Covenant Theological Seminary

The Suffering Champion

Phillip Bozarth

Drs. David Chapman and Greg R. Perry April 26, 2010 NT350 Pastoral and General Epistles and Revelation, Spring 2010 St. Louis, Missouri

Introduction Hebrews is a sermon which was likely written before the destruction of the temple in AD 70 but a couple of decades after Christs ascension. () Its many parenetic passages attest that it was occasioned by the authors concern that some in the church of his hometown were tottering between the Christian Faith and a kind of Judaism which reverenced angels. Its author is unknown, but Paul, Apollos, Barnabas, and Luke are leading candidates. This paper provides a commentary on Hebrews 2:10-16. It should be noted that the pericope more properly spans from 2:10-18, but space limits the scope of the paper to the end of the authors argument for Christs superiority over the angels, which closes in 2:16. It is appropriate to begin in v. 10 because the verse marks the authors explanation of how the most anticlimactic part of Jesus lifehis death mentioned in 2:9 leads to the most victorious part of the gospel. The chapter breaks at 2:18 because in 2:17-18 the authors teaches upon implications of the incarnation for Christs priestly office. In 2:10-16 the author teaches upon the incarnation to call his audience to a deeper commitment to Christ. In defending Jesus superiority to the angels, the author quotes from the Old Testament (OT), alludes to Greek myths, and addresses the Greco-Roman cultures greatest fear. The passage comes on the heels of a Christological interpretation of Psalm 8 (2:5-9) and begins with a theodicy for Jesus passion (2:10). It then asserts that those who Jesus sanctifies are adopted into the family of God (2:10-11) and submits OT proof texts for Jesus solidarity with humanity (2:12-13). The Christus Victor story is retold with allusions to Greek myth (2:1415), and the author summons his teaching on the incarnation as a reason his audience should not succumb to the temptation of angel worship. (2:16)

By recasting the Fathers redemptive purpose for humanity in the language of Greek legend, the author presents a spiritual economy in which the experience of suffering is the metal and medal of champions and the incarnation of the Son of God commends him to Gods other children as the one worthy of their worship, fidelity, and trust. Commentary , , .

For, it was fitting for him, for whom everything exists and through whom everything exists, in bringing many sons into glory, to prepare the champion of their salvation for his task by making him to suffer. Hebrews 2:10 Verse 10 holds some words with semantic ranges that are hard to concisely convey in the English language. w appeared commonly in Hellenistic theodicy to justify the behavior of

the gods, and it communicated what actions were appropriate for the gods.1 Use of the word here suggests that the sufferings of Jesus were consistent with Gods known character and purpose, and that Jesus sufferings were pursuant to the Fathers goal of bringing many sons to glory.2 could be a title applied to leaders, rulers, and originators of arts, it was also a

title bestowed upon legendary figures, heros, founders of cities, trailblazers, and champions.3, 4, 5,6

The myth of Hercules was well-known in Hellenistic culture. For his victorious battle with the

1

William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 55. 2 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 55. 3 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993) 161. 4 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 57. 5 Harold W. Attridge and Helmut Koester, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989) 87. 6 George H. Guthrie, Hebrews, The NIV application commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 107.

personification of Death, the Hellenized world knew him as Arcgoj and soter (savior).7 To call Jesus Arcgoj in a Hellenized culture was equivalent to calling Jesus the real superman in American culture.8 Given the context which unfolds in Heb. 2:14-16, the best translation is champion. 9, 10 While Exodus and messianic typology are more properly assigned to the two other occurrences of the word in the NT, Attridge asserts that the ensuing verses underplay those meanings and hark more of Herculean wrestling in the underworld.11 [T]o prepare for his task is a dynamic equivalent translation. o was used

widely in Greek in a purely formal sense to mean complete, whole, or adequate.12 At Levitical priests ordination, the LXX translates the Hebrew idiom fill the hands, with o , and, in Greek, a form of the word was assigned to someone who was qualified for office.13

Rogers assesses the import of the word in this context to mean Jesus would undergo a14

vocational process by which he is made complete or fit for his office. suffering which the Father saw fit ( w) for him to endure.

