Bible Commentaries
Hebrews

THE LETTER TO THE HEBREWS

John Wick Bowman

INTRODUCTION

Authorship

The Letter to the Hebrews was early known and employed throughout the extent of the Church, East and West. It was first quoted in Rome by Clement, one of the Church Fathers (a.d. 95). Thereafter it was employed in the West by several writers of the second and third centuries. The church of Alexandria appears to have been the first to consider that Hebrews was written by Paul or reflected his thought It was suggested that it had been written by Paul in Hebrew and translated into Greek by Luke. Others in the third century held that the style was non-Pauline though the ideas were considered to be Paul’s. One of the Church Fathers of this century, Origen, held that "God only knows certainly" who wrote the epistle. An early papyrus manuscript of the third century, recently discovered, which emanates from Egypt and possibly Alexandria, places Hebrews immediately after Romans and before First Corinthians, thereby indicating the belief that the epistle was from the pen of Paul.

From the period of the Reformation to modem times there has been great diversity of opinion on the matter of authorship. Calvin held it to be from Paul’s pen, while Luther thought of Apollos as the author and Erasmus suggested Clement of Rome. Others gave their vote to Barnabas. One startling suggestion was that the letter was written by Priscilla. More recent writers continue to propose a variety of authors, no one of whom has won a majority of supporters.

Readers

There is as much disparity of opinion regarding the Christian group addressed in the letter as in the matter of authorship. From the early fourth century there have been those who have believed that the letter was addressed to the church in Jerusalem, or at any rate to the Palestinian church. Others have thought of a Jewish-Christian community in one of the large centers of the ancient world, such as Alexandria, Rome, or Ephesus. Some suggest a Hellenistic-Jewish group within the Roman church. ("Hellenistic" refers to the influence of Greek ideas and culture upon the Jewish religion. ) Others hold that the letter was addressed to Christians as such, either including both Gentiles and Jews or composed exclusively of Gentiles. In this last case, of course, the title of the epistle would be a misnomer.

Date

Two sets of facts have generally been emphasized as determining the date to be assigned to the writing of the letter. The first of these has to do, on the one hand, with the apparent use which the author of Hebrews has made of some of the Pauline epistles and, on the other, with the fact that Clement of Rome (a.d. 95) quotes from Hebrews in his letter to the Corinthian church. Thus Deuteronomy 32:35-36 is used by Paul in Romans 12:19 and by Hebrews at 10:30. Similarly, in both Romans 4:17-21 and Hebrews 11:11-12; Hebrews 11:19 reference is made to the age of Abraham and Sarah at the time of the promise of the birth of Isaac. Clement refers to Jesus as "the high priest of our offerings, the defender and helper of our weakness" (see Hebrews 2:18; Hebrews 3:1; Hebrews 4:15). He also describes Jesus as one "who, being the brightness of his majesty is by so much greater than angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name" (see Hebrews 1:3-4). These two considerations suggest a date for the letter somewhere between a.d. 56 and 95.

The second consideration suggestive of a date is to be found in the fact that the readers had already suffered one persecution for their faith and were now facing the likelihood of a second (Hebrews 10:32-34; Hebrews 12:3-11). There has been, however, little unanimity among interpreters as to which persecutions are meant. The following have been suggested as possibilities — the one under Claudius in A.D. 49 (Acts 18:2); the well-known persecution under Nero in a.d. 64; the destruction of the Jewish state in a.d. 70; and the persecution under Domitian in a.d. 95.

Suggested dates for the writing of the epistle are as follows: between 58 and 95, 85-110, 75-80, 70-95, about 95, 65 or 66, and sometime in the middle 60’s.

A New Solution

From the above statement of the history of the problem, it will be apparent that there can be no authoritative pronouncement relative to the circumstances, author, readers, and date of writing of the Letter to the Hebrews. The best minds of the Church have given their attention to the solution of these problems and have found themselves unable to reach a united conclusion with regard to them. The Christian student, accordingly, if he is to face the problem at all, must do so with an open mind and a sincere endeavor to make the best of the data available.

