LETTER TO THE HEBREWS - Course By Dr. Swatenam

Letter to the Hebrews is the most important writing in the NT after the four gospels. Even though it is a unique writing it is often undervalued.
Author
Most of the scholars opine that it is not written by St. Paul. Those who hold this view say so because the author has not written his name at the beginning or at the end of the letter as he used to do in all his letters. But the professor holds the view that it is written by St.Paul for the same reason. He is a genius and no such person other than himself can be found among the NT writers. But his name is not written in the letter, because Paul had no jurisdiction over the Hebrews. Jurisdiction of Paul is to the gentile communities. He was not included in the twelve. Jews were under St. Peter. From the letter to the Romans we know that Paul loved Jewish people and sometimes he gave them advice. But at the same time he had no authority over them. (Ch. 13). Since he had no jurisdiction over the Jews he did not give his sign in the letter. Heb 3, 13 is a hint to this.

Besides, the author is a competent person, master of Greek language and he has knowledge of the Jewish faith, customs, etc. No one else among the NT writers is so competent as St. Paul. This supports the professor’s view.
The Date
It is written before 70 AD, before the destruction of Jerusalem.

Spiritualised land of Israel - eternal life.
Spiritualised offspring - Priesthood of Christ.
8, 1 - 10, 39: Heart of the Epistle - New covenant.
Eucharist is connected with the new covenant. In NT the priesthood of Christ is emphasised. Some say that priesthood of Christ has no relation to the Eucharist.
Chapter 13 - only plausible interpretation is that of Swetnam.
The whole book is theological excluding the last four verses.
Method in Exegesis
There are two sources of revelation: Scripture and tradition. Scripture includes the form and the content. Syntax and structure (of the text) and tradition (of the church) help us to find the content. But here we concentrate on structure and tradition.
Any science is a search for patterns. Isolated phenomena are meaningless for science. In other words, science is a search for intelligibility. (Something becomes intelligible because of patterns.) The structure is for intelligibility. In Hebrews it is very important because it helps us to understand the content.

The author must have tried to include certain points in his letter. Our search for structure is the search for these points. These pints will help us to find out the content.
Tradition means something handed over. According to the professor, the core of the tradition is the words of institution. With it Christ instituted the Church. There was a time when Christianity existed without Bible (first 30years). But no time did she exist without Eucharist.

Therefore, three main concentrations in this course will be structure, tradition and content. (The professor believes that scientific method consists not in denying presuppositions but in making them explicit.)

I. Prologue (1, 1- 4)

A

B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J


The prologue consists of one long sentence with two parts separated by ‘;’.This was intended to be a very powerful introduction. The author wanted to say something about the father and the son. He employed master Greek language for this. In this prologue the father and the son are mentioned explicitly only in one place. They are important because they are mentioned only once. The whole sentence is about them. God is the subject in the first part (A-D). The second part is the description of the son (E-J). It is understood that God here is God the father. In the structure e by the professor, the Father and the Son are mentioned in the second block. Hence it is an important part.

In the Greek language the main idea would be given either in the beginning or at the middle. Here it is in the middle.
First line summarises the whole OT and OT scriptures. ‘Spoke’ in Greek is the same word for ‘revelation’. In a son: The Son is the culmination of speaking or revelation. They thought it in terms of OT revelation (mostly prophecy). The author and the readers shared the same tradition. So situate in the OT context. The author of Hebrews is not aware of the dogma of OT because he was aware of the experience of the reality.
The whole Christian faith is expressed by the clause ‘spoke in a Son’ (A-B). The centre of gospel accounts is the Eucharistic words. The first Christians received the Christ event in a liturgical context.
The language here is simple, but profound. The phrase ‘in the Son’ has an implication that others are illegitimate sons!
C) The Son is the heir of all things. Because God placed him before all and made heir of all. Everything in the world belongs to the son. God is the source of legitimacy. It is grated to the son.
In the Hebrew context sonship is not merely physical. It has also a functionall meaning. The spark, for example, is the son of fire. In this sense Christ is the son because he takes up the legitimacy of the father. He was legitimate and authentic. (This should be what made the disciples to follow him at the first call).thus for the author of Hebrews the sonship is functional. However later councils assert ontological sonship and equality. Both are not contradictory. Actually the functional sonship puts the basis for ontological sonship.
D)Through whom God created ages of time. God is outside the time. God and son existed outside the time. This is in line with the whole tradition of Logos.
E) E and F are at the centre. Therefore they must be at the most important words. ‘Being the radiance of his glory’: Glory (Doxa) is that which is expressed externally. E.g.the external implications of a king. Whole creation is the manifestation of God’s glory. The son is the stem of God here.

