"LET US STRIVE TO ENTER THAT REST" THE LOGIC OF HEBREWS 4:1-11 Harold W.

Attridge
Perkins School of Theology Dallas, TX 75275

One of the most controverted questions in the study of the Epistle to the Hebrews is the nature of the eschatological perspective which it represents, and a focal point of the debate about this issue is the passage on the "rest" which awaits the addressees (4:1-11). The two ends of the spectrum of recent interpretation are represented by Theissen1 on the one hand, who sees Hebrews here as developing a "Gnostic"2 tradition paralleled by materials in Philo, and by Buchanan3 and Hofius4 on the other, who see Hebrews as working wholly within the framework of Jewish apocalyptic expectations. Parallels adduced by these interpreters are, to

*Gerd Theissen, Untersuchungen zum Hebrerbrief (Gtersloh: Mohn, 1969). For similar approaches, cf. Ceslaus Spicq, LEpitre aux Hbreux (2 vols; Paris; Galbalda, 1952-53); idem, LEptre aux Hbreux (Paris: Gabalda, 1977); C. K. Barrett, "The Eschatology of the Epistle to the Hebrews," The Background of the New Testament and its Eschatology (C. H. Dodd Festschrift; ed. W. D. Davies and D. Daube; Cambridge, 1954) 363-93; F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964). For an important recent contribution to the assessment of the eschatological perspectives of Hebrews, cf. George W. MacRae, "Heavenly Temple and Eschatology in the Letter to the Hebrews," Semeia 12 (1978) 179-99. 2 Theissen consciously builds on the analysis of Hebrews by Ernst Ksemann, Das wandernde Gottesvolk: Eine Untersuchung zum Hebrerbrief (3d ed.; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1959). His definition of "Gnostic" is a broad phenomenological one. Cf. Untersuchungen, 127, . 8, "Gnosis = Rckkehr zum Ursprung von jeder Schpfung." This is not the context in which to discuss the adequacy of such a definition. Suffice it to note that Theissen's use of the category does not presuppose the presence in the first century of the fully developed Gnostic mythology of the classical systems of the second and third centuries. He is willing (p. 129) to use the term "Frhgnosis" vel sim. to describe the religio-historical framework within which he sees Hebrews operating. 3 George Wesley Buchanan, To the Hebrews (AB; Garden City: Doubleday, 1972). 4 Otfried Hofius, Katapausis: Die Vorstellung vom Endzeitlichen Ruheort im Hebrerbrief (Tbingen: Mohr, 1970)

280

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

one degree or another, illuminating,5 but the concentration on these parallels may obscure the dynamics of Hebrews' argument, which should serve as the fundamental criterion by which to assess the work's eschatology. This brief paper will attempt to illuminate those dynamics. The pericope in question is part of a longer section beginning with 3:1 where it is argued that Jesus is superior to Moses as the son is superior to a servant within a household. The addressees, who have already been described as "partakers of a heavenly calling" (3:1), are said to be members of that household, if they hold fast to their hope (3:6b). What follows, from 3:7-4:11, is essentially a complex bit of paraenesis which develops the implications of the conditional clause in 3:6b. That paraenesis proceeds with an exegesis of Ps 95:7-11, cited in Heb 3:7-11. The psalm quotation provides three essential components which are subsequently developed. It begins with the adverb smeron. On the one hand, this provides the author with the basis for the exegetical argument in 4:7-8, that David would not have spoken of a day of rest after the conquest if the conquest had made that rest possible. At the same time the author takes that opening of the psalm as an address to his own generation (3:15, cf. 4:7). Thus "today" has a dual significance. It is interpreted both within the context of the supposed original utterance of the psalm by David and within the context of those who hear the challenge of the psalm "at the end of these days" (1:2). That the promise and challenge of the Scriptures are available in the author's "today" is an important element of this paraenetic passage. Note in particular 4:3, "For we who believe are entering the rest." The psalm also compares its hearers with the desert generation (3:8-10). Development of this typology is, of course, a major element in what follows, where the author takes pains to point out that the cause of the failure of the desert generation to obtain the promised rest was its disobedience due to lack of faith (3:1819).6

