A View of the Book of Hebrews

1. A View of the Book of Hebrews May 2014

2. Who is Garry Wills? • Early had attended a Jesuit University for five years studying to be a priest. • Is Professor Emeritus of History from Northwestern • Has written 40 books since 1973, many about the history of the Roman Catholic Church. • His latest book argues that priests were inserted into the hierarchy hundreds of years after the Resurrection. • Priests are self-serving for the institution, but are unnecessary. • The Book of Hebrews was added late to the canon, and justifies the priesthood.

3. Focus of This Study • Examine the Book of Hebrews through the interpretation of Garry Wills • Make sense of the role this puzzling book played in the development (evolution?) of the Roman Catholic Church. • Understand why Melchizedek was chosen to relate to Jesus. • What does Hebrews imply about the meaning of the death and resurrection and communion, etc.?

4. III.10. Who Wrote the “Letter to the Hebrews?”

5. Who wrote Hebrews? • Saint Paul’s Letter to Hebrews: • Is not a letter • Is not Paul’s • And was not written to Hebrews • Basic Pauline concepts are not in it (Paul never referred to priests). • Style is different than any other NT author • 152 words used that don’t appear anywhere else in NT. • Filled with literary devices such alliteration (1st verse), chiasms (A-b-b-A) (7.3)

6. Suggested Authors of Hebrews • Luke (sophisticated Greek, but lacks theology of letter) • Paul’s partner Barnabas (Tertullian) • Paul’s assistant Apollos (Luther) • Paul’s fellow evangelist Silas (Edward Riehm) • Paul’s friend Priscilla (Adolf von Harnack) • “Who wrote it, God alone knows.” (Origen)

7. Raymond Brown’s conclusion: …the most sophisticated rhetorician and elegant theologian of the New Testament is an unknown. To employ his own description of Melchizedek, the writer of Hebrews remains without father or mother or genealogy. The quality of his Greek and his control of the Scriptures in Greek suggest that he was a Jewish Christian with a good Hellenistic education and some knowledge of Greek philosophical categories. His allegorical style of hermeneutics has parallels in Philo and in Alexandrian interpretation; but that interpretation was taught elsewhere and so the claim that the writer came from Alexandria remains unproved. Those from whom he learned about Christ may have had a theological outlook similar to that of the Hellenist moment and its freer attitude toward the Jewish cultic heritage.

8. Hebrews is not a letter • All NT book titles were added later, not by author. • Paul’s letters were directed at places or individuals. • Hebrews contains no directive to place or person. • Has no opening greeting or good wishes. • Author calls his message “this supporting address” (13:22) which is a term used of a sermon in Acts 13:5. Hebrews is probably a written homily (sermon) to which the author has given an epistolary ending.

9. When was Hebrews Written? • Written before the mid’90s A.D. because it was quoted in Clement of Rome’s letter of that date. • Letter refers to sacrifices in the Mosaic traveling tent (post 70 destruction of Temple). • Letter refers to persecution of Christians. Hebrews was probably written in the 80’s A.D., about the time of Luke and Matthew.

10. Who was the Audience? • To second generation Christians (not those who knew Jesus during his ministry) (2:3) • The community has lost its prior fervor (10:32-34). • This has led to internal division (12:15-16) • And backsliding (10:38-39) • It was written in elegant Greek, so probably not to Christians in Jerusalem, but instead to those former Jews in the Roman Empire.

11. How was it brought into the Canon of the NT? • Though it was written in the west, it was more rapidly accepted in the east. • In the second century Alexandria, the Corpus Paulinum made it part of the Bible and was used by the Eastern Councils. • It was formally accepted in Rome in the canon only in 393 A.D. at the Synod of Hippo and in 397 and 419 A.D. at the Synods of Carthage. • Roman Church probably realized it was not written by Paul, but later accepted it as helpful to the defense of the full divinity of Christ against the Arians.

