by the Roman Christians in the time of Domitian does not appear to have been a general, worldwide movement, there is evidence that it made itself felt in Asia, since Eusebius makes it responsible for the banishment of the apostle John to Patmos. It is easy to suppose that the imprisonment of Timothy mentioned in 13:23 was a part of the same movement, and that upon his release he found himself at Ephesus or in its vicinity. There is at least nothing improbable in this, and it points to some place lying between Ephesus and Rome as that at which Hebrews was written. Philippi and Corinth were such points, and it is altogether possible that at one of these the letter was written. Yet in all this we have only probabilities, and sometimes precarious ones, on which to build. The Alexandrianism so characteristic of the epistle has suggested to some that Alexandria was its place of origin. It is true that the writer's Judaism is of that impersonal and scholastic type so closely associated with Alexandria, and this fact must not be lost from view. Yet it would be a mistake to suppose that type of Judaism confined, in the first century, to the city of its origin. Evidence is not wanting that the whole eastern world had felt its influence. Moreover, the references to Italy and Timothy, in chapter 13, while very difficult of interpretation, are least of all compatible with an Alexandrian origin for the epistle. When Paul wrote his letter to the Romans from Corinth, he seems to have appended to it a long list of greetings to Christians at Rome, including not a few salutations from friends of theirs at Corinth, some of them no doubt persons who had formerly been at Rome. While these verses in Romans are not free from critical suspicion, they present a suggestive parallel to the words "they of Italy salute you," and remind us that in Corinth especially, Roman Christians were at all times likely to be found. H.E. 3: 18: 1. VII. STYLE AND LANGUAGE In contrast with the nervous, rapid, intense, and often impetuous style of Paul, that of the writer to the Hebrews exhibits the utmost rhetorical restraint and poise. At the same time, it is by no means wanting in trenchant and incisive vigor, and possesses peculiar accuracy and precision. Beyond that of other New Testament writings the language of Hebrews exhibits finish, dignity, and elevation; to a degree indeed that some have thought inconsistent with a personal or practical character. The Greek in which it is written is more literary than is that of any other New Testament book. The vocabulary is notably large. It is not that of everyday speech, but rather of a school of theological thought. The classical and Septuagint elements in it are very considerable. The style betrays no less art. The sentences are periodic and fitly proportioned, sometimes exhibiting, as Blass has pointed out, the Asian rhythms characteristic of prose writers of the Common Dialect. In proportion to its length Hebrews shows more abundant use of the Old Testament than any other New Testament book except the Apocalypse, which surpasses it in the number of its literary reminiscences, but not in the bulk of its Old Testament material. In using it the writer adheres steadily to the Septuagint; the possible exceptions are Heb. 10:30, where Deut. 32: 35 is quoted in precisely the form of Rom. 12:19; and Heb. 12: 12, where the Hebrew of Isaiah 35:3 seems to have influenced him. Not only the text of the Septuagint, but its canon is reflected in the epistle; e.g. in chapter 11, where Maccabæan heroes are included side by side with prophets and martyrs of the earlier time. The writer's manner of introducing his quotations from the Old Testament is worthy of note. The phrase "It is written," frequent in the Synoptics and the letters of Paul, 1 and to some extent in John, Acts, and 1 Peter, does not appear in Hebrews. Still less does the writer refer his quotations to their sources, as Matthew and Paul often do. Our only parallel to these in Hebrews is the expression “saying in David," 47. Yet his method is not usually that of tacit reminiscence, like that of the Apocalyptist; 2 for he has an introductory phrase for most of his quotations. This is usually the colorless "He saith" or "He said," and, as the subject is unexpressed, it is in each case a question what subject is to be supplied in thought. Sometimes, certainly, a human speaker is contemplated (2:6; 7:21). In other instances, Christ is the speaker (2:12; 10:5); in others, the Holy Spirit (3:7; 10: 15). In most instances of express quotation, however, God appears as the speaker (15, 13; 4:3; 5: 5, 6; 7: 17; 8:5, 8). Not that the writer assumes God as the speaker of