F) Son is the stamp of His (God’s) inner being. Stamp means seal (of wax). The wax will produce the exactly real. Son is the exact reproduction of God’s inner being. The centre has something to do with the inner being and its expression. Hence, metaphysics. 9Radiance means ray).
(What the author writes here has relation to the Chalcedon and Nicene formulations. The same Holy Spirit is working in both! However ‘the how’ of the relation or the relation through the Holy Sprit cannot be proved. The councils did not reveal but only defined. It is the preview of Chalcedon and Nicene Councils. These councils use Greek terminology. We see the equality of the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in the Pauline salutation (The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and love of the Father…). The New Testament contains the whole subsequently defined dogmas.
G) The Son maintains all things in His omnipotence.
H) In the context of the epistle purification is only by shedding blood. For shedding blood Son had to become man. Therefore it implicitly implies incarnation.
I) He is at the right hand of the majesty on high. Jews do not use the term God. Hence majesty on high. To be seated is the sign of authority. This block is the culmination of the Christ event.
J) This is a transitional clause that links the prologue with what is to follow. He is going to speak of the angels and the name of the Son. The name inherited is the ‘Son’.

II. Chapter 13, 1 – 20 (TODA)
The professor’s interpretation of chapter 13 includes
1 Structure
2 Explanation of the central part [toda] and
3 Third Step (Taking the structure together)
1. Structure
A: 13, 1-5a - Warnings

Chapter 13, 1 - 2 are about brotherly love(charity)
V 3.advise to remember fellow Christians in prison for faith.
V 4. About sexual matters/purity.
V 5a. Do not be greedy (warning against money).
In these five verses we have four different instructions.
B: 13, 5b-6 – Two quotations from OT.

God speaks and the faithful replies. In the OT passage the faithful is viewed as one person but the author of Hebrews sees it as applicable to all. (You can trust me - We trust in you).

C. V 7-8. V 7. Remember your leaders the same word ‘leader’ comes also in V17. Obey your leaders. The term ‘leaders’ seems to make a frame. Therefore the mater inside it must be of the same subject. But actually it is not.
D.V 9-10. Food
E. V 11. Outside the camp
F. V 12. Outside the gate
G. V 13. Outside the camp.
The phrase ‘Outside the camp’constitutes an inner frame. The phrase ‘Outside the gate’ in V 12 also gives the same idea but in different words. The gate here means the gate of Jerusalem.
H. V 15 - 16. About sacrifice of praise. D and H are similar in the sense that D speaks of food and H speaks of sacrifice.
I. V. 17. Leaders
J. V. 18 19. Request for prayer
K. V. 20- 21. Final block. Final blessing

1.A
2.B
C
D
E
3. F
G
H
I
I
4.J
5.K

The structure is symmetrical,i.e., equal in measurement. Two brief
blocks – long central block – two brief blocks. This structure suggests that the central part is important. The core most part (F) is about Jesus’ sacrifice. The central block is marked by the frame ‘leaders’.
Now we have a pattern that is something understandable

