JAaiaJLjltSfaZifS THE THEOLOGY EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS THE THEOLOGY EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS Vl^ITH A CRITICAL INTRODUCTION GEORGE MILLIGAN, B.D, MINISTER OF CAPUTH, PERTHSHIRE; EDINBURGH T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET 1899 PRINTED BY __ MORRISON AND GIBB LIMITED, FOR T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. LONDON : SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED. NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER's SONS. TORONTO : FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY. IN PIAM MEMORIAM PATRIS CARISSIMI PREFACE The increasing interest that is being taken in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the ever-deepening feeling of its vital relation to some of the most pressing questions of our own time, must be pleaded in justification of the addition of another to the many books that have recently appeared dealing with it. And at the same time the author ventures to express the hope that the present volume will be found to fill a place hitherto unoccupied at least by any English writer on the subject. For while there are Critical Commentaries on the Epistle in abundance, and Expositions, both scholarly and popular, dealing with its teaching as a whole, he is not aware of any other book in English presenting that teaching in systematic form. He is painfully conscious how far short his own attempt comes of what such a study in Biblical Theology ought to be ; but he trusts that the different points of view' suggested, and the questions raised, may at least direct the attention of others better qualified than himself to the same task. He has endeavoured to indicate his indebtedness to previous workers on the Epistle as fully as possible in the footnotes, and would only further draw attention to the fact that the list of books referred to at p. xvii is in no sense to be regarded as a complete Bibliography of the subject. It is simply a list of those books which he vm PREFACE has himself found most useful, and whose titles are there given in full, in order to shorten subsequent references. In addition to them, moreover, he has had one other source of help open to him which he desires specially to acknowledge. At the time of his father's death certain MS. Notes passed into his possession, which were in tended as the first rough draft of a Critical Commentary on the Epistle, and which, even in their unfinished state, have often furnished the present writer with valuable assistance in determining the general drift of an argument, or the exegesis of a particular passage. It is with the earnest prayer that his book may not be found altogether unworthy of being associated with a memoiy so loved and honoured, that he now sends it forth. Of one thing at least he is convinced, that, however far he may have failed in adequately presenting the doctrine of this wonderful Epistle, the final answer to the meaning and perplexity of human life is to be found in the recognition of the truth contained in its opening words, which are a key to the whole Epistle, and which at this season come home with such peculiar power: Tlo}.v/j,ipoii y.ai "Autor Epistolae ad Hebraeos, quisquis est, sive Paulus, sive, ut 13 Chap. i. Eras tints. Council qf Trent. The Eefor- ination. Luther. H INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. i. Melancthon.Calvin. Beza The Re formed Con fessions. The seven teenth century. Melancthon always treated the Epistle as anonymous, and in like manner Calvin was not greatly concerned as to who the author was, though on internal grounds he was clear that he could not have been Paul,^ but possibly Luke or Clement.^ His friend, Theodore Beza, also ascribed the Epistle not to the Apostle, but to one of his disciples.* Such was the general opinion for some time, though gradually the feeling in the Church tended towards again treating the Epistle as Paul's own. In the Lutheran Church the expression of this feeling was confined to individual theologians ; but in the Reformed Church the great Confessions of the sixteenth century classed the Epistle among the Pauline writings.* And it continued to be so regarded throughout the seventeeeth century, except by a few Socinian and Arminian writers, in evidence of which it is sufficient to point to its title in our own Authorised Version of 1611, " The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews," instead of the simpler and uncompromising title which Luther had adopted, "The Epistle to the Hebrews.'' ego arbitror, Apollo " {ad Gen. 48, 20). In his Epist. am Christtag. Heb. i. I ft'. (Walch, Th. xii. p. 204), Luther speaks of "some" having held the Apollos - author ship ; but he gives no names, and may be referring simply, as Bleek conjectures, to oral conversations he himself had with learned friends (Hebrder Brief, i. p. 249, note). ^ "Sed ipsa docendi ratio et stilus alium quam Paulum esse satis testantur. " In Ep. ad Hebr. argii- menttim. ^ ' ' 'Verisimile est Lucam vel Clementem esse auctorem huius epistolae." Comm. c. xiii. 23. ^ ' ' Hie igitur non est Paulus ille, qui ex revelatione ipsius Christi didi- cit evangelium, sed ex apostolorum discipulis quispiam." One. ii. 3. In the Geneva Bible of 1560 the name of St. Paul is omitted from the title of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in a prefatory argu ment the authorship is left an open question— "For seeing the Spirit of God is the author thereof, it diminisheth nothing the authority although we know not with what pen He wrote it." ^ Amongst the few scholars of the day who ventured to dispute this was the Scotch John Cameron (d. 1625), who, though with hesitation, ascrited the Epistle to Barnabas : "Nohm hic quicquam pro certo afifirmare, libenter tamen mihi per- suaserim eam Barnabae adscribi debere." Praelectiones in Selectiora Novi Testamenti Loca, Salmurii, 1626-28, vol. iii. p. 140. HISTORY AND AUTHORSHIP 15 Nor was it relegated, as by Luther, along with the Epistles of James and Jude and the Apocalypse, to a kind of second rank among the New Testament writ ings,^ but was inserted at the end of the Pauline Epistles as forming one of them. The Rationalistic School of the eighteenth century once more, however, revived the old doubts as to the Pauline authorship, and these gradually gained ground even among the evangelical theologians of Germany. Particulars as to their names and works will be found in the exhaustive Introduction to the Epistle, first published in 1828, by Friedrich Bleek, who by his own careful study of the peculiarities of the Epistle, may be said to have given the final blow to the traditional view. Since his time, indeed, there have not been wanting individual scholars who have still clung to the Pauline hypothesis ; ^ but they have become ever fewer in number, until to-day, whatever difference of opinion may exist as to who the author really was, the belief that he was Paul is practically abandoned. We shall see in our next chapter the internal grounds on which this conclusion rests. In the meantime, it is enough to recall as the general result of our inquiries that, notwithstanding widely conflicting views as to its authorship, the canonical authority of the Epistle is no longer seriously called in question, and that accord ingly we may approach our further study of it under the conviction that the Church has in it an integral portion of the Word of God. ^ It occupied this same position in Tindale's N.T. of 1526 following 3 John, and preceding the Epistle of James. Tindale describes it, however, as "The pistle off Paul unto the Hebrues." 2 Amongst these may be men tioned in Germany von Hofmann (1873), Biesenthal (1878), and Holtzheuer (1883) ; and in England Dr. Kay in the Spea/ier's Com- mentary (1881), and Dr. Angus in Schaff's Popular Commentary (1883). See further p. 33. chap. i. The eighteenthcentury'. The nine teenth century. GeneralConclusion. Chap, ii. Question of authorship treated as an open one. The Epistle not a trans lation. CHAPTER II INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP From the brief survey of the history of the -Epistle to the Hebrews contained in the previous chapter we have seen that, while its canonical authority is now fully re cognised, the question of authorship has to a very notice able extent been always treated as an open one. The North African Church, indeed, apparently recognised in it without hesitation the work of Barnabas ; but we have no evidence that this opinion ever became widely accepted. And though there have been later periods in the Church's history when the Alexandrian belief in the Pauline authorship attained an almost universal assent, this would seem to have been due not so much to the evidence of tradition, as to the desire to associate an Apostolic name with an Epistle, the value of whose contents was so evident. We are free, therefore, to approach the Epistle untrammelled by any authoritative or continuous Church tradition one way or the other, and to ask what evidence it itself affords as to who wrote it. And in doing so, we may at once get rid of all the theories which rest upon the belief that our Epistle in its present form is a translation from an original Hebrew document. Such, we have seen, was the view of Clement of Alexandria,^ and a similar view gained ^ See p. 9 f. internal evidence AS TO AUTHORSHIP 17 currency in the West through the influence of Jerome. " Paul had written," so he says, " as a Hebrew to the Hebrews in Hebrew," but " what had been eloquently written in Hebrew, was more eloquently turned into Greek ; and this is the reason why the Epistle seems to differ from the other Pauline Epistles." ^ But whatever help this theory may give in the direction thus indicated by Jerome, no trace of any such Hebrew document any where exists ; nor is the thought of it consistent with the phenomena displayed by the Epistle itself The purity and elegance of its language and style, the diffi culties of conceiving any Hebrew or Aramaic original for some of its most striking expressions,^ and the numerous plays on words in which it abounds,* — all point in the direction of the Greek version being the original one. While practically decisive proof that it is so lies in the fact that the quotations in the Epistle from the Old Testament are taken from the LXX, and not from the Hebrew text : * a proof which cannot be set aside on the plea that these quotations may have been first introduced in the translation from Aramaic to Greek, for the writer's arguments are frequently based on peculiarities of the LXX.^ We may safely, therefore, conclude that the Epistle, as we have it now, is the Epistle as it left its author's hands. And we have now to examine the internal evidence which it affords as to who he was. ' 1 " Scripserat [Paulus] ut Hebraeus Ilebraeis Hebraice, id est suo elo- quio disertissime, ut ea quae elo- quenter scripta fuerant in Hebraeo, eloqiientius verterentur in Graecum ; et hanc caussam esse quod a ceteris Pauli epistolis discrepare videatur." Catalog, script, eccles. c. 5. ^ For example, diTa.iyafj.a 5^ KaTTjprLa-oj ; xii. 26 f. dwa^ ; and see further, p. 22. Chap, ii.' i8 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE chap. ii. Internal evidenceagainst the Paulineauthorshipderived from (i) C. ii. 3. And in doing so, it will be found most convenient to consider that evidence in the first place as it bears upon the theory that St. Paul wrote it, and in the event of his failing to satisfy the particulars with which we are con fronted, then to see whether any of the other names that have been suggested do so better. In view of the general consensus of modern scholarship against the Pauline authorship, such an inquiry may seem, perhaps,, no longer necessary. But a view which at one time so largely prevailed in the Church can hardly be definitely set aside without the grounds for this conclusion being at least indicated. And such an inquiry, as we propose, has the further advantage of drawing attention to many important peculiarities of the Epistle itself (i) We begin then with the significant passage c. ii. 3, where the writer, identifying himself according to his general custom with those to whom he writes,^ ranks himself along with them as having received the Gospel at second hand. Neither he nor they had been among the immediate hearers of the Lord ; but the so great salvation which He proclaimed " was confirmed unto us by them that heard." Now is it possible to think of St. Paul, who prided himself so on receiving his com mission directly from the Risen Lord (Gal. i. i, 11 f), writing in this way? Or was there not rather a very special reason on the present occasion why, if he were the writer, he should have asserted his Apostolic authority to the full? To some of the Gentile Churches to whom he wrote it might be of little consequence where the Apostle got his message, so long as it commended itself to them. But no one writing to Jewish Christians to ^ See the use of the first personal pronoun in c. iv. i, 11, 14, 16; vi. I ; .I. 22 ff. ; xii. 28 ; xiii. 1 3 ff. The second person occurs in c. iii. i> 12, 13 ; '^ii. 4; xii. 25, etc. INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 19 exalt the New Dispensation, of which he was minister, over the Old Dispensation, endeared to them by so many sacred ties, would fail to support his message by every means in his power. Luther, therefore, followed by Calvin, does not go too far when he puts this verse in the forefront of the arguments against the Pauline authorship ; while a modern scholar speaks of it as " justly held to be a most grave (or indeed fatal) objec tion " to it.i (2) The indirect evidence which the Language of the Epistle affords points in the same direction.^ Its voca bulary is peculiarly rich. Thayer enumerates about one hundred and sixty-nine words in it which are not found elsewhere in the Greek Scriptures : and though naturally, from the general sirnilarity of their topics, another long list of words and phrases can be made out peculiar to our Epistle and the acknowledged Pauline writings, it is remarkable how many of Paul's most characteristic expressions are here altogether wanting. Thus we do not once find our Lord referred to by the favourite Pauline designation "Christ Jesus"; but, on the other hand, very frequently by the simple name "Jesus," which Paul rarely uses alone. While the familiar phrase " in Christ," in which the Pauline theology may be said to be summed up, is equally awanting. Neither do we any longer find the revelation of God in Christ described as " the Gospel " ; * nor the corresponding verb employed actively of men engaged in its proclamation. When the verb does occur it is in the passive, with reference to the Chap. ii. ^ Westcott, Comm. p. Ixxvi. Calvin's words are, " Caeteriim hic locus indicio est, epistolam a. Paulo non fuisse compositam. Neque enim tam humiliter loqui solet, ut se unum fateatur ex Apostolorum discipulis" {Comm. in loc). ' The peculiarity of our Epistle (2) Lan guage. in this and sirailar directions is well brought out in Seyffarth's Essay, De Epistolae quae dicitur ad Heb raeos indole maxime peculiari, Lip siae, 1 82 1. 2 T6 evayyeKiov. The word occurs in all the Pauline Epistles except Titus. 20 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. (3) Style. divine appeal addressed to men both under the Old and New Dispensations.^ Other familiar Pauline words, which are wholly want ing in our Epistle, are the noun " mystery " Qj,-j(!Tripm), and the verbs "to fulfil" (t^.jjpoSv), "to build up" (otxo8o/j,iiv), and "to justify ' (Sr/.aioiJv) ; while in not a few instances where St. Paul is accustomed to use simple, terse expressions, our writer shows a preference for more sonorous derivatives.^ A similar difference of usage can be traced in the connecting particles employed.^ (3) The independent Style of the Epistle to the Hebrews is equally marked. There is about it a purity of Greek, a literary finish, and a rhetorical art to which St. Paul was an entire stranger. The Apostle was too much concerned with what he had to say to mind very much how he said it ; arid in consequence his overflow ing thoughts often come jerking out with an utter disregard of grammar and of style. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, on the other hand, every sentence is carefully finished, every period exactly balanced.* And the orderly plan of the whole, the springing of each slip in the argument from what immediately precedes,^ ' C. iv. 2, kal ydp itxiiev driy- yeKia-fievoi Kaddirep KcLKetvoi. Comp. ver. 6. " Thus for ixutBjs (l Cor. iii. 8, 14 ; ix. 17) we find ixLaBairoSocsLa (Heb. ii. 2 ; x. 35 ; xi. 26) : for /j-aprvpelv (Gal. v. 3}, avvcin^p- Tupety ( Heb. ii. 4) ; for rb t4\os twv althvoiv ( I Cor. X. II ), -^ crvvreXela. tijov alibvbiv (Heb. ix. 26) ; and for -Koyit^eo-ffai (Rom. iii. 28 ; 2 Cor. x. 11), dpdXoyl^eo-dac (Heb. xii. 3). ' " In the epistles of St. Paul ehi-s occurs 50 times, eiVe 63, Trore (in affirmative clauses) 19, elra (in enumerations) 6, el Si Kal 4, dwep 5, iKTOS el p.ij 3, e'iye 4, /.tTJTrws 12, fiTIK^n 10, iievovvye 3, eav 88 times, while none of them are found in the epistle except Hv, and that only once (or twice) except in quota tions. On the other hand oBev, which occurs 6 times, and edvirep, which occurs 3 times in the epistle, are never used by St. Paul." Ren dall, The Epistle to the Hebrews, Appendix, p. 27, n. i. ^ ^ See, e.g., c. i. 1-4; ii. 2-4; vi. I, 2; vii. 20-22, 23-25; i.\. 23-28; xii. I, 2. "The Epistle to the Hebrews is the only piece of writing in the N.T., which in structure of sentences .and style shows the care and dexterity of an artistic writer." Blass, Grammar of N. T. Creek, Eng. tr. 1898, p. 296. = Thus the mention of the " faith- INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 21 and the use of such aids to style as full-sounding phrases,^ the rhetorical question,^ rhetorical trajections,^ explanatory parentheses,* and vivid pictorial images, sometimes condensed in a simple word, all betray the skilful literary workman.® As examples of these last we may recall the solemn warning to give earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we " drift away," ^ where the thought is of a boat being carried down stream away from secure anchorage ; or the reference to all things as being " opened " ^ to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do, the idea being suggested either by the bared throat of the victim that has been flayed and hung up, or by the drawing back of a criminal's head to expose him to the public gaze.^ (4) Its Quotations from the Old Testament are another distinguishing feature of our Epistle. For not only are they very numerous, but the great majority of them, twenty - one out of twenty - nine, are peculiar to this Epistle among New Testament writings.