convinced of better things for them, namely that he and they have salvation (6.9). Presently, they possess boldness and should not throw it away (10.35). Finally, as the following discussion will suggest, the author places them at the foot of the mountain of God on the way to possessing their inheritance, unlike Esau who squandered his (12.22). He warns them against the sin of apostasy, precisely because they have not yet committed it. Finally, the similarities between the many �� and Jesus add support for this interpretation of ��. Because Jesus the Son provides the example for them, and he was not being corrected but was being trained unto perfection, then that suggests that the author stresses that presently the audience experiences the educative rather than punitive aspect of ��.32 1. The �� of Jesus The analysis in Chapters 2 and 3 of this study brought attention to the fact that the author frequently notes that Jesus endures suffering �� Son. T��. 5.7 where 31 Peterson, Perfection, p.169. So also, Attridge, Hebrews, p.355; Lane, Hebrews, p.2:409; Michel, Hebräer, pp.428�9. 32 At times, in the education of children, the line between educative and punitive is not so clearly de��-12 leaves open the p�� that is not the motivation for the dif�culties they are enduring at the time the author is writing to them. 1

154

You Are My Son

Jesus learns to obey through suffering even though he was a Son. It also appears in Heb. 7.28 where Jesus is the Son who has been perfected. Since suffering is the vehicle that leads to perfection (2.10; 5.5), this suggests that Jesus is the Son who experienced suffering in order to �� Three times in ch. 2, the author implies that God perfects Jesus through sufferings precisely as his Father. Fir�� of the Father/Son relationship is apparent in the terms he uses to describe humanity in vv. 10-11. Those whom God is leading are the many ��, and they are those whom Jesus is not afraid to address as brothers. That implies that God is portrayed in these verses as a Father. Second, as discussed in Chapter 2, one viable interpretation of the ambiguous �� in Heb. 2.11 is that it refers to descent from a common father. Third, the ��) in 2.18 is paralleled in other ��tion this term is put into close association with �� in Wis. 3.5 and Sir. 4.17, as well as the education by God as a Father in Wis. 11.9�10. �� therefore becomes another way of describing the divine �� process of bringing his Son to perfection. 33 Adding to these portrayals of the suffering of the Son, the author �� and subsequent victory � at the beginning of Hebrews 12. There he states that after Jesus endured death on the cross and the shame that came with this death, he took his �� this summation reiterates that Jesus takes p�� Son. First, the use of �� recalls the process of perfection Jesus ��-9; 7.28). Moreover, the statement that Jesus endured (��) the cross fore��) as endurance of ��-11). Because Jesus is being held up as an �� nal allusion to Ps. 109.1 LXX in the letter, �� nce. After his endurance of the

33 ��um�� The Necessity of ��Asceticism and the New Testament [L. E. Vaage and V. L. Wimbush, eds; New York: Routledge, 1999], pp.331�53 [341]). 1

4. ��

155

suffering through which God his Father perfected him, Jesus took his place as the royal Son and heir whom God invites to share in his sovereignty over all things. These passages suggest that God displays his Fatherhood in ways that utilize suffering to make his Son perfect. The paternal role in which God uses suffering resonates with the topos of divine paternal discipline, or ��. To ��perfecting of Jesus as �� is not a novel idea. Several interpreters of Hebrews view �� 34 and L. K. K. Dey argues in ��the author [of Hebrews] has interpreted the suffering, temptation, and death of Jesus�as an education (paideia) �� 35 �� connection between perfection and ��, however, has not remained unchallenged. Ha�� is ill de�� 36 �� tradition in Hellenistic Jewish literature that understands suffering and temptation as �� Somn. 2.107; Quis Her. 73), Wis. 1.9-10; 12.22; 2 Macc. 6.12, 15, 27-28, 31 and 4 Macc. 10.10-11. The problem is that in none of these texts is �� explicitly linked with perfection. In one passage Philo connects the phrase ��, to which the author of Hebrews appeals in Heb. 5.8, to perfection, and in another he joins the same phrase to the experience of children. Neither of these texts, however, mentions ��. On the other hand, the texts from the LXX speak of dif��, but in no instance do these lead speci�cally to perfection for those who are being disciplined. �� of Jesus, it is not because these two terms were explicitly linked �� perfecting as his �� ts in the thought world of Hebrews because of ��

34 �� p.341; Peterson, Perfection, p.94; John R. Walters, Perfection in New Testament Theology: Ethics and Eschatology in Relational Dynamic (MBPS, 25; Lewiston, NY: Mellen Biblical, 1996), p.88. 35 Dey, Intermediary World, p.222. 36 Attridge, Hebrews, p.153 n.197.

1

156

You Are My Son

relationship to humanity;37 that is, the concepts of perfection and �� in Hebrews are united because God exercises the same fatherly actions toward both Jesus and humanity. 2. The �� of the �� The author begins his analysis of Prov. 3.11-12 with a positive counterpoint to the negative commands of the citation: instead of not despising (�� ) and not fainting (�� ), they should endure (��).38 This endurance is related to their training (��). The two terms are also joined in Ps. Sol. 10.2 and 14.1, both of which �� ). There, �� follows �� as a simple accusative, while in Hebrews it is the object of the preposition ��.39 The preposition functions either as an indication of the goal toward which the discipline is �� 40 or as a description 37 Matthew Thiessen provides support for this position in his analysis of Hebrews 12 in light of the wilderness motif in chs. 3 and 4. He argues that Hebrews �� that Israel experienced in the ��pline (sometimes described using athletic imagery) in wh�� prepared for entry into the land of promise, and that this discipline demonstrated the legiti��-13, ��NTS 55 [2009], pp.366�79 [373]). 38 Commentators debate whether or not this word should be read as a statement �� have support in the letter. They are presently experiencing dif�culties (10.32-34; 12.8), yet they need to continue to do so in a faithful way (12.1, 14-17). The �exibility of this word expresses again a theme that has run throughout the whole sermon: the double-��exhibited in Heb. 3.6, 14 [��]; 4.14; 10.23 [��]; 10.35 [�� ]; 10.36 [�� ]; 12.1 [��]; 12.17 [do not ��] yet also �� cation of their experience in light ��Hebrews, p.320), as do Delitzsch (Hebrews, p.2:314), Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.650), and Moffatt (Hebrews, p.201). Croy argues that in addition to the exhortation of 12.1 and the commands of 12.12-13, the imperative reading shou�� the exhortation which addresses them as sons (vs. 5)�� Endurance in Suffering, p.199). Attridge (Hebrews, p.361), Lane (Hebrews, p.2:421), and Koester (Hebrews, p.528) also support reading the verb as an imperative. 39 The variant �� is not well supported externally and could be an assimilation to the �� of v. 8 (Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.650). 40 So argued by Ralph Marcu�� JBL 70 (1951), pp.129�30 ��, JBL 71 (1952), pp.43�4. 1

4. ��

157

of the implied predic�� author urging them to endure so that at the endpoint they can experience ��41 The commands �� and �� pertain�� better to read the author equating the endurance of their situation � what they are doing and must continue to do � �� raining takes on for them is the imperative that they should keep going in the midst of dif�culties. The challenging assignment they have is to resist collapsing in the midst of or walking away from the race God has set for them no matter what the circumstances might be.42 �� part of th��43 They should view whatever dif�culties they experience as the disciplinary call of God to endure them. 44 Next, the author appeals to the pedagogical tradition from which the citation came. If a father has a child, the father educates that child. Conversely, if someone in his audience does not experience discipline, that indicates that he is not a child of God, but illegitimate (��). This is �� that it does not �� (you all have become sharers). Moreover, by describing them as �� of discipline, the author is using a term employed in other places in the letter to describe the audience (3.1, 14; possibly at 1.9). As they have become sharers in Christ the �rstborn Son (3.14), so also they have become sharers in the discipline God uses for his children.45 In addition, the use of the perfect of �� suggests that 41 �� Hebrews, p.320). 42 Croy reads the verse in this wa�� in 4-��Endurance in Suffering, p.199), and that the conclusion of ��Endurance in Suffering, p.200). 43 Koester, Hebrews, p.528. 44 Koester chooses not to insert the precise experience that should be endured �� Hebrews, p.528). Although the fact that they have not endured death lessens the degree of what they are experiencing, it also extends the length. Because they have not died, they still have much to endure. Hence, it is appropriate to see a reference to the sufferings of the audience as that which they should endure. S�� (Hebrews, p.2:422). 45 �� . Although 1

158

You Are My Son

this status is already an established reality. The audience has experienced ��ings (10.32) and have shown their ability to endure (��, 10.32). As those who have not yet given up, but have the race of endurance in front �� for endurance of their trials. Instead of being a source of discouragement, these dif�culties should encourage the audience insofar as they are proof of their participation in the discipline that God brings upon his ��. In �� because they are his sons and daughters. The author introduces the bene�ts of being a son or daughter of God �� gh a comparison with human fathers. In the past, they all respected the fathers of their �esh who disciplined them. Their earthly fathers disciplined their children for a relatively short amount of time (��). God has no time limit; his disciplin�� Moreover, the fathers of the �esh disciplined according to what seemed good or right to them (��). They were, according to their own limited judgment, trying to do the right thing. By contrast, God based his discipline on that which was bene�cial. God does not have to guess at what was best, but works that which will certainly be for the good of the recipient of his discipline.46

Hebrews does not use hortatory language at this point, a concern for the audience is ��Hebrews, p.��primarily paraenetic�� Attridge indicates that any Christological speculation about the nature of �� who �learns obedience� (��) in the midst of suffering because that is what the ��p.153). The rhetorical situation helps to shape this particular way the Christology of the letter comes to expression. Nevertheless, it is not simply a move prompted by the needs of the addressees, as if it did not re�ect the �� nce as ��in concert with the theology��is the ground for the paraenesis the author presents to his audience. 46 Attridge interprets the phrase this way, holding up the difference between �� Hebrews, p.363). The contrast sharpens if the �rst phrase is not read as judiciously for the biological fathers. It is possible that they disciplined their children according to what seemed best for them and not for their children. The phrase is so read by Chry��ict chastisement�ful�lling [their own] pleasure oftentimes, and �� Hom. Heb. 29.3, Gardiner [NPNF1 p.14:500]). This interpretation also appears in Johnson (Hebrews, p.322) and Martin ��p.232). 1

4. ��

159

Based on this pattern, the author argues that it is a matter of eternal importance to submit themselves to the Father of spirits.47 While there is no mention of the bene�ts garnered by respecting their biological fathers, the result of their submission to God their Father is that they will live (��). This is a �tting reward coming from a Father whom the author frequently names the living God (Heb. 3.12; 9.14; 10.31; 12.22). More�� action is that he might impart to his children his own holiness. The God whose throne is the most holy place (10.19) indeed wants to impart that holiness to his children. Finally, the author admits that from the perspective of those who are �� grief and not joy (12.11). Later on, however, those who have been trained by it receive the peaceful fruit of righteousness as a reward for their endurance. In the �nal benediction the author designates God as the God of peace.48 Attridge is right to see the connection between this ��ursue peace in 12.14,49 yet it is also important to highlight the connection between this description of �� children who are trained by him (12.11). The God characterized by peace produces peaceful fruit in the lives of his sons and daughters. In listing the rewards that come to those children who are trained by �� Fatherhood over these sons and daughters and his Fatherhood over Jesus. ��t. This bene�t is God sharing aspects of his own character. The living God gives life. The holy God gives his holiness. The just God (6.10) gives righteousness. The God of peace (13.20) gives peace. In both relationships, 47 �Spirit� can be a term used to refer to humanity (Attridge lists Dan. 5.14; Rev. 22.6; Hermas, Vis. 3.12.3; and Philo, Somn. 2.273). The comparison here is between their biological fathers, and God who is not so directly related to them by �� relationship God shares with the audience that goes deeper than biology. He created their inner being, and his rewards af�� 48 This divine terminology, never extant in the LXX, appears in the New Testament only in the letters of Paul (Rom. 15.33; 16.20; 2 Cor. 13.11; Phil. 4.9; 1 Thess. 5.23). D�� (Hebrews, p.2:402). Clare K. Rothschild puts this phrase forward as evidence that ��Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon: The History and Signi�cance of the Pauline Attribution of Hebrews [WUNT, 235; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009], p.69). 49 Attridge, Hebrews, p.405 n.14. 1

160

You Are My Son

God shares with his children aspects of his own identity: sovereignty with his Son, and life, holiness, righteousness, and peace with many sons and daughters. ��rstborn Son makes possible the rewards awaiting his other children at the end of their journey. In order to provide life, God, through the perfecting of his Son (2.10; 5.89), has freed them from the fear of death (2.15) and opened up a living �� Son ransomed them from the grip of death, so too did it set them on the �� Father freed them from the grip of death and sin so that they can submit to the Father of Jesus Christ � their own Father � and take on his charac�� the possibility for the rewards his many sons and daughters will reap at the end of their training. What, then, about perfection? If the author is identifying a correspondence between the suffering Jesus endured and the suffering his audience is enduring, a similar correspondence should exist between the results of their endurance. Just as Jesus was perfected through suffering, so too should the audience of Hebrews become perfect through the suffering God their Father utilizes to discipline them. As shown above, righteousness and a share in holiness result from �� in ch. 12. In several places earlier in the letter, the author connects righteousness and holiness with perfection. First, in Heb. 5.14, the author chides his audience over their dullness with respect to their ability to hear (��). He takes up the common moral-philosophical trope contrasting those who partake of milk with those who partake of solid food (Heb. 5.12).50 He describes the individual who partakes of milk as a babe (��) and those who have solid food as the mature ones, the ��. His other description of the �� as one who is �� implies that what differentiates the �� is that they have been tested by this word of righteousness. Their possession of the habit (��) of discerning good and evil shows that they can not only hear the righteous word but also act upon it. They possess this habit because their senses have been trained (��). This discussion reveals one of the de�nitions the author attributes to the �� word group. The ��, in contrast to infants, are mature people who have been trained. 50 Isa. 28.9; 1 Cor. 3.2; 1 Pet. 2.2; Odes 19.1ff.; Philo, Agr. 9; Migr. Abr. 29; Congr. 19; Somn. 2.9; Omn. prob. lib. 160; Epictetus, Diatr. 2.16.39; 3.24.9; Seneca, Ep.88.20. 1

4. ��

161

��, to train, occurs again in this twelfth chapter. The coveted prize of the peaceful fruit of righteousness comes to those who have been trained (�� (12.11). Using language of the Greco-Roman educational system, which associates �� and ��,51 �� loving and bene�cial paternal discipline. The combination of these two passages shows the connection between �� discipline his children, trains them (Heb. 12.11) � and those who endure this training become mature or perfect (Heb. 5.14). The �� are the children of God who have been trained through his ��; perfection is �� 52 Another instance of the connection between perfection and �� author provides his audience with a glimpse of the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of God. Included in this city is the assembly of �rstborn ones, who are described as the spirits of the righteous who have been perfected (�� ). That they are described as spirits (��) recalls the designation for God in 12.9 as the Father of spirits. The description of them as righteous implies that they have received �� have been trained (12.11). Their righteousness is proof that God has perfected them. 3. Jesus and the Many Children �� same result (perfection) through the same process (suffering) in the context of the same relationship (paternal/�lial) implies that the same �� . The �� with his �rstborn Son lead to the conclusion that Jesus is perfected because he is the Son of God who endures the �� the pedagogical training � of his Father. Moreover, since the suffering that God utilizes to 51 Epictetus, Diatr. 2.18.27; 3.12.7; Isocrates, Nic. 10; Philo, Mos. 1.48; Plutarch, Lib. ed. 2D-E. Croy discusses the close association between �� and �� as two different, yet closely related, types of training (Endurance in Suffering, pp.158�9). 52 Walters also highlights the correspondence between these passages and �� does after all involve the capacity of making moral judgments, and increasingly so. Such moral growth is by the instructive, disciplining ��Perfection in New Testament Theology, p.112). 1

162

You Are My Son

perfect Jesus is the same suffering that prepares Jesus to be high priest, the author portrays the high priesthood of Jesus as that for which Jesus is quali�ed because he experiences and endures the �� of his Father. �� de�nition of perfection as the result of training (5.11-14).53 That which �� high priest is the �� of his Father. ��, he serves as the ultima�� so that he might be perfect. The correspondence in relational status and �� not as correction, but primarily as training toward maturity. Just as it was the will of his Father that Jesus suffered so that he might be �� causes the many �� to experience suf�� dwell. The nature o��Fatherhood as manifest in his relationship with Jesus is the same nature God displays toward the audience: discipline for the sake of ultimate perfection. After con�rming the �lial connection between the audience and Jesus by highlighting the au��, the author points to �� F�� Son through the will of his Father shows that the author draws a connection between the dif�culties Jesus experiences and those experienced by �� rst speech to Jesus portrayed what he �� the attainment of �� so also, the citation of Prov. 3.11-12 �� loving familial relationship that the audience of Hebrews experiences as �� Second, the similarity between Jesus and the audience is reinforced by ��ts that come to those who endure �� in which the child comes to share in the characteristics of the Father so that they can dwell in his presence. After being perfected through suffer53 �� not serve as the transition to a new theme. It stands as the interruption of the theme ��14�is fundamentally important for illuminating the theological assumptions and intention of the author of ��Christian Philosophy, p.19).

