Aneka Artikel Membaca Surat Ibrani

8/17/2019 Aneka Artikel Membaca Surat Ibrani

1/28

READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS


2/28

Resources or Biblical Study

om TatcherNew estament Editor

Number 66


A Resource or Students


3/28


A Resource or Students

Edited by

Eric F. Masonand

Kevin B. McCruden

Society o Biblical LiteratureAtlanta


4/28

READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWSA Resource or Students

Copyright © 2011 by the Society o Biblical Literature

All rights reserved. No part o this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any ormor by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or bymeans o any inormation storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permit-ted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing rom the publisher. Requests or permission

should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Offi ce, Society o BiblicalLiterature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA.

Library o Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Reading the Epistle to the Hebrews : a resource for students / edited by Eric F. Mason

and Kevin B. McCruden.

p. cm. — (Society o Biblical Literature resources for biblical study ; no. 66)Includes bibliographical reerences and indexes.ISBN 978-1-58983-608-2 (paper binding : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-1-58983-609-9

(electronic format)1. Bible. N.T. Hebrews—Textbooks. I. Mason, Eric Farrel. II. McCruden, Kevin B.BS2775.55.R43 2011227'.8706 2011033812

Printed on acid-ree, recycled paper conorming toANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994

standards or paper permanence.


5/28

C

Acknowledgments ...........................................................................................vii

Abbreviations ....................................................................................................ix

IntroductionEric F. Mason ...............................................................................................1

Hebrews among Greeks and RomansPatrick Gray ...............................................................................................13

What Has Middle Platonism to Do with Hebrews? James W. Tompson ..................................................................................31

Cosmology, Messianism, and Melchizedek: ApocalypticJewish raditions and HebrewsEric F. Mason .............................................................................................53

Te Interpretation o Scripture in the Epistle to the HebrewsDavid M. Moffi tt .......................................................................................77

Hebrews, Rhetoric, and the Future o Humanity Craig R. Koester .........................................................................................99

Hebrews, Homiletics, and Liturgical Scripture InterpretationGabriella Gelardini .................................................................................121

Jesus the Broker in Hebrews: Insights rom the Social Sciences

Jerome H. Neyrey, S.J. .............................................................................145

Hebrews as the Re-presentation o a Story: A Narrative Approach toHebrewsKenneth Schenck .....................................................................................171


6/28

vi READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

Te Teology o the Epistle to the HebrewsFrank J. Matera .......................................................................................189

Te Concept o Perection in the Epistle to the HebrewsKevin B. McCruden ................................................................................209

Te Jesus o Hebrews and the Christ o ChalcedonRowan A. Greer .......................................................................................231

“A Sacrice o Praise”: Does Hebrews Promote Supersessionism?

Alan C. Mitchell ......................................................................................251

Hebrews in the Worship Lie o the Church: A Historical Survey Mark A. orgerson ..................................................................................269

EpilogueHarold W. Attridge ..................................................................................297

Bibliography ...................................................................................................309Contributors ...................................................................................................327Index o Ancient Sources..............................................................................329Index o Modern Authors.............................................................................351


7/28

A

Te editors o this project are indebted to numerous people who have

made this book possible. We are delighted that this volume is part o theResources or Biblical Study series, published by the Society o BiblicalLiterature and Brill, and we grateully acknowledge the guidance andencouragement o the RBS New estament editor om Tatcher. We rstcontacted om with the idea or a rather different kind o student-riendlyintroduction to the study o Hebrews, but he asked us to consider reen- visioning the project loosely along the lines o an existing RBS volumeedited by David L. Barr, Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for

Students (2003). Te timing o the conversation was ortuitous, as omhad recently begun ormulating plans to extend the series by commission-ing volumes like Barr’s on other New estament books. We easily wereconvinced o the merits o his suggestion, and we happily reconguredour project in a way consistent with the spirit o the Barr volume yet alsosensitive to the distinctive challenges o studying Hebrews. While cer-tainly any deciencies o the volume remain our own, we have benettedmuch rom om’s advice as well as rom comments offered by the anony-

mous readers o the book proposal. Likewise, we have received excellentguidance at each step rom the SBL publication staff, especially LeighAndersen, Bob Buller, and Kathie Klein.

Naturally, the success o a project such as this hinges largely on thecooperation o those who write the various chapters. We are extremelygrateul to our contributors, an invigorating mix o junior and seniorscholars, and we are humbled by their willingness to participate in thisendeavor. All o them took very seriously our joint task o explaining this

complex biblical text in ways accessible to students and other nonspecial-ist readers. Likewise, all were very conscientious o the timeline o theproject and graciously took care to adhere to this in the midst o the manyother demands on their individual schedules. We realize as editors that wewere very ortunate to work with such outstanding scholars and persons.

