Hebrews 1-8, Volume 47A

William L. Lane, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin

• Publisher: Zondervan Academic
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9780310585954
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Commentary

Over 2 million copies sold in The Word Biblical Commentary series.

This commentary series delivers the best in biblical scholarship from the leading scholars of our day who share a commitment to Scripture as divine revelation.

It emphasizes a thorough analysis of textual, linguistic, structural, and theological evidence, resulting in judicious and balanced insight into the meanings of the text in the framework of biblical theology. These widely acclaimed commentaries serve as exceptional resources for the professional theologian and instructor, the seminary or university student, the working minister, and everyone concerned with building theological understanding from a solid base of biblical scholarship.

Overview of Commentary Organization:

• Introduction—covers issues pertaining to the whole book, including context, date, authorship, composition, interpretive issues, purpose, and theology.
• Pericope Bibliography—a helpful resource containing the most important works that pertain to each particular pericope.
• Translation—the author’s own translation of the biblical text, reflecting the end result of exegesis and attending to Hebrew and Greek idiomatic usage of words, phrases, and tenses, yet in reasonably good English.
• Notes—the author’s notes to the translation that address any textual variants, grammatical forms, syntactical constructions, basic meanings of words, and problems of translation.
• Form/Structure/Setting—a discussion of redaction, genre, sources, and tradition as they concern the origin of the pericope, its canonical form, and its relation to the biblical and extra-biblical contexts in order to illuminate the structure and character of the pericope. Rhetorical or compositional features important to understanding the passage are also introduced here.
• Comment—verse-by-verse interpretation of the text and dialogue with other interpreters, engaging with current opinion and scholarly research.
• Explanation—brings together all the results of the discussion in previous sections to expose the meaning and intention of the text at several levels: (1) within the context of the book itself; (2) its meaning in the OT or NT; (3) its place in the entire canon; (4) theological relevance to broader OT or NT issues.
• General Bibliography—occurring at the end of each volume, this extensive bibliography contains all sources used anywhere in the commentary.

I. The Revelation of God through His Son (1:1–2:18)

Bibliography

Black, D. A. “The Problem of the Literary Structure of Hebrews: An Evaluation and a Proposal.” GTJ 7 (1986) 163–77. Bligh, J. Chiastic Analysis of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Oxford: Heythrop College, 1966. ———. “The Structure of Hebrews.” HeyJ 5 (1964) 170–77. Cladder, H. “Hebr 1,1–5,10.” ZKT 29 (1905) 1–27. Descamps, A. “La structure de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” RDT 9 (1954) 251–58, 333–38. Dussaut, L. Synopse structurelle de l’Épître aux Hébreux. 5–32. Gyllenberg, R. “Die Komposition des Hebräerbriefs.” SEÅ; 22–23 (1957–58) 137–47. Haering, T. “Gedankengang und Grundgedanken des Hebräerbriefs.” ZNW 18 (1917–18) 145–64. Nauck, W. “Zum Aufbau des Hebräerbriefes.” In Judentum, Urchristentum, Kirche. FS Joachim Jeremias. ed. W. Eltester. BZNW 26. Giessen: Töpelmann, 1960. 199–206. Rice, G. E. “Apostasy as a Motif and Its Effect on the Structure of Hebrews.” AUSS 23 (1985) 29–35. Smothers, T. G. “A Superior Model: Hebrews 1:1–4:13.” RevExp 82 (1985) 333–43. Swetnam, J. “Form and Content in Hebrews 1–6.” Bib 53 (1972) 368–85. Thien, F. “Analyse de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” RB 11 (1902) 74–86. Vaganay, L. “Le plan de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” In Mémorial Lagrange. Paris: Gabalda, 1940. 269–77. Vanhoye, A. “Discussions sur la structure de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” Bib 55 (1974) 349–80. ———. “Les indices de la structure littéraire de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” SE 2 (1964) 493–509. ———. La structure littéraire de l’Épître aux Hébreux. StudNeot 1. Paris/Bruges: Desclée de Brouwer, 1963. ———. “Structure littéraire et thèmes théologiques de l’Épître aux Hébreux.” In Studiorum Paulinorum Congressus Internationalis Catholicus 1961. Vol. 2. AnBib 18. Rome: Biblical Institute, 1963. 175–81. ———. A Structured Translation of the Epistle to the Hebrews. tr. J. Swetnam. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964. ———. “Thema sacerdotii praeparatur in Heb. 1, 1–2, 18.” VD 47 (1969) 284–97.