^ No doubt Chap. ii. ful" High-priest in c. ii. 17 is followed by the comparison with. Moses in c. iii. 1-6, in which faithfulness is a leading trait ; and the reference to " them that have faith" in c. x. 39 by the roll-call of the faithful in c. xi. ¦• For example, Tro\vfiepus Kal Tro\wpJ7roi5 c. i. I ; Trdaa Trapd^atris Kal wapaKoi] ii. 2 ; ivSiKov jUiirSa- iroSoaiav ii. 2 ; Ss eKdBicev iv Se^if rod Bpbvov Trjs p.eya\o3avv7)s ev rois oi'ipavoh viii. I (comp. the simpler Pauline ev de^iqi rod BeoS KaBiifievos, Col. iii. . I ) ; X'^P'-^ ai/j.areKxv(rlas ix. 22. 2 Kal rl ?Ti Uyia ; c. xi. 32. On the other hand, the Pauline rhetorical forms rl oSv ; rl ydp ; ^7/ yivoiro, etc., are wanting. ^ C. vii. 4 (rarpidpxvi) ! x"- ' ' {diKaioo-iJVTjs) ; xii. 23 {Bei}). * C. xii. 17, 21, 25 ; xiii. 17. ° " Si Paul est un dialecticien in comparable, le redacteur de notre epitre a plutot les qualites d'un orateur riche et profond assure- ment, mais qui ne neglige pas non plus les effets de style et la recherche du beau langage." Bovon, IhM. du N. T. ii. p. 391. ^ C. ii. I, ^17 Trore irapapuiofiev. ^ C. iv. 13, rerpaxti^i-ff^iva. * For other examples see West cott, Comm. p. xlviii. ^ Of the twenty-nine quotations twenty - three are taken from the Pentateuch and Psalter. And ofthe primary passages quoted as referring to the Person and Work of Christ, all with two exceptions (2 Sam. vii. 14; c. i. 5 : Isa. viii. 17 ; u. ii. 13) are taken from the Psalms. See the whole of Westcott's vahiEible (.1) Quota tions from O.T. 22 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. this may be partially explained by the nature of the subject with which the Epistle deals ; but this does not affect the further peculiarity of the source whence they are drawn. Thus, though St. Paul in his quotations as a rule makes use of the LXX,' he constantly refers back to the Hebrew text ; but the author of our Epistle, as we have already had occasion to notice, depends wholly upon the LXX, and uses it further, as Bleek has shown,^ in a recension closely resembling the Alex andrian Codex, whereas St. Paul, when he uses the LXX at all, does so in the form of the Vatican Codex. One result of this exclusive use of the LXX has already been adverted to, and though not bearing directly on the point immediately before us, may be most conveniently illustrated here, the fact, namely, that in several instances the writer actually bases his argument upon expressions which have no place in the original Hebrew text.^ Take, for example, the rendering of Ps. xl. 6-8, which is found in c. x. 5-7, " Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body hast Thou prepared me: in burnt-offerings and sacrifices for sin Thou hadst no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I am come (jn the roll of the book it is written of me) to do Thy will, O God " : where it will be noticed that the words, " a body hast Thou prepared me," as in the LXX, take the place of the Hebrew, " Mine ears hast Thou pierced." And yet it is upon this mention of " a body," a body which it is im plied corresponded to God's will, that the author bases his comparison of the effectiveness of the sacrifice of Christ as compared with the effectiveness of the sacri- Dissertation, On the use of the 0. T. in Die Epistle {Comm. pp. 469-75). ^ Hebrder Brief, i. § 82, p. 369!?. ^ Kurtz {Comm. § 3. 2) recalls the words of Jerome, ad Jes. 6. 9 : ' ' Pauli quoque idcirco ad Hebr. epistolae contradicitur, quod ad Hebraeos scribens utatur testimoniis, quae in Hebraicis voluminibus non habentur," INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 23 fices of the Law. Nor to the first readers of the Epistle would this cause any difificulty. The LXX was their Bible in ordinary use, and was regarded by them as possessed of an equal authority with the Hebrew text ; while any perplexity that we may feel as to the validity of the argument is got over by remembering that after all the general sense is not thereby materially affected. In the present passage, for instance, both Hebrew and LXX lead up to the main point, the surrender of will, in which the sacrifice is perfected. Not yet, however, have we exhausted the full peculiarity of our author's mode of citation. St. Paul, it is well known, in quoting from the Old Testament, generally introduces his quotations with the vague " it is written," ^ or where he uses the more personal " saith," joins with it either the name of the human writer, or the general designation "the Scripture" — "Moses saith," "David saith," "the Scripture saith." ^ But in our Epistle the quotations are always made anony- mously.8 Nowhere is there any mention of the name of the writer ; * but invariably the words are ascribed to God as the Speaker (except in one case where God is directly addressed, and the indefinite " one hath some where testified,", c. ii. 6, is employed), or on two occa- sidris to Christ, or on yet other two to the Holy Spirit.® And the explanation seems to lie in the light in which throughout the Old Testament Scripture is regarded ' Tiypairrai.. It occurs sixteen times in the Epistle to the Romans alone. ^ Rom. X. 19 ; xi. 9 ; iv. 3. * A similar practice exists, though not invariably, in the Epistles of Clement and Barnabas. See, e.g., I Clem. 15, 21, 46 ; and Barn. c. 2, 3' S- , '' C. iv. 7 is only an apparent exception. •'"' For God as the Speaker, see c, i. 5 rlvi yap eXitev {sc. b Be'ji] ; i. 7 X^7ei, etc. : for Christ, c. ii. 11, 13 ; x. 5 ff. : and for the Holy Spirit, c. iii. 7ff. ; x. 15. In the last two instances the words are also else where ascribed to God (c. iv. 7 ; viii. 8); while in c. x. 15 the use of /iaprvpel, not Xiyei, points to the Holy Spirit as only the witness to the divine plan, and not the ulti- . mate authority. chap. ii. 24 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. (5) Doc- trinal Teaching Difference of stand point f-om PaulineEpistles as regards the Gentiles, the relation ofthe Law io the Gospel, by our writer. To him it is present, living, always effective, not exhausting itself on its first proclamation, but coming home to each new generation with ever- increasing force in the light of fuller knowledge. (5) And this may prepare us for our last point in the present connexion, and that is the independent position of the Epistle to the Hebrews as regards con tents, or Doctrinal Teaching. Not, indeed, that this has been very generally allowed. At all periods in its history it has been a favourite contention that while it is separated from the Pauline Epistles by such marked peculiarities of language and style as we have just been noticing, it still stands to them in the closest possible relation as regards thought and substance. And this position is still maintained by many modern scholars, who have quite abandoned the idea of direct Pauline authorship.^ We shall have occasion again to notice the amount of truth underlying this contention ; but that it can be accepted in the sense in which it is usually made, seems to us wholly impossible. It will not, indeed, be possible to substantiate this fully till we have examined the teaching of the Epistle in detail ; but in the meantime one or two points that lie on the surface may be noted. Thus there is not a single reference in our Epistle to the Gentiles as such, or to the question of circum cision or uncircumcision, which plays so large a part in the Pauline Epistles. And while the relation of the Law to the Gospel may be said to lie at the root of our writer's argument, as well as of so much of the teaching of St. Paul, the manner of this relation is very ^ Thus Dr. Salmon writes, "On a comparison of the substance and language of the Epistle with those of Paul's acknowledged writings, it appears, I think, with certainty that the doctrine of the Epistle is alto gether Pauline." Introd. to the New Test. 7th ed. p. 421. INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 25 differently conceived in the two cases. By St. Paul the Law is everywhere regarded as an interlude which comes in between the Promise and the Gospel, — an interlude whose function it is to bring home to man the sense of sin, and which stands therefore in direct contrast to the Gospel. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, on the other hand, the Law is regarded rather as an imperfect Gospel, a system of Divine institutions and arrange ments intended to secure and preserve fellowship between God and His people, until God's highest pur poses are revealed.^ And, consequently, the Pauline distinctions between " letter " and " spirit," " the spirit of bondage" and "the spirit of adoption," give place in their turn to those between "shadow" and "substance," "antitype" and "type."^ If, too, both writers agree in attributing the new and better state of things which has been brought in by Christianity to the work of Christ, they draw attention to different points in its historical presentation. The centre of the Pauline system is the Risen Christ, the second Adam, in whom fallen humanity receives as it were a fresh start. But in the Epistle to the Hebrews our thoughts are carried beyond the risen to the Ascended Christ, in whom believers have free access to God. Only once, indeed, and then indirectly, is the fact of the Resurrection even mentioned (c. xiii. 20) ; while again and again we are invited to behold Jesus in His heavenly glory as the Priest or High-priest of ¦^ ' ' L'un abolit la Loi, I'autre la transfigure." Menegoz, La Tlieo- logie de I Epitre aux Hdbreux, p. 190. Comp. also p. 197, " L'auteur de I'PZpitre aux Hebreux est un evoltttiomtiste ; Saint Paul est un revolutiomiaire, en prenant ce terme en son sens exclusivement moral et religieux." 2 It . should be noted that, in verting the usual theological usage nowadays, our writer regards the "type" as primary (c. viii. 5; comp. Acts vii. 44, and contrast V. 43), and the "antitype" as secondary, (c. ix. 24 ; comp. so- called 2 Clem. c. xiv. with Light foot's note, and contrast I ¦ Pet. iii. 21). Chap. ii. the stress laid on Christ'sA scension and Heavenly Priesthood. 26 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. and the result of His worli. Nor is ihe author to be sought among the immediate friends of Paul, such men, titles neither of which occur at all in the Pauline Epistles. And so once more, in keeping with this priestly terminology, we are prepared to find the result of our Lord's work as applied to believers indicated by such words as "cleansing," "consecration," " a bringing to perfection," rather than by the distinctive Pauline "justification.'' The " righteous " man is no longer the man to whom God has imputed a condition which has been freely won for him in Christ, but the man who, through faith proving itself in obedience, has earned the testimony of God (c. xi. 4). Not indeed, it need hardly be said, that there is any real inconsistency between the two writers. On all fundamental points there is complete harmony between them. Only the independent standpoints from which they survey the same great field of truth are so reflected in their theological systems, that nowhere so much as in the sphere of doctrine or teaching does the difference between them appear. And this may ^yell prepare us for a further conclusion. Not only can Paul not be the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, but it is extremely unlikely that the writer is to be sought in the immediate circle of his followers or friends : otherwise he would have repro duced more closely his master's teaching. And yet the Epistle has been so often ascribed to such men as St. Luke, or Barnabas, or Silas, or Apollos, that it is necessary to look a little more closely at their claims.^ ' The name of Clement of Rome has also from the earliest times found supporters. But the un doubted parallels of language with his Epistle (see p. 5 f. ) prove only that Clement used, or copied from, the Hebrews. While the marked differences in rhetorical skill and depth of thought between the two Epistles are wholly destructive of the idea of oneness of author ship. Besides, if Clement was the INTERNAL E'VIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 27 general It was, as we have already seen, on the ground of similarity of diction and style with his acknowledged writings that the name of St. Luke was first associated with our Epistle ; and in more recent times his claims have been again revived, mainly through the influential advocacy of Delitzsch. And, indeed, if we were able, with Clement of Alexandria, to regard the Greek Epistle as the translation of a Hebrew original, much might be said for the view that we owe it to St. Luke in its present form, the parallels of language are often so striking.' But the Epistle is unquestionably an independent writing, and not a translation. And it is equally im possible to admit the view, so strongly advocated by Ebrard, that the form is St. Luke's, but the thoughts St. Paul's ;2 for, as we have just been seeing, it is in the very sphere of thought or doctrine that the differences between it and the Pauline writings are most marked.^ The mere reseniblance in language, too, between it and St. Luke, to say nothing of the fact that it fails in certain important particulars,* is not sufficient of itself to determine the question of authorship. For to apply only one test, an even greater resemblance in language and style can be traced between the writings of St. Chap. ii. (i).«. Luke author, how comes it that no tra dition to that effect was preserved in Rome, where the Epistle was so early known ? 1 Delitzsch's evidence to this effect, which is scattered through his whole Commentary, has been collected by Liinemann, Comm. pp. 27-35. It '^ presented also in an interesting way with additions by Bishop Alexander in his Leading Ideas of the Gospels, 3rd ed. pp. 302-24. And see, further, Simcox, The Writers ofthe N. T. Appendix I. Table iii. 2 Ebrard, Comm. p. 426 f. ^ Even Delitzsch admits that ' ' it always seems strange that we do not anywhere meet with those particular ideas which form, so to speak, the arteries of Paul's doctrinal system." Comm. ii. p. 412. * Kurtz gives as examples that Luke always describes the Heads of the Church as irpea^irepoi, but our author only as 'T}yo6/j.evoi (c. xiii. 7, 17, 24), and that the former describes baptism only as ^dw- na/j.a, never as. in our Epistle as ^airrta-fijs (c. vi. 2). Comm. p. 18, note. 28 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. (2) Silas. (3) J^"'- nabas. Luke and of St. Paul.' And yet no one imagines that the former had anything to do directly with the production of the Pauline Epistles. Apart, moreover, from all such considerations, it is sufficient to point out that the author of our Epistle must, according to an apparently unanimous consensus of opinion, have been a Jew ; while St. Luke, from the manner in which in Col. iv. 14 he is distinguished from those " who are of the circumcision " (ver. 1 1), was in all probability a Gentile. The same objection does not apply to Silas ; but, on the other hand, the very closeness of his connexion with the Church at Jerusalem seems to be fatal to his claims. One who could be described along with St. Paul and Barnabas as one of the "chief men among the brethren " (Acts xv. 22), could hardly class himself in the second rank in point of time of apostolic men (c. ii. 3). Nor have we any evidence of the possession on his part of that Alexandrian training which, as we shall see more fully afterwards,^ our author must have possessed. It is, however, principally on the ground of the total want of any positive evidence connecting his name with the Epistle that Silas must be set aside.^ It is just in this latter particular that the strOng^est point may be made on behalf of Barnabas. He was distinctly nam.ed by TertuUian as the author, and in a way which suggests that that Father was giving not merely his own personal opinion, but the general opinion of the Church in Africa.* But if so, we cannot help ^ See Ploltzmann, Die Synop- tischen Evangelien, p. 316 ff. ;' and the Tables in Plummer's St. Liil;e {lntern.at. Crit. Comm.), p. livff. ^ See Chap. IX. ^ He was first suggested by the German theologians Mynster and Bohme, independently of each other, in support of certain theories of their own regarding the Epistle, and his name has recently found little or no support, though it is favoured by Godet in the Expositor, 3rd Ser. vii. p. 264. " See p. 7. INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 29 asking. How comes it that the tradition was confined to Africa, and was apparently not so much as known in the Roman or the Alexandrian Church ? Is it not just possible that TertuUian made a mistake, and confused our Epistle with that other Epistle which was widely cir culated in the early Church as the work of Barnabas, and which still bears his name ? If, indeed, this later Epistle could be accepted as the genuine work of Barnabas, we would have conclusive evidence against his connexion with the Epistle before us ; for the two writings, though possessed of a common aim, exhibit a most marked contrast in style and treatment.^ While even if, as is now generally admitted, we look upon the so-called Epistle of Barnabas as really the work of another,^ there is still the same difificulty, as in the case of Silas, of associating the Epistle to the Hebrews with a man whose home seems to have been in Jerusalem (Acts iv. 37), and who stood on such close terms of intimacy with the first apostles (Acts ix. 27 ; xi. 22; Gal. ii. 13).^ There remains still the name of Apollos, a name which, if not originally suggested by Luther, certainly became first known through him.* And it must be at once admitted, that the particulars we can gather re garding Apollos from the pages of the New Testament correspond in a wonderful manner with the particulars which the Epistle itself discloses as to its author. Apollos was a " Jew ... an Alexandrian by race, an eloquent man . . . and he was mighty in the Scrip- ' Westcott, Comm. pp. Ixxx-iv. 2 See Hefele, Das Sendschreiben des Apostels Barnabas aufs neue untersucht, Tiib. 1840 ; and J. G. Miiller, ErJddrung des Barnabas briefes, Leipzig, 1869. The tradi tional view is defended in Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biogr., art. Bar nabas. '* Notwithstanding the above diffi culties, the writing of the " word of exhortation" (Heb. xiii. 22) by the "son of exhortation" (Acts iv. 36) is perhaps at present the favourite hypothesis especially among German scholars, and is the one to which we would most readily incline if it was necessary to fix upon a name. •^ See p. 13. Chap. (4) Apollos. 30 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. ii. Ignoranceas ro authorship. tures " (Acts xviii. 24). He was apparently a. friend of Timothy (i Cor. xvi. 10-12; Heb. xiii. 23), and though standing in a close relation to St. Paul was yet inde pendent of him (i Cor. iii. 4). While the retiring dis position with which St. Paul credits him (i Cor. xvi. 12) is in harmony with our Epistle,' in which the writer keeps his own personality so much in the background. But, at the same time, when occasion required, Apollos could "speak boldly" (Acts xviii. 26; Heb. iii. 6 ; x. 35), and the subject of his public disputations with the Jews, "showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ" (Acts xviii. 