-vii-


8/28

viii READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

We are indebted to the editors o two journals or their kind permis-sion to include revised versions o previously published materials. Chapter

4 in this volume is adapted rom Eric F. Mason, “Hebrews and the DeadSea Scrolls: Some Points o Comparison,” Perspectives in Religious Studies 37 (2010): 457–79; and chapter 6 is revised and updated rom Craig R.Koester, “Hebrews, Rhetoric, and the Future o Humanity,” Catholic Bibli-cal Quarterly 64 (2002): 103–23. Likewise, we are grateul to EdmondoLupieri, the John Cardinal Cody Chair o Teology at Loyola UniversityChicago, or hosting a seminar in honor o this volume on 10 February2011. Tis was an enjoyable and invigorating opportunity or discussion

o three o the chapters in this collection, those by the editors and MarkA. orgerson, and we appreciate very much the responses to our papers byLoyola graduate students Amanda Kunder, Jeremy Miselbrook, and AmyPezderic.

Finally, we would be remiss i we ailed to express appreciation tothose persons who have most supported us in this project, our wives Jac-queline Mason and Kerry McCruden, and our children Anastasia Masonand Liam and Samuel McCruden. Without their aithul encouragement

and love, we could not have persevered.Eric F. Mason

Kevin B. McCruden


9/28

A

G L S

Aelius TeonProgym. Progymnasmata

AlbinusEpit . Handbook of Platonism

Apollonius o yanaEp. Letters

Aristotle

Eth. nic. Nichomachean EthicsRhet. Rhetoric

AthanasiusC. Ar. Orations against the Arians

AugustineConf. Confessions

Barn. BarnabasCicero

De or. De oratoreDiv. De divinationeFlac. Pro FlaccoInv. De inventione rhetoricaNat. d. De natura deorumOff. De offi ciisPart. or. Partitiones oratoriaeQuint. Fratr. Epistulae ad Quintum fratrem

Clement o AlexandriaEcl. Extracts from the ProphetsQuis div. Salvation of the RichStrom. Miscellanies

-ix-


10/28

x READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

Cyril o Alexandria Adv. Nest. Against Nestorius

Demosthenes1–2 Aristog. 1–2 Against Aristogeiton1–3 [4] Philip. 1–4 PhilippicCor . On the CrownExord. Exordia

Dio ChrysostomOr. Discourses

Dionysius o Halicarnassus

1–2 Amm. Epistula ad Ammaeum i–iiEpictetus

Diatr. Diatribai (Dissertationes)Euripides

Herc. fur. Madness of HerculesEusebius

Praep. ev . Preparation for the Gospel Herodotus

Hist. HistoriesHesiod

Teog. Teogony Irenaeus

Haer. Against HeresiesIsocrates

Hel. enc. Helenae encomium (Or. 10)John Chrysostom

Hom. Heb. Homiliae in epistulam ad HebraeosJosephus

Ag. Ap. Against Apion Ant. Antiquities J.W. Jewish War

JustinDial. Dialogue with rypho

Lucian

Merc. cond. Salaried Posts in Great HousesPhilops. Te Lover of LiesSacr. Sacrices

Marcus Aurelius Meditations


11/28

ABBREVIAIONS xi

Maximus o yreDiss. Dissertationis

OrigenCels. Against CelsusHom. Exod. Homiliae in Exodum

Philo Abr. On the Life of Abraham Aet. On the Eternity of the World Cher. On the CherubimConf. On the Confusion of ongues

Congr. On the Preliminary StudiesContempl. On the Contemplative LifeDecal. On the DecalogueDeus Tat God is UnchangeableEbr . On DrunkennessGig. On GiantsHer. Who Is the Heir? Hypoth. Hypothetica

Ios. On the Life of JosephLeg . Allegorical InterpretationLegat. On the Embassy to Gaius Migr. On the Migration of Abraham Mos. Te Life of MosesOpif. On the Creation of the World Plant. On Planting Post. On the Posterity of Cain

Praem. On Rewards and PunishmentsProb. Tat Every Good Person is FreeProv. On ProvidenceQE Questions and Answers on ExodusQG Questions and Answers on GenesisSacr. On the Sacrices of Cain and Abel Somn. On DreamsSpec. On the Special Laws

PhilostratosEp. EpistulaeGymn. De gymnasticaVit. Apoll. Vita Apollonii


12/28

xii READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

PindarNem. Nemean Odes

PlatoLeg. LawsPhaed. PhaedoPhaedr. PhaedrusResp. Republicim. imaeus

Pliny the YoungerEp. Epistulae

Plutarch [and Pseudo-Plutarch]Cat. Maj. Cato the Elder Def. orac. De defectu oraculorumE Delph. De E apud DelphosExil. De exilioFrat. amor. De fraterno amoreGarr. De garrulitateIs. Os. De Iside et Osiride

