Who wrote Hebrews? This question has puzzled believers for generations. The book is actually anonymous, but although the name was not indicated, the writer was definitely known to his readers. Even though there is frequent quotation of the Old Testament,² not once did the author refer to any Biblical writer by name. In order to remain consistent within his literary style, the author perhaps chose to remain anonymous. In this way his readers would be motivated by the impact of his message rather than by the influence of his personality or position.

Scholars have suggested several names as possibilities for the authorship of this book. Among them are Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, Priscilla, Silas, and, of course, Paul. Generally, the debate centers around Paul: Did he or did he not write the book? Quite often, more effort is spent in the denial of Pauline authorship than in the positive affirmation of arguments for a substitute writer. Even the early church had problems over the authenticity of the book. The Eastern church accepted it as an original Pauline, canonical book, whereas the Western church denied its Pauline authorship and excluded it from the canon, mainly because of the uncertain authorship.

What, then, are the arguments used against the view that Paul wrote the book? Since Paul opened all thirteen of his Epistles with a salutation including his name, the absence both of his name and the salutation is first cited (cf. 2 Thess. 3:17). The critics also claim that the literary style which undergirds Hebrews is substantially different from that in acknowledged Pauline writings. Since Paul was the self-acknowledged Apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; Gal. 2:7), would he have written such a lengthy treatise to a Jewish assembly? Paul claimed that his message and apostleship were given to him directly by Christ (Gal. 1:1, 11–12), but this writer was dependent upon others for his knowledge of salvation: "How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him?" (2:3). Like Luke, he seemed to identify himself as a second generation Christian (cf. Luke 1:1–2). The central theme of the book, the high priesthood of Christ, is not found anywhere in Paul’s writings. The quotations of the Old Testament are all taken from the Septuagint, whereas Paul generally quoted from both the Greek translation and the Hebrew Old Testament. Timothy’s release probably took place after the writing of Second Timothy or after Paul’s martyrdom (13:23; cf. 2 Tim. 4:9, 21). Since the book was probably written just before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple (a.d. 70) or in the latter third of the first century, the author’s expectation of a release from imprisonment does not fit into the political atmosphere of Paul’s second Roman captivity (10:34; 13:23; cf. 2 Tim. 4:6). Honest inquiry must admit that these arguments considered together do appear impressive.

On the other side, what are the proofs cited to support the Pauline authorship of this book? The author was in prison, and Paul suffered many imprisonments (10:34; cf. 2 Cor. 11:23). This one does not have to be equated with his second Roman captivity. In all previous confinements he did expect to be released (13:23; cf. Phil. 2:23–24; Philem. v. 22). Contrary to critical analysis, there are several doctrinal affinities between Hebrews and Paul’s writings: the preeminence of Christ (1:1–3; cf. Col. 1:14–19); the authentication of apostles by divine gifts and miracles (2:3–4; cf. 1 Cor. 12–14; 2 Cor. 12:12); the humiliation of Christ (2:9–18; cf. Phil. 2:5–11); the use of Israel’s wanderings as examples to contemporary believers (3:7–4:8; cf. 1 Cor. 10:1–11); the temporary nature of the old covenant (8:1–13; cf. 2 Cor. 3:6–18); and the emphasis of the faith principle (11:1–40; cf. Rom. 1:17). In fact, Habakkuk’s declaration that the just shall live by faith (Hab. 2:4) is quoted three times in the New Testament (Heb. 10:38; cf. Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11). This quotation seems to have been a distinctive Pauline trait. The close companionship of Timothy is also cited (13:23). Although Paul saw himself as an apostle to the Gentiles, he preached to the Jews first wherever he went (Rom. 1:16), often visited the Jerusalem church, and had a deep spiritual concern for Israel (Rom. 9:1–5; 10:1–4). His Pharisaical training under Gamaliel in Jerusalem would have provided him with a thorough knowledge of the history and the rites of the Jewish sacrificial system (Acts 22:30). Few others would have had the background to compose such a book heavy with allusions to Exodus and Leviticus. The closing section bears a great resemblance to Pauline concerns. He requested prayer in his behalf (13:18; cf. Eph. 6:19), desired a good conscience (13:18; cf. Acts 24:16; 2 Tim. 1:3), identified the Father as the God of peace (13:20; cf. Rom. 15:33; Phil. 4:9; 1 Thess. 5:23), and pronounced a benediction of grace (13:25; cf. Philem. v. 25). Some have even suggested that Peter’s allusion to Paul’s writings included a specific reference to Hebrews (2 Peter 3:15–16).

