HEBREWS,
EPISTLE
TO
incidental
to
their
position
we
seem
to
liear
echoes
of
contrasts
out
of
the
very
parallelisms
instituted.
The
Levltical
priest
is
not
(a)
royal;
he
'is
appointed'
to
fulfil
certain
obligations
(8',
cf.
6');
he
is
not
(&)
essen-tially
righteous;
he
has,
before
he
fulfils
his
mediatorial
functions,
first
to
offer
for
his
own
sins
(8',
cf.
6');
his
work
does
not
conduce
to
(c)
peace,
for
'
conscience
of
sins'
is
still,
in
spite
of
priestly
activity,
alive,
and
'perfection'
is
not
thereby
attained
(10");
Ills
priest-hood
is
not
(d)
personal;
it
is
an
inherited
authority
'made
after
the
law
of
a
carnal
commandment'
(7"),
and
the
personal
equation
is
shown
to
be
eliminated
by
the
fact
that
it
is
the
blood
of
goats
and
calves
that
he
offers
(9'^);
finally,
it
is
not
(e)
eternal;
its
ordinances
were
temporary,
'
imposed
until
a
time
of
reformation
'
O'").
In
every
instance
'the
more
excellent
ministry'
(8»)
of
Jesus
is
substantiated,
while
the
repeated
asser-tions
of
the
sacrificial
character
of
His
priestly
work,
by
the
emphatic
declarations
that
He
is
not
only
the
Priest
but
the
Sacrifice
(7"
Q'^-
^),
show
the
difficulty
the
writer
must
have
felt
in
sustaining
a
comparison
which
is
summed
up
in
an
antithesis
('once
in
the
year'
9',
and
'eternal'
9'^).
The
whole
discussion
may
be
regarded
£^
an
a
fortiori
argument
on
behalf
of
the
superiority
of
the
priesthood
of
Jesus.
The
ritual
of
the
Day
of
Atonement
is
selected
as
the
basis
of
his
contention,
and
it
was
here
that
the
Levitical
ceremonial
was
at
its
noblest
(9'-').
Even
here
the
above-mentioned
antithesis
is
observable;
the
Levitical
ministry
was
discharged
in
a
Tabernacle
which
was
but
"a
copy
and
shadow
of
the
heavenly
things'
(8'),
while
that
of
Christ
fulfils
itself
in
'the
true
tabernacle'
(S'^),
where
alone
are
displayed
the
eternal
realities
of
priestly
sacrifice
and
mediation.
The
offering
of
Himself
is
not
merely
the
material
sacrifice
of
His
body
on
the
cross,
though
that
is
a
necessary
phase
in
His
ministerial
priesthood
(cf.
2*-
");
it
is
the
transcendent
spiritual
act
of
One
who
is
sinless
('through
the
eternal
Spirit
offered
Himself
without
blemish,'
9"
T^
4").
,
This
gives
the
offering
its
eternal
validity
('once
for
all,'
727
912
10"),
and
although
'the
sacrifice
of
Himself
was
consummated
'at
the
end
of
the
ages,'
its
force
and
value
reach
back
to
'
the
foundation
of
the
world
'
(9»,
cf.
9"),
and
continue
for
all
the
time
that
is
to
come
(7Ki
9^).
Two
other
interdependent
ideas
remain
to
be
briefly
considered.
It
has
already
been
said
that
our
author
may
be
described
as
a
theological
evolutionist,
and
in
no
sphere
of
his
thought
is
this
more
evident
than
in
his
ideas
of
salvation
and
of
faith.
Salvation
is
not
so
much
the
present
realization
of
the
redemptive
value
of
Christ's
atoning
work
as
a
movement
commencing
here
and
now
towards
that
realization
in
all
its
fulness.
It
is
true
that
faith
is
for
him
the
power
to
bring
the
unseen
realities
into
touch
with
the
present
life
(ll""-).
At
the
same
time,
the
dominant
conception
of
salvation
in
the
writer's
mind
is
the
fruition
of
hopes
originated
and
vitalized
by
the
teaching
and
experiences
of
Jesus.
Future
dominion
in
a
new
world
ordered
and
inhabited
in
perfect
moral
harmony
(see
Westcott,
Ep.
to
Heb.,
on
2')
awaits
those
who
neglect
not
'so
great
salva-tion'
(2').
The
basis
upon
which
this
lordship
rests
is
the
actualized
crowned
Kingship
of
the
Man
Jesus,
which
is
at
once
the
guarantee
and
the
rationale
of
the
vision
(2'^').
Immediately
following
this
view
another
conception
arises
dealing
with
the
realization,
in
the
future,
of
a
dominion
based
upon
conquest.
Death
and
the
author
of
death
are
the
enemies
which
Jesus
has
'brought
to
nought';
and
not
only
has
He
done
this,
but
He
delivers
those
who
all
their
life
were
in
bondage
'through
fear.'
The
perfect
humanity
of
Jesus
is
again
the
avenue
along
which
this
goal
is
reached
.
No
other
way
is
possible,
and
in
Him
all
may
find
their
servitude
transmuted
into
freedom
and
dominion
(cf.
2'<->*).
Once
more,
arguing
from
the
imperfect
realization
by
the
Israelites,
under
Joshua,
of
their
HEBRON
hopes,
the
author
points
out
that
what
they
looked
for
in
vain
is
a
type
of
a
higher
thing
which
is
now
actually
awaiting
'the
people
of
God.'