. 2.Toda (Explanation of central part v 7-17)
Toda is a Hebrew word. It means a ceremony of thanksgiving and praising God in public in other words public act of praising and thanks giving it means both praise and thanks giving but because of the absence of such a word in modern languages it is translated either as praise or thanks giving. E.g. Out of the ten leapers in whom Jesus healed only one returned and praised God. The Toda ceremony involved three elements. (This ceremony was done in the context of Jewish meal.)
A. Consumption of bread
B. Hymn of praise
C. Bloody sacrifice in the temple. It can be done only by the priest.
The full expression is Zebach Toda. Zebach means ‘sacrifice’ and toda is ‘praise’. It is sacrifice of public praise and thanksgiving for some favours God has granted. In this occasion the one who offers the sacrifice calls his friends to enjoy. We see Toda explained in Lev 7, 11 – 15. this word appears also in Ps 50, 14. Lev 7, 11 - 15 is the basic. To understand this we must have a basic knowledge about the temple practices because this text of Leviticus was written when the temple was already there. Therefore the author presumes the knowledge of ceremonies. The LXX translates this as Tusia Aineseos (qusia ainesewV) (Zebach Toda). It was easy to translate Zebach. But there was no word for Toda. LXX picked up the aspect of praise (Aineseos). See Heb 13, 15. this text also uses the same words. Let us offer a sacrifice of praise. It means Christians adapted the Toda or sacrifice of praise of Jews and made it Christian Toda; it is Christ’s sacrifice and it is Eucharist. Christ makes only one sacrifice which is for ever. One bloody sacrifice which cannot be repeated. However it is reproduced in non-bloody fashion. Obviously Christian toda is not the same as OT toda. The Christian is not in the temple but out side the gate. From this context we can conclude that block F speaks of sacrifice.
In the Christian Toda we have the right to eat the ritual bread (Eucharist). Food of Jews and food of Christians are parallel here. The food of Christians is the new toda. Thus, the professor interprets that the Central section is about Christian Toda. According to him Eucharist has an important role in this epistle. It is not with out reference to sacrifice that the author mentions the high priest. The word sacrifice is mentioned explicitly in 13, 15.
Being a Christian means to make the offering (sacrifice) of praise every moment-living the sacrifice. each man offers one sacrifice-sharing the same bloody sacrifice by communion. It can also be understood as many sacrifices. It is many because of the many ritual consumption of the bread.
It is the Latin translation of Zebach Toda is Sacrificium laudis (Sacrifice of praise). The Vulgate uses this word.
3.Third Step (Taking the structure together)
The latin missal itself calls eucharist “this sacrifice of praise” (Sacrificium Laudis). The structure of thirteenth chapter corresponds to the structure of latin mass.
[Latin Mass: A) Our confession (rependence) B) Scripture C) Anaphora (Eucharistic part) D) Intention of the Mass E) Blessing –Heb 13 Structure:one brief block (warnings), another brief block (quotations from scripture), a long central block ( Toda), another brief block (requesting prayer) and another brief block (blessing )]
The last blessing is ending with ‘Amen’ both in the epistle and Latin Mass. Chapter 13 seems to be a summary of Latin Mass. It may not be mere coincidence. But we cannot prove how the relation came to be. But it is plausible that Eucharist was in his mind. The professor supposes this because of the explicit mention of toda in V 15. Eucharist of the Catholic Church is like Jewish Toda.
According to the professor the epistle was written before 70 AD. (However many scholars opine that it is after 70.) Therefore it was written in a time when the Jewish sacrifice was still extant. However, the structure of Mass was evolved to the present style only in the second or third century. Thus, the adaptation from Roman Mass seems to be highly improbable. In short, it is not easy to explain the ‘how’.

Reviewing the Method (Heb 13)
Grammar
Form
The language of Scripture Structure
Content

Negative Function
Tradition
Positive Function

Let’s go outside the camp. Camp = Tabernacle of Exodus time. It means ‘ let us go outside the tradition of Judaism. The new Toda is no longer inside the temple; it is outside the temple, since Christ is taken outside. Now it is the Christian Toda. The Christian Toda has continuity with the Jewish Toda, but there is difference. Eucharist is Christian Toda. There is only one bloody sacrifice. But eating of bread and hymns are many. It is the ultimate Toda.

Tradition
Negative Function: To elimate explanations that is not true according to the tradition of the catholic church. Eg. Anything to counter Mass is not the right interpretation of Ch.13.
Positive Function: Tradition of the church guides us in thinking about the Eucharist. My belief in the centrality of the Eucharist helps me to find the appropriateness of interpreting it (Ch 13) as Eucharistic. Protestants do not accept it since they don’t give the central place to the Eucharist.
Tradition can be used for interpreting the scripture because the tradition of the author and the tradition we have received are the same. Besides it is the Holy Spirit who guides the church. Thus structure and tradition contribute our understanding of the content.
Some examples of understanding the text by entering into it.
1. Gen 22: Abraham received reward as a gift of God.
Heb 11, 17 - 19: We can either stay outside the faith of Abraham or get into it. How do we enter into the faith of Abraham. See what it has to do with me in my own situation: what about my trust in God. Is it like the absolute trust of Abraham in God? He had trust because he knew that God can raise Isaac from death and maintain the promise. Therefore Abraham got his son Isaac back as a symbol - a symbol of Jesus Christ rising from the dead. This is the Christological interpretation.
2. Cardinal Newman: Everyone has a presupposition in reading the text. This is present also in all our actions. The presuppositions come from our moral choice, mode of person, mode of attitude, etc. mode of life has something to do with concrete life situations. However I am always free (though all of my life influences my judgement).
Thus we interpret that ch 13 is about Eucharist. It is important to find out what relevance this text has to me.












1, 5 - 2,1:
1,4 is the transitional verse
1,5: Angels and Son: Son is above the angels, because Son assumed body so that he can shed blood and die. But the angels cannot die. 1, 5: the two citations contain the term ‘son’ at the beginning and at the end. It means Son is important. the angels are not sons as Christ is.

Gezera Shawa: Means “inference, equal” respectively. It is an exegetical method in which a term in one verse of scripture is interpreted according to its use in another.