That process was Jesus

Ellingworth, Hughes, and Lane ascribe

to the Father rather than to Jesus

because the participle is anarthrous and because infinitives take an accusative subject.15 16 17 18

7

William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 57. 8 George H. Guthrie, Hebrews, The NIV application commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 108. 9 Ibid., 107. 10 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 57. 11 Harold W. Attridge and Helmut Koester, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989) , 88. 12 Ibid., 83. 13 Ibid., 83-84. 14 Cleon L. Rogers and Cleon L. Rogers, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Pub.House, 1998), 520. 15 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 158. 16 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 102. 17 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 56.

Without an article before

, Jesus is leading, but, grammatically, nothing is conjoined to needs an accusative subject, the participle form

his leadership. Because the infinitive

of w takes an accusative case, and this makes the Father perform the action of leading many sons to glory. Hughes says the participle is a proleptic aorist, and Rogers also finds that usage here defensible.19, 20 Bruce, Ellingworth, and Koester agree that the action of the participle is performed by the Father, but they attribute rather an ingressive aorist usage to the participle.21, 22,23

Wallace differentiates the two functions of the aorist, saying ingressives are common in

Scripture while proleptics are rare.24 A proleptic banks upon the occurrence of a future event so strongly that it is reckoned as done, while an ingressive stresses the start of an action without commenting on whether it continues.25 However, the passages broader context vouches for the proleptic. In Heb. 2:9 Jesus is said to have been crowned with glory and honor, yet 2:8 acknowledges that some of that glory which God will give to Jesus and to humankind is yet not fully recognizable. Heb. 2:8-9 gives more traction to the proleptic because the author speaks of glory as something that is already and is also yet to come.

Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 2000), 192. 19 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 102. 20 Cleon L. Rogers and Cleon L. Rogers, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Pub.House, 1998), 520. 21 Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Edition, (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990), 77. 22 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 160. 23 Craig R. Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 227. 24 Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 2000), 558, 563. 25 Ibid., 558, 563.

18

.

For the Sanctifier and those sanctified are all from one Father. For this reason, he is not ashamed to call them brethren. Hebrews 2:11 Hughes, Ellingworth, and Buchanan doubt grammatically, designates God the Father because,

is a masculine substantive, and, without specifying what it modifies, it modifying

could conceivably pair with any masculine noun.26 27 28 The discomfort with

Father, in Hughes case, derives from his perception that a common divine origin would blur the absolute and essential distinction between Creator and creation and that Jesus relation to his Father is inherently different from the relation those whom he sanctifies have to the Father.29 Ellingworth objects that, since the angels could also claim God as their source, denoting

God the Father does not grant any uniqueness to the Sons solidarity with the other sons, which is clearly the intent of the passage.30 Alleging that the incarnation is the point of the passage, Hughes posits that a referent of Adam or Abraham better coheres with the thrust of the passage.31 He puts forth Abraham as the likeliest possibility, since he is named in v. 16, and Buchanan concurs.32 Ellingworth adds his assent, noting that the author often had Abraham in mind as he wrote Hebrews, since the book speaks of him several times.33

Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 104-105. 27 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993),164-165 . 28 George Wesley Buchanan, Anchor Bible. To the Hebrews, (Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1972),32 . 29 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 104. 30 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 165. 31 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 105. 32 George Wesley Buchanan, Anchor Bible. To the Hebrews, (Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1972), 32. 33 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 165.

26

Though Hughes and Ellingworth attribute to

to Abraham as the likeliest proper

noun it modifies, they think the verse is better translated by a common noun. Their argument lies in the observation that may legitimately be taken as neuter, in which case, its referent may

be seed, kind, or blood.34 Many commentators agree that this option makes the most of the passages incarnation theme.35 36 But most ancient, medieval, and modern commentators understand as Father, like

Attridge, Koester, and Lane prefer.37 38 39 First, Adam is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews, and, although Abraham is spoken of several times, he will not be named by the author until 2:16. The topic changes a few times in the interval of four verses. Rather, the immediate context, v. 10, is theocentric, which makes God the Father the likeliest referent of in v.

