James SWETNAM

Filologa Neotestamentaria 14 (2001) 101-120

THE CONTEXT OF THE CRUX AT HEBREWS 5,7-8 An article in Biblica by the present author outlined a proposed solution for the crux at Heb 5,7-8 1. The present article will attempt to put this proposed solution in the general and particular context of the structure of the first six chapters of the epistle. This contextualization should help indicate the intention of the author of Hebrews and thus clarify and further commend the proposed solution. The structure on which this contextualization is based is, like the solution to the crux at Heb 5,7-8, a suggestion, to be judged on the intrinsic merits or lack thereof of the arguments adduced. I. The Structure of Hebrews 1,1 6,20 1. Hebrews 1,1 3,6 Another article on the structure of the Epistle to the Hebrews concluded that the section 1,1 3,6 is best divided according to a symmetrical pattern: after the exordium (1,1-4) comes a passage of exposition about the risen-exalted Christ as Son of God (1,5-14) followed by a brief paraenesis based on this exposition (2,1-4); then comes a passage of exposition on Jesus as son of Abraham, possibly under the title Son of Man (2,5-18), followed by a brief paraenesis based on this exposition (3,1-6) 2. This interpretation of the structure of Hebrews has set the stage for the present article about the crux at Heb 5,7-8, which will now analyze the structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 in order to situate 5,7-8 in its larger context. 2. Hebrews 3,7 6,20 a) Hebrews 3,7 4,11 Heb 3,7 6,20 begins with a quotation attributed to the Holy Spirit. This quotation is from Ps 95,7-11. At Heb 4,3-5 a passage from Ps 95,7-11 _____________________ 102 which involves the rest of the Promised Land is linked to the rest of God after creation 3, suggesting that the author is effecting a

spiritualization of the promise made to Abraham: the promise of receiving land becomes a promise of receivng Gods own rest.4 Previous remarks in 3,1-6 with regard to Moses, based as they seem to be on 2,10-12 and the imagery of leading sons to glory,5 suggest that Christ who is foreshadowed by Moses, is the leader, under God, in this journey to the spiritualized promised land 6. This leader is explicitly invoked at 3,14 under the name of Christ. He is not explicitly mentioned as Jesus, but another foreshadowing of his leadership is mentionedJoshua is presented under the name of Jesus ( 0Ihsou=j) (4,8) 7. Joshua did not give the people definitive entrance into the land; if he had, there would not be talk of another day in which entrance is still possible 8. This presentation of the journey of the people of God to enter into his restwith the apparently gratuitous 9 introduction of Joshua under the name of Jesusserves as a preparation for the famous passage at Heb 4,12-13 which speaks of Gods word as live and active and sharper than any two-edged sword: _____________________ 103 b) Hebrews 4,12-13 Zw=n ga_r o9 lo/goj tou= qeou= kai_ e0nergh_j kai_ tomw/teroj u9pe_r pa=san ma/xairan di/stomon kai_ pneu/matoj, a9rmw=n te kai_ muelw=n, kai_ kritiko_j e0nqumh/sewn kai_ e0nnoiw=n kardi/aj: kai_ ou0k e1stin kti/sij a0fanh_j e0nw/pion au0tou=, pa/nta de_ gumna_ kai_ tetraxhlisme/na toi=j o0fqalmoi=j au0tou= pro_j o4n h9mi=n o9 lo/goj 10. Indeed, the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And before him no creature is hidden, but all are naked and laid bare to the eyes of the one to whom we must render an account 11. The almost universal contemporary interpretation of the word (lo/goj) of v. 12 has it as referring to scripture 12. This interpretation gives a superficially plausible exegesis of the passage, which speaks of the lasting relevance of Gods word. But there are a number of difficulties with this exegesis 13: 1) The terminology is inconsistent. The fact that the occurrence of o9 lo/goj in v. 13 is different from the occurrence of o9 lo/goj in v. 12 is odd, since the occurrences seem to be intended as a frame for the

passage. This change from lo/goj as word (of scripture) to lo/goj as account is bizarre 14. _____________________ 104 2) The imagery is inconsistent. In v. 12 the image is about the penetrating power of o9 lo/goj, whereas in v. 13 the image seems to refer to a sacrifice or, possibly, to a wrestling hold 15. 3) The description is inconsistent. It is not clear how a twoedged sword is appropriate for a sacrifice, much less for a wrestling hold 16. 4) The language is inconsistent. The use of the illative particle ou]n in 4,14 is anomalous. In 4,12 the word ga/r refers to what immediately precedes: on the reading of lo/goj as Scripture, the imagery involving the penetrating power of the sword gives the reason why the hortative spouda/swmen is used in the preceding verse, and yields a tolerable sense. But on the same reading, the particle ou]n in v. 14 is more difficult to account for. It would normally refer to what immediately precedes. But even if the assumption is made that it alludes to the distant discourse about the high priest in 2,13b-18the only previous explicit mention of a0rxiereu/j in the epistlethe transition from v. 13 is abrupt, and, in the end, unintelligible, for nothing in v. 13 refers to Christ as high priest 17. Further, if o9 lo/goj refers to scripture, the use of the participle zw=n (living) modifying o9 lo/goj is inconsistent with the language involving zw=n elsewhere in Hebrews. In the epistle this word zw=n is used of God himself (3,12; 9,14; 10,31; 12,22), or of Christ (7,25; 10,20, or of human life (2,15; 7,8; 9,17; 10,38; 12,9), but never of non-personal life. Heb 4,12 is the only text in Hebrews where zw=n would refer to non-personal life if o9 lo/goj refers to scripture. A coherent solution to these problems would be to take the word lo/goj as referring to Jesus Himself, as in the Johannine prologue 18. The above inconsistencies are thus resolved at one stroke: 1) The terminology becomes consistent. If the lo/goj of the expression o9 lo/goj at 4,12-13 is understood as referring to Jesus Himself 19, it can have the same meaning in both verses. In v. 12 the allusion to Jesus as o9 lo/goj would refer to his ability as divine to furnish a spiritual circumcision of the heart needed to effect a definitive entry into Gods rest. The idea of circumcision comes from 4,8 and the allusion to Joshua, who circumcised the Israelites on their entrance into the land

