HEBREWS,
EPISTLE
TO
to
his
writing,
and
he
hoped
once
again
to
visit
them
with
Timothy
as
his
companion
(13i'-
^s).
Their
spiritual
growth
was
arrested
just
at
the
point
where
he
had
looked
for
vigour
and
force
(5"^-
6'"),
and
this
resulted
in
moral
degeneracy
(S"
12'
S'^),
and
in
neglect
of
that
ordinance
which
promotes
social
intercourse
and
Christian
fellowship
(10^).
As
a
Church,
too,
they
were
in
a
position
to
help
their
poorer
brethren
(6'°),
and
he
expected
them
to
continue
that
help
in
the
future
(6")
—
a
feature
of
early
Christian
activity
which
re-minds
us
of
the
poverty
of
the
Church
in
Judaea
(cf
.
Ac
11"
24",
Ro
1S2S,
1
Co
16>«-
etc.).
To
the
present
writer
this
allusion
of
itself
presents
a
formidable,
if
not
a
fatal,
objection
to
the
theory
that
Palestine
was
the
destination
of
our
Epistle.
This
conclusion
is
strength-ened
by
the
elegant
Greek
in
which
the
Epistle
is
written,
and
by
the
writer's
use
of
the
LXX
instead
of
the
Hebrew
OT.
On
the
other
hand,
the
only
direct
internal
evidence
pointing
to
the
readers'
relations
with
Rome
is
found
in
the
salutation,
'They
of
Italy
salute
you
'(13^).
It
is
true
that
this
is
sufhcient
to
establish
a
connexion;
but
it
would
be
futile
to
deny
that
it
is
capable
of
a
double
explanation
—
that
the
Epistle
was
written
either
from
or
to
Italy.
The
former
seems
at
first
sight
the
more
natural
interpretation
of
the
words
(cf.
Col
418)
and
we
are
not
surprised
to
find
such
scholars
as
Theodoret
and
Primasius
expressing
their
belief
that
our
author
here
discloses
the
place
from
which
he
writes.
Indeed,
on
the
supposition
that
'they
of
Italy'
were
the
writer's
companions
who
were
absent
with
him
from
Rome,
the
words
do
not
seem
the
most
felicitous
method
of
expressing
their
regards.
It
would
be
natural
to
mention
some
at
least
of
their
names
in
sending
greetings
from
them
to
their
brethren,
with
whom
they
must
have
been
on
terms
of
the
most
in-timate
fellowship
(cf.
Ro
le^'-,
1
Co
IS").
Besides,
if
he
wrote
from
Rome
we
have
a
natural
explanation,
amounting
to
a
vera
causa,
of
the
fact
that
our
Epistle
was
known
there
from
the
very
first
;
for
it
must
not
be
supposed
that
a
writing
like
this
was
allowed
to
go
forth
without
copies
having
been
made
beforehand
(for
a
supposed
instance.
of
this
kind
in
the
case
of
St.
Luke's
writings,
see
Blass,
Ev.
sec.
Lucam,
and
Acta
Apostolorum,
especially
the
Praefatio
and
Prolegomena
respectively,
where
that
scholar
contends
that
the
remarkable
textual
variations
in
these
writings
can
be
explained
only
by
the
theory
of
a
second
edition
of
each).
Nor
can
the
claim
of
Alexandria
to
be
the
destination
of
the
Epistle
be
said
to
have
much
force.
The
argu-ment
on
which
this
theory
is
mainly
based
has
to
do
with
the
discrepancies
between
the
writer's
descriptions
of
Levitical
worship
and
that
which
obtained
in
the
Jewish
Temple
in
accordance
with
the
Mosaic
code
(cf.
e.g.
gai.
727
etc.).
It
has
been
supposed
that
he
had
in
his
mind
the
temple
of
Onias
at
LeontopoUs
in
Egypt.
This,
however,
is
pure
conjecture
(cf.
Westcott,
ib.
Introd.
p.
xxxix.),
and
is
contradicted
by
the
historical
evidence
of
the
late
date
at
which
the
Epistle
seems
to
have
been
known
in
Alexandria,
and
by
the
fact
that
its
authorship
was
completely
hidden
from
the
heads
of
the
Church
in
that
place.
We
are
thus
reduced
to
the
balancing
of
probabihties
in
selecting
an
objective
for
our
Epistle,
and
in
so
doing
we
have
to
ask
ourselves
the
much
canvassed
question.
What
were
the
ante-cedents
of
the
readers?
Were
they
Gentile
or
Jewish
converts?
Until
a
comparatively
recent
date
it
was
believed
universally
that
the
writer
had
Jewish
Christians
before
his
mind.
A
formidable
array,
however,
of
NT
critics,
especially
Continental,
now
advocate
the
theory
that,
in
spite
of
appearances
to
the
contrary,
the
original
readers
of
our
Epistle
were
Gentiles
or
mainly
Gentiles
(e.g.
von
Soden,
JUlicher,
Weizsacker,
Pfleiderer,
M'Giffert,
Bacon,
etc.).
