The presence of Heb 1.5-14 within Hebrews has continued to baffle scholars, and many have not even attempted to relate the section to the broader argument of the sermonFootnote 1, an odd state of affairs given that many scholars regard Hebrews as the most elegant piece of literature in the NT.Footnote 2 Suggestions that the author was countering angel worship or a form of angel christology are, while prevalent in scholarship, speculative at best as there is no polemic against angels in the speech or anywhere in the rest of the text.Footnote 3 The argument that the author engages in a synkrisis between the angels and Christ in order to exalt simultaneously Christ and to weaken the authority of the old covenant certainly carries much more weight, especially given the relationship between Sinai and the angels in 2.2-3, but this suggestion does not go nearly far enough in explaining all the diverse elements of the entire passage.Footnote 4 While some scholars have rightly recognized that the catena centers upon the Son of God's royal enthronement, the reason as to why the author should begin his sermon this way has yet to be answered convincingly. I want to suggest, however, that this catena of verses, which I will argue depicts a hymnic celebration of the Father's declaration of Jesus' sonship and his royal enthronement to the heavenly world, is critical for the entire logic of the author's argument and the symbolic world which the text creates.Footnote 5 At the very least, the Son's exaltation, depicted in Heb 1.5-14, functions as the means whereby God secures his promises to humanity (2.5-18), is the basis for the argument that Jesus is humanity's Melchizedekian high priest (5.5-6; 7.1-28), and establishes the narrative goal or pattern which God's children follow (12.1-3). That the catena occupies a critical role in the author's narrative logic is further demonstrated by the author's final argument in Heb 12.18-29, a text which, I will suggest, forms an inclusio with Heb 1.5-14. The major task set before me will be to demonstrate the role which these two texts play in the author's argument regarding the Son's heavenly enthronement. I will then conclude by briefly suggesting how this celebration of the enthroned Son is a highly appropriate, even necessary, way for the author to begin his argument of how the Son accomplishes humanity's salvation as its pioneer as he enters into God's own world.Footnote 6
1. Hebrews 1.5-14 and the Firstborn Son's Entrance into the Heavenly Kingdom
In 1.5 the author subordinates the role of the angels by placing direct speech from the LXX on the Father's lips: υἱός μου εἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε; καὶ πάλιν, ἐγὼ ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατέρα, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόν (‘You are my son, Today I have begotten you’, and again, ‘I will be a Father to him, and he will be a Son to me’). It is of utmost significance to note that the primary metaphor which the author uses to refer to Jesus is familial, namely his Sonship. The climactic moment of the scene in the catena is the Father's declaration of Jesus' sonship as he enters into God's throne room. Having referred to the Son's purification for sins in 1.3b, the author develops the most important theme of the exordium where he claims that Jesus ‘has taken his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high’ (ἐκάθισɛν ἐν δɛξιᾷ τῆς μɛγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς, 1.3c). This allusion to LXX Ps 109.1, a text which is the final quotation in the catena (Heb 1.13; see also Heb 8.1; 10.12-13; and 12.2), sets the theme for the rest of Heb 1.5-14 as the catena centers upon the Son's enthronement and entrance into the Father's heavenly throne room.Footnote 7 Having taken his seat at the Father's right hand, Jesus subsequently ‘inherited a more excellent name than them’ (ὅσῳ διαϕορώτɛρον παρ’ αὐτοὺς κɛκληρονόμηκɛν ὄνομα, 1.4b).Footnote 8 While the similarity of this text to Phil 2.9-11 makes it tempting to assume that the unspecified name is κύριος, the inheritance of the name surely must be that of ‘Son given the father/sonship language of 1.5 and the fact that the author begins his sermon by using the metaphor of son in 1.2’.Footnote 9 By using the perfect form of the verb κληρονομέω the author emphasizes and foregrounds the Son's inheritance.Footnote 10 The reader is, therefore, reminded of the fact that the author has just prior claimed that God appointed this Son ‘heir of all things’ (ὃν ἔθηκɛν κληρονόμον πάντων, 1.2b). This reality of the Son being described both as ‘heir of all things’ (1.2) and inheriting the name Son (1.4) is not insignificant for humanity, for in 1.14 the author claims that the angels are ministers for ‘those who are about to inherit salvation’ (διὰ τοὺς μέλλοντας κληρονομɛῖν σωτηρίαν). While the precise relationship between the Son's inheritance and humanity's inheritance is left ambiguous at this point in the author's argument, the readers are, nevertheless, given a subtle indication that Jesus' inheritance of Sonship will have soteriological ramifications for humanity.