28), might well be taken as the basis of the teaching afterwards unfolded in the Epistle. Striking, however, as these resemblances are, in the total absence of any early tradition in the Church to confirm it, the suggestion of Luther must remain as at best merely a happy conjecture, whose wide acceptance " is only ex plicable by our natural unwillingness to frankly confess our ignorance on a matter which excites our interest." ^ And yet, apparently, it is to this frank confession of ignorance that we are in the meantime shut up.^ Not withstanding the unwearied labours of many scholars, and the fresh and varied light which their researches have thrown on many debateable points regarding our Epistle, so far as the problem of its authorship is con cerned, if we except the negative conclusion that at least it was not written by St. Paul, or by anyone closely associated with him, the Church to-day is still little further on than in the days df Origen, taking his words as applicable to ultimate authorship as well as to present form : " But who it was who wrote the Epistle, God only knows certainly." ^ It is in this respect, as Delitzsch has ^ Westcott, Comm. p. Ixxlx. - For a Table of the different views that have been held as to authorship, see appended Note, p. 32. ^ See p. 10. INTERNAL EVIDENCE AS TO AUTHORSHIP 31 well remarked, "like the great Melchizedek of sacred story, of which its central portion treats. Like him it marches forth in lonely, royal, and sacerdotal dignity, and like him is d^EvsaXo'yjj-o; ; we know not whence it cometh nor whither it goeth." ^ . Nor is this conclusion, unsatisfying as at first sight it may appear, without its compensating aspects. " Was it not meet," asks Professor Bruce, " that he who tells us at the outset that God's last great word to men was spoken by His Son, should disappear like a star in the presence of the great luminary of day ? Was it not seemly that he who wrote this book in praise of Christ the Great High Priest, should be but a voice saying to all after-time, ' This is God's beloved Son, hear ye Him ' ; and that when the voice was spoken he should disappear with Moses, Aaron, and all the worthies of the old covenant, and allow Christ Himself to speak without any medium between Him and us?"^ While Dr. Westcott justly claims the anonymous Epistle as a witness to the spiritual wealth of the Apos tolic age : " We acknowledge the divine authority of the Epistle, self-attested and ratified by the illuminated consciousness of the Christian Society ; we measure what would have been our loss if it had not been included in our Bible ; and we confess that the wealth of spiritual power was so great in the early Church that he who was empowered to commit to writing this view of the fulness of the Truth has not by that conspicuous service even left his name for the grateful reverence of later ages. It was enough that the faith and the love were there to minister to the- Lord (Matt. xxvi. 13)."'' Chap. Compensating aspects of this ignorance. ^ Couim. i. p. 4. 2 Expositor^ 3rd Ser. vii. p. 178. Comm. p. Ixxix. Note. NOTE The Authorship of the Epistle The following Table, showing the views that have prevailed as to the Authorship of our Epistle, is taken with additions from Holtzmann, Einleitung in das N.T. 3te Aufl. pp. 296, 301, and MiSnegoz, La Theologie de I'Epitre aux Hebreux, pp. 62, 63 : — I. Luke : (independently) Calvin — (under the influence of Paul) Stier, Guericke, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alexander, among Protestant theologians; Hug, DoUinger, Zill, among Roman Catholic theologians. 2. Clement of Rome : (independently) Erasmus — (under the influence of Paul) Mack, Reithmayr, Langen, Bisping, among Roman Catholic theologians. 3. Silas: Mynster, Bohme, Godet. 4. Barnabas : J. E. Ch. Schmidt, Ullmann, Twesten, "Wieseler, Volkmar, Ritschl, Grau, Thiersch, B. "Weiss, A. Maier (Rom. Cath.), Keil, Kiibel, H. Schultz, Renan, Overbeck, de Lagarde, Zahn, Harnack ; And in England ; Salmon. 5. Apollos : Luther, L. Osiander, Leclerc, Heumann, L. Mulier, Semler, Ziegler, de 'Wette, Bleek, Feilmoser (Rom. Cath.), H. A. Schott, Tholuck, Liinemann, Bunsen, Kurtz, L. Schulze, de Pressensd, Hilgenfeld, Scholten, Reuss, Pfleiderer ; And in England; Alford, S. Davidson, Farrar, Moulton. 32 THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE EPISTLE 33 6. Paul : Storr, G. W. Meyer, Steudel, Paulus, Stein, Gelpke, Scheibel, Olshausen, 'VVichelhaus, Jatho, Hofmann, Volck, v. d. Heydt, Biesenthal, Holtz heuer, Laharpe, Hofstede de Groot, among Protes tant theologians ; The majority of the Roman Catholic theo logians ; And in England and America ; Stuart, Foster, Bloomfield, 'Wordsworth, M'Caul, Kay, Angus, Field. 7. An unknown Jewish-Alexandrian writer: Eich horn, Seyffarth, Neudecker, Baumgarten - Crusius, Moll, Kostlin, Ewald, Grimm, Hausrath, Kluge, Lipsius, von Soden, Holtzmann, Mendgoz, Jiilicher; And in England ; Rendall, Dods, W. R. Smith, ¦Westcott, Vaughan, A. B. Davidson, and Bruce. Note. Chap. iii. I. The Destination. No help from the title. Evidence from the Epistleitself. Tlte readers were (i) members ofa definite community : CHAPTER III THE DESTINATION, DATE, AND PLACE OF WRITING OF THE EPISTLE From the inquiry, Who wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews ? we turn naturally to the inquiry. To whom was it written? Who were the readers for whom it was in the first instance intended? And here again we are. at once met with the striking peculiarity that while the Epistle contains no direct mention of its writer, neither does it name those to whom he wrote. For it must be kept in view that the familiar title " To the Hebrews " formed no part of the original. Epistle,! and that, even if it did, it would in itself be ambiguous, as the word "Hebrews" {"ElSpaToi or 'EBpaToi) is used in the New Testament sometimes of the Aramaic-speaking Jews of Palestine in contrast to the Hellenists or Greek-speaking Jews (Acts vi. i), and at other times of Jews generally, whatever language they spoke, in contrast to Greeks or Gentiles (2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Phil. iii. 5). We must turn therefore to the Epistle itself for what indications we may gather from it regarding its readers. And here the first point that strikes us is that they were evidently members of a definite community. The ^ It is found however in our of writers holding such different earliest existing MSS. (c. 400 A.D. ), views regarding its authorship as and still earlier {c. 200 a.d.) in TertuUian (see p. 7), and Clement references to the Epistle on the part of Alexandria (see p. 9). THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 35 absence of any formal introduction,^ such as we find in the Pauline Epistles, has indeed sometimes led to the conjecture that the writing is of the nature of a theological treatise addressed to Hebrew Christians generally,^ or even to all wavering and dispirited be lievers,^ rather than an Epistle written with a definite circle of readers in view. But the closing verses and salutations point clearly in the latter direction,* and this conclusion is confirmed by the intimate acquaint ance which the writer shows throughout with his readers' state, and the deep personal feeling which underlies his practical appeals.^ No better definition of the writing indeed can be given than the author's own. It is a " word of exhortation," which he has addressed to certain " brethren " from whom for the time he has been parted, but to whom he hopes soon to be restored.^ It would appear further that these brethren consisted of men "in the same general circumstances of age, position and opinion"'' They are treated at least as all holding the same views, and being exposed to the same dangers. And this has led to the conjecture that they formed onty a part of a larger community, a view to which a certain amount of support is lent by their being addressed apart from their leaders.^ In any case they must have been a comparatively small body, for 1 This has been explained on different grounds, as that the watch fulness of the writer's enemies made concealment necessary (Ewald), or that he occupied no position of authority in the Church (Weiss). 2 "The first systematic treatise of Christian theology" addressed to "Jewish Christians, in general, considered from a theoretical point of view." Reuss, Hist, of Christ. Theol. ii. p. 241 f. » " Das Schreiben ist an alle Schwankende und Verzagte gerich- tet, wenn gleich mit besondrer Riicksicht auf die Judcnchristen." Biesenthal, Das Trostchreiben des Apostels Paulus an die Hebrder, p. 19. ¦* C. xiii. 7, 17-19, 22-24. ^ Comp. c. V. II, 12; vi. 9, 10; X. 32 ff. ; xii. 4. •> C. xiii. 22, 23. Note eitiareika (ver. 22), itself pointing to a writing of an epistolary nature. ' Westcott on c. v. 11. ^ C. xiii. 17, 24. Chap. iii. (2) in ihe same gene ral circu7u- stances : 36 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Ciiap. iii. (3) and of Jewish ex traction. This proved by special refereTlces, such a general similarity of circumstances to have existed among them, and this explains further the par ticularity of the writer's references : " Take heed, brethren, lest haply there shall be in any one of you an evil heart of unbelief"; "Looking carefully lest there be any man that falleth short of the grace of God.''^ When we pass to the question of the readers' nationality, we are at once met with the traditional view, to which the title gives expression, that they were of Je-a>ish extraction. And numerous indications of this have been found in the Epistle itself In his opening words, for example, the writer, who was clearly himself a Jew, speaks of "the fathers" to whom God spoke in the Old Testament prophets, in an absolute way which implies that they were not only the spiritual, but the lineal ancestors of himself and his readers. And similarly in c. ii. 16, the latter are described as " the seed of Abraham," in a connexion where to give the words a metaphorical or spiritual meaning would both destroy the contrast with the " angels " of the previous clause, and break the chain of the writer's argument which throughout rests on the real oneness between the Saviour and those He comes to save (comp. ver. 11). And so again with the familiar designations, borrowed from the Old Testament, " the people" (c. ii. 17; xiii. 12) or "the people of God" (c. iv. 9). It is true that elsewhere we find Gentile converts described in the same way (Tit. ii. 14 ; i Pet. ii. 9, 10). But this is impossible, as Weiss has pointed out,2 in the case of an Epistle, where, throughout, these designations are applied to the Old Testament covenant people,^ whose lineal descendants Christian believers 1 C. iii. 12; xii. 15. Comp. c. " C. v. 3 ; vii. 5, 11, 27; ix. iv. 1. 7, 19; xi. 25. ''¦ Hebrder Brief, p. 21. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 37 are everywhere represented to be. It is as such, for example, that in c. iv. the Hebrews are invited to enter into the rest into which their fathers had failed to enter; and again are exhorted to "go 'forth . . . without the camp," outside the old limits of Israel, within which they must first have been, in order to enjoy the full benefits of the New Covenant offering (c. xiii. 13. Comp. ver. 11). While elsewhere the effect of that, offering is directly represented as " the redemp tion of the transgressions that were under the first covenant" (c. ix. 15. Comp. xiii. 12). Apart however from such special indications of the readers' nationality, as these and similar passages contain, the intimate acquaintance with Jewish rites and customs which is throughout assumed, and still more the whole tone and argument of the Epistle, unmistakeably point to Jewish readers. Only to them would an argument based all through on a comparison between the Old Covenant and the New, a setting forth of how much better Christianity is than Judaism, come home with living force. Only they would hold so closely to the Divine authority of the Old Testament Scriptures, that these could be used, as throughout this Epistle ,they are used, as one great means for their instruction and encouragement. Only they could share in the fond recollections with which even amidst the glories of the new, the writer recalls the memories of the vanished age. Whatever, indeed, the precise relation in which the author stood to his readers, it seems impossible not to think of them as having these memories as a common possession, or to regard his Epistle otherwise than as the direct, personal appeal of one who had himself proved the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, and who now desired his believing Jewish fellow-countrymen to rise with him to the full sense of their privileges. Chap. iii. and by the general tone and argU' ment ofthe Epistle. 38 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Cliap. iii. Recent aitefnpis to substitute the thought of Gentile readersnot eslal)- lished by the passages usuallycited. It would be unnecessary to dwell upon this, so generally has the idea of a Jewish destination for the Epistle been admitted, were it not for the numerous attempts which have lately been made to substitute the thought of Gentile readers.^ It may be that these attempts are largely made in the interests of a par ticular locality, to which it is contended that the Epistle was addressed, a contention to which we shall return again ; but in any case it is confidently alleged that there are certain passages in the Epistle, which only the thought of a Gentile destination can explain, passages such as c. vi. i, 2 ; ix. 14; xiii. 4 ; and xiii. 24. But a brief reference to these will show that this in terpretation is both unnecessary and erroneous. Take the first of them : " Wherefore let us cease to speak of the first principles of the Christ, and be borne on unto perfection ;. not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the teaching of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment" (c. vi. i, 2). Here, it is said, the "first principles '' enumerated are evidently those elementary doctrines of Christianity which Gentiles would need to be taught as a foundation for further instruction. But were they not equally " first principles " for the Jews ? And what more natural than that the writer should recall them to his Jewish fellow-countrymen, before passing on to the "perfection" to which he was summoning them ? The plural " baptisms " seems ^ The thought of Gentile readers was apparently first entertained by Roeth in 1836 {Epistolam vulgo "ad Hebraeos" inscriptam non ad Hebraeos, id est Christianas genere fudaeos, sed ad Christianas genere Gentiles et iptidem ad Ephesios datam esse. Francof. ad Moen. ), and has since been revived, amongst others, by Weizsacker, Das Apostolische Zeitalter, p. 473 f. (E. tr. ii. p. 157 ff.); von Soden, Haiid- Comm. vi. p. 1 1 ; Jiilicher, Einl. in das N.I', p. no ("an Christen schlechthin, ohne jede Reflexion auf ihre Nationalitat") ; and McGiffert, History of Cliris- tianity in the Apostolic Age, p. 465 ff. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 39 indeed expressly used so as to include the various "washings" which were customary among the Jews (comp. c. ix. lo) along with Christian baptism: and Menegoz has further pointed out that the striking expression " faith upon God " (t/Vtewj ior/ km) implies more readily the idea of continued trust in a God whose existence is beyond dispute, and in whom Jewish Christians had always believed, than the belief in the existence of the true God in opposition to heathen idols, which is adopted by those who favour the Gentile address.^ Nor does this contrast between the true God and idols underlie the correct interpretation of c. ix. 14: " How much more shall the blood of the Christ, who through eternal spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God ? " The writer simply, as elsewhere in the Epistle (c. iii. 12; x. 31 ; xii. 22), adopts the expression, so familiar to the Jews in the Old Testa ment, of " the living God " to denote God as He is in Himself, or as He is now manifesting Himself in His Son. Similarly the exhortation of c. xiii. 4, "Let marriage be had in honour among all," is directed not, as is alleged, against a certain ascetic tendency which had begun to show itself among Gentile converts (comp. I Tim. iv. 3), but rather against all unlawful and im pure relations, as the remaining words of the verse clearly prove, " And let the bed be undefiled : for for nicators and adulterers God will judge.'' While once more, the closing salutation, "They of Italy salute you " (c. xiii. 24), whatever bearing it may be found to have upon the readers' locality, in no way determines their nationality. J La Theologie de F Epitre aux Hibreitx, p. 25. Chap. iii. C. ix. 14. C. xiii. , C. .via 24. 40 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. Nor can we think ofa viixed com munity of Jews and Gentiles. Conclusion. There is then, it appears to us, no direct evidence in the Epistle itself in favour of a Gentile destination. The whole possesses rather what Menegoz well char acterises as a so thoroughly Jewish " flavour of the soil,"^ that we are at once led to think of Hebrew readers, and of Hebrew readers only. For neither is it possible to imagine, as many are tempted to do, a mixed community of Jews and Gen tiles. Had this been the case, must there not inevitably have been some reference in the Epigtle to the vexed questions which were at the time agitating all such communities, and with which St. Paul deals so fully in his Epistles? But of any such reference there is not the slightest trace.^ Not because the writer is blind to the needs of the Gentiles, or for a moment thinks of them as altogether outside the pale of salvation, but because he is primarily concerned with the needs of certain fellow-countrymen to whom he is writing, and still more because, in accordance with his whole theological system, he regards the Jewish Church as the seed-corn, out of which the universal Church is developed.* We conclude therefore that, whoever the first readers of the Epistle may have been, they were neither Gentiles, nor a mixed community of Jews and Gentiles, but Jews, men of Hebrew race and upbringing, who had been ' " Ce qui nous frappe, au con- traire, dans cette Epitre, c'est, dans toutes ses parties, un 'gout de terroir ' juif tellement prononce et une absence si complete de toute allusion au culte paien, que nous avons quelque peine a comprendre qu'on puisse y decouvrir la moindre indication revelant des lecteurs sortis du paganisme." Menegoz, Theol. de r£p. attx Hebr. p. 26 f. 2 Not even in c. xiii. 9 where the " divers and strange teachings " and the "meats" do not refer to such ascetic tendencies as St. Paul condemns (Rom. xiv. 15,20; i Cor. viii. 8), but rather to those Judaistic principles and practices, from which the writer would have his readers come forth. "The real point is, that the Apostle connects these teachings with the ' camp,' and sees an antithesis between them and 'grace,' the principle of the new covenant." Davidson, Comm. in loc. ' Comp. Riehm, Der Lehrbegriff des Hebrderbrief es, p. 168 ff. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 41 converted from Judaism to Christianity, but who required further instruction in the true character of their new faith.^ When, however, we pass to the question of where these Jewish Christians were located, it is not so easy to come to a definite conclusion, and it will be necessary to examine somewhat in detail the claims that have been put forward on behalf of three separate places. From the earliest times it has been customary to look for them at or near Jeriisalem, principally on the grounds that there we shall most easily find a Jewish Church free from Gentile admixture ; that there Jewish Christians would be most readily exposed to the attacks of their Jewish fellow-countrymen ; and, above all, that it is in the immediate vicinity of the Temple that we most readily look for that too great dependence upon Jewish rites and customs which the readers of the Epistle are supposed to manifest.^ But the first two reasons can in no sense be regarded as conclusive arguments in favour of Jerusalem, for there are many other places which would suit these conditions equally well ; while, as regards the third, nowhere in the Epistle, as a matter of fact, have we any evidence that those addressed were engaged in the practice of Temple- worship. For the present tenses, under which the old Jewish ritual is described, and which are appealed to in this connexion,* are the presents not of actual observ- ^ Westcott dismisses the idea of a Gentile destination as nothing more than " an ingenious paradox " {Comm. p. xxxv). And in the same connexion so advanced a critic as Beyschlag writes, " In spite, therefore, of all the wander ings of recent criticism, we must rest content with the statement of theold superscription TT/jos 'E^patoDs; and only by clinging to this is the letter iljuminated, while the view which makes it to be addressed elsewhere thrusts it into complete darkness " {New Testament Theo logy, Eng. tr. ii. p. 287). -' Comp. Bleek, Hebrder Brief, i. pp. 28 ff., 55 ; Liinemann, Comm. pp. 42, 56 ; Riehm, Lehrbegriff, PP- 33 ff- Other supporters of this destina tion are Hug, de Wette, Tholuck, Thiersch, Delitzsch, Godet, Weiss, Westcott, Vaughan, and Bruce. 3C. viii. 4,5; ix. 6ff., 18; x. iff.; xiii. I off. In almost all these cases Chap. iii. II. The Locality of the readers. I. Jerusa lem. A rguments in favour of Jerusalem ; but these not conclusive. 42 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. Reasonsagainst the Jerusalem address. ance, but what we may call Scripture-presents. The writer speaks from the point of view of the record in Scripture.! While a further blow is given to this whole theory by the fact that the references throughout are not to the services of the Temple at Jerusalem at all, but to the old Tabernacle ritual of the wilderness. And so again with the assertion that the Hebrews are evidently treated as if they regarded participation in the sacrificial ritual " as a necessary requirement for the complete expiation of sins," not only is there no direct evidence for this, but so far from underlying " the whole argumentation of the Epistle as an everywhere-recurring presupposition," as Liinemann would have us to believe,^ it is rather directly contrary to it. For had it been the case, how then, as Zahn has well pointed out, could the writer have praised his readers' early faith and love (c. iii. 14 ; vi. 10 ; x. 22, 32 ff) without going pn to indi cate in the clearest manner why what had formerly been a permissible part of true faith could no longer be so regarded, and, above all, without demanding their separa tion from the Temple cultus, which they had come so to' misunderstand, with something of the same energy with which St. Paul called upon his converts to separate themselves from their old idolatry (i Cor. x. 14-22 ; 2 Cor. vi. 14-17).* Apart moreover from these considerations, there are not a few reasons which seem wholly to exclude Jerusalem from amongst the possible destinations of the Epistle. Thus it is difficult to think of an Hellenist, like the author, standing in so close a relation to the Jerusalem Church, as is here supposed, or addressing its the translators of the A.V. have erroneously substituted past tenses. ^ For a similar use of the present tense see Jos. Ant. iii. 6 ; c. Apion, i. 7, ii. 23 ; Clem. Rom. I Cor. 40, 41 ; Ep. ad Diogn. 3 ; Just. Dial. c. Tryph. 117. ^ Comm. p. 56. = Real- Encycl. f. prot. Theol. 2te Aufl. V. p. 662. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 43 members in such terms of strong reproach as, " When by reason of the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that some one teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God " (c. v. 1 2 ; comp. vi. 1-3). Rather if Jerusalem is the destination, we would expect some indication, which is however wholly wanting, of its position as the Mother -church of Christendom, from which already teachers had been "scattered abroad . . . preaching the word."i Nor can we easily reconcile c. ii. 3 with a Church in which many of those who had seen the Lord must still have been alive (comp. i Cor. xv. 6). The fact too that the Epistle is written in Greek, and that singularly pure Greek,^ and that its Old Testament references are based throughout on the LXX, and not on the original Hebrew,* is hardly what one would , expect in an Epistle addressed to the Aramaic-speaking Jews of Palestine. While again it would be strange, to say the least, to find a Church which elsewhere we hear of only as requiring to be ministered to, here described as ministering to others.* If too the statement, " Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin " (c. xii. 4), is to be taken as meaning that in their history as a Church the Hebrews had not yet been called_^ upon to shed blood, this would be impossible in the case of a Church which had already furnished as martyrs St. Stephen and St. James.^ ' Acts viii. 4, 25 ; xi. 19 ff.; Rom. XV. 27 : contrast Heb. v. 12. ^ There are fewer Hebraisms in Luke and the Epistle to the Hebrews than in any other parts of the N.T. See Schaff, Cotn- panion to the Greek Test. p. 27. ^ See p. 22. "•Acts xi. 30; xxiv. 17; Gal. ii. 10 ; I Cor. xvi. 1-4 ; 2 Cor. viii. 4; ix. 1, 12 : contrasted with Heb. vi. 10. ^ This difficulty is often got over on the plea that the reference is only to the Hebrews' present troubles, to them as the second generation of the Church : and the recollection of previous martyrdoms is then sup posed to add point to the present e-xhortation (so Westcott). But the author's mode of regarding the community to which he writes as having an historical identity (c. ii. 3 ; V. iiff. ; vi. gff. ; x. 32 ff. ) is, as Chap. iii. 44 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. 2. Alex andria. Wiesele^s proof un tenable. In view of these and similar difficulties, many have accordingly sought the destination of the Epistle in Alexandria.! In the Temple of Onias, at Leontopolis, a few miles distant from Alexandria, if not in the Temple at Jerusalem, may be found, it is said, those surroundings of Temple-worship and ritual which the circumstances of the readers require. And Wieseler, one of the strongest advocates of this destination, thinks that he has found conclusive proof of it in the correspondence of certain supposed devia tions in the Epistle from the arrangements of the Temple at Jerusalem with what from other sources he believes to have been the constitution and practice of the Temple at Leontopolis.^ But in this he has been conclusively shown by Grimm amongst others, to be wholly wrong.-* And it is the less necessary to repeat the refutation, because the whole position, while other wise untenable,* falls to the ground in view of the fact already alluded to that the references in the Epistle are Davidson well points out, decidedly against this view. The words must accordingly mean, not that in the Hebrews' present troubles persecu tion had not gone the length of bloodshed, "but that in their his tory as a church they had not yet been called upon to shed their blood" {Comm. p. 235). Davidson himself favours the idea that the Epistle was addressed to some com munity ofthe Dispersion in the East, and so Rendall, who thinks specially of Antioch. ^ The external evidence claimed in support of this view from the Canon of Muratori is quite unten able. See p. 7, note i. ^ See his Chronologie des apostol. Zeitalters, p. 479 ff. ; and especially Eine Untersuchung iiber den Hebrderbrief in the Schriften der Universitdt zu Kiel, 1861, 1862. The passages from the Epistle on which he relies are c. vii. 27 ; ix. 1-5 ; and x. II ; all of which are capable of other explanations. ^ See the elaborate article in the Zeitschrift fiir wissenschaftliche 'Theologie, 1870, pp. 57-67. Grimm himself thinks the Epistle may have be^ addressed to Jamnia (p. 71). "• Thus, so far from the Alex andrian Jews themselves holding the temple at Leontopolis in peculiar honour, we know that they were in the habit rather of sending their yearly temple-gifts to Jerusalem, and even of going pilgrimages there, so long as Herod's temple continued to exist. (Comp. Philo, Opp. ed. Mangey, ii. p. 646 : KaB' bv -xpbvov eis rb Tcarpi^ov lepbv ea-re\\bfx,riv ei^ifievbs re Kal Bicsuv.) The temple at Leontopolis was finally closed in the time of Vespasian (Joseph. B. fud. vii. 10. § 4). THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 45 throughout not to any temple at all, but to the old Jewish Tabernacle. Stronger support for the Alexandrian address of the Epistle may be found in its use of the LXX according to the Alexandrian Codex, in its word-correspondences with the Alexandrian Book of Wisdom ^ and the Second Book of Maccabees,^ and in fact in its generally-admitted Alexandrian tone and colouring. It is allowed how ever that these considerations point to the personality of the writer as well as to the locality of the readers. And though Dr. Samuel Davidson, one of the few English scholars who favours, though not decisively, this address, thinks that only in Alexandria could readers be found able to appreciate our writer's reason ing, or follow his spiritualising of Judaism,* it must not be forgotten that Alexandrian culture was widely spread, and could be looked for at Jerusalem, or any other great centre of Jewish influence.* While what seems almost decisive against Alexandria itself as the destina tion is the fact that though the Epistle was so early known and valued in the Church there, that Church, according to a very consistent tradition, believed it to have been addressed to the Hebrews of Palestine.^ There remains still the conjecture that the Epistle was addressed to Rome, a conjecture which may be said to be the favourite at present, at anyrate among Alexandrian address in addition to Wieseler may be mentioned Ritschl, who, after maintaining the Jerusalem address {Enst. d. Alt. Kirche, p. 159), came round to this view {Sttid. u. Krit. 1866, H. I, p. 9off.) ; and R. Kostlin ( Theol. falirbb. of Baur and Zeller, 1854, H. 3, p. 388 ff. ). Plumptre regards the Epistle as addressed to the Jewish Christian ascetics in Alexandria {Expositor, 1st Ser. vol. i. pp. 428-432}. I 3 ; iirbaraai? c. i. 3 ; Bepdicoiv <-. iii. 5 2 Mace. vi. iSff. , ' Compare e.g. TroXv/j.epios c, Wisd. vii. 22 ; diraiyaa-iia c. Wisd. vii. 25 f. Wisd. xvi. 21 Wisd. X. x6. 2 C. xi. 35 f. vii. 3 Introd. to the Study ofthe N. T. (1868) i. p. 267. * We read, for example, of a Synagogue of Alexandrians at Jeru salem, Acts vi. 9. ^ Amongst upholders of the Chap. iii. Other argu ments not decisive. 3. Rome. 46 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. This destination supportedby external evidence, and by in ternal evi dence, such as the references to persecu tion. German scholars, and which certainly meets many of the circumstances of the case.^ Thus it agrees well with the external evidence which goes to show that the Epistle was well known in Rome from the earliest times, and further that the Roman Church knew that it was not written by St. Paul.^ And its anonymous character may even find an ex planation in the fact that the author modestly shrank from putting himself into apparent rivalry with St. Paul, by whom an Epistle had directly been addressed to the Roman Christians.* On this same hypothesis too not a few of the in ternal references in our Epistle gain a fresh significance. Take, for example, " the great conflict of sufferings," through which the Hebrews are represented as having formerly passed (c. x. 32 ff.). By those who think that the Epistle was addressed to Jerusalem, these are usually referred to persecutions undergone by the Hebrews at the hands of their unbelieving fellow-countrymen on account of the new faith they had adopted. But the expressions used point more naturally to persecutions at the hand- of heathen persecutors,* and are very usually referred to the Neronic persecutions in 64 A.D. ^ It was first made, so far as we can discover, by Wetstein in 1752 {Nov. Test. ii. p. 386 f. ), and after receiving the strong support of H. Holtzmann {Stud. u. Ki-it. 1859, H. 2, p. 297 ff.) has been adopted by, amongst others, Kurtz, Renan, A. Harnack, Mangold, Schenkel, Zahn, and von Soden. In England it found a warra sup porter in Alford. Prof Bruce refers to a recent and able contri bution in support of it in Reville's Les Origines de I' Episcopal, Paris, 1894, which we regret we have been unable to see. ^ Euseb. H. E. iii. 3 ; rrpb^ t^s 'Pu/aaiwi' eKKXrjo^las us /lij HaiiKov o&a-av abrijv avrikiyeaBaL. ^ Alford, Comm. iv. pt. i. ch. i. § II. 36. For our writer's acquaint ance with the Epistle to the Romans, see Chap. IX. of this volume. ^ Qearpl^oiJ.evoi — rois Sea/Mlois — rrjv dpirayriv rdv inrapxbvruiv ifiGiv (c. X. 33 f ). The last was we know a common Roman punishment, and is specially mentioned in connexion with the persecution of the Jews under Domitian (Euseb. H. E. iii. 17). The very fact, too, that there were "possessions'" to spoil sug gests the inhabitants of a wealthy town like Rome rather than the poor saints at Jerusalem. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 47 and after.! But for these again, with their hitherto unexampled horrors, they are not strong enough. How, for example, of a Church that had come through them could it be said, " Ye have not yet resisted unto blood" (c. xii. 4)?^ And we are led therefore to think rather of the expulsion of the Jews under Claudius about the year 50 A.D. Of the circumstances attending this expulsion, which is expressly referred to in the Book of Acts (c. xviii. 2), we know very little ; but the words of Suetonius, which ascribe it to tumults that had arisen in the Jewish quarter " at the instigation of Chrestus," are generally taken as alluding to the effect of the early preaching of Christianity.* While the fact that the expulsion from Rome was not wholesale, as we can gather from the precise statement of Dio Cassius,* enables us to imagine the unbroken continuance of a small Jewish- Christian Church in the Capital, then, as ten years later, "everywhere spoken against" (Acts xxviii. 22); and upon which, at the time of our Epistle, fresh sufferings were apparently falling,^ sufferings which may after wards have developed into the terrible persecution under Nero. Another particular which gains a fresh meaning from the Roman address is the mention of Timothy in c. xiii. 23. That the Church at Jerusalem had any ^ Others again, as Harnack, refer them rather to the persecutions under Domitian about 95 A.D. 2 Ewald feels this difficulty so much that he understands the destination of the Epistle to be not Rome, but Ravenna {Das Send schreiben an die Hebrder, p. 6).^ 3 "Judaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma ex- pulit." Claud. 25. For similar riots resulting from the preaching of Christianity, comp. Acts xiii. 50 ; xiv. 19 ; xvii. 5 : and see Sanday and Headlam, Comm. on Romans, p. xxi. f. ¦* Dio Cass. lx. 6 : roii re '\ov- Salovs, ir-Keovda-avras aD^ts ibare XaXeTTws &.v dvev rapaxijs iirb rov b-x\ov (TtpuJV rrjs TroXews elpxBrjvai, oi/K e^7]\a(re fUv, ri^ bk Bij icarpli^ vd/j.(p /3t(f> xpw/t^pous e/cAeutre fir] trvva- Bpoi^ea-Bat, rds Sk eraipelas eirava- xBelaas virb rov Votov SiiXv^e. ^ Comp. u. X. 25 ; xii. 4 ff. , 26 f. ; xiii. 13. Chap, iii. and to Timothy, 48 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. and to " they of Italy." Difficulties in the way of tlie Roman destination special interest in him, we have no reason to believe ; but we can at once understand how eagerly his return would be looked for at Rome, where he was already so well known. And so again, with the salutation in the following- verse, " They of Italy salute you." ! On any hypothesis which does not connect the Epistle in some way with Italy, it is difficult to understand why the greeting of these Italian Christians should thus be specially sent in an Epistle which is peculiarly free from personal touches. But if the author is writing, as we have been imagining to the Church in Rome, what more natural than that he should associate with him in his closing salutations certain Italian Christians who are with him at the time.^ It is true that the words are grammatically capable of another interpretation. They may mean, "Those who are in Italy send greeting from Italy":* in which case they would indicate the place from which the Epistle was written, rather than its destination. But if this were so, would not the writer naturally have used some more specific designation, and spoken of "those from Rome," or whatever the particular town where he was at the time ? In any case the words can hardly be set aside as contributing nothing to the solution of the question now before us. And any theory which enables us to give them a full and natural meaning may justly claim their support. On the other hand, there are certain grave objections to the Roman destination, as it is commonly under stood, which cannot be lost sight of Thus, we have ^ ' Affird^ovrai {i^ds ol dirb rijs 'IraXlas (c. xiii. 24). ^ For a similar use of aTro as in dicating absence at the time frora the place spoken of, comp. Matt. XV. I ; John i. 45 ; Acts vi. 9 ; x. 23 ; xxi. ^7 ; xxiv. 18, etc. ^ Winer-Moulton, Grammar of N. T. Greek, 8th ed. p. 784, where however the first rendering is also admitted to be possible. THE DESTINATION OF THE EPISTLE 49 seen that there is every reason to believe that our Epistle was addressed in the first instance to a purely Jewish-Christian Church, whereas the Epistle to the Romans " implies a mixed community, a community not all of one colour, but embracing in substantial proportions both Jews and Gentiles."! As a Church, too, it would seem to have owed its origin to the congregating in Rome of believers from all parts of the world, rather than to the direct influ ence of individual teachers, as was the case with the Hebrews.