12. Summary of What Hebrews is: Hebrews is a supporting address (13:22) to backsliding (10:38-39) Christians in Rome, who felt the need for reassurance from their Jewish roots, and had therefore grown negligent in attending the house churches and performing the mutual services of the Christian community (13:2-7)

13. III.11. What Does it Mean?

14. The Title “Letter to the Hebrews” is not helpful to understanding • By the first century A.D., the term Hebrews was considered archaic. • Jonah 1:9 is the only place where a person is self-described as a Hebrew. All other instances involve them being described as Hebrew by others. • Hebrew is more of a linguistic distinction rather than ethnic, but many Jews did not speak Hebrew and the book is written in Greek.

15. First century Christian can be divided into four groups • Christians who observed full Jewish law such as Pharisee converts (Acts 15:5) • Christians who did not insist on circumcision, but retained some Jewish observances, particularly food laws. • Christians such as Paul, who respected Jewish observance but did not require it. • Those who denied any continuing obligation to the Jewish past, as typified by Johannine writings. Hebrews was written by someone from the 4th group to preach to those from the 2nd.

16. The Central Meaning of Hebrews: New Covenant, New Priest, New Sacrifice • For the faltering Roman Christians who are missing the Jewish Mosaic Covenant, Hebrews lays out the Jesus alternative: • New Covenant that fulfills the old. Angels delivered the first to Moses, but the new one comes directly from God’s son. • New Priest: Hebrews for the first time anywhere, describes Jesus as a priest greater than all others. • New Sacrifice: Animal sacrifice is replaced with the perfect sacrifice of the Son of God. 12:18-24 summarizes the idea of replacement of the old with Jesus.

17. Hebrews’ message can be traced in eight steps • Superiority of the New Pact (1.1-14) • A Mediator Who Shares our Humanity (2.5-3.19) • The New Pact is the Promised New Day (4.1-16) • A Priest with Our Frailties (5.1-6.12) • In Common with Melchizedek (6.13-8.6) • The Old Pact is Canceled (8.7-10.39) • Fidelity to the Old Pact a Model for Fidelity to the New (11.1-12.17) • The New Pact More Majestic (12.18-13.25)

18. 1. The Superiority of the new Pact • Hebrews begins with the messianic Psalm 110 to prove that Jesus is superior not only to Moses but to angels. (1:1-14) • Jewish apocryphal writings and secular authors commonly believed that angels were cooperating agents. (i.e. Deuteronomy 33.2 implies this) • 2:1-4. How much more important is the new covenant revealed not by angels, but by the Son of God himself.

19. 2. A Mediator Who Shares our Humanity • 2:5. After arguing that the Son of God is higher than angels, the author quotes Psalm 8. Mankind is lower than the angels, and Jesus was human. This is to make the point that Jesus is fully human as well as fully God. • The Eastern Church adopted Hebrews early partly because it supported the view of the Trinity. • 3:1-19: Our fidelity to Jesus should be the same as Jesus’ fidelity to God the Father. • Pistis should be translated as fidelity, not as faith. Jesus does not believe in the Father, but instead has fidelity to Him and the New Covenant.

20. 3. The New Pact is the Promised New Day (4:1-16) • Joshua did not find lasting peace (katapausis) after taking his people to the Promised Land (Josh 21:43, 22:4) • In Psalm 95:7, David said that therefore there would be a new day to find peace. This is predicting the New Pact (New Covenant). • In He 4:8, the Greek “Iēsous” can stand either for Joshua or Jesus, but context says it is Joshua. • 4:14-16. Press on!

21. 4. A Priest with our Frailties (5:1 – 6:12) • Like Aaron, Jesus is a priest who can speak for human frailty (“sin apart,” 4:15). • The emphasis on frailty sets up the later claim that Christ not only performed sacrifice, but he was the sacrifice. • 5:11-14 makes the point that the coming discourse is new to the audience and that the argument and logic is difficult and complex.