Second, the two LXX citations in 1.5, which are from Ps 2.7 and 2 Sam 7.14 respectively, demand that the reader view the catena of ch. 1 as depicting and celebrating the enthronement of the Son to the heavenly realm.Footnote 11 Both Ps 2.7 and 2 Sam 7.14 are royal pronouncements which speak of a Davidic son who enters into kingly rule on behalf of God's people. The tradition history of the use of these verses within the NT and their Septuagintal context strongly confirms that they should be read within Hebrews as referring to the Son's resurrection/exaltation (cf. Mark 1.11; Acts 4.25-27; 13.33; Rom 1.3-4).Footnote 12 It is significant, for example, that Psalm 2 refers to a king whom God sets over Zion (βασιλɛὺς … ἐπὶ Σιων ὄρος τὸ ἅγιον, 2.6; cf. Heb 12.22-23) who obtains the world as his inheritance (τὴν κληρονομίαν, 2.8). And likewise 2 Samuel 7 depicts God's chosen king as his Son, a kingly Son who is promised an eternal rule and throne (7.13, 16). More important, however, is the fact that the immediate context suggests a scene of enthronement as it declares: ‘he sat down at the right of the majesty in the heavens’ (ἐκάθισɛν ἐν δɛξιᾷ τῆς μɛγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς, 1.3c). And the next verse refers to him ‘becoming so much better than the angels’ (τοσούτῳ κρɛίττων γɛνόμɛνος τῶν ἀγγέλων, 1.4a). Thus, it should really not be too controversial to read these verses as depicting Jesus' exaltation to the heavenly realm where he inherits the royal name ‘Son’. This reading is confirmed by the author's final citation of the catena in 1.13 where he invokes LXX Ps 109.1: κάθου ἐκ δɛξιῶν μου, ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου (‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet’). Psalm 109.1 is, of course, the classic NT prooftext depicting the royal Son's exaltation to the right hand of the Father's throne.Footnote 13 Psalm 109.2 (LXX) establishes a relationship between Zion and God's heavenly throne room as the exalted heavenly figure is said to rule ‘from Zion’ (ἐκ Σιων). The frequency with which these royal-messianic texts (Pss 2; 109; and 2 Sam 7) are quoted and alluded to within the NT makes it necessary to emphasize that the author uses these texts in order to portray the remarkable reality of the Son's entrance into the life and power of God. The unstated but obvious premise is that the Son has been resurrected and is now alive in a more real, transcendent, and powerful existence.Footnote 14
The confluence of these themes, namely the Father / Son relationship and the Son's inheritance of, and entrance into, the heavenly realm of the Father is continued throughout the chapter. Hebrews 1.6 dramatically depicts the Son's entrance into the heavenly world: ὅταν δὲ πάλιν ɛἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον ɛἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγɛι· καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντɛς ἄγγɛλοι θɛοῦ (‘and again, when he leads forth the firstborn son into the world, he says, “Let all the angels of God worship him”’). While the exact Septuagintal reference is disputed, a possible conflation of LXX Deut 32.43 (προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντɛς υἱοὶ θɛοῦ) and Deut 32.8 (ἀγγέλων θɛοῦ) is the most likely source of the quotation.Footnote 15 If Deuteronomy 32 is the source, then the author may have subtly established a relationship between the angels and Sinai.Footnote 16 With respect to 1.6a, many interpreters claim that οἰκουμένη should be read as referring to the earthly material world, and that the verse, therefore, depicts the Son's birth or the Incarnation.Footnote 17 This interpretation must, however, be rejected. First, the author's only other use of the term οἰκουμένη occurs in 2.5 where the author states that it is the ‘world which is to come’ (τὴν οἰκουμένην τὴν μέλλουσαν) which is the topic under discussion.Footnote 18 Here in 2.5 it is stated that this ‘world to come’ was not subjected to angels, the premise being that it was, rather, subjected to the Son (the fuller argument being made in 2.5-9).Footnote 19 It makes abundant sense, therefore, to view 1.5-14 as the author's description of the Son's entrance into this heavenly reality. After all, the author has described in 1.5-14: (a) the Son's exaltation above all of his enemies (1.13); (b) his eternal and virtuous rule (1.10-12); (c) his sharing of God's eternal throne (1.8-9); and (d) his inheritance of the name ‘Son’ (1.4-5). Thus, ‘the subjection of the inhabited world’ of which the author speaks in 2.5 must refer in some measure to these elements. Further, one should not view the author's statement in 10.5 (Διὸ ɛἰσɛρχόμɛνος ɛἰς τὸν κόσμον) as a legitimate parallel which would confirm that 1.6 depicts Christ's incarnation, for the word κόσμον is used here and not οἰκουμένη.Footnote 20 Secondly, given that the author has just described the Son's exaltation to the Father's right hand in 1.3c-5, it is logical to interpret 1.6 as continuing this theme. While one could argue that πάλιν functions adverbially, the author frequently uses it in order to connect various quotations (additionally, see 2.13 and 10.30).Footnote 21 Thus, the author's use of πάλιν to modify λέγɛι (not ɛἰσαγάγῃ) indicates that a change of topic is not in view and that his citation of the LXX is continuing the theme of the Son's exaltation from 1.5.Footnote 22 The familial title of τὁν πρωτότοκος indicates that 1.6 is the third of three explicit Sonship citations. While the language of ‘the firstborn son’ is abundant throughout the LXX, its usage in Ps 88.28 where it refers to Israel's coming Davidic King is especially pertinent.Footnote 23 In this Psalm, the Son cries out: ‘You are my Father my God’ (πατήρ μου ɛἶ σύ θɛός μου, LXX Ps 88.27), and in the Father's act of appointing the Davidide as his πρωτότοκος, the Father makes him ‘exalted above all those who rule the earth’ (ὑψηλὸν παρὰ τοῖς βασιλɛῦσιν τῆς γῆς, 88.28). In doing so, the Father makes the Son's throne to endure forever and ever (ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος … τὸν θρόνον αὐτοῦ, 88.30; note the linguistic similarities with the Son's throne in Heb 1.8). Thus, Heb 1.6 further continues the celebration of 1.4-5 as it depicts the Father leading his royal firstborn son into the heavenly realm and commanding the angels to worship this Firstborn Son.