[Lib. ed.] De liberis educandis Mor. MoraliaQuaest. conv. Quaestionum convivialum libri IX Sept. sap. conv. Septem sapientium conviviumSol. SolonSuperst. De superstitione

QuintilianInst. Institutio oratoria

Rhetorica ad HerenniumRhet. Her. Rhetorica ad Herennium

SenecaBen. De beneciisIra De IraProv. De providentia

StraboGeogr. Geography

SuetoniusClaud. Divus ClaudiusNero Nero

acitus Ann. Annales


13/28

ABBREVIAIONS xiii

Hist. Historiaeertullian

Marc. Against MarcionTeodore o Mopsuestia

Cat. hom. Catachetical Homily Teophrastrus

Char. CharacteresXenophon

Cyr . Cyropaedia Mem. Memorabilia

D S S

DJD(J) Discoveries in the Judaean Desert (o Jordan)ar AramaicCD Damascus Document (versions A and B rom the

Cairo Genizah)1QapGen Genesis Apocryphon

1QpHab Pesher Habakkuk 1QM War Scroll1QS Rule o the Community 1QSa Rule o the Congregation1QSb Rule o the Blessings1QpPs Pesher Psalms4Q174 Florilegium4Q175 estimonia

4Q177 Catena manuscript a4Q255–264 Rule o the Community 4Q266–273 Damascus Document4Q285 War Rule4QMM (394–399) MM (“Some o the Works o the Law”)4Q400–407 Songs o the Sabbath Sacrice4Q491–496 War Scroll4Q543–549 Visions o Amram

5Q11 Rule o the Community 5Q12 Damascus Document6Q15 Damascus Document11Q13 Melchizedek 11Q14 War Rule


14/28

xiv READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

11Q17 Songs o the Sabbath Sacrice11Q29 Rule o the Community?

Mas1k Songs o the Sabbath Sacrice (ound at Masada)

P

1 En. 1 EnochJub. Jubilees

R L

b. Babylonian almudB. Qam. Bava QammaBer. BerakotGen. Rab. Genesis Rabbahm. MishnahMeg. MegillahPesiq. Rab. Pesiqta Rabbati

Roš. Haš. Roš HaššanahŠabb. ŠabbatSanh. SanhedrinSukkah Sukkaht. osefaa‘an. a‘anity. Jerusalem almud

O

ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers . Edited by AlexanderRoberts and James Donaldson. 10 vols. Repr.,Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994. [orig. 1885–1887]

BDAG Bauer, W., F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W.Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New es-

tament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rded. Chicago: University o Chicago Press, 1999.BiPa Biblia Patristica. Index des citations et allusions

bibliques dans la littérature. Paris, 1975–ca. circa


15/28

ABBREVIAIONS xv

King James VersionLCL Loeb Classical Library

SeptuagintLW Luther’s Works. American Edition. Edited by

Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut . Lehman. 55 vols.Philadelphia: Muehlenberg and Fortress; St.Louis: Concordia, 1955–1986.

Masoretic ext New American Bible New American Standard Bible

New Living ranslationNPNF 1 he Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 1.

Edited by Philip Schaff. 14 vols. Repr., Peabody,Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994. [orig. 1886–1889]

NPNF 2 he Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2.Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. 14 vols.Repr., Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994. [orig.1890]

New Revised Standard VersionOG Old Greek Revised Standard VersionSIG Sylloge inscriptionum graecarum. Edited by W.

Dittenberger. 4 vols. 3rd ed. Leipzig, 1915–1924.s.v. sub verbo (“under the word”)DN heological Dictionary of the New estament .

Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. ranslated

by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerd-mans, 1964–1976.WUN Wissenschafliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen

estament


16/28


17/28

I

Eric F. Mason

Te title o this book is Reading the Epistle to the Hebrews: A Resource forStudents, and the phrases on both sides o the colon are vital to convey theintent or this volume. Tis is a book about the Epistle to the Hebrews,which has been called “the Cinderella” o New estament studies (Guthrie2004, 414; ollowing McCullough 1994, 66). Tis designation accuratelyreects the explosion o interest in the book in recent decades—since thepublication in 1989 o Harold W. Attridge’s landmark commentary in

the Hermeneia series—afer years o relative neglect. For centuries, mostinterpreters assumed Paul was the author; once scholarship rejected thattraditional identication, the anonymous author o Hebrews was essen-tially sidelined as eccentric and rarely included in discussions o prooundearly Christian voices. Rudol Bultmann virtually ignored the book, orexample, in his classic Teology of the New estament in the mid-twentiethcentury (1951–1955). In recent years, however, Hebrews has reemergedas a text o signicant interest, so much so that now many would affirm

Frank J. Matera’s assessment that the author is “one o the great theologianso the New estament … equal in theological stature” with those o thePauline and Johannine traditions (Matera 2007, 333).