_____________________ 105 (Josh 5,2-9) 20. In v. 13 the allusion to Jesus as o9 lo/goj refers to his being with God the judge to act as intercessor, as is clear from what follows in 4,14-16. 2) The imagery becomes consistent. The imagery of v. 12 involves the imagery of spiritual circumcision; the imagery of v. 13 involves the imagery of a sacrificial victim. V. 12 looks back to what precedes: the first Jesus (Joshua) did not usher the people into Gods rest through his circumcision, but the second Jesus will. V. 13 looks forward to what follows: God is judge of all, before whom nothing is hidden, but Jesus is with him as the Christians intercessor, i.e., as high priest.21 3) The description becomes consistent. The two-edged sword (ma/xaira di/stomoj), when viewed in the context of the diverse imagery of vv. 12-13, is seen to be a two-edged knife. In v. 12 it is the knife of circumcision used by Joshua (Josh 5,2) 22. In v. 13 it is the knife of sacrifice used by Abraham for the intended sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22,6cf. Heb 11,17) 23. V. 12 looks back to v. 8, where Joshua is portrayed as being unable to give rest to the people 24. V. 13 looks forward to vv. 14-16 and the discussion of the high priest as intercessor which is conveyed by the words pro_j o4n h9mi=n o9 lo/goj. The description in the first third of v. 13 (kai_ ou0k e1stin a0fanh_j e0nw/pion au0tou=) is about the omniscence of God and suggests that he is judge 25 . The _____________________ 106 middle third (pa/nta de_ gumna_ kai_ tetraxhlisme/na toi=j o0fqalmoi=j au0tou=) is about a sacrifice, with the sacrificial victim stretched out with the neck naked and laid bare 26 and exposed to the knife. It alludes to Christ as victim and implicitly serves as an introduction to the final third of the verse which speaks of Christ as lo/goj. He is acting as priestly intercessor as the result of his sacrifice of self. This two-fold use of ma/xaira is alluded to by the word di/stomoj (two-edged): the ma/xaira has two functions: it serves for circumcision in v. 12 and for sacrifice in v. 13. And, like the knife, the verses speaking of these two functions look in opposite directions. 4) The language becomes consistent. Taking the expression o9 lo/goj as referring to Jesus as high priestly intercessor explains why the word ou]n is used at v. 14; v. 13, with its portrayal of the lo/goj as intercessor pro_j to_n qeo/n, has given the occasion to refer to Jesus as

high priest in the verse immediately following. The underlying supposition of Jesus as intercessor contained in the phrase pro_j to_n qeo/n is confirmed by the mention of Jesus intercessory role in 4,16 27. Further, the word zw=n assumes a usage consonant with Heb 7,25 and 10,20 28. _____________________ 107 In the interpretation being suggested here, Heb 4,12-13, with its use of lo/goj as a designation of Jesus, acts as a pivot in the section 3,7 6,20. Heb 4,12 sums up the first part, 3,7 4,11, which discusses the spiritualized promise of land, i.e., Gods rest, and prepares the way for the following part, about Christs priesthood. By portraying Jesus as divine (o9 lo/goj) the author implicitly indicates why entrance into the spiritualized land of Gods rest is possible: Jesus, who is equal to God, is able to effect the spiritual circumcision of the heart needed for such an entrance 29. Further, by portraying Jesus as divine (o9 lo/goj), the author implicitly indicates why entrance into this spiritualized land of Gods rest will be infallibly achieved by the group as a whole: again, the divinely-effected spiritual circumcision is certain in its effects unless thwarted by individual acts of disobedience 30. Thus the lo/goj makes possible the attainment of the promise of land for those who remain partakers in Christ, as the transition verse 3,6 introducing 3,7 6,20 states 31. Heb 4,13, on the other hand, introduces what is to follow by its imagery of sacrifice and intercession which are associated with priesthood (Heb 4,14 5,10).

c) Hebrews 4,8-16 The division of 4,12-13 into two parts, one looking to what precedes and one looking to what follows, makes possible a suggestion about the structure of the immediate context of these verses: Heb 4,811 is the immediate paraenetic antecedent of Heb 4,12, and Heb 4,1416 is the immediate paraenetic consequence of Heb 4,13 32. Heb 4,8-11 is the immediate paraenetic antecedent for Heb 4,12, for these verses focus on the contrast between Joshua and the lo/goj as _____________________ 108

regards the possibility of entering into Gods sabbath rest 33. The preparation for this immediate paraenetic antecedent for Heb 4,12 begins, of course, at Heb 3,7, with its citation of Ps 95,7-8. Following this citation there is a short paraenesis culminating in Heb 3,14 which echoes Heb 3,6 even to the point of having the same verbal form of kate/xw: kata/sxwmen 34. Thus Heb 3,14 acts as a conclusion to the paraenesis following the citation of Ps 95,7-11 at Heb 3,7-11 35. With v. 15 36 and the citation of Ps 95,7-8 begins a new subsection which terminates with a citation of the same verses (in somewhat abbreviated form) at Heb 4,7. The imagery of Heb 4,12 in the interpretation being followed here suggests that Joshua is being considered from the standpoint of circumcision. The circumcision of the body which he effected was unequal to the task of ushering Gods people into Gods own rest; only the circumcision of the heart effected by the lo/goj can make such an entrance possible. The section Heb 4,8-11 thus assumes an intrinsic paraenetic coherency centering on the efficacy of the lo/goj of 4,12 as regards circumcision and entrance into Gods own rest. Given the parallel nature of Heb 4,13 with regard to 4,12, the inference suggests itself that Heb 4,14-16, symmetrical with Heb 4,8-11 as regards both length and position, assumes the position of the immediate paraenetic consequence of Heb 4,13 which centers on the intercessory efficacy of the lo/goj. Thus Heb 4,14-16 describes the function of Christ as intercessor with God, as introduced by the phrase pro/j o4n h9mi=n o9 lo/goj. The imagery is not of entrance but of approaching prose/rxesqai, a word which has cultic overtones in Hebrews 37. V. 16 indicates the aspects under which approaching the a0rxiereu/j is being considered: e1leoj and xa/rij 38. _____________________ 109 d) Hebrews 5,1-10 Hard on the discussion of the lo/goj as intercessor at Heb 4,14-16 there follows a section dedicated to a comparison and contrast between the Aaronic high priesthood of the old dispensation and the high priesthood of Christ (5,1-10) 39. Helping to delimit the section are the framing words a0rxiereu/j and qeo/j in vv. 1 and 10 40. It is in this section that the crux 5,7-8 is found. The section will be discussed at length in the second major part of this article. V. 10 has the air of a conclusion of one dis- cussion and the beginning of another: prosagoreuqei_j u9po_ tou= qeou= a0rxiereu_j kata_ th_n ta/cin Melxise/dek.

