”
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has led many scholars to understand Hebrews against the background of Qumran theology. Yadin believes the recipients of Hebrews had been members of the Qumran sect before their conversion to Christianity. So the Son’s superiority to the angels in Hebrews 1 is designed to combat the Qumran theology which views the angels as ‘sons of God’ (cf. ‘sons of heaven’, 1QS 4:22; 11:8; Gen. Apo. II:5, 16), or even as ‘gods’ (11QMelch, line 10).Many scholars have attempted to understand Melchizedek in Hebrews 7 in the light of 11QMelchizedek, which describes Melchizedek as a heavenly figure and eschatological deliverer.However, the connection between Hebrews and Qumran theology has been challenged by F. F. Bruce who argues that the purpose of Hebrews’ mentioning of the angels and the superiority of the Son is not
to discourage the readers from angel-worship but rather to lend emphasis to two points which the writer is concerned to make: (1) The sanctions attending the law, which was communicated through angels, were severe enough in all conscience; how much more awful must be the consequence of belittling God’s final communication which was delivered not through angels but by the Son? (2) Whereas the old order was subordinated to angels, the new world, which is to supersede it, is subjected to the Son of man.
Thus Bruce understands the angels in Hebrews 1:7 as the counterpart of the ‘myriads of angels’ in Hebrews 12:22 where the angels are understood to be the attendants sent to minister to the heirs of salvation. Bruce said that when ‘believers come to the myriads of angels it is not to worship them, but to worship the God whose servants they are’. Horton and Buchanan also suggest that Hebrews could be understood without reference to Qumran. It seems to be clear that although there are some parallels found in the Qumran and Hebrews it is by no means certain that the arguments in Hebrews are influenced by the Qumran community.”
Kiwoong Son, Zion Symbolism in Hebrews: Hebrews 12:18-24 as a Hermeneutical Key to the Epistle (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2005), 11–12.
Discussion (0)
There are no comments for this doc yet.