everything said in the Old Testament, without distinction. On the other hand, in most cases where he represents God as speaking, he is following the example of the prophet or psalmist from whom the words are drawn. Yet such instances as 1:6, 8 give color to the opinion that the writer conceives God as the speaker in all revelation; indeed, in the first chapter not a little of his argument seems to depend upon this position. In all this we miss the explicit scriptural conception and treatment of the Old Testament so characteristic of the Synoptic gospels and of Paul, with their oft-repeated "It is written," and in this important and undeniable trait of the epistle we seem to recognize something not indeed nonJewish, but at all events non-Palestinian. In conclusion, the precision of these quotations must be mentioned. The writer is on the whole, and so far as we can judge, with the imperfect Septuagint texts at our command, singularly faithful to his authorities. This is at once evident if an extended passage such as 8:8-12 be compared with its source in the Septuagint of Jeremiah Heb. 10: 7 is only an apparent exception. 31:31-34. Slight differences of course appear, but hardly more than now exist between one manuscript of the Septuagint and another. Indeed, it is not too much to say that in this matter of the precision of his Old Testament quotations, and his practically uniform adherence to a single text, the Septuagint, the writer to the Hebrews yields to no other New Testament writer. In this almost scholarly habit of his is reflected again that quality of precision and exactness which so strongly characterized his expression and his thought. VIII. ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE It is altogether probable that an address and salutation originally stood at the beginning of Hebrews, and how it 1 came to disappear, whether by accident or design, can only be conjectured. The letter begins immediately with a statement of its theme, the completeness and finality of the revelation in the Son (1: 1-4). While the letter is peculiarly difficult to analyze, since instruction and exhortation are so interwoven through its whole course, its main outlines may be sketched as follows: I. Christ, the mediator of the new revelation, superior to all other mediators (angels, Moses), supreme in the universe, and the fulfiller of man's destiny of universal dominion, I : 1-2 : 18. 1. The Son is shown from scripture to be superior to angels, 1: 1–14. 2. The consequent peril of rejecting the salvation offered by the Son, 2: I-4. 3. Man's promised world-dominion realized in Christ, through his experience of suffering, 2: 5-18. II. Christ the Son greater than Moses the Servant, and his Rest superior to that ushered in by Joshua, 3 1-4 13. 1. Christ and Moses, 3: 1-6. 2. Warning against apostasy and unbelief, and consequent failure to attain the Rest of God, 37-4 : 13. III. Christ above Aaron and all earthly high priests, the final, eternal, sinless, oath-attested high priest, after the order of Melchizedek, 4 : 14−7 : 28. I. Exhortation (serving as transition and introduction), to hold fast, and to approach God with boldness, conscious of the presence with him of a sympathetic and potent high priest, 4 14-16. 2. Christ a true high priest by his divine appointment and his human experience, 5: 1-10. 3. Complaint and rebuke of the readers' backwardness, coupled with warning and encouragement, 5 : 11–6 : 20. 4. The Melchizedek priesthood of Jesus, 7 : 1-28. IV. Christ's high priestly service, carrying with it the new covenant, is infinitely better than theirs (which was but the shadow), in its heavenly sanctuary, its sacrifice of himself, and its eternal efficacy, 8: 1-10: 39. 1. The new priesthood implies the new and better covenant, 8:1-13. 2. The better sanctuary, sacrifice, and ministry, 9: 1–28. 3. The final and eternal efficacy of Christ's sacrifice, IO: 1-18. 4. Exhortation to draw near and hold fast, reënforced by solemn warnings against apostasy, and reminders of former heroic days, 10: 19-39. V. The character of faith, as the faculty of laying firm. hold on the unseen realities, exemplified in all the heroes of faith, and preeminently in Jesus, set forth with especial reference to the trials of the readers, which are the discipline of their faith, not its disappointment, II : 1-12 : 29. 1. Faith the power through which those of old wrought their achievements, and gained God's commendation, II: I-40. 2. Exhortation to follow their example, or rather that of Christ, accepting the tasks and trials of life as the Father's discipline, 12 : 1-13. 3. Warning against moral failure, with its inexorable penalty, 12:14-17. |