^ And once more, it is very difificult to reconcile the vigorous faith of the Church, which St. Paul describes as " proclaimed throughout the whole world " (Rom. i. 8 ; comp. xvi. 19), with our writer's description of his readers as having " become dull of hearing," and " such as have need of milk, and not of solid food " (c. v. 11,12). If therefore the Roman hypothesis is to be main tained, some modification of it must be found to which the above-named objefctions do not apply. And that is possible if in "the Hebrews" we see neither the whole nor a part of the great Roman Church, as it meets us for example in St. Paul's Epistle, but a smaller Christian community with an older origin still, and which had continued to maintain an independent existence. Nor is the existence of such a community in Rome wholly conjectural. In the Book of Acts we are ex- ^ Sanday and Headlam, ut s. p. xxvi. It may be noticed however that many scholars beheve the fewish element in the Church of Rome to have been particularly strong, as Sabatier ( The Apostle Paul, Eng. tr. p. 190 ff.), who refers for what he considers to be decisive proof to Mangold, Der Romerbrief und die Anfmige der romischen Gemeinde (Marburg, 1866). Comp. also 4 Renan, Hibbert Lectures, 1880, p. 57 ff. Alford's argument in the same direction from the frequency with which St. Paul strikes in his Epistle the note " To the Jew first " ( Comm. iv. pt. i. ch. i. § II. 25) has Httle or no weight, as this simply embodies the rule of Christian expansion our Lord Himself laid down. ^ C. ii. 3, 4 ; comp. x. 32 (puria- Bhres, a definite historical event. Chap. iii. leading to a ¦modifica- iion ofthe ordinaryview. so INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. pressly told that amongst those who listened to St. Peter's address on the Day of Pentecost were " sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes" (c. ii. lo). And what more natural than that these on their return to Rome should proceed to evangelize their fellow-country men, amongst whom there was in fact " a synagogue of the Hebrews." ! And if so, was it not inevitable that the imperfect acquaintance with Christianity, which alone these new teachers had been able to acquire, should result in an equal ignorance on the part of those they taught of the deeper aspects of the faith — an ignorance which, as we shall see more fully afterwards, it was the great object of the writer of this Epistle to dispel ? ^ ' We are very far indeed from maintaining that the Roman destination of our Epistle is thus conclusively established. All that we would say is that in the form in which we have endeavoured to present it, it rests on certain definite historical grounds both external and internal to the Epistle, and is free from the grave ob jections which attach themselves to such destinations as Jerusalem or Alexandria.* ' 2uj'a7W7-)) Al^peuiv. Schiirer, Hist, of few. People in the time of Jesus Clirist, Eng. tr. Div. II. vol. ii. p. 248. ^ In further support of the gener ally Judaistic character of the early Christianity in Rome, and which may possibly be traced to some such circumstances as we have been de scribing, the words of Ambrosiaster, a, fourth-century writer, may be re called. They are quoted by Sanday and Headlam (p. xxvf), who however think that he exaggerates the strictly Jewish influence on the Church. " Constat itaque tempori- bus apostolorum ludaeos, propterea quod sub regno Romano agerent, Roraae haiiitasse : ex quibus hi qui crediderant, tradiderunt Romanis ut Christum profitenles, Legem ser- varent. . . . Romanis autem irasci non debuit, sed et laudare fidem illorum ; quia nulla insignia vir- tutum videntes, nee aliquem apos tolorum, susciperant fidera Christi ritu licet ludaico " (S. Ambrosii Opp. iii. 373 f., ed. Ballerini). ^ As siiowing the extraordinary variety of opinion that has always existed regarding the destination of our Epistle, it may be interesting to mention a few of the other places that have been suggested, as — An tioch (Bohme, Hofmann), Cyprus (Ullmann), Galatia (Storr and Mynster), Laodicea (Stein), Ephesus (Baumgarten Crusius, Roeth), Corinth (Michael Weber, Mack, Tobler), and Spain (Nicolaus a Lyra, Ludwig). THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE 51 If we have been correct in the arguments on which we have rested the probable destination of the Epistle, the question of Date narrows itself down within certain well-defifted limits. It must fall be tween the expulsion of the Jews from Rome under Claudius in 50 a.d., and the Neronic persecution which began in 64 A.D. And there are two con siderations which incline us to place it nearer to the second or later date, than to the earlier. One is that what we have been led to regard as the suffering of the Jews under Claudius is distantly referred to in the Epistle as " the former days " {rae Tponpov ruiipac, c. x. 32). The other that, as we have seen (p. 47), there are not a few indications in the Epistle that other and severer sufferings were actually commenced, sufferings which, in the lack of other information, it is natural to identify with the first threatenings of the Neronic persecution itself The year 63 or 64 A.D. seems therefore to meet best the whole circumstances of the case. And even if the Roman hypothesis has to be abandoned altogether, we would not be inclined to place the Epistle more than a very few years later. Though there is nothing in the Epistle itself actually to determine that the Temple was still standing at the time of writing, its whole argument is better adapted to the state of mind which would exist before, rather than after, the overthrow of Jewish national hopes and expectations in the terrible catastrophe of 70 A.D. Nor indeed is it easy to imagine that that event could have occurred withoiit leaving some dis tinct trace on our writer's pages, in view of its close connexion with his theme. All theories therefore which place the Epistle as late as the time of Domitian {c. 90 A.D.), or even of Trajan {c. 116 A.D.), seem to Chap. iii. III. The Date ofthe Epistle. i.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iii. IV. The Place of Writing. be out of keeping with the general conditions of the writing.! As regards the Place of 'Writing, absolutely nothing can be determined with certainty. The subscription, which is found in our A.V., " Written to the Hebrews, from Italy, by Timothy," has, it need hardly be said, no independent authority.^ And though the greeting, " They of Italy salute you " (c. xiii. 24), has often been supposed to point in the same direction, the words are capable, as we have seen, of a different interpretation, which expressly places the writer in some place outside of Italy. Where, however, this was, is quite uncertain. The only point on which there appears to be any sort of agreement is that in all probability it was a seaport town, as the writer seems to have been on the point of setting out to rejoin the Hebrews, and Corinth, Ephesus, Alexandria, and Caesarea * have in consequence all been suggested. But no definite evidence can be brought forward in support of any one of them, and in these cir cumstances it is wisest simply to confess our ignorance. ^ See Westcott {Comm. p. xliii), who himself places the Epistle be tween 64 and 67 A.D. (in which he is at one with the majority of modern writers, as Tholuck, Liine mann, Wieseler, Riehm, Kurtz, Keil, B. Weiss, Menegoz, A. B. Davidson, and "Vaughan), and most probably just before the outbreak of the Romish-Jewish war in the latter year. Rendall and Bruce think that the war had actually begun. ^ In the form given above it is not found in any MS. of the Epistle earlier than the ninth century. The Alexandrian MS., however, reads, Tcpbs "E^palovs iypdcfn) dicb Pti^Tjs. ^ Caesarea was favoured by Ewald {Das Sendschreiben a. d. Hebrder, p. 8), and it is interesting to find the same conclusion recently arrived at, on apparently quite independent grounds, by the Rev. W. M. Lewis (in the Thinker, 1893, 1894 ; and The Biblical World, Aug. 1898) and Prof. W. M. Ramsay (in the Expositor, Nov. 1898, p. 330). The last two writers also, though differ ing as to authorship, agree in fixing the date as early as 58-60 a.d. CHAPTER IV THE READERS, AIM, CHARACTERISTICS, AND ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE We have already seen that the Hebrews formed a small community of Jewish Christians, located probably in Rome, who owed their first enlightenment in Christian truth to certain teachers, who had come under the direct influence of the Lord's followers. And we have also ventured the conjecture, that if these teachers can be identified with the " sojourners from Rome," whom we hear of as being in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost, we have at least a possible explanation of the rudi mentary character of the Hebrews' first faith. The imperfect acquaintance with Christianity, which alone from their circumstances these teachers would be able to acquire, would necessarily reflect itself in their disciples, and result in their faith continuing to be largely tinged with the spirit of the Synagogue. Whether however this be the exact cause of the Hebrews' condition or not, there can be no doubt as to their need of further instruction in Christian truth, or as to our writer's intention to supply this in the Epistle before us. He recognises gratefully indeed the practical proofs of their sincerity which, on their first enlighten ment, the' Hebrew Christians had afforded. They had proved themselves active in the exercise of Christian love, ministering to the necessities of the saints 63 Chap. iv. I. The spiritual state ofthe Hebrews. Their danger lay in i-niperfect apprehension of Christi anity, 54 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iv. ratherthan in threatenedapostasy to Judaism. (c. vi. lo) : when persecution had arisen, they had endured resolutely " a great conflict of sufferings," and shown a ready compassion towards them that were in bonds : they had even welcomed with joy the s-poiling of their possessions, realising through trial (//kwo-xovt-es) that they had their own selves for a better possession and an abiding one (c. x. 32-34). But, notwithstanding all this, the writer sees that the Hebrew Christians were in a very critical state. Owing to their imperfect appre hension of the true nature of Christianity, they had not only not made the progress that might have been expected of them, but had "become dull of hearing"; and instead of being teachers, as from the time they might well have been, they had need rather that some one teach them again " the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God" (c. v. 11, 12). Their failure in spiritual growth too had been accom panied, as is ever the case, by failure in practical life. There was no longer the same zeal in frequenting the Christian assemblies, and discharging the consequent responsibilities (c. x. 25). And the ministering to others' needs, though it had not wholly disappeared (c. vi. 10), was apparently in danger of being weakened, if not supplanted, by a spirit of covetousness (c. xiii. i, 2, 5). This is not, it must be admitted, the account of the Hebrews' state which is always, or even generally, given. By many writers, and more especially by those who favour the Jerusalem address of the Epistle, their peculiar danger is thought to lie rather in a threatened apostasy to Judaism. Exposed on all sides to the attractive influences of their old worship, threatened with persecution at the hands of their unbelieving Jewish fellow-countrymen, taunted it may be with a lack of patriotism amidst the imminent perils which were overhanging their land, and disappointed on their own THE READERS OF THE EPiSTLE 55 account at the delayed Second Coming of the Lord, the Hebrews, we are told, had lost heart, and were on the point of relapsing from Christianity altogether. The practical compromise which they had hitherto attempted, superadding the acceptance of Christian truth to the observance of many Jewish customs, seemed to them no longer possible, and in the choice to which they now felt themselves shut up, it was Judaism that was proving the stronger power.! But of this state of things, plausible though it sounds on the assumed premises, there is no direct evidence in the Epistle itself^ Nowhere, whether in the elaborate contrasts which he draws between the New Covenant and the Old, or in the practical appeals with which he accompanies them, does the writer warn his readers against falling back into the religion of Moses.* The lessons which he draws are of an entirely different and more general kind.* " How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?" " Take heed, brethren, lest haply there shall be in any one of you an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God." "Let us therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace, that we may receive ^ For a recent statement of this view comp. Hort, fudaistic Chris tianity, p. 156 ff. -^ Thus Maurice, who himself favours the Jerusalem address of the Epistle, notices that " it is remark able that these Hebrew Christians are not charged with open and con scious departure from any truth which had been delivered to them by their early teachers, with any apparent abandonment of the duties belonging to their own peculiar position. The one complaint of them is, that they had been content with their first imperfect apprehen sions, that they had not laboured after a fuller and deeper know ledge" (Warburton Lectures on The Epistle to the Hebrews, p. 11). ^ Even in c. xiii. 9 where the ' ' divers and strange teachings " and the "meats" are to be under stood of Jewish practices (see p. 40), the incidental way in which this danger is referred to at the close of the Epistle shows it to be " only a symptom of the general retrogres sion of religious energy " (Jiilicher, Einleittmg in d. N.T. p. ill). J Comp. McGiffert, History op Chrisfianity in the Apostolic Age, p. 466 f. Chap. iv. This shown from the Epistleitself. 56 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iv. mercy, and may find grace to help in time of need." " And we desire that each one of you may show the same diligence unto the full assurance of hope even to the end : that ye be not sluggish, but imitators of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." " Let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the leader and perfecter of faith." ! And even in the solemn warnings against the worst of all sins, the wilful denial and repudiation of Christ after once accepting Him (c. vi. 4-8 ; x. 26-31), there is not only " no sign," as has been well pointed out, that the writer " thinks of such apostasy as due to the influence of Judaism, or as connected with it in any way,"^ but, what is often lost sight of, he expressly excludes the Hebrews from the number of those who had fallen into this sin. " But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salva tion, though we thus speak '' (c. vi. 9). " But we are not of shrinking back unto perdition ; but of them that have faith unto the gaining of the soul " (c. x. 39). At the same time, the very fact that the writer thinks it necessary to draw attention to this sin, combined with the earnest tone of exhortation which runs through the whole Epistle, proves in what real danger the Hebrews were, not only of not understanding the full significance of the doctrine they held, but of allowing it to lose its power over them altogether. While if, as we have . already seen, fresh persecution against them was imminent, if not Actually commenced, we have a still further reason for the anxiety felt on their account, as iv. 16 ; vi. because of the weakness of the flesh. He gave away a future blessing for a present good. This is a fault not of sceptics and un believers, but of a weak people who need inspiration and encourage ment. " ^ C. ii. 3 ; iii. II, 12 ; xii. I, 2. '' McGiffert, uls. p. 467. McGiffert further cites Heb. xii. 16 as instruc tive in this connexion. ' ' Esau sold his birthright not because he did not believe it had value, but THE AIM OF THE EPISTLE 57 well as a natural explanation of the references to their and their leaders' former steadfastness under similar trials.! In these whole circumstances then, our writer sees that what the Hebrews require is to have brought home to them the true meaning and power of Chris tianity, for that only thus will they be strengthened to hold firm to the knowledge they already possess, as well as be urged onward to another and a higher stage of progress. And it is, accordingly, to this- un folding of the true glory of their new faith in contrast with the old, in which they have been brought up, that he sets himself And in doing so, he makes free use of that aspect of religion as a covenant, which was so familiar to his readers from their early upbringing, and assumes, what no one will think of denying, that this is the perfect ¦religion, in which the covenant -relationship of com munion between God and man, and man and God, is perfectly and finally accomplished. The text indeed of the whole Epistle may be found in the twice-quoted prophecy of Jeremiah : " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." ^ For it is in Christianity adequately understood, that the writer claims that the New Covenant has at length been fulfilled, and its consequent blessings of spiritual obedience, and universal knowledge, and forgiveness of sin completely realized. God, he recalls, has always been revealing Himself that by the revelation of His character and plan He may lead men into that communion and fellowship with Himself, in which alone they can find the true 1 C. X. 32 ff. ; xiii. 7. ^ Jer. xxxi. 31 ff. ; Heb. viii. 8ff. : . 