11.40 As for the theme of incarnation, vv. 10 and 13 identify those who Jesus sanctifies as the children of God the Father, and v. 10 and 11 stress the redemptive work of Christ through which God adopted those who are sanctified as his children.41 More poignantly, a reference to Abraham in v. 11 does not minister to the Hebrews in their crisis of faith. They did not need to know that Jesus descended from Abraham; his ancestry was well-enough known. What they did need to know, however, was that they would be vindicated for faith in Jesus, even if that faith required their death. By assuring them that Jesus

Ibid., 164. Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 105-106. 36 Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Edition, (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990), 81. 37 Harold W. Attridge and Helmut Koester, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), 89. 38 Craig R. Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 229. 39 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 58. 40 Ibid., 58. 41 Craig R. Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 230.35

34

had made them sons of God so that they both they and Jesus belonged to the Father as his legitimate children, the author bolstered their faith in the Jesus who was their incarnate God. As to the other objections above, the angels relationship to God is strictly one of fealty, and Hebrews 1:14 classifies them as servants to elect humanity. Thus, finding the Father as the source of both Jesus and the children of God does not at all require that he be as equally endeared to the angels as he is to his children. Further, because 2:17 speaks of Jesus incarnation with the aorist tense and Heb. 1:2-3 declare the uniqueness of Jesus relationship to his Father, allowing to designate the Father serves no more injury to the Creator/ creation distinction

than any other scripture-based claim to the legitimate, albeit, adopted sonship of those whom Jesus has sanctified. Thus, v. 11 does show that Jesus and the adopted sons of God have a unique unity in coming from one Source, God the Father. x

Saying, I will proclaim your name to my brothers, in the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to you. Heb. 2:12 2:12 comes from Ps. 22:22, thus, the use of this quote here evidences that Ps. 22 was recognized as messianic by the early church. Its references to pierced hands and feet, cruel mocking, and division of the sufferers garments as spoil, as well as Jesus recitation of at least 22:1 while upon the cross commended it as messianic to any first century Christian.42 Bruce advises that the whole OT context of NT quotations of the OT be imported into every instance where the NT quotes the OT.43 Here, at least, the author does that, finding in v. 22 support for the fraternal relationship Jesus attained with fellow worshippers. Lane understands this verse as

42 43

Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Edition, (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990), 82. Ibid., 82.

teaching that Jesus takes on the liturgical function of leading the people of God in worship in the eschaton.44

. Heb. 2:13

,

And again, I, I also will trust in him. And again, Behold, I and the children which God gave to me. Although presents two separate quotations within 2:13, the author quotes Is. likely signifies that the author intends to make two separate

8:17 and then Is. 8:18.

points from the same OT pericope.45 The first quote serves the authors point by casting Jesus as dependent upon Yahweh in faith like every other human. Significantly, the author edits the quote by adding an emphatic , the purpose of which is to comment upon Jesus condescension to full humanity while remaining still the heir of all things and the one through whom the world was made.46, 47 (Heb. 1:2) But on what basis does the author attribute either of these quotations from the prophet Isaiah to Jesus? The key to interpreting the passage as messianic is to follow Bruce s tact of importing the whole OT context into the NT quotation. Isaiah 8 concerns the disaster which will strike Judah for its unfaithfulness. While his countrymen despise his words, Yahweh gives Isaiah children, the names of whom attest to impending doom. In saying, Behold, I and the children Yahweh has given me, Isaiah delineates the community of faithful from the community of theWilliam L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 59. 45 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 169. 46 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 57-58. 47 Donald Guthrie, The Epistle to the Hebrews: An Introduction and Commentary, (The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, 15. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2002), 91.44