e) Hebrews 5,11 6,20 Heb 5,11 seems to begin a long section of paraenesis: the tone changes from the impersonal exposition of 5,1-10 to the direct address of 5,11. This direct speech continues on until 6,20, where the mention of Melchizedek signals the discourse of 7,1-28 on this primordial figure. Within 5,11 6,20 there is a division into negative warnings (5,11 6,8) and a positive counterpart (6,9-20) 41. In the negative part occurs the famous crux about the impossibility of repentance (6,4-6) 42. Because of their extended length and paraenetic nature, these two passages suggest that they are the conclusion of the major section beginning at Heb 3,6. The end of this major section is indicated by the change in subject matter and tone occurring at Heb 7,1 43. The suggestion that Heb 5,11 6,20 refers back to the entire section beginning at 3,6 would seem to be confirmed by the way the author plays upon the theme of promise. At 4,1 he had already referred to the entrance into the rest as being the result of a promise 44. At Heb 6,12 this theme is explicitly picked up and linked with the matching theme of inheritance 45. The addressees are urged to take as their models those who through faith and perseverance have inherited the promises (. . . dia_ pi/stewj kai_ makroqumi/aj klhronomou/ntwn ta_j e0paggeli/aj). The _____________________ 110 author is thinking here of the patriarchs of Israel who received the announcement of the promises, but not what was promised 46. The reception of what was promised is reserved to the Christians who imitate the faithful perseverance of the patriarchs 47. The prime example of receiving promises through persevering faith is Abraham (Heb 6,13-15). The texts cited from the Old Testament are from the aftermath of Abrahams obedient offering of Isaac in Gen 22. On the occasion of his manifestation of persevering faith Abraham receives the promise (e0pe/tuxen th=j e0paggeli/aj). Coming as it does immediately following the citation of Gods oath to bless and multiply Abraham, this promise can only be understood as referring to the promise of progeny. That the author of Hebrews had only one promise in mind is confirmed by his repetition of the singular in 6,17 (. . . toi=j klhrono/moij th=j e0paggeli/aj). In the context of the structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 being suggested here, the above texts involving promise are significant. The author of Hebrews is thinking of the two promises made to Abraham: the promise of entering into Gods rest (4,1) and the promise of progeny

(6,15).48 Further, if the analysis of the structure being advanced in this paper is correct, he is thinking of them together in relation to the paraenesis which he is giving with regard to the entire section 3,7 6,20 (6,12). That the section 3,7 4,12 is thus about the promise of entering into Gods rest would seem to be evident. That the section 4,13 5,10 is about the promise of progeny is not evident at all. The problem here is to link the use of e0paggeli/a/ e0paggeli/ai in 6,12.13.15.17 49, where the discussion is obviously about the promise of progeny, with what precedes. This is what the present article is attempting to do with a fresh view of the structure of 4,13 6,20 50. If the structure is valid, the corollary is that the priesthood of _____________________ 111 Christ is intrinsically connected with the promise of progeny made to Abraham: it is through Christs priesthood that this progeny is definitively realized.51 Finally, this promise of progeny which is connected with the priesthood of Christ is seen through the prism of the Aqedah: the promise of progeny is viewed as being particularly certain because it is reinforced by Gods oath given after Abraham passed Gods test of faithful perseverance (Heb 6,13-15). Thus the Aqedah, by reason of the reinforcing oath of God with regard to his previous promises, has a special relation to those promises 52. f) The Structure of Hebrews 3,7 6,20: A Summary A summary of the above considerations yields the following outline: A 3,7-14 Citation of Ps 95,7-11 and paraenesis based u9po/stasij B 3,15 4,7 The rest of Ps 95,7-11 is the rest of Gen 2,2 C 4,8-11 Anticipatory paraenesis looking forward to 4,12 D 4,12-13 o9 lo/goj, stronger than a two-edged knife C 4,14-16 Consequent paraenesis following on 4,13 B 5,1-10 A 5,11 6,20 Summarizing paraenesis negative and positive The entire section 3,12 6,20 is about the two promises made to Abraham of land and progeny. The section 3,7 4,13 is primarily about the promise of land, and indicates that the goal of this promise is no

_____________________ 112 longer an earthly rest in the land of Canaan but Gods own rest. The one who makes entrance into this rest possible is Christ as lo/goj. The section 4,13 6,20 is primarily about the promise of progeny (cf. 6,13-18), and indicates that this progeny is not composed of those physically descendant from Abraham but of those who in some way come under the influence of the priesthood of Christ as lo/goj. In order to come to a better understanding of what this implies it is necessary to study Heb 5,1-10 in its context.

II. The Setting of Hebrews 5,7-8 in the Context of Hebrews 1,1 6,20 1. The Internal Structure of Hebrews 5,1-10 In Heb 3,15 4,7 the key structural factor is the gezerah shawah linking the rest of Ps 95,7-11 with the rest of Gen 2,2. The key structural factor in the parallel section 5,1-10 would seem to be a parallel gezerah shawah linking the you (su/) of Ps 2,7 with the you (su/) of Ps 110,4. In linking Ps 95,11 and Gen 2,2 the author shows that the rest promised to Abraham is really the rest of Gods own life; in linking Ps 2,7 and Ps 110,4, the author shows that the you addressed in the psalm is really the you of the order of Melchizedek. The crucial factor in understanding the meaning of this arrangement is the precise relevance of Ps 2,7, which, of course, is much discussed 53. Ps 2,7 is cited three times in the New Testament: at Acts 13,33; at Heb 1,5; and here at Heb 5,5. In Acts the context is unmistakable: the citation of Ps 2,7 is used with reference to the risen Christ 54. Heb 1,5 also seems to use Ps 2,7 with reference to the resurrection, to show that the resurrection of Christ (Ps 2,7) implies his enthronement/exaltation (2 Sam 7,14) 55. Thus there would seem to be nothing untoward in interpreting the citation of Ps 1,7 at Heb 5,5 as referring to the resurrection, even though no unanimity can be hoped for with regard to this view (or, indeed, of any other). The point of the gezerah shawah, then, is to show that at his resurrection Christ became a priest of the order of Melchizedek. The fact that the resurrection of Christ is singled out as the occasion of His entering into the priesthood of the order of Melehizedek is thus significant for the author of Hebrews. According to the interpretation of the epistle being advanced here his reasoning is as follows:

_____________________ 113 Resurrectionas opposed to exaltation/enthronementis possible for Christ only because He died, and He could die only because He had assumed blood and flesh (Heb 2,14-15). This blood and flesh is the stuff of Christs sacrifice for the expiation of sins (Heb 2,17) offered on the occasion of His being tested (peira/zw) as Abraham was tested at the Aqedah (Heb 2,18; 11,17) 56. In Heb 5,110 Christs sacrifice preliminary to His resurrection (i.e., His sacrificial death on the cross) is alluded to through the use of the technical term to offer (prosfe/rw)57 at 5,1.3 of the Old Testament Aaronic high priest, and at 5,7 of Christ. Thus the account of the Old Testament Aaronic high priest in 5,1-4, with its use of prosfe/rw at 5,1.3, reinforces the sacrificial nature of Christs loud cry and tears (kraugh/ i0sxura/, da/krua) portrayed as sacrificial in nature through the use of the technical term having offered (prosene/gkaj) (5,7) 58. These are the loud cry and tears uttered by Christ on the cross in His citing Ps 22 59. And this sacrifice on the cross is the bloody sacrifice toward which the allusion to the td in Ps 22 is ordered 60. The crux about Christ at Heb 5,7-8 ends with His offer of sacrifice implicit in the citation of Ps 22 being accepted even though He was son and could reasonably expect that such a plea not be honored by His Father (. . . kai_ ei0sakousqei_j a0po_ th_j eulabei/aj kai/per w\n ui9o/j) 61. Christ is then brought to perfection (teleiwqei/j), i.e., brought to a corporal completion appropriate for His divine nature at the time of his resurrection (5,9) 62. Finally, the passage containing the crux ends at 5,10 with this risen state of Christ being addressed by God as high priest according to the order of Melchizedek (prosagoreuqei_j u9po_ tou= qeou= a0rxiereu_j kata_ th_n ta/cin Melxise/dek) (5,10). The term addressed (prosagoreu/w) is especially meaningful in the context, for it can refer to a peaceful greeting used as an expression of honor 63. This fits in neatly with the use of the gezerah shawah construction at 5,5-6, where the linking word you (su) is used of God to express his designation of Christ high priest according to the order of Melchizedek at the moment of His resurrection. _____________________ 114