16 f. Chap. iv. II. Conse quent Aim ofthe •writer to unfold the true mean' ing of Christi anity. Use made of the co7'e- nant-idea. 58 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iv. III. Certain general Characteristics. (i) N.T. facts are takenfor granted. (2) Use 7tiade of O.T. satisfaction of their nature, and the true happiness of that state in which His love designs that they shall live. Only now, however, has He done so with a fulness and perfection which have reached their culminating point. It follows, therefore, that previous revelations are to be regarded less as inferior to the present, than as shadows of it, and preparations for it. It follows also, that those who have been favoured with the later revelation are not to think of it as a mere step in an upward progress from which they may rise to another and a higher. No future revelation will or can be given. And the duty of such as live in the present light is to let the light shine into them, and so to realize the fulness of the blessing which is already theirs. Once the Hebrews have done so, once they have laid hold of the " solid food " which is being held out to them, and for which they are now prepared, they will see the propriety of ceasing to speak of the first principles of Christ, and be borne forward to that perfection which is the believers' true goal (c. vi. i). We shall see again what are the principal arguments on which our writer depends for accomplishing this. In the meantime certain general Characteristics of the Epistle as a whole may be noted. Thus, the outstanding facts of the Christian Revela tion are throughout taken for granted. Nowhere does the writer offer any proof of them. Nor is this necessary, for the Hebrews, whatever their sins and shortcomings, are still Christian believers, and it is in the true signi ficance, and not in the credibility, of the Christian facts that they require to be instructed. And for the purpose of this instruction, the writer, like a skilful apologist, falls back upon the help of that older revelation, which is still to him and to his readers the direct Word of God. And in the utterances of CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EPISTLE 59 Psalmist and Prophet and in the Divine institutions and ordinances of the First Covenant, he teaches the Hebrews to find not only evidence of God's gracious dealings with His people in the past, but also pre- intimations of the great salvation which had first been assured to them in Christ. The words of Ps. ex. 4, for example, " Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek,'' are made the basis of the demonstration of the true character of Christ's High- priesthood upon which the main argument of the Epistle depends. While again, the services of the great Day of Atonement, in which the whole Jewish sacri ficial system was, as it were, summed up, are expressly stated to be "a parable for the time then present" (c. ix. 9), a pointing forward therefore to the inward and spiritual cleansing, which in themselves they were unable to accomplish. The whole Jewish economy is thus treated as symbolic, and it is. by the contemplation of "the antitype," alike in its glory and its failure, that the Hebrews are taught to rise to the full meaning of " the type." For it cannot be too clearly kept in view, that the writer's ultimate aim is not merely to show that Christianity is better than Leviticalism, but that in itself it is the absolute, the perfect religion. Behind "the apologetic better" we are always led to see " the dogmatic best" ! At the same time, the directly practical character of the whole Epistle is very marked — so marked that by many it has been regarded as its leading aim. And though we have preferred to keep the doctrinal exposi tion in the foreground, it is readily admitted that the writer's chief interest in his great theme is the effect it will have upon those to whom it is presented. ¦¦ Bruce, art. Hebrews, Epistle to, in Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, vol. ii. p. 327. Chap. iv. (3) Prac tical char acter of the Epistle. 6o INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iv. (4) 'ts general method. So far, indeed, is he from regarding the truth as a mere matter of theory, that he is not able to wait, as St. Paul frequently does, for the conclusion of his doctrinal argument before enforcing his practical appeal. With him rather, the doctrinal and the prac tical are intermingled throughout ; and at each step of his exposition he pauses to press home upon his readers the vital significance for them of the truths he has been unfolding.! This feature of the Epistle, however, while adding so much to its personal interest, makes it very difficult to formulate any detailed plan of its contents. When doctrine and appeal are so closely intermingled, and when the author is constantly recalling some truth in order to emphasize it, or cautiously preparing the way for some idea strange to his readers, which he desires afterwards to develop, there must necessarily be differ ences of opinion as to the exact division of the argu ment. At the same time, nothing can be more certain than that the author had before him from the first a definite conception of the course he was to follow. The general progress of his thought is clear, and with a true literary instinct he uses even his practical appeals to pave the way for what is to follow.^ In the Note appended to this chapter we have accordingly attempted to indicate in a tabulated form the relation in which the principal parts or divisions of the Epistle stand td each other.* Here we may content ourselves with a brief resume or analysis of its contents as a whole. It will prepare us for the closer examination of its teaching or doctrine, to which we are next to turn. ^ Witness the practical exhorta tions in c. ii. 1-4, iii. 7-i9i iv. 14- 16; V. Il-vi. 20; x. 19 ff. ^ See p. 20. "Von Soden regards the whole Epistle as constructed according to the laws of ancient rhetoric, and finds in this another proof of the writer's Greek culture {Hand-Comm. vi. p. 6ff. ). * See Note, p. 66. ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE 6l The main theme of the Epistle, as we have already seen, is the perfection and finality of the Christian religion, conceived as a covenant - relationship which God has established with man. And as in every covenant the important point is the person by whom it is mediated, the writer in his opening words strikes the keynote of all that is to follow in a contrast between the prophets through whom of old time God spake to the fathers, and a Son in whom at the end of these days He has spoken to us. It is this Son, the effulgence of His glory, and the very image of His substance, whom God has appointed heir of all things, and who, having made purification of sins, is now set down at God's right hand, there awaiting the complete fulfilment of His work (c. i. 1-4). Already therefore it is to the Son as King-Priest, though the title is not actually used, that our thoughts are directed. But before he proceeds to develop this, the leading idea of his Epistle, the writer pauses to emphasize the glory of the Son's Person as compared with the agents by whom the Old Covenant had been mediated. The first comparison is between the Son and the angels by whom, according to Jewish belief, the Law was given ; and the Son is shown to be superior to the angels both from what in Himself He is (c. i. S-14), and from the' glory to which through humiliation He has been raised (c. ii. 5-18); while a short practical appeal is inserted between these two arguments warning the Hebrew Christians of the danger of neglecting the " so great salvation " that has been secured to them (c. ii. 1-4). A second comparison is then instituted with Moses, who occupied an altogether unique position in the Jewish economy, but who, in his turn, is shown to be inferior to the High-priest of the Christian confession, Chap. iv. IV. Analy sis of Con tents. The main theme. Tlie superi ority of the Son over angels. and over Moses. 62 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap, iv. The High- priesthood ofthe Son. even Jesus. For faithful though he was, Moses was only a servant within God's house, while Jesus was a Son over it. And through Him consequently believers in their turn become the true house of God, if they hold fast their joyful confidence firm unto the end (c. iii. 1-6). Another practical appeal naturally follows, in which the writer first of all impresses upon his readers the need of this continued faith and perseverance (c. iii. 7-19), and then shows them that there is still a true Sabbath-rest after which to strive, of which the rest of Canaan offered to their fathers had given them the promise (c. iv. 1-13). Having thus paved the way by show ing the supreme excellence of the Son, the writer enters upon the main section of his Epistle (c. iv. 14-x. 18). Its theme is the High-priesthood of the Son, to which incidental reference has already twice been made (c. ii. 17 ; iii. i) ; and the leading thoughts are (i) the Person of the Son as High-priest, and (2) the nature of the High- priestly work which in consequence He is able to perform. As regards the first of these points, we are first shown that Christ possesses the qualifications of every High- priest, seeing that He has been appointed by God, and is able to sympathize with man ; and further, that, while sharing these qualifications with the Aaronic high- priests. He stands on a very different footing from them. His Priesthood belongs to another and a higher order altogether, an order which the writer, making use of an Old Testament illustration, describes as "after the order of Melchizedek" (c. v. i-io). No sooner however has he introduced this thought, than he again pauses, to rouse his readers from the dulness of apprehension into which they have fallen. ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE 63 and to remind them, that the solid food which he desires to communicate is only for full-grown men, who have ceased to occupy themselves with merely the rudiments of the faith, and have their spiritual senses trained by means of use to discern what is best fitted for the strengthening of the soul (c- v. 1 1-14). Such men, considering -the time, the Hebrews must be held to be, and therefore with them he desires to be borne onward unto perfection. Their former Christian life, and the love which they continue to show to the people of God, are to him sufficient guarantee that, notwithstanding all their shortcomings, they are still in the way of salvation. And his great wish is, that they give diligence to have their hope full, and to sustain it in this fulness to the end (c. vi. 1-12). In this constancy of hope they have an example in their great ancestor Abraham who, having patiently endured, obtained the promise. To them, as to him, is the same encouragement held out, encouragement in their case all the greater, because their hope is anchored in heaven itself, whither as forerunner Jesus has entered, "having become a High- priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek '' (c. vi. 13-20). Having thus ingeniously brought his practical appeal round to the point in his argument where he had broken off, the writer proceeds to unfold the meaning of Christ's Melchizedekean Priesthood, using for that purpose both what Scripture says regarding Melchizedek, and also what it leaves unsaid (c. vii. i-io). And theri when the glory of this new Priesthood has been fully established, falling back upon his favourite method of contrast, he shows the relation of what he has been saying to the ancient Levitical priesthood. If this latter had succeeded in effecting the end at Chap. iv. 64 INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE Chap. iv. The Son's High- priestly fninistry. which all priesthood aims, the perfecting, namely, of the worshipper, and bringing him into a true and abiding relation with God, no other priesthood would have been necessary. Only because it had failed is the promise given of another Priesthood, not only new, but of a wholly different type from the old. For the Mel chizedekean order is not legal but spiritual, not carnal and consequently transitory, but eternal ; while, as confirmed by an oath, it is immutable, and inviolable, because it is embodied in one, and does not pass on to another (c. vii. 11-25). It is because Christ is High- priest after this order, that He perfectly meets the needs of humanity, and is able to discharge a perfect ministry (c. vii. 26-28). In describing this ministry, the writer indicates first generally the conditions under which Christ discharges it, and which determine the nature of the New Cove nant He has set up (c. viii. 1-13). And then he contrasts it in detail with the ministry of the Levitical high-priest. Alike in scene, and in priestly service, it excels it. For the Tabernacle which the Levitical priests serve, glorious though it is, is only the shadow of an eternal reality, and into its inmost shrine the high -priest alone can enter, and that only once a year after offering .for himself, and for the people. But Christ, the eternal High-priest of a greater and more perfect Tabernacle, has entered once for all in His own blood, and so obtained eternal redemption (c. ix. I-14). Thus, through the outpouring of His blood, a New Covenant has been inaugurated. At " the consummation of the ages " Christ hath been manifested to put away sin by His sacrifice, and men now await the return of their great High-priest to announce the complete accomplishment of His work (c. ix. 15-28). ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE 65 The culminating point of the writer's argument has now been reached : but a new difificulty starts up before him which he fears may prevent his readers from entirely acquiescing in the conclusion to which he has come. May not the Hebrew Christians say, " We can understand your argument, but it is a strange thing, is it not, that in that case the Almighty should ever have prescribed the Levitical ministry at all. Does not the fact that its rites are part of this Divine and glorious Law, prove that you have not done them justice ? " To meet this, accordingly, the writer turns from the special rites with which he has been dealing in order to show that this want of finality and completeness belongs to the very nature of the Law, and that in express Divine utterances it looks forward to the Christ that is to come. And this he proves first in relation to the work of Christ (c. X. i-io), and secondly in relation to the effect His work produces on us (c. x. 1 1-18). The remainder of the Epistle is mainly hortatory, though even here, so close is the relation in our writer's mind between doctrine and practice, that two summaries of his preceding arguments, couched in the loftiest pos sible language, are introduced (c. xii. 18-24; xiii. 8-12). The whole concludes with a personal Epilogue in which, after expressing the hope that he will soon see them again, the writer conveys to the Hebrews his final greeting, " Grace be with you all. Amen." Chap. iv. Its relation to the Levitical ministry. Appropria tion of the truth laid down. Epilogue. Note. NOTE General Plan of the Epistle The Theme of the Epistle ; the Finality of the Christian Religion, as mi;diated in a Son : c. i. 1-4. I. The Supreme Excellence of the Son's Person : c. i. 5-iv. 16. This shown more particularly in His superiority to — I. Angels : c. i. 5-ii. 18. 2. Moses : c. iii. 1-6. Practical Exhortation : c. iii. 7-iv. 13. II. The Consequent Glory of the Son's High-priest hood : c. iv. 14-x. 18. Exhortation introducing the subject : c. iv. 14-16. I. The Son as High-priest: c. v. i-vii. (i) The Son possessed ofthe general qualifications of all priesthood : c. v. i-io. Renewed Exhortation preparing for the main truth : c. v. 11 -vi. (2) The Son an absolute High-priest, because a High- priest after the order of Melchizedek : c. vii. 2. The Son's High-priestly Ministry: c. viii. i-x. 18. (i) Its general conditions : c. viii. 1-13. (2) Its relation to the Old Covenant : c. ix. (3) Its finality : c. x. 1-18. III. The Appropriation ofthe benefits of the Son's High-priestly Work ; c. x. ig-xii. Personal Epilogue : c. xiii. 66 PART II THE THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE CHAPTER V THE COVENANT-IDEA AND THE PERSON OF TPIE SON We have seen already, that the great theme of our Epistle is the Finality of the Christian Revelation, and that, in supporting his theme, the writer approaches the consideration of all God's dealings wiih men from the old Jewish standpoint of a covenant, the underlying idea of which may be summed up in the words of the prophet Jeremiah : " I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people." ^ In accordance moreover with the regular Biblical practice this covenant is regarded not as an agreement entered into between God and man, but rather as a saving provision instituted wholly by God,^ who further, in keeping with the covenant-idea, is conceived not so much as a King or righteous Ruler, whose law is to be obeyed, but as a God of holiness (c. xii. lo) to be worshipped or served (c. ix. 14 ; xii. 14). While those with whom He enters ^ Jer. xx.xi. (xxxviii. ) 33 ; Heb. viii. 10. ^ This aspect of the Old Covenant is emphasized in our Epistle by the substitution in c. ix. 20 of the strong iverelkaro for diiBero of Ex. xxiv. 8 ; while in c. viii. 6 it is expressly said that the New Covenant " hath been enacted {vevoixoBirrirai.)," or constituted by Divine legislation, " upon better promises." According to Professor A. B. Davidson : "By the time of the LXX translation berith had become a religious term in the sense of a onesided engagement on the part of God, as in P and late writings ; and to this may be due the use oi^ the word diaBijKii, disposition or appointment, though the term was then somewhat inappropriately ap plied to reciprocal engagements among men." Art. Covenant in Hastings' Did. of tlie Bible, i. p. 514. Chap. V. The cove nant-idea. 70 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. Failure of the First Covenant, and estah* lishmeni of the Second. into covenant are not individuals, but a nation or people, who in virtue of the provision He has made draw near to Him (c. X. I, 22). Such a people Israel became under the First Covenant, but it was only on condition of their keeping the law, and here they failed. They " continued not " (c. viii. 9), and " a consciousness of sins " (a-jnldrigiv a!J,apricov, c. x. 2) was awakened in them by their failure.