1

4. ��

163

�� and will subsequently come to share in his qualities so they can celebrate on Mt. Zion. The author has made clear to them that these realities � life, holiness, righteousness, and peace � are theirs, if only they endure. The addressees of Hebrews are privileged to stand in the same relationship with God as does Jesus. God, therefore, expresses his paternal role with both Jesus, the son of man, and the audience of Hebrews by utilizing his �� to bring them to perfection. III. Exhortations to the Children: Hebrews 12.12-17 A. Positive Instructions Because the audience of Hebrews, unlike Jesus, is still in the midst of �� , the author employs the exhortation that follows to instruct his audience how they might be able to help one another to endure it. He does so with four injunctions. First, he calls his listeners to restore (��) certain de�ciencies.54 He describes the hands of some of those among the group as ��. �� describes that which is drooping or weak,55 but can also describe that which is weak to the point of inactivity.56 Correspondingly, he describes their knees as ��, a verb that connotes both weak things 57 and things that are weak to the point of being paralyzed. 58 After this restoration, those who are impeded or, if taken in its stronger form, even halted in their ability to keep moving, can fully join in the race.

54 The weak hands and wobbly knees constitute a phrase that also appears in Isaiah (35.3) and Sirach (25.23). In Sirach, the weak hands and knees are the result of living with an unpleasing wife. More similar to the passage in Hebrews, Isaiah 35 describes the great joy of those whom the Lord is saving and gathering to Zion (35.10; cf. Heb. 12.22). This great promise encourages those who have not yet attained this salvation to keep their strength until they see it become a reality. In addition, the transition out of the wilderness (Isa. 35.1; cf. Heb. 3.8, 17), the glimpse of the glory of the Lord (Isa. 35.2; cf. Heb. 1.3; 2.7, 9), and the encouragement offered in this text (Isa. 35.4; cf. Heb. 12.5) strengthen the possibility that the author of Hebrews is alluding to this text to encourage his readers to press on to Zion just as Isaiah encourages his readers to do the same. 55 Deut. 32.36; T. Job 18.3; Diodorus Siculus 14.105.2; Philo, In Flacc. 10; Josephus, Ant. 6.35. 56 Sir. 4.29; 1 Clem. 34.1. 57 Gen. 19.11; Diodorus Siculus 20.72.2. 58 Lk. 5.18, 24; Diodorus Siculus 18.31.4. 1

164

You Are My Son

To this the author adds the second injunction that they should make straight paths for their feet (��), an allusion to Prov. 4.26 (��).59 He issues his call to make straight paths for the sake of those with crippled limbs (��), whose hands and knees are not functioning at their full capacity. Making the paths straight ensures that the weak ones will not be put out of joint (��). If this were to happen, they would be paralyzed and would not be able to continue on the path. If, however, the readers make straight paths, the weak would not be disquali�ed from the race, but would instead be healed (12.13). Straight paths � in addition to making the race easier to run � will also repair the maladies of the members of their group. The third and fourth charge is for the audience to pursue peace with all and to pursue holiness. In v. 11, peaceful fruit was the reward that came �� S�� who remain under his discipline (12.10). God is training them so that they might share in his holiness and attain peace. God sets the path that leads to these things. Nevertheless, their response should be to keep moving toward that quality God has promised to give them. As an added motivation, the author asserts that those who do not have holiness will not be able to see the Lord (12.14). Those who are not holy will not be able to enter his holy place. �� 60 First, they are to restore the knees needed for walking. Second, they should make straight paths. Third and �nally, they should follow after both peace and sancti�cation. In sum, they need to keep running the race set before them (12.1), and to aid the members of their community who are having a dif�cult time doing so, so that they can all attain the bene�ts promised by God to his children. B. Negative Examples The author follows the instructions for these positive steps with negative warnings, which culminate in the story of Esau, a story of disregarding 59 �� instructions in Hebrews 12. It begins with a call for children to listen to the instruction (��) of their father (4.1), and continues to address the listener as a son (��, 4.10). For the child who heeds the instruction, the father promises life (4.22, 23; cf. Heb. 12.9) and healing (4.22; cf. Heb. 12.13). 60 ��of the conspicu��nal chapters of the letter (Wandering People, p.100). 1

4. ��

165

�� ritance. The author begins by exhorting them to look out for one another (��). Doing so will help them to avoid three disastrous outcomes. First, being mindful of one another will prevent anyone from falling short of the grace of God. God makes his graciousness evident in that which God gives to his children who complete his training: peace, righteousness, holiness, and life. If, however, they give up on the race, they will fall short of attaining the gracious gifts of God. Second, to buttress his point, the author articulates another warning drawn from Deuteronomy. There, after Moses outlines the blessings and curses entailed in the covenant, he describes one who turns away from God and serves the gods of the nations, describing that person as a root that produces bitterness and gall. Such a person receives his just punishment with the elimination of his name (Deut. 29.20), but his actions also lead into the story of the failure and punishment of the entire nation (Deut. 29.26-28). The author of Hebrews notes that if a bitter root comes to their community, this root could cause the contamination of many. These two injunctions combine to form a powerful image. The one who falls short is like one who falls in the middle of the race path. He becomes a great cause of stumbling for those who are endeavoring to �nish the race, and he becomes a hindrance to exactly what the congregation should strive for � peace and sancti�cation.61 Because he tarnishes peace with bitterness, he subsequently eliminates the possibility of holiness. The contamination he brings would ruin the sanctity of the group and thus eliminate their chance to see God. The author constructs the third outcome to be avoided with an appeal to the example of Esau, whom the author calls immoral and vile. The use of ��, or fornicator, is effective because the metaphor of fornication was used frequently to describe one who turned away from God and his blessings.62 ��, or ungodly, also provides an apt foil because it is used as the opposite of ��.63 This description of Esau provides a sharp contrast to the sancti�ed devotion to God the author wishes the readers to pursue. As one of the harshest warnings in the entire letter, the author appeals to this story to exhibit the incredible loss his readers would face if they disregard their position as children of God. The crime on which the ��rstborn child 61 ��has the power to threaten the community precisely with regard to its pea�� many have become de�� (Perseverance in Gratitude, p.457). 62 Hos. 2; 3.1; Isa. 57.8-9; Jer. 2.20; 3.2, 9; 13.27; Ezek. 16; 23; 43.7, 9. 63 Lev. 10.10; 1 Sam. 21.5; Ezek. 22.6; 44.23. 1

166

You Are My Son

and trading it for the temporary enjoyment of one meal (Gen. 25.32-34). He favored meeting his immediate physical need for food rather than considering the longstanding blessings of his birthright. In v. 17, the author proceeds directly to the other major event in the life of Esau. As Isaac was nearing death, he did not bestow upon Esau the blessing of the �rstborn (Genesis 27). This is the place where the author of the Hebrews leaves the story � in the fact that Esau was rejected. As the narrative continues in Genesis, Isaac does issue some sort of blessing upon Esau. Even though it ends on a slightly positive note � that Esau will not be in slavery forever (Gen. 27.40) � Esau surely ��nounced, Esau holds a grudge against his brother who has tricked him and wishes to kill Jacob (Gen. 27.41). The author of Hebrews reiterates the �� asserting that he was unable to �nd a place for repentance (�� ). Interpreters have attributed the action of �� to �� 64 then the word indicates that he was not able to revoke the consequences of selling his birthright. Esau functions, then, as an example of a person who could not undo his careless action. This very negative view of Esau �nds attestation in much of the rest of the Old Testament and in intertestamental literature. In the Minor Prophets, for example, Jacob is the loved brother and Esau is the hated one (Mal. 1.3). Esau is covered with shame and cut off forever (Obad. 1.10), and Esau's punishment is not revoked (Amos 1.11). Jubilees ��erce (19.14). He was malicious since youth, devoid of virtue, and lacked the ability to do what is right (35.10-13). The pseudo-blessing of Isaac on Esau also includes �� sin completel� �� (Jub�� Leg. 3.2, Colson and Whitaker), and his story provides the �� (Sacr. 81, Colson and Whitaker). On the other hand, other interpreters have read �� as a change in the mind of Isaac pertaining to the situation of Esau. 65 If interpreted in this way, Esau was asking Isaac to revoke the mistaken blessing he had given to Jacob and, instead, give Esau the blessing of the �rstborn. When Esau begged to receive the blessing and found no place for repentance,

1

64 65

E.g., Koester, Hebrews, p.542; Lane, Hebrews, p.2:458. Hughes, Hebrews, p.541; Spicq, Hebréux, p.2:402.

4. ��

167

that indicates that Esau could not convince Isaac to change his mind and give him a genuine blessing (Gen. 27.36-40), even though he asked with tears (Gen. 27.34). The particular attribution of �� is not �nally determinative for the interpretation of this warning. The way in which the author retells the story implies that Esau was ineffective either to undo his own deed or to change the mind of Isaac because Esau had squandered his status as the �� to inherit the blessing becomes the consequence of giving up his birth�� for the �nal result. Both Esau�s selling of the birthright and Isaac�s giving away of the blessing remain unchangeable realities. In the �� suggesting that he had a hand in his irremediable situation. By joining the �� the close connection between the status of being a �rstborn child and inheritance. Because Esau thoughtlessly gave up the �rst, he lost the ability to attain the second. By appealing to the sobering highlights of �� family, uniting again the concepts of endurance and �lial status (12.4�� given him the many bene�ts that belong to the �rstborn child. Because he forfeited his status as the �rstborn, he lost the blessing that came with it. He could not get it back, even though he pleaded his case with tears. The author thus lifts up his story as a chilling negative example for the readers. The example of Esau provides a stark reiteration of the warnings that appear previously in the sermon.66 In ch. 6, the author describes someone �� person falls away (��), it is impossible for him to repent. This is �� ch. 10, the author asserts that if a person sins willfully after knowing the truth, there is no longer a sacri�ce for her sins but only an expectation of �� which she was sancti��31). These are not minor offenses. The author seems to be describing nothing short of apostasy.67 66 Attridge, Hebrews, p.370. 67 Attridge, Hebrews, p.370; Bruce, Hebrews, p.352; Ellingworth, Hebrews, p.322; Johnson, Hebrews, p.163. Seneca captures the gravity of disinheritance when he discusses the feelings of fathers who are hesitant to disinherit their children: 1

168

You Are My Son

�� child � ��rstborn Son � �� child. Hebrews 12.7-11 has stated that if they endure, they will reap the bene��. 12.12-17 argues ��nity, and lose their inheritance as did Esau. God has received them into his family; God addresses them as his sons and daughters and treats them as his legitimate children. On the other hand, the bene�ts that come with their status as children of God have not yet been fully secured by them. If they forfeit this status by breaking connectio�� Son, they have no hope of persuading God to grant them their inheritance. �� are those who remain obedient members of his Son (3.14; 5.9). IV. The Assurance: The Inheritance of the Firstborn The dire warning made explicit in the story of Esau is just that: a warning, not a fact. Therefore, the author follows this account with two encouragements for his audience. They stand at the very foot of the �� hear God continue to speak to them as a Father through his Son. A. Two Mountains Despite the intensity of this warning, the author is quick to assure his readers that the great misfortune of Esau does not presently apply to them. On the contrary, in the rhetorical climax of the letter,68 the author ��rst offence? Only when great and repeated wrong-doing has overcome his patience, only when what he fears outweighs what he reprimands, does he resort to the decisive pen; but �rst he makes an effort to reclaim a character that is still unformed, though inclined now to the ��Clem. 1.14.1 [Basore]). 68 �� rhetoric, our author chooses to �nish quite literally in a blaze of divine glory, using highly emotive rhetoric to bring his argument home and indelibly imprint it in the �� From a rhetorical viewpoint the �nal exhortation is in the emphatic position, and one may conclude that this is what our author has been ��Letters and Homilies, p.336). Those who also view this section as climactic include Ellingworth (Hebrews, p.669), 1

4. ��

169

��rstborn children are celebrating the attainment of their inheritance. Earlier, in Hebrews 3�4, the author warned his readers not to pattern themselves on the disobedience displayed by the wilderness generation. He alludes to that story again in Hebrews 12, however, in order to declare to his audience that they are in a different position from that of the wilderness generation. They have not approached the same mountain. Approach or movement toward something is an important theme in Hebrews. In all seven instances, the verb �� is used to describe coming before God (4.16; 7.25; 10.1, 22; 11.6; 12.18, 22), but Heb. 12.18 is the only instance in which the author uses fearful language to describe approaching God. He paints a picture of an ominous place burning with �re and surrounded in darkness, gloom, and a windstorm. Trumpets blast and a voice speaks words such that those who hear beg for silence. Here, the author is recounting the story of the wilderness generation standing before Mt. Sinai (Exodus 19). It is such a powerfully holy place that even if a beast touched the mountain, it would have to be stoned (Heb. 12.20/Exod. 19.13). It is striking that his �rst description �� mountain can be touched, it holds the prospect of death. The author asserts that this place was so fearful that even Moses, whom he holds up as an exemplary character earlier in the letter (3.1-5; 11.24-28), proclaims his fear and shows it bodily through trembling. Juxtaposed to this terrifying scene towers the mountain the audience has approached. They have come to Mt. Zion, the mountain associated with Jerusalem, the city of King David (2 Sam. 5.7; Pss. 2.6; 101.2). Because Jerusalem is the dwelling place of the temple, by extension it is also designated as the dwelling place of God (Pss. 9.12; 19.13). For Hebrews, Zion is the city of the living God, a descriptor of God the author utilizes throughout the letter (3.12; 4.12; 9.14; 10.31; 12.11). Finally, the author names the mountain as Jerusalem. In the case of Hebrews, as for other authors of the time (2 En. 55.2; Philo, Somn. 2.250; Gal. 4.26; Phil. 3.20), it is a heavenly Jerusalem, aligning with Grässer (Hebräer, p.3:302), Guthrie (The Structure of Hebrews, p.143), Koester (Hebrews, p.548), and Lane (Hebrews, p.2:448). Kiwoong Son argues that this �� s��ority of the �� the p��Zion Symbolism in Hebrews: Hebrews 12:18-24 as a Hermeneutical Key to the Epistle [PBM; Milton Keyes: Paternoster, 2005], pp.23, 78). 1

170

You Are My Son

�� (3.1). Jesus took his sacri�ce to a heavenly temple (9.23), and the faithful �� . Zion, they are able to gaze into this heavenly realm. Moving on from a description of the place to a description of the beings located there, the author delineates �ve different people or groups of people, alternating between divine and human constituents. He begins with a large gathering of angels who are celebrating. The angels have not been mentioned since the opening two chapters where the author showed their inferiority in comparison with Jesus (1.5, 13) and their disadvantage in comparison with human beings (2.16). 69 Nevertheless, in the picture of ��n in the celebration. There with the angels dwells the assembly of the �rstborn. Firstborn (��) is the terminology the author uses to speak of Jesus in the �rst chapter (1.6). In this instance, this is not the assembly that belongs to the �rstborn one (��, singular), but the assembly (��) that is made up of �rstborn ones (��, plural). Every member of the assembly is given the honorable designation of being the �rstborn. �� are considered children of God (2.10, 12-13, 14; 3.6; 12.5-9), and it is especially comforting after the warning about Esau, who squandered his birthright and lost access to the blessings that come to the �rstborn (12.15-17). It is the story of Esau that most plausibly accounts for the ��guage from �� to ��. Those who hold fast to God attain the great blessings that come to the �rstborn children. The author further describes the congregation as those who have been registered (��) in heaven.70 A reference to a written document is striking in a letter so concerned with speaking and listening. Therefore, in addition to referring to their registry in heaven, this way of describing the congregation correlates with the scripture spoken twice in Hebrews that God, in the New Covenant, will write his laws on the minds of his people (��, �� children are enrolled in heaven because they have been inscribed with �� 69 Jesus did not take hold of the nature of angels (2.16), and so the angels serve as ministers to those people who Jesus did aid. 70 To be legally registered (��) also appears in Lk. 2.1, 3, and 5. Attridge (Hebrews, p.375 n.72) also notes that a registry in heaven is a recurring theme (Exod. 32.32; Ps. 68.29 LXX; Isa. 4.3; Dan. 12.1; Lk. 10.20; Rev. 13.18; 17; Hermas, Vis. 1.3.2; Sim. 2.9). 1

4. ��

171

Having described this place as the city of the living God, the author then says explicitly that God is there. He describes God as the judge of all, a rather ominous description that highlights the paradoxical nature of ��theless, they can approach with con�dence. This paradox is intensi�ed by the fact that there with God are the spirits of righteous people who have been made perfect. The three-word description (�� ) draws upon themes established earlier in the chapter where the author portrays God as a pedagogical Father. In v. 9, the author describes God as the Father of spirits, who disciplines his children so that they might attain righteousness. Moreover, Jesus learns obedience through the process God uses with him as his Father (2.11; 5.8-9; 7.28). Jesus, who is perfect in faith through his obedient action (12.2), has perfected the faith of the congregation (10.14). These people have been included in the dwelling place of God because God, through his fatherly actions with Jesus and with his many sons and daughters, has prepared them to pass the test of his judgment. �� because the way has been opened to them through the mediator of the New Covenant (12.24), Jesus himself. His sprinkled blood, as the author argues in other places (Heb. 9.12, 14; 10.19; 13.12), gives them access to God.71 The author describes this blood as that which speaks better than the blood of Abel. The author asserted in 11.4 that even though Abel died, he still speaks because the faith expressed in his gift to God showed him to be righteous.72 �� for humanity. Jesus himself � unlike Abel � is alive to intercede before God (7.25) because he has been exalted as heir to the right hand of his Father. B. Do Not Resist the One Speaking The second assurance begins in the form of an admonition: they should remain on guard lest they resist the One who is speaking to them. The �� his interpreters to think that he believes the audience has already arrived. 73 71 It is possible that the community experiences these realities in the present through the practice of the Eucharist. Thanks to Michael Kibbe for calling my attention to this interesting connection. 72 �� for all forever (Attridge, Hebrews, p.377)? 73 George Wesley Buchanan suggests that upon th�� received the bene�� 1

