Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
Hebrews – Introduction
Hebrews – Our Course of Studying the Introduction
Canonical – Does the book belong in the Bible? Is it inspired?
Conceptual – What are some interesting viewpoints concerning Hebrews?
Circumstantial – What is the background information of Hebrews?
Compartmental – How is Hebrews to be divided and diagramed?
Before reading any further, read the entire book of Hebrews at one sitting.
Canonical – Does the book belong in the Bible? Is it inspired?
What is the first question we should ask at the beginning of studying any of the books and letters in the Bible? The answer is – does it belong in the Bible? Is it inspired? While I am sure that we are all going to agree that it does, asking this question is important on at least two accounts:
1. That we don’t put our faith in the hands of what others have decided.
2. That we come to appreciate the care and concern that our forefathers went to so that they could make sound decisions as to what was and was not inspired.
Historically speaking, people in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire accepted it more quickly (by the 2nd or 3rd century A.D.) than those in the Western half (by the 4th century A.D.) – which argues against the Pauline authorship (more on that later). “The first list of New Testament books, The Muratorian Canon, compiled about A.D. 170, does not mention it at all.” (Barclay, p.5) And yet, Clement, as early as 96 A.D. was already quoting it. What was the main reason for rejecting it? The lack of certainty of the authorship. What was the main reason for accepting it? The book itself.
What are the criteria for accepting a writing as canonical? (http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/NT_Canon.htm)
- Apostolic Origin – attributed to and/or based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their closest companions).
- Universal Acceptance – acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the Mediterranean world (by the end of the fourth century).
- Liturgical Use – read publicly along with the OT when early Christians gathered for the Lord’s Supper (their weekly worship services).
- Consistent Message – containing theological ideas compatible with other accepted Christian writings (incl. the divinity and humanity Jesus).
The first test, apostolic origin, is “the reason” according to Barclay for assigning Paul as the author:
“At no time in the history of the Church did men ever really think that Paul wrote Hebrews. How then did it get attached to his name? It happened very simply. When the New Testament came into its final form there was of course argument about which books were to be included and which were not. To settle it one test was used. Was a book the work of an apostle or at least the work of one who had been in direct contact with the apostles? By this time Hebrews was known and loved throughout the Church. Most people felt like Origen that God alone know who wrote it, but they wanted it. They felt it must go into the New Testament and the only way to ensure that was to include it with the thirteen letters of Paul. Hebrews won its way into the New Testament on the grounds of its own greatness, but to get in it had to be included with the letters of Paul and come under his name. People knew quite well that it was not Paul’s but they included it among his letters because no man knew who wrote it and yet it must go in.” (Barclay, p.8)
Conceptual – What Are Some Interesting Viewpoints Concerning Hebrews?
Interesting Observations
I. Quotes:
- Hebrews 13:22 – But I urge you, brethren, bear with this word of exhortation, for I have written to your briefly.
- “A sermon waiting to be written.”
- A possible reason for this view is because of the hortatory sections – “exhortative: giving strong encouragement”:
- “Let Us”
- “Five Warnings” (for these two sermons spread throughout Hebrews, see the Compartmental Section of this outline.)
- Another possible reason for this opinion is that the Greek in Hebrews is some of the highest quality in the N.T. (which is another argument used against Paul being the author). Apparently, the composition of the book of Hebrews was laid out very carefully and wasn’t a quick response to a serious problem.
- A possible reason for this view is because of the hortatory sections – “exhortative: giving strong encouragement”:
- “The Epistle to the Hebrews is in many respects the riddle of the New Testament” (E.F. Scott)
- This is due to questions concerning when it was written, to whom it was written, and most obviously, who wrote it.
- All of this will be discussed the Circumstantial Section.
- “This ‘word of exhortation’ was written under the shadow of the doom of national Judaism. The signs which our Lord had given in his prophecies of judgment were being fulfilled; and ‘the day’ was visibly approaching which He foretold (ch.10:25). The ‘forty years’ of respite (30-70 A.D.) granted to unbelieving Israel, had nearly expired (ch.3:7-19). A ‘shaking’ was going on in the powers of earth and heaven, amongst all the civil and religious institutions of the nations, which portended their speedy removal (ch.12:26-29)…. For a generation Judaism and Christianity, the old covenant and the new, had subsisted side by side [in Judea]; but this could be no longer. ‘He taketh away the first, that He may establish the second’ (ch.10:9). The supreme crisis had come for these Jewish Christians. They had clung to the ancient fold, and in their zeal for the law (Acts 21:20) had strained their loyalty to Jesus Christ almost to the breaking point. Now they must choose between the two camps. Either they will follow their High Priest ‘without the gate, bearing’ from their Jewish kinsmen ‘His reproach’; or they must take sides with His enemies and crucifiers, and remain within the gate of Jerusalem awaiting the judgment of which ‘a fearful expectation’ filled every thoughtful Hebrew mind (ch.10:27,37-39). This, they must understand, would be to ‘draw back unto perdition’. The siege and fall of Jerusalem verified the warning in full measure.” (G.G. Findlay, via J. Sidlow Baxter, The Strategic Grasp of the Bible, p.382.)
II. In William Barclay’s introduction to Hebrews, he describes four distinct, yet proper biblical conceptions of religion:
- “An Inward Fellowship with God” – “It is a union with Christ so close and so intimate that the Christian can be said to live in Christ and Christ to live in him. That was Paul’s conception of religion. To him it was something which mystically united him with God.”
- “A Standard for Life and a Power to Reach that Standard” – On the whole that is what religion was to James and to Peter. It was something which showed them what life ought to be and which enabled them to attain it.”
