NOTAS

THE CONTEXT OF THE CRUX

AT HEBREWS 5,7-8
JAMES SWETNAM
An article in Biblica by the present author outlined a proposed solution
for the crux at Heb 5,7-8
1
. The present article will attempt to put this pro-
posed solution in the general and particular context of the structure of the first
six chapters of the epistle. This contextualization should help indicate the
intention of the author of Hebrews and thus clarify and further commend the
proposed solution. The structure on which this contextualization is based is,
like the solution to the crux at Heb 5,7-8, a suggestion, to be judged on the
intrinsic merits or lack thereof of the arguments adduced.
I. The Structure of Hebrews 1,1 6,20
1. Hebrews 1,1 3,6
Another article on the structure of the Epistle to the Hebrews con-
cluded that the section 1,1 3,6 is best divided according to a symmetri-
cal pattern: after the exordium (1,1-4) comes a passage of exposition about
the risen-exalted Christ as Son of God (1,5-14) followed by a brief parae-
nesis based on this exposition (2,1-4); then comes a passage of exposition
on Jesus as son of Abraham, possibly under the title Son of Man (2,5-18),
followed by a brief paraenesis based on this exposition (3,1-6)
2
. This
interpretation of the structure of Hebrews has set the stage for the present
article about the crux at Heb 5,7-8, which will now analyze the structure
of Heb 3,7 6,20 in order to situate 5,7-8 in its larger context.
2. Hebrews 3,7 6,20
a) Hebrews 3,7 4,11
Heb 3,7 6,20 begins with a quotation attributed to the Holy Spirit.
This quotation is from Ps 95,7-11. At Heb 4,3-5 a passage from Ps 95,7-
1
J. Swetnam, The Crux at Hebrews 5,7-8, Bib 81 (2000) 347-361.
2
J. Swetnam, The Structure of Hebrews 1,1 3,6, Melita Theologica 43 (1992) 58-66.
Cf. also J. Swetnam, Hebrews 1,5-14: A New Look, Melita Theologica 51 (2000) 51-68.
Filologa Neotestamentaria - Vol. XIV - 2001, pp. 101-120
Facultad de Filosofa y Letras de Crdoba (Espaa)
1l which involves the rest of the Promised Land is linked to the rest of
God after creation
3
, suggesting that the author is effecting a spiritualiza-
tion of the promise made to Abraham: the promise of receiving land
becomes a promise of receivng Gods own rest.
4
Previous remarks in 3,1-
6 with regard to Moses, based as they seem to be on 2,10-12 and the
imagery of leading sons to glory,
5
suggest that Christ who is foreshadowed
by Moses, is the leader, under God, in this journey to the spiritualized
promised land
6
. This leader is explicitly invoked at 3,14 under the name
of Christ. He is not explicitly mentioned as Jesus, but another foreshad-
owing of his leadership is mentionedJoshua is presented under the
name of Jesus ( ljcu ,) (4,8)
7
. Joshua did not give the people defini-
tive entrance into the land; if he had, there would not be talk of another
day in which entrance is still possible
8
.
This presentation of the journey of the people of God to enter into his
restwith the apparently gratuitous
9
introduction of Joshua under the
name of Jesusserves as a preparation for the famous passage at Heb
4,12-13 which speaks of Gods word as live and active and sharper than
any two-edged sword:
3
The linking is effected by means of a gezera shawa, an exegetical argument in which
a term in one verse of scripture is interpreted according to its use in another (cf. H. W.
Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews [Hermeneia; Philadelphia 1989], 128-129).
4
Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 129-130.
5
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 1,1 3,6, 62-63.
6
Cf. the use of the word c ,j, , in 2,10 and the comments of P. Ellingworth:
Hebrews use of v, :,, (6:20) of Christ suggests that c ,j, , in Hebrews may
have kept alive the hellenistic metaphor of a pioneer opening a path on which others can
follow. This suits both the immediate context here (c ,c, .c) and the development in
3:7 4:11 of the theme of Gods wandering people (P. Ellingworth, The Epistle to the
Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text [NIGTC; Grand Rapids/Carlisle 1993] 161).
7
See Attridge, Hebrews, 130, under Heb 4,8. Attridge notes: The reference to
Joshua, whose name in Greek ( ljcu ,) is the same as that of Jesus, suggests a typolog-
ical comparison between one c ,j, , of the old covenant and that of the new. Such a
typology was explicitly developed in later Christian literature, but it is not exploited
here. The present article will dispute this last observation: the typology is developed
with reference to circumcision.
8
The rest to which the psalm referred cannot have been the rest that Joshua pro-
vided in the promised land. For then there would have been no need for the psalmists
appeal to heed Gods voice today. The psalms reference to divine rest is seen to be not
a simple analogy between the exodus generation and the psalmists audience, but a
prophetic proclamation of the good news itself, a reaffirmation of Gods promise direct-
ed to anyone who has faith (Attridge, Hebrews, 130).
9
Apparently gratuitouson the supposition that v. 8 is part of a passage serving as
a preparation for 4,12-13 with its emphasis on scripture, there would seem to be no need
to mention Joshua, who had nothing to do with Gods word. In v. 8 Joshuas role as the
one presumed to be leading the people into Gods rest is stressed. The word of God for
the Israelites as for the Christians is contained in the promise to Abraham (Heb 4,1-2;
cf. 6,15). Joshua failed in leading the people into the land. But in the current dominant
interpretation the word of God will somehow succeed where he did not.
102 James Swetnam
b) Hebrews 4,12-13
Z. . ,c , ` ,, u -.u -c. . ..,,j , -c. . .,, u v. ,
vc cc. c c.,c. :. c. -c. v..u c,, c ,. . . -c. u.`. .,
-c. -,..- , . .-uj c... -c. . .... . -c,:. c, -c. u - . c..
-. c., c c.j , . .. v.. cu u , vc .c :. ,u.c -c. .,cj`.c. -
.c . , -c`. , cu u v, , . j . . ` ,,
10
.
Indeed, the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-
edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from mar-
row; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And
before him no creature is hidden, but all are naked and laid bare to the
eyes of the one to whom we must render an account
11
.
The almost universal contemporary interpretation of the word
(` ,,) of v. 12 has it as referring to scripture
12
. This interpretation gives
a superficially plausible exegesis of the passage, which speaks of the last-
ing relevance of Gods word. But there are a number of difficulties with
this exegesis
13
:
1) The terminology is inconsistent. The fact that the occurrence of
`,, in v. 13 is different from the occurrence of `,, in v. 12 is
odd, since the occurrences seem to be intended as a frame for the pas-
sage. This change from `,, as word (of scripture) to `,, as
account is bizarre
14
.
10
Text after NA
27
.
11
Translation after NSRV (The Holy Bible containing the Old and New Testaments.
New Revised Standard Version: Catholic Edition [Nashville, 1993] 219 [New Testament
section]).
12
Attridge, Hebrews, 134, notes that The identification of the Logos here as Christ
is common in patristic sources, some of which he identifies. He names several modern
commentators who follow this interpretation, but does not give his approval. See also W.
L. Lane, Hebrews 18 (WBC; 1991) 103, who strongly defends the contemporary con-
sensus that ` ,, means scripture and not Christ.