Ps 2, 7: The Israelite kings enjoyed special relationship with God (as sons). So the first verse (5a) has to be interpreted in terms of the second verse (5b) and vice versa. Acts 13, 33: here also the son enjoys a special position.
Son as God cannot die. He dies as man. But son as God rose from the dead. The problem before the author was to explain the death and resurrection of Christ. After the resurrection, son has got the immortal body. he re-entered into the new relation with the father. We do not know what the nature of the immortal body is. Fourth Lateran Council says that God is more unlike than what we think and than what we can think. It means God is a mystery.
V 5: The son is generated, not born.
The author is trying to see OT in the context of Risen Christ.
V 6: First born: It does not mean there are other children of God. But angels of God worship him when he has a mortal body, i.e., in incarnation.
V 7: Angels are like servants but Son has a position. In 6 - 7 he speaks about the angels and speaks to the angels.
V 8 - 9: speak about the resurrection. Your throne, staff…… oil of joy indicate the resurrection. It speaks about the son.
V 13: Vv 5 and 13 makes a frame because of three words to whom, angels and say. The enemy of Christ is death.
1, 5 - 14 are exposition and 2, 1 - 4 are exhortation based on exposition.
2, 1: Therefore we have to hold all the more what has been heard. This is the tradition.
2, 2: If the angels’ words were important and its disobedience brought punishment.
Here it speaks about the 10 commandments given to Moses through angels; not directly from God.
2, 3: What Christ spoke ….we get through tradition. Eucharist is the tradition handed over to us.
In Heb 13, 7 leaders of the past and (17)leaders of the present. The author of Hebrews belong to the second generation. They handed over the words spoken by our Lord sacramentaly. It is the Eucharist. In Mosaic law words spoken through angels - logoV. (Sinatic Covenant is logoV). In the Eucharist, for the author, is leader speaking laleo logoV to qeou. Eucharist is the spoken word of the Son. Here son spoke logoV. In the Holy of Holies there was the tablet of God. In the NT Jesus Christ is present in the place of Tablet of Mosaic law. We are in the second exodus. Because we have the Eucharist. The Eucharist is the Lord. In this section we do not see any hint to the sacrificial death of Jesus. Eucharist is God’s presence among us.
V 4. He is contrasted with God. The author believes that the Holy Spirit inspires. There are allusions to the Trinity. Spirit inspires Psalmist. There are two authors - Human and Divine.

Son of God Son of Man
1, 5 - 14 2, 5 - 18


2, 1 - 4 3, 1 - 6
Eucharist


We have to see these texts as the Jews saw the text. Son functionally takes the characteristics of the Father. Jesus contains all the ideas of legitimacy as the Jews thought. Son of God and Son of Man are the views functionally viewed. How it is viewed functionally, not ontologically? Jesus is God ontologically. If Jesus has to face the prospect of death he must have faith in God, functionally.
2, 5: Author is saying that the son is above angels.
2, 7 - 8: It is from Ps 8. He leaves out after greeting what he needed. Why? Because he wanted to explain this in the light of the resurrection of Christ.
2, 7: Jesus was made a little lower than angels because of the mortal body, so that he can die.
2, 8: God made all things subject to Him under feet. It is seen in 1, 13 also.
2, 8 and 1, 13: Gezera Shawa.
In 2, 7 we see synonymous parallelism: Man and Son of man.
The passage speaks about the exaltation which is the resurrection of Christ.
V 9 speaks about the death of Christ and his suffering; yet he resurrected. Death will exist no more. It is no more a possibility for those who join in the life of Christ in heaven. Those who disobeyed the Mosaic law were severely punished. But how severe would be the punishment to those who disobey Eucharistic presence. He exhorts them to remain steadfast in the suffering.
2, 7: We see an anqrwpqV and ou’oV antrwpoV. Here the author views Christ as someone who trusts in God. Here Dr. James Swetnam takes anqrwpqV as Abraham and ou’oV antrwpoV as Christ. If Jesus is the son of Abraham, he protects the qualities of his Father. (Author of Midrash takes exactly this ……). ou’oV antrwpoV is the NT Isaac.
V 9: He defeated evil. He is a priest bringing up both heaven and earth. Christ has tow priesthood: heavenly and earthly. Since he is Son of man he is priest. Since he had a human body he died. It is his earthly priesthood. Since he received a heavenly body he has heavenly priesthood. How does his heavenly priesthood exist today? He officiates the Eucharist and he is doing his priesthood. What happened to his earthly priesthood? It is transformed into his heavenly priesthood. So that there is the unique death. It cannot be repeated.
The misleading concept - Two stage theory: He assumed human body to die and accepted heavenly body later. It is not correct. After resurrection Jesus has a transformed body. The earthly body of Christ is perfected by His priesthood.
It is in this context we should understand his being anointed in the resurrection in the first part of the first chapter. He is anointed with joy. It is for his new priesthood.
V 13 is the central point. Trusting the Son of man. Functionally Son has to share the faith of Abraham. The verse cannot be about a trusting God, but about a man - Son of man. V 12 sums up what we see in the above verses.

