A View of the
Book of
Hebrews
May 2014
Who is Garry Wills?
• Early had attended a Jesuit University for five years
studying to be a priest.
• Is Professor Emeritus of History from Northwestern
• Has written 40 books since 1973, many about the
history of the Roman Catholic Church.
• His latest book argues that priests were inserted into
the hierarchy hundreds of years after the Resurrection.
• Priests are self-serving for the institution, but are
unnecessary.
• The Book of Hebrews was added late to the canon, and
justifies the priesthood.
Focus of This Study
• Examine the Book of Hebrews through the
interpretation of Garry Wills
• Make sense of the role this puzzling book played in
the development (evolution?) of the Roman
Catholic Church.
• Understand why Melchizedek was chosen to relate
to Jesus.
• What does Hebrews imply about the meaning of
the death and resurrection and communion, etc.?
III.10. Who Wrote the
“Letter to the Hebrews?”
Who wrote Hebrews?
• Saint Paul’s Letter to Hebrews:
• Is not a letter
• Is not Paul’s
• And was not written to Hebrews
• Basic Pauline concepts are not in it (Paul never referred
to priests).
• Style is different than any other NT author
• 152 words used that don’t appear anywhere else in NT.
• Filled with literary devices such alliteration (1st verse),
chiasms (A-b-b-A) (7.3)
Suggested Authors of Hebrews
• Luke (sophisticated Greek, but lacks theology of
letter)
• Paul’s partner Barnabas (Tertullian)
• Paul’s assistant Apollos (Luther)
• Paul’s fellow evangelist Silas (Edward Riehm)
• Paul’s friend Priscilla (Adolf von Harnack)
• “Who wrote it, God alone knows.” (Origen)
Raymond Brown’s conclusion:
…the most sophisticated rhetorician and elegant
theologian of the New Testament is an unknown. To
employ his own description of Melchizedek, the writer of
Hebrews remains without father or mother or genealogy.
The quality of his Greek and his control of the Scriptures
in Greek suggest that he was a Jewish Christian with a
good Hellenistic education and some knowledge of Greek
philosophical categories. His allegorical style of
hermeneutics has parallels in Philo and in Alexandrian
interpretation; but that interpretation was taught
elsewhere and so the claim that the writer came from
Alexandria remains unproved. Those from whom he
learned about Christ may have had a theological outlook
similar to that of the Hellenist moment and its freer
attitude toward the Jewish cultic heritage.
Hebrews is not a letter
• All NT book titles were added later, not by author.
• Paul’s letters were directed at places or individuals.
• Hebrews contains no directive to place or person.
• Has no opening greeting or good wishes.
• Author calls his message “this supporting address”
(13:22) which is a term used of a sermon in Acts
13:5.
Hebrews is probably a written homily (sermon) to
which the author has given an epistolary ending.
When was Hebrews Written?
• Written before the mid’90s A.D. because it was
quoted in Clement of Rome’s letter of that date.
• Letter refers to sacrifices in the Mosaic traveling
tent (post 70 destruction of Temple).
• Letter refers to persecution of Christians.
Hebrews was probably written in the 80’s
A.D., about the time of Luke and Matthew.
Who was the Audience?
• To second generation Christians (not those who
knew Jesus during his ministry) (2:3)
• The community has lost its prior fervor (10:32-34).
• This has led to internal division (12:15-16)
• And backsliding (10:38-39)
• It was written in elegant Greek, so probably not to
Christians in Jerusalem, but instead to those former
Jews in the Roman Empire.
How was it brought into the
Canon of the NT?
• Though it was written in the west, it was more rapidly
accepted in the east.
• In the second century Alexandria, the Corpus Paulinum
made it part of the Bible and was used by the Eastern
Councils.
• It was formally accepted in Rome in the canon only in
393 A.D. at the Synod of Hippo and in 397 and 419 A.D.
at the Synods of Carthage.
• Roman Church probably realized it was not written by
Paul, but later accepted it as helpful to the defense of
the full divinity of Christ against the Arians.