13
See J. Swetnam, Jesus as ` ,, in Hebrews 4,12-13, Bib 62 (1981) 214-224. The
difficulty with trying to understand Heb 4,12-13 comes in no small part from the fact
that the passage has become an accepted topos for the efficacy of the word of scripture:
Heb 4,12-13 is about the efficacy of the word of scripture because, as everyone knows,
the word of scripture is sharper than a two-edged sword.
14
Cf. the remarks of A. Vanhoye: Une inclusion ouvre et ferme la longue phrase
[sc., 4,12-13]: les premiers mots prsentent `,, u -.u et les derniers disent
j.. `,,. A,,, il est vrai, nest pas pris les deux fois dans la mme acception:
au dbut, il sagit de la parole de Dieu; la fin, il sagit, soit de lexpos en course,
soitplus probablementdu compte que nous aurons rendre. Il en rsulte pour le
text une certaine bizarrerie, qui saccentue encore, lorsquon remarque que le v,, .
(traduit: et cest lui) dsigne le `,, du dbut: cest la parole quil faut adress-
er la parole! (A. Vanhoye, Structure littraire littraire de ptre aux Hbreux [Paris
1976
2
], 102).
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 103
2) The imagery is inconsistent. In v. 12 the image is about the pene-
trating power of ` ,,, whereas in v. 13 the image seems to refer to a
sacrifice or, possibly, to a wrestling hold
15
.
3) The description is inconsistent. It is not clear how a two-edged
sword is appropriate for a sacrifice, much less for a wrestling hold
16
.
4) The language is inconsistent. The use of the illative particle u . in
4,14 is anomalous. In 4,12 the word ,c , refers to what immediately pre-
cedes: on the reading of ` ,, as Scripture, the imagery involving the
penetrating power of the sword gives the reason why the hortative cvu-
:c c... is used in the preceding verse, and yields a tolerable sense. But
on the same reading, the particle u . in v. 14 is more difficult to account
for. It would normally refer to what immediately precedes. But even if the
assumption is made that it alludes to the distant discourse about the high
priest in 2,13b-18the only previous explicit mention of c ,..,.u , in
the epistlethe transition from v. 13 is abrupt, and, in the end, unintel-
ligible, for nothing in v. 13 refers to Christ as high priest
17
. Further, if
` ,, refers to scripture, the use of the participle . . (living) modify-
ing ` ,, is inconsistent with the language involving . . elsewhere in
Hebrews. In the epistle this word . . is used of God himself (3,12; 9,14;
10,31; 12,22), or of Christ (7,25; 10,20, or of human life (2,15; 7,8;
9,17; 10,38; 12,9), but never of non-personal life. Heb 4,12 is the only
text in Hebrews where . . would refer to non-personal life if ` ,,
refers to scripture.
A coherent solution to these problems would be to take the word
` ,, as referring to Jesus Himself, as in the Johannine prologue
18
. The
above inconsistencies are thus resolved at one stroke:
1) The terminology becomes consistent. If the `,, of the expres-
sion `,, at 4,12-13 is understood as referring to Jesus Himself
19
,
it can have the same meaning in both verses. In v. 12 the allusion to
Jesus as `,, would refer to his ability as divine to furnish a spiri-
tual circumcision of the heart needed to effect a definitive entry into
Gods rest. The idea of circumcision comes from 4,8 and the allusion to
Joshua, who circumcised the Israelites on their entrance into the land
15
Attridge, Hebrews, 134-136.
16
Attridge, Hebrews, 136.
17
Ellingworth (Hebrews, 266) notes that u . does not draw an inference from what
immediately precedes, and posits an interruption in the thought from 3,7 to 4,13.
Attridge, too (Hebrews, 138-139), says that u . is a resumptive particle. But neither
Ellingworth nor Attridge indicates why the author of Hebrews thinks it appropriate to
resume his discussion of Christs priesthood precisely at this point.
18
Cf. J. Swetnam, A Possible Structure of Hebrews 3,7 10,39, Melita Theologica
45 (1994) 128-135.
19
The title Jesus is suggested by the word ljcu , at 4,8 referring primarily to
Joshua and indirectly to Jesus.
104 James Swetnam
(Josh 5,2-9)
20
. In v. 13 the allusion to Jesus as `,, refers to his
being with God the judge to act as intercessor, as is clear from what fol-
lows in 4,14-16.
2) The imagery becomes consistent. The imagery of v. 12 involves the
imagery of spiritual circumcision; the imagery of v. 13 involves the
imagery of a sacrificial victim. V. 12 looks back to what precedes: the first
Jesus (Joshua) did not usher the people into Gods rest through his cir-
cumcision, but the second Jesus will. V. 13 looks forward to what follows:
God is judge of all, before whom nothing is hidden, but Jesus is with him
as the Christians intercessor, i.e., as high priest.
21
3) The description becomes consistent. The two-edged sword (c c.,c
:. c,), when viewed in the context of the diverse imagery of vv. 12-13,
is seen to be a two-edged knife. In v. 12 it is the knife of circumcision used
by Joshua (Josh 5,2)
22
. In v. 13 it is the knife of sacrifice used by Abraham
for the intended sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22,6cf. Heb 11,17)
23
. V. 12 looks
back to v. 8, where Joshua is portrayed as being unable to give rest to the peo-
ple
24
. V. 13 looks forward to vv. 14-16 and the discussion of the high priest
as intercessor which is conveyed by the words v, , . j . . ` ,,. The
description in the first third of v. 13 (-c. u - . c.. c c.j , . .. v.. cu -
u ) is about the omniscence of God and suggests that he is judge
25
. The
20
Thus the mention of Joshua makes sense: he is being implicitly contrasted with Jesus.
The fact that in Greek the same word can be used for both facilitates the implicit contrast,
which is developed only with v. 12. (Cf. above, nn. 7 and 9.) The basis of this comparison
is the common element of circumcision of the heart described in v. 12. Joshua was unable
to effect this spiritual circumcision, but Jesus is, and this is the reason why the Christians
as a group will enter Gods spiritual rest whereas the desert generation of Israel did not and
could not. (Cf. above, n. 8.) |c,:. c (heart) in 3,8.10.12.15; 4,7 indicates the key factor
in the failure of the desert generation to enter the land. The word -c,:. c is taken up in
4,12 in the imagery; in the interpretation being advanced here this imagery involves cir-
cumcision of the heart or spiritual circumcision, as in Rom 2,28-29. In Col 2,11-12 this
spiritual circumcision is identified with baptism. In this regard it is useful to compare the
text from Colossians with Heb 10,22, where the word -c,:. c also occurs in the context
of baptism. (Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 288-289, and Ellingworth, Hebrews, 523-524.)
21
This division of 4,12-13 into a verse which looks what precedes and a verse which
looks at what follows can be compared to the way Heb 2,13a seems to face both forward
and backward (Swetnam, Hebrews 1,1 3,6, 61).
22
Cf. J. Moatti-Fine, La Bible dAlexandrie: Jsus (Josu) (Paris 1996), 116-117, on
c c.,c as knife at Josh 5,2. She also gives a lengthy presentation of the discussion
about spiritual circumcision which this verse has occasioned in the early Church.