- “The Highest Satisfaction of their Minds” – “Their minds seek and seek until they find that they can rest in God. It was Plato who said that ‘the unexamined life is the life not worth living.’ There are some men who must understand or perish. On the whole that is what religion was to John. The first chapter of his gospel is one of the greatest attempts in the world to state religion in a way that really satisfies the mind.”
- “Access to God” – It is that which removes the barriers and opens the door to his living presence. That is what religion was to the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews. With that idea his mind was dominated. He found in Christ the one person who could take him into the very presence of God. His whole idea of religion is summed up in the great passage in Hebrews 10:19-23….If the writer to the Hebrews had one text it was: ‘Let us draw near.’” (Barclay, Hebrews, pp.1-2
- Maybe a practical way to describe these four purposes is:
- Spiritually Personal
- Spiritually Practical
- Spiritually Intellectual
- Spiritually Approachable
III. Another interesting aspect to Barclay’s introduction shows there is a “Double Background” which might lend some evidence as to who not only wrote Hebrews, but also who received it.
- The Greek Background – “Ever since the time of Plato, five hundred years before, the Greeks had been haunted by the contrast between the real and the unreal, the seen and the unseen, the temporal and the eternal. It was the Greek idea that somewhere there was a real world of which this was only a shadowy and imperfect copy (Philosophically the term “Idealism” is used to describe this line of thinking – PDH). Plato had the idea that somewhere there was a world of perfect forms or ideas or patterns, of which everything in this world was an imperfect copy….”
- This sounds so much like the line of thinking in Hebrews 8-10
- The Hebrew Background – “…To the Jew it was always dangerous to come too near to God….In view of this there entered into Jewish thought the idea of a covenant. God, in his grace and in a way that was quite unmerited, approached the nation of Israel and offered them a special relationship with himself. But this unique access to God was conditional on the observance by the people of the law that he gave to them….So Israel had access to God, but only if she kept the law. To break the law was sin, and sin put up a barrier which stopped the way to God….What men needed was a perfect priest and a perfect sacrifice, someone who was such that he could bring to God a sacrifice which once and for all opened the way of access to him. That, said the writer to the Hebrews, is exactly what Christ did.”
- Along this line of thinking, J. Sidlow Baxter compares Hebrews with Leviticus.
- Summation – “To the Greek the writer to the Hebrews said: ‘You are looking for the way from the shadows to reality; you will find it in Jesus Christ.’ To the Jew the writer to the Hebrews said: ‘You are looking for the perfect sacrifice which will open the way to God which your sins have closed; you will find it in Jesus Christ.’ Jesus was the one person who gave access to reality and access to God. That is the key thought of this letter.” (Barclay, Hebrews, pp.2-5)
IV. Two Unique Features of Hebrews:
- “It is the only place in the N.T. where we have a full-scale treatment of our Lord’s high priestly ministry in heaven.”
- It is unique in its wonderful contribution on the eternal finality of our Lord Jesus as Sinbearer, High Priest, and Sanctifier of His people.” (J. Sidlow Baxter, The Strategic Grasp of the Bible, p.388)
Circumstantial – What Is The Background Information Of Hebrews?
Author
Introductory Comments:
From the following selected quotes, it is obvious there is disagreement concerning who is the author of Hebrews.
- “…the letter is Paul’s and that it was written to Hebrews in the Hebrew language and translated [into Greek] by Luke.” Clement of Alexandria (around 200 A.D.)
- “. .the thoughts are those of the emissary (i.e., Paul), but the language and composition that of one who recalled from memory and, as it were, made notes of what was said by his master.” (Origen, c. 280 A.D.)
- “Who wrote the Epistle God only knows.”[1] (Origen)
- “That it is not the work of Paul is the almost unanimous judgment of modern scholars” (Vincent).”
- But then again, most modern scholars deny even inspiration.
Other suggested authors: Luke, Clement of Rome, Barnabas (Tertullian around A.D. 200, plus much of the “Western Church”. At least Barnabas was a Levite [Acts 4:36]), Silas, Apollos [Martin Luther, A.T. Robertson possibly because he was mighty in the scriptures and eloquent (Acts 18:24), plus if there is an Alexandrian influence to the letter, Apollos was from Alexandria (Acts 18:24)], Aquila, and Mark. My guess, and that is all that it is, is that BOTH Barnabas or Apollos wrote Hebrews, with Barnabas being the lead writer – more on this later.
Procedure:
- Arguments for Pauline Authorship
- Arguments against Pauline Authorship
- Arguments for Dual Authorship
Prefacing Statement before discussing authorship in depth:
- Does it matter who wrote Hebrews?
- Absolutely not since the ultimate author is God through the Holy Spirit. Then why study this subject?
- Because it makes us more familiar with the subject matter of Hebrews and the other N.T. books as we compare and contrast their styles and emphases. In so doing we become more familiar with overall themes and how they are covered both within and outside of Hebrews.
- And it makes us more familiar with the subject matter by taking a close look at what the book itself says about the author. In doing so, we are forced to read more closely
Arguments For Paul
- Tradition: Many of the “Church Fathers” ascribe it to Paul. The earliest of these was Pantaenus (A.D.180). The argument is weighty. “Think of it: by about A.D. 150 Pantaenus, the then leading teacher of Alexandria, was referring to it as a generally accredited epistle of Paul – which means that in only seventy years after Paul’s death it was generally accepted as his! The point is not merely that Pantaenus himself believed it to be Pauline, but that at so early a date it was generally viewed as such. How could it so quickly and altogether uncontradictedly have been thus generally received as Paul’s if it were someone else’s?”[2]
- One possible explanation is that the author, if not Paul, was known to be a companion of Paul, and therefore Paul mistakenly became known as the author through association. If Barnabas was the author, this could help the argument.
