The character and work of the trinitarian God is expounded on every page of Hebrews. The writer calls for allegiance to the One God of Israel and makes him known as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.1 Hebrews is not, of course, a doctrinal tract on the Trinity. It is first and foremost a sermon urging faltering believers to continue with Christ.2 However, as the writer expounds Scripture and exhorts the addressees to respond with faith and obedience, he says a great deal that illumines the trinitarian character of God. To examine adequately all the relevant material in Hebrews would require a monograph of its own, and so the aim of this present study is more modest: to consider the ways in which the writer presents the three divine persons in relation to two central themes of his discourse, the themes of revelation and redemption.3 To what extent are the divine projects of revelation and redemption undertaken explicitly by the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? What is shown concerning the identity and role of each person, and concerning the ways in which they interrelate?
Hebrews opens with the affirmation that God, having spoken ‘in [en] the prophets’ in former times, has spoken in these last days ‘in’ (en) his Son (1:1–2). The following verses express with eloquence and economy the manner and substance of God’s speech in the Son (note that 1:1–4 is all a single Greek sentence). God has made himself known through all that the Son is and does. The Son is himself ‘the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature’ (1:3).4 His activity in making and upholding the universe, providing purification for sins and taking his seat on high all constitutes God’s self-revelation. Thus his speech ‘in’ the Son is personal – even ontological – in its character. Although the terms in which Hebrews expresses this theology of personal revelation through the Son differ from the terms of John’s prologue, there is here in Hebrews a similar idea: the Son is himself God’s revelatory Word, his speech in personal form.5
Having introduced the idea that the Son is the personal revelation of God in 1:1–4, the writer then turns in 1:5–14 to consider the nature and implications of his sonship through citing a number of Old Testament passages, primarily from the Psalms. On one level the writer’s purpose here is clear enough: he wishes to demonstrate that the Son is superior to angels. But why is it important that the Son should be seen to be superior to the angels? Some insight is given in 2:1–4, where the writer moves from making his biblical case to exhorting his addressees to respond to the truth he has declared to them:6
Therefore we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable, and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation? (2:1–3a)
Traditionally, Jewish interpretation viewed angels as the agents by whom God delivered the Law at Sinai;7 hence the writer’s reference to ‘the message declared by angels’ (cf. Acts 7:38, 53; Gal. 3:19). The writer’s agenda here is to prove that Jesus is superior to the angels in order that the addressees may pay closer attention to the salvation message they heard through him.
But how does the writer think that this series of Old Testament citations will prove his point? He begins in 1:5 by quoting Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14 as words spoken by the Father to the Son. These, of course, are key verses speaking of the promised messianic king in the line of David. He then proceeds (after a brief citation of Psalm 104 at verse 7)8 to quote two more psalms that address the Davidic king (Pss 45 and 110), applying them to Jesus.9 However, the writer’s primary agenda in this section is not to demonstrate that Jesus is a Davidic king. Indeed, Jesus’ status as a Davidic king (even as the Davidic king) would not necessarily imply his superiority to angels.
It is important to bear in mind the intended audience of Hebrews: Jewish converts who have put their trust in Jesus as the Messiah, but who are questioning whether they are secure in him and are tempted to revert to old covenant religion.10 The writer’s argument takes it for granted that if Jesus is the promised Davidic king, then the various unquestionably kingly/messianic texts cited in chapter 1 do apply legitimately to him. The writer does not offer an argument for their applicability to Jesus, but rather draws out the striking implications of his messianic identity through the writer’s selection of extracts: the messianic king is called ‘Son’ and even ‘God’.
G. B. Caird rightly observed that Hebrews treats the Old Testament as being self-consciously and ‘avowedly’ incomplete.11 Hebrews takes it for granted that without the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus there were very significant aspects of the Old Testament that ultimately did not make sense. In his programme of reconvincing these tottering Jewish believers to trust in Jesus the writer takes them precisely to those Old Testament texts that most clearly cry out for fulfilment in the Messiah.12 Here in chapter 1 the writer invites his addressees to consider afresh some familiar kingly/messianic texts (as well as one or two less obviously kingly texts) and notice that they identify the Davidic king as both ‘Son’ and ‘God’. Yes, there was a limited and ‘hyperbolic’ sense in which Davidic kings could have been called both ‘son’ and ‘god’ within the context of Old Testament history. But none of these kings was truly and ontologically God or the Son of God. And so, the writer reasons, texts that ascribe such titles to the Davidic king present an obvious difficulty for any reader of the Old Testament who will not accept that Jesus is the person of whom they speak. Without Jesus those texts lead ultimately to positions of logical incoherence or theological impossibility.