172

You Are My Son

With the warning that follows, he shows that this is not the case. They, like the Israelites before Sinai, stand at the foot of the mountain. They are not yet at the top. Because they do not yet reside in this heavenly Jerusalem, his admonition for them therefore is this: watch out so that you do not resist the One who is speaking. The author does not want them to make the same mistake of the wilderness generation who resisted the God who spoke to them and were consequently punished by being denied entrance to the Promised Land (Exod. 20.19; Ps. 95.7-8; Heb. 3.78, 15; 4.7). Since God is speaking to them not from an earthly mountain, but from heaven itself, they have even less hope of turning away from his voice without recompense. To buttress this warning, the author adds that the One speaking to them has promised to shake both the heavens and the earth. Nothing shakable can withstand his thunderous voice (12.26). Finally, he leaves them with a chilling picture of who God is. �� 74

at Mount Zion when Jesus was cruci�ed� (Hebrews, p.223). Similarly Bruce states, ��y� So, by virtue of their accepting the gospel, the readers of this epistle had come to that spiritual realm ��Hebrews, p.355). 74 This description of God resonates with that in Exodus 24, a narrative to which the author alludes in Heb. 9.19-20. After the covenant ceremony involving blood in vv. 3-8, Moses and his colleagues come up onto the mountain of God. This action, however, departs from the instructions of vv. 1-2. At the beginning of this chapter, God told Moses that only he would be allowed to draw near to the Lord. His companions could ascend with him and worship at a distance, but they were speci�cally commanded not to draw near (�� ). Moreover, the people were prohibited even from coming up with Moses and the others (24.2). After the ceremony, however, the necessity of distance is absent, and, most strikingly, Moses is not singled out. There, together they see (v. 10). The last time they saw anything, in Exodus 20, it was the mountain smoking. That sight resulted in fear, trembling, and the observers removing themselves at a distance from God (Exod. 20.18). According to the LXX, in ch. 24, however, this small group of Israelites not only sees the place where the God of Israel stands, but also even dines there. After this intimate and more inclusive event, Moses and Joshua go up higher onto the mountain. While they ascend, the sons of Israel remain at the foot of the mountain watching. On this occasion when they see the manifestation of the glory of the Lord appearing now not just as smoke but as a consuming �re (��), the text makes no mention of their fear. At the close of the Sinai episode, the people of Israel look ��aming �re. Hence, like Moses and Joshua, the righteous spirits who have been perfected dwell with this �re unscathed and those observing the �re from the ground need not be afraid. 1

4. ��

173

The designation of this �ery God as the One who is speaking (�� ) recalls a recurrent theme throughout the letter. Throughout, the author has portrayed God speaking to the audience (1.2; 3.7�4.7; 8.812; 10.30-31, 37-38; 12.5-6). The �rst thing the author says about himself and his audience in the �rst sentence of the sermon is that they are people to whom God is speaking (��, Heb. 1.2). Moreover, because God speaks to them �� the relation of the Father and the Son. It is, therefore, paternal speech. �� a Father and, in these last days, God is speaking to the audience of the sermon, the audience hears God speaking to them as a Father. His speech points them to the relationship that makes him Father, the relationship between himself and Jesus, the Son. This relationship reminds them of the suffering Jesus experienced through the will of his Father and the subsequent honor and glory he attained from his Father. They are reminded that as children of God their lives can follow the same pattern. Since they hear God speaking as a Father (1.2), they are given boldness to reply to God in the same way Jesus does: as children. In support �� ness (��), the author brings forth God to speak for the �nal time, saying: �� (Heb. 13.5).75 This assurance gives the audience, for the �rst time, boldness to speak the scriptures. They speak the words from Psalm 117: �� ,76 and they proclaim the Lord as their helper (Heb. 13.6). In light of all this, they do not have to fear the action of any person. They give voice to a stance of trust in God similar to the attitude of trust that Jesus himself articulated, �� (2.12).77 75 This statement resonates with several texts from the LXX, including Gen. 28.15; Deut. 31.6; Josh. 1.5. Attridge suggests that both Philo (Conf. ling. 166) and the author of Hebrews might be citing from a variant of Deut. 31.6, 8. 76 Psalm 117 LXX includes several themes emphasized in Hebrews: the psalmist declares that the Lord became salvation to him (vv. 14, 28; cf. Heb. 1.14), that the Lord disciplined him (v. 18; cf. Heb. 12.4-11), and that the Lord did not hand him over to death (v. 18; cf. Heb. 2.15-16). 77 Attridge eloquently notes: ��nale of Hebrews, the followers of Jesus, in the person of the homilist and his audience, have assumed the role of Jesus in his dialogue with God. Their prayer of the psalm is what Heb. 13.15 calls for, an acknowledgement of God. Their prayer af��delity, a faith��p.212). So also J. Ross Wagner states: �� implies that �� 1

174

You Are My Son

Despite the �lial similarities the audience of Hebrews shares with Jesus, there remains one radical difference between them. Because they are vulnerable to sin (2.1; 3.6, 7-8, 12, 15; 4.1, 11; 5.11; 6.4-6; 10.26-31, 35-39; 12.1, 12-17, 25) and he was and is sinless (4.15; 7.26), his example alone is no guarantee that they too will dwell in the presence of God forever. In ch. 12, the author puts before his audience the examples of two sons. Jesus, who will take possession of all the blessings of his inheritance (1.3, 13; 2.8-9; 12.2), and Esau who, because he gave up his birthright, did not (12.17). The author issues the warnings that he does because it is yet to be determined whose example they will follow. Therefore, the author�� more than just an appeal to the example �� relationship for humanity. Even more fundamental than its exemplary �� ship with humanity a reality. Because God the Father perfected his Son Jesus and established him as the heir of all things and the eternal high priest, the audience of Hebrews can be con�dent that they are the children of God and as such will receive the inheritance promised to them. 78 C. Benediction The author reinforces the con�dence of the audience with his closing benediction (13.20-�� Son and heir of God. Here, he calls God the God of peace (�� ).79 The God of peace made peace an attainable reality for the audience when he raised Jesus up from the dead. For the fourth time in the letter, God is portrayed as the one who leads his children (1.6; 2.10; 8.9). Previously, he led Jesus, his �rstborn Son, into the �� (1.6), but here the focus is that out of which he is leading Jesus, the realm of comes to ��Faith��p.104). 78 Heather Gorman argues that the author puts emphasis on the juxtaposition of positive and negative appeals: ��pathos never stand alone as an end in themselves. They work together with positive appeals toward the greater goal of encouraging a group of weary Christians to maintain their faith in spite of their ��Pathos��RQ 54.2 [2012], pp.77�90 [88]). 79 This description of God appears in the Pauline letters (Rom. 15.33; 16.20; 2 Cor. 13.11; Phil. 4.9; 1 Thess. 5.23). 1

4. ��

175

the dead (��). This is the explicit af�rmation of the resurrection, which has been supposed throughout the letter.80 The living God is the God who can bring people back from death (11.19, 35), just as Jesus trusted that he could do (5.7). By doing so with his Son, Jesus, the power of death was defeated forever (2.14). In the benediction, the author designates Jesus as the great shepherd of the sheep.81 Previously, the attribution of greatness had been attached to his role as high priest (4.14; 10.21). In a similar way, the shepherd metaphor af�rms both his participation with humanity and also his distinct position of leadership over them. It �ts well with the imagery of Jesus as the �� (Heb. 2.10; 12.2). Because God has brought the shepherd up from death, the shepherd can similarly lead the sheep. The path on which God leads Jesus proceeds on the blood of the ��plete participation in the human condition (2.14; c.f. 2.17; 4.15) and, in that participation, his sacri�cial act (9.12, 14). This is the �nal reference to the obedient suffering of Jesus through which his Father perfected him. The shedding of this blood �� New Covenant was established (12.24). The New Covenant is the eternal covenant because it is based on the promise that Jesus will be priest forever (Ps. 109.4 LXX; Heb. 5.6; 6.20; 7.17, 21, 28) and will provide the eternal inheritance of redemption/salvation and forgiveness to its participants (5.9; 8.12; 9.12, 15; 10.17). �� wi�� his Father (1.10): ��. This is an af�rmation of his highly exalted �� af�rmation that he has wrested power from the power of death and sin, and now reigns as Lord over all things. Having obediently endured his �� heir. The good news proclaimed by the author of Hebrews is that this supreme Lord is in fact the Lord of his readers. They are members of his kingdom (12.28) and, even more, members of his household (3.6). Jesus 80 As David Mof�tt argues persuasively in Atonement and Resurrection. 81 Both Lane (Hebrews, p.2:562) and Rothschild (Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon, p.70) highlight the similarity to Isa. 63.11-12, which refers to God leading up Moses, the great shepherd of the sheep. For those with ears to hear, this is one more af��t is also a royal association between Jesus, and his ancestor David, who tended the sheep (1 Sam. 16.19; 17.34; 1 Chr. 17.7; Pss. 77.70; 151.1; Ezek. 27.24; 34.23).

1

176

You Are My Son

is now Lord over all, and the audience of Hebrews is privileged to participate in the blessings of his Lordship. The author desires that God would strengthen his readers in all good �� cation �� ncti�ed (10.10) and receive what was promised to them (10.36), their eternal inheritance (6.12, 17; 9.15). This is all possible through Jesus Christ, who is worthy of glory for all �� crown of glory and honor as sovereign heir over all things (2.9). His position of glory has been inaugurated and will remain forever, and the hope of the children of God is secure because their inheritance of �� V. Conclusion The interpretation of Hebrews 12�13 set forth here highlights the ��ather/Son relationship �� present experiences, and goal. At the beginning of ch. 12, the author reminds the readers that Jesus has endured the suffering his Father willed, which came to fruition in his death on the cross (12.2). Subsequently, he �� Following this summary, the author incontrovertibly establishes his �� Jesus thereby provides the template for the relationship the audience has with God. By describing the process by which �� paternal training, the author lifts up Jesus as the ultimate example of a Son who endures intense suffering to obey his Father faithfully. By showing that God teaches even his �rstborn, preeminent, eternal, exalted, and divine Son through suffering � even the suffering of the cross � the author argues that th�� to perfect his children through their obedient endurance of their own challenging circumstances. The utilization of suffering shows God to be a Father who disciplines and Jesus to be an obedient Son. Their actions in this relational interplay provide for the audience a picture of the kind of Father God is and the kind of children they should be. God will lay

1

4. ��

177

before them their own dif�cult contest, and they should also respond with faithful endurance. The author then comforts them with the assurance that their trying experiences are the �� of God their Father. �� , he took his honorable and glorious seat �� just as Jesus did, they too can look forward to receiving their reward. The author motivates them by vividly portraying the greatness of the inheritance that awaits them. The audience of Hebrews can be assured that as they endure � �� they will ��rstborn. �� lial �� promised by his Father and secured by his sacri�cial death, victory over death, and living intercession � balances the auth�� that they are a part of this guaranteed inheritance. This study has sought to show how the author of Hebrews offers this stalwart assurance to his audience. First, in his appeals to various scriptures throughout the opening sections of Hebrews (1.5�3.6), the author speci�es that as the ��ond, he shows throughout the letter how the suffering that Jesus endures is the way in which Jesus wins and sustains the human component of his inheritance through the sacri�ce and intercession enacted in his priesthood. Consequently, although his warnings against squandering their inheritance present real possibilities, they are only that: possibilities whose volume is tempered in the presence of the resounding voice of God, who in speaking to them �� declares that they are the inheri��dent that they will attain their own inheritance of salvation among the assembly of the �rstborn. They can run boldly toward their inheritance because they know they are the inheritance of Jesus Christ, the reigning Son of God. As children of God, the audience of Hebrews can trust that their �� will lead to the possession of their inheritance, just as it did for Jesus, because, as children of God � those to whom God is speaking in his Son � they are the inheritance of Jesus. The author can be so intense in his warnings because his claim of what God the Father has done in concert with his Son, Jesus, is so comprehensive. He leaves them with the assurance that Jesus is now glori�ed forever as the Lord who will inherit all things. As the children of God, they are part of the inheritance that Jesus has won through death and continually sustains through his priestly intercession. Their boldness and boast of 1

178

You Are My Son

hope is grounded in the fact that God is faithful (10.23). He has promised to place all things under the feet of his Son in his household, including his many sons an�� Just as the author begins his sermon with a picture of the family of God, so too he brings it to a close by appealing to this relationship. �� throughout the entirety of the letter creating the concomitant �lial identity and hope of the audience. Second, the training the audience is experiencing and the reward to which they look forward continue to point to the character of God as Father and remind �� faithful response as Son. It is in the �nal section that the author fully �� closing sections of the letter also offer the fullest picture of the audi�� and inheritance, including the guaranteed inheritance of Jesus upon which both rest.

1

CONCLUSION Most interpreters of the Epistle to the Hebrews acknowledge the presence �� theological, christological, and ecclesiological implications throughout the letter. Seeking to advance the understanding of Hebrews by �lling in this lacuna, this study devotes concentrated attention to the portrayal of God as Father, Jesus as Son, and the author and his congregation as children of God. �� throughout his argument. In my �rst chapter, I argued that the author �� lial relationship with God. Following this description of the Son (vv. 14), the author emphatically asserts the existence of the relationship that grants Jesus his supreme position through a pair of scriptural citations (1.5). By setting up the citations of Ps. 2.7 and 2 Sam. 7.14 as a conver�� a Son, and by arranging them so that each line and the citation as a whole focus on both the Father and the Son, the author has �� ethos as a Father and �� thus setting the tone for the rest of the sermon. I argued that the force with which the author articulates this relationship suggests that Heb. 1.5 provides the best context in which to interpret the statements about the Son in vv. 1-4. The Son, whom God appointed as heir of all things, who re��pated with God in the creation of all things, and who continues to participate in their sustenance, is the person with whom God relates as a Father. Out of this ��him as both �� and ��. Certain rights and responsibilities accompany this name: the worship of the angels, an eternal reign, participation in creation, and sovereignty over all things. Spoken by God in vv. 6-13, the scriptural catena con�rms that Jesus is the supreme heir because the allpowerful God, who is his Father, has chosen to share with him all things. �� subjects all things under the feet of the son of man of Psalm 8 functions

180

You Are My Son

��LXX in Heb. 1.13 as well as his statement that God appointed Jesus as heir of all things in Heb. 1.2, suggesting that he reads Psalm 8 as a scriptural declaration of ��ment at this point shows that Jesus takes this exalted position precisely as a human who has experienced death. God makes Jesus perfect through this process (2.10), not because Jesus was lacking in any way, but because as he reenters the presence of God, he makes possible the same entrance for the human portion of his inheritance who was enslaved to the fear of death (2.14-15). Through his defeat �� can now follow him, their ��, to their own participa�� glory. Hence, Jesus wins back humanity from slavery so that he becomes the perfect heir of all things. Each section of Hebrews 2, along with the scriptures cited and alluded to by the author, presents this story. By �� this process, he became the perfect heir who, reigning next to God, will �� of death. In my third chapter, I moved to the center section of the letter to show �� his Father (Hebrews 5) �� priest in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7). Jesus is quali�ed for this �� e other hand, through his priestly offering of his own body and blood, he secures salvation from sin for his many brothers and sisters. As he sits as �� them on their journey. Through both of these priestly acts � his offering and his intercession � he supports the ultimate possession of his own inheritance: the many �� of God. �� share as �� of God provides the content of my �nal chapter. Beginning with how the new covenant motif resonates with the family of God theme, I then analyze the �nal chapters of Hebrews, where the author clearly proclaims that God is Father to his readers. He does so by presenting Prov. 3.11-�� This relationship interprets the present dif�culties of the audience (they are undergoing the fatherly discipline of God) and sets the goal toward which they are mov�� holiness, and righteousness). It becomes clear that the author has been �� Jesus as a model for the audience. Just as Jesus was perfected through suffering, so too can they 1

Conclusion

181

be perfected, because they are all �� of God. Positive encouragements and negative warnings, which reach a climax in the story of Esau who abandoned his birthright, exhort the audience to remain in this familial relationship with God, no matter how dif�� great relief, the audience has not yet followed in the footsteps of Esau, and so he reminds them of the inheritance to which they are looking ��. Zion, where all the �rstborn children of God dwell in celebration. From this mountain, God continues to speak to them. Because God speaks to them in his Son, they ��ship with God �� reigning and glorious Lord, and his priestly intercession which accompanies this status, assures the audience that they are a part of his promised and won inheritance. This assurance provides stalwart encouragement for them to hold fast to their confession (3.6, 14; 10.23) and �nish the race (12.1). I. Contributions to Scholarship on Hebrews My recognition of the prominence and function of the familial theme in Hebrews provides plausible answers to a number of signi�cant problems that continue to bedevil interpreters of the letter, even as it challenges several in�uential interpretations. First, the preceding investigation directly opposes those who argue that the familial language, particularly �� in the letter. For example, James Moffatt argues, ��hood, it is not in such terms that he expresses his own conception of God� [T]he author of �� lays no stress upon the Fatherhood of God for men; except in connexion with the discipline of suffering, he never alludes to the goodness of God as paternal, even for Christians, and indeed it is only in OT quotations that God is called even the Father of the Son (15 55).1 1 Moffatt, Hebrews, p.xxxv. With a similar argument, Angela Rascher states, �� h Jesus ist im Hebr allerdings nicht zu �nden, nur der Sohn wird als Sohn von Gott angesprochen. Die Bezeichnung, �� und Sohn. Auch ist im Hebr keine Unterscheidung in der Verwend�� Schriftauslegung, p.46). Alexander C. Purdy also �� fashion. Only twice is God called the Father, even of the Son (1.5; 5.5, both O.T.