Summary of What Hebrews is:
Hebrews is a supporting address (13:22) to
backsliding (10:38-39) Christians in Rome, who felt
the need for reassurance from their Jewish roots,
and had therefore grown negligent in attending the
house churches and performing the mutual services
of the Christian community (13:2-7)
III.11. What Does it
Mean?
The Title “Letter to the Hebrews”
is not helpful to understanding
• By the first century A.D., the term Hebrews was
considered archaic.
• Jonah 1:9 is the only place where a person is selfdescribed as a Hebrew. All other instances involve
them being described as Hebrew by others.
• Hebrew is more of a linguistic distinction rather
than ethnic, but many Jews did not speak Hebrew
and the book is written in Greek.
First century Christian can be
divided into four groups
1. Christians who observed full Jewish law such as
Pharisee converts (Acts 15:5)
2. Christians who did not insist on circumcision, but
retained some Jewish observances, particularly
food laws.
3. Christians such as Paul, who respected Jewish
observance but did not require it.
4. Those who denied any continuing obligation to
the Jewish past, as typified by Johannine writings.
Hebrews was written by someone from the
4th group to preach to those from the 2nd.
The Central Meaning of Hebrews: New
Covenant, New Priest, New Sacrifice
• For the faltering Roman Christians who are missing
the Jewish Mosaic Covenant, Hebrews lays out the
Jesus alternative:
• New Covenant that fulfills the old. Angels delivered
the first to Moses, but the new one comes directly
from God’s son.
• New Priest: Hebrews for the first time anywhere,
describes Jesus as a priest greater than all others.
• New Sacrifice: Animal sacrifice is replaced with the
perfect sacrifice of the Son of God.
12:18-24 summarizes the idea of replacement of the old with Jesus.
Hebrews’ message can be traced
in eight steps
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Superiority of the New Pact (1.1-14)
A Mediator Who Shares our Humanity (2.5-3.19)
The New Pact is the Promised New Day (4.1-16)
A Priest with Our Frailties (5.1-6.12)
In Common with Melchizedek (6.13-8.6)
The Old Pact is Canceled (8.7-10.39)
Fidelity to the Old Pact a Model for Fidelity to the
New (11.1-12.17)
8. The New Pact More Majestic (12.18-13.25)
1. The Superiority of the new Pact
• Hebrews begins with the messianic Psalm 110 to
prove that Jesus is superior not only to Moses but
to angels. (1:1-14)
• Jewish apocryphal writings and secular authors
commonly believed that angels were cooperating
agents. (i.e. Deuteronomy 33.2 implies this)
• 2:1-4. How much more important is the new
covenant revealed not by angels, but by the Son of
God himself.
2. A Mediator Who Shares our
Humanity
• 2:5. After arguing that the Son of God is higher than
angels, the author quotes Psalm 8. Mankind is lower
than the angels, and Jesus was human. This is to make
the point that Jesus is fully human as well as fully God.
• The Eastern Church adopted Hebrews early partly
because it supported the view of the Trinity.
• 3:1-19: Our fidelity to Jesus should be the same as
Jesus’ fidelity to God the Father.
• Pistis should be translated as fidelity, not as faith. Jesus
does not believe in the Father, but instead has fidelity
to Him and the New Covenant.
3. The New Pact is the Promised
New Day (4:1-16)
• Joshua did not find lasting peace (katapausis) after
taking his people to the Promised Land (Josh 21:43,
22:4)
• In Psalm 95:7, David said that therefore there
would be a new day to find peace. This is
predicting the New Pact (New Covenant).
• In He 4:8, the Greek “Iēsous” can stand either for
Joshua or Jesus, but context says it is Joshua.
• 4:14-16. Press on!
4. A Priest with our Frailties (5:1 –
6:12)
• Like Aaron, Jesus is a priest who can speak for
human frailty (“sin apart,” 4:15).
• The emphasis on frailty sets up the later claim that
Christ not only performed sacrifice, but he was the
sacrifice.
• 5:11-14 makes the point that the coming discourse
is new to the audience and that the argument and
logic is difficult and complex.
In Common with Melchizedek
(6:13-8:6)
• Previous section compared Jesus to Aaron, but this
section emphasizes their differences.