2. Hebrews 5,1-10 in Its Context in Hebrews a) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Sacrifice of Isaac

In the suggested structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 given above, the verses 4,12-13 are central because of their focus on the lo/goj as the pervasive agent for the attainment of the promises made to Abraham of spiritualized land and spiritualized progeny. Heb 4,13 contains an allusion to the sacrifice of Isaac under the image of an outstretched neck waiting for the sacrificial knife (tetraxhlisme/na). In the interpretation of Heb 5,7-8 which serves as the occasion of the present article, the offering of Jesus with a loud cry and tears of prayers and petitions to the one able to save Him from death (deh/seij te kai_ i9kethri/aj pro_j to_n duna/menon sw|/zein au0ton e0k qana/tou meta_ kraugh=j i0sxura=j kai_ dakru/wn prosene/gkaj) was said to take place on the cross when He cited the opening verse of Ps 22 as an indication of His willingness to undergo the fate of the protagonist of the psalm and not be saved by a divine intervention through Elijah.64 The fact that He was heard although Son (ei0sakousqei_j . . . kai/per w\n ui9o/j) was attributed in part to an implied contrast with the Aqedah in Heb 11,1719 65. A problem with this interpretation is that in Hebrews there is no apparent indication that Isaac willingly offered himself as a sacrifice: in the text of the Aqedah at Gen 22,1-18 he seems to be purely passive and this passivity seems to be the background of the use of Gen 22 at Heb 11,17-19. Thus the imagery of Heb 4,13, if understood against this background, would argue for a purely passive attitude on the part of Isaac. But this problem can be solved if one takes the free-will offering of Jesus in Heb 5,7-8 as an indication that the author of Hebrews was referring to the tradition current in Judaism at the time that Isaac offered himself willingly at the Aqedah. Though Gen 22,1-18 as it stands in the biblical text gives no indication that Isaac took an active part in the sacrifice 66, by the first century A.D. the tradition accompanying this scriptural account had developed in Jewish tradition to the point where Isaac freely offers himself as a sacrificial victim. This is clear in 4 Maccabees 13,12 and at 16,20, where Isaacs comportment is invoked as an example to be imitated by Jews when tempted to renounce their faith 67. The same tradition is found in Pseudo_____________________ 115 Philos Biblical Antiquities 32,3 and 40,2-3 68. Finally, Flavius Josephus Jewish Antiquities 1,232, from the end of the first century A.D., also represents the tradition of Isaacs free participation in Abrahams sacrifice 69. Thus it is not impossible that the interpretation of Heb 5,78 proposed as a solution to the crux in these verses, involving as it

does Jesus free offering of himself, can be situated in the same tradition as Isaacs free offering of himself in the Aqedah. Consequently, at Heb 4,13, given the relevance of Ps 22 at Heb 5,7-8, there would seem to be no reason for not thinking that the author of Hebrews had Christs active offering of Himself in mind precisely as fulfillment of the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham presented in Heb 11,17-19 70. b) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Expiatory Priesthood of Christ In the interpretation of Heb 4,13 given above the clause pro_j o4 h9mi=n o9 lo/goj is understood to mean with whom is the Word on our behalf: the Word is taken to be Christ who is in Gods presence to intercede for Christians. This posture and function of Christ is taken up in the verses 4,14-16 which are a follow-up to 4,13 according to the interpretation being advanced here: in v. 16 the Christians are urged to approach with boldness the throne of grace in order to receive mercy and find grace for time of need (proserxw/meqa ou]n meta_ parrhsi/aj tw=| qro/nw| th=j xa/ritoj, i3na la/bwmen e1leoj kai_ xa/rin eu3rwmen ei0j eu1kairon boh/qeian). The implication is that the Christians are to approach Christ as high priest (cf. the preceding verse, we have a high prieste1xomen a0rxiere/a) in his present state, which can only be, in the context of the epistle, in His risen state. Thus 4,13 implicitly refers to two different states of Christs priesthood: 1) the earthly state in which He was subject to death (alluded to by the imagery of the outstretched neck); 2) the risen state in which He is no longer subject to death. 4,15 alludes to the _____________________ 116 first state of Christ by the use of the word tested (peira/zw), which, in the context of the epistle, means that Christ has been exposed to the need for faith in the face of death as Abraham and Isaac were (cf. Heb 2,18 and 11,17) 71. Thus, in order to explain these data, one must think of Jesus priesthood as involving two stages: 1) the earthly stage in which His assuming human blood and flesh permitted His sacrificial death (cf. Heb 2,14); 2) the heavenly stage in which His resurrected body permits His exercise of the priestly ministry which has resulted from His earthly sacrifice. This two-fold stage in the priesthood of Jesus is present in Heb 5,7-8. The first stage is alluded to in the phrase in the days of His

flesh (e0n tai=j h9me/raij th=j sarko_j au0tou=). The second stage is alluded to with the words addressed by God as high priest (prosagoreuqei_j u9po_ tou= qeou= a0rxiereu/j). In the context this refers to Christ becoming a priest according to the order of Melchizedek on the occasion of his resurrection (cf. Heb 5,5-6). The technical term for this in Hebrews is to perfect or to complete (teleio/w), used at Heb 5,9. In Hebrews, as understood by the present writer, this term refers to the second, definitive state of Jesus priesthood willed by God. This definitive state implies physical perfection so that Jesus is no longer subject to death in any way 72. The activity of the risen Jesus in His definitive priestly stage includes that of expiating the sins of the people (cf. Heb 2,17 as well as Heb 4,16). The role of forgiver of sins is essential for the understanding of Jesus Christ in Hebrews, for it is at the heart of His role as high priest, a role which is central in the epistle. Christs priestly role in the definitive expiation of sins is based on His once-forall sacrifice in the first stage of His priesthood. But the continuing exercise of this expiation is in the second stage. As a result of this unique priesthood the nature of the covenant between God and His people changes, and hence the people, in a sense, change as well.73 It is in this sense that the definitive fulfillment of Gods promise of progeny to Abraham is achieved: the progeny are Gods people definitively purified from their sins by the earthly and risen Jesus. _____________________ 117 In terms of the td the first stage of Christs priesthood is the one in which the once-for-all-sacrifice of Himself takes place; the second stage of Christs priesthood is the one in which He has arrived at his definitive priestly perfection (cf. the word teleiwqei/j at 5,9) and in which He becomes a cause of eternal salvation (ai1tioj swthri/aj ai0wni/ou). This is the stage in which the Christians are urged to draw near (prose/rxomai), a word with cultic overtones, is often used in Hebrews (cf. Heb 4,16; 7,25; 10,1.22; 11,6; 12,18.22) 74. c) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Priesthood of Christ according to the Order of Melchizedek The importance of Christ as lo/goj (according to the interpretation being advanced in this article) can hardly be exaggerated for the section Heb 3,7 6,20, for it dominates by reason of its place and by reason of its function. Given this interpretation, it comes as no surprise to find at Heb 5,1-10 a sub-section which is built around the