1

182

You Are My Son

My investi�� audience to the prominent theme of suffering (2.9, 10, 18; 5.8; 9.26; 10.32; 12.5-11; 13.12) speaks to its importance rather than its lack of stress. Second, the author frequently �� to glory (2.10). God has made those in the audience members of his household (3.1-6). He disciplines them as a Father so that they can share in his life, holiness, righteousness, and peace (12.5-11). He treats all of his children as �rstborn, inviting them to dwell in his presence on Mt. Zion (12.22). Finally, t�� scriptural quotations increases, rather than decreases, its importance for the sermon. The author builds his argument upon the scriptures of Israel. Proof of the authoritative value they hold for him lies in his dominant method of citation. they are the spoken words of God. ��thers, ignores both �� Fatherhood without explicit use of the title �� and also the relational connotation of other terms, such as Son, child, brother, heir, inheritance, and ��.2 In addition to beginning and concluding his sermon with explicit discus��rst to Jesus and then to �� many �� (1.5; 12.5-6), references to these relationships permeate his argument. God as Father perfects His Son through suffering (becoming human and dying, 2.8-9, 10, 17; 3.1; 4.15; 5.7-8; 7.28; 10.10; 12.2). ��g Son results in his position as the exalted heir (1.3, 13; 2.8-9; 3.6; 4.14; 5.9-10; 7.28; 8.1; 10.5-7, 12; 12.2; 13.20-�� household who are looking forward to the attainment of their own inheritance (1.14; 2.10, 12; 3.1-6; 5.9; 7.25; 8.8-12; 9.15; 10.14; 12.5-11, 22-24). To ignore or diminish the importance of the family of God the quotations), and that God is the Father of men only appears in connection with the �� The Epistle to the Hebrews [IB, 11; New York: Abingdon, 1955], p.599). 2 �� in Hebrews as a wh�� Sonship is a major theme, but �� (Hebrews, p.114). Similarly, Hugh Monte�� employs [the catena] to describe the status of the Son, not that of God the Father. �� Hebrews, �� doctrine [the Fatherhood of God] is assumed throughout the Epistle, but is only explicitly stat��Sonship and Salvation�� writer says nothing expressly about the Fatherhood of God, the whole of the Epistle ��Sonship and Salvation, p.93). 1

Conclusion

183

�� consequently, to miss one of the most compelling ways he supports the exhortation to his audience. �� foundational image in his theology. God is certainly a holy God with whom humans could not dwell had Jesus not granted access through his death, resurrection, session, and intercession. Yet this access is won because of the way in which God disciplines and grants an inheritance to his Son. When humans come into his presence, they do so as his children. In highlighting the paternal motif, I call into question the presiding theological motif in ��, Despising Shame and in his subsequent commentary on Hebrews, Perseverance in Gratitude. DeSilva argues that the author constructs a particular picture of God in order to in�uence the behavior of the readers. With this argument, my reading of Hebrews is in complete agreement. I disagree, however, with the picture of God DeSilva constructs. For him, the author of Hebrews� primary theological image is that of God as the divine Benefactor or Patron.3 In this imagery, Jesus is the �patron of the Christian community and [serves] as broker of the patronage of God��4 and the author and his audience are often described as the �friends� or �clients� of God.5 While some reviewers found this interpretation insightful,6 many more, like myself, questioned the �ttingness of imposing this language on the text.7 Bene�ts and gratitude clearly play a role in the soteriological narrative of Hebrews. Nevertheless, the author of Hebrews does not use patron language (��) for God or for anyone else in his sermon.

3 For example, Despising Shame, pp.181, 210�11, 220, 231, 234, 242, 247, 248, 256, 258, 259, 260, 262, 264, 266, 296, 308, 315, 318; Perseverance in Gratitude, pp.50, 59, 63, 113, 121, 238, 349, 504. 4 DeSilva, Despising Shame, pp.26, 211, 220; Perseverance, p.433. 5 DeSilva, Despising Shame, pp.236, 238, 240; Perseverance, pp.58, 63. 6 These include Peter Davids, CBQ 60 (1998), pp.363�5; Clayton N. Croy, ATJ 29 (1997), pp.143�5; and Paul Ellingworth, EvQ 74 (2002), pp.77�8. 7 �� honor and shame, patron and client, advantage and disadvantage � are so thickly superimposed on �� ResQ 43 [2001], pp.187�9). Attridge (Bib 82 [2001], pp.584�6), Arnold S. Browne (JTS 52 [2001], pp.285�7), Iain D. Campbell (Them 28 [2002], pp.82�4), David M. Hay (Int 55 [2001], pp.191� 2), Don Howell (JETS 42 [1999], p.161), Koester (CBQ 62 [2000], pp.749�50), Stephen Motyer (Anvil 18 [2001], pp.138�9), and Charles Talbert (PRSt 28 [2001], pp.141�2) raise similar concerns. 1

184

You Are My Son

�� perception of the relational metaphor of the letter. Fathers and their children were certainly bound in a relationship of reciprocity in which bene�ts and honor passed from one to another. The relationship between a father and a son, however, differs from that of a patron and a client insofar as all fathers are (or should be) benefactors, but not all benefactors are fathers. Seneca, in his treatise on bene�ts, recognizes the superior�� me. If I repay this kindness, I give him more than I received, because he has the pleasure, not only of being supported, but of being supported by a son, and receives more delight from my �lial devotion than from the �� everywhere to everyone that he has been conquered in bene�ts by his ��8 The honor a son gives to a father carries more value than any other bestowal of gratitude. DeSilva himself recognizes that the extension of �� ts to include adoption and the giving of inheritance is ��9 By consistently casting God as a Benefactor and the audience as his clients, DeSilva detracts from the depth of relationship the author conveys with the familial language he does employ. As DeSilva correctly argues, the audience owes honor for the inestimable bene�ts God has afforded to them, but readers grasp the depths of this reciprocity even more when they see that it takes place between a Father and his children. As an example of the gravity lost with �� descri��ees aware of the danger through a number of stern warnings designed to arouse fear and dread in the hearers of the consequences of pursuing a ��10 To the contrary, the warning passages speak of trespasses against the Son of God (6.6; 10.29) and, hence, elicit the insolence committed against his Father. Even more �� disregarding the bene�ts associated with sonship. The author warns them not to spurn their birthright. In addition to the risk of losing their reputation as a grateful person,11 they would lose their very inheritance. To the 8 Seneca, Ben. 3.32, 38 [Basore]. 9 DeSilva, Honor, Patronage, Kinship and Purity, p.131. 10 DeSilva, Despising Shame�� them to reconsider, in light of the impossibility of a return to their spurned benefac�� 11 Seneca, Ben. 3.6.2; 3.17.1-12.

1

Conclusion

185

sin of ingratitude,12 those described in the warning passages add the sin of parental disrespect.13 The danger before them is that they might dishonor their Father, an even more dreadful atrocity than the disrespect of a Patron. Consequently, recognizing the gravity of the offense actually increases the salvi�c assurance offered by the passage. Whereas a patron might take offense at any number of missteps and cease to offer bene�ts, only very serious and repeated misdeeds quali�ed a son to be disinherited.14 The audience can trust that as heirs of salvation (1.14) they will attain their salvation, if they avoid the grave sin of apostasy. Even more assurance comes from knowing that they are the inheritance of Jesus, the sinless son, who will never do anything to squander his inheritance of all things. Some rev�� results in a picture of God as a heavenly overlord whose grace is downplayed in the emphasis on the reciprocity demanded of the readers.15 Jason A. Whitlark offers one of the most extended critiques on this front in his monograph, Enabling Fidelity to God: Perseverance in Hebrews in Light of the Reciprocity Systems of the Ancient Mediterranean World.16 Whitlark argues that DeSilva has a �backward-looking attitude� that 12 �� worst of crimes, being compared to sacrilege against the gods, since the Graces were ��Honor, Patronage, Kinship and Purity, p.110). 13 See Sir. 3.1-16. 14 �� disinherit a son for his �rst offence? Only when great and repeated wrong-doing has overcome his patience, only when what he fears outweighs what he reprimands, does he resort to the decisive pen; but �rst he makes an effort to reclaim a character that is still unformed, though inclined now to the more evil side; when the case is hopeless, ��Clem. 1.14.1 [Basore]). 15 Howell articulates the problem in this way: as opposed to indebtedness, �� undeserving people who respond with praise and thanksgiving, grounded in the �� Despising Shame�� that Hebrews belongs to synergistic covenantal nomism where grace may get one into the believing community, but where human obedience, motivated by gratitude, is necessary to transport one into the Age to Come. The data to counteract such an impression are abundantly present in Hebrews (e.g. 4.16; 8.10; 10.14, 16; 12.5-11; 13.5-6, 12, 20-21, etc.) but DeSilva leaves them undeveloped in this com�� (review of Perseverance in Gratitude, p.142). 16 Whitlark, Enabling Fidelity to God: Perseverance in Hebrews in Light of the Reciprocity Systems of the Ancient Mediterranean World (PBM; Colorado Springs: Paternoster, 2008). 1

186

You Are My Son

privileges gratitude for past bene�ts over faith in the promised future as the motivating factor in the exhortation.17 More fundamentally, he argues that DeSilva operates with an �optimistic anthropological assumption� which must af�rm that ��ts are based upon his estimation of the be�� bene�ts received��18 DeSilva assumes that human beings do have the capacity to �engage in a relationship of reciprocity with God�� whereas Whitlark argues that Hebrews operates with a more pessimistic anthropology that assumes humans must be transformed from within before they can respond to God.19 Ultimately, I think these critiques are not fair. DeSilva convincingly shows that the system of reciprocity is entirely one of grace. Ideally, the benefactor freely gives and the client freely responds in gratitude. 20 His appeal to this metaphor, while enlightening in its revelation of the culture of the ancient world, does not fully capture the pathos of the author of �� theological model. First, it avoids projecting a title upon God without attestation in the letter and seeks to allow the author � through his exposition �� to de�� so doing, my interpretation of Hebrews highlights the depth of �� is brought into relationship with him as their Father. In this relationship, God has even more right to deserve their respect and obedience (12.9). Moreover, the audience can be con�dent that, short of the apostasy of �� endure. A patron/client relationship simply does not convey the intimacy and endurance that a familial relationship naturally does. �� provides a forceful argument for a high Christology in the letter, 21 advancing the work of scholars who advocate for the same christological stance. For example, John Webster draws from the exordium to argue for the divinity of Jesus in Hebrews. About the phrase �� , he states,

17 Whitlark, Enabling Fidelity, p.144. 18 Whitlark, Enabling Fidelity, p.141. 19 Whitlark, Enabling Fidelity, pp.145�6. 20 DeSilva, Honor, Patronage, Kinship and Purity, p.129. 21 See my argument against James D. G. Dunn, Kenneth L. Schenck, G. B. Caird, and L. D. Hurst above, pp.25�9, 41�6). 1

Conclusion

187

��he real force of the phrase here is to locate the being of the Son in God, and so to reinforce his uniqueness�� Moreover, �� speaking �� is God speaking in person, it requires us somehow to conceive of a repetition or differentiation within the being of God himself��22 I noted that the author surrounds his use of wisdom/word terminology in Heb. 1.1-�� s is not the putative background of what is said in (for example) Wisdom Christology, but the identity of the one by whom this divine action is undertaken��23 My investigation provides support for the prominence of ��lial identity in the �� emphatic portrayal of the relationship between God and the Son proclaimed in Heb. 1.5 by God himself. The relationship depicted there �� personal heir who has reigned alongside God since before creation and who will reign with God the Father forever. �� ions of Melchizedek. For example, Jerome H. Neyrey argues that the alpha-privitive statements about Melchizedek in 7.3 � �� re�ect common topoi of Hellenistic philosophy on what constitutes a true god. In the context of Hebrews, the statement ultimately describes not Melchizedek, but Jesus.24 Richard Bauckham supports this argument with evidence from Jewish sources and argues that when adopted into the context of the Jewish understanding of God, such hellenistic god-language undergoes an important re-functioning. It becomes monotheistic language� [W]hat the author of Hebrews says of Melchizedek in 7.3 is precisely what he said of Christ in applying the words of Ps 102 to him in chap. 1. In both cases, this is the full eternity of the only true God. 25

By highlighting the importance of genealogy in the Melchizedek discussions, I reinforce this argument. The author utilizes the story of Melchi��

22 Webster, ��, pp.78 and 80. 23 Webster, �� 24 Jerome H. Neyrey, �� 7.3): Topos for a True Deity�, CBQ 53 (1991), pp.439�55. 25 Bauckham, ��36, here 31. 1

188

You Are My Son

Hence, this study challenges those interpreters who place an inordinate focus on the humanity of Jesus.26 The humanity of Jesus is indeed a vitally important aspect of the letter, but imbalanced attention to it can �� status as Son. Jesus is human precisely because he is the Son of God who has become a son of man through obedience to the will of his Father. Authors like Käsemann and Koester are right to point to the importance �� h as that of David Mof�� his �esh and blood � that gives him the right to sit at ��y beings��27 Nevertheless, I argue that this statement does not represent the full picture of the �� lial relationship with God. Interpreters need not emphasize one aspect of Christology to the diminishment of the other because the author of Hebrews unites both ��lial relationship he has with God the Father.

26 Examples of such scholars with whom I have engaged in the dissertation include G. B. Caird and L. D. Hurst (see above, pp.41�6). For example, Hurst states, �� . When did he speak? It could not have been through the pre-�� p.156). Hurst con�� can speak to this audience through a Son in the last days without it being necessary �� argument works in a similar direction, de�� his humanity rather than his ��as Christ is the Son, he is such principally in relationship to the sons. In other words, he is Son as �� Das wandernde Gottesvolk�� thesis of propositio ��God�s designs for human beings are accom�� p.105). I af�rm the importance of this statement for Hebrews, but argue that it is �� [t]he depiction of the Son of God enthroned in heaven does not address the principal concern of the speech; instead, it has an important �� 27 Mof�tt, Atonement and Resurrection, p.141. 1

Conclusion

189

Fourth, my argument about the aut�� tological assertions in the way that he does, namely that his discussion of �� humiliation. Initially, I show that this division does not neatly fall into distinct sections, exaltation in Hebrews 1, humiliation in Hebrews 2. On �� Hebrews 2 has numerous references to his exaltation, by referring to �� 9), subjects all things under his feet (2.8-9), perfects him so that he can �� to glory (2.10), and gives him possession of his children (2.13b). Therefore, I argue that the dominant note in the �rst chapter is his exaltation, but in the second chapter the author couples this �� arrangement is to bolster the con�dence he is seeking to instill in his audience. At the beginning and at the conclusion of his sermon he �� because God the Father, who keeps his promises (6.12-18; 11.11), has promised that his Son will ultimately take possession of all things. After �� position has for his audience by describing how Jesus became heir of all things, including humanity.28 �� heir of all things, the author presents the �rst half of an inclusio. The ��-21) surrounds his sermon. Fifth, the familial theme suggests a way in which to understand the �� lling in of an imperfection or the culmination of a process of maturation; rather, it is �� is perfected when he takes his position of glory and honor as the heir of all things. He would not have been able to reach this state of perfection had he not endured the particular dif�culties to which his Father called him. In his death, he removed the barriers that kept humanity outside his

28 �� Jesus' cruci�xion, it provides a perspective from which the meaning of Jesus' death �� with his sharp distinction between the subject matter of the �rst and second chapter whereby the exaltation of Jesus as Son loses its place of prominence. 1

190

You Are My Son

sovereignty and hence became the heir of all things that were promised �� Peterson, my interpretation con�rms that �the context gives a very broad perspective on what that perfecting involved. In the �rst place, it must have something to do with this ascen�� destined ��-9). In the second �� which is the ground of his exaltation (verse 9), the means by which he robs the Devil of his power ��-15), and the means by which he expiates the sins of the people (verse 17). Finally, it may be seen to involve his whole incarnate experience, by means of which he beca�� particularly his suffering, which equipped him to help those who are similarly tested.29

�� suffers because he experiences the paideia of his Father so that he can inherit humanity and take his place a�� entire creation. Moreover, my interpretation avoids the problem raised by �� a vocational model of perfection assumes at least to some degree the n�� itself to the same criticism brought to bear against the moral/ethical model. How can a notion of development, whether conceived along moral or vocational lines, rest harmoniously alongside those passages in the �� 30

�� creation has been captured by the power of death. Sixth, and closely related to �� way in which the paternal/�lial relationship in Hebrews informs the ��high priest and Son. I have argued �� high priest�� arises as a vocation.31 His priestly call arises out of the �lial 29 Peterson, Hebrews and Perfection, p.67. 30 McCruden, Solidarity Perfected, p.21. 31 See above, pp.107�8. ��

1

Conclusion

191

relationship he has with God, becomes a reality through the dynamics of this relationship, and then serves that relationship as his priestly vocation secures his inheritance. Finally, attention to the family imagery of Hebrews tips the balance toward the initiative of God in the soteriological interplay between divine and human agency. While supporting a widespread assertion that �� and also makes their status a reality,32 I explicate how both of those assertions are true as articulated by the author through his use of familial language. With regard �� experiences testing through suffering through the will of his Father so that he can be perfected. Similarly, the audience participates in the same relational dynamics with God. More importantly, with regard to �� lial status, I show that because God has perfected Jesus as heir, humanity is rescued from slavery, brought into the household of God, and set on a path to attain their own inheritance. ��dience certainly has a role to play in holding to their faith and pursuing after their goal. They are to remain faithful. Patrick ��Brotherly Love and the High Priest Christology of Hebrews� captures this sentiment as he shows the correspondence