5 Theissen (Untersuchungen, 124-29) criticized Ksemann's reliance on Barnabas 15. Instead he appeals to texts of Philo which deal with the theme of "rest in God," such as Quod Deus immut. 11, to which Ksemann had already drawn attention; Ques. Exod. 2.46; and Opific. mund. 100. On the other hand, Hofius (Katapausis, 59-74) surveys a variety of apocalypses where the motif of an eschatological place of rest appears, calling particular attention to 4 Ezra 7:36 and 8:52. ^ h e The charge against the desert generation in 3:18 involves an interesting variant, /, (P46, Lat) instead of 0>, a variant which is

HAROLD W. ATTRIDGE

281

Finally, the conclusion of the psalm quotation (3:11) provides the basis for the argument about God's rest in 4:1-11. The crux of the author's argument lies in those verses and they merit closer scrutiny. The theme of this section is enunciated in the first verse of chapter four. A promise to enter God's "rest" has been left in force. That promise is, however, conditional on faithful obedience to God. Therefore the current heirs of the promise are warned to be fearful of falling short (4:1) and are encouraged to strive to enter the "rest" (4:11). In order for these exhortations to make sense it is necessary for our author to show that the promise is still in effect. That, in fact, is the major import of the verses standing between the inclusio of the two hortatory subjunctives of 4:1 and 11. The author could conceivably have made his point with a simple observation which now forms almost an aside in this section. In vv 7-8, he again cites the opening of Psalm 97 and remarks that David's call to hear the voice of God "today" would make little sense if the "rest" mentioned in the psalm had been achieved by the members of the Exodus generation. Had the author been content with this observation, he would have advanced a relatively simple typology. The Christian community would correspond to the Exodus generation as antitype to type. The type did not achieve its divinely intended goal because of faithless disobedience. Therefore the antitype must pick up where the type left off, be faithful and obedient to God's will and enter the "rest." This is basically the way in which the argument here is understood by those who see Hebrews as operating within an apocalyptic framework, with a local understanding of katapausis. On this reading the remarks of vv 3-5 are otiose, to say the least. In fact, however, the author seems to lay heavy emphasis on those verses, for they apparently provide the demonstration of his essential contention, that the promise to enter God's rest still remains open. Note that 6 summarizes the preceding argument and seems to draw an exegetical inference from it. What vv 3-5 in effect achieve is to define God's "rest" in such a way as to support the claim that the achievement of that rest remains a possibility.
paralleled in the allusions to the failure of the desert generation in Heb 4 6, 11 As most commentators recognize, the substitution of "faithlessness" for "disobedienee" in these verses is most likely a simplifying correction, under the influence of the prominence of "faithlessness" in 3 19 and 4 2 Of course, for Hebrews lack of faith and disobedience are intimately connected

282

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

The author argues by means of a gezara shawa.1 In Heb 4:3, the term katapausis from Psalm 95 is associated with the verb katepausen in Gen 2:2. This suggests that the "rest" promised in the psalm is the same as the rest into which God himself entered on the first sabbath.8 That suggestion is made explicit in 9, "There fore a sabbatismos is left for the people of God." It seems clear then that the author's argument, in his own estimation, hinges upon the equation of katapausis and sabbatismos, that is, upon the redefinition of the first term by means of the second. What, in fact, has the author achieved by the redefinition? For those who view this pericope simply in terms of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology, the author's argument is hardly clear. For Buchanan, who understands "rest" in the light of OT usage9 as a reference to "quiet, independent existence on the promised land,"10 the term sabbatismos reflects the association of "rest" terminology with the sabbath rest, and the sabbatical and jubilee years.11 Its use in Heb 4:9 "provided a basis for understanding national 'rest' in sabbatical terms."12 But ultimately for Buchanan the use of the sabbatismos terminology is simply to point to God's behavior as a prototype for that of Israel, who will, like God, rest from her works.13 While the
Cf. Hofius, Katapausis, 55. This move in the argument is already implicit in the comment that the author appends to his citation of Ps 95:11 in Heb 4:3, , "even though the works had been completed from the foundation of the world." The force of this remark is to emphasize that the divinely promised "rest," (or "my rest," in the words of Ps 95:11) is not primarily a future reality pertaining primarily to human beings, but a feature of God's own existence which precedes and stands outside of human history. Buchanan's translation (Hebrews, 53), "namely, [from] the works [that] took place from the foundation of the world," obscures the force of the remark, and is grammatically impossible. Although the particle may have the significance which Buchanan gives it here, the anarthrous participle cannot be construed as attributive, as Buchanan does. Hence the particle must be seen in its more normal, adversa tive sense, used here with a genitive absolute. 9 Cf. especially Deut 12:9 and Exod 33:14. Buchanan (Hebrews, 64) also cites Deut 29:9, which is quite irrelevant to the issue. 10 Buchanan, Hebrews,!1. u Ibid., 64. 12 Ibid., 71. Buchanan here also cites Isa 58:13-14, which is hardly an appropriate parallel. Isa 58:12, to be sure, speaks of national restoraton, which is promised as a reward for the behavior enjoined in vv 9-10. The national restoration is not spoken of as "sabbatical" in any sense. V 13 constitutes yet another injunction, to keep the sabbath, which will also have its reward, as promised in 14. 13 Buchanan, Hebrews, 71.
8 7