- Anonymous: “The simple fact that the Epistle is anonymous is presumptive evidence that it was written by Paul” on the assumption that Jewish Christians were prejudiced against Paul. Pantaenus explained why, in his opinion, Paul did not append his name to the epistle: “Since the Lord, who was the Apostle of the Almighty, was sent to the Hebrews, Paul, by reason of his inferiority, as if sent to the Gentiles, did not subscribe himself an Apostle to the Hebrews, both out of reverence for the Lord, and because he wrote of his abundance to the Hebrews, as a herald and Apostle to the Gentiles.”[3] Clement of Alexandria suggested Paul sent it anonymously because the Jews were prejudiced against Paul.
- Personally, I doubt the first recipients received it anonymously. It had to be delivered by a messenger. And would they have first read it without knowing it to be authoritative?
- An epistle being anonymous being “presumptive evidence that it was written by Paul” is ridiculous. None of the rest of Paul’s letters was anonymous, and they were written to audiences that contained Jews, although not totally Jewish.
Style: Some expressions and patterns of writing similar to Paul.
- Companions: Timothy is a known companion of Paul, and is mentioned in the closing section.
- I have a feeling more than just one person knew Timothy!
Arguments Against Paul
- In Rome, a Pauline authorship was rejected very early on.
- If Hebrews was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic and subsequently translated to Greek then our translations are not based upon the original language. [“No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul” (Robertson, Word Studies, v.5, p.329)], then:
- Our translations are not based upon an inspired text.
- Why did the author quote from the LXX instead of the Masoretic text?
That is why we should expect the original edition to have been written in Greek by the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
- Narrow View: Hebrews 2:3-4
Hebrews 2:3-4 (NASB)
3 how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,
4 God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.
Hebrews 2:3-4 (Jewish New Testament – JNT)
3 then how will we escape if we ignore such a great deliverance? This deliverance, which was first declared to us by those who heard him;
4 while God also bore witness to it with various signs, wonders and miracles, and with gifts of the Ruach HaKodesh which is distributed as he chose.
Many suggest that Paul is simply identifying himself with the readers as the author of Hebrews often does (i.e., 6:1 – “let us press on to maturity”). While that is an excellent counter argument, I would only count it weighty if the author had only said, how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? …without the following comment concerning the method these people learned the message.
However, two counter arguments dissuade me from accepting this explanation.
- The author does not only identify himself with the audience in being a recipient of the salvation given, but rather appears to place himself as an indirect or second generation hearer.
- I am unsure Paul would have assumed the identity of his audience in such a detail when elsewhere he was adamant that “I have neither receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” (Gal.1:12). Surely Paul would not have given fodder to his enemies concerning his apostleship.
A closer look at the text shows three distinct groupings:
- Message first spoken through the Lord…
- Confirmed to us…
- By those who heard.
- This last group heard the Lord directly.
- This might even argue against my hypothesis that Barnabas was the author.
More internal evidence would be the salutation and how it differs from Paul’s writings.
The only real benefit I see in pursuing this point is that the following information serves as an overview of both Paul’s epistles and this anonymous treatise.
- Broad View: Themes within Hebrews
“(2) The Methods of Thought and the Points of View – These differ from those of the Pauline Epistles. The two do not materially disagree. They reach, substantially, the same conclusions, but by different processes and from different positions. The points of emphasis differ. Topics which, in the Pauline letters, are in the foreground, in Hebrews fall into the shade or are wholly passes over.
“(a) The conception of faith. In Paul, faith is belief in Jesus Christ as a means of justification, involving a sharp opposition to the works of the law as meriting salvation. In Hebrews, faith is trust in the divine promises as distinguished from seeing their realization, a phase of faith which appears rarely in Paul. Both agree that faith is the only true medium of righteousness; but Hebrews sets forth two great factors of faith, namely, that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them which diligently seek him.
“(b) The mode of presenting the contrast between the covenant or works and the covenant of grace through faith. Both Paul and the author of Hebrews recognize a relation and connection between the two covenants. The one prefigures and prepares the way for the other. The Christian church is ‘the Israel of God,’ ‘the people of God,’ ‘the seed of Abraham.’ Both teach that forgiveness of sin and true fellowship with God cannot be attained through the law, and that Christianity represents the life-giving Spirit, and Judaism the letter which kills. Both assert the abrogation of the old covenant by Christ. Paul, however, views Judaism almost entirely as a law to be fulfilled by men; while our writer regards it as a system of institutions designed to represent a fellowship between God and his worshippers. Paul, accordingly, shows that the law cannot put man into right relation with God, because man cannot fulfill it; while Hebrews shows that the institutions of the old covenant cannot, by reason of their imperfections, establish a real fellowship with God. To Paul, the reason why the old covenant did not satisfy lay, not in the law, which ‘is holy and just and good,’ but in the relation of man to the law, as unable to fulfill its demands. It cannot effect justification, and it works to make man conscious of his sin, and to drive him to the true source of righteousness. To our writer the reason is to be sought in the fact that the atoning and purifying institutions of the law cannot remove the sins which prevent fellowship with God.
“From Paul’s point of view he might have been expected to show that, in the Old Testament economy, it devolved on the sacrificial institution, centered in the high-priesthood, to meet the want which was not met by legal obedience. To his assertion that men could not fulfill the demands of the law, it might have been answered that the sacrifices, not in being works of the law, but in being ordained by God himself as atonements for sin, changed men’s defective righteousness into a righteousness which justified them before God. But Paul does not meet this. He nowhere shows the insufficiency of the Old Testament sacrifices. He does not treat the doctrine of the high priesthood of Christ. He regards the system of sacrifices less as a divinely-ordained means of atonement than as a work performed by men, and therefore in the line of other works of the law.