Introduction

Although an impression of careful composition according to a well-ordered plan is conveyed on every page of Hebrews, there has been no common agreement concerning the literary structure of the document. The broad range of critical opinion has been conveniently reviewed by A. Vanhoye (La structure, 11–32), who found in the lack of consensus a mandate for a fresh investigation of the question. His detailed studies have demonstrated the importance of both conceptual and literary considerations for discovering the plan of the work.

The writer’s intention is direct address. He classifies Hebrews as a sermon reduced to writing (13:22). That explains why he expresses himself in the categories of speaking and hearing (cf. 2:5; 5:11; 8:1; 9:5; 11:32). The writer’s rhetorical style is more characteristic of the spoken word than of formal composition. Convinced that what he has to say must be understood, he provided his readers with formal literary indications of the course of his thought. He knew that these would be readily recognized by his intended audience. They had become familiar with such rhetorical procedures through repeated exposure to preaching in the synagogue and the church (ibid., 34–49; id., SE 2 [1964] 493–509). Recognition of these fixed techniques of style assists the modern interpreter to recover the literary structure of Hebrews.

The most important of these procedures is the announcement of the subject. The writer customarily introduces a brief formulation that presents the theme of each of the major divisions of his discourse. The subject of the first unit, which extends from 1:5—2:18, is announced at the end of the exordium, or introduction (1:1–4), when the writer affirms that the Son is superior to the angels (v 4). In 1:5–14 the superiority of Jesus to the angels who mediated the message of the Law (2:2) is documented by repeated reference to biblical statements. This section serves to prepare the readers for an earnest admonition to respect the authority of the redemptive word delivered through the Son (2:1–4). The comparison between Jesus and the angels is sustained in 2:5–16, where it is demonstrated that Jesus’ condescension to be made “lower than the angels” (2:9) does not call into question his transcendent dignity. His incarnation (2:5–9) and solidarity with the human family (2:10–18) were necessary for the achievement of redemption. With the statement of 2:16 (“for surely it is not angels he helps”), angels are mentioned for the last time, apart from two incidental references near the end of the discourse (12:22; 13:2). The writer is prepared to lead his readers in a new direction, and in 2:17–18 he announces the subject to be developed in the next major unit of the presentation (Vanhoye, SE 2 [1964] 496–97).

Within the framework established by the formal announcement of the subject, the writer provides other literary indications that disclose the structure of his thinking. He makes use of the literary device of an inclusio, the introduction of the same expression or phrase at the opening and at the close of a paragraph of integrated thought. In the initial segment of his address two examples of this rhetorical procedure may be observed. The first serves to identify 1:5–14 as a unified paragraph:

1:5. “To which of the angels did God ever say . . . ?”

1:13. “To which of the angels has God ever said . . . ?”

The second inclusio establishes the limits of the development in 2:5–16:

2:5. “For it is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come.”

2:16p. “For surely it is not angels that he helps.”

Since the function of 2:17–18 is to announce the subject of the next major division, these verses stand outside the inclusio. Nevertheless, on the basis of the writer’s rhetorical procedure, 1:5–14, 2:1–4, and 2:5–18 may be identified as separate but related paragraphs within the first major division of the address.

Relationship between the several paragraphs may be established by catchword association. At the beginning of a new paragraph, a word or expression may be repeated from the close of the preceding paragraph (Vaganay, “Le plan,” 269–77). The initial presentation of the writer’s argument (1:5–14), for example, is tied to the exordium (1:1–4) by reference to the angels:

1:4. “So he became so much superior to the angels [τῶν ἀγγέλων].”