The writer has already introduced a Christology of pre-existence (‘through whom also he created the world’, 1:2) and ontological sonship (‘He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature’, 1:3). He judges that the addressees recognize the authority of the Old Testament and should be receptive to a persuasive argument from it (they are, after all, tempted to return to old covenant religion). And so he seeks to demonstrate that the Old Testament itself points to a Davidic king who is both truly Son and truly God. Here, then, is the force of the argument: this promised king, whom Scripture attests to be both Son of God and God himself, is inestimably greater than the angels, and so merits urgent and careful attention (2:1).
For the writer, the words of the Old Testament citations in Hebrews 1 are (and always were) words fundamentally about Christ and, in a number of cases, addressed to Christ.13 In affirming that God ‘says’ these words to or of the Son, the writer is not carrying out an exegetical sleight of hand for a dramatic purpose. The words of the Old Testament citations might have been scripted centuries before, and have been spoken many times in the life and worship of God’s people, but they had an appointed time of ultimate and full expression in the life and work of the Son. In the case of the Old Testament citations in Hebrews 1 the divine conversation they record takes place at the time of the enthronement of the Son on high.14 The same principles undergird Hebrews 2:12–13, where the Son responds to the Father by using words from Psalm 22 and Isaiah 8. These words were spoken in an anticipatory way by the psalmist and the prophet, but are ultimately the Son’s words. Thus the writer presents the Old Testament citations in Hebrews 1 and 2 as offering a window into a conversation that takes place between two divine persons within the Godhead. The significance of the fact that God converses with the Son through these citations should not be overlooked. It powerfully affirms the Father and the Son are not interchangeably the same, but rather true persons who relate – even converse – one with another.
The quotations in Hebrews 1 constitute the most concentrated catena of separate Old Testament citations in the book, but there is a steady stream of other Old Testament citations throughout the letter, and many of these are similarly introduced as words spoken by a divine person. On a few occasions the Holy Spirit is named as the speaker. The quotation of Psalm 95:7–11 in Hebrews 3:7–11 is introduced by the words ‘as the Holy Spirit says’. The words of warning of the psalm recall the rebellion in the wilderness but are not tied to a single moment of historical fulfilment or relevance. Rather, the warning is for the people of God to heed God’s voice whenever they hear it:
Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion . . .
The Holy Spirit is the named speaker again in Hebrews 10:15, where the words of the Old Testament citation are directed to ‘us’, that is, to the addressees of the letter. In both these instances where the Holy Spirit is named as the speaker of Scripture words, the direction of speech is from the Godhead to the people of God.15
On two other occasions in Hebrews the Holy Spirit is shown to have a revelatory role, and in both these cases the intended recipients of this revelation are again the people of God. Speaking of the revelation of the message of ‘salvation’ at 2:3–4, the writer notes:
It was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.
These gifts of the Spirit form a key part of God’s ‘bearing witness’ to the authenticity of the salvation message declared ‘at first by the Lord’ (i.e. Jesus) and then ‘attested’ by eyewitnesses (quite possibly the apostles). Beyond noting that the Spirit’s role in this context is to facilitate and reinforce the divine work of revelation to the people of God, two further observations are relevant. First, this important summary statement of the means by which the salvation message was revealed and disseminated presents that complex of events as a collaborative work of the three persons of the Godhead: the Lord Jesus declares the message, God the Father bears witness to it and he does so in part ‘by gifts of the Holy Spirit’. Second, the Spirit acts specifically as the agent for the Father in this collaborative project of revelation. God (the Father, as distinguished from ‘the Lord’, who is the Son here) is the one bearing witness; the distributions of the Spirit form part of his bearing witness and are given in accordance ‘to his will’ (2:4b).
At 9:8 there is one further instance where the Holy Spirit reveals truth to contemporary readers of Scripture. Speaking of the biblical pattern given for the tabernacle in the wilderness with its two parts (the ‘holy place’ and the ‘most holy place’),16 the author says, ‘By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing (which is symbolic for the present age)’ (9:8–9a). The writer contends that the arrangement of the tabernacle as given to Moses (see 8:5) and recorded in Exodus was a ‘parable’ or ‘symbol’ that had a revelatory purpose tied to ‘the present age’ (9:9a).17 The work that the Holy Spirit performs in this regard is that of ‘indicating’ (dēlountos) the relevance of the arrangement of the tabernacle.