“This gap is filled by the writer to the Hebrews, in showing that the ceremonial economy did not and could not effect true fellowship with God. He, no doubt, perceived as clearly as Paul that the observance of the ritual was of the nature of legal works; but he speaks of the ritual system as only presumed means of grace intended to define and enforce the idea of fellowship with God, and to give temporary comfort to the worshipper, but practically impotent to the institute and maintain such fellowship in any true and deep sense. Therefore he emphasizes the topic of the priesthood. He dwells on the imperfect and transient nature of the priestly office: he shows that the Levitical priesthood was only a foreshadowing of a better and permanent priesthood. Christ as the great high priest, who appears nowhere in the Pauline Epistles, is the central figure in the Epistle to the Hebrews. He treats of the ritual system and its appliances as mere types of an enduring reality: he characterizes the whole body of Levitical ordinances and ceremonies as fleshly; and through all runs the one, sad note, accentuated again and again, ‘they can never take away sins”’ ‘they can never make the comers thereunto perfect:’ ‘they are mere ordinances of the flesh, imposed until the time of reformation.’
“(c) The view of the condition in which the subject of the law’s dominion is placed. To Paul it is a condition of bondage, because the law is a body of demands which man must fulfill (Rom.7). To our writer it is a condition of unsatisfied longing for forgiveness and fellowship, because of the insufficiency of the ritual atonement. Accordingly, Hebrews points to the satisfaction of this longing in Christ, the great high priest, perfecting by one offering those who are being sanctified, purging the conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Paul points to the fact that Christ has put an end to the tyranny of the law, and has substituted freedom for bondage. The conception of freedom does not appear in Hebrews….
“(d) The doctrine of the resurrection of Christ. This emerges everywhere in Paul’s epistles. There is by one allusion to it in Hebrews (13:20), although it is implied in the doctrine of Christ’s high-priesthood, he being a priest ‘according to the power of an indissoluble life’ (7:16). [Unless 3:12 is an allusion to Christ as the living God. Why? Because if the Hebrew Christians apostatized back to Judaism, they still would have believed in a living God, unlike Gentiles who upon falling away, would have again worshipped idols (1 Thess.1:9)” – PDH.] It is also possible to interpret the allusion to the living God as, “To go back to the old economy of types and shadows, the economy of partial access to God, would be literally to depart from the living God. It would be, practically, to deny him as a living God, by denying all development and expansion in his revelation of his own life, and confining that revelation to the narrow limits of the Mosaic system; in other words, to identify the living God with the dead system. To depart from Christ, the Life, and to seek the God of the Old Testament revelation, would be to fall back from a living to a dead God.” (Ibid., pp.370,371)]
“(e) The Gentiles. There is no mention of the Gentiles in relation to the new covenant, a topic which constantly recurs in Paul.
“(f) Sin. Sin is not treated with reference to its origin as by Paul. The vocabulary of terms for sin is smaller than in the Pauline writings.[4]
An Alternative View – Dual Authorship
“Origen’s agnosticism is certainly to be applauded. Still, there is one possibility which, to my knowledge, has not been suggested. It is possible that this is a work of dual authorship. This is based on the fact that “we” is used throughout to signal the author (cf. 2:5; 5:11; 6:9, 11; 8:1; 9:5; 13:18). To be sure, the author(s) uses “we” repeatedly throughout the epistle—in both an exclusive and inclusive way, that is, both to distinguish himself/themselves from the audience and to identify with the audience. But in two of the above references, an “editorial ‘we’” (i.e., plural used to refer to a singular author) is quite unlikely. In 6:11 “we desire each one of you to know” blurs the author while itemizing the audience (and is quite uncharacteristic of the editorial ‘we’ as used elsewhere in the NT); in 13:18 the author(s) urge(s) the audience to “pray for us”—followed immediately by “I urge you the more earnestly to do this.” Both the use of the first person plural in an oblique case and the juxtaposition of the first person singular are highly irregular for the editorial ‘we.’”
“But there is a second argument based on the “we.” In all of Paul’s letters—even those where associates are mentioned in the salutation—before half way through the letter the “we” always and permanently reverts to “I.” Not so in Hebrews. Only in 11:32 and five times in chapter 13 (vv. 19, 22, 23) does the author use the first person singular. From my cursory examination of the non-literary papyri, this phenomenon does not parallel any uses of the editorial “we” common in the hellenistic period.”
“In light of these data, we propose that this work was co-authored, though one writer was more prominent than the other. The credentials of Barnabas and Apollos have always been the most impressive, though it is quite difficult to tell which one would be the leading spokesman. This is answered largely by the question of audience—which in itself is disputed. At this stage, our best guess is that Barnabas was the main author with Apollos as the assistant.” (Daniel B. Wallace , Th.M., Ph.D.; www.bible.org)
Places where a plural pronoun is used – study to indicate whether the plurality includes the author and recipients, or just the author or authors. If the plurality includes the author and not the recipients, then the next test is to see whether or not the author is including himself into another group such as the apostles, or if the plurality actually indicates a plurality of authors.
w (NASB) Heb.1:2; Heb.2:1; Heb.2:3; Heb.2:5; Heb.2:8; Heb.2:9; Heb.3:1; Heb.3:6; Heb.3:14; Heb.3:19; Heb.4:1; Heb.4:2; Heb.4:3; Heb.4:11; Heb.4:13; Heb.4:14; Heb.4:15; Heb.4:16; Heb.5:11; Heb.6:1; Heb.6:3; Heb.6:9; Heb.6:11; Heb.6:18; Heb.6:19; Heb.6:20; Heb.7:14; Heb.7:19; Heb.7:26; Heb.8:1; Heb.9:5; Heb.9:24; Heb.10:10; Heb.10:15; Heb.10:19; Heb.10:20; Heb.10:21; Heb.10:22; Heb.10:23; Heb.10:24; Heb.10:25; Heb.10:26; Heb.10:30; Heb.10:39; Heb.11:3; Heb.11:40; Heb.12:1; Heb.12:2; Heb.12:9; Heb.12:10; Heb.12:25; Heb.12:28; Heb.12:29; Heb.13:6; Heb.13:10; Heb.13:13; Heb.13:14; Heb.13:15; Heb.13:18; Heb.13:20; Heb.13:21; Heb.13:23;
(Heb 1:2 NASB) in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
(Heb 2:1 NASB) For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it.