During the past decade certain significant facts have come to our attention which would appear to suggest the possibility of a new solution. These data are principally of two kinds — first, the rediscovery of or re-emphasis upon the fact that the Judaism of the first Christian century was by no means a single phenomenon; and second, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Khirbet Qumran and the valleys south of Wadi Qumran which have materially increased our knowledge of one type of contemporary Judaism in the first Christian century. It will be well at this point to state the position which, in the light of these recent developments, will be supported in this commentary. This is to the effect that ( 1 ) the author and readers of the Letter to the Hebrews belonged to a single group in the Palestinian situation to be designated as "Hellenistic-Jewish Christians"; (2) this group lived together at some undesignated point, possibly at Sychar in the Roman province of Judea (which included both the old Judea and old Samaria); (3) the occasion of writing was the author’s earnest desire to stimulate greater zeal for the distinctive elements in the Christian gospel among Christians who, because of their "liberal" background, were intrigued with that gospel’s similarities to the best in Judaism; and (4) the epistle was written shortly before the destruction of the Jewish state in a.d. 70, when the Qumran sect was forced to abandon the center of its influence at Khirbet Qumran. It is our intention to suggest that both the author of the letter and his readers were converts from the ranks of Hellenistic Judaism, and that the readers had fallen under the influence of the teachings of the Qumran sect — an influence which had not intrigued the author, though he found it convenient in view of his readers’ known interest to state the message of the gospel in terms made familiar by the teachings emanating from Khirbet Qumran. The author, though he belonged to a section of the Christian community whose background was quite other than the Hebraic Judaism out of which Paul sprang, was nonetheless familiar with Paul’s writings and generally sympathetic with his doctrinal position, while at the same time his statement of the fundamental teachings of the Christian faith followed a pattern different from that of Paul. The letter then may be dated in a.d. 65 or 66, at the beginning of the First Jewish War and almost synchronous with the date of Paul’s death in Rome.

The Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity of First-Century Palestine

First-century Judaism was by no means a unified faith. There were sectarian cleavages within it, some of them characterized by bitter hatred toward other branches of Jewry. The major cleavage is generally designated by the terms "Hebraic Judaism" and "Hellenistic Judaism" (see Acts 6:1). Paul himself employs this terminology and claims to have belonged to the Hebraic side (Philippians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 11:22). The terms employed to designate the two branches of Judaism have a reference which is far wider than the respective languages spoken by the two parties, though the use of different languages is not excluded. "Hebraic" and "Hellenistic" refer rather to the total cultural patterns adopted: on the one hand, adherence to strict Jewish patterns of life, and on the other, accommodation to Greek cultural patterns. Nor does the factor of place necessarily have any bearing upon the problem. Paul was a native of Tarsus in Cilicia and therefore a resident of the Hellenistic world outside of Palestine, and yet he was a typical example of the Hebraic Jew. Contrariwise, the Sadducees, whose center and entire life involvement was the Temple in Jerusalem, were notable for having adopted the Hellenistic culture pattern.

To one like Paul who had been converted from the strictest element (the Pharisaic) within Hebraic Judaism, it became clear that culture patterns have no significance for the Christian faith. Such was the nature of his argument with Peter at Syrian Antioch, which he reports in Galatians 2:11-21. We read, however, in Acts 6, 7 of a sharp controversy which developed between the Hebraic-Jewish Christians and their Helienistic-Jewish Christian brethren.

We have little enough to go on here — merely the account of the controversy itself as narrated in the sixth chapter and a statement of the beliefs of the Hellenistic-Jewish Christians as contained in Stephen’s speech in chapter 7. It seems clear, however, that the Hellenistic party were generally committed to what one might term the more "prophetic" point of view. This included the idea proclaimed by the prophets as early as Amos in the eighth century before Christ that the true faith had universal significance and so was equally for all peoples. The same striking idea is abundantly illustrated in Stephen’s address — that God’s revelation of himself to men is independent of land (Acts 7:2; Acts 7:9; Acts 7:30-31; Acts 7:36; Acts 7:38). This revelation is also independent of cultural background, as Moses’ culture was largely that of the Pharaohs (vss. 17-22) and of Midian (vss. 23-29). It is likewise independent of a particular house of worship, both that which Stephen calls "the tent of witness in the wilderness" and Solomon’s Temple (vss. 44-50). And finally, the implication is that God’s revelation is independent even of the people of the Law (the Jews) , for Stephen makes it clear that it was characteristic of Israel that they rejected the revelation which God gave through selected individuals called "prophets" (vss. 25-26, 35-36, 51-53).

The Hellenistic-Jewish Christian faith as proclaimed by Stephen is reflected throughout Hebrews, notably in 2:5-18, where the author argues on the basis of Psalms 8:4-6 that Jesus in his incarnation has come "that by the grace of God he might taste death for every one" (vs. 9). The same point is made in connection with our author’s choice of Melchizedek, "king of Salem, priest of the Most High God" (Hebrews 7:1-3), as one who though he was in no sense a Jew yet was a blessing both to Abraham and to all his descendants, including the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:4-10).