belief that Christ at His resurrection became a priest of the order of Melchizedek. Now Melchizedek, in his appearance in Hebrews, is contrasted with the Levitical priesthood of the old dispensation: Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but likened to the Son of God he remains a priest in perpetuity (. . . a0pa/twr a0mh/twr a0genealo/ghtoj, mh/te a0rxh_n h9merw=n mh/te zwh=j te/loj e1xwn, a0fwmoiwme/noj de_ tw=| ui9w=| tou= qeou=, me/nei i9ereu_j ei0j to_ dihneke/j) (Heb 7,3). And the contrast with the Levitical priesthood is made with explicit reference to perfection or completion (teleiw/sij) (7,11). Thus, when the reader comes upon these words in Chapter 7 of Hebrews, there should be no surprise. For Melchizedek is a defining figure for the purposes of the author of Hebrews, given his conviction of the centrality of the priesthood of Christ for the fulfillment of the promise of progeny made to Abraham after the Aqedah. If Melchizedeks priesthood is like Christs priesthood, it is clear that the people who are shaped by Christs priesthood will be like Melchizedeks atemporal existence: without father, without mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life because made like the Son of God 75. _____________________ 118 Here the unique saving effect of the lo/goj is apparent. Just as the structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 indicates that the lo/goj is uniquely qualified to effect a definitive entrance of Gods people into Gods rest, so the structure indicates that the lo/goj is uniquely qualified to create the people who are to enter 76. The author of Hebrews mentions at Heb 5,9 that the Christ who has been brought to perfection has become cause of salvation without end (ai1tioj swthri/aj ai0wni/ou) for all who obey Him. Because of this use of swthri/a at Heb 5,9 in the context of the Christian td, it is possible to ascertain at what point this message of salvation had its beginning of being spoken (Heb 2,3): at the institution of the Christian td by Jesus. And because of the context of the Christian td it is also possible to ascertain what the author of Hebrews means by obeying (u9pakou/w) Jesus, whose command to His followers was Do this in memory of me. And because the comparison with Melchizedek occurs in the context of the Christian td it is also possible to ascertain the relevance of the Christian td for the definitive fulfillment of the promise of a progeny which, like Melchizedek, is without father, without mother, without genealogy, without beginning, without end: Eucharist generates Gods People 77.

III. Summary and Conclusions The present article was occasioned by a previous article which offered a tentative solution to the classic crux at Heb 5,7-8. That article, by rigid adherence to the syntax and vocabulary of the verses, supplied an initial interpretation which viewed Christ as begging to die. Then the coincidence of vocabulary between the verses of the crux and Ps 22 led to a suggestion about a Sitz im Leben for this interpretation in the gospel portrayal of Jesus: that Jesus begged to die by reciting the opening verses of Ps 22 on the cross and thereby freely accepting death when onlookers thought he would share their expectations that he could possibly still be saved. An analysis of Ps 22 in the light of the td suggested how Jesus could learn obedience from His sufferings freely accepted, just as did the one suffering in the psalm. The present article seeks to understand the background of the suggested solution to the crux at Heb 5,7-8 by attempting to place it in its context in Hebrews. By interpreting the verses immediately previous to _____________________ 119 the crux at 5,5-6 as a gezerah shawa the conclusion is drawn that through the resurrection (alluded to in 5,5) Jesus entered into the priesthood according to Melchizedek (mentioned in 5,6). By interpreting the verses immediately following the crux at 5,9-10 as alluding again to the Christian td (5,9) and to Jesus being addressed by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek (5,10), the importance of the td and of Melchizedek is again brought to the fore. The gezerah shawah of 5,5-6 is seen in the article as balancing a gezerah shawah at Heb 4,3-5 which the author of Hebrews presents as identifying the Rest promised to Israel in the promised Land with the Rest of God after creation. These two uses of gezerah shawah are interpreted in the article as key texts in understanding the Christianization of the two promises made to Abraham of Land (4,3-5) and Offspring (5,5-6). The first gezerah shawah occurs in a sub-section framed by citations of Ps 95 at Heb 3,15 and Heb 4,7 which emphasizes the role of the heart in entering the Rest of everlasting life. Immediately following this sub-section comes another sub-section on the inability of Jesus (Joshua) to introduce the people into this Rest (4,8-11). This is prelude to 4,12 in which the word lo/goj is interpreted as referring to

Christ Himself, not to the word of Scripture. The imagery is understood as describing the spiritual circumcision of the heart needed for entry into Gods Rest. 4,13 is also seen as speaking of Christ as lo/goj, but this time in His role of intercessor with God. This explains why 4,14 has an inferential particle introducing the theme of Jesus as high priest. The sub-section 4,14-16 is an exhortation based as a consequence of 4,13 just as the sub-section 4,8-11is an exhortation based in anticipation on 4,12. There follows another sub-section, parallel to 3,15-4,7, composed of the verses 5,1-10. This is the sub-section in which the crux 5,7-8 occurs as a part of the discussion of Christs priesthood. The fact that the word Melchizedek occurs in the verse immediately before Heb 5,7-8 and is found immediately after, in 5,10, shows the importance of this enigmatic Old Testament high priest for understanding the high priesthood of Christ in the whole section 4,135,10. The passage 5,11 6,20 is interpreted in the present paper as being paraenetical, first negative (5,11 6,8) and then positive (6,920). This concludes the entire section 3,7 5,10. This section opens at 3,7-14 with a citation of Ps 95 and an accompanying application to the idea of u9po/stasij. The latter word, along with its use at 1,3 and 11,1 (as some future article will attempt to show), is a defining element in the macrostructure of the epistle. The explanation for the relevance of Melchizedek for the high priesthood of Christ is found outside the passage 3,7 6,20, at 7,1-28. But the explanation is prepared for in the positive paraenesis at 6,9-20 which is based on a presentation of the promise of progeny reaffirmed to Abraham with a promise by God as the aftermath _____________________ 120 of the sacrifice of Isaac. Thus the high priesthood of Christ in 4,13 6,20, since it is interpreted in Hebrews as being prefigured by the high priesthood of Melchizedek as presented in 7,1-28 as introduced by 6,9-20, should be seen as the vehicle of transmitting the Christianized promise of progeny to Abraham by God. This progeny, like Melchizedek and hence like Christ, is viewed as being without (human) father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days nor end of life (7,3). Thus the key elements for understanding the background of the crux at Heb 5,7-8 are Jesus as lo/goj in 5,13 and Jesus as prefigured by Melchizedek. That is to say, the crux at Heb 5,7-8, with its emphasis on Christs free sacrifice of Himself and the relation of this sacrifice to

the Christian td, is intimately connected with the promise of God to Abraham of Progeny following the sacrifice of Isaac. But in Hebrews, this progeny is brought to a spiritualized, Christianized fulfillment transcending the promise of physical Progeny as the original promise in Gen 22 is usually understood.

