I Co 1211 ; 21-* II 1 Co 152« ; 512 II 1 Co 32 ; 5'* || 1 Co 2^ ; 610 II 2 Co 8* ; 10»" || Ro 121^ ; lO^s || 2 Co 13^ ; lO^s
II Ro 1" ; 12'* II Ro 14=9 . 1222 1310 II Gal 425'- ; 1318 || Ph 4i=- 18 ; I3i8f. II 2 Co !"• 12 ; 132*' II Ro 1528 ; U-^ || Ph 4=1- 22 (Moffatt, LNT, p. 453). It may be doubted whether direct literary connexion can be proved in any of these cases. Even where such connexion seems most certain — when the two writers agree with each other, whUe differing both from the LXX and from the Hebrew, in the text of an OT passage (He 10^°, Eo 12i*) — it is possible that they are quoting independently an interpretation which is at least as old as the Targum of Onkelos. Yet in many ways the Epistle presupposes the work of St. Paul. Though they see things from a different point of view, the two are in fundamental agreement. Both display 'the same broad concep- tion of the universality of the Gospel, the same grasp of the age-long purpose of God wrought out through Israel, the same trust in the atoning work of Christ, and in His present sovereignty' (Westcott, op. cit. p. Ixxviii). That the A^Titer to the Hebrews can take up an attitude of wide universalism Avith- out mentioning the question of circumcision or even naming the Gentiles at all, and can calmly put aside the Law almost as though its futility were self-evident, implies that the Pauline battle of Galatia and Rome has been fought and won.
(5) The Fourth Gospel. — In point of time the Epistle to the Hebrews stands midway between the Pauline Epistles and the Johannine writings. In the development of apostolic theology it occupies precisely the same place. St. Paul had a hard struggle to establish the principle of the universal application of the gospel to Jew and Gentile alike. The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Fourth Gospel both take this for granted. St. Paul, though he does not dwell on the idea, occasionally speaks of Christ's death in terms of sacrifice (Eph 1^ 2i^ 5'^ 1 Co 5^ Ro 325 83 etc.). The Epistle to the Hebrews deals fully with the sacrificial aspect of Christ's death, and sets forth at length the corre- sponding conception of His Priesthood. The root- ideas contained in the doctrines of Christ's Priest- hood and Sacrifice find their final expression in the seemingly simple and unstudied language of the Fourth Gospel, even though the terms ' priest ' and 'sacrifice' are never used (cf. Jn 10i'2i 12^2 jg? 27)^ Lastly, the description of the person and work of Christ given in the opening verses of the Epistle (He 1^"*) might almost be taken to be a first sketch of the completed picture of the ' Divine Word made flesh' contained in the prologue to the Fourth Gospel.
'The teaching which St. John has preserved offers the final form of the Truth. St. John's theory (if we may so speak) of the work of Christ is less developed in detail than that which is found in the Epistles of St. Paul and in the Epistle to the Hebrews ; but his revelation of Christ's Person is more complete. He concentrates our attention, as it were, upon Him, Son of God and Son of man, and leaves us in the contemplation of facts which we can only understand in part ' (Westcott, op. cit. p. Ixf.).
8. Importance. — The Epistle to the Hebrews has an interest peculiarlj* its own. It is the earliest exposition of the Christian tradition by one who had all the instincts of a scholar and a philosopher.
542 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
HEIFER
"Wherever the author may have been born, h.e may- be regarded, as the NT representative of the tyjie of mind which afterwaixls appeared in the great teachers of the Cliristian school of Alexandria. At the same time he is altogether free from the particular limitations of that school. He agrees w^ith the Alexandrians in his philosophical bent and his love of cultured and scholarly expression, but he is also of one mind Avith the school of Antioch in his appreciation of the importance of fact. His doctrine of the Person of Christ com- bines the two central truths, the isolation of one of which was the cause of disaster both to Alex- andria and to Antioch. For while he insists, equally with the Alexandrians, on the cosmic work and pre-incamate glory of the Son, he is not less emphatic than the Antiochenes in his statement of the completeness of His participation in human suffering and temptation and His exaltation in human nature to the right hand of power. The Epistle to the Hebrews rendered permanent service to the Church by showing that the way to under- stand something of the meaning of the Person of Christ is not to minimize either the Divine or the human nature, but to emphasize both.
In his interpretation of the OT, the writer of Hebrews seems to be in sympathy much more with Antioch than with Alexandria. His exegesis is based on principles which have never been forsaken without disastrous consequences. He recognizes the OT as a Divinely-given revelation, and yet a revelation which is partial and incomplete. He realizes the true method of historical interpretation : a passage of Scripture must be explained in the light of its context ; its real nieaning is that which the writer intended it to bear. These are the principles which lie at the root of all sound biblical criticism.