The unworthiness of "rebellious" Israel is also portrayed with telling effect (Hebrews 3:7-19), in contrast with faithful prophetic spirits like Abraham and his descendants, Joseph and Moses, "the prophets," and others of their type who suffered persecution at the hands of the forefathers of the Jews themselves (ch. 11). The true faith’s independence of land and even of the Holy City of Jerusalem is brought out with telling force by Hebrews (Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:14-16; Hebrews 11:23-31; Hebrews 13:12-14).

Finally, Stephen’s thesis that the true faith does not depend upon the use of a particular house of worship is directly related to the major theme of Hebrews. This letter, like Stephen, takes its start from the instruction which God gave Moses in Exodus 25:40. Moses was to erect a house of worship "according to the pattern which was shown" him on the mountain (Hebrews 8:5; Acts 7:44). The writer maintains that the true house in which God’s worship is to be carried on is a spiritual or eternal one (Hebrews 9:11-12). That is, it is a house made up of living personalities (Hebrews 3:6) — a thought also worked out by Paul (Ephesians 4:11-16; Colossians 2:19). In addition to these major similarities between the message of Stephen and that of Hebrews, there are minute ones of a striking sort of which but one may be mentioned here, namely, the mediation by angels of the Old Testament revelation (Acts 7:53; Hebrews 2:2).

It seems clear from the above comparison that the author and his readers, who as we have said belonged to a single group of second-generation Christians (Hebrews 2:3-4), must have been Hellenistic-Jewish Christians of the type represented by the "seven" of Acts 6:5-6. This element in the Early Church, dating back to at least a.d. 35, was scattered after the persecution that arose as the result of Stephen’s martyrdom "throughout the region of Judea and Samaria" (Acts 8:1). If we allow some thirty years to intervene before the writing of Hebrews, it will perhaps appear not unlikely that they should have drawn together at some central point. And what better place could be imagined than a spot near the ancient capital city of Samaria, possibly at Sychar?

This possibility moves into the realm of probability when the incident recounted in John 4 is recalled (see especially vss. 5 and 39). For, as has been shown recently, the interests manifested by the Gospel of John are those of the Hellenistic-Jewish branch of the Christian Church, and it is striking that the city of Samaria should be spoken of as a center of evangelism both in John 4 and in the Book of Acts (8:4-25) in connection with the evangelistic work of Philip, who along with Stephen was a member of the Hellenistic-Jewish Christian community. At Mount Gerizim near Samaria the ancient Samaritans had erected a temple in competition with that at Jerusalem (John 4:20). It is, therefore, the more striking that Jesus should declare to the woman of Sychar that "the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father" (John 4:21), and that "the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" (vs. 23); while the author of Hebrews in like vein argues that "the sanctuary and the true tent" in which Christian worship is to be maintained is one "not made with hands, that is, not of this creation" (Hebrews 8:2; Hebrews 9:11 ) . Similarly, "Mount Zion," "the city of the living God" which Christians are said by our author to approach for worship, is "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Hebrews 12:22), for as he says, "Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is to come" (Hebrews 13:14).

The Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls

The above distinction between Hebraic- and Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity affords us only one-half of the picture suggestive of the setting in which the letter to the Hebrews had its origin. The momentous discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls beginning in 1947 has provided us with the other half. Though it is true that the "monastic" community at Khirbet Qumran was the center of the sect, yet the scrolls are witnesses to the fact that cells or "camps" were maintained throughout all Palestine, a fact to which Josephus apparently is referring when he speaks of the Essenes as those who "have no certain city but many of them dwell in every city."

It should be evident, then, that there was every chance of the Hellenistic-Jewish Christian community in Palestine coming into contact with and being influenced by this sect. Numerous similarities may be pointed out between the teachings of the Qumran group and those of the Letter to the Hebrews. For example, the group spoke of themselves as the people of the (new) "covenant." There can be no doubt that the reference of this term is to Jeremiah 31:31-34, the passage quoted in Hebrews 8:8-12. And the coincidence of thought between the Qumran Scrolls and Hebrews is seen to be the more striking when one notes that of the twenty-eight references in the New Testament to the "new covenant," exactly one-half are to be found in Hebrews alone. Reference has already been made to the fact that in Hebrews 8:2 coupled with 3:6 the teaching emerges that the Christian community is the true "house" or "temple" of God. This same claim is made for itself by the Qumran community. Both the Qumran sect and Hellenistic-Jewish Christians speak of themselves as "the enlightened ones." Both claim to be a people who possess "truth" in a peculiar way. Both groups claim to have experienced the "power" of God in a special way. Both claim to constitute a "fellowship of the saints" including those on earth and those in heaven. Both consider themselves to be tested and proved by God.