unfaithful, and Isaiah acknowledges his role as an Arcgoj of sorts to the children of God on Yahwehs behalf. The author, with the license of apostolic exegesis, plays Jesus in the role of Isaiah, claiming that Jesus likewise emerged as an Arcgoj to the people of God amidst an unfaithful generation, and, in doing so, he demarcated the community of the faithful from the community of the unfaithful. Lane and Bruce understand the verse similarly.48, 49 Bruce errs, however, to infer from Heb. 2:13 that those who are sanctified relate to Jesus as their father, a notion unsupported in the rest of the NT.50, 51 need not connote fatherhood, though it

could imply custody or kinship. The Father entrusts his own children to his trustworthy son, (2:17) the Arcgovn of their salvation. (2:10) , , , Heb 2:14 ,

Since, then, the children partake of flesh and blood, he also likewise partook of the same, that through death he should defang the one who formerly had the power of death. Although the parallel structure of the sentence makes and

synonymous, Lane and Ellingworth make much of their respective perfect and aorist aspects.52 53 The author speaks of humanitys existence in flesh with the perfect tense because humans always have had flesh and still do. The author speaks of Jesus existence in flesh with an aorist because

William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 60. 49 Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews: Revised Edition, (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990), 84. 50 Ibid., 84. 51 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 109. 52 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 60. 53 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 171.

48

he existed without it for an eternity before becoming incarnate. His incarnation, though it continues to this day, happened at his birth to the virgin Mary.54 has a semantic range much larger than defang. BDAG defines it as to55

cause something to loose its power or come to an end. render inoperative nullify.56

Hughes attests to its meaning

The Devil as a serpent is a motif throughout Scripture, thus the

unique contribution of defang here for a dynamic equivalent translation. [F]ormerly is added to convey in English the utter defeat represented by the fuller meaning of in the

aorist tense, lest defang alone soften the author s intent. The verb affirms the theme in this pericope of Christ as a victorious warrior.57

,

.

And release them, who, by fear of Death, were enslaved through their whole life. Heb. 2:15 Antiquity regarded the fear of death as the sum of all fears. Greco-Roman culture particularly identified it as a fundamental human problem, such that Seneca told of a protagonist who conquered death by overcoming the fear of death.58 Euripides, Plutarch, and Cicero each wrote of the fearing death as a kind of slavery.59 Thus, the authors reference to an enslaving fear of death was not abstract or foreign to his audience. Note that at this point also, a

Cleon L. Rogers and Cleon L. Rogers, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Pub.House, 1998), 520. 55 Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and William Arndt, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 525. 56 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 111. 57 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 172. 58 Harold W. Attridge and Helmut Koester, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), 93. 59 Craig R. Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 232.

54

Hellenistic reader would probably have understood that the author was recasting the myth of Hercules entering the underworld to do mortal combat with Death.60 61 is an articular substantival infinitive.62 The article renders to live a noun, and is singular,

the genitive case of the article shows the constructions utility with . While the plural of , , and govern. The singular of

claims this slavery

through the fear of death as the collective experience of humankind.

.

For surely, he did not take on the nature of angels, but he takes on the nature of the seed of Abraham. Heb 2:16 The interpretation of v. 16 hinges upon the meaning of . Rogers defines

the word as take hold of, seize, take to oneself, but many modern translators put into English as help, a metaphorical sense of the word which only emerged in the seventeenth century.63 64 Anti-Trinitarian teachers advocated this weakened meaning because it was less detrimental to their error, though now the position is respected by evangelical scholars.65 But the consensus among the early Greek and Latin Fathers and most ancient versions was that the word pertained to the Son of God taking on human nature.66 67 68 In more than thirty

Harold W. Attridge and Helmut Koester, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), 93. 61 William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews, Word biblical commentary, v. 47., (Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991), 61. 62 Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 2000), 235. 63 Cleon L. Rogers and Cleon L. Rogers, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Pub.House, 1998), 521. 64 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 116. 65 Ibid., 61. 66 Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993), 177.