Hebrews 1.7-12 continues the celebration of the enthroned Son by comparing the eternal and virtuous character of his throne and rule with the fleeting and perishing order of the material world with which the author surprisingly connects the angels. In 1.7 the author refers to God as making the angels as ‘winds’ or ‘spirits’ (πνɛύματα) and ‘flames of fire’ (πυρὸς ϕλόγα). The angels are, in other words, associated with the sensual material world.Footnote 24 The reference to the angels as λɛι τουργοὺς αὐτοῦ confirms this as it looks forward to the author's claim in 1.14 that the angels are λɛι τουργικὰ πνɛύματα whose role is to ensure humanity's salvation.Footnote 25 Reference to the angels as ‘winds’ and ‘flames of fire’ likely evokes a connection between the angels and the Sinai theophany (Exod 3.2; 14.19; 19.9, 16–19; cf. Acts 7.30).Footnote 26 That an association with Sinai as physical is intended by the author is evident from 12.18, a text we will examine in more detail shortly, where the author associates Sinai with such things as fire and wind (κɛκαυμένῳ πυρὶ καὶ γνόϕῳ καὶ ζόϕῳ καὶ θυέλλῃ, 12.18b). The reference to the angels as ‘ministers’ (λɛι τουργ-) in both 1.7 and 1.14 may suggest their function to be that of cultic service whereby they perform cultic worship in the heavenly throne room (2 Bar 21.6; 4 Esd 8.20-22).Footnote 27 In contrast to the angels who are God's servants and are associated with Sinai, note that when the Son is enthroned to the heavenly realm he becomes a sharer of God's eternal throne: πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱόν· ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θɛὸς ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος (‘and to the Son, Your throne O God is forever and ever’, 1.8a). The Son not only enters into the sphere of God but also becomes a sharer in the eternal rule and reign of God which, as 1.8b-9 declares, is characterized by the virtues of integrity, righteousness, and a hatred of lawlessness. While the created order associated with the angels will disappear and is even now disappearing, the Son's throne and rule will last forever (1.10-12). The author quotes LXX Ps 101.26-28 in order to establish the Son's rule over all of creation, including the angels (1.10), something hinted at already in 1.3 where the author claimed that the Son was active in creation. The heavens and the earth will perish and be rolled up like a garment but the Son's years will never come to an end (1.11-12). Whereas the angels are associated with the transience of the created world (1.7), the enthroned Son's share in the Father's throne ensures that his years will never cease (1.12b).
We may now ask the question: why has the author singled out the angels as the foil in his comparison between them and the Son? What is it precisely which makes the contrast between the Son and the angels useful to the author's argument? First, the connection between the angels and the giving of the law at Sinai is frequently attested in post-biblical Jewish literature as a means of describing the Law's glory (Jub. 1.29; Josephus, Ant. 15.136; Acts 7.38, 53; Gal 3.19). In one text God's angel is described as ‘the mediator between God and men for the peace of Israel’ (Test Dan 6.2). The author of Hebrews makes this connection between the angels and Sinai explicit in 2.2 where ‘the word which was spoken through angels’ is contrasted with God's new revelation in Christ (2.3). Insofar, then, as the angels are associated with the Torah, they are inferior to the heavenly Zion (1.5-14). Second, the author's establishment of the relationship between the angels and the created order which is temporal, mutable, and ultimately destined to perish functions as a contrast with the heavenly Zion and the Son's throne which is eternal and unchanging. Finally, given that the angels inhabit the heavenly Jerusalem (see 1.6b; 12.22), it is necessary that the author establish that it is humanity—not angels—which occupies the attention of God's salvific purposes. Thus, the author's claim that God ‘did not subject the coming world to angels’ (Οὐ γὰρ ἀγγέλοις ὑπέταξɛν τὴν οἰκουμένην τὴν μέλλουσαν, 2.5) establishes that it is humanity which occupies the center of God's purposes.