1 .

^ *

j I

HAROLD W. ATTRIDGE

283

prototypical function of God's rest in this passage is clear, Bu chanan's insistence on the interpretation of the key terminology here in essentially political terms leaves the relationship between type and antitype purely formal. Buchanan, in fact, fails to recog nize that in Heb 4:4-5 an attempt is made to redefine the term katapausis. For Hofius, for whom the "rest" is a locale, specifically the heavenly fatherland (Heb 11:14), the heavenly Jerusalem (Heb 11:10, 16; 12:22; 13:4), and the heavenly temple (10:1a),14 the term sabbatismos provides a more precise definition of what the people of God have to expect in their eschatological katapausis, namely, the festivity and praise of a sabbath celebration.15 Some of these connotations may well attach to the term used in Hebrews, but to determine the basic sense of the term here by appeal to parallel material is questionable. The most relevant factors for interpreting katapausis here are (1) the fact that it summarizes the implications of the gezara shawa argument of Heb 4:4-5, and (2) that it is in turn interpreted by the remark of 10 "he who enters his rest himself has rested from his work as God did from his." Thus the redefinition of katapausis in Ps 95:11 by the author of Hebrews decisively dissociates the term from its potential political or apocalyptic connotations. To enter God's "rest" is not to take possession of the land of Israel, nor to enter a concrete eschatolo gical temple. Rather, it is to have a share in God's eternal "sabbatical" repose.16
14 Hofius, Katapausis, 53-54. Hofius argues that the eschatological resting place can be associated with realities created from the foundation of the world, a notion with abundant parallels in apocalyptic and rabbinic literature. This understanding does not do justice to the way in which Hebrews formulates the connection between God's rest and the works of creation. Note in particular Heb 4:36 (on which see also n. 8 above). God's rest, in the words of the psalm "my rest," is not included among the things created ab initio, i.e., it is not one of God's works. It is rather the state into which God enters when those works are accomplished. Any other relationship between the "works" of creation and the "rest" would make unintelli gible the parallel drawn between God and his faithful people in Heb 4:10. 15 Ibid., 102-10. In discussing the term sabbatismos, which is a hapax in the NT, Hofius provides a useful collection of comparative material from later sources. This material is not decisive, however, for the interpretation of the term in Hebrews. Hofius also properly criticizes Ksemann's speculation that sabbatismos reflects Gnostic aeonic speculation about the Hebdomad. 16 The logic of the author of Hebrews' argument also reduces the significance of the observation by Hofius (Katapausis, 98) that there is a clear distinction between the katapausis language of Hebrews and the anapausis language of Gnostic texts, a

