10 A Literary and Structural Analysis of Hebrews 1-7: An Inter-Biblical Interpretation of Melchizedek

In the previous chapters, we have examined how a later OT biblical writer read and interpreted an antecedent Scriptural text, taking also its cotexts into account in his interpretation. In this chapter, the study moves from inner-biblical interpretation to inter-biblical interpretation,673 that is, to the area of how the NT interprets the OT. Our primary concern is whether the author of Hebrews, when alluding to or citing an OT text, also took the cotext(s) of that OT text into consideration. For instance, when the author of Hebrews interpreted Psalm 110, a frequently quoted OT text in the letter, did the author also take into consideration other Psalms by reading and interpreting them together? Did the author allow the other Psalms (cotexts of Psalm 110) to shed light on Psalm 110 and ultimately let the Psalms shape the theme and structure of the letter? With the above questions in mind, we lay out the study of this (and the following) chapter. Our study of Hebrews will concentrate on how these texts, Psalms 2, 110 (viewed as cotext to each other), and Genesis 14 (with its cotexts, such as Genesis 22, Numbers 22-24 and 2 Samuel 7) are interpreted in Hebrews.674 This leads us to consider how these OT texts have shaped the argument of Hebrews in the areas of compositional structure, and theme. We will primarily confine ourselves to the first seven chapters of Hebrews, and a reason for this confinement will be explained as our study progresses. In this chapter, our approach to Hebrews 1-7 is a rhetorical analysis intended to detect the structure and theme of Hebrews. (In our next chapter, we will analyze Hebrews 5-7 through discourse analysis and turn the spotlight on Hebrews 7, still bearing in mind the use of OT quotations in shaping the theme and structure of the book of Hebrews.) The study of Hebrews presents several major problems. We intend to list several of the key issues as well as, for the purpose of a fuller treatment, to direct our readers to up-to-date scholarly works. Three unresolved major issues are authorship,

Hebrews did influence how the author structured his letter. The question before us is, how much did the use of the OT shape the structure of Hebrews? 680 This question, it should be noted, is not new. Some scholars have advanced the thesis that the structure of Hebrews can be detected in light of the use of several key OT citations in the letter. Caird, among others, is one of the early proponents of this thesis.681 He proposes that the four key OT citations, Psalms 8, 95, 110 and Jeremiah 31, "control the drift of the argument."682 His proposal, though later modified by other scholars,683 remains one of the viable solutions to the structure of Hebrews.
Taking the route of Caird and others,684 we argue that one can detect the structure and the message or themes of Hebrews by a close examination of how the OT texts are cited (or alluded to) and interpreted in the body of the letter. Such examination, on the one hand, will enhance our understanding of the use of the OT in Hebrews, or by extension, the OT in the NT. On the other hand, we hope to avoid, as George Rice cautions,685 allowing our attention to the structure to overshadow the theme (or motif) in Hebrews, as many biblical scholars have done. In summary, we will pay attention to OT citations or allusions by detecting both the structure and the theme of Hebrews, assuming that the OT did shape the theme and structure of Hebrews.686

A Rhetorical Analysis of the Thematic Development in the Structure of Hebrews: The Use of the OT Scriptures as Clue
In the next five sections, we will argue that in Hebrews 1 we can detect a structural unity based on the citation of and allusion to OT texts. Next, based on the structure of Hebrews 1 as detected in the first section, we will examine, through rhetorical analysis, the development of the thematic notion in Hebrews 1 based on the OT allusion and citations found in Hebrews 1. Then we will briefly review the thematic notion serving as a programmatic guide for Hebrews 1-7. In the third section, we will argue that the sonship notion has its rhetorical effect on Hebrews 1-7, based on an inclusio. In the fourth section, we will review the sonship notion in light of the use of OT allusions and quotations in Hebrews 1 and 7. In the fifth (final) section, we will respond to the matter of why the sonship theme is limited to Hebrews 1-7.687