Three points should be kept in mind as we continue our exploration of the author's Son-of-God-Christology. First, the significance of the filial language should not be underestimated. The author has chosen to begin his argument with a catena of quotations which is dominated by the relationship between the Father and the Son. The first and second of the LXX quotations (1.5) in Hebrews are proclamations of Jesus' Sonship directly proceeding from the Father's mouth. It is precisely because he is the Son of God the Father that Jesus can share in his sovereignty. Second, the catena of Septuagintal quotations focuses upon celebrating Jesus' inheritance of the name Son as he is enthroned upon his Father's throne and enters into the heavenly realm. The author systematically applies royal-messianic texts to the Son and does so in a way that emphasizes this rule as, not the earthly kingdom of the Son of David, but the cosmic reign of the one who has entered into God's own life.Footnote 28 Third, the author opposes the rule of the Son which is characterized by eternality with that of the angels who are associated with the temporal and even dying created order. I suggest that these three claims function as the indispensable and foundational premises for much of the rest of the author's argument.
2. Hebrews 12.18-29 and the Firstborn Children's Entrance into the Heavenly World
The significance of the catena in Heb 1.5-14 as well as its purpose and importance for the entire sermon become more evident when one compares it with the author's final argument in 12.18-29, a passage which contains many of the same themes.Footnote 29 Like 1.5-2.4 the author initially establishes the superiority of the Son and the heavenly Jerusalem (1.5-14; 12.18-24) and then sets forth a warning not to ignore this superior revelation (2.1-4; 12.25-29). There seems to be in fact something of an inclusio between Heb 1.5-14 and 12.18-29.Footnote 30 Whereas the author begins his composition by celebrating the firstborn Son's inheritance and entrance into the heavenly realm, he concludes by celebrating the proleptic inheritance of the firstborn sons as they enter into the heavenly Jerusalem. Whereas the catena celebrates the eternal and unchanging reign of the Son's kingdom in opposition to the transience of the material world, the author concludes with a contrast between the unshakeable heavenly ‘city of the living God’ (12.22) and the created order which will come to an end (12.26-27). While this insight is significant in establishing the importance of the themes found in Heb 1.5-14, only a few comments need to be made here in order to make this point.
First, as the Son's rule is contrasted with the material creation which will perish and fade away (1.10-12), so is the assembly of the sons in heaven contrasted with the sensual phenomena of the Sinai event. This is vividly captured in the author's statement: ‘for you have not come to a place which can be touched and a burning fire and to darkness and gloom and a whirlwind’ (Οὐ γὰρ προσɛληλύθατɛ ψ ηλαϕωμένῳ καὶ κɛκαυμένῳ πυρὶ καὶ γνόϕῳ καὶ ζόϕῳ και θυέλλῃ, 12.18).Footnote 31 Note how in Heb 1.7 the author reduces the importance of the angels precisely by comparing them to the transient and sensual elements of ‘wind’ (πνɛύματα) and ‘flames of fire’ (πυρὸς ϕλόγα). The author's strategy of associating the angels as the mediators of the Sinai covenant in 2.2-3 is reused again here as the author now associates the Sinai theophany with the sensual and temporal (12.18-19). The entire created order, to which the Sinai covenant belongs, the author warns, will be destroyed for as God has promised, ‘Still once more I will shake not only the earth but even the heaven’ (12.26b). The author interprets this quote from Hag 2.6 to mean that in a little while God will ‘remove the things that are shaken as things that have been made, so that what is not shaken may remain’ (12.27b).Footnote 32 Again, the warning corresponds quite directly to the first chapter where the Son's throne is referred to as eternal, unending, and unchanging (1.8, 12), but the created order is said to be destined for destruction (1.10), is in the process of being made old (1.11), and is being rolled up like a garment (1.12).
Secondly, the author makes the important claim that his audience has now come to ‘Mount Zion, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem…’ (Σιὼν ὄρɛι καὶ πόλɛι θɛοῦ ζῶντος, 'Ιɛρουσαλὴμ ἐπουρανίῳ, 12.21a). The mention of Mount Zion evokes the royal Davidic dynasty and kingdom, perhaps most emphatically associated with such texts as 2 Samuel 7, Psalms 2, 89, and 110—all of which appear in some sense in Heb 1.5-14 in order to portray the Son's entrance into his heavenly kingdom and reign (respectively: Heb 1.5b, 5a, 6a, and 13b).Footnote 33 The author's key move here, a move common to early Christian exegesis, is to associate the fulfillment of these promises, namely of an everlasting royal Davidic kingdom associated with God's kingly rule, with Jesus Christ's resurrection and exaltation.Footnote 34 This ‘city of the living God’ (πόλɛι θɛοῦ ζῶντος, 12.22) which is ‘the heavenly Jerusalem’ ('Ιɛρουσαλὴμ ἐπουρανίῳ) is the goal of the pilgrimage of both the ancients and the audience.Footnote 35 The former, we are told, made no remembrance of their earthly homeland for they were looking for the better heavenly city which God had prepared for them (11.14-16). The same goal is held out for the audience, as we will see later, as they run toward the exalted Son (12.1-2).