Most o the contributors to the present volume are recognized spe-cialists on the study o Hebrews, as a perusal o the volume’s bibliographywill demonstrate. Others have not normally published on Hebrews butbring particular expertise rom another eld or discipline to the study othis text, thereby enriching this collection with contents ranging beyondthe topics normally addressed in academic biblical studies. ogetherthese essays examine numerous important issues or reading Hebrews,such as the author’s conceptual inuences and engagement with Scriptureand other traditions, the book’s structure, its major theological themes,emerging interpretative methods or engaging the text, and the use o

-1-


18/28

2 READING HE EPISLE O HE HEBREWS

Hebrews (both positively and negatively) by subsequent generations oreaders.

Our assumption is that most readers o this book will study it along-side a standard commentary. As such, rather than seeking to duplicatewhat those volumes do best (treatment o standard issues such as author-ship, date, and so orth, plus detailed exegesis o the biblical text), ourocus has been to provide extended discussions o important issues that gobeyond what is easible in a typical commentary. Our hope is that readerswill nd the chapters in this book both illuminating and provocative asthey ponder Hebrews in the company o our contributors.

Tis leads naturally to consideration o the second hal o this book’stitle: “a resource or students.” Our contributors have been charged not just to write chapters that engage the best o contemporary scholarshipon Hebrews but to do so with the needs and concerns o student read-ers at the oreront. We have sought to write with an advanced under-graduate readership in mind, but also in ways that will be benecial ormore advanced students in seminary or graduate school and indeed orany educated reader studying Hebrews or the rst time. Tis means we

have been intentional about dening specialized terminology, providingrelevant historical and cultural background inormation, and explainingtenets o the methodologies we utilize. While Hebrews is the subject oseveral very readable introductory commentaries and handbooks writtenby esteemed scholars (including some excellent volumes by contributorsto this book), we are aware o no other student-oriented book on Hebrewsthat addresses the breadth o issues with the range o perspectives thatthe present volume offers. We trust that students and other readers o

Hebrews will nd the essays here to be understandable, instructive, andenlightening.

* * *

Hebrews is a difficult, mysterious, and sometimes even cryptic book, ele-ments that have contributed both to its neglect and appeal. We cannotknow the identity o its author, though (despite early reservations in

the West) rom the ourth through sixteenth centuries interpretersoverwhelmingly assumed it was Paul until Erasmus and Martin Lutherreopened the question (or an excellent survey o the history o interpreta-tion o Hebrews, see Koester 2001, 19–63). Other suggestions by ancientand modern readers have included Barnabas, Apollos, and even Priscilla;


19/28

MASON: INRODUCION 3

extensive arguments or Luke (Allen 2010) and a Pauline pseudepigrapher(Rothschild 2009) have recently appeared. Most contemporary scholars,

however, concede that we cannot know the author’s personal identity butthat we can discern several things about him rom the text. His heartelt,pastoral “word o exhortation” (13:22) was preserved as a letter (albeit onelacking a typical epistolary beginning) but exhibits ne homiletic qualities.He wrote eloquent Greek, normally described as the most rened in theNew estament (see rotter 1997, 163–84, or a very accessible survey othe author’s literary sophistication and style), and he was equally comort-able with the canons o Greek rhetoric and the middot o Second emple

period Jewish exegetical traditions. Tis resulted in sometimes complex,ofen creative, and always proound interpretations o the Septuagint as heurged his audience to remain aithul to its Christian commitment in themidst o adversity in the latter part o the rst century ..

We do not know exactly what sort o issues the audience aced, andeven among the contributors to this volume explanations will differ. For-merly most interpreters assumed that the recipients were Jewish Chris-tians who struggled over the relationship between their heritage and their

aith in Jesus, thus they were either hesitant to break away rom the syna-gogue or else inclined to return. Such interpretations have deep roots intradition, in part due to the heavy use o sacricial and priestly imageryin the book, and this contributed both to the title later added to the book(“o the Hebrews”) and the assumption among many early readers thatit was intended or the Jerusalem church. Increasingly, however, moderninterpreters argue that nothing in Hebrews demands a reading so depen-dent on Jewish ethnicity; instead, the problem is discouragement and

apathy in the midst o withering social opposition and (sometimes) per-secution. Still, however, scholarly reconstructions o the precise settingcontinue to vary. Regardless, almost all interpreters now agree that thetext was sent to riends still in Rome (“those rom Italy send you greet-ings,” 13:24).

Detailed consideration o these matters need not detain us herebecause such things are covered in signicant detail in most critical com-mentaries. Instead, as noted above, the purpose o this volume is to exam-

ine major issues or interpretation o Hebrews that go beyond the scopeo the typical commentary yet are vital or beginning readers o the text.Our subjects may be grouped in ve categories: issues o conceptual andhistorical background, structure o the text, emerging methodologicalapproaches, major theological issues, and reception history.