23
Cf. M. Harl, La Bible dAlexandrie: La Gense (Paris 1986), 193, on c c.,c as
knife in Gen 22,6.
24
Cf. the discussion in E. Grer, An die Hebrer. 1. Teilband. Hebr 16 (EkK;
Zrich/Neukirchen-Vluyn 1990), 214-216
25
The picture of God in 4: 12-13 confirms the eschatological framework of Hebrews
as Alexandrian Jewish; God is Judge, and he does not only judge at a general resurrection
of the dead, but at the end of each mans life (10:25, 9:27. . . .) (G. W. Trompf, The
Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12-13, Studia Theologica [Scandinavian Journal of
Theology] 25 [1971] 130-131). Cf. also Ellingworth, Hebrews, 264.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 105
middle third (vc .c :. ,u.c -c. .,cj`.c. .c . , -c`. , cu -
u ) is about a sacrifice, with the sacrificial victim stretched out with the
neck naked and laid bare
26
and exposed to the knife. It alludes to Christ as
victim and implicitly serves as an introduction to the final third of the verse
which speaks of Christ as ` ,,. He is acting as priestly intercessor as the
result of his sacrifice of self. This two-fold use of c c.,c is alluded to by
the word :. c, (two-edged): the c c.,c has two functions: it serves
for circumcision in v. 12 and for sacrifice in v. 13. And, like the knife, the
verses speaking of these two functions look in opposite directions.
4) The language becomes consistent. Taking the expression ` ,, as
referring to Jesus as high priestly intercessor explains why the word u . is
used at v. 14; v. 13, with its portrayal of the ` ,, as intercessor v, ,
. -. ., has given the occasion to refer to Jesus as high priest in the
verse immediately following. The underlying supposition of Jesus as inter-
cessor contained in the phrase v, , . -. . is confirmed by the men-
tion of Jesus intercessory role in 4,16
27
. Further, the word . . assumes
a usage consonant with Heb 7,25 and 10,20
28
.
26
Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 264-265. There is a Jewish tradition, reflected in the
Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and the Targum Neofiti on Genesis, that Isaac in v. 10 of both
targums stretches out his neck (hyrvvi eyep in Pseudo-Jonathan, hyravi eyep in Neofiti)
after freely offering himself in sacrifice. Cf. M. Maher, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis
(The Aramaic Bible [The Targums] 1B; Edinburgh 1992), 8, and M. McNamara, Targum
Neofiti 1: Genesis (The Aramaic Bible [The Targums] 1A; Edinburgh 1992), 118. For the
text cf.: E. G. Clarke, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch: Text and Concordance
(Hoboken 1984), 24 (for Pseudo-Jonathan) and A. Daz Macho, Neophyti 1. Targum
palestinense ms de la Biblioteca Vaticana. Tomo 1. Genesis (MadridBarcelona 1968), 127
(for Neofiti). This is not to suggest, of course, that these two targums date in their present
form from the same period as Hebrews. But the fact that there was a tradition, even at a
later date, about Isaac stretching forth his neck at the moment of his sacrifice in Genesis,
is striking, given the other allusions in Hebrews to this sacrifice, not to mention the explic-
it reference to it at Heb 11,17. Cf. the views of P. S. Alexander, Targum, Targumim,
ABD, 6 (D. N. Freedman [ed.]; NewYorkLondonTorontoSyndey-Auckland 1992),
323: There are no good grounds for dating anything in Neof. later than the 3rd/4th cent.
C.E.; . . . Ps.-J. can be seen as the ultimate stage in the evolution of the PT, which in its
latest strata betrays the influence of early medieval midrash.
27
For the present writer 4,15-16 are key elements for the understanding of the word
` ,, in 4,13. For vv. 15-16 show in what sense Jesus as high priest is to be understood
in the context of v. 14, and v. 14 shows, by reason of the inferential particle u ., in what
sense the phrase v, , . -. . is to be understood.
28
The interpretation advanced here that the ` ,, of Heb 4,12-13 is a designation
of Jesus does not mean that the same word does not have a connection in Hebrews with
Scripture. At Heb 2,2 the word ` ,, refers to the Law, and at Heb 4,2 it seems to
allude to the word of Scripture in the citation j .,. . c . j , ..j , cu u c -u cj.
from Ps 95,7 at Heb 3,7. (Cf.: Attridge, Hebrews, 125; Ellingworth, Hebrews, 242).
Thus when ` ,, is used to refer to Christ himself at Heb 4,12-13 it there serves as a
prime analogate with reference to Gods communications past and present. These
communications are alluded to at the very beginning of the epistle (1,1-2) and referred
to constantly in the course of the work. (The fact that at Heb 2,2 the author of Hebrews
uses the word ` ,, to refer to the Law [which in Hebrews is understood as the Book
106 James Swetnam
In the interpretation being suggested here, Heb 4,12-13, with its use
of `,, as a designation of Jesus, acts as a pivot in the section 3,7
6,20. Heb 4,12 sums up the first part, 3,7 4,11, which discusses the
spiritualized promise of land, i.e., Gods rest, and prepares the way for
the following part, about Christs priesthood. By portraying Jesus as
divine ( `,,) the author implicitly indicates why entrance into the
spiritualized land of Gods rest is possible: Jesus, who is equal to God,
is able to effect the spiritual circumcision of the heart needed for such
an entrance
29
. Further, by portraying Jesus as divine ( `,,), the
author implicitly indicates why entrance into this spiritualized land of
Gods rest will be infallibly achieved by the group as a whole: again, the
divinely-effected spiritual circumcision is certain in its effects unless
thwarted by individual acts of disobedience
30
. Thus the `,, makes
possible the attainment of the promise of land for those who remain
partakers in Christ, as the transition verse 3,6 introducing 3,7 6,20
states
31
.
Heb 4,13, on the other hand, introduces what is to follow by its
imagery of sacrifice and intercession which are associated with priesthood
(Heb 4,14 5,10).
c) Hebrews 4,8-16
The division of 4,12-13 into two parts, one looking to what precedes
and one looking to what follows, makes possible a suggestion about the
structure of the immediate context of these verses: Heb 4,8-11 is the
immediate paraenetic antecedent of Heb 4,12, and Heb 4,14-16 is the
immediate paraenetic consequence of Heb 4,13
32
.
Heb 4,8-11 is the immediate paraenetic antecedent for Heb 4,12, for
these verses focus on the contrast between Joshua and the ` ,, as
of Scripturecf. Heb 9,19] is a strong argument against seeing the ` ,, of Heb 4,12-
13 as referring to Scripture: if the ` ,, of Scripture [cf. Heb 3,7] was unable to effect
an entrance for Gods people under Joshua, why should it do so for Christians?)
29
Cf. above, n. 20. The section Heb 1,5 2,4 was dedicated to showing the full
divinity of the Son. Cf. Swetnam, Heb 1,5-14, 61-62.
30
Cf. J. Swetnam, A Suggested Interpretation of Hebrews 9,15-18, CBQ 27 (1965)
383.
31
Unfortunately scholars who take the ` ,, of vs. 12 to be the divine Logos
(Bruce, F. W. Farrar, T. H. Robinson, etc.), tend to create discontinuity in the thought
of 3:7 4:13, by pointing to theoretical considerations which are not there (G. W.