Messianism and the Priestly Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews [STDJ, 74; Leiden: Brill, 2008], pp.13, 38), but he also notes both that Jesus is priest because �God appointed him to the of�ce� (p.25) and that �The author has an understanding of Jesus as priest which has resulted from conscious, sustained theological re�ection on Ps 2:7 and Ps 110:1, 4� (p.38). 32 �� ole process by which he was perfected as their saviour and high priest in order to appreciate the help he can give for running the race that is set before them (12.1ff.). His life of obedience, his sacri�cial death and heavenly exaltation are the means by which he was perfected. Believers in turn are perfected by the very actions and accomplish�� Hebrews and Perfection, p.186). Second, he articulates �� through suffering� provides a pattern for Christian discipleship. Christians share to a certain extent in the same struggle or contest that Christ endured and, because he pioneered the way, they have the prospect of enjoying his victory if they share his faith and manifest the same sort �� Hebrews and Perfection, p.187). Similarly, Mof��[i]f they endure, they will receive their inheritance. Not only is this exempli�ed by Jesus, but because of who Jesus is and what he has do��Atonement and Resurrection, p.301). 1

192

You Are My Son

�� depiction of Jesus as brother and other depictions ��On Brotherly Love� (De fraterno amore 478A�492D). There, Gray argues that the ��llment of what had been promis�� ancestors is, �in the hands of the audience�� He concludes: If the audience does not get to the �nish line, according to the logic of 11.�� in 12.1-13 thus extend far beyond themselves to all those mentioned in ch. 11. With this remarkable move the author raises the stakes considerably and seeks to impress upon his audience the gravity of the situation and the crucial role they play in salvation history. In this presentation, then, Christ elevates his brothers by granting them a digni�� unique status. 33

Each member of the audience must endure until the end, but I argue �� on as Sovereign and Savior and Heir has already been guaranteed. The emphasis falls upon what has taken place in the familial relationship between God and Jesus. The audience of Hebrews participates in this relationship because of the actions of God and Jesus, but is not responsible for bringing all of salvation history to its culmination. Responsible interpretations of Hebrews cannot deny that the author is legitimately concerned that the audience of Hebrews might turn away from their participation in Christ. This is a real and terrifying possibility. If they fall away, they do so to the extent that they repudiate who God has already declared them to be: his own children. This rejection, however, is only a possibility that has not yet been actualized. As �� children, supported by the aid of the Father (13.8) and the intercession of the Son, the author is con�dent that they will reach the promised rest �� This con�dence rests not just on �� ised aid means a great deal to the audience, most especially because he administers his bene��se (1.2, 13; 2.8-�� apparent of all things. It is this reality that most assures the audience of the security of their identity and future.

1

33

��

Conclusion

193

II. Conclusion In the �rst moments and in the closing thoughts of the sermon, the author �� an unparalleled inheritance, his own name, and the roles and honors that come with it, and subjecting his Son to the process of perfecting so that ��. In this relationship, the Son attains his inheritance of all things. This theological motif provides a framework in which major portions of the letter �t into a coherent picture of one �� home of their faithful Father.

1

BIBLIOGRAPHY Aelius Aristides. The Complete Works: Orations Xvii-Liii. Translated by C. A. Behr. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Allen, David M. Deuteronomy and Exhortation in Hebrews. WUNT, 2/238. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. �� -elle tombée dans la ��La nouvelle revue théologuque 96 (1974), pp.1054�66. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Series 2. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. 1885�87. 10 vols. Repr. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994. Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by George A. Kennedy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. Attridge, Harold W. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989. ��. �� Pages 197�210 in The Forgotten God: Perspectives in Biblical Theology: Essays in Honor of Paul J. Achtemeier on the Occasion of His Seventy-Fifth Birthday. Edited by A. A. Das and F. J. Matera. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002. ��. �� Pages 197�212 in The Psalms in the New Testament. Edited by S. Moyise and M. J. J. Menken. New York: T&T Clark, 2004. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� Bib 82 (2001), pp.584�6. ��12 and the Septuagint Rendering of Ps. 102.23�� ZNW 3 (1902), pp.280�5. Barker, Margaret. ��. London: SPCK, 1992. Basil. Letters. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari. 4 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926�1934. Bauckham, Richard. Cruci�ed God: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament. Disbury Lectures. Cumbria, UK: Paternoster, 1998. ��. Jesus and the God of Israel: God Cruci�ed and Other Studies on the New ��. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. �� But We See Jesus�: The Relationship Between the Son of Man in Hebrews 2.6 and 2.9 and the Implications for English Translation�� Pages 88�99 in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in its Ancient Contexts. Edited by Richard Bauckham et al. LNTS, 387. London: T&T Clark, 2008. �� Pages 188�98 in Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche: Festschrift für Joachim Jeremias. Edited by Walter Eltester. BZNW, 26. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1960. Boswell, John. The Kindness of Strangers: The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe from Late Antiquity to the Renaissance. New York: Pantheon, 1988.

Bibliography

195

Braun, Herbert. An die Hebräer. HNT, 14. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984. Brooke, George J. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005. ��-b�� JBL 117 (1998), pp.93�6. Browne, Arnold S. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� JTS 52.1 (2001), pp.285�7. Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Rev. ed. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990. Buchanan, George Wesley. To the Hebrews: Translation, Comment, and Conclusions. AB, 36. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1972. Byrne, B. Sons of God, Seed of Abraham: A Study of the Idea of the Sonship of God of All Christians in Paul Against the Jewish Background. Analecta biblica, 83. Rome: Biblical Institute, 1979. �� Pages 73�81 in The New Testament Age: Essays in Honor of Bo Reicke. Edited by William C. Weinrich. 2 vols. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1984. Calvin, John. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. Translated by W. B. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963. Campbell, Iain D. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� Themelios 28 (2002), pp.82�4. Champlin, Edward. Final Judgments: Duty and Emotion in Roman Wills, 200 B.C.� A.D. 250. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. Charlesworth, James H., ed. Rule of the Community and Related Documents. Vol. 1 of The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994. ��. Pages 209�32 in Fighting Words and Images: Representing War Across the Disciplines. Edited by Elena V. Baraban, Stephen Jaeger, and Adam Muller. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. Cicero. De Inventione Rhetorica. Translated by H. M. Hubbell. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1949. ��. Letters to Atticus. 4 vols. Translated by D. R. Shackleton Bailey. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. ��. On the Orator. Translated by E. W. Sutton and H. Rackham. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1942. ��. Pro Caelio. Translated by R. Gardner. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1958. ��. Tusculan Disputations. Translated by J. E. King. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927. Cockerill, Gareth. The Epistle to the Hebrews. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012. Collins, Adela Yarbro and John J. Collins. King and Messiah as Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. Cooley, M. G. L., ed. The Age of Augustus. London: London Association of Classical Teachers, 2003. Craddock, Fred B. The Pre-existence of Christ in the New Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 1968. Craigie, Peter C. Psalms 1�50. WBC, 19. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004. Crook, John A. Patria Potestas. CQ 17 (1967), pp.113�22. 1

196

You Are My Son

Croy, Clayton N. Endurance in Suffering: Hebrews 12:1�13 in Its Rhetorical, Religious, and Philosophical Context. SNTSMS, 98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Despising Shame: Honor Discourse and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews. ATJ 29 (1997), pp.143�5. Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Translated by Shirley C. Guthrie, Charles A. M. Hall. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964. ��Moses in the Letter to the Hebrews. SBLDS, 42. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979. �� 3 in the Septuagint: Its Translation-Critical, Tradition-�� . Pages 241�59 in Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception. Edited by Dirk J. Human and Gert J. Steyn. LHBOTS 527. New York: T&T Clark, 2010. Dahood, Mitchell, S.J. Psalms I. AB. New York: Doubleday, 1966. Davids, Peter. Review of D. DeSilva, Despising Shame: Honor Discourse and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews. CBQ 60 (1998), pp.363�5. Davidson, A. B. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Handbooks for Bible Classes and Private Students. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1950. Delitzsch, Franz. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Translated by T. L. Kingsbury. 2 vols. ��, 4/20. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1872�78. Demetrius. On Style. Translated by Doreen C. Innes and W. Rhys Roberts. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995. Demosthenes. Funeral Oration. Translated by J. H. Vince et al. 7 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1930�49. DeSilva, David A. Despising Shame: Honor Discourse and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews. SBLDS, 152. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. ��. Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-�� Hebrews�� Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. De Vaux, Roland. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. BRS. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997. Reprint of Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Translated by John McHugh. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1961. Translation of Les Institutions ��. 2 vols. Paris: Cerf, 1958, 1960. Dey, L. K. K. The Intermediary World and Patterns of Perfection in Philo and Hebrews. SBLDS, 25. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975. Dio Chysostom. Discourses. Translated by J. W. Cohoon and H. Lamar Crosby. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932�51. Diodorus Siculus. Library of History. Translated by C. H. Oldfather. 12 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1933�67. Diogenes Laertius. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925. Dionysius of Halicarnassus. De Thucydide. Translated by Stephen Usher. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974�85. ��. Roman History. Translated by Earnest Cary and Herbert B. Foster. 9 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1914�27. Docherty, Susan. The Use of the Old Testament in Hebrews. WUNT, 2/260. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. Dunn, James D. G. Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989. 1

Bibliography

197

�� Perspective�� Pages 127�46 in Feminist Companion to the Catholic Epistles and Hebrews. Edited by A.-J. Levine and M. M. Robbins. London: T&T Clark International, 2004. ��. The Jewish Heroes of Christian History: Hebrews 11 in Literary Context. SBLDS, 156. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997. ��. �� of Suffering, the Necessity of Discipline, and the Pursuit of Perfection in Hebrews�� Pages 331�53 in Asceticism and the New Testament. Edited by L. E. Vaage and V. L. Wimbush. New York: Routledge, 1999. Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1993. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� EvQ 74 (2002), pp.77�8. Epictetus. Discourses. Translated by W. A. Oldfather. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967�85. Epicurus. Fragments�� Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 1993. Euripides. Electra. Translated by David Kovacs. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. ��. Orestes. Translated by David Kovacs. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002. Eusebius. Preparation for the Gospel. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981. Reprint of Preparation for the Gospel. Translated by Edwin Hamilton Gifford. Oxford: Clarendon, 1903. G�� Pages 357�76 in Angels: The Concept of Celestial Beings � Origins, Development and Reception. Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature, Yearbook 2007. Edited by F. V. Reiterer, T. Nicklas, and K. Schöp�in. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2007. Gardner, Jane F. Family and Familia in Roman Law and Life. Oxford: Clarendon, 1998. Gheorghita, Radu. The Role of the Septuagint in Hebrews: An Investigation of Its In�uence with Special Consideration to the Use of Hab 2:3�4 in Heb 10:37�38. WUNT, 2/160. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. �� ExpTim 86 (1975), pp.328�32. ��2�� NTS 49 (2003), pp.90�107. Gorman, Heather. ��Pathos��. RQ 54.2 (2012), pp.77�90. Grässer, Erich. An die Hebräer. 3 vols. Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament, 17. Zurich: Benziger, 1990�97. Gray, Patrick. �� High Priest Christology of Hebrews�� JBL 122 (2003), pp.335�51. ��. Godly Fear: The Epistle to the Hebrews and Greco-Roman Critiques of Superstition. SBLABS, 16. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Greer, Rowan A. The Captain of Our Salvation: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Hebrews. BGBE, 15. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1973. �� Hebrews 2.5�18�� Vox Evangelica 6 (1969), pp.54�71.

1

198

You Are My Son

Guthrie, George H. �� 8:4�6 in Hebrews 2:5�9�� JETS 49 (2006), pp.235�46. ��. The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis. NovTSup, 73. New York: Brill, 1994. ��High Priest: The Christology of the Epistle ��. Pages 247�67 in Contours of Christology in the New Testament. Edited by R. N. Longenecker. McMaster New Testament Studies. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. Hamerton-Kelly, Robert G. Pre-Existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man: A Study in the Idea of Pre-existence in the New Testament. SNTSMS, 21. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. Hannah, Darrell D. Michael and Christ; Michael Traditions and Angel Christology in Early Christianity. WUNT, 2/109. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1999. Hay, David M. Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series, 18. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� Int 55 (2001), pp.191�2. Hayman, Peter. �� JJS 42 (1991), pp.1�15. �� Convention�� Pages 122�36 in The Future of Christology: Essays in Honor of Leander E. Keck. Edited by A. J. Malherbe and W. A. Meeks. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. ��. The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1�4:11. 2nd ed. BRS. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Heraclitus. Allegoriae. Translated by Philip Ellis Wheelwright. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959. Herodotus. Histories. Translated by A. D. Godley. 4 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920�25. Holtzmann, Osc�� ZNW 10 (1909), pp.251�60. Homer. Illiad. Translated by A. T. Murray. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1924�25. Hornblower, Simon and Antony Spawforth, eds. Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Howell, Don. Review of D. DeSilva, Despising Shame: Honor, Discourse, and Community Maintenance in the Epistle to the Hebrews. JETS 42 (1999), p.161. Hübner, Hans. Gottes Ich und Israel: Zum Schriftgebrauch des Paulus in Römer 9�11. FRLANT, 136. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984. Hughes, Graham. Hebrews and Hermeneutics: The Epistle to the Hebrews as a New Testament Example of Biblical Interpretation. SNTSMS, 36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Hughes, Philip E. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. �� Pages 151�64 in The Glory of Christ in the New Testament: Studies in Christology in Memory of George Bradford Caird. Edited by L. D. Hurst and N. T. Wright. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987. Hurtado, Larry W. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. 1

Bibliography

199

Isaeus. Isaeus. Translated by E. S. Forster. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927. Isocrates. Letters. Translated by La Rue Van Hook. Vol. 3. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1945. ��. Nicocles. Translated by George Norlin. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928. ��. Panegyricus. Translated by George Norlin. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928. Johnson, Luke Timothy. Hebrews: A Commentary. NTL. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006. Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926�65. Juel, Don. ��. Pages 135�50 in Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Justinian. Institutes. Translated by Peter Birks and Grant McLeod. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987. Käsemann, Ernst. Das wandernde Gottesvolk: Eine Untersuchung zum Hebräerbrief. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1957. Kennedy, George. A New History of Classical Rhetoric. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994. ��. trans. Progymnasmata: Greek Textbooks of Prose Composition and Rhetoric. Writings from the Greco-Roman World, 10. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Kistemaker, Simon J. Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews. NTC. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984. ��. The Psalms Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Amsterdam: Wed. G. Van Soest N. V., 1961. Koester, Craig. �� Pages 361�87 in Salvation in the New Testament: Perspectives on Soteriology. Edited by Jan G. Van der Watt. Boston: Brill, 2005. ��. Hebrews. AB, 36. New York: Doubleday, 2001. ��. �� CBQ 64 (2002), pp.103�23. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� CBQ 62 (2000), pp.749�50. �� im Hebräerbrief im Zusammenhang mit dem neutestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch�� Pages 35�68 in Theologische Studien: Martin Kähler zum 6. Januar 1905 dargebracht. Edited by Friedrich Giesebrecht. Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1905. ��. Der Sohn und die Söhne: Eine exegetische Studie zu Hebräer 2,5�18. BFChTh. Jahrgang, 8, Heft 5+6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1904. �� Theory�� Pages 73�87 in Rhetoric, Ethic, and Moral Persuasion: Essays from the 2002 Heidelberg Conference. Edited by Thomas H. Olbricht and Anders Eriksson. New York: T&T Clark International, 2005. Kurianal, James. Jesus Our High Priest: Ps 110, 4 as the Sub-structure of Heb 5,1�7, 28. EurHoch, 23/693. Frankfurt: Lang, 2000. 1

200

You Are My Son

Lane, William L. Hebrews. 2 vols. WBC, 47. Dallas: Word, 1991. Lee, Aquila H. I. ��-Consciousness and Early Christian Exegesis of Messianic Psalms. WUNT, 2/192. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005. Lehne, Susan. The New Covenant in Hebrews. JSNTSup, 44. Shef�eld: JSOT, 1990. �� Hebräerbrief. PadTS, 41. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 2004. Lidgett, J. Scott. Sonship and Salvation: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Epworth, 1921. Lierman, John. The New Testament Moses: Christian Perceptions of Moses and Israel in the Setting of Jewish Religion. WUNT, 2/173. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004. Loader, William R. G. Sohn und Hoherpriester: Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zur Christologie des Hebräerbriefes. WMANT, 53. Neukirchen�Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1981. Long, Thomas. Hebrews. IBC. Louisville: John Knox, 1997. Lucian. The Passing of Peregrinus. Translated by A. M. Harmon. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936. Lucretius. On the Nature of Things. Translated by W. H. D. House. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1924. ��1518�� Pages 19�250 in Luther: Early Theological Works. The Library of Christian Classics. Edited and translated by James Atkinson. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1962. �� NTS 53 (2007), pp.114�29. ��. Eschatology and Exhortation in the Epistle to the Hebrews. WUNT, 2/223. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007. Marcus Aurelius. Meditations. Translated by C. R. Haines. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1916. �� JBL 71 (1952), pp.43�4. ��. �� JBL 70 (1951), pp.129�30. Mason, Eric. �� Hebrews�� Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Region of the SBL. Bourbonnais, IL, February 12, 2011. ��. �You Are a ��ple Jewish Messianism and the Priestly Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews. STDJ, 74. Leiden: Brill, 2008. McCormack, Bruce L. �� -4 ��72 in Christology, Hermeneutics, and Hebrews: Pro�les from the History of Interpretation. Edited by Jon C. Laansma and Daniel J. Treier. LNTS, 423. London: T&T Clark, 2012. ��. �� Hebrews�� Pages 37�68 in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology. Edited by R. Bauckham, D. Driver, and T. Hart. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. McCruden, Kevin B. �� Mark�� BR 52 (2007), pp.41�56. ��. Solidarity Perfected: Bene�cent Christology in the Epistle to the Hebrews. BZNW, 159. New York: W. de Gruyter, 2008. �� NTS 26 (1980), pp.363� 79. ��5�14�� Bib 66 (1985), pp.504�33. 1