60

occurrences of the word in the LXX, it never means help in a metaphorical sense.69 Furthermore, v. 18 describes Jesus as one who helps, and there the word is bohqew, therefore, something different from help is intended.70 Lastly, translating as taking on the nature fits better with the authors

argument. The audience was being drawn away from worship of Christ by a form of Judaism which required them to reverence angels, thus the lengthy excursus showing not only Christs superiority to angels but mans also. This verse is the last the author speaks of angels until 12:22, and v. 16 marks the closure of his argument against angel worship, therefore, v. 16 ought to deal a fatal blow against the appeal of worshipping angels. is present tense, which means the action it expresses is ongoing. Thus, , not as an

his finale is that the Son of God sits now in heaven as a human, a

angel. If the point of v. 16 is that humanity has been raised higher than the angels because the Son of God sits at the right hand of his Father as a human, that is reason not to worship angels. The effect is, Do not worship angels because you have been raised above them, and they are servants to you. But if the point of v. 16 is that nowadays Jesus helps humans rather than angels, his argument falls flat. Perhaps he does not help them because serve him well, in which case, they may still merit worship. His argument only works if the thrust of v. 16 is that Jesus is incarnate, a human, not an angel.

Conclusion67

Craig R. Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 232. 68 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 115. 69 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977), 118. 70 Ibid., 118.

The first of many theological contribution of Hebrews 2:10-16 are the implications of Christs victory as the Arcgoj over his peoples long dreaded tyrant, the Devil. That Christ has defanged him and made his people no longer subject to his slavery means freedom from the fear of death. Because his victory came through resurrection, the removal of the fear of death results fundamentally in the abatement of every other fear humans face. The passage also gives the Church a theology of suffering. Suffering was the means through which Jesus was perfected for the task of sanctifying the children of God. Significantly, the Father, who had all means available to him (2:10), chose this path for qualifying the Champion of his peoples salvation. This says three things. First, the Champion suffered, then so will his followers. Second, his followers must expect suffering to qualify them for their callings as it did Jesus for his calling. Third, the children of God must know that the grief of their suffering, though it comes to them from their Father, will result in glory given to them from their Father who loves them. In challenging the audience to consider Jesus as more worthy of worship than the angels, the author implies that Christians must treasure and trust Jesus more than anyone or anything else. Angel worship was a chief temptation of the authors audience, and, in later chapters, he compares Christ as superior to Moses and the Levitical priesthood. In doing so, he strikes down as unworthy for worship anything or anyone other than Jesus, and the passage teaches the Church to worship Christ exclusively. Lastly, by handily quoting scripture, speaking in terms of his cultures legends, and addressing his cultures fear, the author instructs those who communicate the gospel to ground their presentation of the gospel in Scripture and craft it so that it is culturally relevant. His

example should inspire them to both deeper bible study and better acquaintance with their culture. Their message should bring forth treasures new and old. Those preaching or teaching Hebrews 2:10-16 would do well to bring out the abovementioned theological contributions and applications of this passage. They should study the influence of Greco-Roman culture upon the author and his original audience, and be careful to speak of the OT quotations from their historical context. Lastly, heed to the Churchs tradition in interpreting this key text on the incarnation is advisable.

Bibliography

Attridge, Harold W., and Helmut Koester. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989.

Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. The Epistle to the Hebrews: Reviseds Edition. Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1990.

Buchanan, George Wesley. Anchor Bible. To the Hebrews. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1972.

Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2005.

Danker, Frederick W., Walter Bauer, and William Arndt. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans, 1993.

Guthrie, Donald. The Epistle to the Hebrews: An Introduction and Commentary. The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, 15. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2002.

Guthrie, George H. Hebrews. The NIV application commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998.

Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1977.

Koester, Craig R. Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New York: Doubleday, 2001.

Lane, William L. Word Biblical Commentary: Hebrews. Word biblical commentary, v. 47. Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1991.

Rogers, Cleon L., Cleon L. Rogers. The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Pub.House, 1998.

Wallace, Daniel B. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Pub. House, 2000.