V 12

V 13a

V 13b
V 12 calls Christians as his brothers.
V 9 speaks about the heavenly priest. We see him in the Eucharist (not in the right hand of the Father).
V 9b. Crowned with glory, so that he might taste death for everyone. We taste Christ in the Eucharist.

(V 2, 13 is a connecting link and it is true of what is found in the following verses. Christ is seen functionally.)
V 9. Speaks about the Eucharist. He tastes death through participating in the death sacramentaly.
V 10. His plan is to lead many sons to glory.
V 11. One sanctifying = Jesus
those being sanctified = we are all from one what is the One.

Faith of Abraham Faith of Christ.
Seed of Abraham Brothers of Christ.
(Children of Abraham
and Christ.
ONE

Abraham is the one who had faith. the seeds are the spiritual children of Abraham (not physical offspring) - those who had the fiath like Abraham. Paul gives this definition to the offspring of Abraham.(Rom 4, Gal 3). In semetic thinking, spiritual childrfen by believing as he believed and trusting as he trusted God. This is also referred in 2, 13a and b.
Christ is the seed of Abraham because he had trusted in God and Christ is surely then the child of Abraham.
Faith of Christ: He had faith and trust in God and as a result he is raised. Those who are brothers of Christ must take courage from Christ. Hence faith of Abraham and faith of Christ are from one faith. They form one faith i.e., faith in God.
V 12 is Ps 22, 22. The cry of Christ is also from this Psalm. To interpret the whold passion, this allusion is used. In spite of his suffering, he repeats his trust.
Ps 22, 1 - 4
In Vv 1-2: His suffering
2 - 5: the trust is stressed. It continues in this pattern.
V 12 is a reference to the Toda functionally. The implication is that before his suffering he made a vow to God that he (Psalmist) will recite the Toda. It shows his greater faith in God. Here the person who suffers has also made the vow of Toda in the midst of the brothers. So V 12 is the reference to the Christian Toda which is the Eucharist.
Going back to Vv 9 - 11. Who officiates the Mass? Christ. What for? For sanctifying the believers. The Eucharist is for the believers only. Through baptism we have the right to this.
Ps 22,22 shows relevance of Christ’s trust in God. The reasons for using ‘brother’ is given in Ps 22, because they participate in Christian Toda.
V 13b is from prophet Isaiah. The children are the children of Abraham, so that I may redeem them by my blood.
V 14. Instead of saying flesh and blood, he uses blood and flesh. It is to give emphasis to blood, by which we are redeemed and sanctified. (Heb 9). The death came to the world through devil; but God, who has power over devil, defeats death.
V 15. People are subject to slavery - slavery is of death. Because OT people did not believe in the resurrection. The author says that Christ raises us from death.
V 17. Hence through the death Christ died, so that he must have the same experience of other people. He died for the expiation of sins.
V 18. After being tested: Christ being tested? Jesus was not tempted, but tested. How? His faith was put to test. Christ as man had trust in God. In all his passion and at the end of his life, he was being tested. We are since not been raised, we are now tested. Since Christ is tested as we, we are his brothers. So we can call God.
Vv 3, 1 - 6 is similar to 2, 1 - 4 - exhortation. Eucharist is not something to be conscious of, but to live. In the OT Sinai represented God’s presence. In the NT Eucharist is God’s presence.
3, 1 - 6 is based on 2, 5 - 6. It is the priesthood of Christ.
3, 1: Holy brothers: 2, 11 says Christ is sanctifying us. Heavenly call - from heavenly priest. Apostle: Just like Moses led the people to the promised land, Christ also leads the people. Moses and Christ are sent by God. (Apostle = one who is sent.).
3, 2: House of God: Hebrew people considers temple as the house of God where God lives. Here the people of God is seen as the house of God. Jesus fashions (builds) the house and he is superior to Moses. God is there. Nothing happens without His will.
3, 5: Moses was witness to the words to be spoken. Heb 9, 18 - 20: When peopld came after exodus, Jews through blood made the Sinai covenant. (9, 20). This is the blood of the covenant. These are the words Moses listened. What covenant the author is mentioning here? It is the new covenant. Here the author deliberately quoted from the OT and used differently in the NT (Eucharist). In the OT Moses was witnessing to the words spoken at the sprinkling of blood. The author of Hebrews mentioning it to say of the Eucharistic new covenant. (9, 20).
What do we have to do here? (3, 1 - 6). To live the Eucharistic new covenant. It is done by the High priest - Christ.
3, 6: if we maintain our boldness and faith we, the house of God, are going to entirety.
The whole book of Hebrews can be divided into three on the basis of three themes:
1) Jesus as God and man.
Jesus as Logos: The new covenant in the place of Sinatic covenant. (Jesus as God). Jesus as man, just as Moses inaugurated the old covenant Jesus inaugurated the new covenant by instituting the Eucharist.