Thirdly, the reader should note the parallel between Heb 1.5-14 and the mention of the ‘myriads of angels in a festal celebration’ (μυριάσιν ἀγγέλων, πανηγύρɛι, 12.22b). The mention of the angels not only evokes the hearer's recollection of 1.5-14, but it makes another thematic connection between one of the functions of the angels. In 1.6 the angels are called upon to celebrate and worship the Son as he enters into God's rule, and here in 12.22 the angels are also said to exist in a festal celebration together with the assembly of the firstborn children (12.23).
Fourthly, the occurrence of the phrase ‘the assembly of firstborn sons enrolled in the heavens’ (ἐκκλησίᾳ πρωτοτόκων ἀπογɛγραμμένων ἐν οὐρανοῖς) should also remind the audience of the mention of Jesus in 1.6 as ‘the firstborn son’ (τὸν πρωτότοκον).Footnote 36 What is remarkable here is that the author begins his composition with the depiction of the royal firstborn son's entrance into the heavenly οἰκουμένη and concludes it with the claim that heaven is now enrolled or registered with firstborn sons. Footnote 37 Somehow humanity inherits the role and title of firstborn children of God from the Firstborn Son of God.Footnote 38 The reader should expect, therefore, in lieu of the beginning and end of the composition, that the author will explain how the exaltation of the Son of God into heaven functions so as to accomplish the entrance of many more sons into heaven.
Finally, note that these firstborn sons in heaven are referred to as ‘spirits of the righteous ones perfected’ (πνɛύμασι δικαίων τɛτɛλɛιωμένων, 12.23b). This final occurrence of τɛλɛιο- indicates that humanity has now fully attained the promise for which it was created, and proleptically indicates the goal of humanity.Footnote 39 Whatever the precise connotations of ‘perfection’ in Hebrews, their entry into God's heavenly presence where Christ has already gone (4.14; 6.19-20; 7.26; 8.1) is surely essential to our understanding. While Hebrews 1 does not use the language of τɛλɛιο- to describe the Son's enthronement, I suggest that the catena in fact paints a hymnic portrait of the Son entering into this state of perfection and this will be borne out in more detail when we examine Hebrews 2 and 12. This language of perfection, I will suggest, refers both to the process of one's moral development and to the subsequent result of entry into God's life and promises. That humanity is referred to by the virtue of ‘righteous’ here in 12.23 echoes the Son's own kingly rule which is characterized by ‘a love of righteousness’ (1.8-10, esp. 9a) and further supports the contention that perfection refers, in part, to moral development. Knowing that the work is bookended by the Son's entrance into heaven (1.5-14) and the proleptic entrance of sons into heaven (12.18-24), the interpreter has good reason to read the middle of the text searching for clues as to the process whereby this takes place.Footnote 40
I have tried to show that the author has created something of an inclusio between the first (1.5-14) and last (12.18-29) major sections of his argument. In the process, I have attempted to demonstrate that the catena of Hebrews 1 is a celebration of the exalted Son who has entered into God's kingdom, a rule which is characterized as heavenly, eternal, pure, and virtuous. While I have not engaged in an exegesis of the passage, I have tried to show that the final section of the sermon (12.18-29) corresponds to the catena in reproducing many of the same themes. What is most striking here is that the heavenly Jerusalem is now filled with not just the Son but an assembly of firstborn children who have been made perfect (12.23). I suggest, therefore, that as the argument begins with the enthronement of God's Son and ends with a proleptic portrait of an assembly of God's children in this heavenly realm, the Son's exaltation may function as a soteriological necessity for humanity. Does the rest of this text support this suggestion?
3. The Soteriological Necessity of the Son's Enthronement
In this section I want to set forth, all too briefly, four texts which suggest that the author of Hebrews envisions the Son's narrative, particularly his enthronement as described in 1.5-14, as a soteriological necessity, and pattern, for humanity.