284

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

The redefinition of God's rest provided in w 3-9 substantially affects the logic of the typological exhortation used here. The author of Hebrews does not make a simple analogy between his contemporaries and the Exodus generation, but rather advances a rather complex argument which may be outlined as follows. The Christian community corresponds to the Exodus generation as antitype to type. Furthermore, the goal which the Exodus generation pursued corresponds to the goal which Christians pursue in the same way, as antitype to type. However, the type in this analogy (the rest in the land of Canaan) is itself an antitype of a more original type, the state of rest which God himself entered at the completion of the week of creation. The complex relationship among the items under discussion in this pericope is by no means unique. A similar set of relationships obtains in at least one other appeal to the Exodus generation in early Christian paraenesis and precisely the same relationship is perceived by the author of Hebrews in his discussion of the temple cult. These two parallels will be discussed in turn. In 1 Cor 10:1-13 Paul also appeals to the Exodus generation in his warning to the Corinthian community not to presume on the efficacy of their sacramental activity.17 As in Hebrews the main thrust of the analogy is the comparison between Israelites and Christians and, as in Hebrews, the inference drawn from the analogy is an ethical one: "These things occurred as types of us, so that we might not be desirous of evils, as many of them desired" (1 Cor 10:6). "Do not be idolaters . . . nor let us commit fornication . . . nor let us tempt Christ" (1 Cor 10:7-9). The basis of the comparison is also, as in Hebrews, a presumption that Christians live at the end of time: "These things happened in a typical way to them, and were written as a warning for us, on whom the ends of the ages have come" (1 Cor 10:11, cf. Heb 1:2).
fact which supports for Hofius the contention that Hebrews is speaking of a specific locale over against some Gnostic language about an eschatological state. It must be recognized that the term for the divine "rest" which Hebrews uses in this pericope is determined by the psalm which is the subject of the author's exegesis. The meaning of that language, however, depends on the exegesis. The relationship between Hebrews' concept of rest and that which appears in Gnostic sources needs to be more carefully considered and that cannot be done in detail here. Such an investigation will probably reveal important similarities due to the background of popular Platonism which affects both Hebrews and Gnosticism. 17 For analysis of the pericope and reference to further literature see in particular the commentary by Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia; Fortress, 1975) 164-69.

HAROLD W. ATTRIDGE

285

Paul, just as the author of Hebrews, is not content with the simple correspondence between the failure of the Exodus genera tion and the potential failure of the Corinthian community. He also finds further analogies between the Exodus experience and the Christian experience which lend his basic exhortation added force. The Israelites, like the Christians, experienced a "baptism" by passing through the sea and being led by the cloud (1 Cor 10:2). They also partook of a "eucharist" in the manna (1 Cor 10:3). They in fact partook of "Christ" in the rock which followed them. In highlighting those aspects of the Exodus experience which can be interpreted typologically of the Christian sacraments, Paul is obviously focusing on an aspect of the OT account which is of little interest to Hebrews.18 His typological exegesis is suited to the needs of his particular argument with the Corinthian community. Nonetheless, there is a generic similarity between the way Paul and the author of Hebrews use Exodus traditions. Both find in the events recounted in the Hebrew Scripture a significance which is perceptible only on the basis of the antitypes of those events in Christian experience.19 This phenomenon perhaps makes more comprehensible the reinterpretation of the "rest" motif in He brews. The author of Hebrews, like Paul, is by no means bound to the primary, literal force of the language recounting those events. Another related feature of Paul's exegesis in 1 Corinthians 10 parallels the moves which Hebrews makes. As in Hebrews, Paul finds that the events of the Exodus acquire their eschatological significance because they are in some way related to a primordial reality. This is certainly the force of the rather obscure remark that the rock which followed the Israelites in the desert was Christ (1

18 Unless the enigmatic reference to the "altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat" (Heb 13 10) alludes to the eucharist, which is unlikely For discussion of this verse, see J M Creed, "Hebrews xm 10," ET 50 (1938-39) 13-15, E L Randall, "The Altar of Hebr 13,10" Australasian Catholic Record (1969) 197-208, Floyd V Filson, ' Yesterday" A Study of Hebrews in the Light of Chapter 13 (London SCM, 1967) 48-54, and the commentary by F F Bruce, Hebrews, 401-2 In any case, it is clear that Chnstian sacraments are not a major interest of Hebrews 19 Whether or not Paul's reading of the Exodus story as a typology of Christian sacraments was based on a previous Jewish justification of baptism is not relevant to our considerations here It is clear that the significance which Paul gives the OT types derives from his judgment as to what the antitypes are On the issue of a prePauline tradition behind 1 Cor 10 2, cf Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 165, 17