What conclusions can be drawn from this debate? In the final analysis, only God knows for sure who the author was. Although the book is nameless, this fact does not detract from the authenticity or inspired authority of its contents. If the book was not written by Paul, then it must have been composed by a close associate of the apostle with or without his direct supervision.

To whom did the author write? The answer to this important question will help solve many of the interpretative problems within the book. Were they saved? Unsaved? Did the author think that they were saved but in reality they were not? Where did they live?

First of all, he regarded his readers as believers. He addressed them as "brethren" (3:1, 12) and as "beloved" (6:9). To him, they were "partakers of the heavenly calling" (3:1) and "partakers of Christ" (3:14). The warnings given to them would only apply to genuine believers (3:12–13). Unbelievers are already possessed with an evil heart of unbelief; nowhere are they commanded to exhort each other.

Second, they were immature (5:11–14). They had been saved a long time, but they had not grown spiritually. They were unable to receive the meat of Biblical teaching because they were on a milk diet. They did not have enough knowledge or experience to make adult distinctions between right and wrong choices. The writer saw them as spiritual "babes."

Third, they were wavering in their faith. After their conversion, they had endured persecutions, identified themselves with other oppressed believers, seen their material possessions destroyed, and had compassion over the author’s imprisonment (10:32–34). However, their present conduct did not manifest that initial freshness and joy any more. They grew tired of their persecutions and failed to trust God as they once did (10:35–38).

Fourth, they were apparently well known to the author. He planned to visit them after his release from prison (13:23). In the hope of his restoration to them (13:19), there is a hint that he had been with them at least on one occasion before.

Fifth, the readers either resided in Rome or in Palestine. In his closing salutation, he wrote: "They of Italy salute you" (13:24). Does this mean that the author was in Italy, perhaps Rome, and that the Italian believers wanted to send greetings? Or, does it mean that Italian believers, outside of their homeland, wanted to be remembered to their Christian friends back in Italy? Evangelical opinion is divided over the issue. Advocates of a Roman destination point out that the readers were known for their financial generosity (6:10) whereas the church at Jerusalem was marked by poverty (Acts 11:27–30; Rom. 15:26). However, the Jerusalem believers did unselfishly share their material possessions (Acts 2:44–45; 4:32–37). Even the Macedonian churches were known paradoxically for both their poverty and liberality (2 Cor. 8:1–2). If the readers’ knowledge of the sacrificial rites came from a past participation in temple worship at Jerusalem, then they were probably residents of the environs around the holy city; however, as loyal pilgrims to the annual feasts of Passover, Pentecost, or Tabernacles (cf. Acts 2:10), they could have gained their facts through that experience. If their knowledge was based solely upon a study of the Old Testament, then they probably resided outside of Palestine. In conclusion, no one can really be dogmatic about the exact destination.

As indicated before, the readers had been saved for a rather long period of time (5:12). They had been verbally assaulted and had suffered the loss of personal property for their faith, but they had not yet been beaten or killed (12:3–4). However, the threat of such severe persecution now loomed in their immediate future. It may be that the imminent Jewish-Roman war prompted this threat. As Jewish Christians, they faced a personal dilemma. Should they identify themselves racially with their fellow Jews in possible combat against the Romans and thus gain the favor of their countrymen? Or, should they remain identified with the Jewish-Gentile Christian assembly and assume a neutral position politically, especially since Christ predicted the destruction of Jerusalem with its temple because of her rejection of Him (Matt. 23:37–24:1–2)? This latter action would incur the wrath of their fellow Jews. They thus faced this question: Shall we go on with Christ and His people even though it means persecution and possible death, or shall we go back to be identified with Jewish national and religious life again and thus avoid this persecution? Some had already made their decision and had defected from the Christian assembly (10:25). The majority had not yet made up their minds. The author, aware of the situation, wrote to admonish them not to take this drastic step of disobedience but to endure patiently and faithfully the persecutions while they anticipated both the imminent coming of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem with its temple (10:22–25).