20/28


C H B

Te question o the conceptual background that most inuenced theauthor o Hebrews is one with a long history o discussion, and virtu-ally any commentary includes some discussion o three major proposals:Middle Platonic thought (especially as represented by Philo o Alexan-dria), Palestinian Judaism, or Gnosticism. While the latter o these haslargely been abandoned in recent decades, especially in English-languagescholarship, one still nds ardent deenses or the other two suggestions,unortunately ofen couched in either-or terms. Both remaining options,

however, largely still concern the Jewish context o the author, whethermore akin to the Platonizing Judaism o Philo o Alexandria or more Pal-estinian strains as represented by the Qumran sectarians and other apoca-lyptic groups. More recently, a number o interpreters have begun to con-sider how interpretation o Hebrews is impacted when read explicitly as atext addressed to a Roman audience.

Four essays in this volume address issues related to the conceptualand historical backgrounds o Hebrews. While each contributor considers

these questions rom a different perspective, all our agree that the authoro Hebrews draws on a rich and varied ont o traditions.

In “Hebrews among Greeks and Romans,” Patrick Gray addressesthe undamental question o “why it is necessary to know anything aboutGreece or Rome in a letter to ‘Hebrews.’ ” Gray explains that, regardless othe ethnicity o the recipients o the book, they lived in the Greco-Romanworld, and “several aspects o the argument o Hebrews stand out more vividly when viewed against the background o Greek and Roman cul-

ture.” Gray provides a lucid consideration o numerous issues, includinglanguage and rhetoric, philosophy, causes o and responses to persecu-tion, understandings o brotherly love, imagery rom athletics, politicaldiscourse, and conceptions o sacrice. Troughout he demonstrates howan understanding o the Greco-Roman world illuminates interpretationo Hebrews—and thus also how both the author and his audience wereimmersed in the broader culture o their era.

Te next chapter, by James W. Tompson, is titled “What Has Middle

Platonism to Do with Hebrews?” and addresses more specically the inu-ence o philosophical thought on the book’s author. Tompson observesthat in the early centuries o the church both critics and proponents oChristianity noted numerous “irreconcilable differences” between Pla-tonism and Christianity, including the eschatological expectations o the


21/28

MASON: INRODUCION 5

latter, yet Christian thinkers requently “employed Platonic language andcategories in varying degrees to explain Christian belies.” Te question o

whether the author o Hebrews also drew upon Middle Platonic philosoph-ical thought remains debated, but Tompson provides a careul, articulatedeense o that position. He rst offers a very helpul survey o MiddlePlatonic thought, especially as expressed by its Jewish proponent Philo.Tompson then considers key passages in Hebrews and explains how theauthor utilized philosophical thought and language in his argumentation.He concludes that, while the author o Hebrews was not a thoroughgo-ing Platonist, nevertheless, “like the Christian theologians who came afer

him, he employed Platonic assumptions or his own pastoral purposes.”Eric F. Mason addresses another major suggestion or the conceptual

background o Hebrews in “Cosmology, Messianism, and Melchizedek:Apocalyptic Jewish raditions and Hebrews.” Like Tompson, Masonargues that the author o Hebrews utilized ideas rom a number o tra-ditions, both philosophical and eschatological. But just as some inter-preters deny the presence o Middle Platonism in Hebrews, others rejectthe idea that the book has parallels with ideas expressed in apocalyptic

Jewish traditions like those reected in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Mason surveys the complicated history o attempts to relate the Scrolls to Hebrews,then cautiously considers similarities in three areas: cosmology, particu-larly conceptions o the heavenly sanctuary and divine throne; messian-ism, especially ideas about a messianic priest; and Melchizedek, speci-cally interpretations that portray him as a heavenly, angelic gure. In eachcase, Mason notes both similarities and differences in Hebrews and theQumran texts, but he concludes that “these points o contact establish the

importance o understanding the broader Second emple Jewish contextor reading this epistle.”

David M. Moffitt considers the author’s Jewish context in a differentway in “Te Interpretation o Scripture in the Epistle to the Hebrews.”Moffitt sets two major goals or his investigation: to survey issues impor-tant or understanding how the author interprets Scripture, and to ana-lyze selected examples o his exegesis that indicate something o his con-ception o Scripture. Moffitt undertakes the rst o these by explaining

the nature o the biblical text (the Septuagint) utilized by the author oHebrews—in the process providing a very helpul primer on textual criti-cism—then discussing several important Jewish interpretative techniquesknown rom the Dead Sea Scrolls and rabbinic literature. Next, he makeshis way through key passages in Hebrews, explaining how the author deals


22/28


with biblical citations and how such compares with techniques current incontemporary Judaism. Troughout his discussion Moffitt reects recent

scholarship on Hebrews’ methods o biblical interpretation (especiallythat o Susan Docherty 2009). He concludes that the author o Hebrewsconsiders Scripture “a repository o divine speech,” words “living andactive” that speak “about Jesus, the Son, and the community that conessesJesus’ name.” Drawing on contemporary exegetical methods, he can recast“scriptural words in new ways,” yet “the words themselves also place con-straints on him” that demand careul attention.