(Heb 2:3 NASB) how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,
(Heb 2:5 NASB) For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking.
(Heb 2:8 NASB) YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET.” For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.
(Heb 2:9 NASB) But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.
(Heb 3:1 NASB) Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession
(Heb 3:6 NASB) but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house–whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
(Heb 3:14 NASB) For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,
(Heb 3:19 NASB) So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.
(Heb 4:1 NASB) Therefore, let us fear if, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you may seem to have come short of it.
(Heb 4:2 NASB) For indeed we have had good news preached to us, just as they also; but the word they heard did not profit them, because it was not united by faith in those who heard.
(Heb 4:3 NASB) For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, “AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST,” although His works were finished from the foundation of the world.
(Heb 4:11 NASB) Therefore let us be diligent to enter that rest, so that no one will fall, through following the same example of disobedience.
(Heb 4:13 NASB) And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.
(Heb 4:14 NASB) Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession.
(Heb 4:15 NASB) For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.
(Heb 4:16 NASB) Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
(Heb 5:11 NASB) Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
(Heb 6:1 NASB) Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
(Heb 6:3 NASB) And this we will do, if God permits.
(Heb 6:9 NASB) But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way.
(Heb 6:11 NASB) And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence so as to realize the full assurance of hope until the end,
(Heb 6:18 NASB) so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have taken refuge would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us.
(Heb 6:19 NASB) This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil,
(Heb 6:20 NASB) where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.
(Heb 7:14 NASB) For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.
(Heb 7:19 NASB) (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.
(Heb 7:26 NASB) For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;
(Heb 8:1 NASB) Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
(Heb 9:5 NASB) and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.
(Heb 9:24 NASB) For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
(Heb 10:10 NASB) By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
(Heb 10:15 NASB) And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,
(Heb 10:19 NASB) Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus,
(Heb 10:20 NASB) by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh,
(Heb 10:21 NASB) and since we have a great priest over the house of God,
(Heb 10:22 NASB) let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
(Heb 10:23 NASB) Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful;
(Heb 10:24 NASB) and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds,
(Heb 10:25 NASB) not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.
(Heb 10:26 NASB) For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,
(Heb 10:30 NASB) For we know Him who said, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY.” And again, “THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE.”
(Heb 10:39 NASB) But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.
(Heb 11:3 NASB) By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
(Heb 11:40 NASB) because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.
(Heb 12:1 NASB) Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every encumbrance and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,
(Heb 12:2 NASB) fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
(Heb 12:9 NASB) Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live?
(Heb 12:10 NASB) For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness.
(Heb 12:25 NASB) See to it that you do not refuse Him who is speaking. For if those did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, much less will we escape who turn away from Him who warns from heaven.
(Heb 12:28 NASB) Therefore, since we receive a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us show gratitude, by which we may offer to God an acceptable service with reverence and awe;
(Heb 12:29 NASB) for our God is a consuming fire.
(Heb 13:6 NASB) so that we confidently say, “THE LORD IS MY HELPER, I WILL NOT BE AFRAID. WHAT WILL MAN DO TO ME?”
(Heb 13:10 NASB) We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat.
(Heb 13:13 NASB) So, let us go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.
(Heb 13:14 NASB) For here we do not have a lasting city, but we are seeking the city which is to come.
(Heb 13:15 NASB) Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.
(Heb 13:18 NASB) Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a good conscience, desiring to conduct ourselves honorably in all things.
(Heb 13:20 NASB) Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord,
(Heb 13:21 NASB) equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
(Heb 13:23 NASB) Take notice that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom, if he comes soon, I will see you.
However, please also note 13:19 and especially 13:22
- This view is intriguing because of its novelty, and because there is definitely a plural presence. I likewise conclude that there is only one main author, while having a plural authorship. As a balancing statement, this concept of “dual authorship” should not be as novel as one thinks.
- Romans – single authorship (1:1,8)
- 1 Corinthians – single authorship, dual greeting (1:1,4)
- 2 Corinthians – dual authorship? (1:1,13), head author (1:15, 13:10)
- Galatians – multiple greeting (1:1-2); single author (1:6)
- Ephesians – single authorship (1:1)
- Philippians – dual greeting (1:1); single authorship (1:3)
- Colossians – dual greetings (1:1); single author (4:8)
- 1 Thessalonians – multiple greetings (1:1); multiple authorship? (2:6,18; 4:1,10,13; 5:12); head author (3:5; 27)
- There is a strong “Western Church” tradition for Barnabas.
- Barnabas was a Levite, and much of the emphasis within Hebrews would be a natural subject for such a man.
- Barnabas is called an apostle within Scripture (Acts 14:14), and therefore would be inspired. He then would have to fill the qualifications for succession as found in Acts 1. The downside to this reasoning is the possible implication from Hebrews 2:3-4, although it is still possible that since Barnabas was not one of the original apostles, he still could have gotten some information first hand, but some other information via the original twelve.
Recipients
The English title, Hebrews, strikes me as significant. The term Hebrew is first used Biblically in Gen.14:13 referring to Abraham. The book of Hebrews is written to Messianic Jews, to borrow a phrase from today. What is the significance? It tacitly implies that the true descendants of Abraham were and are those who accept Jesus as the fulfillment of the promise God made to Abraham that all the earth would be blessed through his seed.
