One cannot rightly discern or fully
appreciate the message of Hebrews without due consideration to background
information and contextual matters. For whom was the document intended, where
does it fit in the historical narrative, and why was it written?
Destination and Readership
There is no consensus among biblical scholars
regarding the intended audience of Hebrews.1 It is apparent that a
particular community is in view, since they have a definite history (2:3; 6:10;
10:32-34; 12:4; 13:17; cf. 5:11 ff.; 6:9-10), have obvious links with the
writer(s) (13:18, 19, 23), and comprise a section of a larger brotherhood
(5:12; 10:25; 13:24). The most prevalent view, which is not without justification,
is that Hebrews is addressed to a community of Jewish Christians who are
linguistically and culturally Hellenistic.
While various destinations have been
proposed,2 the most prevalent views focus on either Jerusalem or
Rome. The Jerusalem proposal has in its favor the ancient title of the document
(“To Hebrews”), although the ascription is probably secondary. It is unlikely
that the document’s style of Greek, along with copious quotations from the LXX
(Greek OT), would have been addressed to Aramaic-speaking Jews in Judea. Seeing
that Christian martyrdom began at Jerusalem (Acts 7:54–8:3; 9:1; 12:1-4), it
would have been incorrect to say to the disciples there, “you have not yet
resisted to bloodshed” (Heb. 12:4 NKJV). At least some of the Jerusalem
Christians would have personally seen and heard the Lord (Heb. 2:3), and the
apparent generosity of the addressees (Heb. 6:10; 10:34; 13:16) is inconsistent
with the poverty of the Jerusalem saints (cf. Acts 11:29; Rom. 15:26). The
charge of spiritual immaturity (Heb. 5:12-14) would seem out of place if
directed to the well-established Jerusalem church.
Rome
as the destination of Hebrews is favored by the majority of modern scholars.3
Hebrews was first attested at Rome, quoted by Clement of Rome in his letter to
the Corinthians (ca. AD 95-96).4 The statement in Heb. 13:24 (“those from
Italy greet you”) may be a reference to Italians away from Italy who are
sending greetings home (N.B. apo [‘from’]
rather than en [‘in’] Italy). Timothy
(Heb. 13:24) was known to the Roman Christians (Rom. 16:21; Phil. 1:1; 2:19; Col.
1:1; Philm. 1; cf. 2 Tim. 4:9, 13). The “great struggle with sufferings”
(Heb. 10:32) could be a reference to Claudius’ edict of 49 (cf. Acts 18:2), though
less likely to Nero’s persecution that began in 64. The Christian message was
confirmed to the readers by eyewitnesses of Christ (Heb. 2:3), and among the
first hearers of the gospel on Pentecost were “visitors from Rome” (Acts 2:10),
not to mention Peter’s probable work in Rome (cf. 1 Pet. 5:13). The issue of
food laws (Heb. 13:9) is comparable to that addressed in Romans 15. If Hebrews
was addressed to a smaller group within a larger community (as noted above),
this accords well with what appears to have been the situation in Rome (Rom.
16:3-16).
Date of Writing
Hebrews would have to be dated prior to
the mid-90s, since it was quoted by Clement of Rome and had already achieved a
status of authority by that time. Factors which point to a date prior to late
summer 70 (when Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed) include the following.
The Levitical ritual system is discussed in the present tense (Heb. 7:8; 8:4; 9:6-7,
9, 13; 13:10), suggesting that it had not yet ceased to function.5 If
the old Jewish structure had already passed away, it is inexplicable that no
mention of this is made when such would have given conclusive proof to the main
argument of Hebrews. Seeing that the old system was “ready to vanish away”
(Heb. 8:13), a date relatively near mid-70, but certainly not after, is preferable. The
Jewish revolt broke out in 66 (although the attitudes that sparked it were
present much earlier), which prompted a wave of patriotic nationalism that
tempted many Jewish Christians to revert to Judaism. It seems reasonable to
assign a date to the writing of Hebrews to sometime prior to the temple’s
destruction in 70, but precisely how much earlier is indeterminable. The year
65 is commonly suggested by conservative commentators.6
Occasion and Purpose
The main theme of Hebrews is the
absoluteness of the Christian religion and its superiority over the old system
of Judaism.7 The recipients had been Christians long enough that
they should have been teachers themselves but were still relatively
immature in their faith (Heb. 5:11-12). “In the first flush of Christian enthusiasm
they had joyfully accepted the loss of all things. But the years had taken
their toll. That first enthusiasm had died out. Hope itself was fading from view.