But while there are similarities of the type indicated between the teachings of the Qumran sect and Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity — similarities which are more or less parallel with other groups within Judaism and Christianity, due to the fact that all draw upon the common source of the Old Testament Scriptures — the dissimilarities in teaching between the two groups are even more striking. This is particularly true of their concepts of high priesthood and sacrifice. In fact, it is exactly at this point that the teachings of the Qumran community and of Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity as exemplified by the Letter to the Hebrews are found to be in violent opposition to each other. This phenomenon more than any other points to the conclusion that the Letter to the Hebrews was written in the context of and contemporary with the existence of the Qumran community at Khirbet Qumran.

It is, for example, known that this sect looked forward to the appearance of a messiah who would be of the House of Aaron and might therefore be termed a "priestly" or high-priestly messiah. The author of Hebrews, however, shows that "our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests" (Hebrews 7:14); he concludes in consequence that Jesus’ high priesthood depends, not upon his earthly connections, but upon the fact that he is of the Melchizedekian order, that is, that he is an eternal figure (Hebrews 6:20; Hebrews 7:11-22). It would seem from these and like references in Hebrews that the author is concerned to deny outright the Qumran claim that the Messiah was to be of the tribe of Levi. His point is exactly that Jesus Christ, because of his eternal character as Son of God (Hebrews 1:1-4), combines within his own person both kingly and high-priestly messiahships. This is in flat contradiction of the point of view elaborated in the Qumran community, and it would seem, therefore, that the letter is written in the context of the teaching of that community.

There is a significant difference as well in the matter of the character of the sacrifice to be offered in the worship of God. It is true that the Qumran sect did not ban the use of animal sacrifices. They did, however, proclaim a day about to dawn within Israel when "atonement will be made for the earth more effectively than by any flesh of burnt offerings or fat of sacrifices." This is teaching derived quite clearly from passages like Hosea 6:6 and Micah 6:6-8. Nothing in the scrolls, however, suggests the type of sacrifice to be offered by Jesus Christ as the High Priest of his people who "entered once for all into the Holy Place, taking not the blood of goats and calves but his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption" (Hebrews 9:12). Nor is there any suggestion anywhere in the scrolls akin to the further statement of our author that "the blood of Christ" (the Messianic High Priest) , "who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God," will "purify your conscience from dead works to serve the living God" (Hebrews 9:14). The Old Testament precursor of such a Messianic High Priest is, of course, the Suffering Servant of the Lord, and of such a figure offering such sacrifice the Qumran Scrolls know nothing.

It has often been remarked that the only Old Testament sacrifices which were a matter of concern to the author of Hebrews were those performed by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. On no other day of the Jewish religious year was the high priest constrained by law to sacrifice at all. But for that day all sacrifice must be offered by him alone. In consequence, for the author of Hebrews only the sacrifices offered on that day were remotely comparable to that of the eternal High Priest Jesus Christ; and by the same token, for him the Christian life constituted one continuous Day of Atonement, even as for the Apostle Paul it was one continuous Passover (see Hebrews 10:19-31; Hebrews 12:22-24; Hebrews 13:12-16; and 1 Corinthians 5:6-8). It seems deeply significant, therefore, that in the Qumran Scrolls no reference to the Day of Atonement should thus far have been found. It is as though Hebrews were pointing to the significant lack at this point in the teachings of the Qumran community, and calling Hellenistic-Jewish Christian readers’ attention to the uniqueness of the Christian faith in having a Messianic High Priest of an eternal rather than an earthly order, whose sacrifice of himself has given to the Christian life the character of an everlasting Day of Atonement.