Commentators differ in their assessment of the nature of the Spirit’s activity, some locating the work of ‘indication’ in the original inspiration of the covenant documents,18 and some locating the activity in a work of the Spirit in giving the writer of Hebrews (and perhaps his addressees) fresh insight into the ancient text.19 The range of meaning of the participle dēlountos would allow for both.20 These options should not necessarily be seen as mutually exclusive, especially given Hebrews’s clear insistence that God continues to speak the scriptural words he once spoke. But the writer’s broader patterns of Old Testament hermeneutics indicate that the balance falls on the Spirit’s inspiring the Scripture (and then continuing to say what he originally said), rather than affording new insight. The writer’s point in 9:8–9a is that, in its original design as laid out in the covenant documents, the Holy Spirit intended the tabernacle to indicate that ‘the way into the holy places is not yet opened’. The Spirit thus pointed to ‘the present age’, when there is no division and direct access to the heavenly sanctuary is available through Christ. That was what the Spirit meant to ‘indicate’ from the moment of inspiration of the covenant Scriptures, and that is what he continues to ‘indicate’ through those same Scriptures.
Here once again is an instance of the Spirit’s speaking the words and message of Scripture to the people of God – both ancient and contemporary.
As already noted, in the single Greek sentence in 1:1–4 the writer presents the person and work of the Son as the means by which God the Father has spoken in ‘these last days’. Because the Son perfectly represents and reveals the Father (1:3a), the work that he achieves in ‘making purification for sins’ is part of the Father’s self-revelation ‘in’ the Son. But the Father’s role in the drama of redemption is not passive: he is the one who bequeaths to the Son the name he inherits in the ascension and enthronement on high (4:4–5). The opening verses of the letter thus give us a summary picture of the whole sweep of redemption as a joint work of Father and Son.
Having established Jesus’ exalted status as the divine Son in chapter 1, the writer goes on to consider his descent in the incarnation in chapter 2. Here the reader encounters one of the most (initially, at least) perplexing aspects of the theology of Hebrews – its teaching concerning the ‘perfecting of the Son’. The writer addresses the theme first in Hebrews 2:10, and returns to it in 5:7–10:
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. (2:10)
In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. (5:7–10)
Both references to the ‘perfecting’ of Christ are made in the context of a discussion of his preparation for, and appointment to, the office of high priest. Although the language of ‘perfection’ may sound like a process by which some ‘imperfection’ is removed or overcome, the context indicates that the Father’s ‘perfecting’ of the Son through suffering refers positively to his vocational shaping, preparation and training for his work as high priest.21 This role is, of course, a role he takes on as the incarnate Son (see esp. 2:9 and 5:7), and for which he is prepared in his incarnate life on earth. Thus his shaping and development for this role may be compared to other human processes of development he experiences in the incarnation.22
Of central interest here is the interaction between the Father and the incarnate Son in the process of ‘perfection’. The Father is shown to be the primary actor, while the incarnate Son experiences and willingly endures the suffering involved in the process. In his suffering he cries out to the Father and is heard because of the ‘reverence’ with which he responds to the Father in this process. As the incarnate Son, faced with trials he had never before faced (and here the writer must be recalling the Garden of Gethsemane and the lead-up to the cross), his obedience to the Father was tested and tried in new ways, and he ‘learned obedience through what he suffered’ (5:8). It is not the case that he was previously disobedient; rather, he had never before been called to obey in the context of human suffering of this kind.
This interaction between the Father and the Son in the process of the Son’s ‘perfection’ is fundamental to the accomplishment of redemption. More than that, this relational dynamic shapes the nature of the redemption the Son achieves for his people.
At this point in our discussion it will be useful to trace the broader flow of the logic of 2:5–11. The writer continues his case for the superiority of the Son over the angels by noting that the ‘world to come’ has not been subjected to them and demonstrates, centrally through an exposition of Psalm 8, that it has been subjected to the Son as representative leader of a new humanity:
Now it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. It has been testified somewhere,
‘What is man, that you are mindful of him,
or the son of man, that you care for him?
You made him for a little while lower than the angels;
you have crowned him with glory and honour,
putting everything in subjection under his feet.’
Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honour because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. (2:5–9)
Psalm 8 looks back to the creation pattern of Genesis 1:26–28 and the special dignity given to humanity in its call to exercise dominion over the rest of the natural world. But the writer notes that in the present fallen world humanity does not exercise this dominion according to the original design (2:8). Adam as representative leader of humanity (‘man’, ‘son of man’) was given a high calling, but through sin failed to exercise his role rightly. There is, however, one great exception to the pattern of fallen humanity: Jesus, who was for a time made lower than the angels in his incarnation, suffering and death, is now enthroned on high (2:9a). In order to address Adam’s failure and restore humanity to the ‘glory and honour’ of its original position Jesus stepped into Adam’s shoes and became ‘son of man’ in the incarnation ‘so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone’ (2:9b; see 2:17). He became a human being in order that he might die as a fitting substitute for other humans.