Some of them were neglecting the public assembly (Heb. 10:25). There were signs not
only of slipping but of complete and irrevocable apostasy (Heb. 6:1-6; 10:26-31)”
(N. R. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today
36).
The epistle describes itself as a “word of
exhortation” (Heb. 13:22). D. Guthrie observes that the message is “not to be
regarded as a theological treatise or an intellectual exercise, but as a
burning issue of vital practical importance…. the readers needed to be warned
against turning away from Christianity” (NT
Introduction 704, 710).
Conclusion
Hebrews makes a lot more sense when read
through the lens of its original audience and historical-cultural setting. By
thus discerning what was intended,
modern-day Christians are much better equipped to understand and apply the
timeless message of Hebrews.
--Kevin L. Moore
Endnotes:
1 Proposed recipients include
Jewish Christians, former Jewish proselytes, Essene priests or former members
of the Qumran community, semi-Essene-proto-Ebionites, or Gentile Christians. The
title Pros Hebraious (“To Hebrews”), probably
appended later for convenient reference, is not a conclusive indicator. W. G.
Kümmel comments: “Heb[rews] knows nothing of any hostility between Jews and
Gentiles, has not once the words ‘Jew’ and ‘Gentile,’ and the author writes to
Christians as Christians” (Introduction
400).
2
These include Palestine (esp. Jerusalem), Syria (esp. Antioch), Asia Minor
(esp. Colosse or Ephesus), Greece (esp. Corinth), North Africa (esp.
Alexandria), Italy (esp. Rome), and Caesarea.
3 N. R. Lightfoot candidly
observes: “the apparent strength of such arguments is due simply to the fact
that no better solution to the problem has been offered” (Jesus Christ Today 35). For objections to a Roman destination, see
D. Guthrie, NT Introduction 714.
4 It is possible to date
Clement’s letter as early as 68-70 (cf. J. A. T. Robinson, Redating the NT 327-35).
5 While this argument may not
in itself be decisive (cf. D. A. Carson and D. J. Moo, An Introduction to the NT 606-07; B. Lindars, Theology of Hebrews 4-19), it is hard to read passages like Heb.
10:1-2 and not draw this conclusion, where it is said of the law that “it can
never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make
perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be
offered…?” How could this statement have been made if the sacrificial system
was no longer operable? If the Jewish sacrifices had in fact ceased (at the
temple’s destruction), failure to mention this extraordinarily significant
detail in the argument of Hebrews is inconceivable.
6 If Paul is considered to have
had a part in the composition of Hebrews (see Authorship of Hebrews Part 1 & Part 2), a date no earlier than 64 or 65 (and not considerably later) would
seem reasonable. Paul was anticipating death when 2 Timothy was written, during
which time Timothy was free (4:6-9), and no indication is given in any of the
Pauline writings that Timothy had ever been imprisoned (in contrast to Heb.
13:23).
7 Note the frequent use of kreittōn (“better”): Heb. 1:4; 6:9; 7:7, 19,
22; 8:6 [x2]; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16, 35, 40; 12:24 = 13x (in the rest of the NT
only 6x). Note also the emphasis on aiōnios
(“eternal”): Heb. 5:9; 6:2; 9:12, 14, 15; 13:20 = 6x.
Related Posts: The Plural Authorship of Hebrews Part 1, Part 2