286

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

Cor 10:4)} In this remark Paul apparently accords a higher significance to the Exodus events than does the author of Hebrews. For the latter there seems to be no question that the rest pursued by the Exodus generation was anything more than the settlement in the land (cf. esp. Heb 4:8). That literal "rest," however, pointed to another, more basic reality which actually constituted the content of God's promise. For Paul, the Exodus generation actually did have access to "Christ." In both cases the correspondence drawn between historical types and antitypes is made possible because the types themselves stand in some relationship to some prior reality. The formal correspondences between Paul and Hebrews on the significance of the Exodus events suggest that both are operating within a tradition of Christian reflection on the subject. That Hebrews in particular is dealing with a traditional type of exegesis here is not surprising, given the location within the plan of the whole work of the pericope in question. The heart of the dogmatic argument of Hebrews, focusing in Christ the High Priest of a new covenant, extends from 5:14-10:39. The novelty of the argument is clearly indicated in 6:1-3. What precedes the central dogmatic section, from 1:1-4:13, is in many ways a prologue, bounded by the references to God's word (1:1; 2:2; 4:12-13). The second, and perhaps more significant, parallel to the complex exegetical logic of Heb 4:3-10 appears later in the epistle, in the discussion of the relationship of the old and new sacrificial systems, within the context of the discussion of the old and new covenants. Basic to this discussion, as to the analogy between the Exodus generation and the Christian community, is the correspondence between new and old (Heb 8:8, 13). Intersecting this analogy is, however, another, comparing and contrasting the earthly and the heavenly. On the one hand the relationship between old and new is of type to antitype, as is clear from the whole

For the haggadic basis of the remark in 1 Cor 10:4, cf. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 166, n. 25. Conzelmann correctly draws attention to two important features of the typological argument of Paul. On the one hand (p. 166, n. 18) "the very structure of the typology itself . . . tells against the direct equation of sacrament then and now." Paul is not arguing that the OT types are to be precisely equated with their NT antitypes. At the same time, the type has its significance because of its relationship to a prior reality. "The 'was' of the typological statement, of the interpretation of the rock as being Christ, means real pre-existence, not merely symbolic significance" (1 Corinthians, 167).

20

HAROLD W. ATTRIDGE

287

discussion. On the other hand the OT type in this relationship clearly derives its significance from the antitype: "For the Law, having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of those things . . ." (Heb 10:1). The types are, moreover, antitypes of more fundamental realities: "For Christ did not enter into holy place made by hands, antitypes of the true holy places, but into heaven itself' (Heb 9:24). The significance of Christ's entry into the heavenly sanctuary presents its own problems, and the ultimate significance of the whole typological scheme underlying the argument of Hebrews needs to be assessed as to the way in which the primordial "type" is ultimately conceived. This issue cannot be treated in detail here.21 What is important to note for our purposes is the way in which the logic of the argument functions. The old covenant's type does not, by any means, precisely define the significance of the new covenant's antitype. Rather, the former achieves its significance from the intersection of two vectors, as it were, the definitive events establishing new covenant and the primordial realities to which those events of the new covenant both point and provide access. Thus the exegetical logic implicit in the typological use of the Exodus in other early Christian paraenesis, the logic made explicit in the comparison of new and old covenants in Hebrews 9-10, and indeed throughout much of Hebrews generally, is precisely the logic at work in the passage in the Exodus generation in Heb 3:1-4:11. Conclusion Hebrews is by no means an easy text to understand. It combines various Jewish and Hellenistic traditions in a subtle and intricate way and often significantly redefines the significance of traditional material. Parallels to its imagery and language from apocalyptic, Jewish philosophical and Greek religious sources can often be suggestive about the significance of the text or about the presuppositions of its original audience, but they cannot be by

2 ultimately, the significance of the types in Hebrews' cultic argument must be seen in the way that they point to the interiority of the new covenant, an interiority intimately associated with the primordial realities of which the types themselves are antitypes. Heb 10:5-10 is central for developing this understanding. Note also 8:10 and 9:14.

288

HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

themselves decisive for exegesis of Hebrews. This is especially true in those passages where our author deals with eschatological material. At work throughout Hebrews is a complex process of interpretation of inherited symbols. The logic of this process must be carefully observed if any adequate interpretation of the text is to be possible. While this paper has not definitely solved the question of Hebrews' eschatology, it has attempted to provide some guidelines for its resolution.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.