• Ilil.r.lfrhiUf. II. p. Sit, note .1.
jM
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO
two authors in respect of religious teuiperament, all shut one up to this conclusion. As to the ilifference of style, it is a nialter of ileUiil, with reference to which a decided impression can be made oidy by a large accumulation of instances, bul the following statement gives a sufticieni idea of it. ' St. I'aul Wius not free from Hebraism, and derives force from the simplicity of his language ; the author (of Hebrews) expresses himself in idiomatic and polished IJreek, and ileligliLs in the poinp of stalely phrases and full-s<iunding derivatives. They dift'i^r in the elementary frame- work of their sentences by employment of differ- ent constructions and different connecting ])ar- ticlcs. Dialectical .subtlety, impetuous bursts of natural eloquence, mighty thoughts struggling for expressiim in disjointed .sentences, are the char- acteristic features of .St. raid's style. Hhetorical skill, studied antithesis, even tiow of faultless grammar, ami measured march of rhythmical jieriods, combine to stamp upon the Kpislle a <listinci and miique character of its own.'» Be- hind this dilTerence of style lies an even more marked difference in religious temperament and experience. St. Paul is a matt of great moral intensity; the author of Hebrews has about him an air of philo.sophic repose. We feel in every page of the Pauline Kpistles that the man who ■wrote them has passed through a great n'ligions crisis. In reading Jlthretrs we have no such feel- ing. Instead of a tragic experience there has been a smooth (jiiiet studious life, whose passage into Christian failh has resembled the dawn of day rather than the sudden flash of light from heaven which smote Saul of Tarsus to the earth on the way to Damascus. A significant index of this eiinable flow is the entire absence from our Kpistle of the well-known Pauline antitheses: law and grace, faith and works, fle.sh and .spirit. There are antitheses here also, but they are less pronnuncL'd, — shadow and substance, type and an- titype.— pointing at, not radical contrariety, but ilitTercnt stages in the religious development of mankind.
The writer of JL'breios was not only not St. Paul, but not even a disciple of St. Paul. To a great extent the proof of the one thesis is at the same time the proof of the other. That he was acquainted with the Pauline literature has been confidently asserted, but cannot be clearly shown. t There are doubtless things that remind us of Pauline texts, e.fj. the description of the law ;is 'the word spoken by angels' (2-), which recalls a similar thought in Gal o'^, and the idea of the heavenly Jerusalem (12-- IS") found in the same Epistle (4-^). But these may be mere coincidences in the use of conce))tions belonging to the common stork of contBini>orary religious thought. Ac- iiuaintauce with Philo's writings can be alleged with nnich greater show of reason.
But while not a follower of St. Paul, our author is in thorough sympathy with all the leading posi- tions of i^ullinism. Without doubt he stands on the ground or uiiiversalism. No express text, indeed, can be cited in support of this a.ssertion. From beginning to end there is not a single allusion to (icntile Chri-stians, or the slightest indication that the writer is aware of the exist- ence of such people. He seems to have in view throughout, God's ancient people, and to have for his sole aim to enable Hebrew Christians to re- main steadfast in the faith amid circumstances of trial. He takes no advantage of opportunities for indicating the universal destination of the gospel; not even in 2i'', where it would have
» Thf Epiille III the /fehreict. hy F. Kendall, ride tlie Aji- pendist^ pp. 26, 27.
fVide vor Soden in Ifantlkommenlar, Einleitnng, p. 2.
been so natural to have said, He (Jesus') took not hold of (in order to save) angels, but He look hold of xKinkind; instead of winch he says. He took hold of the seed of Abraham. Nevertheless, the Epistle breathes throughout the spirit of uiii- versalism. The whole scheme of thought, though excogitated for the benefit of Hebrews, is capable of universal application, and implies that Chri.s- tianity is the concern of all mankind. The remark hoUls true especially of the Christologj-. The co.s- mic relations in wliich the Son is .Mt in the proem inilicate that the word s|)oken by God through Him is a revelation for the whole world. It is only in universalist writings, such as the Kpistles of St. Paul and the Go.spel of St. John, that a cosmic Chrislology is to be looked for. Not le.ss uni- versalist in tendency is the view of the sacrifice of Christ presented in ch. It'*. The doctrine takes its colour from Levitical institutions, but in its core it is not .lewi.sh but human. The ])hra.se hii an eternal npirit lifts the whole subject above the distinctions, not only of time and .space, a-s already pointed out, but also of race and nationality. It lias the .same ring as the great epoch-niaking text in St. .Tohu's Gospel: 'The hour Cometh, when ye shall neitlier in this mountain, nor yet at Jern- saleiii, worship the Father. . . . The hour cometli, an<l now is, when the true wonshipjiers shall wor- ship the Fiither in .spirit and in truth' (4-'-^).