3.1. The Firstborn Son Leads his Siblings to Glory: Hebrews 2.5-18
In Heb 2.5-9 the author turns from the reign of the exalted Son to humanity's failure to attain the state of glory and rule which God had promised it in Ps 8.5-7. The quotation of Psalm 8 ends with the promise ‘you have subjected all things under his [i.e. humanity's] feet’ (πάντα ὑπέταξας ὑποκάτω τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ, Heb 2.8a); attentive readers will recognize that the author has, just a mere half-dozen verses before, claimed that God has placed all of the Son's enemies under his feet (ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου, 1.13b). Footnote 41 The Son has entered into God's heavenly οἰκουμένη (Heb 1.6), but humanity's hope of inheriting this world (Heb 2.5) has been frustrated.Footnote 42 The link with the celebration of Hebrews 1 suggests that the Son has experienced the fulfillment of God's promise to humanity. From humanity's present standpoint, God's promise to Adam looks to have been thwarted as ‘we do not yet see all things subjected to him’ (2.8b).Footnote 43 The Son has, however, entered into the promise of Psalm 8 as the author describes him as ‘having been crowned with glory and honor’ (δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεϕάνωσας, Heb 2.9b), a direct reference to the promise made in Psalm 8 (δόξῃ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστɛϕανωμένον αὐτόν, Heb 2.7b). Thus, the argument here depends entirely upon the assumption that the Son has already entered into God's rule—exactly that which we have seen in Heb 1.5-14.
The Son's entrance into God's rule is, however, beneficial for humanity, for it is precisely the Son's obedient suffering and subsequent exaltation which accomplishes humanity's salvation. In 2.10 the author makes the bold claim that it was fitting, or appropriate, for God ‘in leading many sons to glory to perfect the pioneer of their salvation through sufferings’ (πολλοὺς υἱοὺς ɛἰς δόξαν ἀγαγόντα τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τῆς σωτηρίας αὐτῶν διὰ παθημάτων τɛλɛιῶσαι). It is essential to note the parallel between God leading the firstborn son into the heavenly world in 1.6 (ɛἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον ɛἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην) and God leading the many sons into glory (πολλοὺς υἱοὺς ɛἰς δόξαν ἀγαγόντα). In each instance, God is the subject who leads his children into a state of perfection. This immediately helps one make sense of Jesus' title in 2.10 as τὸν ἀρχηγόν.Footnote 44 Its connotations of source, initiator, and pioneer result from the fact that as ‘the firstborn son’ Jesus has proleptically entered into God's rule and heavenly realm in advance of and on behalf of ‘the many sons’. We see here that the author's choice of ‘firstborn Son’ further functions as a means of identifying Jesus as the head of a family, the elder brother as it were, of God's children. Thus, as the Father proclaims that Jesus is his Son (1.5), so the Son directly affirms humanity as his fellow siblings (2.11-13).Footnote 45 His participation in their humanity ensures their salvation and their reconciliation with the Father (Heb 2.14-18).
Finally, we must note that the manner in which humanity is led to glory is accomplished through Jesus being perfected through sufferings (διὰ παθημάτων τɛλɛιῶσαι). The statement is similar to that of 2.9b where we saw Jesus ‘crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death (τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανάτου)’. In 2.9, sufferings are the means whereby the Son is ‘crowned with glory and honor’, whereas in 2.10 sufferings are the means through which the Son is ‘perfected’. Thus, while τɛλɛιόω has a wide semantic range within Hebrews, here its parallel with 2.9 strongly connotes the sense of exaltation.Footnote 46
3.2. A High Priest According to the Order of Melchizedek (5.5-10)
Perhaps most well known about Hebrews' Christology is its novel characterization of Jesus as humanity's high priest. The author is clear, however, that Jesus' priestly status is of another order than the Levitical priesthood, and he plainly admits that Jesus belongs not to the tribe of Levi, but to the tribe of Judah (7.14; cf. 8.4; Num 18.1-7). Jesus' priesthood is based not on the Levitical order of priests, but ‘according to the order of Melchizedek’ (5.6b, 10b). What is central to my thesis here is the rarely noted fact that the author's argument for Jesus' Melchizedekian priesthood is based on the audience's acceptance of the prior claim, made in Heb 1.5-14, that Jesus is God's royal and heavenly enthroned Son. After claiming in 5.4 that no high priest takes the honor on his own initiative, but is rather called by God, the author suggests analogically that the same process took place with Jesus' appointment to high priest. Just as the Father ‘spoke to him, “You are my Son, today I have begot you”’ (ὁ λαλήσας πρὸς αὐτόν· υἱός μου ɛἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμɛρον γɛγέννηκά σɛ, 5.5b; quoting Ps 2.7), so also Jesus receives his high priesthood from the one speaking to him: ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’ (σὺ ἱɛρɛὺς ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μɛλχισέδɛκ, 5.6). It is important to note that the author intentionally draws the reader back to the royal celebration of the enthroned Son by means of quoting Ps 2.7, one of the central texts quoted in the opening catena to celebrate the Son's exaltation (Heb 1.5).Footnote 47 The author's innovation here is to draw upon the common early Christian strategy of applying texts such as Ps 2.7 (Heb 1.5) and Ps 110.1 (Heb 1.13), which depict the Son's exaltation, as the foundation for extending the claim that the Father has also spoken the words of Ps 110.4 to the Son.Footnote 48 Thus, it is not too much of an exaggeration to say that the author's high priestly christology is founded upon the Son of God's entrance into the heavenly kingdom.