1:5. “For to which of the angels [τῶν ἀγγέλων] did God ever say . . . ?”

The two paragraphs are linked together by the repetition of the expression. As a result, the transition from assertion to demonstration is achieved smoothly.

Another literary device that serves to identify the limits of a larger unit of thought is the repetition of characteristic terms. This technique gives to a section a recognizable character that is altered only when the writer is prepared to introduce another section of his argument. In the opening segment of the discourse the characteristic term is angels; ten of the twelve occurrences of this term are concentrated in 1:1—2:18. The introduction of other characteristic terms after 2:16 serves to alert the readers that another line of thought is being introduced in 2:17–18.

These literary procedures are not incidental to the conceptual development in Hebrews. They were conventional techniques of composition upon which the writer could rely for identifying the course of his argument. They are used consistently throughout the document and furnish an invaluable support to the exegetical study of the text.

Other stylistic devices are employed to emphasize the writer’s pastoral concern for his readers. Attention is arrested and interest is sustained by the alternation between two types of discourse: exposition and admonition (see especially Gyllenberg, SEÅ; 22–23 [1957–58] 137–47). The initial segment of this address consists of two paragraphs of exposition (1:5–14 and 2:5–18) that are separated from each other by a paragraph of solemn exhortation (2:1–4).

On the basis of these formal rhetorical procedures, the theme of the first major division of Hebrews can be identified as the revelation of God through his Son. The writer first demonstrates the relationship of the divine Son to the God who speaks. The characterization of God as the one who has intervened in human history with his spoken word is the prelude to the characterization of the divine Son as the one through whom God has spoken his ultimate word (1:1–4) exposes the peril of ignoring the word of redemption delivered by the Son (2:1–4). The recital of the Scriptures that confirm the transcendent dignity of the Son (1:5–14). The writer then exhibits the solidarity of the Son with those who have been addressed by God (2:5–18). He considers the humiliation and glory of the Son (2:5–9) and affirms the appropriateness of his identification with suffering humanity oppressed by the fear of death (2:10–18). The first major division thus serves as a foundational statement for the body of the sermon that follows, which reaches its climax in the pointed appeal, “See that you do not refuse the one who is speaking” (12:25).

A. God Has Spoken His Ultimate Word in His Son (1:1–4)

Bibliography

Attridge, H. W. “New Covenant Christology in an Early Christian Homily.” QuartRev 8 (1988) 89–108. Black, D. A. “Hebrews 1:1–4: A Study in Discourse Analysis.” WTJ 49 (1987) 175–99. Bornkamm, G. “Das Bekenntnis im Hebräerbrief.” In Studien zu Antike und Urchristentum: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Vol. 2 Munich: C. Kaiser, 1963. 188–203. [Reprinted from ThBl 21 (1942) 56–66.] Bovon, F. “Le Christ, la foi, et la sagesse dans l’Épître aux Hébreux (Hébreux 11 et 1).” RTP 18 (1968) 129–44. Charles, J. D. “The Angels, Sonship and Birthright in the Letter to the Hebrews.” JETS 33 (1990) 171–78. Cockerill, G. L. “Heb 1:1–14, 1 Clem 36:1–6 and the High Priest Title.” JBL 97 (1978) 437–40. Dey, L. K. K. The Intermediary World and Patterns of Perfection in Philo and Hebrews. SBLDS 25. Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1975. Ellingworth, P. “Paul, Heb...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Editor’s Note
• Table of Contents
• Editorial Preface
• Author’s Preface
• Abbreviations
• Commentary Bibliography
• Main Bibliography
• Introduction
• I. The Revelation of God through His Son (1:1–2:18)
• II. The High Priestly Character of the Son (3:1–5:10)
• III. The High Priestly Office of the Son (5:11–10:39)
• Indexes