Now the writer further draws out the significance of the humanity of the Son for the salvation he achieves:
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source. That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers, saying,
‘I will tell of your name to my brothers;
in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise.’
(2:10–12, citing Ps. 22:22)
Through his incarnation, suffering, death, resurrection and ascension, Jesus ‘brings many sons to glory’ – now not simply restoring the original creation pattern in Adam, but exalting humanity to something even higher. In the incarnation the Son of God became a son of man and so became able to call other human beings ‘brothers’. But more than that, he became the ‘founder’ or ‘pioneer’ (the representative leader) of their salvation, leading them up to the glory he himself entered in the ascension.
Those ‘sons’ whom the Son redeems become his ‘brothers’ and share in the glory of his resurrected and ascended life in the presence of the Father. The ‘congregation’ or ‘assembly’ (ekklēsia) in which the Son sings the praise of the Father (2:12) is at once the heavenly ‘assembly’ pictured in 12:22–24 and the earthly gatherings of God’s people that mirror and anticipate it.23 Significantly, the writer refers to this heavenly gathering as ‘the assembly of the firstborn’ (ekklēsia prōtotokōn, 12:23). Hebrews has already identified Jesus as ‘the firstborn’ Son of the Father (1:6a). But now all his redeemed people – gathered in the divine presence (12:22–23) through his shed blood and priestly mediation (12:24) – are identified as an assembly of ‘firstborn’ children.24
It would be clearly too much to say that the unique trinitarian category of sonship is extended to redeemed humanity, but Hebrews nonetheless affirms that Jesus’ saved people join the divine ‘family’ as brothers of the Son and sons of the Father.25
This extension of the ‘family’ relationship from the Son to other sons undoubtedly shapes many aspects of the way in which new covenant believers are called to relate to the Father in Hebrews. It certainly accounts (at least in part) for their ability to approach his presence through Christ. The Son has been welcomed into the Father’s presence (1:3b); believers, already part of the heavenly ‘assembly of the firstborn’ (12:23), are invited to approach the divine presence with boldness themselves (4:16; 10:22). At least in some cases this new relational dynamic explicitly underpins the extension of divine discourse to the people of God (Jesus addresses his ‘brothers’ in the ‘congregation’, 2:12; the Father addresses his people as ‘sons’ by using words of Scripture, 12:5–6).26
Most strikingly and clearly, this shared experience of sonship emerges as the underlying assumption in the discussion of fatherly ‘discipline’ in Hebrews 12:3–11. The writer has just called the addressees to ‘run with endurance the race that is set before us’ (12:1), drawing their attention to Jesus, ‘the founder [or ‘leader’ or ‘pioneer’, archēgos, see 2:10] and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame’ (2:2). The endurance of Jesus is then given as a model for responding to the hostility believers face from a sinful world:
Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or faint-hearted. In your struggle against sin [i.e. against sinful opposition in the world, in parallel to the opposition Jesus faced from sinners] you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. (12:3–4)
Like in chapter 2, Jesus as archēgos is representative leader of his people in 12:2, enduring suffering on the way to the joy of the final destination. As the discussion proceeds, the category of sonship returns explicitly to view once more, now as a category applied specifically to believers as the Father addresses the listeners explicitly as ‘sons’ in the words of Scripture:
And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?
‘My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.’
(12:5–6, quoting Prov. 3:11–12)
Although God has been referred to as Father of the Son in 1:5, he has never before in Hebrews been referred to as Father of his people. But now, as the people of God follow in the footsteps of Jesus their archēgos in enduring suffering, they share in an experience that is basic for all true sons as they relate to their father – they receive discipline from his hand. Indeed, this experience is a mark of their legitimacy as true sons (12:7–8), demonstrating that God is rightly called their ‘Father’ (12:9).27
Although the Spirit is only infrequently mentioned in connection with the work of redemption, Hebrews indicates that his role is integral. Most striking in this regard is Hebrews 9:14, where the writer affirms that Christ ‘through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God’. Previous references to the Holy Spirit in the discourse (2:4; 3:7; 6:4; 9:8; 10:15) prepared the reader to understand the mention of ‘Spirit’ here as referring to the Holy Spirit, rather than to a separate aspect of Christ’s own being.28 The nature of the Spirit’s work in Christ’s self-offering is neither limited to a specific function nor clearly tied to a specific conceptual background here.29 Rather, the whole process by which Christ ultimately came to offer himself to God the Father as a sacrifice is to be understood as a Spirit-enabled process.