3.3. An Eternal High Priest with an Indestructible Life (7.1-28)
What are the characteristics of this Melchizedekian priesthood? Returning to ch. 5, we see that the Son's ‘having been perfected’ (τɛλɛιωθɛίς, 5.9) is parallel to God's ‘designating (προσαγορɛυθɛίς) him … a priest according to the order of Melchizedek’ (5.10). Thus, it is only after the Son has been perfected that he becomes a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.Footnote 49 Why is it that God's act of ‘perfecting’ the Son is parallel to God's ‘designating’ him as an eternal priest? I suggest that it is precisely the key attribute of the Melchizedekian priest of ‘the power of an indestructible life’ (7.16) which is parallel to God's act of perfecting the Son. The author fastens upon the words of Ps 110.4, ‘you are a priest forever’ (σὺ ἱɛρɛὺς ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα; 5.6; 7.17, 21), and it is precisely this quality of the Son's eternality which qualifies him to be the Melchizedekian priest. Returning to ch. 5, we see the author claim that the Son prayed to ‘the one able to save him out of death (ἐκ θανάτου)’ and that ‘he was heard because of his piety’ (ɛἰσακουσθɛὶς ἀπὸ τῆς ɛὐλαβɛίας).Footnote 50 That the Son ‘was heard’ by God must be taken to indicate that the Son was saved ‘out of death’. Given the fact, however, that the author has made the point that the Son ‘tasted death for everyone’ (2.9b), attained perfection through sufferings (2.10), and defeated death through his own death (2.14), the author cannot mean that Jesus was spared from the experience of death. Since Jesus was not saved from this experience, in order for the author's claim that God ‘heard him’ to have any meaningful substance, it must refer to something that happened to Jesus after he died.Footnote 51 The description of God in 5.7 is similar to 11.19, ἐκ νɛκρῶν ἐγɛίρɛιν δυνατὸς ὁ θɛός, which is a clear reference to God's ability to raise Isaac from the dead. Jesus, then, does not escape or avoid death but overcomes it through God's act of resurrection/exaltation.Footnote 52
This emphasis on life and eternality in opposition to death and temporality is the primary trait of the Melchizedekian priesthood and is confirmed throughout ch. 7. Thus, Melchizedek is like the Son due to his ‘having no end of life’ (μήτɛ ζωῆς τέλος ἔχων, 7.3), being testified to as ‘living’ (ζῇ, 7.8), and having ‘the power of an indestructible life’ (δύναμιν ζωῆς ἀκαταλύτου, 7.16). Whereas many Levites have been high priests due to death (7.23), Jesus holds the priesthood perpetually because ‘he remains forever’ (ὁ δὲ διὰ τὸ μένɛιν αὐτὸν ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, 7.24; cf. Ps 110.4) and he ‘always lives to intercede on [humanity's] behalf’ (πάντοτɛ ζῶν ɛἰς τὸ ἐντυγχάνɛιν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν, 7.25b). The author's final statement that God's oath (i.e. Ps 110.4) appoints as high priest ‘a son made perfect forever’ (υἱὸν ɛἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τɛτɛλɛιωμένον, 7.28) strongly echoes the event in 5.7-10.Footnote 53 The relationship between these texts suggests that the Son's perfection refers to the event where he was raised from the dead and entered into the enduring quality of God's life—something depicted in Heb 1.10-12 (LXX Ps 101.26-28) where it is said to the Son that his throne ‘is forever’ (1.8), that creation will perish but ‘you will remain’ (1.11), and ‘your years will not be erased’ (1.12).Footnote 54
3.4. ‘Looking Away to Jesus’ (12.1-3)
The argument of Heb 12.1-3 also depends upon the opening salvo of 1.5-14 as the author's command to finish the race depends upon the audience granting both the claim that Jesus has entered into God's own life (Heb 1.5-13) and that he is their elder human brother (Heb 2.10-14). Specifically, the runners are to ‘look away to Jesus the author and perfecter of the faith’ (ἀϕορῶντɛς ɛἰς τὸν τῆς πίστɛως ἀρχηγὸν καὶ τɛλɛιωτὴν ᾽Ιησοῦν). The injunction commands them to look ahead to Jesus who has already finished the race—the same contest in which they are now competing (10.32-33). The mentioning of the proper name ‘Jesus’ emphasizes the Son of God's human nature and thereby his solidarity with humanity (cf. 2.5-18; 5.7-9). The description of Jesus as both ἀρχηγὸς καὶ τɛλɛιωτής carries the connotations of the originator/beginner and finisher.Footnote 55 That Jesus is the ἀρχηγός of humanity's faith recalls 2.10 where the author declared that God ‘perfected the ἀρχηγός of their salvation through sufferings’. Jesus is the originator of both ‘faith’ (12.2) and ‘salvation’ (2.10) in that he is the first one, and thereby humanity's prototype, to have entered into God's promises for humanity.