James SWETNAM Pontifical Biblical Institute Piazza della Pilotta, 25 00187 Rome (Italy) 2001 Filologa Neotestamentaria

________________________________ NOTES
1

J. Swetnam, "The Crux at Hebrews 5,7-8", Bib 81 (2000) 347-361.

J. Swetnam, "The Structure of Hebrews 1,1 3,6", Melita Theologica 43 (1992) 5866. Cf. also J. Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,5-14: A New Look", Melita Theologica 51 (2000) 51-68. The linking is effected by means of a gezera shawa, an exegetical argument in which a term in one verse of scripture is interpreted according to its use in another (cf. H. W. Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews [Hermeneia; Philadelphia 1989], 128129).
4 3

Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 129-130. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,1 3,6", 62-63.

Cf. the use of the word a0rxhgo/j in 2,10 and the comments of P. Ellingworth: "Hebrews use of pro/dromoj (6:20) of Christ suggests that a0rxhgo/j in Hebrews may have kept alive the hellenistic metaphor of a pioneer opening a path on which others can follow. This suits both the immediate context here (a0gago/nta) and the development in 3:7 4:11 of the theme of Gods wandering people" (P. Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text [NIGTC; Grand Rapids/Carlisle 1993] 161). See Attridge, Hebrews, 130, under Heb 4,8. Attridge notes: "The reference to Joshua, whose name in Greek ( 0Ihsou=j) is the same as that of Jesus, suggests a typological comparison between one a0rxhgo/j of the old covenant and that of the new. Such a typology was explicitly developed in later Christian literature, but it is not
7

exploited here." The present article will dispute this last observation: the typology is developed with reference to circumcision. "The rest to which the psalm referred cannot have been the rest that Joshua provided in the promised land. For then there would have been no need for the psalmists appeal to heed Gods voice today. The psalms reference to divine rest is seen to be not a simple analogy between the exodus generation and the psalmists audience, but a prophetic proclamation of the good news itself, a reaffirmation of Gods promise directed to anyone who has faith" (Attridge, Hebrews, 130). Apparently gratuitouson the supposition that v. 8 is part of a passage serving as a preparation for 4,12-13 with its emphasis on scripture, there would seem to be no need to mention Joshua, who had nothing to do with Gods word. In v. 8 Joshuas role as the one presumed to be leading the people into Gods rest is stressed. The word of God for the Israelites as for the Christians is contained in the promise to Abraham (Heb 4,1-2; cf. 6,15). Joshua failed in leading the people into the land. But in the current dominant interpretation the word of God will somehow succeed where he did not.
10 9 8

Text after NA27.

11

Translation after NSRV (The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments. New Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition [Nashville, 1993] 219 [New Testament section]).

Attridge, Hebrews, 134, notes that "The identification of the Logos here as Christ is common in patristic sources", some of which he identifies. He names several modern commentators who follow this interpretation, but does not give his approval. See also W. L. Lane, Hebrews 18 (WBC; 1991) 103, who strongly defends the contemporary consensus that lo/goj means scripture and not Christ. See J. Swetnam, "Jesus as lo/goj in Hebrews 4,12-13", Bib 62 (1981) 214-224. The difficulty with trying to understand Heb 4,12-13 comes in no small part from the fact that the passage has become an accepted topos for the efficacy of the word of scripture: Heb 4,12-13 is about the efficacy of the word of scripture because, as everyone knows, the word of scripture is sharper than a two-edged sword. Cf. the remarks of A. Vanhoye: "Une inclusion ouvre et ferme la longue phrase [sc., 4,12-13]: les premiers mots prsentent o9 lo/goj tou= qeou= et les derniers disent h9mi=n o9 lo/goj. Lo/goj, il est vrai, nest pas pris les deux fois dans la mme acception: au dbut, il sagit de la parole de Dieu; la fin, il sagit, soit de lexpos en course, soitplus probablementdu compte que nous aurons rendre. Il en rsulte pour le text une certaine bizarrerie, qui saccentue encore, lorsquon remarque que le pro_j o3n (traduit: "et cest lui") dsigne le lo/goj du dbut: cest la parole quil faut adresser la parole!" (A. Vanhoye, Structure littraire littraire de ptre aux Hbreux [Paris 19762], 102).
15 14 13

12

Attridge, Hebrews, 134-136. Attridge, Hebrews, 136.

16

17

Ellingworth (Hebrews, 266) notes that ou]n does not draw an inference from what immediately precedes, and posits an interruption in the thought from 3,7 to 4,13. Attridge, too (Hebrews, 138-139), says that ou]n is a resumptive particle. But neither Ellingworth nor Attridge indicates why the author of Hebrews thinks it appropriate to resume his discussion of Christs priesthood precisely at this point.

18

Cf. J. Swetnam, "A Possible Structure of Hebrews 3,7 10,39", Melita Theologica 45 (1994) 128-135.

The title Jesus is suggested by the word 0Ihsou=j at 4,8 referring primarily to Joshua and indirectly to Jesus.
20

19

Thus the mention of Joshua makes sense: he is being implicitly contrasted with Jesus. The fact that in Greek the same word can be used for both facilitates the implicit contrast, which is developed only with v. 12. (Cf. above, nn. 7 and 9.) The basis of this comparison is the common element of circumcision of the heart described in v. 12. Joshua was unable to effect this spiritual circumcision, but Jesus is, and this is the reason why the Christians as a group will enter Gods spiritual rest whereas the desert generation of Israel did not and could not. (Cf. above, n. 8.) Kardi/a (heart) in 3,8.10.12.15; 4,7 indicates the key factor in the failure of the desert generation to enter the land. The word kardi/a is taken up in 4,12 in the imagery; in the interpretation being advanced here this imagery involves circumcision of the heart or spiritual circumcision, as in Rom 2,28-29. In Col 2,11-12 this spiritual circumcision is identified with baptism. In this regard it is useful to compare the text from Colossians with Heb 10,22, where the word kardi/a also occurs in the context of baptism. (Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 288-289, and Ellingworth, Hebrews, 523-524.) This division of 4,12-13 into a verse which looks what precedes and a verse which looks at what follows can be compared to the way Heb 2,13a seems to face both forward and backward (Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,1 3,6", 61).