Bibliography

201

�� Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. New Orleans, LA, November 22, 2009. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1994. Michel, Otto. Der Brief an die Hebräer. 8th ed. KEK, 13. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1949. Mitchell, Alan C. Hebrews. SP, 13. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1989. ��. �� and Rhetorical Propriety in Hebrews 2:10�� CBQ 54 (1992), pp.681�701. Moffatt, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1924. Repr. 1963. Mof�tt, David. Atonement and the Logic of the Resurrection in the Epistle to the Hebrews. NovTSup, 141. Leiden: Brill, 2011. ��. Jesus the High Priest and the Mosaic Law: Reassessing the Appeal to the Heavenly Realm in the L�� Pages 195�232 in Problems in Translating Texts About Jesus: Proceedings from the International Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting 2008. Edited by Mishael Caspi and John T. Greene. Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 2011. Monte�ore, Hugh. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. BNTC. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1964. Motyer, Stephen. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical �� Anvil 18 (2001), pp.138�9. Moule, C. D. F. The Birth of the New Testament�� Companion, 1. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1962. Mowinckel, Sigmund. ��. BRS. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Reprint of ��. Translated by D. R. Ap-Thomas, with forward by James Crenshaw. New York: Abingdon, 1962. Neyrey, Jerome H. ��): Topos for a True Deity�� CBQ 53 (1991), pp.439�55. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Series 1. Edited by Philip Schaff. 1886�89. 14 vols. Repr. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994. Nickelsburg, George W. E. Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity, Continuity, and Transformation. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003. ��The Letter to the Hebrews. PNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. �� Pages 143�66 in Grace Unlimited. Edited by Clark H. Pinnock. Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1975. ��Son and High Priest: A Study in the Christology of Hebrews�� EvQ 60 (1988), pp.195�216. Peeler, A. ��. Koinonia 20 (2008), pp.12�26. Peterson, David. Hebrews and Perfection: An Examination of the Concept of Perfection in �� SNTSMS, 47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. �� Pages 21�44 in The �� Edited by J. J. Petuchowski and M. Brocke. New York: Seabury, 1978. P�tzner, Victor C. Hebrews. ANTC. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997. 1

202

You Are My Son

Pietersma, Albert. ��-Production and Text-Reception: Psalm 8 in Greek�� Pages 485� 501 in Die Septuaginta � Texte, Kontexte, Lebenswelten: Internationale Fachtagung veranstaltet von Septuaginta Deutsch (LXX.D), Wuppertal 20.�23. Juli 2006. Edited by M. Karrer, W. Kraus, and M. Meiser. WUNT, 219. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. Plato. Laws. Translated by R. G. Bury. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926. ��. Phaedrus. Translated by Harold North Fowler. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1914. ��. Statesman. Translated by Harold North Fowler and W. R. M. Lamb. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925. ��. Timaeus. Translated by R. G. Bury. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929. Plutarch. Lives. 10 vols. Translated by Bernedotte Perrin. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1914�21. ��. Moralia. 16 vols. Translated by Frank Cole Babbitt. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927�2004. Polybius. The Histories. 6 vols. Translated by W. R. Patton. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925�2011. Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969. Philo. Translated by F. H. Colson, Ralph Marcus, and G. H. Whitaker. 12 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929�62. Pseudo-Aristotle. De Mundo. Translated by E. S. Forster and D. J. Furley. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955. Purdy, Alexander C. The Epistle to the Hebrews. IB, 11. New York: Abingdon, 1955. Rascher, Angela. Schriftauslegung und Christologie im Hebräerbrief. BZNW, 153. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 2007. �� ections on the Interpretation of the Melchizedek Tradition in Heb ��. Bib 81 (2000), pp.81�94. Rothschild, Clare K. Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon: The History and Signi�cance of the Pauline Attribution of Hebrews. WUNT, 235. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. �� Hebrews 1�� JBL 120 (2001), pp.469�85. ��. Cosmology and Eschatology in Hebrews: The Settings of the Sacri�ce. SNTSMS, 143. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. ��. ��His Appointment: Creation and Enthronement in Hebrews�� JSNT 66 (1997), pp.91�117. ��. Understanding the Book of Hebrews: The Story Behind the Sermon. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003. Scholer, John M. Proleptic Priests: Priesthood in the Epistle to the Hebrews. JSNTSup, 14. Shef�eld: JSOT, 1991. Seneca. Epistles. Translated by Richard M. Gummere. 3 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1917�25. ��. Moral Essays. Translated by John W. Basore. 3 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928�35. ��rfection and Eschatology in Hebrews�� WTJ 39 (1976), pp.60�71. �� Ph.D. diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2000. 1

Bibliography

203

Smyth, Herbert W. Greek Grammar. Rev. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956. Son, Kiwoong. Zion Symbolism in Hebrews: Hebrews 12:18-24 as a Hermeneutical Key to the Epistle. PBM. Colorado Springs: Paternoster, 2005. Sowers, Sidney G. The Hermeneutics of Philo and Hebrews: A Comparison of the Interpretation of the Old Testament in Philo Judeaus and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Basel Studies of Theology, 1. Zurich: EVZ, 1965. Spicq, Ceslas. ��. 2 vols. Ebib. Paris: Lecoffre, 1952�53. S��o��. HvTSt 59.4 (2003), pp.1107�26. ��. A Quest for the Assumed LXX Vorlage of the Explicit Quotations in Hebrews. FRLANT, 235. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Still, Todd D. �Christos as Pistos: The Faith(fullness) of Jesus in the Epistle to the Hebrews�� Pages 40�50 in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in Its Ancient Contexts. Edited by R. Bauckham et al. LNTS, 387. New York: T&T Clark, 2008. Strack, Hermann L., Paul Billerbeck, and Günter Stemberger. Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash. Translated by Marcus Bockmuehl. 2nd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996. Stuckenbruck, Loren T. Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John. WUNT, 2/70. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1995. Swetnam, James. Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in Light of the Aqedah. Rome: BIP, 1981. Tacitus. Annals. Translated by John Jackson. 2 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1914. Talbert, Charles H. Learning Through Suffering: The Educational Value of Suffering in the New Testament and in Its Milieu. Zacchaeus Studies: New Testament. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1991. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentar�� Perspectives in Religious Studies 28 (2001), pp.141�2. �� NTS 55 (2009), pp.366�79. Thompson, James W. The Beginnings of Christian Philosophy: The Epistle to the Hebrews. CBQMS, 13. Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1982. ��. Hebrews. Paideia. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008. ��. Review of D. DeSilva, Perseverance in Gratitude: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on t�� ResQ 43 (2001), pp.187�9. Thompson, Marianne Meye. The Promise of the Father: Jesus and God in the New Testament. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000. Treie�� ctrine of Scripture Practiced in Hebrews�� Pages 337�52 in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology. Edited by R. Bauckham, D. Driver, and T. Hart. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Überlacker, Walter. Der Hebräerbreif als Appell. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1989. �� Mid-America Journal of Theology 16 (2005), pp.13�28. 1

204

You Are My Son

Vanhoye, Albert. Situation du Christ: Épître aux Hébreux 1 et 2. LD, 58. Paris: Cerf, 1969. ��. Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews. SubBi, 12. Rome: Ponti�cio Istituto Biblico, 1989. �� Isaiah 8:11-18 in the New Testament�� Pages 76�106 in The Word Leaps the Gap: Essays on Scripture and Theology in Honor of Richard B. Hays. Edited by J. R. Wagner, C. K. Rowe, and A. K. Grieb. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. ��. ��-16 as a Test Case�� JBL 126 (2007), pp.251�69. Walters, �� Pages 42�76 in Paul in the GrecoRoman World: A Handbook. Edited by J. Paul Sampley. New York: Trinity, 2003. Walters, John R. Perfection in New Testament Theology: Ethics and Eschatology in Relational Dynamic. MBPS, 25. Lewiston, NY: Mellen Biblical, 1996. ��ections on the Exordium to the Epistle to the Hebrews�� Pages 69�94 in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology. Edited by R. Bauckham, D. Driver, and T. Hart. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Weiss, Bernhard. Der Brief an die Hebräer. KEK. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1897. Westcott, B. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. 3rd ed. London: Macmillan, 1928. Westfall, Cynthia Long. A Discourse Analysis of the Letter to the Hebrews: The Relationship Between Form and Meaning. LNTS, 297. London: T&T Clark, 2005. ��. �� 201 in Christian�Jewish Relations Through the Centuries. JSNTSup, 192. Edited by S. E. Porter and W. R. Pearson. Shef�eld: Shef�eld Academic, 2000. ��. Review of C. N. Croy, Endurance in Suffering. JSNT 76 (1999), pp.121�2. Whitlark, Kevin. Enabling Fidelity to God: Perseverance in Hebrews in Light of the Reciprocity Systems of the Ancient Mediterranean World. PBM. Colorado Springs: Paternoster, 2008. Widdicombe, Peter. The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius. OTM. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Wider, David. Theozentrik und Bekenntnis: Untersuchungen zur Theologie des Redens Gottes im Hebräerbrief. BZNW, 87. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1997. �� NTS 6 (1959�60), pp.159�67. ��cation? A Patristic Debate about Logos�� Pages 218� 89 in The Glory of Christ in the New Testament: Studies in Christology in Memory of George Bradford Caird. Edited by L. D. Hurst and N. T. Wright. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987. Williamson, Ronald. Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Windisch, Hans. Der Hebräerbrief. HNT, 14. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1931. Witherington, Ben, III. Letters and Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary on Hebrews, James and Jude. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2007. Wrede, William. Das literarische Rätsel des Hebräerbrief. FRLANT, 8. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1906. 1

INDICES INDEX OF REFERENCES HEBREW BIBLE/ OLD TESTAMENT Genesis 1�2 16 1.26 67 1.28 67 2�4 59 6 47, 48 6.2 47 6.4 47 7.28 123 11.31 19 14 120, 121, 123 14.17-20 120 15.7-8 39 19.11 163 21.10 15 21.12 36 22.17 56 25.5 15 25.6 15 25.8 75 25.31-34 15 25.32-34 166 27 166 27.34 167 27.36-40 167 27.40 166 27.41 166 28.15 173 42.12 114 46.7 81 48.14 19 48.15 39

Exodus 2.10 4.10 4.22-23 4.22 6.6 6.14 6.25 14.31 15.6 15.12 15.17 15.18 19.13 20 20.18 20.19 23 23.19 24 24.1-2 24.2 24.3-8 24.8 24.10 25.1 29.46 32.32 33.11 34.14 34.26 Leviticus 4�5 8.35

81 112 39, 144 146 131 82, 83 19 112 19 19 39 56 169 172 172 172 48 106 172 172 172 172 35 172 36 131 170 19 59 106

131 59

9�10 10.10

131 165

Numbers 3.12-13 3.41 3.45 7 8.16-18 10.4 11.11 11.25 11.29 12.6-8 12.6 12.7 12.8 13.2-3 13.3 13.16 14.4 16.2 18.20 18.21 18.24 18.26 25.4 26.55 36.1-12

52 52 52 131 52 82 112 12 12 112 12 112 112 82 83 82 82 82 39 39 39 39 82 15 15

Deuteronomy 1.31-32 4.24 7.8 8.2-5

39 172 131 145

206 Deuteronomy (cont.) 8.5 39, 145 9.3 172 10.9 39 12.12 39 13.5 131 14.1 39 17.18 19 18.2 39 18.18 12 18.19 12 21.15-17 15 21.17 15 21.18 145 23.19 106 29.20 165 29.26-28 165 31.6 173 31.8 173 32 47, 54, 60, 94, 97 32.4 54 32.5-6 39 32.5 54 32.6 54, 144 32.8 47 32.10-11 54 32.10 39 32.11 39 32.12 54 32.18-20 39 32.18 54 32.19 54 32.20 36, 54 32.22 54 32.35-36 54 32.35 94 32.36 94, 148, 163 32.40 54, 56 32.43 47, 52�4, 94 32.44 19 32.52 54 33.12 19 33.21 82

Index of References 34.5 34.10

112 12, 112

Joshua 1.1 1.5 1.13 1.15 7.19 8.31 8.33 9.24 13.3-6

36, 112 173 112 112 59 112 112 112 15

Judges 4.23 5.2 6.8 18.31

59 82 12 106

1 Samuel 2.8 3.1-21 3.21 10.6 10.10 16 16.19 17.34 19.16 19.23 20.31 21.5 2 Samuel 5.7 7 7.1 7.4 7.5 7.8 7.11 7.12-14 7.12-13 7.12 7.14

19 12 12 12 12 12 175 175 56 12 19 165

169 38, 94, 97 94 36 32, 33, 95 94 95 95 95 95 12, 28�30, 35, 37�40,

7.16 7.18 7.19 7.24 12.20 12.24 21.7 22 22.3 22.39 22.44 22.45 22.49 22.50

45, 61, 95, 96, 116, 145, 179 95 95 95 95 106 12 19 96, 97 89 97 97 97 97 96, 97

1 Kings 1.13 2.12 5.17 5.19 8.17 8.20 8.53 8.56 13.20 18.12

19 19 106 106 106 106 112 112 12 112

2 Kings 17.13 21.10

12 12

1 Chronicles 2 5.24 6.33 9.11 9.13 9.26 17.3 17.7 17.11-15 17.13

119 82, 83 106 106 106 106 36 175 30 29, 30, 37, 39, 116

207

Index of References 22.10 26.26 28.6 28.21 29.10

37, 39, 116 83 37, 39, 45, 116 96 39

2 Chronicles 1.3 12.5 24.6 24.9

112 12 112 112

Ezra 9.11

12

Nehemiah 2.9 7.70 7.71 9.6

82 83 83 57

Esther 16.16

49

Job 1.6-12 2.1-10 38.7 42.15

99 99 67 15

Psalms 1 2

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.7

38 12, 14, 26, 37, 38, 58, 61, 96, 97, 116, 118 37, 97 37 37, 71, 96, 169 29, 32, 33, 36-40, 58, 71, 106, 115, 117,

2.7-8 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.12 6.6 8

8.3 8.4 8.5-7 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8-9 8.8 8.9 8.14 8.17 8.21 9.7 9.12 10.16 17.5 18.35 19.13 21 21.2 21.16 21.21 21.23 21.23 21.24 21.32 22.2 28.1 29.1 29.10 36.9

118, 137, 179, 191 116 14, 26, 96, 98 37, 71, 96 97 37, 97 99 46, 68, 71, 73, 74, 76, 77, 79, 86, 87, 94, 97, 98, 102 66 6 66, 67 71, 102 67, 70, 71 66, 68, 69, 75 67, 68 67, 68, 75 75, 76 71 71 94 56 169 56 99 19 169 86, 88�91, 97, 100 88 88 101 87 85, 88 101, 126 101 88 47 47 56 39

36.22 36.29 39 39.6 40.7-9 44 44.6 44.7-8 44.7 44.18 67.6 68.29 68.36 72.15 77.70 82.6 88 88.7 88.27-28 88.28

89 89.5 89.6 89.7 89.8 89.28 90.11 92.8 94.7 95.7-8 96 96.7 10.22-23 101 101.2 101.20 101.21 101.26 101.26-28 101.26-27 102 102.12 102.13

39 39 135 85 110 55, 58, 59, 96, 97 96 55 59 97 39 170 39 39 175 47 12, 40 47 39 14, 37, 39, 40, 52, 116 47 118 47 47 47 56 83 56 36 172 97 53, 67 100 57, 59, 97, 100 169 57 57, 100 75 56, 100 16 187 56 39

Index of References

208 Psalms (cont.) 103 103.2 103.4 103.6 103.7 104.44 109

109.1

109.1-3 109.3 109.4

110 110.1-3 110.1

110.4 114.8 117 117.14 117.18 117.28 118.111 121.5 131 137.1 151.1 Proverbs 1.1 3 3.1 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.11-12

16, 55, 97 55 55 55 40 39 55, 68, 69, 97, 116� 18 36, 39, 58, 68, 69, 96, 142, 154, 180 119 37, 39, 116, 117 106, 115, 118, 123, 137, 175 119, 120 119 19, 58, 117, 119, 191 117, 143, 191 126 173 173 173 173 39 19 118 67 175

147 145 144 144 144 144 140, 141, 144�7,

3.11 3.12 3.15 3.17 3.18 3.22 3.23 3.35 4.1 4.26 5.12 8.10 8.25 8.26-29 8.30 13.22 13.24 19.18 22.5 23.13 29.17 Isaiah 1.2 1.4 3.6 4.3 8 8.4 8.16 8.17 8.17 8.18 11.1-5 12.2 28.9 30.1 30.9 34.17 35 35.1 35.2