S

Interpreters o Hebrews have long struggled to explain how the book isstructured. Still there is no consensus, though the ve-part outline pro-posed by Albert Vanhoye (1976 [rst ed. 1963]), arranged concentricallyaround a central emphasis on sacrice in 5:11–10:39, has been especiallyinuential. Normally interpreters have sought to organize the book in alinear ashion based on verbal or thematic cues in the text, but others have

utilized insights rom disciplines such as discourse analysis with varyingresults (Guthrie 1994; Westall 2005). Te book’s sermonic qualities haveprompted still other scholars to analyze the book in light o rhetorical orhomiletical models, and two chapters here explore such possibilities rom very different perspectives.

Craig R. Koester, in “Hebrews, Rhetoric, and the Future o Human-ity,” notes that consideration o the structure o Hebrews is vital because“the way that interpreters perceive the book’s structure reects the way

they understand its message.” He argues that the book is best understoodwhen considered through the lens o Greco-Roman rhetoric. Koesterprovides an introduction to the canons o classical rhetoric while present-ing Hebrews as a text with an exordium (1:1–2:4), a proposition (2:5–9),three series o arguments (2:10–12:27), a peroration (12:28–13:21), and anepistolary postscript (13:22–25). Troughout he illustrates his approachwith copious examples rom classical literature and explains how eachsection o the text would unction to appeal to the audience. Also, he

interacts with other scholars’ suggestions about the book’s structure andeatures. He concludes that the author, addressing “a Christian commu-nity in decline … ocused his speech on the way that the hope o inherit-ing glory in God’s kingdom seemed to be contradicted by the ingloriousexperience o Christian lie in the world.” Te author assures his audience


23/28

MASON: INRODUCION 7

that God is aithul and that the ministry o Jesus ensures the ulllmento their promised inheritance.

In the next chapter, “Hebrews, Homiletics, and Liturgical ScriptureInterpretation,” Gabriella Gelardini offers an alternative approach. Sheobserves that the author o Hebrews makes extensive use o biblical quo-tations but varies the methodology and concentration o citations romsection to section in the book, a technique most closely paralleled in syna-gogue homilies. Gelardini provides a very helpul introduction to ancientsynagogue practices, architecture, and liturgy beore turning to describethe nature o and expectations or synagogue homilies. In her reading, the

key biblical passages undergirding the homily we now call Hebrews wereExod 31:18–32:35 (the orah text, or sidrah, with the theme o covenantbreaking) and Jer 31:31–34 (the related reading rom the Prophets, thehaphtarah, on covenant renewal). Te overall structure is that o a three-part petichta homily with elaborate expectations or the use o scripturalcitations in each section. Gelardini asserts that the key texts rom Exodusand Jeremiah were paired in the reconstructed ancient Jewish “triennielreading cycle between the two ast days rom ammuz 17 and Av 9,” the

ormer commemorating the destruction o the law tablets by Moses inresponse to the golden cal incident and the latter the rebellion at Kadesh-barnea. Both also were associated with the destruction o the First empleby the Babylonians, with isha be-Av also related to the all o the Secondemple and the ailure o the Bar Kokhba revolt. As the lowest points onthe Jewish calendar, they are “shadow images” o its highest point, YomKippur, and this explains the importance o the Day o Atonement rite orthe author o Hebrews.

E M A

Recent decades in biblical scholarship have been marked by the emergenceo new methodologies beyond the traditional historical-critical modesthat have long characterized academic biblical studies. Hebrews has notnormally been a prominent text under consideration by practitioners onew approaches, especially compared to the attention received by other

New estament texts such as the Gospels and Pauline Epistles, but thatdoes not mean it is not ertile ground or such investigations.One might argue that social-scientic interpretation o the New es-

tament no longer is an “emerging” eld, but analyses o Hebrews remainew, and there is much internal debate among practitioners about the


24/28


proper appropriation o such techniques or biblical interpretation. (ForHebrews, see especially deSilva 2008 [orig. 1995] and 2000, both exam-

ples o sociorhetorical interpretation, and the rather different approacho Whitlark 2008.) Jerome H. Neyrey, a veteran social-scientic inter-preter who earlier examined Jesus’ role in the Gospel o John using themodel o a “broker” (Neyrey 2007), analyzes Hebrews’ portrait o Jesusas priest in “Jesus the Broker in Hebrews: Insights rom the Social Sci-ences.” Neyrey explains the importance o patron-client relationships inthe ancient Mediterranean world and the vital role played by brokers, go-betweens who “bring the client’s needs to the attention o the patron, as

well as the beneactions o the patron to the clients.” Next he considers thepresentation o Jesus as priest/broker in Hebrews through the lens o vequestions: How does one become a broker? What makes one successul?What does one broker? Why a broker, and why this one? What tariff doesa broker receive? In the course o his discussion, Neyrey also considershow Hebrews presents Jesus as priest in ways akin to the ancient rhetoricalcategories students learned in progymnasmata exercises.