There is good evidence that the book was written just a few years before the destruction of Jerusalem (a.d. 70), perhaps about a.d. 67–68. It had to be composed during the lifetime of second generation Christians who themselves had been saved for some while (2:3–4; 5:11–14). Timothy was still alive (13:23). The author used present verbal tenses and participles to describe the ritual service of the priests (8:4, 13; 9:4, 5, 9; 10:1, 8, 11; 13:10, 11). This would seem to indicate that the temple was still standing. However, some have pointed out that the use of the present tense was only a literary device and it was employed by Church Fathers writing after a.d. 70. They further claim that the author was comparing the priestly ministry of Christ with that of the Mosaic tabernacle, not that of the Zerubbabel-Herod temple. The natural reading of the text, though, seems to refer to a comparison of simultaneous ministries on earth and in heaven. If the book had been written after a.d. 70, certainly the author would have referred to the destruction of the temple as his capstone argument. His silence argues for the earlier date.

The main purpose was to demonstrate the superiority of the person and work of Christ to the Old Testament sacrificial system (1:1–10:18). Once the author had made that point, he was then able to combat the imminent danger of defection (2:1–4; 10:19–25), to provoke his readers to growth into Christian maturity (5:11–14; 10:32–39), to comfort them in their persecutions (11:1–12:13), to warn them about the severity of divine chastisement (6:3–12; 10:26–31; 12:3–13), to alert them to the dangers of false teaching (13:9), and to request prayer for himself (13:18–25).

This book contains the classic presentation of the doctrine of the priesthood of Christ. Although other books emphasize the value of Christ’s death, the emphasis here is upon Christ as the priest who made the sacrifice of Himself. In addition, the book reveals an area of Christ’s ministry untouched in other volumes: His present priestly ministry of intercession. Paul mentioned that Christ was at the right hand of God, making intercession for believers (Rom. 8:34); the Book of Hebrews describes the nature of that intercession:

The key passage on the exposition of divine chastisement is also found here (12:3–12). A believer should not despise the chastening of God, but he should endure it and profit spiritually from it. Chastisement is a sign of divine love and sonship; lack of it may indicate an illegitimate relationship or an unregenerate heart. It should produce reverence, submission, peace, righteousness, and encouragement in the believer’s life.

The book also contains the "Faith Hall of Fame" (11:1–40). The Old Testament characters of Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, Rahab, and others are cited as examples of men and women who believed that "he [God] is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (11:6). These endured the persecutions of the world because they trusted God. The famous definition or description of faith is set forth here: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (11:1). Whenever evangelical Christians think of the subject of faith, their minds automatically turn to Hebrews 11.

The book is full of warnings, inserted at various intervals within the presentation of the author’s theme (2:1–4; 3:7–9; 4:1–13; 5:11–6:20; 10:26–31; 12:14–17; 12:18–29). The writer did not want to wait until his conclusion to apply the truths to the lives of his readers. These warnings were signaled by the sevenfold use of "lest" (2:1; 3:12, 13; 4:11; 12:3, 13, 15).

The author involved himself in the commands he directed toward his readers by making use of the Greek hortatory subjunctive. These are all introduced by the words "Let us.…" Here is a listing of the thirteen instances:

This type of command was not as direct or harsh as a regular imperative. The author thus spoke to himself as well as to his readers.

The key word of the book is "better." The word is used thirteen times to show the superiority of the believer’s position in Christ (1:4; 6:9; 7:7, 19, 22; 8:6 [twice]; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16, 35, 40). In Christ the believer has a better hope, covenant, promises, substance, country, and resurrection.

In the opening verses of this book, which begins more like a treatise than a letter, the author set forth three contrasts between two modes of divine revelation:

Visions, dreams, and theophanies marked Old Testament history. Whereas the prophets said: "Thus saith the Lord," Christ said: "I say unto you." In seven ways He was better than the prophets: heir of all things, creator of the time-space universe, brightness of God’s glory, express image of His person, sustainer of the world, purger of our sins, and the One seated beside the Father.