Trompf, The Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12-13, 127, n. 16). The present writer
will leave to the judgment of the reader whether the considerations about form and con-
tent offered in this paper are theoretical considerations which are not there or not.
32
The inferential particles are helpful indicators: the ,c , of 4,12 points to what is
previous, just as the u . of v. 14 points to what is previous but in the context of a parae-
nesis, as at 4,1.11.16; 10,19.35; 13,15 (cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 138, n. 20).
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 107
regards the possibility of entering into Gods sabbath rest
33
. The prepara-
tion for this immediate paraenetic antecedent for Heb 4,12 begins, of
course, at Heb 3,7, with its citation of Ps 95,7-8. Following this citation
there is a short paraenesis culminating in Heb 3,14 which echoes Heb 3,6
even to the point of having the same verbal form of -c. .: -cc c.-
..
34
. Thus Heb 3,14 acts as a conclusion to the paraenesis following the
citation of Ps 95,7-11 at Heb 3,7-11
35
. With v. 15
36
and the citation of
Ps 95,7-8 begins a new subsection which terminates with a citation of the
same verses (in somewhat abbreviated form) at Heb 4,7.
The imagery of Heb 4,12 in the interpretation being followed here
suggests that Joshua is being considered from the standpoint of circum-
cision. The circumcision of the body which he effected was unequal to
the task of ushering Gods people into Gods own rest; only the circum-
cision of the heart effected by the `,, can make such an entrance
possible.
The section Heb 4,8-11 thus assumes an intrinsic paraenetic coheren-
cy centering on the efficacy of the ` ,, of 4,12 as regards circumcision
and entrance into Gods own rest. Given the parallel nature of Heb 4,13
with regard to 4,12, the inference suggests itself that Heb 4,14-16, sym-
metrical with Heb 4,8-11 as regards both length and position, assumes
the position of the immediate paraenetic consequence of Heb 4,13 which
centers on the intercessory efficacy of the ` ,,. Thus Heb 4,14-16
describes the function of Christ as intercessor with God, as introduced by
the phrase v, , . j . . ` ,,. The imagery is not of entrance but
of approachingv,c. ,.c-c., a word which has cultic overtones in
Hebrews
37
. V. 16 indicates the aspects under which approaching the
c ,..,.u , is being considered: . `., and c ,.,
38
.
33
Sabbatliches Feiern wird die Daseinsweise des in die Gottesruhe eingekomme-
nen Volkes Gottes sein (Grer, An die Hebrer, 220).
34
V. 14 is so similar in content to v. 6 as to have affected the textual tradition
(Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225).
35
The rather unusual configuration involving Heb 3,12-14 seems to be caused by the
desire of the author to emphasize the word u v ccc., in 3,14. This word would seem
to be of particular importance in Hebrews, acting as an indicator, with three analogous
meanings, of the major divisions of the epistle: Heb 1,1 3,6 (cf. the use of u v ccc.,
in 1,3), Heb 3,7 10,39 (cf. the use of u v ccc., at 3,14), and Heb 11,1 13,19 (cf.
the use of u v ccc., at Heb 11,1). Any attempt to discern a macrostructure in the
epistle would seem to have to come to terms with this word.
36
The grammatical connections between vv. 14, 15, and 16 are uncertain
(Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225). Ellingworth suggests four possible interpretations. The one
followed here is his #4: a full stop is placed after v. 14 and a comma after v. 15 (cf.
Ellingworth, Hebrews, 225-226).
37
Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 269-270.
38
Attridge (Hebrews, 142) suggests that . `., may refer in 4,16 to past transgres-
sions, while c ,., refers to contemporary and future needs.
108 James Swetnam
d) Hebrews 5,1-10
Hard on the discussion of the ` ,, as intercessor at Heb 4,14-16
there follows a section dedicated to a comparison and contrast between
the Aaronic high priesthood of the old dispensation and the high priest-
hood of Christ (5,1-10)
39
. Helping to delimit the section are the framing
words c ,..,.u , and -. , in vv. 1 and 10
40
. It is in this section that the
crux 5,7-8 is found. The section will be discussed at length in the second
major part of this article. V. 10 has the air of a conclusion of one dis-
cussion and the beginning of another: v,cc,,.u-.. , u v u -.u
c ,..,.u , -cc j . c .. M.`.c. :.-.
e) Hebrews 5,11 6,20
Heb 5,11 seems to begin a long section of paraenesis: the tone changes
from the impersonal exposition of 5,1-10 to the direct address of 5,11.
This direct speech continues on until 6,20, where the mention of
Melchizedek signals the discourse of 7,1-28 on this primordial figure.
Within 5,11 6,20 there is a division into negative warnings (5,11 6,8)
and a positive counterpart (6,9-20)
41
. In the negative part occurs the
famous crux about the impossibility of repentance (6,4-6)
42
. Because of
their extended length and paraenetic nature, these two passages suggest
that they are the conclusion of the major section beginning at Heb 3,6.
The end of this major section is indicated by the change in subject mat-
ter and tone occurring at Heb 7,1
43
.
The suggestion that Heb 5,11 6,20 refers back to the entire section
beginning at 3,6 would seem to be confirmed by the way the author plays
upon the theme of promise. At 4,1 he had already referred to the
entrance into the rest as being the result of a promise
44
. At Heb 6,12
this theme is explicitly picked up and linked with the matching theme of
inheritance
45
. The addressees are urged to take as their models those
who through faith and perseverance have inherited the promises (. . . :.c
v. c.., -c. c-,-u. c, -`j,.u ... c , . vc,,.`. c,). The
39
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 3,7 10,39, 135-136.
40
Cf. J. Kurianal, Jesus Our High Priest: Ps 110,4 As The Substructure of Heb 5,1
7,28 (European University Studies, Series XXIII, Theology, 693; Frankfurt am
MainBerlinBernBruxellesNew YorkWien 2000), 81.
41
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 3,7 10,39, 135-137.
42
For an attempt to solve this crux cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 3,7 10,39, 136.
43
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 3,7 10,39, 137.
44
The promise in Heb 4,1 is contained implicitly in the final verse of the citation of
Ps 95,7-11 found at Heb 3,11. Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 238.
45
For Christ as heir cf. already Heb 1,2 and 1,4. For Christians as heirs cf. Heb
1,14.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 109
author is thinking here of the patriarchs of Israel who received the
announcement of the promises, but not what was promised
46
. The recep-
tion of what was promised is reserved to the Christians who imitate the
faithful perseverance of the patriarchs
47
.
The prime example of receiving promises through persevering faith is
Abraham (Heb 6,13-15). The texts cited from the Old Testament are
from the aftermath of Abrahams obedient offering of Isaac in Gen 22. On
the occasion of his manifestation of persevering faith Abraham receives
the promise (. v. u.. j , . vc,,.`. c,). Coming as it does immedi-
ately following the citation of Gods oath to bless and multiply Abraham,
this promise can only be understood as referring to the promise of prog-
eny. That the author of Hebrews had only one promise in mind is con-
firmed by his repetition of the singular in 6,17 (. . . . , -`j,. .,
j , . vc,,.`. c,).