LOGOS
3, 7 - 4, 12: Promise of the land.
Promise of land is given to Abraham. The author of Hebrews spiritualises the promise of land.
4, 13 - 7, 38: Promise of the offspring.
Here the author spiritualises the promise of offspring.

3, 7 - 4, 12:God’s own rest indicates the eternal life.
4, 13 -7, 38: Promise in the line of Melchizedech. Just as his heavenly body is not the earthly body, his heavenly priesthood is not like the earthly priesthood. He is outside time and hence all are relived from sin.
As the promised land was spiritualised the second promise also is spiritualised. All are made his offspring.
Why Melchizedech is introduced? Not to say about Melchizedech’s death or beginning, but to speak about the priesthood.
3, 6 is a connecting link with the next pericope. It speaks about the house of God.
3, 7: the author of Hebrews quotes from Ps 95. He considers Holy Spirit as the speaker (the divine author). Threrefore it speaks of inspiration by the Holy Spirit.
3, 8: It is about desert generations. They are taken as an example. God wanted to test Israel just as He tested Abraham. He has shown them signs and wonders. E.g. Manna, Crossing the Red Sea, etc.
3, 9: Humans tested me: They had no faith in God. Human beings have no authority to test God. David tells Israel that God is testing them. But the author of Hebrews says this to the Christians. Don’t be rebellious in the land. Do not turn away from Christian life. The author might have had the persecuted church in mind.
3, 13: ‘Today’ indicates that the possibility of entering into the rest of God is still open. The forefathers did not enter the rest. But no prophesy of God will remain unfulfilled.
The verse speaks of deceitful pleasantness of sin: though sin seems to be pleasant, it is actually deceitful.
3, 14: We become sharers in Christ through baptism. That is we are going to participate in the entrance of Christ to the eternal life ( promised land). By baptism we are members of Christ. It is the immediate effect of baptism. By it the original sin and other sins are forgiven. It is because we are made part of the mystical body of Christ. Sin cannot remain with the Mystical body of Christ.
3, 7 & 4, 7 make a frame (Today, if you hear His voice…) What is inside has a unified meaning.
3, 12-19 constitutes a special section. It is a warning against disbelief. The theme of Psalm (the same text) is repeated in the middle of this section. Therefore it is a very important idea. It gives a negative exhortation. (3, 15 is a negative admonition).
In 4, 1ff. We see positive aspects. The promise still remains open because the desert generations did not achieve it. The Christians (church) as a whole cannot go astray. Because Christ is also a member. But in desert generation all died without entering the promised land. However, all Christians cannot fail but one or the other can go astray.
4, 2 Desert generation did not have the advantage of faith in Christ as we have. We have received the Good news - Good news of entering into God’s rest.
4, 3: It is from Ps 95. It is repeated in V 5.
4, 4 is from Genesis (Gen 2). It speaks of God’s rest on the seventh day (after creation). That is the Sabbath rest. Verses 4 & 5 make Gezera Shewa. It is an exegetical method in which a term in one verse of the scripture is interpreted according to its use in another. It’s a Jewish method. What can be said of Genesis 2 (rest) can be said about Ps 95 (rest). This means that the rest of new exodus generation (Christians) is God’s own Sabbath rest, i.e., Paradise, eternal life.
4, 6: Some did not enter in to the rest because of the lack of faith. However Christ has already taken the advantage of the promise.
4, 1-7: Here the positive admonition is seen. You will not fail since Christ is your guide. It includes the argument that Christian rest is not any land but God’s own rest. Here is the importance of the Church. But many in the history ignore this and project the individual alone.
3, 15 - 4, 7
Today is right now. Christians in Rome are under terrible persecution, but they should not fall into disbelief. The belief in Christ is seen in the Church. It is the faith of the Church. When we become the members of the Church, we share the faith of the Church, which is faith in Christ. Any believer can loose the faith but it cannot destroy the faith of the Church, because it is the faith of Christ.
4, 8: Jesus did not give them rest. Here Jesus is Joshua (LXX uses Jesus for Joshua). The author sees Joshua as the prefiguration of Jesus. ‘If Jesus has given them rest’: this clause means that Joshua could not give them the real rest. He was the man who did not disbelieve on the journey to Canan. So he led them to the rest - to the promised land. But the rest for the author of Hebrews is the eternal rest. The author speaks of people who did not enter the rest even though they never disbelieved. Therefore a new meaning for the rest, i.e., eternal life.
Joshua was a human being. Still he leads people to the promised land. Here is the new Joshua - Jesus. Joshua could only to the promised land. Joshua’s entry into the Sabbath rest did not take place.