149, 152, 153, 156, 162, 180 35, 149 39 144 144 144 144 144 144 151 164 151 151 22 21 21 15 145 145 151 145 145

39 13, 39 82 170 89, 91, 94, 96, 97 91 89 90, 96 89 91 37 89 160 39 39 39 163 163 163

35.3 35.4 35.10 40.26 40.28 42.5 43.6 45.7 45.10-11 45.12 45.18 46.3 48.12 48.13 49.8 50.1 51.16 53.12 57.8-9 57.13 60.21 61 61.7 63.8 63.11-12 63.16 64.8 Jeremiah 1.1-19 2.20 3.2 3.4 3.9 3.14 3.19 3.22 4.22 7.23 7.25 8.6 11.4 13.27 23.5-8 24.7

163 163 163 57 57, 113 57 39 113 39 57 16, 57 39 56 57 39 39 57 39 165 39 39 56 39 39 175 39, 144 39, 144

12 165 165 39 165 39, 81 13, 39, 144 39 39 143 12 143 143 165 37 143

209

Index of References 25.4 31.9 31.31-34 31.32 31.33 38 38.1 38.9 38.20 38.31 38.33 38.34 39.38

12 144 35 100 170 143, 144 143 13, 39, 81, 143 13, 39, 143 36 142 144 143

Lamentations 5.2-3 39 5.19 56 Ezekiel 11.20 14.11 16 22.6 23 27.24 34.23-24 34.23 36.12 36.28 37.23 37.24-25 43.7 43.9 44.23 44.28 46.18 Daniel 2.11 3.25 3.28 3.92 5.14 12.1

143 143 165 165 165 175 37 175 39 143 143 37 165 165 165 39 15

67 47 47 67 159 170

Hosea 1.10 2 3.1 11.1-3 11.1 13.4 13.14

39 165 165 144 13, 39 57 99

Joel 2.28 3.2

12 19

Amos 1.11 3.7 7.14-15

166 12 12

Obadiah 1.10

166

Micah 5.2-5 6.4

37 131

Habakkuk 1.1

12

Haggai 1.1 1.3

36 12

Zechariah 1.1 7.7 8.8

12 12 143

Malachi 1.3 1.6 2.10 3.17

166 39 39, 144 39

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 2.5-6 32 3.17 37

4.4-10 4.11 5.21 5.22 6.9 10.40 11.10 12.32 13.32 21.33-46 21.37 21.38 22.43-44 22.44 23.29-31 23.34 23.37 26.53 27.46

32 83 99 99 144 110 32 16 16 13 110 69 58 119 13 13, 110 13, 110 83 85, 88

Mark 1.1-3 1.2 1.13 2.4 7.6 9.12 9.37 10.46 12.1-12 12.6 12.7 12.10 12.36 14.34 15.9 15.34

36 32 83 126 32 32 110 19 13 110 69 32 58 85 119 85, 88

Luke 2.1 2.3 2.5 3.4 3.22 4.43 5.18 5.24

170 170 170 32 37 110 163 163

Index of References

210 Luke (cont.) 9.48 10.5 10.16 10.20 11.2 11.17 11.49 13.34 19.3 20.9-19 20.14 20.17 20.36 20.42 23.46 24.27

110 114 110 170 144 114 110 110 126 13 69 32 74 58, 119 85 32

John 2.17 3.17 3.34 5.18 5.36 5.38 6.29 6.45 6.57 7.29 8.29 8.42 8.44 10.36 12.14-16 12.27 16.32 17.3 17.8 17.18 17.21 17.23 17.25 20.21 23.16 23.22

32 110 110 15 110 110 110 32 110 110 30 110 99 110 32 85 30 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 151 151

Acts 2.34 4.25-26 7.22 7.42 13.33 15.15-16 16.34 22.3 22.11

58, 119 37 151 32 32, 37 32 114 151 126

Romans 1.7 1.17 4.13 7.14 8.14 8.29 8.34 8.36 9�11 9.9 9.13 9.15 9.17 9.25 9.33 10.19 10.20 10.21 11.4 11.8 11.26 11.36 12.2 15 15.9 15.11 15.33 16.5 16.20

144 32 69 122 81 52 119 32 36 36 36 36 36 36 32, 36 36 36 36 36 32 32, 36 77 16 36 36, 85 85 159, 174 114 159, 174

1 Corinthians 1.3 1.16 1.19 1.20

144 114 32 16

2.9 3.1 3.2 7.33 8.6 11.32 11.34 15.25-27 15.25 15.27

32 122 160 16 77 151 114 68 119 76

2 Corinthians 1.2-3 3.3 4.13-14 6.9 6.18 8.15 13.11

144 122 85 151 37 32 159, 174

Galatians 1.1 3.13 3.29 4.1 4.4 4.7 4.26 4.27

144 32 69 69 110 14 169 32

Ephesians 1.2 1.20-22 1.20

144 68 119

Philippians 1.2 3.20 3.21 4.9

144 169 68 159, 174

Colossians 1.2 1.15 1.16 1.18 3.1

144 52 77 52 119

211

Index of References 1 Thessalonians 1.1 144 5.23 159, 174

1.2

2 Thessalonians 1.2 144 1 Timothy 1.2 1.20 3.4 3.12

144 151 114 114

2 Timothy 1.2 2.25 3.16

144 151 151

Titus 3.7

69

Philemon 3

144

Hebrews 1�2 1

1.1�4.13 1.1-5 1.1-4

1.1-3 1.1-2 1.1 1.2-4

20 8, 20, 21, 42, 52, 58, 65, 71, 74, 81, 94, 97, 98, 112, 114, 145, 147. 187, 189 2 7 8, 11, 21, 26, 29, 32, 41, 42, 51, 61, 179, 187 25 49 1, 2, 58, 147 10, 13, 14, 26

1.3

1.3-4 1.4-5 1.4

1.5�3.6 1.5-13 1.5-6 1.5

1.6-13

1.6

2�4, 10, 14, 16, 19, 20, 26, 35, 51, 57, 58, 64, 66, 68, 69, 72, 79, 83, 93, 98, 103, 106, 113, 141, 173, 180, 188, 192 4, 6, 17� 19, 22, 26, 27, 58, 65, 81, 82, 94, 111, 113, 119, 128, 131, 138, 163, 174, 176, 182, 189 75 14 4, 10, 12, 18, 26, 30, 43, 44, 53, 56, 58, 86 177 8, 35 3 2, 3, 8, 10, 12, 26, 28�32, 34, 35, 38, 41, 42, 44�6, 51, 55, 56, 61, 94, 143, 147, 150, 170, 179, 181, 182, 187 10, 20, 51, 59, 61, 179 2, 10, 14, 39, 47, 5256, 81, 94,

1.7 1.8-13 1.8-9 1.8

1.9-12 1.9 1.10-12

1.10 1.11-12 1.13

1.14�2.4 1.14

2

2.1-4

110, 147, 148, 170, 174, 188 2, 27, 74, 147 10 2, 17, 96, 147 3, 10, 37, 52, 60, 98, 147 133 59, 60, 94, 157 2, 27, 55, 60, 100, 147 27, 75, 147 55 2, 4, 10, 17, 19, 50, 54, 60, 68, 69, 72, 96, 119, 128, 142, 147, 170, 174, 180, 182, 192 83 4, 55, 64, 65, 73, 74, 131, 136, 140, 144, 173, 182, 185 15, 19, 20, 53, 65, 66, 73, 74, 76, 77, 90, 94, 97�9, 102, 103, 105, 107, 10914, 124, 126, 154, 180, 189 64

212 Hebrews (cont.) 2.1 64, 141, 153, 174 2.3-4 126 2.3 64, 87, 110 2.4 2 2.5-18 64 2.5-9 64, 190 2.5 6, 53, 73, 74 2.6-16 65 2.6-9 66, 76, 80, 93, 102 2.6-8 77, 91 2.6 6, 87, 93, 147 2.7-9 4, 43, 116 2.7 56, 65, 70, 81, 87, 163, 189 2.8-9 46, 79, 94, 174, 182, 189, 192 2.8 10, 17, 53, 66, 69, 70, 77, 79, 93, 98, 116, 128 2.9 56, 65, 70, 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 87, 88, 91, 94, 98, 110, 125, 163, 176, 182, 190 2.10-11 154 2.10-18 64, 111 2.10 4, 15, 27, 54, 66, 7678, 80, 84, 86�8, 91� 4, 102, 105, 113, 125, 129, 131, 133,

Index of References

2.11-13 2.11-12 2.11

2.12-13

2.12

2.13-14 2.13

2.14-16 2.14-15 2.14

2.15-16 2.15

2.16 2.17�5.10 2.17-18 2.17

134, 136, 140, 144, 148, 154, 160, 170, 174, 175, 180, 182, 189 84 4 10, 58, 66, 86, 91, 93, 114, 140, 154, 160, 171 17, 93, 98, 102, 126, 170 18, 34, 57, 66, 87, 91, 93, 94, 97, 110, 147, 173, 182 4, 81 34, 66, 9294, 96, 140, 144, 147, 189 98, 102 100, 180, 190 66, 87, 91, 98, 99, 105, 114, 126, 132, 140, 170, 175 173 57, 88, 93, 100, 105, 106, 131, 192 101, 106, 170 109 133 4, 6, 43, 66, 87,

2.18

3�4 3 3.1�5.10 3.1-6

3.1-5 3.1

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6

3.7�4.13 3.7-11 3.7-8 3.7 3.8�4.11 3.8

89�91, 105, 106, 110, 111, 114, 125, 131, 135, 140, 175, 182, 190 77, 87, 100, 125, 154, 182 169 106, 109, 156 109 12, 90, 102, 109, 115, 182 112, 169 4, 56, 90, 106, 109, 110, 114, 136, 140, 157, 170, 182 10, 89, 90, 106, 113 56, 81, 115 27, 113, 116 106, 113 3, 4, 10, 106, 109, 113, 115, 116, 133, 134, 137, 148, 156, 170, 174, 176, 181, 182 115 34, 35, 147 172, 174 44, 147 141 163

213

Index of References 3.9-11 3.9 3.12 3.13 3.14

3.15

3.16 3.17 3.19 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7

4.8 4.9-10 4.10 4.11 4.12-13 4.12 4.14�10.31 4.14�10.25 4.14�5.7 4.14

4.15-16 4.15

2, 147 150 4, 159, 169, 174 6, 44, 134, 153 56, 156, 157, 168, 181 34, 35, 44, 147, 172, 174 2 6, 163 54 124, 125, 156 50, 164, 174 2 2, 90, 147 34, 147 2, 126, 147 2 2, 34, 35, 44, 147, 172 82 82 164 90, 174 2 169 2 106 108 3, 6, 10, 79, 106, 107, 128, 130, 137, 156, 175, 182 134 125, 175, 182, 190

4.16 4.22 4.23 5 5.1 5.3 5.4 5.5-9 5.5-6 5.5

5.6

5.7-9 5.7-8 5.7

5.8-9 5.8

5.9-10 5.9

5.10 5.11-14 5.11-12 5.11 5.12 5.14 6 6.4-6 6.4 6.5

90, 169, 185 164 164 117, 118, 131, 180 6, 124, 131, 137 96 2, 115 4 3, 17, 137 2, 3, 10, 81, 115, 118, 127, 143, 147, 154, 181 19, 56, 106, 108, 118, 147, 175 78 182 2, 57, 90, 96, 147, 153, 175 154, 160, 171 3, 128, 132, 155, 157, 182 182 4, 128, 129, 131, 136, 168, 175, 182 2, 19, 118 128, 162 152 174 2, 152, 160 160, 161 134, 167 174 56 2, 17

6.6 6.10 6.11 6.12-18 6.12-13 6.12 6.13-18 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.17

6.19-20 6.19 6.20

7

7.1-10 7.2 7.3

7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7�4.7 7.7 7.8 7.9-10 7.10 7.11 7.12 7.13-14 7.14 7.15 7.16-17

3, 10, 141, 184 54, 159 152 189 50 134, 176 119 2, 120, 142 2, 147 2, 50, 119 2, 4, 50, 69, 133, 140, 142, 176 134 82, 144 19, 108, 118, 128, 175 106, 120, 123, 137, 180 118 120 3, 10, 19, 106, 120, 121, 187 120, 121 120 2, 50, 120, 121 173 120, 124, 126 121, 127 120 120 2, 19, 118, 122 122 122 118, 119, 122 19 17

214 Hebrews (cont.) 7.16 122 7.17 2, 19, 108, 118, 119, 147, 175 7.18-19 135 7.18 122 7.19 122, 128, 129, 132, 136, 144 7.21 2, 17, 19, 108, 118, 119, 147, 175 7.22 142 7.23-25 121 7.24 56 7.25 131, 133, 134, 169, 171, 182 7.26 79, 128, 190 7.27 90, 111, 138 7.28 2�4, 10, 106, 118, 123, 127� 9, 154, 171, 175, 182 8 137 8.1 4, 17, 19, 106, 119, 128, 142, 182 8.2 113 8.3 137 8.4 122 8.5 2, 17, 147 8.6 2, 50, 109, 142 8.7 135 8.8-12 2, 35, 147, 173, 182 8.8 106, 147 8.9 100, 147, 174

Index of References 8.10

8.11 8.12 8.13 8.20 9�10 9 9.1 9.5 9.6-7 9.9 9.10 9.11 9.12

9.13 9.14

9.15-17 9.15

9.16-17 9.16 9.19-20 9.20 9.23 9.24 9.25 9.26 9.28 10

106, 142, 143, 170, 185 144 6, 144, 175 2 35 143 131, 132, 134, 138 131 82 131 136 131, 135 113, 138 111, 131, 138, 171, 175 135, 136 90, 111, 132, 136, 138, 159, 169, 171, 175 132 2, 4, 50, 111, 132, 136, 140, 175, 176, 182 16 14 172 34, 147 56, 113, 170 128, 134 109, 138 6, 134, 182 132 94, 107, 110, 135, 137, 138, 167

10.1-23 10.1 10.4 10.5-8 10.5-7 10.5 10.7 10.9 10.10

10.11-12 10.11 10.12-13 10.12

10.13 10.14

10.15-17 10.16-17 10.16 10.17 10.18 10.19-20 10.19

10.20 10.21 10.22 10.23

10.26-31 10.26 10.29 10.30-31

135 169 135 17, 34, 85, 87, 147 182 110, 147 176 135, 148, 176 90, 111, 131, 138, 160, 176, 182 19 136 136 4, 6, 17, 19, 119, 128, 182 69, 96, 107 17, 131, 136, 138, 160, 171, 175, 182, 185 34, 35 132, 143, 147 170, 185 6, 175 17, 136 101 4, 133, 138, 159, 160, 171 160 137, 175 169 50, 90, 156, 178, 181 167, 174 141, 153 3, 10, 184 173

215

Index of References 10.30

10.31 10.32�13.25 10.32-34 10.32 10.35-39 10.35 10.36 10.37-38 10.38 11 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 11.10 11.11 11.12 11.13 11.16 11.17 11.18 11.19 11.24-28 11.33 11.35 11.39 11.40 12�13 12

12.1-13

2, 34, 35, 54, 94, 147-49 159, 169 2 7, 156 158, 182 174 156 50, 156 2, 35, 147, 173 150 18, 192 2 2, 18, 27 2, 56, 171 2 37, 169 2, 69, 106, 126 2 2, 50 82, 113 2, 50, 56, 189 56 2, 50, 54 82, 113, 170 2, 50, 125 2, 147 175 169 50 175 2, 50 4, 192 176 9, 52, 84, 101, 139, 140, 154, 156, 160, 161, 164, 169, 174, 176 192

12.1-2 12.1

12.2

12.3-11 12.3 12.4-11

12.4 12.5-11

12.5-9 12.5-8 12.5-6

12.5

12.7-11 12.7 12.8 12.9-10 12.9

12.10 12.11

12.12-17 12.12-13 12.13 12.14-17 12.14

141 152, 156, 158, 164, 174, 181, 191 4, 17, 19, 56, 89, 90, 106, 119, 128, 154, 174�6, 182 101 56 127, 144, 157, 167, 173 153, 157 4, 37, 97, 154, 182, 185 170 4 2, 3, 35, 151, 173, 182 3, 144, 146, 147, 150, 156, 163 168 148, 156, 157 56, 156 145 3, 148, 164, 171, 182, 186 164 4, 144, 159, 161, 164, 169 163, 168, 174 156 144, 164 156 159, 164

12.15-17 12.16 12.17

12.18-29 12.18 12.19 12.20 12.21 12.22-24 12.22

12.23 12.24

12.25 12.26 12.28 12.29 12.31 13 13.3 13.5-6 13.5 13.6

13.8 13.12

13.13 13.15 13.20-21

170 186 34, 126, 156, 166, 174 17 169 2 2, 169 34, 147 4, 133, 182 37, 82, 113, 153, 159, 163, 169, 182 53, 87, 129 56, 106, 109, 111, 133, 138, 171, 175 2, 174 2, 35, 50, 147, 172 4, 126, 176 54 147 9, 81 7 185 2, 35, 147, 173 34, 89, 141, 147, 173 57, 192 106, 111, 131, 138, 171, 182, 185 7 173 174, 182, 185, 189