Likewise, Jesus is the τɛλɛιωτής of faith in that he brings to completion the faith of the OT heroes—a faith which had yet to attain perfection and inherit the promises (11.39-40). Already we have seen this language of perfection applied to Jesus. In 2.10 God perfects Jesus through sufferings; in 5.9 Jesus is perfected through his learning obedience through what he suffered; and in 7.28 the author speaks, on the basis of his entrance into a resurrected life, of a Son made perfect forever. I suggest that in 12.2 these same resonances are at work. Jesus has, through endurance and fidelity to God, finished the race and thereby entered into a perfect form of existence. The author indicates as much in 12.2b where he says of Jesus that ‘for the joy set before him (ὃς ἀντὶ τῆς προκɛιμένης αὐτῷ χαρᾶς), he endured the cross, while thinking lightly of the shame, and has taken his seat at the right hand of the throne of God (ἐν δɛξιᾷ τɛ τοῦ θρόνου τοῦ θɛοῦ κɛκάθικɛν)’. The author again holds up Jesus' endurance of suffering as a model for his audience (2.10, 14; 4.15; 5.7-9). While it is possible to translate the preposition ἀντί as ‘instead of’, it makes much better sense to read it as ‘for’ and as indicating the reason for which Jesus endured the cross (cf. 12.16).Footnote 56 The joy which Jesus enters into is described in 12.2b with the familiar words of Ps 110.1: ‘he has taken his seat (κɛκάθικɛν) at the right hand of the throne of God’. The author foregrounds Jesus' exaltation through his use of the perfect tense and further emphasizes the event and continuing state of Jesus' exaltation. The joy that was set before the earthly Jesus was, therefore, his promised exaltation to the right hand of God—a promised state which he has now entered into.Footnote 57 When the author calls upon the audience to consider (12.3) and fix their gaze (12.2) upon this one who endured such hardship, he sets before their eyes the perfected Son who has entered into God's life. And because he is the ‘author and perfecter of faith’, Jesus' experience functions as the paradigm for humanity's narrative. The joy which Jesus has entered into, depicted so powerfully in Heb 1.5-14, is the goal which lies before the audience.
4. The Literary and Theological Function of Hebrews 1.5-14
In this essay I have argued three basic points. First, Heb 1.5-14 depicts the celebration of the final stage of the Son's narrative as he enters into God's own life, is exalted to the Father's right hand, takes up his throne, and inherits the name ‘Son’. The entire theme of the opening argument and each quotation from the LXX, which can be easily sidetracked by the undue focus on the angels, centers upon the Son's enthronement and the nature of his rule. Secondly, I have demonstrated that there is a literary connection between this text and the author's final argument in Heb 12.18-29 which is a proleptic portrait of the heavenly Zion. This text forms an inclusio with Heb 1.5-13 as both texts portray the heavenly Zion (12.22), the presence of festive angels (1.6; 12.22), an emphasis on the heavenly kingdom as eternal in contrast to the temporal/tangible (1.8, 10-12; 12.18-19), and the presence of the Firstborn Son (1.6) and firstborn children who have been perfected (12.23). Thirdly, I have demonstrated that the opening depiction of the enthroned Son is soteriologically necessary for the author's entire argument.
The argument of Hebrews begins, one might say, with the end in that it depicts the final aspect of the Son's narrative—the Son's entrance into the heavenly realm. Thus, I suggest that when applied to the Son, at least one of the connotations of the stem τɛλɛιο- is the perfection of his existence as he inherits God's promises. While the author refrains from applying explicit resurrection language to the Son (except 13.20), one sees the author frequently emphasize the perfected quality of his life. So, for example, he is ‘heard’ because of his piety by ‘the one able to save him from death’ (5.7-10). He is qualified to be humanity's priest according to the order of Melchizedek because he has been enthroned to God's right hand (5.5), as a result of the power of his indestructible life (7.16), and because he is a ‘Son who has been made eternally perfect’ (7.28). This aspect of the Son's narrative is foundational for the rest of humanity also. Just as the Father leads the Son into the heavenly realm (1.6), so the Father leads humanity into glory through the Son (2.10). The Son's attainment of the promises functions so as to release these promises to humanity (2.5-9). Jesus functions, therefore, as the firstborn Son of God (1.5-14), as humanity's forerunner (6.19-20), as the source of salvation (5.9), and as providing both the pattern and goal for humanity (12.1-3).