4, 9: Sabbath rest awaits the people of God.
4, 10: One enters into the new Promised Land, needs no work, i.e., eternal rest.
4, 11: we have the right to enter into the rest. However there is still possibility of falling away. Therefore, we must hasten our journey, so that we may not fall into disbelief and lose the rest.
4, 12: The logoV here is usually interpreted as Scripture. But according to the Professor this interpretation makes problems. Therefore he suggests a different interpretation.
Professor’s interpretation of the logoV
logoV is used here in a sense of John’s prologue, i.e., Jesus Christ. The word of God is living. (V. 12). We find in no other place in the epistle the attribute ‘living’ applied to a non-person. Therefore it may not be the scripture. If the word of God is so powerful as it is presented in V 12, why did it (Mosaic Law) not make desert generation enter into the rest?
Therefore the author must be speaking of circumcision. It is about spiritual circumcision (interior change), change of heart. Heart is where one stands before God and makes choice. Your disposition to God is in the heart. We read in the book of Joshua that he circumcised the people just after entering into the land. (Ch 5). The circumcision of flesh helped the people to enter into the promised land. However he did only physical circumcision and not spiritual circumcision. Therefore they could not enter the eternal rest.
Change of heart means belief in Jesus Christ. Joshua practised physical circumcision, but the Lord proposed spiritual circumcision. It is the criterion to enter into rest. Through Baptism one enters into the rest. If one is baptised and has not sinned, he will enter the rest. This is the good news. The faith helps us to withstand persecution.
macaira means ‘Sword’ and ‘knife’. Here it indicates knife – knife of circumcision. The book of Joshua uses the same word. Joshua did not use any sword for circumcision, but knife. logoV is the knife of circumcision that is new way of changing our heart to God. It is the new spiritual circumcision. It is sharper than any two edged knife and it penetrates to the division of soul and spirit, joints and marrow… It cuts not simply the flesh. It is the climax of the whole pericope.
Usually the verses 12 and 13 are taken together. However according to the Professor V. 12 goes with what precedes and 13, with what follows. 4, 12 is the climax of 3, 7 – 4,11. According to the Professor’s translation and the original V. 12 begins and V. 13 ends with the word logoV. This is not an accident. The author wants to call attention to logoV. logoV of V. 12 is the same as logoV of V. 13.
However to get the real meaning we need to take these verses separately. Knife in V. 12, as we have seen, is the knife of circumcision. Jesus is sharper and can penetrate into all parts of the body and the personal identity. It is also the climax of what immediately precedes, i.e., Vv. 8 – 11. (Joshua’s physical circumcision).
The separation of V 12 and 13 is based on imagery. The imagery in V 12 is the circumcision and in V 13 is of sacrifice. Here we have an allusion to the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham.
No creature is invisible before God, but all things are naked and exposed to His eyes. The Greek word for ‘exposed’ has a sacrificial connotation. It means the neck of animals exposed for sacrifice. God here is one who does the sacrifice. Christ is the victim. He is victim on our behalf. Now he is with God and interceding for us.
‘With whom’: Here the proposition used is proV. This same proposition is found in the prologue of the Gospel of John. O¢ logoV e proV FeoV. “The word was with God.”). This passage is about the son of God.
God sacrificed Christ on the cross? Christ was doing God’s will. The death on the cross (sacrifice) was the culmination of Jesus’ earthly priesthood. He was both the victim and the priest. Christ is the high priest. In this sense God offered Christ. The result is that now Christ is with God to intercede for us. He is the real intercessor, because he is the victim. Because of his divinity and power he has unique place.
4, 14: V 14 is related to V 13. Christ is now in God’s rest. Thus this verse makes sense if we take logoV as the Son of God. (Those who hold that logoV is scripture argues that we have to go back to Ch 2 to understand the High priest here).
4, 15: Christ’s trust is put to test. Jesus trusted in God not because that God will spare him from death, but God will raise him from the dead, because he knew that Isaac was not martyred.
4, 16: It sums up the passage from 13 – 16. it is also a transitional verse.
5, 1- 4: the author is giving a description of the OT priesthood. The OT priesthood is applied to Christ. He is like OT priest. But there are dissimilarities. These dissimilarities make the priesthood of Christ completely different and greater. E.g. OT Toda-NT Toda (Eucharist). Christ is appointed for man by God. But, OT priests are elected because they are born in a tribe chosen by God. The Catholic priest is not so. However, formally Catholic priesthood depends on the call by the church.