^ If therefore the covenant was to be maintained, means had to be sought by which this sinful defilement might be removed, and the barrier that had been raised up broken down. And these were found in the divinely- appointed order of priests and sacrifices, and, above all, in the services of the great Day of Atonement, in which the high-priest entered immediately into the presence of God, as the representative of the people, embodying as it were in his own person the continuance ofthe covenant relationship, and making an ideal atonement for the whole nation. But, gracious as these provisions were, they were not sufficient to accomplish fully the desired end. " The law made nothing perfect" (oiih yap inXi'msiM h voiior., c. vii. 19). The First Covenant was not "faultless" {S.lMcii'TTroc, c. viii. 7), and, conscious of its own imperfec tion, gave promise of another priest (Ps. ex. 4 ; Heb. vii. 17), and a better sacrifice (Ps. xl. 6, 7; Heb. ix. 23 ; X. 9), by means of which a Second Covenant was established, which was not only " new " in point of time {via, c. xii. 24), but "new" in point of quality {¦/.aivri, c. viii. 8; ix. 15), and which could also be ' It is important to notice that these sins, as committed within the covenant, are regarded as sins of weakness or ignorance (c. iv. 1 5 ; V. 2), or negatively as ' ' dead works " (c. vi. I ; ix. 14) ; and that in their effect they are thought of not so much as bringing down the wrath of God upon those who commit them, as of 'hindering their free approach to God. THE COVENANT-IDEA 71 described as " eternal " (aliiinoi, c. xiii. 20). For while under the First Covenant the priests were " having infirmity" (c. vii. 28), that is, men mortal and con stantly-changing (vv. 8, 23), the Priest of the New Covenant was made " not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an indissoluble life" (c. vii. 16). And while the sacrifices of the First Covenant effected at most a purification of the flesh (c. ix. 13), and had constantly to be repeated (c. x. i), the offering of the High-priest of the New Covenant " hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified " (r£-£A£/wz£i/ Sig ro di^viy.i; ro-jc ayiaf^dfjj'ivo'jc, C. X. I4). The Epistle thus resolves itself largely into a com parison between the two Covenants, or, as the covenant- relationship rested on the priesthood as its foundation or basis (Jt' aur^g mo/j-ofirnrai, c. vii. 1 1), and any change in the priesthood carried with it a corresponding change in the covenant or economy of which it formed a part (c. vii. 12), into a comparison of their respective priest hoods. But the character of the priesthood, in its turn, depended upon the personnel, or, to use the common phrase in the Epistle, the " order " of those of whom it was composed. And consequently it is round the "order" of the High-priest ofthe Christian confession that our writer's argument principally turns. His place of ministry, the nature of His offering, and the efficacy resulting from it, all depend upon the kind of Priest He is. And it is because He is a High-priest, not after the " order of Aaron," but after the " order of Melchizedek," that the Covenant which He has established is final and eternal. Before however he comes to that, the writer has to show that both by nature and training Christ is fitted to be a High- priest of this "order," and it is to these two points Chap. Connexion of covenant with priest hood. 72 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. V. The Chris tian High- priest a SON. Use ofthe title in the Epistle. accordingly that the opening chapters of the Epistle are directed. ^ And, in approaching them, we cannot perhaps do better than try to group their teaching, along with later passages in the Epistle bearing on the same points, round the distinctive title of SON as applied to Christ. It is a title which we find in the ordinary combina tions, " the Son of God " (c. vi. 6 ; vii. 3 ; x. 29), and "Jesus the Son of God" (c. iv. 14), and once by itself, " the Son " (c. i. 8) ; but in addition, it is also used here, as nowhere else .in the New Testament, without the article — the intention being evidently to lay stress on the nature or character, rather than the personality, of Him who is so designated. Thus, in the opening verses of the Epistle, the writer begins by reminding his readers that while God has spoken to the fathers " in the prophets," in itself a title of honour, to us He has made use of a higher messenger still. He has spoken " in a Son." Or, as the words may be paraphrased, in order to avoid any possible ambiguity of suggesting that there may have been more sons than one, " in one that is Son," one who possesses all the lofty characteristics and qualities to which the title Son points. Similarly, in the comparison which is instituted between " the Apostle and High-priest of our Confession, even Jesus" and Moses, while the faithful ness of both is recognised, the faithfulness of Moses is shown to be only that of " a servant " in the house, but Christ is faithful as "a Son" over the house (c. iii. 1-6). In c. V. 8 again, with reference to the earthly discipline through which Christ passed, we are expressly told that "though He was a Son " He " yet learned obedience by \"That which gives eternal through — who reveals, mediates, validity or absoluteness lo the new and sustains it. " Davidson, Cw«;«. covenant is the person, the Son of p. 165. God, who in all points carries it THE COVENANT-IDEA 73 the things which" He suffered," and so attained that perfect sympathy with man required for His High- priestly office. While once more, when we reach the consideration of that office itself, the writer lays special stress on the fact that, while the high-priests appointed by the law have " infirmity " (aahnlav), and are conse quently unable to fulfil the highest ends of their office, our High-priest is " a Son, having been perfected for evermore " {viov, ilr. rh aiuva rinXnoiiMviov, c. vii. 28). We shall have to return td these passages again in different connexions. In the meantime we are content to gather from them that the Sonship is regarded by our author as lying at the basis of the whole of Christ's Person and Work;i and further, that he associates it with Him alike in His pre-existent. His earthly, and His exalted states. In none of the passages indeed is the name Son expressly 'given to Christ in His pre- existent state ;^ but it is clearly implied in c. i. 2 that it was applicable to Him, for it was the same Son, through whom God spoke to us, who also made " the ages " ; while in c. i. 2, v. 8, the title is directly applied to the incarnate Christ, and in c. iii. 6, vii. 28, to the glorified Redeemer. The name " Son " may thus be taken as a kind of connecting link between the three states, and help to remind us that, according to the uniform teach ing of Scripture, it is one unchanged Personality who exists through them all.^ ^ "The Sonship of Christ is the fundamental idea of the Epistle. It is this relation to God that enables Him to be the Author of salvation to men." Davidson, Comm. p. 79 ; and see the whole of the valuable Note on the Son, PP- 73-79- ^ Delitzsch, Westcott, and others, apply the title to the Eternal Son in c. V. 8 ; but by the preceding clauses the reference there seeras to be liraited to what befell the "Son in the days of His flesh." ^ Comp. Holtzmann, who finds all three states in c. i. 3 : " Immer der gleiche Eine tragt vor der Zeit schon alle Dinge, bewirkt in der Zeit Reinigung von Slinden und fiihrt nachzeitliches Dasein droben zur Rechten Gottes" {Lehrbuch der Neutestainetitlichen Theologie, ii. p. 297). Chap. V. lis^ relation to Chrises Person and Work. 74 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. V. I. The Son in Himself. I. The pre- existent Son. The Son in the days of His flesh was the same in His inmost being as the Son in His state of pre-existence : it was only the outward form of His manifestation that was changed. And if the glory of Divine Sonship was hidden for a time in the lowliness and humiliation of a suffering life, it was only in order that the same glory might shine forth with renewed brightness when He who was crucified in weakness was raised by the power of God. Keeping this before us, let us see what our Epistle has to teach us regarding the Son in each of the three states just indicated ; and then we shall be better able to understand the comparisons, which are instituted be tween Him and the other mediators of God's purposes. I. The Son in Himself. We begin with the pre-existent state of the Son, the fullest and most significant reference to which is found at the very opening of the Epistle. For no sooner has the writer made mention of a Son as the supreme organ of God's present-day revelation, and i-eferred to the Heirship to which in consequence He has been ap pointed, than he proceeds to emphasize His fitness for the office by a lofty encomium upon His Person. This Being, in whom all things are consummated, is the same, through whose instrumentality " the ages " — the successive periods of the world's history, have already been called into being, and who therefore existed before them. While in relation to God He is described as " being the effulgence of His glory, and the very image of His substance," and hence,^ in relation to the world, as " upholding all things by the word of His ^ ^ipoiv re, where the simple re, as distinguished from Kal, indicates that there is a close connexion and affinity between the two clauses. THE PERSON OF THE SON 75 power," where the present participles "being" and " upholding " describe " the eternal, unchangeable, and absolute background " ^ of the whole of the Son's historical action. And so in several other passages, this condition of pre-existent glory is clearly pointed to. Thus in c. ii. 9 the writer, quoting the words of Ps. viii., finds for them an unexpected fulfilment in Him " that hath been made for a little lower than the angels, even Jesus." Evidently this was not His natural estate ; but He stooped to it, in order that through Him man's promised supremacy over all things might be reached. In the great com parison again with Melchizedek, which occupies c. vii., it is noticeable that though in His historical manifestation Christ was long subsequent to Melchizedek, He is brought before us as the original to whom Melchizedek is compared. It is not Christ who is made like to Mel chizedek, but Melchizedek who is " made like unto the Son of God " (c. vii. 3),^ the power of whose " indissoluble life '' is later in the same chapter shown to lie at the root of His Priesthood. And similarly in c. x. 5 we read of "the body" that has been prepared for Christ, and which becomes His " when He entereth into the world." He did not belong to the world : He came into it. In none of these passages indeed does the writer describe how he came by this belief in the Son's pre- existence. He is content with simply presenting it as the condition or background of His subsequent historical manifestations ; but that in his own mind he associated the pre-existence with the -essentially Divine Being of domp. Acts ii. 37, xxvii. 5 ; and see Blass, Grammar of N. T. Greek, § 77. 8, p. 263. ^ Delitzsch, in loc. ; and comp. Westcott, "The &v in particular guards against the idea of mere 'adoption' in the Sonship, and Chap. affirms the permanence of the di vine essence of the Son during His historic work " {Comm. p. 9). 2 " Non dicitur filius Dei assimi- Jatus Melchisedeco, sed contra, nam filius Dei est antiquior et arche- typus." Bengel. Pre-exist ence asso ciated with the thought of Divinity, 76 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. V. as shown by individualexpressions. the Son, the remarkable expressions of c. i. 3 appear clearly to indicate. For although the exact interpreta tion to be given to the words " the effulgence of God's glory and the very image of His substance '' is much disputed, and though in dealing with such transcendent mysteries all human language is necessarily imperfect, the relationship which they imply can hardly be satisfied by mere general dependence or likeness between the Son and God, but can result only from oneness of being. The Son is " the effulgence " {a-ita-oyaaiM/) of the Father, because not by any isolated ray, nor even by the con tinual shining forth of rays, but completely and fully He manifests His source. He is His " express image " (xapazT-^p) because, along with this unbroken connexion of Being with the Father, He is yet possessed of a true Personality, in which the "essence" of God finds perfect expression.'' Similarly, when we pass to the clause which deter mines the Son's relation to the world. The guiding and controlling of all things, and the carrying of them to their appointed end, which the Jews were accustomed to attribute to God (Isa. xlvi. 4), are here a|:tributed to the Son. As One who had made " the ages," He consciously sustains them : and He does so further ¦' Origination from God, inde pendent existence, and likeness to God are, according to Kiehm {Lelir- begriff des IPebrderbriefes, p. 282 f. ), the characteristics of the Son in His pre-existent state here brought before us. And it is not uncommon to find in dicaiyaafLa the equivalent of the theological term "co-essential" {bii,ooi(noi), thus excluding Arianism, and in xapa/crTjp the equivalent of "only-begotten" {fiovoyev-f)^), thus excluding Sabellianism. But we must beware of attempting to define the words too closely. Calvin says wisely, "When thou hearest that the Son is the brightness of the Father's glory, thus think with thy self, that the glory of the Father is invisible to thee, until it become refiilgent in Christ : and that He also is called the impress of the P'ather's substance, because the majesty of the Father is hidden, until it show itself, as it were im pressed, in the image of the Son. They who overlook this reference of the expressions, and go higher in their philosophizing, fail to appre hend the design of the apostle, and therefore fatigue themselves in vain " {Comm. in loc). THE PERSON OF THE SON 77 by " the word of His power " (rw priiMari rr,: b-j\idij,ioic auTov), again the peculiar attribute of Jehovah in the Old Testament, and by which later in this same Epistle God's own creative power is described (y.aTnprledai roue aiZvac prjij^ari Stov, c. xi. 3). Nor is the proof of the Son's Divinity limited only to such incidental expressions as these. It may be said rather to underlie the whole argument regarding the final nature of Christ's High-priestly work, the main argument therefore of the Epistle ; for it is the char acter of Christ's Person which, as we have already noticed, and shall frequently sge again, lends its true meaning to that work. And the force of the writer's reasoning regarding it would, to say the least, be very much weakened, unless we are allowed to infer that inhis mind the Son occupied towards God an altogether unique position, or, in a word, is thought of as Himself God. On these grounds then, though in the Epistle the name God is never actually applied to the Son in His pre-existent state,^ and though here, as elsewhere throughout the Scriptures, God is regarded as the ultimate cause of all things, and even the Son stands in a certain position of eternal subordination to Him, it seems to us clear that it is only the essential Deity of the Son which can justify the expressions which are used regarding Him, or give its true meaning and power to His appointment^ by God Chap. 1 In c. i. 8 it is the title of Christ as exalted King. The ascription of glory in c. xiii. 21 which, applied to the Son, is often cited as a proof of His Divinity (see for example Riehm, Lehrbegriff, p. 286), is better applied to God Himself (so Bengel, Delitzsch, Westcott, Rendall). ^ ^ C. iii. 2, iroiijo-avn. It is of course possible, adhering to the more ordinary meaning of the word. to translate ' ' created "or " made " with reference to our Lord's huraan ity (Bleek, Liinemann) ; but the reference to appointment to ofiice seems here more natural (comp. Mark iii. 14 ; Acts ii. 36 ; i Sam. xii. 6). According to Philastrius {de Haer. Ixxxix. ) this Epistle was not read in certain churches, "quia et factum Christum dicit in ea." and by the whole argu ment of the Epistle. 78 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. 2. Tlie il carnate.Son. The Son's humanity is (i) real: to the office of " the Apostle and High-priest of our confession." ^ As to how he reached this belief, our writer nowhere gives us any hint. It is a favourite theory that he reasoned back from the thought of the glorified Re deemer, who is the centre of all his teaching. But more probably it came to him from a study of certain Old Testament passages, particularly from the Psalms, which, in accordance with his regular practice of searching the Old Testament'" not for its original mean ing " but for its " pre-intimations of his own Christian thoughts," he everywhere ascribes directly to the Mes siah, and in which a certain peerless pre-eminence is bestowed upon Him.'^ But the mere possession of Divinity does not make a perfect Priest : it must be accompanied by humanity. Only one who was Himself incarnate, true and perfect man as well as God, could truly represent God to man and man to God. And so it was that the Son, in the preparation for His Priestly office, was "in all things made like unto His brethren" (c. ii. 17). Upon the manner of the Son's Incarnation, the author nowhere dwells. He is content simply with the fact. But he emphasizes that so often, and from so many different points of view, as to leave us in no doubt regarding the importance he attached to it. How clearly, for example, the reality of the Son's humanity comes out in the constant use of His human name, Jesus. It occurs no fewer than nine times, and , ^ There have been many attempts recently to weaken the full force of this conclusion. Thus even Bey schlag, who finds in our writer's Christology ' ' superhuman declara tions which go beyond those of any other N.T. teacher," speaks of the name Son as only " the name of a unique higher being next to God " {N. T. Theol: ii. pp. 305, 309) ; and for statements to much the same effect, see Holtzmann, N. T. Theol. ii. p. 298, and Menegoz, Iheol. de t hp. aux Hibr. p. 84 ff'. ^ Comp. Weiss, Biblische Theologie des N.T.l\ i8i5(Eng. tr. ii. p. i84ff'. ). THE PERSON OF TIIE SON 79 on every occasion but one (c. xiii. 1 2, which is a simple historic statement) it furnishes the key to the argument, and in consequence occupies the emphatic position at the end of the clause.^ Equally noticeable are the repeated references to the events of Christ's earthly life. His descent after the flesh (c. vii. 14), His active ministry (c. ii. 3), the opposition He encountered (c. xii. 3), the intensity of His personal sufferings (c. v. 7 f ), the Cross (c. xii. 2 ; xiii. 12), the Resurrection (c. xiii. 20), and the Ascension (c. i. 2, 3), all are brought before us in a manner the more striking that it is so largely incidental. But significant as these references to the outward events of Christ's life are, still more interesting are those which bring out the true humanity of His inner life. Thus we find Him spoken of as exercising faith or trust in God (c. ii. 13 ; xii. 2); as moved by mercy and sympathy towards His brethren on account of His likeness to them (c. ii. 17; iv. 15); as giving utterance to His needs " in prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears " (c. v. 7) ; as heard because of the " godly fear " by which His prayers were marked (c. v. 7) ; and most remarkable perhaps of all, as Himself the object of God's " saving power " (c. v. 7). Now it need hardly be said that this thought of "saving" is not connected in the slightest degree with sin on Christ's part. On the contrary, there is perhaps no book in the Bible in which His absolute sinlessness is more emphatically asserted (c. iv. 15; vii. 26), and yet at the same time so asserted as to show that not even here have we any limitation to that perfect oneness with humanity on which the efficacy of His High-priestly work depends. For, in the first place, Christ's sinlessness is not a mere nega- ^ C. ii. 9 ; iii. I ; vi. 20 ; vii. 22 ; x. 19 ; xii. 2 ; xii. 24 ; xiii. 12 ; xiii. 20. Chap. 8o THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. (2) per fected: tive innocence, arising from immunity from that trial which is a necessary law of human life.^ That He was tried, and that " in all points like as we are, sin ex cepted " (c. iv. 75), is rather one of the writer's most emphatic statements. And, in the second place, it must not be forgotten that it is just this experience of the strength of trial or temptation, and not of the yielding to it, which constitutes the true ground of all sympathy. Not because Christ hath sinned, but because He " hath suffered being tempted " — the tenses of the verbs em ployed point to the permanent effect of the suffering after the temptation itself has passed away — He is able to succour men in their present and continuous temptations.^ Whether, therefore, we regard Christ's life from the outside or the inside, it is the life of One who in the path of actual experience and trial was prepared for His great work. This will become clearer if we pass to a second aspect of Christ's humanity, arising out of what has just been said, and which is even more characteristic of the teaching of our Epistle, and that is, that it was a perfected humanity.