In the context of the structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 being suggested here,
the above texts involving promise are significant. The author of Hebrews
is thinking of the two promises made to Abraham: the promise of enter-
ing into Gods rest (4,1) and the promise of progeny (6,15).
48
Further, if
the analysis of the structure being advanced in this paper is correct, he is
thinking of them together in relation to the paraenesis which he is giving
with regard to the entire section 3,7 6,20 (6,12). That the section 3,7
4,12 is thus about the promise of entering into Gods rest would seem to
be evident. That the section 4,13 5,10 is about the promise of progeny
is not evident at all. The problem here is to link the use of . vc,,.`. c/
. vc,,.`. c. in 6,12.13.15.17
49
, where the discussion is obviously about
the promise of progeny, with what precedes. This is what the present
article is attempting to do with a fresh view of the structure of 4,13
6,20
50
. If the structure is valid, the corollary is that the priesthood of
46
Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 176.
47
Ellingworth (Hebrews, 333) argues for a partial, temporal fulfillment of the prom-
ises as a type of the definitive future fulfillment reserved for Christians. But it would
seem preferable to regard the receiving of the promises even in Heb 11,33 as the recep-
tion of the original promises made to the patriarchs, and not the fulfillment of the prom-
ises themselves, even in a partial, temporal guise. Thus the use of the word . v.u,-c ..
in Heb 11,33 is consistent with its use in Heb 6,15.
48
The divine promises to Abraham involved two major componentsthat the patri-
arch would be the father of a great nation [cf. Gen 12:2-3; 15:5; 17:5] and that this
nation would inherit the land [cf. Gen 12:7; 13:4] (Attridge, Hebrews, 178).
49
Cf. the discussion of Heb 6,13-15 above.
50
The relation between priesthood, law and people in Heb 7,11-13 should also be
noted. The people (`c ,) in Hebrews never changes (cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 190),
but the promises, covenant and priesthood do. The concept of the new covenant is
co-ordinate . . . with that of Christs priesthood [sc., in Heb 8,6], and serves to show that
it is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a total re-ordering by God of his dealings
with his people. Both here and in 7:20-22, Jesus status in relation to the new covenant
is not arbitrary or accidental; it is by divine appointment attested in scripture. Within
110 James Swetnam
Christ is intrinsically connected with the promise of progeny made to
Abraham: it is through Christs priesthood that this progeny is definitive-
ly realized.
51
Finally, this promise of progeny which is connected with the
priesthood of Christ is seen through the prism of the Aqedah: the prom-
ise of progeny is viewed as being particularly certain because it is rein-
forced by Gods oath given after Abraham passed Gods test of faithful
perseverance (Heb 6,13-15). Thus the Aqedah, by reason of the rein-
forcing oath of God with regard to his previous promises, has a special
relation to those promises
52
.
f ) The Structure of Hebrews 3,7 6,20: A Summary
A summary of the above considerations yields the following outline:
A 3,7-14 Citation of Ps 95,7-11 and paraenesis based u v ccc.,
B 3,15 4,7 The rest of Ps 95,7-11 is the rest of Gen 2,2
C 4,8-11 Anticipatory paraenesis looking forward to 4,12
D 4,12-13 ` ,,, stronger than a two-edged knife
C 4,14-16 Consequent paraenesis following on 4,13
B 5,1-10
A 5,11 6,20 Summarizing paraenesis negative and positive
The entire section 3,12 6,20 is about the two promises made to
Abraham of land and progeny. The section 3,7 4,13 is primarily about
the promise of land, and indicates that the goal of this promise is no
this re-ordering, the divine promises hold an essential but subordinate place
(Ellingworth, Hebrews, 409). In other words, the type of priesthood is crucial for the
promises. And since, in Hebrews, promises refer primarily to the land and progeny
promised to Abraham, Christs priesthood is crucial for the spiritualization of these
promises. Underlying all of these considerations is the role of Melchizedek in Hebrews.
Since the entirety of chapter 7 of the epistle is given to him, it is clear that this role is
not inconsiderable. The superiority of Melchizedek over Abraham is stated explicitly in
7,4. What seems to be at stake here is the replacement of Abraham by Melchizedek as
the symbolic head of the new (Christian) people. The priestly nature of this people,
based on the priesthood of Christ the Son of God, is implied by the author of Hebrews
when he says that Melchizedek is likened (c .... .,) to the Son of God and
remains a priest forever (7,3): it is Christ who is the center and source of the new
Christian people, and Melchizedek serves as the Scriptural elucidation. But Christ does
not become the Father of this Christian people. Precisely because He is Son they
become related to God the Father in a special way through Him. In Hebrews, in a very
real sense, God the Father replaces Abraham as the father of the Christian people.
51
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 3,7 10,39, 137.
52
Cf. Heb 11,17, where Abraham, on the occasion of his sacrifice of Isaac, is
described as the one who had received the promises ( c , . vc,,.`. c, c .c:.c -
..,). The use of the plural with regard to the promises is all the more significant in
the light of v. 18, which singles out the promise of progeny.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 111
longer an earthly rest in the land of Canaan but Gods own rest. The
one who makes entrance into this rest possible is Christ as ` ,,. The
section 4,13 6,20 is primarily about the promise of progeny (cf. 6,13-
18), and indicates that this progeny is not composed of those physically
descendant from Abraham but of those who in some way come under the
influence of the priesthood of Christ as ` ,,. In order to come to a bet-
ter understanding of what this implies it is necessary to study Heb 5,1-10
in its context.
II. The Setting of Hebrews 5,7-8 in the Context of Hebrews 1,1 6,20
1. The Internal Structure of Hebrews 5,1-10
In Heb 3,15 4,7 the key structural factor is the gezerah shawah link-
ing the rest of Ps 95,7-11 with the rest of Gen 2,2. The key structural
factor in the parallel section 5,1-10 would seem to be a parallel gezerah
shawah linking the you (cu) of Ps 2,7 with the you (cu) of Ps 110,4. In
linking Ps 95,11 and Gen 2,2 the author shows that the rest promised
to Abraham is really the rest of Gods own life; in linking Ps 2,7 and Ps
110,4, the author shows that the you addressed in the psalm is really the
you of the order of Melchizedek.
The crucial factor in understanding the meaning of this arrangement
is the precise relevance of Ps 2,7, which, of course, is much discussed
53
.
Ps 2,7 is cited three times in the New Testament: at Acts 13,33; at Heb
1,5; and here at Heb 5,5. In Acts the context is unmistakable: the citation
of Ps 2,7 is used with reference to the risen Christ
54
. Heb 1,5 also seems
to use Ps 2,7 with reference to the resurrection, to show that the resur-
rection of Christ (Ps 2,7) implies his enthronement/exaltation (2 Sam
7,14)
55
. Thus there would seem to be nothing untoward in interpreting
the citation of Ps 1,7 at Heb 5,5 as referring to the resurrection, even
though no unanimity can be hoped for with regard to this view (or,
indeed, of any other). The point of the gezerah shawah, then, is to show
that at his resurrection Christ became a priest of the order of
Melchizedek.
The fact that the resurrection of Christ is singled out as the occasion
of His entering into the priesthood of the order of Melehizedek is thus
significant for the author of Hebrews. According to the interpretation of
the epistle being advanced here his reasoning is as follows:
53
Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 282, and further references there.