5, 1: priest is appointed by God even though they are born in certain tribe. Man is the centre of priest’s vocation. This verse expresses the central part of OT priesthood and is applicable to catholic priesthood also. The OT priest offer sacrifice for sin. Catholic priest too does this.
5, 2: Christ subjected Himself to weakness in the sense that he received a human body that could die and not in the sense that he is sinful as the OT priests. (4, 15: Tested in every way without sin.). Christ’s faith (Trust) was put to test.
5, 4 and 5, 1 are connected: Call of God is important.
5, 5: The quotation is from Ps 2, 7. In Acts of the Apostles this quotation refers to resurrection, i.e., when he was exalted. Here also it means the same. It is about earthly high priesthood, because heavenly priest cannot die.
5, 6: Quotation from Ps 107. At resurrection Christ became heavenly high priest – a priest in the order of Melchizedech.
Vv. 5 and 6 makes Gezera Shewa. “You” shows Gezera Shewa. What is said about Son in V. 5 (earthly priest) is applicable to Son in V 6 (heavenly priest). Christ’s glorified body was so that it made Him like Melchizedech.(Ex 7). Melchizedech is important for the author because he is the model of Christ’s priesthood. During NT times Melchizedech was a cause of speculation. The author has only one purpose with him: he illustrates the priesthood of Christ.
Cfr. Heb 7, 1. Here the author simply quotes OT passage about Melchizedech. He had no father, no mother, no genealogy, no beginning and no end. This is the whole point. The author of Genesis does not mention all these things. What he does is only not giving the names of his father, mother, etc. But the author of Hebrews interprets that this was just to say that Melchizedech had no beginning and end (basing on the inspiration). Christ is a priest with no beginning and end, no father and mother and no genealogy. It means that Christ’s priesthood is unique. His uniqueness consists in the fact that he has taken an immortal body. Thus he escaped time, i.e., he is outside the time. Since he is outside the time, he could forgive the sins of all. Thus all are made the offspring of Abraham.
Because of Gezera Shewa whatever is said in V. 6 about Melchizedech is applicable to what is said in V. 5 about earthly sacrifices. V. 5 says God glorified Christ at resurrection and he became heavenly high priest. V. 6 says that at resurrection Christ is priest in the order of Melchizedech. Jesus really had no beginning and end. He is completely outside the time. Paschal mystery is unique and heard only ones. Its effects cannot remain only in the past. It transcends the time and is present to all human beings. (CCC 1085).
This is the real offspring of Abraham: very superior to the physical offspring. The resurrection of Christ makes the spiritual offspring possible.
We participate in the priesthood of Christ, who is the first member of the priesthood in the order of Melchizedech. V.7. He =criterion.
Vv 7 – 10: one of the most difficult passages in the epistle. The question here is how he gets the priesthood in the order of Melchizedech. V 7: ‘in the days of his flesh’, refers to earthly priesthood. Loud cry, tears, petitions, pleas, etc. may not be referring to Gethsemen experience as it is usually interpreted. It has allusion to Ps 22. V 7 mentions that the prayer was heard. Therefore the begging could not be to free him from death. V 8 contains the clause ‘although Son’. It goes with the previous verse. Therefore the begging could not be to raise from death. If he is Son then he will normally raise.
According to the professor Christ was asking the Father for the permission to die – to let him die. He was heard because of his piety. God the father, though commanded his death, was reluctant at the last moment. Then what about Elohi, Elohi lamaa Sabaktani? (The hearers confused that Jesus was calling Elijah. There was a tradition that Elijah would save the Messiah at the last moment). According to the Professor this cry really means “No, no, I (My loyalty) want to die”. Even though I am Son, I want to die. The author of Hebrews speaks of Christ as a model of trust. If he wanted to escape, how can then he be a model?
Another difficulty here is V 8b. How can Christ learn obedience from his suffering? Ps 39, 40: “I have come to do your will O Lord”. Christ was always obedient. A plausible interpretation is that Christ learned the effects of obedience. He got rewards which cannot be even imagined. He became priest according to the order of Melchizedech. God announced to keep His promise of offspring because of obedience. Thus Christ’s obedience caused him to be Abraham’s progeny. Christ is the real spiritual offspring of Abraham. Abraham’s and Jesus’ obedience resulted in one faith. Therefore Christ called us ‘Children’. We are Abraham’s children if we maintain our perseverance till the end.
V. 9a: ‘having been made perfect’ – having been raised, Christ was consecrated Heavenly high priest.
9b. : ‘who obey him’ – we (Christians) obey him. We obey the command of the Eucharist. The priests obey the command in a special way. They celebrate Eucharist and speak of the logos