Full of O.T. characters like Melchizedek who you have hardly heard of
Complex language
discouraging warnings
all kinds of stuff about the temple and sacrificial system
But
Contains many of our most encouraging and helpful texts of Scripture (as we will see)
Has the best presentation anywhere of the New Covenant
Teaches us some things about Jesus that are not taught with the same clarity anywhere else
The core message packs a very powerful punch
Introduction to Hebrews
Many people are discouraged by Hebrews
“Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews” ?
That title was given 100’s of years after it was written
As we shall see, it’s not written by Paul, it’s not an Epistle and it’s not to the Hebrews!
Authorship
Ultimately unknown
not stated in letter
early on in History, some stated it was Paul —probably because they believed an apostle had to have written it for it to be in Scripture (but Mark, Luke...)
Cannot be Paul or Scripture would contradict itself
[Heb 2:3] compared with [Gal 1:11-12]
The big question is Why it is anonymous
author would have got into trouble were it known (unlikely—not afraid of persecution [12:4])
Christians sometimes write books anonymously because they don’t want the glory for themselves
So what do we know about the author?
Amazingly talented writer (written at the level of the most polished Greek literature)
Hangs out with Paul’s group (Timothy: [Heb 13:22,23])
Some ideas are very similar to Paul’s but there are some new insights
Knows the O.T. Scriptures very well
Suggestions of people we know were Paul’s friends
Barnabas
Silas
Apollos
Mark
Luke
Can’t be Timothy!
Can’t be one of the 12
Reasons for suggesting Apollos:
[Acts 18:24][“Now a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus.”]
he was noted for his eloquence and this book is very eloquent!
he was from Alexandria—the home of this style of polished Greek
he was “mighty in the Scriptures” i.e. the Old Testament
[Acts 18:28][“he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.”]
[1 Cor 1:12] —there seems to be an Apollos fan club
[1 Cor 3:4-6] —this is a problem in the church
So this gives a motive for making it anonymous
But Paul put his name to his letters, why not Apollos?
you have to with a letter, but this was not a letter (as we shall see)
It is a work of art, a piece of literature, a demonstration of extraordinary literary skill
We can’t be sure, but Apollos is as good a guess as anyone
Date
It must have been before 70AD when the temple was destroyed or he could hardly have failed to mention that!
We cannot be more precise
Place
13:24 is totally ambiguous—those originally “from” Italy, living elsewhere, or the greeting could be “from Italy”.
Recipients
Must be Greek-speaking because of the complexity of the language (High-Greek)
The term “Hebrews” was reserved for Jews still living in Palestine, who wouldn’t have Greek as a first language
Some suggest it could be Jewish converts who were tempted to return to Judaism
But there is actually no reason to restrict it to Jews
So it could have been to any church in Greek speaking world (most of the Roman Empire)
But there is actually no reason to restrict it to Jews
The Gentiles were just as likely to be interested in the Scriptures
They were even more likely to want to know how the O.T. related to themselves
This is one of the main purposes of the book
Form
Not an Epistle (letter)
Most people suggest it was a sermon that was later written down
My theory...
No opening section (from / to / grace / prayer of thanksgiving)
3 verses on the end show that it was written to be sent
Paul’s epistles are full of “I write to you...”
Whereas this is full of expressions such as [11:32 “what more shall I say? For time will fail me...”]
Frequent references to running out of time
[5:11 “say... hearing”]
Most people suggest it was a sermon that was later written down
two problems
very long for a sermon
very complex
many of the intricate literary features would be lost in a sermon
My theory (this is just an example of what might have happened!)
The church in Corinth wanted to run a conference, so they contacted Apollos, who was in Rome at the time.
They had been really blessed by his understanding of how the O.T. related to us today.
They asked him to give three messages on this theme at the conference.
It was a great success and lots of people wanted the tapes or the DVD...
So they asked Apollos if he would write the messages out for them.
He agreed on condition it was anonymous, because of all the trouble with factions at Corinth.
When he did so, he did quite a bit of work polishing it and organizing the content.
He then sent them a copy with a note attached to the end ([13:22-24]).
We will look at the structure shortly
Some Christians react to the idea that something can be Scripture and art at the same time
Some of the Psalms are intricate Hebrew poetry
Other books as well, such as Song of Solomon
unfortunately I can’t show you the beauty of the Greek, since you would have to be fairly advanced Greek students to really appreciate it.
My Greek tutor once made me translate some of it...
Structure
What is our primary purpose in reading this book?
Not just to get some “precious thoughts”
our first responsibility is to understand it
then we listen to what God is saying to us through it
involve mind, spirit, emotions, will
then we respond to it
involve mind, spirit, emotions, will
we wouldn’t be allowed to go to the middle of John Arnott’s sermon & take a few words out of context
we are going to look at the whole structure of the book
this is not intellectualism, it is faithfulness and submissiveness
If God has chosen to play the music in a certain style, we have to attune ourselves to it
History of attempts to find a structure
Tradition view divides it into teaching [start-10:18] and application [10:19-end]
Only reason is that this is how Paul’s epistles are usually structured
It is generally recognized that this fits very badly
A second view is the “Patchwork”
In effect gives up on any structure
In the last 100 years, there has been a lot of success in identifying literary features in the book which help us determine the structure.
many of my ideas come from papers by scholars: Albert Vanhoye, David Alan Black, David J. MacLeod & Amar Djaballah
Structure
Three sermons
At the conclusion of most of the parts, he announces the next section
“Inclusio”
Overall structure
handout of structure
My suggestion is that originally there were three messages, of three points each
Each one could stand alone as a sermon
At the start of the 2nd and 3rd, he summarizes the previous one and outlines what is to come
This is a good practice when you are speaking
There is also a warning application in between each message and a longer application at the end
The writer (who is also the speaker ([13:22]) has shaped the material very cleverly and in almost perfect symmetry
shown in handout
At the conclusion of most of the parts, he announces the next section
This is a good practice when you are speaking
shown in handout
“Inclusio”
This is the term scholars use for words or phrases that are like matching bookends and the start and end of a passage