Kenneth Schenck considers a different emerging methodology in

“Hebrews as the Re-presentation o a Story: A Narrative Approach toHebrews.” Others have applied this approach to study o New estamentletters—most notably Richard Hays (2002 [orig. 1983]) on Galatians—with the assumption that Paul “was arguing with his opponents over astory ”; such a oundational narrative understanding o the gospel andits implications included various elements both shared and disputed bythe apostle and his detractors. Schenck surveys the application o literarycriticism to the New estament in recent decades and considers critiques

o the approaches used by Hays and others, then asserts that the authoro Hebrews also has in mind a story that undergirds his message in theepistle. Schenck rejects the idea that Hebrews was written to Jewish Chris-tians “tempted to return to mainstream Judaism and its Levitical meanso atonement” in the years beore the destruction o the temple. Instead,he argues that the author o Hebrews offers consolation afer the destruc-tion o the temple in 70 .. to Christian believers o any ethnicity whomight question their aith in the afermath o that event. In order to do

this, the author draws upon a shared body o assumptions rom the bibli-cal “story” he shares with the recipients and re-presents them in “a radicalreinterpretation o key events in the common Christian-Jewish story.” Tismotive explains the author’s signicant interest in things and ideas such assanctuaries, atonement, exaltation, and priesthood. As such, “the author


25/28

MASON: INRODUCION 9

builds on the audience’s current understanding and common Christiantraditions and re-presents them in striking terms.”

M I

Hebrews is a prooundly theological book, and as noted earlier the signi-cance o this has been increasingly recognized in recent decades. Frank J.Matera offers an overview o the theology o the book in “Te Teology othe Epistle to the Hebrews.” Matera notes that “the task o New estamenttheology is to provide a thick and rich description o the theology in the

New estamant so that what was written in the past will have meaning andrelevance or the uture,” yet this task is difficult because the New esta-ment texts were not intended as theological treatises. Nevertheless, theyare steeped in religious thought, and one may consider their contents usingclassic theological categories, provided that one remains cognizant o theoriginal nature o the texts under discussion. Matera nds in Hebrews “themost systematic presentation o the person and work o Jesus in the Newestament” but also challenges, including its distinctive presentation o

Jesus as priest, its emphasis on Jesus’ death but relative silence on the res-urrection and parousia, and its sel-description as a “word o exhortation.”Matera explicates the theology o the book in three parts: consideration oits doctrinal exposition (chiey on the person and work o Christ) and itsmoral exhortation (especially concerning what one may know o the audi-ence and their hope or the uture), then reections on the signicance oHebrews’ theology or contemporary Christian aith and thought.

Next, Kevin B. McCruden explores more specically a particular theo-

logical issue in Hebrews in “Te Concept o Perection in the Epistle tothe Hebrews.” Perection terminology occurs eighteen times in Hebrews,yet McCruden notes that it is difficult to ascertain exactly how the authorunderstands this idea. He undertakes his investigation with “the meth-odological assumption that a larger narrative world or theological storyinorms this ancient sermon,” one very comprehensible to an ancientaudience but likely “prooundly alien” to modern readers. He proceeds toexplain this story, particularly with respect to the role that perection plays

in the “human career” o Jesus, and nds many parallels between Hebrewsand the kenōsis hymn in Phil 2:6–11. Also, McCruden draws links betweenthe perection o Jesus and the perection o his aithul people. He con-cludes, “while the event o Jesus’ exaltation comprises one aspect o whatJesus’ perection means or the author o Hebrews, the personal aithul-


26/28


ness o Jesus also plays a signicant role in the perecting o the Son as eter-nal high priest.” Likewise, “the aithul ultimately experience perection in

the age to come,” yet “even now … perection understood as communionwith God is an experiential reality that has been made possible throughthe personal sacrice o Jesus that cleanses the believer rom within.”

R H

raditionally Hebrews has been overshadowed by other New estamentbooks in the history o Christian thought, especially the Gospels and

Pauline Epistles (even though it was long considered among the latter).Nevertheless, Hebrews has had considerable inuence in certain ways.Sometimes this has been positive, as in the development o key christo-logical doctrines, and at other times it has been negative, as when read asa text espousing Christian supersessionism. Also, Hebrews has been usedin varying ways in the history o Christian worship. Tree chapters in thislast major section o the book explore these varied topics.