While it is obvious to whom Hebrews was written, it is not obvious where these people lived. The most obvious answer would be these people were Palestinian Jewish Christians because of the exclusive nature of the audience. Most churches were racially mixed. The most obvious place for a totally Jewish congregation would be in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Two problems with this theory are that the LXX is quoted instead of a Hebrew translation. Plus, the book was written in Greek and not Aramaic, although Matthew, also written to a Jewish audience, likewise was written in Greek.
Another theory is that the recipients were in Rome, or at least in Italy. Hebrews 13:24 reads, Those from Italy greet you. From is apo and could mean “in” as the greeting came from those “in Italy.” Most likely it refers to their former home, thus the translation from would simply suggest the greeting came from a group familiar to the recipients via homeland.
An interesting theory is that the audience was Alexandrian Jewish Christians, although there are also problems associated with this view, as there are with all views:
“A plausible hypothesis assigned its destination to the Jewish Christians in Alexandria. This was based on the fact that the Muratorian Canon (170-210), while omitting Hebrews, notes an Epistle to the Alexandrians (Ad Alexandrinos). It was argued that, since the Canon contains a list both of Paul’s genuine epistles and of those falsely ascribed to Him, and since Hebrews is not mentioned, the Alexandrian epistle can mean only the Epistle to the Hebrews. It was further urged that Alexandria had, next to Jerusalem, the largest resident Jewish population in the world, and that at Leontopolis in Egypt was another temple, with the arraignments of which the notices in Hebrews corresponded more nearly than with those of the Jerusalem temple [This temple was founded B.C. 180-145 by Onias, one of the high-priestly family. The building was a deserted temple of Pasht, the cat-goddess. A description is given by Josephus B.J. vii.10,3; Cont. Ap. ii.2. The fact that the Alexandrian temple corresponded more with the Hebrew account is not necessarily weighty since Hebrews does not mention the temple, but rather the tabernacle. More on this later.] Moreover, the Alexandrian character of the phraseology of the epistle was supposed to point to Alexandrian readers.”[5] [Because of the similarity to Philo’s writings – PDH]
The following is from Josephus (The Works of Flavius Josephus, vol.3)
THE FRIENDSHIP THAT WAS BETWEEN ONIAS AND PTOLEMY PHILOMETOR; AND HOW ONIAS BUILT A TEMPLE IN EGYPT LIKE TO THAT AT JERUSALEM.
1. BUT then the son of Onias the high priest, who was of the same name with his father, and who fled to king Ptolemy, who was called Philometor, lived now at Alexandria, as we have said already. When this Onias saw that Judea was oppressed by the Macedonians and their kings, out of a desire to purchase to himself a memorial and eternal fame he resolved to send to king Ptolemy and queen Cleopatra, to ask leave of them that he might build a temple in Egypt like to that at Jerusalem, and might ordain Levites and priests out of their own stock. The chief reason why he was desirous so to do, was, that he relied upon the prophet Isaiah, who lived above six hundred years before, and foretold that there certainly was to be a temple built to Almighty God in Egypt by a man that was a Jew. Onias was elevated with this prediction, and wrote the following epistle to Ptolemy and Cleopatra: “Having done many and great things for you in the affairs of the war, by the assistance of God, and that in Celesyria and Phoenicia, I came at length with the Jews to Leontopolis, and to other places of your nation, where I found that the greatest part of your people had temples in an improper manner, and that on this account they bare ill-will one against another, which happens to the Egyptians by reason of the multitude of their temples, and the difference of opinions about Divine worship. Now I found a very fit place in a castle that hath its name from the country Diana; this place is full of materials of several sorts, and replenished with sacred animals; I desire therefore that you will grant me leave to purge this holy place, which belongs to no master, and is fallen down, and to build there a temple to Almighty God, after the pattern of that in Jerusalem, and of the same dimensions, that may be for the benefit of thyself, and thy wife and children, that those Jews which dwell in Egypt may have a place whither they may come and meet together in mutual harmony one with another, and he subservient to thy advantages; for the prophet Isaiah foretold that “there should be an altar in Egypt to the Lord God; (5) and many other such things did he prophesy relating to that place.”
2. And this was what Onias wrote to king Ptolemy. Now any one may observe his piety, and that of his sister and wife Cleopatra, by that epistle which they wrote in answer to it; for they laid the blame and the transgression of the law upon the head of Onias. And this was their reply: “King Ptolemy and queen Cleopatra to Onias, send greeting. We have read thy petition, wherein thou desirest leave to be given thee to purge that temple which is fallen down at Leontopolis, in the Nomus of Heliopolis, and which is named from the country Bubastis; on which account we cannot but wonder that it should be pleasing to God to have a temple erected in a place so unclean, and so full of sacred animals. But since thou sayest that Isaiah the prophet foretold this long ago, we give thee leave to do it, if it may be done according to your law, and so that we may not appear to have at all offended God herein.”
3. So Onias took the place, and built a temple, and an altar to God, like indeed to that in Jerusalem, but smaller and poorer. I do not think it proper for me now to describe its dimensions or its vessels, which have been already described in my seventh book of the Wars of the Jews. However, Onias found other Jews like to himself, together with priests and Levites, that there performed Divine service. But we have said enough about this temple.