Salvation
consists
in
entering
into
that
eternal
Sabbath-rest
where
Jesus
has
gone
before,
and
where
the
presence
of
God
is
(cf.
4").
The
pivotal
conception
round
which
these
ideas
revolve
is
the
unity
of
Christ
and
man,
the
likeness
in
aU
things,
sin
alone
excepted,
which
was
effected
by
the
Incarnation.
Our
author's
habit
of
looking
on
faith
as
an
active
force
in
men's
lives
displays
the
same
tendency
to
make
the
future
rather
than
the
present
the
field
of
his
vision.
At
the
same
time,
it
would
be
a
great
mistake
to
imagine
that
the
present
is
outside
the
scope
of
his
thought.
Obedience,
however,
is
the
word
and
thought
preferred
by
him
when
he
speaks
of
the
present
grounds
of
salva-tion
(5»'-,
cf.
118).
Faith
is
for
him
a
force
working
towards
ethical
ideals,
a
power
which
enables
men
of
every
nation
and
class
to
live
lives
of
noble
self-denial
for
righteousness'
sake,
'
as
seeing
him
who
is
invisible
'
(cf.
11'-"
42
6IZ
103»).
Of
this
faith
Jesus
is
'the
author
and
perfecter'
(12^),
and
Jiere,
too,
we
get
a
glimpse
of
that
quickening
Divine
humanity
upon
which
the
writer
lays
such
constant
stress,
and
which
is
the
source
of
the
effort
demanded
from
his
readers
when
he
asks
them
to
imitate
their
former
rulers
In
a
faith
which
issued
in
a
glorious
martyrdom.
J.
R.
Willis.
HEBRON
('association').
—
1.
The
third
son
of
Kohath,
known
to
us
only
from
P
(Ex
6",
Nu
3<»-
2')
and
the
Chronicler
(1
Ch
&'■
's
15«
23>2-
").
The
Hebronites
are
mentioned
at
the
census
taken
in
the
wilderness
of
Sinai
(Nu
3^'),
and
appear
again
at
the
later
census
in
the
plains
of
Moab
(26'8);
cf.
also
1
Ch
15'
23"
262>-
'<"■.
2.
A
son
of
Mareshah
and
father
of
Korah,
Tappuah,
Rekem,
and
Shema
(1
Ch
ai^-ia).
HEBROIf.
—
A
very
ancient
city
in
Palestine,
20
miles
S.S.W.
from
Jerusalem.
It
is
in
a
basin
on
one
of
the
highest
points
of
the
Judaeau
ridge,
being
about
3040
ft.
above
sea-level.
A
note
of
its
antiquity
is
given
in
Nu
1322,
which
states
that
it
was
'
seven
years
older
than
Zoan
in
Egypt.'
Its
original
name
seems
to
have
been
Kiriath-arba
(i.e.
probably
TetrapoUs,
or
'
Four
Cities'),
and
it
was
a
stronghold
of
the
Anakim.
In
the
time
of
Abraham,
however
(whose
history
is
much
bound
up
with
this
place),
we
read
of
Hittites
here.
From
Ephron
the
Hittite
he
purchased
the
cave
of
Machpelah
for
the
burial
of
Sarah
his
wife
(Gn
23).
This
allusion
has
given
rise
to
much
controversy.
At
the
time
of
the
entry
of
the
Israelites
it
was
held
by
three
chieftains
of
great
stature,
Sheshai,
Ahlman,
and
Talmai
(Nu
1322).
On
the
partition
of
the
country
it
was
allotted
to
the
tribe
of
Judah,
or
rather
to
the
Calebites
(Jos
I412
15"),
who
captured
it
for
the
Israelite
immigrants.
The
city
itself
was
allotted
to
the
Kohathite
Levites,
and
it
was
set
apart
as
a
city
of
refuge
(Jos
20').
Here
David
reigned
seven
and
a
half
years
over
Judah
(2
S
5'),
till
his
capture
of
Jerusalem
from
the
Jebusites
fixed
there
the
capital
of
the
country.
It
was
here
also
that
the
rebellious
Absalom
established
himself
as
king(2
S15™).
It
was
fortified
by
Rehoboam
(2
Ch
H'»).
After
the
Captivity
it
was
for
a
time
in
the
hands
of
the
Edomites
(though
from
Neh
ll^*
it
would
appear
to
have
been
temporarily
colonized
by
the
returned
Jews),
but
was
re-captured
by
Judas
Maccabaeus
(1
Mac
S«5).
In
the
war
under
Vespasian
it
was
burned.
In
1167
it
became
the
see
of
a
Latin
bishop;
in
1187
it
was
captured
for
the
Muslims
by
Saladin.
The
modern
town
contains
about
10,000
inhabitants.
Its
chief
manufactures
are
glassware
and
leather
water-skins.
In
the
centre
is
the
Haram
or
mosque,
formerly
a
Crusaders'
church,
built
ove?
the
reputed
cave
of
Machpelah.
The
modern
name
is
Khalll
er-Bahman,
'
the
friend
of
the
Merciful
'
—
the
Muslim
title
of
Abraham.
'Abraham's
oak'
is
shown
near
the
city,
but
t»his
is
as
apocryphal
as
the
ascription
of
a
cistern
called
'Sarah's