Rowan A. Greer, author o a classic volume on patristic interpreta-

tion o Hebrews (Greer 1973), examines the use o Hebrews in christo-logical controversies in “Te Jesus o Hebrews and the Christ o Chalce-don.” Afer considering broadly the use o Scripture by early Christianinterpreters, he turns to consider two difficulties or understanding theidentity o Christ posed by Hebrews: “I Christ is ‘the exact imprint oGod’s very being,’ does this mean that he is divine in such a way as notto compromise monotheism? Further, i Christ is divine, why would heneed to ‘learn obedience by what he suffered’? Indeed, how could a divine

being possibly suffer at all?” Greer nds these two issues respectivelyat the heart o two crucial debates in early Christianity, the Arian con-troversy and the resulting Nicene Creed (381 ..), with Athanasius oAlexandria and Teodore o Mopsuestia offering opposing arguments,and the fh-century Nestorian controversy, prompted by the rinitarianaffirmations in the creed and now engaged by Cyril o Alexandria andNestorius. Greer careully considers the issues in both debates and the useo Scripture by each o the our proponents. Greer concludes, “Describing

some o the interpretations o Hebrews put orth during the period o therst our general councils underlines the importance o the theologicalrameworks that shape them. Nevertheless, all the interpreters claim thattheir presupposed rameworks spring rom Scripture. I we take theseclaims seriously, there is a circularity or reciprocity binding exegesis and


27/28

MASON: INRODUCION 11

theology together.” With this he offers a challenge to the assumptions omodern biblical interpreters as well.

Alan C. Mitchell then considers a very different history o interpret-ing Hebrews in “ ‘A Sacrice o Praise’: Does Hebrews Promote Superses-sionism?” Mitchell notes that, “rom the second century .., Christianshave used [Hebrews] to promote the view that Christianity, accordingto God’s plan, had replaced Judaism,” and he concedes that much inHebrews can be read in that light. He cautions against such interpre-tations that may promote anti-Semitism, however, especially in lighto the Holocaust. Mitchell argues that “Hebrews itsel is not inherently

supersessionist,” despite the long history o interpretation otherwise. Heoffers a denition o supersessionism and surveys its various expressions,examines three key passages in Hebrews (7:1–12; 8:8–13; 10:1–10) ofenread to support that view, and offers a different approach to the bookthat avoids such conclusions. Te context o the book o Hebrews itselis a major actor or Mitchell’s argument: the New estament books werewritten “beore Christianity had split denitely rom Judaism. When oneunderstands the rich variegation o Judaism in the rst century .. and

the processes o sel-denition each o the various Jewish sects under-took, then texts that appear as polemical need not be seen as anti-Semiticor supersessionist.” Instead, they are documents o intra-Jewish debate,even i addressed to Gentiles who have attached themselves to this Jewishmessianic movement.

Finally, Mark A. orgerson approaches the traditional interpreta-tion o Hebrews rom yet a third perspective, that o a liturgist examin-ing the history o Christian worship. In “Hebrews in the Worship Lie o

the Church: A Historical Survey,” orgerson considers how Hebrews hasbeen utilized in multiple aspects o ecclesial lie, including preaching, bap-tism, Eucharist, ordered ministry, lectionaries, hymnody, service books,and visual art. He includes copious examples documenting the role oHebrews in each o these areas, drawing rom a diverse range o Christiantraditions both ancient and modern. orgerson notes that Hebrews “hasoccupied a unique niche” in Christian worship lie: “Tough the Epistle tothe Hebrews has not had a large role to play in the development and prac-

tice o Christian worship, it has remained an enduring source o inspira-tion and theological interpretation.” Perhaps more surprising, orgersonillustrates that the inuence o Hebrews in Christian worship has risen inrecent years in many circles, especially when gauged by its increased pres-ence in lectionary cycles.


28/28


Given his instrumental role in the present wave o interest in Hebrews,it is only appropriate that the volume’s epilogue is penned by Harold W.

Attridge. Attridge offers trenchant comments on each essay, reecting bothon their individual contributions and the questions they raise or uturestudy. He especially notes the “intertexts” considered by each contributor,evaluating how they approach Hebrews in relation to other ancient litera-ture and ideas. He writes, “Teir use o these various lenses through whichto read Hebrews is a marvelous illustration o the challenges inherent inmaking sense o this biblical book.” Elsewhere he states that this volume’sessays “should certainly serve to engage a new generation o students” o

Hebrews. I so, the goals inherent in both phrases o the book’s title willbe ullled.

Aneka Artikel Membaca Surat Ibrani

Documents

Transcript of Aneka Artikel Membaca Surat Ibrani