4. Now it came to pass that the Alexandrian Jews, and those Samaritans who paid their worship to the temple that was built in the days of Alexander at Mount Gerizzim, did now make a sedition one against another, and disputed about their temples before Ptolemy himself; the Jews saying that, according to the laws of Moses, the temple was to be built at Jerusalem; and the Samaritans saying that it was to be built at Gerizzim. They desired therefore the king to sit with his friends, and hear the debates about these matters, and punish those with death who were baffled. Now Sabbeus and Theodosius managed the argument for the Samaritans, and Andronicus, the son of Messalamus, for the people of Jerusalem; and they took an oath by God and the king to make their demonstrations according to the law; and they desired of Ptolemy, that whomsoever he should find that transgressed what they had sworn to, he would put him to death. Accordingly, the king took several of his friends into the council, and sat down, in order to hear what the pleaders said. Now the Jews that were at Alexandria were in great concern for those men, whose lot it was to contend for the temple at Jerusalem; for they took it very ill that any should take away the reputation of that temple, which was so ancient and so celebrated all over the habitable earth. Now when Sabbeus and Tlteodosius had given leave to Andronicus to speak first, he began to demonstrate out of the law, and out of the successions of the high priests, how they every one in succession from his father had received that dignity, and ruled over the temple; and how all the kings of Asia had honored that temple with their donations, and with the most splendid gifts dedicated thereto. But as for that at Gerizzm, he made no account of it, and regarded it as if it had never had a being. By this speech, and other arguments, Andronicus persuaded the king to determine that the temple at Jerusalem was built according to the laws of Moses, (6) and to put Sabbeus and Theodosius to death. And these were the events that befell the Jews at Alexandria in the days of Ptolemy Philometor.
Date
While a certain date is impossible allusions to a time frame suggest the possibility that a second generation Christian wrote the book (Heb.2:3-4) and that the recipients have had time to grow to where they should have been teachers (Heb.5:12). Also, they had forgotten the “former days” (10:32). Chapter thirteen verse 7 could be interpreted to mean their leaders had died.
Most agree Hebrews was written prior to the destruction of the temple for two reasons:
- The contrast to the sacrifices of the Old Covenant and the New. After the temple was destroyed, the sacrifices themselves ceased. Possibly 69 AD might be accurate.
- There would have been a mention of such a drastic event since the Holy Place is spoken of so often. This suggestion I disagree with since the Holy Place mentioned is in the Tabernacle, not the Temple.
The above is possible, but we must include that within Hebrews, the emphasis is on the Tabernacle, not the temple (9:1ff Emphasis on Tabernacle)
Within Hebrews there is a greater emphasis on the Tabernacle than the Temple, although the same people worshipping the same God in the same way used both. Why? While the treatise does not tell us, maybe we can surmise some possible reasons why.
- The tabernacle was directly ordered by God from the beginning of their exodus. The tabernacle goes back to Mt.Sinai. The temple was originally David’s idea.
- Since the tabernacle was associated with Mt. Sinai, it was more closely tied to the covenant given there by God and agreed to by the people.
- In chapter 2, the Holy Spirit gives as an example of Israel’s disobedience their sin in the wilderness. This would be a time-period associated with the tabernacle and not the temple.
- Being that the tabernacle came prior to the temple, and each was an anti-type of heaven (Heb.9), the tabernacle was more closely associated with Heaven since it came first.
- The tabernacle was never defiled by idol worship and the destruction by the Gentiles.
- Since the tabernacle was mobile, it better represented the spirit aspect of worshiping in spirit and in truth (Jn.4:24).
Purpose
Heb.13:22
WHO – Jewish Christians
WHAT – The Theme: Better
WHEN –
WHERE –
WHY – Why was this book needed? Why should we study it?
Why Was This Book Needed?
1) The Jewish Christians were falling away, back to an unfulfilling way of spirituality. It was unfulfilling in that it had no present Messiah, and could not grant true forgiveness.
2) Why were these Hebrews in danger of falling back? In my opinion, peer pressure and pride brought about by an unexpected consequence of salvation by Faith (Acts 15). The Mosaical law was no longer needed. If the Jews did not have their law, what made them distinct from the world? Only their past made them distinct (Rom.3:1ff). I also wonder if the fear of persecution caused some to want to distance themselves from their Gentile brothers (Heb.10:32ff).
HOW – The Holy Spirit
Hebrews 2:3-4 (NASB)
3 how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,
4 God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.
Hebrews 2:3-4 (Jewish New Testament – JNT)
3 then how will we escape if we ignore such a great deliverance? This deliverance, which was first declared to us by those who heard him;
4 while God also bore witness to it with various signs, wonders and miracles, and with gifts of the Ruach HaKodesh which is distributed as he chose.
Compartmental – How Is Hebrews To Be Divided And Diagramed?
Before delving into Hebrews as a whole, it might be helpful and interesting to see how it fits into the Bible as a whole, and specifically how it fits into the N.T.
- It is obviously a book of the N.T., and yet it is also very much an O.T. book:
- The audience is Jewish.
- The book is filled with O.T. quotations.
- Part of the “Catholic” or “General” Epistles because they are not addressed to a specific church, or individual – although that description might not be as accurate as one thinks (i.e., 2,3 John)
I. The Better Messenger: the Son [6]
Qualifications
Superiority to angels
Parenthesis: The peril of neglect
The Incarnation
II. The Better Apostle
Superiority to Moses
Parenthesis: The peril of unbelief
Superiority of His Rest
Parenthesis: The peril of disobedience
III. The Better Priest
Comparison with Aaron
The Order of Melchizedek
Appointed
Author of salvation
Parenthesis: The peril of immaturity
Forerunner
A living priest
Constituted by oath
Relation to Sacrifice
IV. The Better Covenant
The Establishment of the Covenant
The Content of the Old Covenant
Christ and the New Covenant
V. The Better Sacrifice
Impotence of the Law
The Offering of Christ
Parenthesis: The peril of rejection
VI. The Better Way: Faith
The Need of Faith
Examples of Faith
The Exercise of Faith
The Objective of Faith
Parenthesis: The peril of refusal
VII. Conclusion: The Practice of Faith
In Social Relations
1:1-2:18
1:1-3
1:4-14
2:1-4
2:5-18
3:1-4:13
3:1-6
3:7-19
4:1-10
4:11-13
4:14-7:28
4:14-5:4
5:5-7:25
5:5,6
5:7-10
5:11-6:12
6:13-20
7:1-17
7:18-25
7:26-28
8:1-9:28
8:1-13
9:1-10
9:11-28
10:1-31
10:1-4
10:5-18
10:19-31
10:32-12:29
10:32-39
11:1-40
12:1-17
12:18-24
12:25-29
13:1-25
13:1-6
13:7-17
13:18-25
First Person Plural Hortatory Subjunctive –
“Let Us”[7]