21

Cf. J. Moatti-Fine, La Bible dAlexandrie: Jsus (Josu) (Paris 1996), 116-117, on ma/xaira as knife at Josh 5,2. She also gives a lengthy presentation of the discussion about spiritual circumcision which this verse has occasioned in the early Church.
23

22

Cf. M. Harl, La Bible dAlexandrie: La Gense (Paris 1986), 193, on ma/xaira as knife in Gen 22,6.

Cf. the discussion in E. Grer, An die Hebrer. 1. Teilband. Hebr 16 (EkK; Zrich/Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990), 214-216 "The picture of God in 4: 12-13 confirms the eschatological framework of Hebrews as Alexandrian Jewish; God is Judge, and he does not only judge at a general resurrection of the dead, but at the end of each mans life (10:25, 9:27. . . .)" (G. W. Trompf, "The Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12-13", Studia Theologica [Scandinavian Journal of Theology] 25 [1971] 130-131). Cf. also Ellingworth, Hebrews, 264.
26 25

24

Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 264-265. There is a Jewish tradition, reflected in the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and the Targum Neofiti on Genesis, that Isaac in v. 10 of

both targums stretches out his neck (hyrvvi eyep in Pseudo-Jonathan, hyr)vi eyep in Neofiti) after freely offering himself in sacrifice. Cf. M. Maher, Targum PseudoJonathan: Genesis (The Aramaic Bible [The Targums] 1B; Edinburgh 1992), 8, and M. McNamara, Targum Neofiti 1: Genesis (The Aramaic Bible [The Targums] 1A; Edinburgh 1992), 118. For the text cf.: E. G. Clarke, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch: Text and Concordance (Hoboken 1984), 24 (for Pseudo-Jonathan) and A. Daz Macho, Neophyti 1. Targum palestinense ms de la Biblioteca Vaticana. Tomo 1. Genesis (MadridBarcelona 1968), 127 (for Neofiti). This is not to suggest, of course, that these two targums date in their present form from the same period as Hebrews. But the fact that there was a tradition, even at a later date, about Isaac stretching forth his neck at the moment of his sacrifice in Genesis, is striking, given the other allusions in Hebrews to this sacrifice, not to mention the explicit reference to it at Heb 11,17. Cf. the views of P. S. Alexander, "Targum, Targumim", ABD, 6 (D. N. Freedman [ed.]; NewYorkLondonTorontoSyndey-Auckland 1992), 323: "There are no good grounds for dating anything in Neof. later than the 3rd/4th cent. C.E."; ". . . Ps.-J. can be seen as the ultimate stage in the evolution of the PT, which in its latest strata betrays the influence of early medieval midrash".
27

For the present writer 4,15-16 are key elements for the understanding of the word lo/goj in 4,13. For vv. 15-16 show in what sense Jesus as high priest is to be understood in the context of v. 14, and v. 14 shows, by reason of the inferential particle ou]n, in what sense the phrase pro_j to_n qeo/n is to be understood.

The interpretation advanced here that the lo/goj of Heb 4,12-13 is a designation of Jesus does not mean that the same word does not have a connection in Hebrews with Scripture. At Heb 2,2 the word lo/goj refers to the Law, and at Heb 4,2 it seems to allude to the word of Scripture in the citation Sh/meron e0a_n th=j fwnh=j au0tou= a0kou/shte from Ps 95,7 at Heb 3,7. (Cf.: Attridge, Hebrews, 125; Ellingworth, Hebrews, 242). Thus when lo/goj is used to refer to Christ himself at Heb 4,12-13 it there serves as a prime analogate with reference to Gods communications past and present. These communications are alluded to at the very beginning of the epistle (1,1-2) and referred to constantly in the course of the work. (The fact that at Heb 2,2 the author of Hebrews uses the word lo/goj to refer to the Law [which in Hebrews is understood as the Book of Scripturecf. Heb 9,19] is a strong argument against seeing the lo/goj of Heb 4,12-13 as referring to Scripture: if the lo/goj of Scripture [cf. Heb 3,7] was unable to effect an entrance for Gods people under Joshua, why should it do so for Christians?)
29

28

Cf. above, n. 20. The section Heb 1,5 2,4 was dedicated to showing the full divinity of the Son. Cf. Swetnam, "Heb 1,5-14", 61-62.

30

Cf. J. Swetnam, "A Suggested Interpretation of Hebrews 9,15-18", CBQ 27 (1965) 383. "Unfortunately scholars who take the lo/goj of vs. 12 to be the divine Logos (Bruce, F. W. Farrar, T. H. Robinson, etc.), tend to create discontinuity in the thought of 3:7 4:13, by pointing to theoretical considerations which are not there" (G. W. Trompf, "The Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12-13", 127, n. 16). The present writer will leave to the judgment of the reader whether the considerations about form and content offered in this paper are theoretical considerations which are not there or not.

31

The inferential particles are helpful indicators: the ga/r of 4,12 points to what is previous, just as the ou=n of v. 14 points to what is previous but in the context of a paraenesis, as at 4,1.11.16; 10,19.35; 13,15 (cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 138, n. 20). "Sabbatliches Feiern wird die "Daseinsweise" des in die Gottesruhe eingekommenen Volkes Gottes sein" (Grer, An die Hebrer, 220).
34 33

32

"V. 14 is so similar in content to v. 6 as to have affected the textual tradition" (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225).

The rather unusual configuration involving Heb 3,12-14 seems to be caused by the desire of the author to emphasize the word u9po/stasij in 3,14. This word would seem to be of particular importance in Hebrews, acting as an indicator, with three analogous meanings, of the major divisions of the epistle: Heb 1,1 3,6 (cf. the use of u9po/stasij in 1,3), Heb 3,7 10,39 (cf. the use of u9po/stasij at 3,14), and Heb 11,1 13,19 (cf. the use of u9po/stasij at Heb 11,1). Any attempt to discern a macrostructure in the epistle would seem to have to come to terms with this word. "The grammatical connections between vv. 14, 15, and 16 are uncertain" (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225). Ellingworth suggests four possible interpretations. The one followed here is his #4: a full stop is placed after v. 14 and a comma after v. 15 (cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225-226).
37 36

35

Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 269-270.

Attridge (Hebrews, 142) suggests that e1leoj may refer in 4,16 to past transgressions, while xa/rij refers to contemporary and future needs.
39

38

Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 3,7 10,39", 135-136.

Cf. J. Kurianal, Jesus Our High Priest: Ps 110,4 As The Substructure of Heb 5,1 7,28 (European University Studies, Series XXIII, Theology, 693; Frankfurt am Main BerlinBernBruxellesNew YorkWien 2000), 81.
41

40

Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 3,7 10,39", 135-137. For an attempt to solve this crux cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 3,7 10,39", 136. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 3,7 10,39", 137.