Certainly
among
the
Christians
of
the
first
two
or
three
generations
there
must
have
been
a
large
number
of
proselytes
who
were
well
acquainted
with
the
Levitical
ceremonial,
and
to
whom
the
de-
HEBREWS,
EPISTLE
TO
scription
of
the
furniture
of
the
Tabernacle
would
have
been
perfectly
inteUigible
(Q^*-;
cf.
vv."»-
""■
10"ff-
etc.).
That
the
addressees
included
Jews
cannot
be
denied
(see
6"-
139-"
etc.).
At
the
same
time,
it
would
be
futile
to
base
an
argument
for
the
purely
Jewish
des-tination
of
the
Epistle
upon
such
passages
as
speak
of
OT
prophetic
revelations
having
been
made
to
'the
fathers'
(1'),
or
of
'the
seed
of
Abraham'
(.2")
as
constituting
the
basis
of
Jesus'
human
nature.
A
similar
identification
is
made
by
St.
Paul
in
writing
to
the
Church
in
Rome
(Ro
4'-26),
where
undoubtedly
there
was
a
large
admixture
of
Gentile
Christians.
Moreover,
Clement
of
Rome
again
and
again
refers
to
'our
fathers,'
though
he
too
is
writing
to
a
Church
largely
Gentile
(see
cc.
4.
31.
62.
etc.).
It
is
also
well
to
remember
that
the
Christian
Churches,
for
a
century
at
least
after
they
had
begun
to
take
definite
shape
as
organized
bodies,
were
dependent,
to
a
very
large
extent,
upon
the
OT
Scriptures
for
their
spiritual
nourishment
and
guidance.
These
were
to
them
the
chief,
if
not
the
only,
authoritative
record
of
God's
revelation
of
Himself
and
His
purposes
to
the
world.
It
was
perfectly
natural,
therefore,
that
St.
Paul
should
presuppose
a
wide
knowledge
of
OT
history,
and,
indeed,
of
the
Jewish
interpretations
of
that
history
(cf.
Ro
6'^-,
1
Co
15^,
2
Co
3»«-
6«,
Gal
3^'),
on
the
part
of
his
Gentile
readers,
just
as
Clement
of
Rome
does.
When
we
turn
to
our
Epistle,
we
are
struck
at
once
by
the
fact
that
the
writer
Is
not
moving
in,
or
thinking
of,
a
hving
practical
Leviticalism.
He
is
dealing
with
Mosaism
in
its
ideal
conditions.
The
ritualism
about
which
he
addresses
his
readers
seems
to
be,
not
that
which
actually
obtained
in
the
later
Temple
services
(cf.
e.g.
7"
10"
Q"),
but
that
splendid
theoretical
ceremonial
every
detail
of
which
was
beUeved
to
be
a
type
and
a
shadow
'of
the
good
things
to
come'
(9"
;
cf
.
W.
R.
Smith's
art.
'
Hebrews
'
inEBr).
Indeed,
the
typological
and
allegorizing
elements
in
the
Epistle
claim
tor
it
almost
peremptorily
a
non-Eastern
objective
;
and
though
the
present
writer
cannot
see
his
way
to
accept
Zahn's
conclusion
that
the
addressees
formed
a
compact
body
of
Jewish
Christians
within
a
large
Gentile
community
of
believers,
he
is
ready
to
yield
to
his
exhaustive
study
of
the
problem
when
he
points
to
Rome
as
offering
the
fewest
objections,
on
the
whole,
to
be
the
destination
of
the
writing
(Einleit.
in
das
NT,
ii.
p.
146
Cf.).
Accepting
this
conclusion
as
at
least
a
provisional,
and
it
may
be
a
temporary,
solution
of
the
diflicult
question
arising
out
of
the
objective
of
our
Epistle,
we
shall
find
several
allusions
to
the
existing
conditions
of
life
in
the
Church
addressed.
Nor
shall
we
be
left
com-pletely
in
the
dark
as
to
the
probable
date
of
its
com-position.
Looking
first
for
incidental
remarks,
inde-pendently
of
the
locale
of
the
readers,
we
find
several
hints
pointing
to
a
comparatively
late
period
in
the
history
of
the
early
Church.
Both
writer
and
readers
were
separated
by
at
least
a
generation
from
the
first
circle
of
beUevers
(2*).
The
readers,
moreover,
had
been
long
enough
under
the
influence
of
the
Christian
faith
to
give
our
author
grounds
for
hope
that
they
could
occupy
the
position
of
teachers
and
of
'perfect'
('full
grown,'
RV)
professors
of
their
religion
(5"°-;
note
the
verb
translated
'ye
are
become,'
which
expresses
the
end
of
a
lengthened
process
of
degeneracy).
This
hope
was
bitterly
disappointed,
although
he
is
careful
to
recall
a
period
when
their
love
was
warm
and
their
Christian
profession
an
active
force
in
their
Uves
(6").
Basing
his
appeal
on
this
memory,
he
strives
to
encourage
them
to
revert
to
their
former
earnestness
('dihgence,'
EV
6");
and,
in
order
to
prevent
that
dulnessto
which
they
had
already
given
way
from
developing
further,
he
urges
them
to
take
for
a
pattern
those
Christian
teachers
who
had
already
spent
their
Uves
in
the
service
of
the
faith
(6'2).
It
is
probable
that
their
ownrulers
of
the
preceding
generation
had
signalized
their
fideUty
