Hebrews

Erik M. Heen, Philip D. W. Krey, Thomas C. Oden, Thomas C. Oden, Erik M. Heen, Philip D. W. Krey

• Editorial: IVP Academic
• Año: 2014
• ISBN:
  9780830897520

Distinctive in form, content, and style, the epistle to the Hebrews offers a profound high Christology and makes an awe-inspiring contribution to our understanding of Jesus as our High Priest. The earliest extant commentary on the letter comes to us in thirty-four homilies from John Chrysostom. These homilies serve to anchor the excerpts chosen by the editors of this volume because of their unique place in the history of interpretation. In addition to being the first comprehensive commentary on the letter, they deeply influenced subsequent interpretation in both the East and the West, and their rhetorical eloquence has long been acknowledged. As in other Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture volumes, the excerpts chosen range widely over geography and time, from Justin Martyr and Clement of Rome in the late first and early second century to Bede the Venerable, Isaac of Nineveh, Photius, and John of Damascus in the eighth and ninth centuries. The Alexandrian tradition is well represented in Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Athanasius, Didymus, and Cyril of Alexandria, while the Antiochene tradition is represented in Ephrem the Syrian, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Severian of Gabala, and Theodoret of Cyr. Italy and North Africa in the West are represented by Ambrose, Cassiodorus, and Augustine, while Constantinople, Asia Minor and Jerusalem in the East are represented by the Great Cappadocians—Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory of Nyssa—Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Jerome. This volume offers a rich treasure of ancient wisdom from Hebrews for the enrichment of the church today.

THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

OVERVIEW: When Pauline authorship was accepted in the East, it became necessary to explain why Paul’s name is not appended to the actual text of Hebrews. Theodore of Mopsuestia and Severian of Gabala represent the received interpretation that, because Paul was an “apostle to the Gentiles,” out of tact and appropriate deference to apostles called to the ministry to the historic people of Israel, Paul’s authorship is not explicitly mentioned in the Epistle to the “Hebrews.”

THE REASON PAUL DID NOT APPEND HIS NAME. THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: Paul did not write as to unbelievers who had acquired an implacable hatred against him but to believers who have shared all things that it is necessary to share. He writes not to those who are simple in their faith but to those who are demonstrating in their works the solidity of their faith and the keenness of their virtue, as the contents of the epistle show. Consequently, the epistle must have been delivered to them as one of Paul’s epistles, for if this were not the case the things written would not benefit them.

Again, in addition to these considerations the things written at the end of the epistle prove what I am stating: “I appeal to you, brethren” he says, “bear with my word of exhortation, for I have written to you briefly.”1 But to whom did he write, “I appeal to you” if those things were not the reason the letter was sent to them? Then he adds, “You should understand that our brother Timothy has been released with whom I shall see you if he comes soon.”2 Clearly you see that Timothy was the one who has delivered the epistle Paul wrote, with whom Paul clearly promises also to see them, if Timothy returns.

What then is the reason for Paul not appending his name? It is evident and very clear. Both Barnabas and Paul divided the preaching task with the disciples of the blessed Peter. [This was] not so that the former could teach some doctrines and the latter others—for there is one goal—but so that Paul and Barnabas might lead to faith some from the Gentiles while Peter and his disciples would lead some from the Jews to faith, deeming this division more expedient because at that time there was still a powerful rivalry due to the custom of the Jews (based on their law) who did not permit themselves to consort with Gentiles. Then some of the apostles had dealings with the Gentiles, while others with the circumcised. But those who had come to faith in all probability deemed the teachers and apostles to be shared by both communities. Thus, when Paul wrote to the Gentiles, he in all likelihood commands them as their apostle, but when he writes to the Hebrews, he does not. FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.3

THE EPISTLE IS PAUL’S. SEVERIAN OF GABALA: The heretics say that this epistle is not Paul’s, and they offer as their first proof of this that his name is not superscribed as in the other epistles. Second, his vocabulary is different, that is, it is foreign to Paul’s customary word choice and usage. One must know, however, that Paul was hated by the Jews on the grounds that he was teaching apostasy from the law, and having been endangered for this reason in Jerusalem and having scarcely escaped, he was sent to Rome. Therefore, writing something useful to the Hebrews, he does not append his name, so that they might not lose any advantage they could have derived from the letter because of their hatred against him.