^ The expression is not a very happy one, but it is difificult to find any adequate English translation for the Greek word employed. " Consummated " would perhaps come nearer to it, but even it is not free from ' One may be allowed to recall Dean Churcfi's great sermon on this subject in his Cathedral and Uni versity ^ermotts, p. 97 ff. ^ C. ii. 18, ^v <^ ydp TT^irovBev abrbs ireipaaBels, d()varai rots ireipa- i^ofM^vots ^OTjBijffaL. " Ai^yarat, nicht nur subjectiv, weil er sie versteKt, wie i 15, sondern objectiv, weil sein Leiden den 14 f. geschilderten Erfolg hat." Von Soden, Hand- Comm. in loc. ^ The nearest approaches to this thought elsewhere in the N.T. are St. Luke's statements in c. ii. 40, 52 of his Gospel, and our Lord's own words regarding His Resurrec tion-glory, where He makes use of the same verb as here (reXeiovv) in c. xiii. 32. But even these are scarcely parallel, for they refer to the Person of Christ in Himself, while in our Epistle the reference is to Him in His character of High- priest. THE PERSON OF THE SON ambiguity, and we retain " perfected " with the proviso that it is not moral perfection which is here thought of, but, if the expression may be allowed, official per fection — a growth into that state in vvhich alone Christ can fully discharge the duties of the High- priestly office, for which He has been designed. A brief reference to three leading passages will make this clear. Thus in c. ii. lo, the writer, after speaking of the humiliation to which for a little while Jesus had been subjected in His redeeming work, goes on, "For it became Him [God], for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the leader of their salvation perfect through sufferings," where the manner of Christ's perfection and the reason for it are both clearly indicated. It was reached " through sufferings " ; and it was so reached because, as man's lot lay in a sin-stained, disordered world, and in consequence only through suffering could his goal be reached. He who would lead him to that goal must first of all tread the same path. The same truth is even more pointedly put in c. v. 8, 9, where we are told that Christ, " though He was a Son, yet learned the obedience by the things which He suft'ered." Not, mark ! " learned to obey," as if He had ever been disobedient, but " learned the obedience " (njv hoToiy.on\i), obedience in all its completeness, the spirit that is of complete self-surrender which came from making the Father's will His own at each step of His earthly experience ; and whose result in His own case was seen in this, that "having been made perfect. He became unto all them that obey Him the author of eternal salvation " (ver. 9). As His " perfection " resulted from " the obedience " which He had learned amid the sufferings of earth, it was in its turn the condition, .so 6 Chap. C. ii. 10. C. V. 8, g. 82 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. C. vii. 28. T (f) and y representa tive. far as disposition went, of His being able to apply the benefits of His work to all who in their turn " obey ' Him {1:0.611 rote hira-Ao'vovdn avTiZ'). While in our third and last passage, the true signifi- , cance of Christ's work for men is shown to consist in this, that in Him, our eternal High-priest, we have "a Son, perfected for evermore " (c. vii. 28). It may seem as if in all these passages, more par ticularly in the last, we have passed altogether out of the range of Christ's humanity to His exalted and glorified state : and no doubt it is only to Him in that state that the term " perfected " fully belongs. But the point on which at present we wish to insist, and to which all the foregoing passages bear evidence, is, that this " perfection " was not reached all at once, but was realized step by step in the experiences of Christ's earthly life. He has been "made perfect," and the true nature of His humanity is seen in this, that each stage of His earthly life was intended to fit Him more completely for that state to which it became God to raise Him,i and in which He could " perfect " others through fellowship with Himself.^ For, once more, neither the reality nor the perfection of the Son's humanity can be properly understood, unless we associate with them a third trait : it is a representative humanity. The main interest of Christ's human life in the eyes of our author lay in this, that it was the life not merely of an isolated individual, but of One who came as "the leader of salvation" [rm apyjiyh rfi; Burripiai, c. ii. lo), and whose sufferings and death were rendered necessary by the fact that they formed the lot of the men He came to save. Starting from the general principle that " both He that consecrateth and ' C. ii. 10, reXeiScrai. - C. X. 14 ; xi. ,39 f. ; xii. THE PERSON OF THE SON 83 they that are consecrated are all out of one," ^ he goes on to show that this spiritual oneness to which Christ leads His brethren requires to be preceded by a physical oneness. For it was " since the children are sharers in blood and flesh " that " Christ also Himself in like manner partook of the same ; in order that through the death " — the death which was really death, and which came to Him in the fate of His own human experience — " He might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil ; and might deliver all them who through fear of death were all their life time subject to bondage."^ Or, as it is stated still more emphatically a few verses further on, Christ " was bound " (uKpiiXiv) in all things to be made like unto His brethren, that " He might become (ytvTjrai) a merciful and faithful High-priest in things pertaining to God " (c. ii. 17). It is a part of the proprieties of the Divine government — so the general argument may be stated — that, in order to the gaining of a victory over any ill that troubles us, the victor must enter the sphere in which the evil existed, that we who are in that sphere may be made, not by outward gift, but by inward experience, par takers of that victory. We are human : he who would save us must also be human. We suffer: he must Chap. ^ C. ii. 1 1, i^ evos (comp. d0' evbs, c. xi. 12). By some referred to Adam, by others to Abraham, and by many modern coramentators to God (Delitzsch; Kurtz, Keil, Westcott, Vaughan) ; but best left indefinite as the author has left it. Bruce translates "of one piece, one v/hoie" {Expositor, 3rd Ser. ix. p. 87). . ^ C. ii. 14, 15. There is 110 reference as yet to Christ's atoning death. That will come later. In the meantime the writer is content with stating that by Himself ex periencing death Christ conquered ' ' the fear of death " for all who stood to Him in the relation of brethren. "While the Holy One stands apart from us in the isolation of .His sinlessness, we, sinners, fear to die ; when we see Him by our side, even in death, which we have been accustomed to regard as the penalty of sin, death ceases to appear as penalty, and becomes the gate of heaven." Bruce, Ex positor, 3rd Ser. ix. p. 93. 84 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. V. 3. The exaltedSon. Prominenceof this aspect in the Epistle. suffer. We die: he must die. If Christ is to con secrate every domain of, man's lot, so that man may in it become the child of God, He must enter into it, and there prevail, that in the same sphere we may afterwards prevail. But this, as we have just seen, Christ did, and in virtue of the perfect human nature which He voluntarily assumed,^ His life touched ours at every point, and Himself " Son," He was instru mental " in bringing many sons unto glory " with and in Himself^ We shall have other opportunities of considering this truth when we come to think more particularly of the Son's High-priestly work, and of its direct application to ourselves. In the meantime, let us pass on to what the Epistle has to tell us regarding the exalted Son. It is the main aspect in which He is presented to us in the Epistle ; and all that has been said regarding His pre-existent and incarnate states is only introduced, as we have more than once hinted, for the light which they throw upon it. It is indeed upon Christ, as so exalted, that the very name " Son " is principally be stowed (comp. c. iii. 6, vii. 28) ; and even in c. i. 2, where the thought of the historical Son is prominent, the writer proceeds immediately to describe Him as having "sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." " Christ " and " the Christ " have been simi- ' C. ii. 14, iiAreux^-" : comp. c. vii. 13. ^ C. ii. 10, TToXkobs vlobs eU Sb^av dyaybvra . . . reXeiwtrai. The aor. participle dyaybvra has been variously understood. Bruce, fol lowing Bleek, regards it in effect as a future, and as expressive of intention ; but it seems rather to refer to an action in a general way coincident in time with the action of the verb reXeifiirai (Burton, Moods and Tenses in N, T. Greek, § 149, p. 68) ; or, raore exactly, the two actions are regarded ' ' as absolute without reference to the succession of time. The perfecting of Christ included the triumph of those who are sons in Him" (Westcott, in loc). It may be further noted that ' ' the many are not in contrast with all, but in contrast with few, and in their relation to one'' (Delitzsch). The magnitude, not the limitation of the number, is thought of THE PERSON OF THE SON larly claimed as belonging in our Epistle only to this state.i And when, we read of " the Lord " absolutely, it is unquestionably the glory of the ascended Re deemer which is recalled to us.^ So strong indeed is the hold which the thought of the exalted Lord's glory has taken of our writer, that on two occasions in a very striking manner he uses this title to invest with their full significance the events even of Christ's past earthly life. "How shall we escape," he asks, "if we neglect so great salvation? which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard" (c. ii. 3). The thought of what Christ -is now, that is, may well lend a most solemn meaning to the message He once declared. And again with His descent according to the flesh. He who " hath sprung out of Judah " is He whom now we know as " our Lord " (c. vii. 14) — a passage which has the further interest that it is the first time in the New Testament that we find the expression " our Lord," now so familiar, standing alone as a name for Christ.^ Apart moreover from these common titles, there still remain two other designations applied to the Son in this Epistle, which help us to understand the true significance of His exalted state. One is "Heir": the. other is "Forerunner." As regards Christ's Heirship, it meets us on the very first meiition of Him as Son. No sooner has the writer reminded us of the Son in whom God spake to men, than he goes on to describe the glory with which at the Ascension the Son's earthly ministry .Chap. '"Christus . . . stets nur von dem im himmlischen Heiligthum waltenden Hohenpriester. " Von Soden, Hand-Comm. p. 32. -'¦ "The Lord raeans for the Heb rew readers Christ seated on His heavenly throne." Bruce, Exposi tor, 3rd Ser. viii. p. 97. ^ " It is from this passage that the designation [our Lord] now so familiar to Christian lips is derived." Farrar, in loc. The exalted Son as Heir, THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. and as Forerunner. was crowned — "Whom He appointed Heir of all things." ^ It is tempting indeed at first sight (and a strong list of authorities might be quoted in favour of the view),^ to refer this appointment back to the eternal counsels of God, and to think of it as having been bestowed on the pre-existent Son ; and it must be admitted that there is nothing in the words them selves to forbid this. Orj the other hand, the immedi ately preceding mention of the historic Son leads us rather to think of the appointment itself as an historic act.^ Just as in Gal. iv. i, 2 the heir "though he is (ideally) lord of all " does not come to his estate " until the time appointed of the father," so Christ, though Heir, does not gain possession of what has all along awaited Him, until, after having executed His work on earth. He enters the heavenly world. Nor need the application of the word " Heir " to Him in this state occasion any surprise. For in Scripture the heir is not so much one who is looking forward to a future posses sion, as one who is enjoying a present possession in virtue of a rightful title to it.* And though in the case of the Son, the actual realization of His lordship over all things has not yet taken place (c. x. 1 3), He may still be regarded as inheritor in possession of the kingdom to which God has raised Him : while His people in their turn, as joint-heirs with Him, already " inherit the promises " (c. vi. 12). For in this matter of inheritance, as in everything ¦^ C. i. 2, bv ^BrjKev K\ijpovbfj.ov irdvrav. ^ For example, Bengel, Bleek, Liinemann, Kurtz, Westcott. 5 So Tholuck, de Wette, Ebrard, Riehm (Lehrbegriff, p. 295 ff.), Delitzsch, Moll, Keil, Weiss, and Moulton. * Thus in LXX xXr/poi/o/xos is used as a translation of v-iy (Judg. xviii. 7 ; 2 Sam. xiv. 7 j Jer. viii. 10 ; Mic. i. 15) and kKv,povonla of ns*"!; (Num. xxiv. 18 ; Deut. ii. 12 ; iii. 20 ; Josh. i. 15). See Keil on Heb. i. 2 (" KX'i;p6cO(iios = der ein KXijpoi oder eine KXripovo/ila inne hat, dem ein K\ijpos 'jure oder facto zuge- teilt ist") ; and Westcott's extended Note, Comm. pp. 167-169. THE PERSON OF THE SON 87 else, the glorified Redeemer does not stand alone. It is as " Forerunner " for us that " Jesus " — and the use of the human name is very instructive as connecting the present exaltation with the fulfilment of the Saviour's work on earth — " entered " Heaven, entered once forall i^ and in so doing "inaugurated" (hixahicv) for His brethren " a fresh and living way " of approach to God (c. X. 20). Professor Bruce therefore does not go too far when he says that the one word Forerunner " expresses the whole essential difference between the Christian and the Levitical religion — between the religion that brings men nigh to God, and the religion that kept or left men standing afar offi"^ True the Levitical high- priest entered the Holy of holies once a year, but it was in the people's stead, and the whole circumstances attending his entering in were such as to suggest to the people that this was a privilege which they could never hope to enjoy. But the Christian High-priest's enter ing in carries with it the assurance of His people following. They enter along with, or rather in Him. The Son's Exaltation is thus as representative as His perfect humanity, and as " the Firstborn " He invites the whole family of mankind to share in the new birth, the triumph into which at the Ascension He was begotten.^ The picture of the Son, which our author presents to us, is thus a very striking Chap. 1 C. vi. 20, bicov irpodpofios virip ri/idv elcrifXBev 'IiytroCs. 2 Expositor, 3rd Ser. vii. p. i67f.; and see further x. p. 48 ff. 3 C. i. 5, 6. There can be little doubt that the quotation of ver. 5 is to be referred not to the day of eternal, timeless generation (as Bleek, Liinemann), or of Baptism (as Beyschlag), but to the eternal sovereignty established at the Re surrection and Ascension (as De- one. Carrying us back to litzsch, Westcott). This is in accord ance with the original reference of the words to the begetting into royal existence (Ps. ii. 7), and to the usage elsewhere of the same words by St. Paul (Acts xiii. 33). In any case the emphatic "to-day" — a favourite word of the Epistle^-must not be deprived of its full meaning, as if the second clause were siraply an amplification of the first (as Riehm, Davidson). General picture of the Son. 88 THEOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE Chap. V. II. The Son in relation to other mediators. I. The Son superior to angels : the thought of One, originally existing in the full glory of oneness with God, he shows us how " for us men and our salvation He became man." From none of the trials, the temptations, the sufferings of our human lot, not even from death itself, did He shrink. Rather through all He was " perfected," fully equipped and furnished to act as our Representative, the Representa tive of a suffering and dying race. And consequently it now becomes His privilege to bestow on those, whom He is not ashamed to call His brethren, the glory and honour with vvhich His own sufferings and death have been crowned. We do not, however, exhaust the teaching of the Epistle with regard to the Person of the Son, if we think of Him only as He is in Himself, or in His relation to us. His glcry is also proved by a three fold comparison which is instituted between Him and the other agents or mediators in God's revelation to men. He is superior (i) to Angels, (2) to Moses, and (3) to the Levitical Priests. The first two comparisons will occupy us briefly in the remainder of this chapter : the third, which forms the main argument of the whole Epistle, will require more detailed examination. II. The Son in Relation to other Mediators. The author begins then by proving the Son's superi ority to Angels, though such a proof may well seem to us at first sight altogether unnecessary : the fact is so self-evident.^ But we must keep in view the state of mind of those to whom in the first instance the Epistle was addressed. ^ On this whole comparison see Professor Robertson Smith's sug gestive papers on Christ and the Angels in the Expositor, 2nd Ser. vols. i. and ii. THE PERSON OF THE .SON 89 In the Jewish Economy angels occupied a very prominent place. There is no evidence indeed, that they were ever regarded as possessing any independent authority. All that they did, they did simply by com mand of God, and as His ministers towards men. At the same time the functions in which they are repre sented to have taken part are of the loftiest kind. They were held to have been associated with God in the creation of man. It was believed that the Law was mediated by them, and that they acted as its adminis- trators.i While the attributes ascribed to the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament were such as tended to raise men's conception of the character of angels in general,^ and to lend peculiar emphasis to the contention that the Son in His mediatorial Exaltation has " become better " or rather " mightier " {-/.pzlr-uv yitbiLivog) than they.^ For it is superiority in power and administrative dignity, rather than in moral excellence, that is here thought of* And the proof of this superiority the writer finds, where his readers would most readily recognise its force, in the Old Testament Scriptures themselves. ^ Comp. Acts vii. 38, 53 ; Gal. iii. 19 ; Joseph. Ant. XV. c. v. § 3. And see also Deut. xxxiii. 2 (LXX) ; Ps. Ixviii. 17 (corap. 2 Kings vi. 17). - Corap. Ex. xxxii. 34 ; xxxiii. 14 ; Josh. V. 14 ; Isa. Ixiii. 9. ^ C. i. 4. The order of the words in the original is a striking example of the writer's oratorical skill— roao&Ti^ Kpelrrojv yevbfJLevos rQv dyy^\(ov oo-(p dia^optorepov Trap' adrobs KeK\rjpovb^iy)Kev 6vofjt.a, where the required emphasis is given both to