In a series of seven direct quotations from the Old Testament (1:4–14), the author demonstrated that Christ was better than the angels because of His deity. He was the Son (1:5), the incarnate firstbegotten (1:6a), the object of angelic worship (1:6b), God (1:8a), the righteous ruler (1:8b), the immutable creator (1:10–12), and the seated one (1:13). Angels ministered both to Him (1:7) and to those who would be saved (1:14). Why did he have to show the superiority of Christ to the angels? In his first warning (2:1–4), he pointed out the difference between that "spoken by the angels" and that "spoken by the Lord." Angels had a part in the giving of the law to Moses (cf. Gal. 3:19). Since those who disobeyed the Mosaic law were punished physically, is it not logical that those who disobey the word of Christ (and He is better than the angels) will receive a greater chastisement? The superiority of Christ can further be seen through His humanity (2:5–9). When God originally made man, He gave to man, not to angels, dominion over the created world; however, man lost that dominion through his sin. Christ became man and through His death and resurrection regained for man that lost dominion which He will exercise in the millennial kingdom. In a third way, Christ was better than the angels because of His saviorhood (2:10–18). Christ did not become an angel to die for angelic sin (2:16); He received a human nature (flesh and blood, seed of Abraham) in order to die for human sin. In so doing, He destroyed the most powerful angel, the devil, the one who had the power to keep men in the realm of death short of resurrection. Christ tasted death for every man and thus could bring many sons into glory (2:9–10). By becoming lower than the angels, He has lifted men to a spiritual position higher than the angels.

Christ was not only better than the spiritual agents in the giving of the law (angels), but also the human agent (Moses). Christ has more glory because as the Son He is the builder of His spiritual house, whereas Moses was merely a servant in God’s house. The second warning (3:7–19) centered around the decision made by Israel when they came to Kadesh-Barnea under Moses’ leadership. Instead of going into the land and claiming the land promised to the Patriarchal Fathers, they feared for their lives when they heard the spies’ report that there were giants in the land dwelling in walled cities. They did not believe that the God who had redeemed them out of Egypt and who had nourished them from Egypt to Kadesh could overcome their enemies. Because of their unbelief, God chastised them with forty years of wilderness wanderings, during which time an entire adult generation died. The readers had come to a spiritual Kadesh. Would they go on with Christ who had redeemed them, certain that some would lose their lives at the hands of their persecutors? Or, would they fail to trust Him and thus bring divine chastisement into their lives? The author admonished them not to repeat the same mistake: "Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness" (3:8).

The third warning centered around Christ’s superiority to Joshua. Although Joshua led Israel into Canaan, he did not establish a permanent rest (cessation of conflict) for the people. Christ, however, can provide a rest in which the believer can find the total provision of God through complete obedience to the will of God. In Canaan, some of the Israelites lost their lives in battle; in the rest of Christ, it is entirely possible that martyrdom will come, but it is better to die in the will of God (in the land) than outside of it (in the wilderness).

The next section (4:14–10:18) contains the heart of the author’s argument. In it he demonstrates that Christ is better than the Aaronic high priesthood and the Levitical priestly order in five different ways. First, He has a better position. On one day of the year, the Day of Atonement, the high priest could go into the Holy of Holies, the inner sanctuary of both the tabernacle and the temple. On the other hand, Christ "is passed into the heavens," the heavenly Holy of Holies, and is there every day of the year. Since the high priest was the representative of men before God, it is self-evident that Christ can do more for His people because of His permanent presence before the Father. Because of who Christ is, the believer can know that He has a sympathetic high priest (4:15); because of where He is, the Christian can go to Him by faith and "obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need" (4:16).

To be a priest, one had to be human and appointed of God. The priests of Israel were able to have compassion on the sinning nation because they committed the same sins and offered sacrifices not only for the nation but for themselves as well. Christ qualified for the priesthood by becoming human and by being appointed to the priestly order of Melchisedec. In Gethsemane Christ’s emotions were manifested, and there He yielded Himself completely to the will of God. As a high priest, He offered Himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the people, but not for Himself because He was without sin (cf. 4:15).