54
By his resurrection Christ was enthroned as Messiah, and from then on his human
nature enjoyed all the privileges of the Son of God, see Rm 1:4c (The Jerusalem Bible
[London 1985], 1821 [ad loc.]).
112 James Swetnam
Resurrectionas opposed to exaltation/enthronementis possible for
Christ only because He died, and He could die only because He had
assumed blood and flesh (Heb 2,14-15). This blood and flesh is the
stuff of Christs sacrifice for the expiation of sins (Heb 2,17) offered on
the occasion of His being tested (v..,c .) as Abraham was tested at the
Aqedah (Heb 2,18; 11,17)
56
. In Heb 5,1-10 Christs sacrifice preliminary
to His resurrection (i.e., His sacrificial death on the cross) is alluded to
through the use of the technical term to offer (v,c. ,.)
57
at 5,1.3 of
the Old Testament Aaronic high priest, and at 5,7 of Christ. Thus the
account of the Old Testament Aaronic high priest in 5,1-4, with its use of
v,c. ,. at 5,1.3, reinforces the sacrificial nature of Christs loud cry
and tears (-,cu,j . cu,c , :c -,uc) portrayed as sacrificial in nature
through the use of the technical term having offered (v,c... ,-c,)
(5,7)
58
. These are the loud cry and tears uttered by Christ on the cross
in His citing Ps 22
59
. And this sacrifice on the cross is the bloody sacri-
fice toward which the allusion to the td in Ps 22 is ordered
60
.
The crux about Christ at Heb 5,7-8 ends with His offer of sacrifice
implicit in the citation of Ps 22 being accepted even though He was son
and could reasonably expect that such a plea not be honored by His Father
(. . . -c. .. cc-uc-.. , c v j , .u`c.. c, -c. v., . . u. ,)
61
.
Christ is then brought to perfection (.`...-.. ,), i.e., brought to a cor-
poral completion appropriate for His divine nature at the time of his res-
urrection (5,9)
62
. Finally, the passage containing the crux ends at 5,10
with this risen state of Christ being addressed by God as high priest
according to the order of Melchizedek (v,cc,,.u-.. , u v u -.u
c ,..,.u , -cc j . c .. M.`.c. :.-) (5,10). The term addressed
(v,cc,,.u .) is especially meaningful in the context, for it can refer to
a peaceful greeting used as an expression of honor
63
. This fits in neatly
with the use of the gezerah shawah construction at 5,5-6, where the link-
ing word you (cu) is used of God to express his designation of Christ
high priest according to the order of Melchizedek at the moment of His
resurrection.
55
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 1,5-14, 57-58 and 57, n. 21.
56
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 1,1 3,6, 63-64.
57
In Hebrews, it [sc., v,c. ,.] is used overwhelmingly (the passive in 12:7 is an
exception) in connection with sacrifice, especially but not only with the OT high priests
or Jesus as subject (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 273).
58
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 351, and 351, n. 21.
59
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 354-355.
60
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 356-360.
61
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 355-356.
62
Cf. J. Swetnam, Christology and the Eucharist in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Bib
70 (1989) 75-78.
63
Cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 296.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 113
2. Hebrews 5,1-10 in Its Context in Hebrews
a) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Sacrifice of Isaac
In the suggested structure of Heb 3,7 6,20 given above, the verses
4,12-13 are central because of their focus on the ` ,, as the pervasive
agent for the attainment of the promises made to Abraham of spiritual-
ized land and spiritualized progeny. Heb 4,13 contains an allusion to the
sacrifice of Isaac under the image of an outstretched neck waiting for the
sacrificial knife (.,cj`.c. .c). In the interpretation of Heb 5,7-8
which serves as the occasion of the present article, the offering of Jesus
with a loud cry and tears of prayers and petitions to the one able to save
Him from death (:.j c.., . -c. . -.j,. c, v, , . :u.c ...
c. ... cu . . - -c.c u .c -,cu,j , . cu,c , -c. :c-,u ..
v,c... ,-c,) was said to take place on the cross when He cited the
opening verse of Ps 22 as an indication of His willingness to undergo the
fate of the protagonist of the psalm and not be saved by a divine inter-
vention through Elijah.
64
The fact that He was heard although Son
(.. cc-uc-.. , . . . -c. v., . . u. ,) was attributed in part to an implied
contrast with the Aqedah in Heb 11,17-19
65
.
A problem with this interpretation is that in Hebrews there is no appar-
ent indication that Isaac willingly offered himself as a sacrifice: in the text of
the Aqedah at Gen 22,1-18 he seems to be purely passive and this passivity
seems to be the background of the use of Gen 22 at Heb 11,17-19. Thus the
imagery of Heb 4,13, if understood against this background, would argue
for a purely passive attitude on the part of Isaac. But this problem can be
solved if one takes the free-will offering of Jesus in Heb 5,7-8 as an indica-
tion that the author of Hebrews was referring to the tradition current in
Judaism at the time that Isaac offered himself willingly at the Aqedah.
Though Gen 22,1-18 as it stands in the biblical text gives no indica-
tion that Isaac took an active part in the sacrifice
66
, by the first century
A.D. the tradition accompanying this scriptural account had developed in
Jewish tradition to the point where Isaac freely offers himself as a sacrifi-
cial victim. This is clear in 4 Maccabees 13,12 and at 16,20, where Isaacs
comportment is invoked as an example to be imitated by Jews when
tempted to renounce their faith
67
. The same tradition is found in Pseudo-
64
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 353-355.
65
Swetnam, Hebrews 5,7-8, 356.
66
But cf. the argument of H. C. White that the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham origi-
nally represented a rite of initiation in which Isaac is made to face death and to accept
it (H. C. White, The Initiation Legend of Isaac, ZAW 91 [1979] 1-30).
67
Cf.: J. Swetnam, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Light of
the Aqedah (AnBib 94; Rome 1981), 46; J. Levenson, The Death and Resurrrection of the
Beloved Son: The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity (New
HavenLondon 1993), 187-187. Levenson dates 4 Maccabees to between 18 and 55 A.D.
114 James Swetnam
Philos Biblical Antiquities 32,3 and 40,2-3
68
. Finally, Flavius Josephus
Jewish Antiquities 1,232, from the end of the first century A.D., also rep-
resents the tradition of Isaacs free participation in Abrahams sacrifice
69
.
Thus it is not impossible that the interpretation of Heb 5,7-8 proposed
as a solution to the crux in these verses, involving as it does Jesus free
offering of himself, can be situated in the same tradition as Isaacs free
offering of himself in the Aqedah. Consequently, at Heb 4,13, given the
relevance of Ps 22 at Heb 5,7-8, there would seem to be no reason for not
thinking that the author of Hebrews had Christs active offering of
Himself in mind precisely as fulfillment of the sacrifice of Isaac by
Abraham presented in Heb 11,17-19
70
.
b) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Expiatory Priesthood of Christ
In the interpretation of Heb 4,13 given above the clause v,, j..