Index of References

216 Hebrews (cont.) 13.20 81, 127, 142, 159 13.21 4, 81 13.22 4 21.12 100 James 2.2 2.5 1 Peter 1.16 5.8

160 69

32 99

1 John 4.9 4.10 4.14

110 110 110

Revelation 1�3 1.5 2.26 3.21 12.5 13.18 17 19.15 21.7 22.6

32 52 37 19 37 170 170 37 37 159

APOCRYPHA AND SEPTUAGINT 1 Esdras 5.1 82, 83 5.62 126 Tobit 5.1-16 13.4

83 49

Judith 14.2

82

Wisdom of Solomon 1.5 151 1.9-10 155 2.24 99 3.5 154 3.8 56 3.11 151 5.5 49 7.21 21 7.25-26 22 7.26 27 7.27 25 8.6 21 9.2 21, 113 9.4 22 9.10 22 11.9-10 145, 154 11.10 145 11.17 113 12.19 49 12.21 49 12.22 155 13.4 113 13.9 16 16.10 49 16.21 49 18.4 49 18.13 49 19.6 49 Ecclesiasticus 1.27 3.1-16 4.11 4.17 4.29 7.23 24.8 24.12 25.23 30.2 30.13 33.25 36.17 39.20 41.1-4

151 185 100 154 163 145 22, 26 22, 26 163 145 145 151 49 56 99

43.33 50.27

57 151

Baruch 4.8

49

Bel and the Dragon 5 57 1 Maccabees 6.15 9.61

81 82

2 Maccabees 1.24 1.25 6.12 6.15 6.27-28 6.31 7.28 11.6 15.4

57 56 155 155 155 155 113 126 17

OLD TESTAMENT PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Apocalypse of Abraham 7.10 57 Apocalypse of Moses 36.1 49 43.4 49 Apocrypon of Ezekiel 2.1 49 2 Baruch 13.9-10 15.1-8 44.8-15 51.3 51.11-12 56.12-16

146 73 73 47 73 47

217

Index of References 1 Enoch 6�7 6.2 10.7 10.8 13.8 14.3 15.4 15.6 31.3 39.1 62.11

47 47 47 47 47 47 75 75 99 47 49

2 Enoch 18.4 47.3-4 55.2 66.4

47 57 169 57

3 Enoch 5.10

72

4 Ezra 6.54 6.58-59

72 72

History of the Rechabites 5.4 48 Joseph and Aseneth 12.1-2 57 12.9 99 Jubilees 1.24-25 1.25 2.1-4 4.15 5.1 12.3-5 15.31-32 19.14 19.29 32.18-19 35.10-13 49.2

143 49 47 47 47 57 47 166 49 73 166 99

Letter of Aristeas 256 125

Testament of Levi 3.5 83

Life of Adam and Eve 3.10 73 10.16 99 10.41 99

Testament of Reuben 5.6 47

3 Maccabees 1.16 5.7 5.25 6.28 7.6

126 126 126 49 49

4 Maccabees 10.10-11 12.21

155 113

Testament of Abraham 6.6 49 20.12 49 20.13 49 Testament of Job 2.4 57 18.3 163 Testament of Moses 10.3 49 10.7 56

Odes of Solomon 2.43 47 19.1 160

QUMRAN 1QH 5.12

126

Psalms of Solomon 10.2 156 13.9 145 14.1 156 17.4 37 17.21 37 17.27 49 18.4 145

1QS 4.23a 9.11

73 122

1Qap Genar 2.1

47

4Q171 3.2a

73

4Q504 3.5-7

146

4QFlor 3.10-19 3.11

38 37

Sibylline Oracles 1.1 frg 122 1.5-6 frg 57 1.16 frg 56 3.20-35 57 3.702 49 5.202 49 8.375-76 57 Testament of Judah 21.1-5 122 24.2 49 24.3 49

BABYLONIAN TALMUD Sanhedrin 38b 72 �� 25b

49

Index of References

218 OTHER RABBINIC WORKS Mekilta 3.98 83 3.105 83

Aristotle Rhetorica 1.2.4 3.14

Pesiqta Rabbati 34a 72

Athanasius Epistula ad Serapionem de more Arii 2.2.7 16

APOSTOLIC FATHERS 1 Clement 34.1 163 Shepherd of Hermas Similitude 2.9 170 7.2 114 Vision 1.1.9 1.3.2 3.12.3

31 50

Orationes contra Arianos 1.46 56 2.9 111 2.23 44 2.57 44 De sententia Dionysii 11 111

114 170 159

CLASSICAL AND ANCIENT CHRISTIAN WRITINGS Aelius Aristides Orations 40.14 82 45.14 77 Ambrose De �de ad Gratianum 3.11.82-86 111 3.11.86 105 Aphthonius the Sophist Preliminary Exercises 11 33, 35 Apuleius Metamorphoses 11.5 23 Aquinas Commentary on the Letter of Saint Paul to the Hebrews 49 44

De incarnatione 10.3 77, 78 Augustine City of God 6.9

Demosthenes Epitaphius 2.7 16 Dio 45.1.2 45.3.1

44 44

Dio Chrysostom Oratoria 6.42 99 12.22 49 12.27 49 12.61 50 12.74 49 12.75 50 33.47 82 55 35 85 33, 35

50

Basil Letter 38

17

Cicero De Oratore 2.184

31

De inventione rhetorica 1.99-100 35 Letters to Atticus 9.2a 99 Pro Caelio 33�34

Demetrius De elocutione 265 35 266 33

35

Tusculanae disputationes 1 99

Diodorus Siculus 3.8.5 16 14.105.2 163 15.8.2 82 16.3.5 82 17.66.2 17 18.31.4 163 20.72.2 163 Diogenes Laertius Lives 1.3 77 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Antiquitates romanae 8.61 125 De Thucydide 39�41 34

219

Index of References Epictetus Diatribai 1.3 1.3.1-2 1.9 1.9.7-8 1.17.25 1.27.7-10 2.16.39 2.18.27 2.18.30 3.12.7 3.24.9 3.26.31 4.7.15-17 Epicurus Fragments 217

50 50 50 50 99 99 160 161 99 161 160 146 99

Herodotus Historiae 1.116 Homer Iliad 1.533-35 14.414-18

Against Apion 2.168 80 17 Life 196 359 50 50

Isaeus On the Estate of Philoctemon 28, 59 15 34 16 Isocrates Epistulae 1.44

14

14 Nicocles (Or. 3) 10 161

Epiphanius Panarion 64.29.6

99

Euripides Electra 559

17

Orestes 1522

99

Eusebius Praeparatio evangelica 13.12.7-8 80 15.6.6 113 Heraclitus Allegoriae (Quaestiones homericae) 34.8 82 Hermogenes Preliminary Exercises 9 33, 34

Panegyricus (Or. 4) 4.61 82 John Chrysostom Homiliae in epistulam ad Hebraeos 3.1 53 4.4 27 4.5 92 5.1 105 5.4 111 29.3 158 Josephus Antiquities 1.3.1.73 3.311 4.74 6.35 7.207 12.3.2 §128 13.12.1

47 145 114 163 82 125 17

151 151

Justin First Apology 12.9 110 63.10 110 Justinian Institutes 2.13.5

15

Lucian The Passing of Peregrinus 23 99 33 99 Lucretius De rerum natura 1.102-26 99 Marcus Aurelius Meditations 4.23 77 Gregory of Nazianzen Theological Orations 4.6 78, 135 Origen Commentarii in evangelium Joannis I.34.151 42 I.34.243 42 Dialogus cum Heraclide 2 62 Homiliae in Numeros 11.5 47

Index of References

220 De principiis I.2.2 I.2.10

42 41

Philo De aeternitate mundi 41 80 De agricultura 9 160 51 22, 48 De cherubim 127

Legum allegoriae 1.48 80 3.129 125 3.132-34 125 3.213 126

22

De confusione linguarum 146 22, 48 160 32 166 173 177 50 De congress eruditionis gratia 19 160 23 15 177 146, 149 Quod deterius potiori insidari soleat 92 126 Quod Deus sit immutabilis 158 83 In Flaccum 10

Legatio ad Gaium 2.90 151 3.2 166 3.84 81 3.167 151 3.244 151 17 99

163

De migratione Abraham 6 22 29 160 Quod omnis probus liber sit 22 99 160 160 De opi�cio mundi 156 146 De plantatione 8�9 9 18 62�64 64 69

22 22 22 22 22 22, 23

De posteritate Caini 89 47 91�92 47

De fuga et inventione 101 22 102 22 57 44

Quaestiones et solutiones in Genesin 1.92 47 4.233 126

De gigantibus 12 83 16 83

Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 19 126 73 155

De sacri�ces Abelis et Caini 1.5 75 63 122 81 166 De somniis 1.141 1.159 1.175 1.215 2.9 2.107 2.250 2.273

83 22, 23 23 22 160 155 169 159

De Specialibus legibus 1.81 22 1.170 16 1.208 77 2.124 15 3.96 125 De vita Mosis 1.48 161 1.155 23 2.243 15 Plato Leges 923c

14

Phaedrus 263b

17

Politicus 289b

17

Timaeus 96B

82

Plutarch Cicero 41.3

69

221

Index of References De fraterno amore 18 125 478A-492D 7, 192

Pseudo-Aristotle De mundo 397b 77

De cohibenda ira 10 125

Quintilian Institutio oratoria 6.2.13 31 9.2.29 33 9.2.30 34 9.2.31-32 33 9.2.31 33 9.2.33 34

De defectu oraculorum 29 80 De Iside et Osiride 53 23 78 80 De liberis educandis 2D-E 161 Moralia 106D 34B Polybius Historiae 2.40.2

99 99

82

Rhetorica ad Herennium 4.66 35 Seneca De bene�cis 3.32 3.38 3.17.1-12 3.6.2 4.11.5 5.5.2-3 24.1-2

184 184 184 184 16 145 145

De Clementia 1.14.1 168, 185 De providentia 1.5 146 Epistulae morales 1.5 50 24 99 30.17 99 88.20 160 Suetonius Tiberius 23

44

Tacitus Annals 1.8

44

Theon Exercises 8

33, 34

INDEX OF AUTHORS Allen, D. M. 54, 83 Andriessen, P. 152 Attridge, H. W. 1�3, 7, 11, 14, 18, 23, 24, 35, 38, 43, 51, 53, 56, 57, 59, 68, 70�2, 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 82, 85�90, 92, 100, 101, 106, 109, 110, 113, 118, 122, 125�9, 131, 132, 134, 135, 142, 149, 150, 153, 155, 156, 158, 159, 167, 170, 171, 173, 183 Bacon, B. W. 57 Baker, D. W. 48 Barker, M. 24 Barth, K. 11 Bauckham, R. 5, 11, 14, 20, 24, 28, 44, 51, 54, 57, 60, 187 Blomberg, C. L. 67, 68, 70, 71, 102 Bornkamm, G. 148 Boswell, J. 12 Braun, H. 2, 59, 68, 72, 82, 86, 89, 92, 126 Brooke, G. J. 38 Brown, W. P. 117 Browne, A. S. 183 Bruce, F. F. 1, 20, 23, 43, 51, 57, 59, 68, 70, 85, 167, 172 Buchanan, G. W. 1, 19, 126, 172 Byrne, B. 48 Caird, G. B. 25, 43, 44, 54 Calvin, J. 70 Campbell, I. D. 183 Champlin, E. 16 Charlesworth, J. H. 122 Chulp, J. T. 45 Cockerill, G. 121 Collins, A. Y. 58, 59 Collins, J. J. 58, 59 Cooley, M. G. L. 44 Craddock, F. B. 25 Craigie, P. C. 48, 68 Crook, J. A. 15 Croy, C. N. 151, 156, 157, 161, 183 Cullmann, O. 79

�� Dafni, E. C. 119 Dahood, M. 116 Davids, P. 183 Davidson, A. B. 148 De Vaux, R. 117 DeSilva, D. A. 4, 6, 12, 15, 17, 23, 51, 53, 59, 68�70, 72, 73, 77, 78, 82, 83, 92, 116, 151, 152, 165, 183�6 Delitzsch, F. 23, 30, 85, 149, 156, 159 Delling, G. 82 Dey, L. K. K. 21, 22, 78, 155 Docherty, S. 52 Dunn, J. D. G. 4, 5, 23�5, 28, 41, 49 Eisenbaum, P. M. 3�5, 32, 33, 35, 154, 155 Ellingworth, P. 1, 2, 5, 14, 20, 23, 24, 30, 59, 68, 70, 72, 77, 79, 82, 85�90, 93, 99, 106, 110, 111, 126, 135, 143, 149, 150, 156, 167, 168, 182, 183 Foerster, W. 14, 69 Gäbel, G. 99, 100 Gardner, J. F. 16 Gheorghita, R. 85, 88, 89 Giles, P. 71 Gleason, R. C. 20 Gorman, H. 174 Grässer, E. 23, 30, 51, 70, 71, 86, 135, 169 Gray, P. 7, 92, 93, 99, 126, 133, 192 Greer, R. A. 78 Grogan, G. W. 88 Guthrie, G. H. 64, 68, 169 Hagner, D. 5, 21, 24 Hamerton-Kelly, R. G. 25 Hannah, D. D. 20 Hay, D. M. 119, 183 Hayman, P. 24 Hays, R. B. 14, 85 Holtzmann, O. 79 Howell, D. 183, 185

Index of Authors Hübner, H. 36 Hughes, P. E. 1, 2, 33, 79, 105, 166 Hurst, L. D. 43, 65, 188 Hurtado, L. W. 54 Johnson, L. T. 1, 20, 23�5, 33, 35, 56, 68� 72, 74, 77, 82, 85, 87, 88, 90, 92, 100, 105, 106, 110�12, 117, 126, 131, 134, 142, 148, 152, 156�8, 167 Juel, D. 119 Käsemann, E. 6, 20, 43, 53, 164, 188 Kennedy, G. 14, 31 Kistemaker, S. J. 1, 44, 57, 148 Koester, C. 1, 6, 7, 32, 56, 65, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 82, 85, 86, 89, 92, 100, 106, 110, 117, 125, 126, 131�3, 135, 148, 156, 157, 166, 169, 183, 188, 189 Kögel, J. 4, 78, 79 Kraus, M. 31 Kurianal, J. 79 Lane, W. L. 1, 2, 4, 24, 40, 51, 56, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 85�7, 89, 92, 105, 106, 110, 117, 126, 127, 148, 149, 153, 156, 157, 166, 169, 175 Lee, A. H. I. 44 Lehne, S. 2, 142 Lewicki, T. 2, 3, 49, 85 Lidgett, J. S. 5, 13, 79, 83, 137, 182 Lierman, J. 112 Loader, W. R. G. 1, 6, 53, 72, 106 Long, T. 30, 79, 105 Luther, M. 77, 127, 158 Mackie, S. D. 7, 44, 51, 85 Marcus, R. 156 Mason, E. 64, 190, 191 Matthews, E. 19, 20 McCormack, B. L. 46, 102, 124 McCruden, K. B. 78, 79, 190 McCullough, J. C. 148, 149 Meier, J. P. 40 Meiser, M. 36 Metzger, B. M. 75, 76 Michel, O. 53, 59, 72, 77, 105, 153 Mitchell, A. C. 12, 30, 70, 71, 77, 84, 149 Moffatt, J. 2, 20, 43, 68, 70, 71, 79, 80, 90, 99, 156, 181

223

Mof�tt, D. 20, 53, 55, 71�4, 79, 86, 87, 91, 105, 107, 108, 121, 122, 124, 126, 129, 175, 188, 191 Monte�ore, H. 20, 38, 53, 68, 71, 126, 182 Motyer, S. 183 Moule, C. D. F. 57 Mowinckel, S. 117 Neyrey, J. H. 187 Nickelsburg, G. W. E. 35 ��. 1, 77, 80, 117, 132 Osborne, G. 130, 131 Parsons, M. 106 Peeler, A. 56 Peterson, D. 53, 78, 79, 130, 148, 153, 155, 190, 191 Petuchowski, J. J. 49 P�tzner, V. C. 5, 68 Pietersma, A. 67, 75 Pritchard, J. B. 116 Purdy, A. C. 181, 182 Quinn, R. D. 68 Rascher, A. 28, 51, 85, 181 Rooke, D. W. 107 Rothschild, C. K. 159, 175 Schenck, K. L. 14, 20, 23�7, 29, 45, 73, 78 Scholer, J. M. 78 Silva, M. 79 Smillie, G. 2 Solin, H. 20 Son, K. 169 Sowers, S. G. 23 Spicq, C. 2, 20, 21, 23, 30, 51, 59, 68, 72, 77, 86, 89, 92, 106, 135, 149, 166 Steyn, G. J. 30, 38, 48, 149 Still, T. D. 90 Stuckenbruck, L. T. 20 Swetnam, J. 70 Talbert, C. H. 151, 183, 185 Thiessen, M. 156 Thompson, J. W. 1, 33, 51, 52, 78, 127, 151, 152, 162, 183 Thompson, M. M. 37, 39 Treier, D. J. 17

224

Index of Authors

Überlacker, W. 40 Vander Beek, W. L. 2 Vanhoye, A. 43, 53, 64, 90, 105, 109 Wagner, J. R. 85, 89�92, 96, 173 Walters, J. C. 16 Walters, J. R. 78, 155, 161 Webster, J. 60, 187 Weiss, B. 18, 86, 148 Westcott, B. F. 1, 43, 48, 53, 59, 70, 79, 80, 88, 92

Westfall, C. L. 64, 112, 152 Whitlark, K. 185, 186 Widdicombe, P. 41, 42, 62, 141 Wider, D. 2 Wikgren, A. 79 Wiles, M. 25 Williamson, R. 23 Windisch, H. 20, 68, 72, 92, 126 Witherington, Ben, III 4, 23, 24, 28, 33, 87, 106, 127, 149, 152, 168 Wrede, W. 1