The reference to Melchisedec introduced the fourth warning. Because of the readers’ immaturity, the author was not able to disclose certain spiritual truths. He admonished them to go on to perfection or spiritual adulthood and to leave the elementary doctrines of the Christian faith (6:1). In a series of four participles, he characterized their spiritual status: They were once spiritually enlightened (2 Cor. 4:3–6); they tasted the heavenly gift; they became partakers of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:9); and they also tasted the Word of God and the coming world powers. He then warned that if such people fell away, they could not be renewed to repentance. At Kadesh-Barnea, after Israel made its crisis decision not to go on, God announced that the adult generation would die in the wilderness. The stunned people changed their minds the next day and decided to go into Canaan, but it was too late. Their decision was irreversible. The author warned that they had reached their spiritual Kadesh. A decision not to go on would bring the severe chastisement of premature physical death. The author knew that his readers had not yet made that final decision. They were still ministering to the saints as they once did. As long as they continued to bear some fruit for God, He was willing to use them, but if the time ever came that they stopped producing fruit, then chastisement would fall upon them (6:7–12; cf. John 15:1–11).

Melchisedec provided a perfect type of Christ (7:1–3). Christ is able to be both a king and a priest as he was. The order of Melchisedec was better than the order of Levi because Levi, genetically present in his great grandfather Abraham, gave tithes to the mysterious king-priest and the latter in turn blessed Levi through Abraham. The principle is clear: "And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better" (7:7). The author further argued that if the Levitical order had been designed to be permanent, then David would have never declared the advent of a priest after the order of Melchisedec (7:11–22). Death ended the priestly functions of the Levites, but Christ through His resurrection has an unending priesthood (7:24). Since there is no break in the continuity of His priesthood, His order is necessarily better.

In the opening five verses the author gave a summary of his discussion of the priesthood so far (cf. 4:14–7:28). He pointed out that Christ is a high priest in the true heavenly tabernacle which provided a pattern for the construction of the earthly Mosaic tabernacle. He concluded: "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises" (8:6). Note the three contrasts in that verse. His priesthood is superior because it is based upon a better covenant, the new covenant (cf. Jer. 31:31–37). He then argued that if God had planned for the ritualistic Mosaic covenant to be permanent, He would never have promised a new covenant years later. The old was to be replaced by the new.

The fourth superiority was revealed in the comparison of sanctuaries. The earthly tabernacle was divided into two sections: the first with the lampstand and table of showbread and the second or the Holiest of all. Since the high priest could go into the second area only once a year, it signified "that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing" (9:8). Christ, however, was a "high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle …" (9:11). His constant presence before the Father guarantees the believer eternal access into the heavenly Holy of Holies.

The superiority of Christ’s sacrifice of Himself provides the fifth contrast. The author argued that if animal blood could produce outward, ceremonial purification, "How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (9:13–14). Since Christ was the mediator of a new testament, He had to die before man could receive the promise of an eternal inheritance. Just as animal blood purified the earthly tabernacle (9:21), so Christ’s blood purified the heavenly sanctuary (9:23). The Levitical priests offered their sacrifices often (9:25), but Christ only offered Himself once (9:28). This section also mentions the three appearings of Christ: His present appearance in heaven as our intercessor (9:24); His past appearance to die on the cross (9:26); and His future appearing to save (9:28). The Old Testament sacrifices were a shadow of the very image, the sacrifice of Christ. The former could never remove the guilt of the sinful conscience; otherwise the sacrifices would not have been repeated. Christ, however, secured the positional sanctification of the believer through the offering of His body once for all (10:10). The priests’ work was never done (10:11), but Christ sat down after He offered the one sacrifice of Himself. His work was finished (cf. John 19:30).

The author has finished his argument for the superiority of Jesus Christ and one’s spiritual position in Him. Based on the fact that the believer has access into the heavenly Holy of Holies and since Christ is there as our high priest (10:19–21), the author then gave his readers three exhortations: "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith"; "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering"; and "Let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works" (10:22–24). Because of the defection of some and the imminence of the destruction of Jerusalem, they needed to unite, not to separate (10:25). He then gave a fifth warning (10:26–31). Under the Old Testament there was no sacrifice provision for open, deliberate sin; rather, the rebel was put to death by men. He then warned that if they defect after receiving "the knowledge of the truth" (10:26; cf. 1:1–10:18), they would receive a "sorer punishment" at the hands of God.