And he writes to them in the tongue of the Hebrews, which was also translated by one of his disciples—by Luke or more likely by Clement who also is mentioned. For this reason the vocabulary is different. And this has been investigated by previous generations, and Eusebius of Pamphilus, a historian of those things in preceding and contemporary generations, made mention of the investigation,4 and it still seemed to our fathers, the predecessors of the bishops, that the epistle was Paul’s. FRAGMENTS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS PROLOGUE.5

THE PROLOGUE
HEBREWS 1:1-4

OVERVIEW: The first four verses of Hebrews 1 serve as an introduction to the whole epistle, and the Fathers saw them as anticipating the major doctrines of Christianity and guarding against some of the major heresies in the early church. (Note that the first passage by Theodoret of Cyr uses the prologue to summarize the content of the whole epistle.) The different ways in which God spoke through the prophets announced a major theological theme in Hebrews, namely, the relation between the Old and New Testaments. The passage of Theodoret of Cyr states the difference: “For Moses gave the Old Testament but Christ the New, which was promised through the prophets of old. The former promised that Palestine would be given; the latter, the kingdom of heaven.” Clement of Alexandria summarizes how the Scriptures are used to interpret Scripture. The heretics also use the Scriptures, he says, but they do not quote them entirely and wrest ambiguous passages from their contexts, gathering a few expressions here and there. Furthermore, they pay attention to mere words, not their sense. Although in the Old Testament God appeared under diverse guises (EPHREM), it was the Word of God that was operative in all those theophanies (EUSEBIUS). However, it is the Son who has the full knowledge of God the Father, and it is only who was able to make us partakers of the divine grace (CHRYSOSTOM). A later commentator, John of Damascus, concludes, citing Timothy, “To search the sacred Scripture is very good and most profitable for the soul.”

The Fathers used these opening verses to comment on their doctrines of God, Christology and the nature of angels. Chrysostom interprets the last days as the time when there was no expectation of deliverance. The term ages may signify material and spiritual worlds (EPHREM) as well as temporal periods (JOHN OF DAMASCUS). Generally, in the third and fourth century the pericope was used to discuss the doctrine of God; in the late fourth and fifth centuries writers like Theodore of Mopsuestia, Cyril of Alexandria and Chrysostom addressed the two natures of Christ as human and divine. Augustine states that Christ “was both a sheep, because of his innocence and simplicity of soul, and a goat because of the likeness of sinful flesh.” If the world could not hear God through the prophets, it should at least hear his crying from the cross (JEROME). Athanasius asks in the light of this passage how the Son of God can be made or be a creature when he made everything himself. The Son contains the whole and reflects the glory of God fully (ORIGEN, CHRYSOSTOM). Gregory of Nyssa explains the brightness imagery of this passage (not found in the RSV, which translates it as “he reflects the glory of God”), relating the role of the Son to the Father by explaining “the brightness of his glory” as his consubstantiality with the Father (THEODORET), which cannot be understood fully by the human mind (CHRYSOSTOM).

Since differing schools understood the two natures of Christ differently, the commentators did not always come to the same conclusions. Cyril of Alexandria emphasizes the union in God’s becoming flesh so that the divine redeems the flesh, while Theodoret carefully protects the distinctions between the human and the divine natures in Christ. “Though God by nature, he became human while remaining God” (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). “For the Lord Jesus Christ is heir of all things,” not as God but as human” (THEODORET). The writer of Hebrews uses metaphorical language to address the role of Christ in relation to the Old Testament, God and the angels. He describes the Son as “heir of all things,” the “stamp of his nature,” “sitting at the right hand of God.” Appointment of an heir refers to the profound mystery of relationship between the Father and the So...