`,, is understood to mean with whom is the Word on our behalf :
the Word is taken to be Christ who is in Gods presence to intercede for
Christians. This posture and function of Christ is taken up in the verses
4,14-16 which are a follow-up to 4,13 according to the interpretation
being advanced here: in v. 16 the Christians are urged to approach with
boldness the throne of grace in order to receive mercy and find grace for
time of need (v,c.,..-c u. .c vc,,jc.c, . -,.. j,
c,.,, ..c `c... .`., -c. c,.. .u,... .., .u-c.,.
j-..c.). The implication is that the Christians are to approach Christ
as high priest (cf. the preceding verse, we have a high priest...
c,..,.c) in his present state, which can only be, in the context of the
epistle, in His risen state. Thus 4,13 implicitly refers to two different
states of Christs priesthood: 1) the earthly state in which He was subject
to death (alluded to by the imagery of the outstretched neck); 2) the
risen state in which He is no longer subject to death. 4,15 alludes to the
68
Levenson (Death and Resurrection, 189-190, dates Biblical Antiquities to some time
in the first century C.E. Cf. his comments on pp. 190-190. Also Swetnam, Jesus and
Isaac, 53-56. And, most recently, B. N. Fish, Offering Isaac Again and Again: Pseudo-
Philos Use of the Aqedah as Intertext, CBQ 62 (2000), 494, n. 42.
69
Cf. Levenson, Death and Resurrection, 190-192. Levenson (190) even suggests that
the tradition about Isaacs willing participation in his sacrifice may have begun with The
Book of Jubilees. Jubilees can be dated to the second century B.C. (cf. R. E. BrownP.
PerkinsA. J. Saldarini, Apocrypha; Dead Sea Scrolls; Other Jewish Literature, Jerome
Biblical Commentary, 67:17 [pp. 1058-1059]).
70
Cf. also Heb 2,18 where Christ is said to have been tested (v..,c .), the same
word used of Abraham at the Aqedah as described in Heb 11,17. This parallel use of a
word implying conscious awareness of the challenge of faith in the face of death would
seem to be another indication that the author of Hebrews was aware of the tradition that
gave to Isaac an active role in the Aqedah.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 115
first state of Christ by the use of the word tested (v..,c.), which, in
the context of the epistle, means that Christ has been exposed to the
need for faith in the face of death as Abraham and Isaac were (cf. Heb
2,18 and 11,17)
71
.
Thus, in order to explain these data, one must think of Jesus priest-
hood as involving two stages: 1) the earthly stage in which His assuming
human blood and flesh permitted His sacrificial death (cf. Heb 2,14); 2)
the heavenly stage in which His resurrected body permits His exercise of
the priestly ministry which has resulted from His earthly sacrifice.
This two-fold stage in the priesthood of Jesus is present in Heb 5,7-8.
The first stage is alluded to in the phrase in the days of His flesh (. .
c. , j . ,c., j , cc,- , cu u ). The second stage is alluded to with
the words addressed by God as high priest (v,cc,,.u-.. , u v u
-.u c ,..,.u ,). In the context this refers to Christ becoming a priest
according to the order of Melchizedek on the occasion of his resurrection
(cf. Heb 5,5-6). The technical term for this in Hebrews is to perfect or
to complete (.`.. .), used at Heb 5,9. In Hebrews, as understood by
the present writer, this term refers to the second, definitive state of Jesus
priesthood willed by God. This definitive state implies physical perfec-
tion so that Jesus is no longer subject to death in any way
72
.
The activity of the risen Jesus in His definitive priestly stage includes
that of expiating the sins of the people (cf. Heb 2,17 as well as Heb
4,16). The role of forgiver of sins is essential for the understanding of
Jesus Christ in Hebrews, for it is at the heart of His role as high priest, a
role which is central in the epistle. Christs priestly role in the definitive
expiation of sins is based on His once-for-all sacrifice in the first stage of
His priesthood. But the continuing exercise of this expiation is in the
second stage. As a result of this unique priesthood the nature of the
covenant between God and His people changes, and hence the people,
in a sense, change as well.
73
It is in this sense that the definitive fulfill-
ment of Gods promise of progeny to Abraham is achieved: the progeny
are Gods people definitively purified from their sins by the earthly and
risen Jesus.
71
Cf. Swetnam, Hebrews 1,1 3,6, 61-65.
72
Cf. Swetnam, Christology and the Eucharist, 77-78.
73
En employant plusieurs reprises le mot peuple, lptre aux Hbreux marque la
continuit entre le peuple dIsral et lEglise chrtienne. Mais laspect de rnovation nest
pas ignor pour autant, ni lexigence dune certaine rupture: lauteur declare avec nette
que le sacerdoce du Christ entrane ncessairement pour le peuple un changement de
constitution (7,11-12; cf. 9,10; 10,9; 13,9-4). Cest seulement dans la nouvelle alliance
que se vrifie pleinement la parole: Je serai leur Dieu et ils seront mon peuple, car la
ralisation de cetter promesse est lie la rmission effective des pchs (Jr 31,32-34;
Hb 8,10-12; 20,16-18 (A. Vanhoye, Situation du Christ. Hbreux 12 [Lectio Divina
58; Paris 1969], 383).
116 James Swetnam
In terms of the td the first stage of Christs priesthood is the one in
which the once-for-all-sacrifice of Himself takes place; the second stage of
Christs priesthood is the one in which He has arrived at his definitive
priestly perfection (cf. the word .`...-.. , at 5,9) and in which He
becomes a cause of eternal salvation (c. ., c.j,. c, c. ... u). This
is the stage in which the Christians are urged to draw near (v,c. ,-
c.), a word with cultic overtones, is often used in Hebrews (cf. Heb
4,16; 7,25; 10,1.22; 11,6; 12,18.22)
74
.
c) The Relation of Hebrews 5,1-10 to the Priesthood of Christ according to
the Order of Melchizedek
The importance of Christ as ` ,, (according to the interpretation
being advanced in this article) can hardly be exaggerated for the section
Heb 3,7 6,20, for it dominates by reason of its place and by reason of
its function. Given this interpretation, it comes as no surprise to find at
Heb 5,1-10 a sub-section which is built around the belief that Christ at
His resurrection became a priest of the order of Melchizedek. Now
Melchizedek, in his appearance in Hebrews, is contrasted with the
Levitical priesthood of the old dispensation: Without father, without
mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of
life, but likened to the Son of God he remains a priest in perpetuity (. . .
c vc ., c j ., c ,...c` ,j,, j . c ,j . j .,. . j . .j ,
. `, . .., c .... ., :. . u. . u -.u, . ... . .,.u , .. ,
:.j..-. ,) (Heb 7,3). And the contrast with the Levitical priesthood is
made with explicit reference to perfection or completion (.`... c.,)
(7,11). Thus, when the reader comes upon these words in Chapter 7 of
Hebrews, there should be no surprise. For Melchizedek is a defining fig-
ure for the purposes of the author of Hebrews, given his conviction of the
centrality of the priesthood of Christ for the fulfillment of the promise of
progeny made to Abraham after the Aqedah.
If Melchizedeks priesthood is like Christs priesthood, it is clear that the
people who are shaped by Christs priesthood will be like Melchizedeks
atemporal existence: without father, without mother, without genealogy,
without beginning of days or end of life because made like the Son of God
75
.
