|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2016 13:23:33 GMT -6
Study of the Background and introductory matter of the book of Hebrews
|
|
JB
•
Dedicated TruthSeeker
Posts: 308
Likes: 42
Gender: Male
|
Post by JB on Oct 23, 2016 19:47:24 GMT -6
Studying the background of Hebrews is challenging. The writer’s name is never given, there are no clear indications of time by which we can date the letter with certainty, and the audience it was originally written to is not mentioned.
Some may see these types of things as unimportant and, at one level, I agree. They are in no way important in the same way as the content of the letter is important. But understanding the background is useful in a few ways. Difficult to understand texts (which Hebrews is full of) come to light more readily if we understand something about the writer and the original readers – their religious and cultural assumptions, for example. Understanding who wrote it and when it was written also help us to understand the letter’s proper inclusion in the canon (that is, the collection of books in our Bible). In fact, Hebrews was the last book added to our Bible because, while nearly everyone who read it recognized the truth and power of its message, many were still not convinced it should be included in a collection of God-breathed scriptures. Studying the development of the canon (which means “measuring rod”) of our Bible is way beyond anything we can undertake in TruthSeekers. If you’re interested, there are two outstanding books by F.F. Bruce that are worth your time:
- The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable and
- The Canon of Scripture.
With a closed canon (i.e., a complete Bible) like we have today, we don’t usually spend much time thinking about these things. But in the church’s early history, when people were often killed for owning scriptures, it was important to know what books were worth dying for.
THE AUTHOR OF HEBREWS
One of the qualifications for a book to have been included in the New Testament was that it was written either by an apostle or by someone who was very close to an apostle.
There are, in my opinion, very strong arguments that Paul was the writer of Hebrews. There are in my opinion very strong arguments that Paul was NOT the writer of Hebrews. My own position is that the writer was most likely a disciple of Paul’s. Because of this, his manner of thinking and communicating, as well as his theology and areas of focus, were understandably very much like Paul’s but still maintained enough individual personality as to not be exactly like him.
I am not going to say much else about authorship. Instead, I’ll point you to the fairest treatment of this question that I’ve come across. It is from Daniel B. Wallace in his commentary called Hebrews: Introduction, Argument, and Outline. Wallace is a professor of NT studies at Dallas Theological Seminary:
www.dannychesnut.com/Bible/Barclay/THE%20LETTER%20TO%20THE%20HEBREWS.htm
THE ORIGINAL AUDIENCE OF HEBREWS
As we study through this letter, it’s hard to miss the fact it was written to Christians who had converted from Judaism. Over and over the readers are treated as people who are saved; over and over again statements are made that wouldn’t be understood except by people who were intimately familiar with Jewish institutions, history, customs, and laws. Those things aren’t explained in the text. It is assumed that the readers already knew them well. In fact, it often seems like the writer is concerned that the readers are about to lapse back into a graceless legal faith and he’s trying to prevent that.
Hardly anybody argues this point, and most accept that these Jewish Christians lived in Palestine. However, I think there’s also a good case to be made that the readers were in Italy based upon a single verse: "Those who come from Italy send you greetings" (Heb 13:24).
Finally, the original readers were not new Christians (this is clear in Hebrews 5:12; Hebrews 10:32; and Hebrews 13:7)
THE DATE OF THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
It’s clear that this letter was written to second or third generation Christians (see Hebrews 2:3). That puts it in the middle to late part of the first century.
These Christians had experienced their own leaders being killed for their faith (Hebrews 13:7). The readers themselves had not yet suffered such life-threatening persecution (Hebrews 12:4), yet they had been mistreated and robbed because of their faith (Hebrews 10:32-34). Finally, the writer makes it clear that they are at risk of real persecution (see Hebrews 12:2-4; Hebrews 13:13).
Putting all of this together, we can make a reasonable guess that there had previously been a major persecution of Christians and that sometime after this letter was written there was another major persecution of Christians. Historically we know that Nero persecuted Christians horribly in the mid 60’s and Domitian did so again in the mid 80’s, so there’s a 20-year time span within which this letter was likely written. Considering that the writer treats the previous persecution as if it was a relatively distant past, sometime around A.D. 70 seems reasonable.
A.D. 70, as you may know, is the year that the Jewish temple was destroyed. When the temple was destroyed, so was the priestly office. Yet, throughout Hebrews the writer writes as if such things as temple service were still a present reality.
Consider the following two passages:
“For every high priest is appointed to offer gifts and sacrifices; thus it is necessary for this priest also to have something to offer. Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law” (Hebrews 8:3-4)
“...the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year” (Hebrews 10:1)
It is difficult to imagine how either of those could have been written, in the present tense as they are, if the temple had already been destroyed.
Therefore, I’m inclined to date the writing of this letter in the late A.D. 60’s, shortly before the temple’s destruction.
CLOSING
I don’t get too hung up on these things. I believe the Holy Spirit worked through holy men to bring together the scriptures as we have them. But neither do I consider this type of study useless. I do hope the above has at least been profitable to you in some way as we dig into the text.
|
|