1. Let us fear . . .
2. Let us therefore give diligence to
enter
3. Let us hold fast our confession
4. Let us draw near . . . to the throne
of grace
5. Let us press on unto perfection
6. Let us draw near
7. Let us hold fast the confession of
our faith
8. Let us consider one another
9. Let us . . . lay aside every weight
10. Let us run the race
11. Let us have grace
12. Let us therefore go forth unto
him
13. Let us offer up sacrifice of praise
4:1
4:11
4:14
4:16
6:1
10:22
10:23
10:24
12:1
12:1
12:28
13:13
13:15
Five Warnings
- 1:1-2:4 – Danger of Drifting: Don’t Drift
- 3:7-4:13 – Danger of Doubting: Don’t Doubt
- 5:11-6:20 – Danger of Deformity: Don’t Degenerate
- 10:26-31 – Danger of Despising: Don’t Despise
- 12:15-29 – Danger of Denying: Don’t Deny
[Daniel B. Wallace, www.bible.org, Hebrews:
Introduction, Argument, and Outline]
At this point the author inserts his/their first warning passage (2:1-4), which addresses the superiority of the message of Christ over that of angels. In essence, the point is, “Don’t drift” (2:1). Whoever rejects the proofs of the message of salvation (2:3-4) in favor of an inferior message of judgment mediated through angels (2:2) will, in fact, face even worse judgment than what was described by angels (2:3).
This discussion about Moses leads naturally into the second warning based on Israel’s wilderness experience (3:6b–4:13). The point essentially is, “Don’t defect.” The author(s) is quite tactful here: only once, and only in a subtle way, does he implicate Moses in Israel’s unbelief in the wilderness (3:16). The audience should draw its own conclusions as to who was more faithful! Unlike the first warning—which dealt with Christ’s superiority to the angels’ message—this warning has to do with the nation’s failure to believe in God (3:6b-11). The readers are urged to believe in the promise of God to give them the Sabbath rest which the nation never obtained (3:12–4:11). What is at stake, however, is not an earthly, transient rest, but an eternal rest—rest from the works which are not based on faith. This warning is concluded with a somber note about God’s piercing Word (4:12-13), illustrating the fact that though some may profess faith, God knows those who possess faith.
The third warning then commences (5:11–6:8): “Don’t degenerate.” Dealing with such subtle typology may be too much for the readers, for they are still immature in the faith (5:11-14). They are to move forward in their spiritual growth (6:1-3) if the seed of salvation is ever to take root. In light of the tremendous exposure they have had to the truths of salvation, it had better take root—or else they are in danger of apostasy (6:4-8). In this passage the author may well be thinking of the parable of the sower (6:7-8) in which good works (productivity) are the evidence of genuine faith (6:7; cf. 5:14; 6:10). Further, he may have in mind someone such as Judas who would clearly fit his description in 6:4-6. If any of his readers, who had been in such a growing congregation and had seen the evidence of God’s Spirit working in their lives (6:4-5), fall away, they “crucify afresh the Son of God” (6:6), making it impossible for them to obtain the salvation which they had professed.35
Nevertheless, not all were genuine believers: hence, a fourth warning section (10:26-31) comes on the heels of this exhortation. In essence, the point is “Don’t despise.” This one sounds very much like the one in 6:4-8, though this time the point is not related to the sown seed of the gospel, but specifically to profaning the blood of Christ (10:29). In the context of the new covenant community the author speaks of such a person as already “sanctified” (10:29)36: this should be compared with the covenant community of the OT in which some were not believers, yet were set apart as a peculiar people by virtue of the sacrificial system (10:26-28). It is clear that the man in the new covenant community is not necessarily saved: note such phrases as “fearful prospect of judgment,” “a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries,” (10:27), “worse punishment” (than physical death), “outraged the Spirit of grace” (10:29), capped off by “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (10:31).
The fifth warning of the book comes on the heels of this note on chastening. In essence, it is “Don’t deny.” The author implores the readers not to deny God by refusing to heed his voice (12:18-29). Once again, as with previous warnings (2:1-4; 10:26-29), the author argues a minor ad maior: from the minimal punishment (physical death) for disobedience in the OT to the maximal punishment for disobedience now (eternal hell). He contrasts Mount Sinai with Mount Zion (12:18-24), showing that the awesome power of God shakes mountains, but it cannot shake the kingdom in which true believers dwell (12:28). The warning is concluded with the somber note that “our God is a consuming fire” (12:29).
[1] Robert Milligan thinks Origin does not direct this statement to the author of Hebrews, but rather the secretary (i.e., Rom.16:22)
[2] J. Sidow Baxter, Explore the Book, v.6, pp.275, 276.
[3] via Robert Milligan, Hebrews, p.6
[4] Vincent, Word Studies, v.4, p.363ff.
[5] ibid., Vincent, p.371
[6] Merrill C. Tenney, New Testament Survey, pp.359-360.
[7] Ibid., p.361-362
Comments