As has been said already, two references in the epistle itself are perhaps indicative of a date. The first is at 5:12, where it is stated that the readers "by this time . . . ought to be teachers." It would seem that the community had been together for a considerable length of time after the scattering abroad indicated in Acts 8:1. The other reference is that pertaining to the two persecutions — one already passed (Hebrews 10:32-34), the other on the horizon (Hebrews 12:3-13). If we may assume that the first of these persecutions was that which arose about Stephen in approximately A.D. 35, the second may be conveniently reckoned as associated with the First Jewish War in a.d. 66-70. During this period, as we now know, the Qumran community was thriving, and its influence throughout the Roman province of Judea was widespread. We may well conclude, therefore, that the occasion prompting the writing of Hebrews was the attractive nature of this sect’s teachings for Christians who had emerged from the Hellenistic-Jewish community and for whom accordingly, "temple," "land," "sacrifice," and "holy city" were of as little concern as for the Qumran community. In the meantime, too, we know that the center of Christian evangelistic effort had passed from Jerusalem to Syrian Antioch, bypassing Samaria and its Hellenistic-Jewish community on the way! That community had never become a band of "teachers" or evangelists with a gospel of God’s redemptive activity on behalf of all men everywhere and with a zeal for carrying that gospel to the ends of the earth, though the creative effect of the persecution out of which the community had sprung surely gave early promise of such zeal and Christian statesman- ship (Acts 8:1; Acts 8:25; Hebrews 5:12; Hebrews 10:32-39). All signs indicate that the early fires had burned low in this Christian group. They were becoming "fainthearted" (Hebrews 12:3), and they fretted under the discipline imposed by Christian living (Hebrews 12:4-11). Like the church at Laodicea, they were now "neither cold nor hot" (Revelation 3:15) — a dangerous attitude exposing such "fainthearted" Christians to the attractions of the nearest second-best religious interest. So far as Judaism was concerned, that second-best was to be found in the high motivation and zeal, as well as in the exalted claim to be the "elect" community (the genuine Israel of God), on the part of the Qumran sect. It was here the attraction lay, then, for this Hellenistic-Jewish Christian community at Sychar. And we know that coupled with this attractiveness to be found in the highest element of the old faith, the fires of nationalism were burning high in the early 60’s in the Holy Land — fires which burst into the flames of open revolt against Rome in a.d. 66. But neither nationalism nor a second-best religion is good enough for followers of Jesus Christ, who himself "suffered outside the gate" of the Holy City (Hebrews 13:12). Accordingly, his followers must "go forth to him outside the camp" of Judaism, "bearing abuse for him" (Hebrews 13:13).

The Message

Hebrews has been termed "the Epistle of the Covenant" and "the Epistle of the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ." Both of these characterizations represent the truth in some measure. Neither singly nor together, however, do they give us a comprehensive picture of the message of Hebrews. Each represents a major stress of the letter, and each clearly gives evidence of the contemporary situation with which the author and his readers are concerned. But both elements may be said rather to constitute "means" which our author employs in presenting his message and endeavoring to arrive at the goal he has in view, rather than the goal itself.

The over-all theme of the letter, and therefore the message which its author is endeavoring to present, may be phrased thus: the responsibilities and privileges of "sonship": (1) of the "Son of God" as eternal High Priest; (2) of the "sons of men" as members of God’s household. As will appear from scanning the outline of the letter, there is a constantly recurring interplay of emphases upon the nature and work of the unique Son, on the one hand, and of similar factors relating to the "sons" on the other. Jesus Christ is first and last the unique Son of God (Hebrews 1:1-4). As such he is in his own person and work separated from all prophets, angelic intermediaries (Hebrews 1:5-14), and even such a great leader of God’s people as Moses himself (Hebrews 3:1-6). He is uniquely over God’s house rather than simply a member of it, in virtue of his being God’s Son (Hebrews 3:6).

But Jesus Christ has chosen through the Incarnation to identify himself with the "sons of men" or more specifically with that particular group among men who may be called sons of Abraham, that is, true members of the household of God (Hebrews 2:9; Hebrews 2:16). He has thus identified himself with man with a view to man’s salvation and has gone through the most trying and debasing of man’s experiences — experiences brought on by man’s sin and resulting in his spiritual and moral death (Hebrews 2:14-18). In searching for a religious analogy to which he might compare this work of the eternal Son of God, the author hit upon the unique plan of presenting Jesus’ work in terms of high priesthood and the sacrifices performed by the high priest on the Day of Atonement. However, unwilling to expose his argument to the attack of any who might point out that Jesus did not belong to the Levitical priesthood and therefore that the analogy of the high-priestly work was inadequate in his case, he came forward with the creative suggestion that Jesus’ high priesthood is similar to that of Melchizedek — an eternal one performed in an eternal tabernacle and associating itself with eternal sacrifices (Hebrews 5:8-10; Hebrews 7:15-28). The argument is a valid one because of the intrinsic nature of the being of the Son of God, a type of being transcending all earthly existence (Hebrews 1:1-14).

