A Tale Of Two Mountains: An Exegesis Of Hebrews 12:18-29

Outline and Structural Analysis

vv. 18-21: Sinai

vv. 22-24: Zion, Heavenly Jerusalem

vv. 25-26: Warning with passage from Haggai 2:6.

v.   27: Explanation of Haggai 2:6

vv. 28-29: Exhortation

There is an inclusio with pyri and pyr in vv. 18 and 29, respectively (Attridge 373, Vanhoye 209). In the Greek, the section consists of five sentences (vv. 18-21; vv. 22-24; vv. 25-26; v. 27; vv. 28-29), with vv. 25-26 in the middle, suggesting that the warning about not refusing him who is speaking combined with the quote from Haggai is central to the section. In vv. 18-21, the author gives a description of the institution of the Old Covenant at Sinai, which is contrasted with the New Covenant characterized by Zion, the heavenly Jerusalem in vv. 22-24. This contrast sets the stage for our author to present a warning to his audience, reinforced by the Haggai quote (vv. 25-26). Next, in v. 27 is a brief explanation of the Haggai quote followed by an exhortation in vv. 28-29.

Manuscript Evidence And The Pauline Authorship Of Hebrews

“Opening our modern edition of the New Testament, we find that Hebrews occupies the leaves between Philemon and James, that is between the thirteenth Pauline and the first Catholic Epistle. Does this collocation separate it from the Corpus Paulinum? Manuscript evidence shows that it does not. In the oldest uncials (S A B C) it follows second Thessalonians and precedes the Pastorals. This is also the position which it occupies in most MSS of the Bohairic Version and in the commentary of St. Ephraem… In the archetype or predecessors of Codex B, it stood between Galatians and Ephesians, as the series of sectional numbers on the margin of that Codex shows. In the Sahidic Version, it even preceded Galatians. The Syriac Versions, the later Greek MSS and the Latin MSS assign Hebrews the order to which we are accustomed, namely, fourteenth place at the end of the Paulines. That it earlier found a place tenth after the nine Letters to the Seven Churches, or after the four great Epistles, or within these in the fourth place is a strong testimony of its ascription to St. Paul. Still more eloquent is the order of the Chester-Beatty papyrus Codex of the early third century. Here Hebrews comes immediately after Romans.”

-William Leonard, Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Christ, The New Priest

I have started to read Albert Vanhoye’s book Old Testament Priests and the New Priest: According to the New Testament and I was struck by this finding at the end of the first chapter:

“The narrative writings of the New Testament never show the Jewish high priests in the exercise of their cultic functions. What is given emphasis is their authority rather than their priesthood; they are ‘important personages’ i.e. ‘high’ more than they are ‘priests.’ It was not possible, however, to separate the two aspects entirely, for the high priests were recognized as being the religious leaders of the people of God. It followed from this that the Christians were in an extremely embarrassing situation. The Gospel narratives, which say little about Jewish priests and much about the high priests, result inevitably in giving the priesthood an unfavorable image. And yet it could not be denied that the priesthood constituted one of the fundamental institutions of the Old Testament. How could the Christian Church claim to be faithful to the totality of biblical revelation and to possess in Christ its definitive fulfillment, if it found itself in a negative relationship with regard to this fundamental institution of the people of God?”

Vanhoye closes his first chapter without answering his question. I haven’t read further, so I don’t know if he does later in the book, but I wanted to point out the importance of his assertion in this paragraph and what its implications are. He shows that the Jewish high priests are not shown exercising their cultic functions. Rather, they are portrayed more as political figures. I think the reason for this is, and hopefully Vanhoye will make this connection later in the book, the Evangelists are implicitly stating what the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews makes explicit; namely that the Old Testament Priesthood has been fulfilled in Christ. When Christ appears, the high priests are no longer portrayed as cultic leaders because THE High Priest has arrived. The cult of the Old Testament people of God, the Qahal, is fulfilled and carried on in the person of Christ. The Levitical priesthood was a concessionary priesthood instituted after the sin of the golden calf. Prior to the golden calf, the priesthood was passed on from father to firstborn son. Now that God’s Firstborn Son has arrived, the priesthood can return back to its original dimension of being about spiritual fatherhood. The spiritual fatherhood aspect of the priesthood is important for understanding the Church’s teaching on why only men can be priests.

For more on Christ’s priesthood, see the paper I wrote for my Biblical Foundations class in Grad school. I’m going to have to revisit this paper and include Vanhoye’s insight here.