Three specific observations should be noted. First, the writer records in this context that Christ offered himself ‘without blemish’. This lack of blemish most naturally refers to his moral rather than physical perfection.30 Implicit, then, is a work of the Spirit that enabled the incarnate Christ to endure trial – including the final trial of his sufferings leading up to his death – without sin (see 4:15), and thus reach the point of his self-offering as morally unblemished.
Second, the designation of the Spirit as the ‘eternal Spirit’ (pneumatos aiōniou) is unique in the New Testament. The writer has already affirmed that Christ secured ‘an eternal redemption’ for his people upon his entry to the ‘holy places’ (9:12; cf. 5:9). Verse 15 will again echo the term ‘eternal’ in speaking of the ‘eternal inheritance’ that Christ secures for his people through his self-offering. Certainly, an implication here is that the Holy Spirit enables Christ by his self-offering to achieve temporally enduring benefits. But the context suggests that beyond this temporal connotation to the designation ‘eternal’ there is also a spatial connotation.31 Christ’s self-offering to God culminates in his ‘appearance’ and ‘entry’ into God’s very presence in the heavenly sanctuary, distinguished from the sanctuary on earth that is made by hands and is part of this creation (9:11–12, 24).
2 Corinthians 4:18 provides an interesting point of comparison. Here Paul indicates that he understands the ‘eternal’ realm to be not simply the temporally abiding realm, but also the unseen realm: ‘For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.’32 If it is right to see a spatial implication to the use of the term ‘eternal’ in Hebrews 9:14, then work of the ‘eternal Spirit’ gains added significance. Although the divine Son had taken on the limitations of finite humanity in the incarnation, he was nonetheless enabled to secure redemption for his people in the heavenly places through the agency of the ‘eternal Spirit’.33 This redemption then provides the necessary internal cleansing of ‘conscience’ required for his people to ‘serve [latreuein] the living God’ (9:14b). The language of divine ‘service’ belongs to the priestly world of the temple (cf. 8:5) and points to the access to God’s heavenly presence that believers enjoy even now through the high priestly work of Christ.34 Thus there is a significant ‘spatial’ aspect to the ‘eternal redemption’ Christ achieves for his people by ‘the eternal Spirit’.
Third, we have mention here in 9:14 of all three persons of the Trinity. By the agency of the eternal Spirit, Christ the Son offers himself to God the Father. Scholars generally agree that Hebrews 9:11–14 provides an important summary of key aspects of the theology of Hebrews.35 It is striking that here, in this condensed statement of truths that are centrally important in the discourse, the writer so clearly mentions the role of each of the three persons of the Trinity and shows how they function together.
Throughout Hebrews the God who reveals himself and redeems his people is unmistakably God the Trinity – Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
In the work of revelation the Father makes himself known in and through the person and work of the Son. The Father and the Son engage relationally with each other as they converse through pre-recorded words of Scripture. The Spirit speaks words of Scripture as well, but words directed not to the Father and the Son but now to the people of God. Similarly, the Spirit acts as the Father’s agent in confirming the revelation of the Son and his work through signs and wonders and the distribution of gifts.
One of the central exhortations of Hebrews is to listen – and to keep listening – to God’s word. This word is fundamentally trinitarian in nature. It is spoken by the Father; its central theme is the person and work of the Son, in whom it is fully expressed; and it is brought to the people of God ‘today’ by the agency and power of the Spirit. Knowing that God the Trinity – Father, Son and Holy Spirit – is addressing his people through the scriptural word is a powerful prompt to listen.
In the great project of redemption the Son becomes man and learns obedience as a human Son of the Father. Through his death and resurrection, which he achieves by the agency of the eternal Spirit, he makes other sons of men his brothers and causes them to become sons of the Father. Having entered into the ‘family’ of God, these human sons share in the experience of the Father’s disciplinary training – but do so knowing that it was first the experience of Christ the Son, their brother and forerunner.
A central pastoral concern of the writer is to urge the addressees to hold fast to the redemption they have received and to enjoy its benefits. This exhortation is repeatedly framed as a call to ‘draw near’ (4:16; 10:22). It is a call to approach God the Father through the mediation of the divine Son, who is high priest of his people. This exhortation prompts the believer to ask how possibly one on earth can approach God in heaven. From all that Hebrews has said and implied of the work of the ‘eternal Spirit’, it naturally follows that the Spirit – whose agency brings and confirms God’s word to his people and who facilitated the offering of the Son before the Father – is the divine person who lifts the believer to the very presence of God in prayerful approach.
That the One God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit shapes not only the theological substance of the writer’s message, but also the response he exhorts the addressees to make.36
© Jonathan I. Griffiths, 2016