22. In Common with Melchizedek (6:13-8:6) • Previous section compared Jesus to Aaron, but this section emphasizes their differences. • Jesus is tied to Melchizedek, who lived in the first patricarchal period, before the first Pact, where he was somehow “a priest forever.” Priests in Aaron’s line are not priests forever, but only until they die (7:8, 7:20) • Through Abraham, they gave tithes to Melchizedek (7:9-10). • The Levites are not confirmed in priesthood by oath, but Melchizedek and Jesus were both assured by the Lord’s word in Psalm 110:4 (7:20-28)

23. Who is Melchizedek? • Gen. 14:18-20. Abraham had just arrived at Sodom from slaughtering the men who had stolen Lot’s (and King Bera’s) belongings. • At Sodom, while greeting King Bera, King Melchizedek arrives from Salem to greet Abraham, and Abraham gives Melchizedek a tithe. • The name Melchizedek is Malki-Sedek in Hebrew, which means ‘Sedek is my King.’ Sedek is the name of a Canaanite god. • Unlike other priests in Genesis, no geneology is given for Melchizedek. • Many scholars think this passage is a later insertion into Genesis, and possibly it is a fragment from a foreign (Canaanite) source.

24. The Melchizedek Controversy – Garry Wills • Wills asserts that the Biblical justification for calling Melchizedek “a priest forever” is weak. • He asserts that Jesus showed no sign of being a priest, or carrying out the duties of a priest during his ministry. • Moreover, even if Jesus is seen as “our priest forever,” there is no justification in Hebrews for establishing a Christian priesthood as in the Catholic Church.

25. Melchizedek in Psalm 110:4 • Calls Melchizedek “a priest forever.” • It’s a puzzling verse as Melchizedek was not in the priest of the Jewish nation, and refers to a succession that is not mentioned in Genesis. • Psalm 110 is the most referenced Psalm in the New Testament, but only Hebrews refers to verse 4. • In any case, Melchizedek is invoked by the writer of Hebrews as a way to explain that Jesus is a replacement for the priesthood and is greater and above all others.

26. 6. The Old Pact is Canceled (8:7-10:39) • Hebrews interprets Jeremiah 31:31 as a prophesy that a new Pact would come because people broke the old one (8:9). • The old Pact had its aura, but the new one excels the first. By the time of Hebrews, old Pact was mostly about food laws. (9:9-10). • Under the old Pact, priests had to make repeated sacrifices, but Jesus sacrifices himself, and only once. (9:18-28). • Controversial point: 9:23-4 says that Jesus must purify heaven when he enters it just like the Levitical priests purified the Holy of Holies. The author of Hebrews may be stretching his parallel too far—Why would heaven need purification?

27. 7. Fidelity to the Old Pact a Model for Fidelity to the New (11:1-12:17) • The Greek pistis is best translated as “fidelity” not “faith.” • The audience already believes, but needs to obey. • Even 11:3 is not about belief in the creation, but instead that trust in the providential Promises of God guided patriarchal heroes. • The example of Noah (11:7): How can he have fidelity to the old Pact when it wasn’t given yet? Hebrews says that the promises to Abraham and his descendants were forebears of the Pact and were faithful to God. (11:9, 17) • God rewarded fidelity to the old Pact, and so how much more would he reward fidelity to the new Pact. (11:39) • The exhortation (12:1-17) uses ordeals of those under the old Pact as models for the trials of the Roman Christians.

28. The New Pact More Majestic (12:18-13:25) • 13:11-13. Comparing Jesus to the burnt carcasses of the sacrificial sin-offerings raises difficulties. The animals were sacrificed inside the temple. And the parallels of Jesus’ persecution to animal sacrifice are distasteful to Garry Wills. • By the time of Hebrews’ writing, animal sacrifice was not being practiced and the temple refers to the Shrine carried by the Israelites on their journey through the desert. Therefore, the backsliding Roman Jewish Christians must have been longing for tradition. • Hebrews ends with a call to return to the house churches and to their fellow Christians.