74
l,c. ,c. in cultic contexts is not to be understood as approach in contrast
to arrive, but rather of communion with God in worshipthe fulfilment, for Hebrews,
of what the old dispensation could not achieve (Ellingworth, Hebrews, 677-678. At p.
671 Ellingworth remarks: l,c. ,c. (cf. 4:16) is always used in Hebrews of wor-
ship or nearness to God, but there is nothing to support a reference to the Lords
Supper. As is clear from the approach of the present writer, based as it is on the td,
this judgment with regard to the Eucharist does not seem correct.
75
Cf. above, n. 50.
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 117
Here the unique saving effect of the ` ,, is apparent. Just as the structure
of Heb 3,7 6,20 indicates that the ` ,, is uniquely qualified to effect a
definitive entrance of Gods people into Gods rest, so the structure indicates
that the ` ,, is uniquely qualified to create the people who are to enter
76
.
The author of Hebrews mentions at Heb 5,9 that the Christ who has
been brought to perfection has become cause of salvation without end
(c. ., c.j,. c, c. ... u) for all who obey Him. Because of this use of
c.j,. c at Heb 5,9 in the context of the Christian td, it is possible to
ascertain at what point this message of salvation had its beginning of
being spoken (Heb 2,3): at the institution of the Christian td by Jesus.
And because of the context of the Christian td it is also possible to ascer-
tain what the author of Hebrews means by obeying (u vc-u .) Jesus,
whose command to His followers was Do this in memory of me. And
because the comparison with Melchizedek occurs in the context of the
Christian td it is also possible to ascertain the relevance of the Christian
td for the definitive fulfillment of the promise of a progeny which, like
Melchizedek, is without father, without mother, without genealogy, with-
out beginning, without end: Eucharist generates Gods People
77
.
III. Summary and Conclusions
The present article was occasioned by a previous article which offered
a tentative solution to the classic crux at Heb 5,7-8. That article, by rigid
adherence to the syntax and vocabulary of the verses, supplied an initial
interpretation which viewed Christ as begging to die. Then the coinci-
dence of vocabulary between the verses of the crux and Ps 22 led to a sug-
gestion about a Sitz im Leben for this interpretation in the gospel por-
trayal of Jesus: that Jesus begged to die by reciting the opening verses of
Ps 22 on the cross and thereby freely accepting death when onlookers
thought he would share their expectations that he could possibly still be
saved. An analysis of Ps 22 in the light of the td suggested how Jesus
could learn obedience from His sufferings freely accepted, just as did the
one suffering in the psalm.
The present article seeks to understand the background of the sug-
gested solution to the crux at Heb 5,7-8 by attempting to place it in its
context in Hebrews. By interpreting the verses immediately previous to
76
Cf. the use of the word .`.. . at Heb 10,1, where by implication, since the law
of the old dispensation could not perfect those approaching (v,c. ,c.) cultical-
ly, the new Law can.
77
Cf. the implications of the use of .`.. . and v,c. ,c. in Heb 10,1 (above,
n. 72) with regard to the Christians who approach the risen Christ in the Christian td.
There is much more to be said about the Christian td in Hebrews than has been said
in the present article, but this will have to await separate treatment..
118 James Swetnam
the crux at 5,5-6 as a gezerah shawa the conclusion is drawn that through
the resurrection (alluded to in 5,5) Jesus entered into the priesthood
according to Melchizedek (mentioned in 5,6). By interpreting the verses
immediately following the crux at 5,9-10 as alluding again to the
Christian td (5,9) and to Jesus being addressed by God as a high priest
according to the order of Melchizedek (5,10), the importance of the td
and of Melchizedek is again brought to the fore.
The gezerah shawah of 5,5-6 is seen in the article as balancing a gezer-
ah shawah at Heb 4,3-5 which the author of Hebrews presents as identi-
fying the Rest promised to Israel in the promised Land with the Rest of
God after creation. These two uses of gezerah shawah are interpreted in
the article as key texts in understanding the Christianization of the two
promises made to Abraham of Land (4,3-5) and Offspring (5,5-6).
The first gezerah shawah occurs in a sub-section framed by citations of
Ps 95 at Heb 3,15 and Heb 4,7 which emphasizes the role of the heart
in entering the Rest of everlasting life. Immediately following this sub-
section comes another sub-section on the inability of Jesus (Joshua) to
introduce the people into this Rest (4,8-11). This is prelude to 4,12 in
which the word ` ,, is interpreted as referring to Christ Himself, not
to the word of Scripture. The imagery is understood as describing the
spiritual circumcision of the heart needed for entry into Gods Rest.
4,13 is also seen as speaking of Christ as ` ,,, but this time in His
role of intercessor with God. This explains why 4,14 has an inferential
particle introducing the theme of Jesus as high priest. The sub-section
4,14-16 is an exhortation based as a consequence of 4,13 just as the sub-
section 4,8-11is an exhortation based in anticipation on 4,12. There fol-
lows another sub-section, parallel to 3,15-4,7, composed of the verses
5,1-10. This is the sub-section in which the crux 5,7-8 occurs as a part of
the discussion of Christs priesthood.
The fact that the word Melchizedek occurs in the verse immediately
before Heb 5,7-8 and is found immediately after, in 5,10, shows the
importance of this enigmatic Old Testament high priest for understand-
ing the high priesthood of Christ in the whole section 4,13-5,10.
The passage 5,11 6,20 is interpreted in the present paper as being
paraenetical, first negative (5,11 6,8) and then positive (6,9-20). This
concludes the entire section 3,7 5,10. This section opens at 3,7-14 with
a citation of Ps 95 and an accompanying application to the idea of
u v ccc.,. The latter word, along with its use at 1,3 and 11,1 (as some
future article will attempt to show), is a defining element in the
macrostructure of the epistle. The explanation for the relevance of
Melchizedek for the high priesthood of Christ is found outside the pas-
sage 3,7 6,20, at 7,1-28. But the explanation is prepared for in the pos-
itive paraenesis at 6,9-20 which is based on a presentation of the promise
of progeny reaffirmed to Abraham with a promise by God as the after-
The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 119
math of the sacrifice of Isaac. Thus the high priesthood of Christ in 4,13
6,20, since it is interpreted in Hebrews as being prefigured by the high
priesthood of Melchizedek as presented in 7,1-28 as introduced by 6,9-
20, should be seen as the vehicle of transmitting the Christianized prom-
ise of progeny to Abraham by God. This progeny, like Melchizedek and
hence like Christ, is viewed as being without (human) father or mother,
without genealogy, without beginning of days nor end of life (7,3).
Thus the key elements for understanding the background of the crux
at Heb 5,7-8 are Jesus as ` ,, in 5,13 and Jesus as prefigured by
Melchizedek. That is to say, the crux at Heb 5,7-8, with its emphasis on
Christs free sacrifice of Himself and the relation of this sacrifice to the
Christian td, is intimately connected with the promise of God to
Abraham of Progeny following the sacrifice of Isaac. But in Hebrews, this
progeny is brought to a spiritualized, Christianized fulfillment transcend-
ing the promise of physical Progeny as the original promise in Gen 22 is
usually understood.
James SWETNAM
Pontifical Biblical Institute
Piazza della Pilotta, 25
00187 Rome (ITALY)
120 James Swetnam