The second part of the author’s thesis is as important for his goal as the first. It rests upon the underlying assumption that although sons of men are in their essential being far beneath the "Son of God," yet there is a certain kinship involved which does not exist between the latter and any other of God’s creatures — not even angels. This unique kinship makes possible not alone the Son’s identification with the sons of men in their low estate and sufferings (Hebrews 2:10-13), but also their identification with him in his responsibilities and privileges. For as Christ was "faithful over God’s house as a son" (Hebrews 3:6), so they are called to constitute "his house" (Hebrews 3:6); and as he was called to be the high- priestly Mediator "on behalf of men in relation to God" (Hebrews 5:1-10), so the demand is laid upon them to be "teachers . . . [of] the word of righteousness" (Hebrews 5:11 to Hebrews 6:8). Moreover, as the responsibility laid upon the Son of God included his high-priestly work, in which he sacrificed himself that men might draw nigh to God through him (Hebrews 7:1 to Hebrews 10:18), even so it is incumbent upon the "sons" as lesser priests, who now have access to the "sanctuary" in God’s eternal tabernacle, to "draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with . . . hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and . . . bodies washed with pure water" (Hebrews 10:19-31). And as Jesus, "the pioneer and perfecter of our faith," endured to the end of the earthly race set before him (Hebrews 12:1-2), so the sons are called to endure, to accept without protest the discipline required for Christian growth (Hebrews 12:3-11), to remain faithful in their allegiance to the revelation of the Christian message (Hebrews 12:18-24), to recognize the divine lordship over their lives (Hebrews 12:25-29), and to accept every obligation which that sovereignty of God imposes upon his true worshipers in the realms of both religion and social ethics (Hebrews 12:28 to Hebrews 13:17).

Finally, the author sees that just as Jesus was called upon to suffer "outside the gate" of the Holy City (Hebrews 13:12), so it is incumbent upon the sons that they also "go forth to him outside the camp," that is, outside the contemporary Judaism in which the author’s Hellenistic-Jewish readers were raised, so "bearing abuse for him" while they "seek the city which is to come" (Hebrews 13:12-16). In view of all that has been said above, there can be little doubt that the letter to the Hebrews was a clarion call to Hellenistic-Jewish Christians to sever the bonds which bound them with Judaism, and that at the opening of the First Jewish War it proved to be one of the effective means toward making complete and irrevocable the final break between the Christian faith and the older Judaism. Both faiths accepted the Old Testament as Scripture, but the incarnate life and work of Jesus Christ gave to the Christian Church a standard lacking in Judaism, by reference to which that Scripture must henceforth be judged and interpreted.

OUTLINE

The Redemptive Power and Lordship of God’s Son. (Hebrews 1:1 to Hebrews 2:18)

Manifesto Regarding the Son of God (Hebrews 1:1-4)

Proof of the Manifesto from Scripture (Hebrews 1:5-14)

Redemptive Implications for the Sons of Men (Hebrews 2:1-18)

The Gospel Call to Become God’s House. (Hebrews 3:1 to Hebrews 4:16)

The Son’s Faithfulness Over God’s House (Hebrews 3:1-6)

The Thrice-Repeated Gospel Call (Hebrews 3:6 to Hebrews 4:16)

The Nature of the Son’s High Priesthood (Hebrews 5:1 to Hebrews 7:28)

Qualifications of a High Priest (Hebrews 5:1-10)

Qualifications of Mature Sons (Hebrews 5:11 to Hebrews 6:20)

The Son’s Melchizedekian High Priesthood (Hebrews 7:1-28)

The Efficacy of the Son’s High-Priestly Work. (Hebrews 8:1 to Hebrews 10:18)

Summary Statement (Hebrews 8:1-6)

Ineffectiveness of the Old Covenant (Hebrews 8:7 to Hebrews 9:10)

Effectiveness of the New Covenant (Hebrews 9:11-28)

The Once-for-All Aspect of the Son’s High-Priestly Work (Hebrews 10:1-18)

The Response Required of Sons to the High-Priestly Work of the Son. (Hebrews 10:19 to Hebrews 13:17)

Summary Statement (Hebrews 10:19-31)

Examples of Faith (Hope) (Hebrews 10:32—11:40)

Exhortation to Endurance as Sons (Hebrews 12:1-29)

The Communal Life of God’s People Outside the Gate (Hebrews 13:1-17)

Epistolary Conclusion. (Hebrews 13:18-25)