He then asked them to remember their immediate postconversion lives in which they trusted God and endured the persecutions of men. Their present need was to recapture that faith and patience (10:32–39). To encourage them he cited Old Testament characters who went through the same experiences. Abel was murdered by his brother because the former offered "a more excellent sacrifice" (11:4). Because they accepted the sacrifice of Christ, they may also lose their lives at the hands of their Jewish kinsmen. Enoch was translated into the presence of God, and it may be that they would likewise be raptured by Christ’s coming before physical death would overtake them (11:5). Noah believed and endured the reproaches of men for 120 years; they needed to realize that judgment would soon overtake their oppressors as it overtook his (11:7). Abraham believed God, obeyed, and "went out, not knowing whither he went" (11:8). Paradoxically, the "land of promise" was also "a strange country" to him, because although he was where God could bless him, he knew that he was a pilgrim and he looked for that heavenly country and city. Abraham was even willing to sacrifice Isaac as a testimony to his faith because he knew that if God could bring life out of the deadness of Sarah’s womb, He could also raise Isaac from the dead. As both physical and spiritual children of Abraham, the readers, so the author hinted, might be called upon to offer their sons in martyrdom. Would they respond as Abraham had? After citing the faith of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph (11:20–22), he pointed to Moses as one "choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season" (11:25). Moses could have avoided persecution by hiding his identity as a Hebrew, but this he refused to do. The readers could avoid persecution also if they refused to be identified with the Christian church. Many other examples are mentioned (11:30–38). Just as they "obtained a good report through faith" (11:39), so the author wanted his readers to do likewise.

Since historical precedent had been established for their anticipated experiences, the author admonished them: "Let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us" (12:1). The sin was the lack of faith. In their effort they should look to Christ as the supreme example of one who endured in order to receive the joy. Their endurance in persecutions could never compare with His endurance of human mockery and of the wrath of God upon the cross. He did it for them; now they can do it for Him.

He reminded them that chastisement was a sign of spiritual sonship and that it should not be despised. In fact, if deliberate disobedience does not bring such discipline, it may be an indication that the person is not related to Christ (12:8). Instead of feeling sorry for themselves, they should look at Christ and what He suffered for them (12:3). No one had died yet for his faith (12:4). God chastised them for their profit if they would only learn the lessons of the experience.

The sixth and final warning is now given. Do not be like Esau who sold his birthright (basis of future spiritual blessings) for a moment of physical relief from his distress. Later, when he changed his mind, he found out that the decision of his father could not be reversed. The question was obvious: Would they exchange future spiritual blessing for a moment of relief from physical persecutions? Such a sin would not be against a legalistic system (12:18–21) but against God’s program of grace described in ten ways (12:22–24). The warning concludes: "See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven" (12:25). Breaking the law brought human punishment; disobeying the voice of Christ would bring divine chastisement. The Jewish nation was about to be destroyed, but the believers had a spiritual kingdom that could not be moved (12:28). He then exhorted: "Let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire" (12:28–29).

In closing his book, the author gave a rapid series of commands dealing with the readers’ obligations to others. Brotherly love (13:1), hospitality (13:2), compassion (13:3), sexual purity (13:4), and contentment (13:5) were to mark their lives. These charges were to be obeyed with the awareness of Christ’s presence and help and with a fearlessness toward their persecutors (13:5–6).

He then admonished them to follow the faith-example of their spiritual overseers (13:7) and to obey them (13:17). Since Christ is constant in His character (13:8), they were to reflect a stability in their doctrinal position (13:9). Since Christ died without the gate of Jerusalem, they were to be identified with Him and not with those Jews who crucified Him. There may be a hint here to Jerusalem Christians to leave the city and not to defend it against an imminent Roman threat. They should put their hope in the heavenly city, not in the earthly one (13:10–14). He admonished them to offer spiritual sacrifices of thanksgiving and generosity instead of returning to the sacrificial system of the temple (13:15–16).

He then requested prayer for himself that he might have a good conscience and an honest life and that he might be restored to their fellowship (13:18–19). After his benediction (13:20–21), he exhorted them to obey his warnings and commands (13:22). He then informed them of Timothy’s release, sent greetings to them, and closed with a brief blessing (13:23–25).