• Jesus is tied to Melchizedek, who lived in the first
patricarchal period, before the first Pact, where he was
somehow “a priest forever.” Priests in Aaron’s line are
not priests forever, but only until they die (7:8, 7:20)
• Through Abraham, they gave tithes to Melchizedek
(7:9-10).
• The Levites are not confirmed in priesthood by oath,
but Melchizedek and Jesus were both assured by the
Lord’s word in Psalm 110:4 (7:20-28)
Who is Melchizedek?
• Gen. 14:18-20. Abraham had just arrived at Sodom from
slaughtering the men who had stolen Lot’s (and King Bera’s)
belongings.
• At Sodom, while greeting King Bera, King Melchizedek
arrives from Salem to greet Abraham, and Abraham gives
Melchizedek a tithe.
• The name Melchizedek is Malki-Sedek in Hebrew, which
means ‘Sedek is my King.’ Sedek is the name of a Canaanite
god.
• Unlike other priests in Genesis, no geneology is given for
Melchizedek.
• Many scholars think this passage is a later insertion into
Genesis, and possibly it is a fragment from a foreign
(Canaanite) source.
The Melchizedek Controversy –
Garry Wills
• Wills asserts that the Biblical justification for calling
Melchizedek “a priest forever” is weak.
• He asserts that Jesus showed no sign of being a
priest, or carrying out the duties of a priest during
his ministry.
• Moreover, even if Jesus is seen as “our priest
forever,” there is no justification in Hebrews for
establishing a Christian priesthood as in the
Catholic Church.
Melchizedek in Psalm 110:4
• Calls Melchizedek “a priest forever.”
• It’s a puzzling verse as Melchizedek was not in the
priest of the Jewish nation, and refers to a
succession that is not mentioned in Genesis.
• Psalm 110 is the most referenced Psalm in the New
Testament, but only Hebrews refers to verse 4.
• In any case, Melchizedek is invoked by the writer of
Hebrews as a way to explain that Jesus is a
replacement for the priesthood and is greater and
above all others.
6. The Old Pact is Canceled (8:710:39)
• Hebrews interprets Jeremiah 31:31 as a prophesy that a
new Pact would come because people broke the old
one (8:9).
• The old Pact had its aura, but the new one excels the
first. By the time of Hebrews, old Pact was mostly
about food laws. (9:9-10).
• Under the old Pact, priests had to make repeated
sacrifices, but Jesus sacrifices himself, and only once.
(9:18-28).
• Controversial point: 9:23-4 says that Jesus must purify
heaven when he enters it just like the Levitical priests
purified the Holy of Holies. The author of Hebrews may
be stretching his parallel too far—Why would heaven
need purification?
7. Fidelity to the Old Pact a Model
for Fidelity to the New (11:1-12:17)
• The Greek pistis is best translated as “fidelity” not “faith.”
• The audience already believes, but needs to obey.
• Even 11:3 is not about belief in the creation, but instead
that trust in the providential Promises of God guided
patriarchal heroes.
• The example of Noah (11:7): How can he have fidelity to
the old Pact when it wasn’t given yet? Hebrews says that
the promises to Abraham and his descendants were
forebears of the Pact and were faithful to God. (11:9, 17)
• God rewarded fidelity to the old Pact, and so how much
more would he reward fidelity to the new Pact. (11:39)
• The exhortation (12:1-17) uses ordeals of those under the
old Pact as models for the trials of the Roman Christians.
The New Pact More Majestic
(12:18-13:25)
• 13:11-13. Comparing Jesus to the burnt carcasses of
the sacrificial sin-offerings raises difficulties. The
animals were sacrificed inside the temple. And the
parallels of Jesus’ persecution to animal sacrifice are
distasteful to Garry Wills.
• By the time of Hebrews’ writing, animal sacrifice was
not being practiced and the temple refers to the Shrine
carried by the Israelites on their journey through the
desert. Therefore, the backsliding Roman Jewish
Christians must have been longing for tradition.
• Hebrews ends with a call to return to the house
churches and to their fellow Christians.