42

43

The promise in Heb 4,1 is contained implicitly in the final verse of the citation of Ps 95,7-11 found at Heb 3,11. Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 238.
45

44

For Christ as heir cf. already Heb 1,2 and 1,4. For Christians as heirs cf. Heb 1,14. Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 176.

46

Ellingworth (Hebrews, 333) argues for a partial, temporal fulfillment of the promises as a type of the definitive future fulfillment reserved for Christians. But it would seem preferable to regard the receiving of the promises even in Heb 11,33 as

47

the reception of the original promises made to the patriarchs, and not the fulfillment of the promises themselves, even in a partial, temporal guise. Thus the use of the word e0pitugka/nw in Heb 11,33 is consistent with its use in Heb 6,15. "The divine promises to Abraham involved two major componentsthat the patriarch would be the father of a great nation [cf. Gen 12:2-3; 15:5; 17:5] and that this nation would inherit the land [cf. Gen 12:7; 13:4]" (Attridge, Hebrews, 178).
49 48

Cf. the discussion of Heb 6,13-15 above.

The relation between priesthood, law and people in Heb 7,11-13 should also be noted. The people (lao/j) in Hebrews never changes (cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 190), but the promises, covenant and priesthood do. "The concept of the new covenant is co-ordinate . . . with that of Christs priesthood [sc., in Heb 8,6], and serves to show that it is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a total re-ordering by God of his dealings with his people. Both here and in 7:20-22, Jesus status in relation to the new covenant is not arbitrary or accidental; it is by divine appointment attested in scripture. Within this re-ordering, the divine promises hold an essential but subordinate place" (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 409). In other words, the type of priesthood is crucial for the promises. And since, in Hebrews, promises refer primarily to the land and progeny promised to Abraham, Christs priesthood is crucial for the spiritualization of these promises. Underlying all of these considerations is the role of Melchizedek in Hebrews. Since the entirety of chapter 7 of the epistle is given to him, it is clear that this role is not inconsiderable. The superiority of Melchizedek over Abraham is stated explicitly in 7,4. What seems to be at stake here is the replacement of Abraham by Melchizedek as the symbolic head of the new (Christian) people. The priestly nature of this people, based on the priesthood of Christ the Son of God, is implied by the author of Hebrews when he says that Melchizedek is likened (a0fwmoiwme/noj) to the Son of God and remains a priest forever (7,3): it is Christ who is the center and source of the new Christian people, and Melchizedek serves as the Scriptural elucidation. But Christ does not become the Father of this Christian people. Precisely because He is Son they become related to God the Father in a special way through Him. In Hebrews, in a very real sense, God the Father replaces Abraham as the father of the Christian people.
51

50

Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 3,7 10,39", 137.

Cf. Heb 11,17, where Abraham, on the occasion of his sacrifice of Isaac, is described as the one who had received the promises (o9 ta_j e0paggeli/aj a0nadeca/menoj). The use of the plural with regard to the promises is all the more significant in the light of v. 18, which singles out the promise of progeny.
53

52

Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 282, and further references there.

"By his resurrection Christ was enthroned as Messiah, and from then on his human nature enjoyed all the privileges of the Son of God, see Rm 1:4c" (The Jerusalem Bible [London 1985], 1821 [ad loc.]).
55

54

Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,5-14", 57-58 and 57, n. 21. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,1 3,6", 63-64.

56

57

"In Hebrews, it [sc., prosfe/rw] is used overwhelmingly (the passive in 12:7 is an exception) in connection with sacrifice, especially but not only with the OT high priests or Jesus as subject" (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 273). Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 351, and 351, n. 21. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 354-355. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 356-360. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 355-356.

58

59

60

61

62

Cf. J. Swetnam, "Christology and the Eucharist in the Epistle to the Hebrews", Bib 70 (1989) 75-78. Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 296. Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 353-355. Swetnam, "Hebrews 5,7-8", 356.

63

64

65

66

But cf. the argument of H. C. White that the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham originally represented a rite of initiation in which Isaac is made to face death and to accept it (H. C. White, "The Initiation Legend of Isaac", ZAW 91 [1979] 1-30).

Cf.: J. Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Light of the Aqedah (AnBib 94; Rome 1981), 46; J. Levenson, The Death and Resurrrection of the Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity (New HavenLondon 1993), 187-187. Levenson dates 4 Maccabees to between 18 and 55 A.D. Levenson (Death and Resurrection, 189-190, dates Biblical Antiquities to some time in the first century C.E. Cf. his comments on pp. 190-190. Also Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac, 53-56. And, most recently, B. N. Fish, "Offering Isaac Again and Again: Pseudo-Philos Use of the Aqedah as Intertext", CBQ 62 (2000), 494, n. 42. Cf. Levenson, Death and Resurrection, 190-192. Levenson (190) even suggests that the tradition about Isaacs willing participation in his sacrifice may have begun with The Book of Jubilees. Jubilees can be dated to the second century B.C. (cf. R. E. BrownP. PerkinsA. J. Saldarini, "Apocrypha; Dead Sea Scrolls; Other Jewish Literature", Jerome Biblical Commentary, 67:17 [pp. 1058-1059]). Cf. also Heb 2,18 where Christ is said to have been tested (peira/zw), the same word used of Abraham at the Aqedah as described in Heb 11,17. This parallel use of a word implying conscious awareness of the challenge of faith in the face of death would seem to be another indication that the author of Hebrews was aware of the tradition that gave to Isaac an active role in the Aqedah.
71 70 69 68

67

Cf. Swetnam, "Hebrews 1,1 3,6", 61-65. Cf. Swetnam, "Christology and the Eucharist", 77-78.

72

"En employant plusieurs reprises le mot "peuple", lptre aux Hbreux marque la continuit entre le peuple dIsral et lEglise chrtienne. Mais laspect de rnovation nest pas ignor pour autant, ni lexigence dune certaine rupture: lauteur declare avec nette que le sacerdoce du Christ entrane ncessairement pour le peuple un changement de constitution (7,11-12; cf. 9,10; 10,9; 13,9-4). Cest seulement dans la nouvelle alliance que se vrifie pleinement la parole: "Je serai leur Dieu et ils seront mon peuple", car la ralisation de cetter promesse est lie la rmission effective des pchs (Jr 31,32-34; Hb 8,10-12; 20,16-18" (A. Vanhoye, Situation du Christ. Hbreux 12 [Lectio Divina 58; Paris 1969], 383).
74

73

"Prose/rxomai in cultic contexts is not to be understood as approach in contrast to arrive, but rather of communion with God in worshipthe fulfilment, for Hebrews, of what the old dispensation could not achieve" (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 677-678. At p. 671 Ellingworth remarks: "Prose/rxomai (cf. 4:16) is always used in Hebrews of worship or nearness to God, but there is nothing to support a reference to the Lords Supper." As is clear from the approach of the present writer, based as it is on the td, this judgment with regard to the Eucharist does not seem correct. Cf. above, n. 50.

75