The Structure of Hebrews in Light of the OT Allusions and Citations in Hebrews 1
The prologue of Hebrews, 1:1-4, as well as chapter one in its entirety, is well written stylistically and effectively provides interpretative clues for a perceptive reader to understand the argument and theme of the letter.688 By examining 1:1-4 and the rest of Hebrews 1, we should be able to detect both the theme and the structure of Hebrews.
Some scholars point to two allusions to the OT in the prologue. First, verse 2 contains the first allusion to Ps 2:8,689 or better, to Ps 2:7-8. To illustrate, we highlight (boxed) the text of Hebrews and Ps 2:7-8 (LXX) as follows: In his article Ebert also delineates his thesis that the prologue is characterized by a symmetrical design, with the implication to study Hebrews bearing in mind the threefoldfunction of the Son as prophet, king, and priest.
In Ps 2:7-8, the messianic king is characterized as Yahweh's "son"690 and as "heir" of the nations. These two notions, the sonship and heirship, are now conferred upon Jesus by the author of Hebrews. A second allusion691 is found in v. 3: ev ka, qisen ev n dexia/ | th/ j megalwsu, nhj ev n uỳhloi/ j.692 It is an allusion to Ps 110:1 (the LXX):693 ka, qou ev k dexiw/ n mou. The exalted messianic figure in Ps 110 is now viewed by the author of Hebrews as fulfilled in Jesus.
While these two OT references in 1:2-3 could be easily missed by the reader, the author cites them more explicitly in the same chapter of Hebrews: Ps 2:7 in 1:5a and Ps 110:1 in 1:13. It seems that the author of Hebrews deliberately uses these two OT references, Ps 2:7-8 and 110:1, to provide a unified structure for Hebrews 1. Hence, the prologue and the rest of Hebrews 1 are tied literarily and thematically to the same two OT references in allusions and citations, making them one unit.694

A Thematic Development of Hebrews in Light of the Rhetorical Structure, Cast by the OT Allusions and Citations in Hebrews 1
Besides unifying the chapter, the juxtaposition of Psalms 2 and 110 in Hebrews 1 has a rhetorical effect695 on the letter. This rhetorical effect shapes the message (themes) of 690 See our study on Psalm 2 in our chapter 8. 691 Ebert, "Chiastic Structure," 173. Cf. J. van der Ploeg, "L'exégèse de l'Ancien Testamen dans l'Épître aux Hébreux," RB 54 (1947): 207. 692 Lane's observation of this word ev ka, qisen ("sat") and the rest of this clause is well-taken: "Syntactically, each of the participial clauses of v. 3 is dependent upon the finite ev ka, qisen, which grammatically provides the main assertion of vv. 3-4. This is particularly significant . . . for it establishes that the acts of purifying and sitting were temporally sequential . . . . These two clauses announce the major themes of the writer's christology, i.e., sacrifice and exaltation . . . . The declaration that the Son has been exalted to a position at God's right hand bears an unmistakable allusion to Ps 110:1, for this is the only biblical text that speaks of someone enthroned beside God." Lane, Hebrews 1-8, 15-16. 693 Psalm 110 in the MT is Psalm 109 in the LXX. From this point onward, we will use Psalm 110 as our reference even when its LXX text is referred to. This applies also to all the psalms with numbers differing in the MT from those of the LXX. 694 John P. Meier, in two articles, attempts to unify the prologue and 1:5-13 by looking at these two units, first in numerical symmetry and then in a general movement of thought. Meier, "Structure and the letter, that is, the Son,696 who is exalted above all (mode of revelation, angels, OT figures, etc).
The sonship notion in the allusions and quotations of Psalms 2 and 110 also entertains a kingly theme. When taking a detailed look at the allusions697 in Heb 1:2-3, as delineated earlier, they seem to echo each other in a chiastic structure set out by Ebert,698 that the Son as messianic heir echoes the Son as messianic king.699 Although the kingship notion is not a dominant theme in Hebrews, its implicit placement here 696 Lane argues that the OT citations in 1:5-13 "were selected to undergird the declarations concerning the Son in the core of the exordium (vv. 2b-3c)." Lane, The key difference between Hughes' thesis and ours is that he sees the son as "the new form of God's address" (or as God's [final] revelation or as the Word of God), superior to "angelic mediators of the Law, to the human agent [i.e., Moses] in that revelation, to the priestly organization based on the Law." See Hughes, Hebrews and Hermeneutics, 24, cf. 5 (the key title). We do not deny the revelatory aspect of Jesus' sonship. Yet Hughes' thesis basically subordinates the sonship in the "Word" while we propose the sonship overarching everything in Hebrews as we will later develop in this chapter. For a christology discussion, see Lane, Hebrews 1-8, cxxxv-cxliv. Lane sees the sonship motif (theme) as dominant in Hebrews 1-4, while the priestly motif as dominant in Hebrews 5-10 in the christology of Hebrews (see p. cxli), but in the end, he acknowledges that christology in Hebrews is a "richly integrated synthesis. For the writer, the integrating factor was the confession that Jesus is the Son of God . . . . The hallmark of his christology is the dynamic way in which motifs merge and flow together in his presentaion of Jesus as the incarnate Son of God" (see p. cxliv). 697 The two allusions are ev n uiẁ/ | ( o] n e; qhken klhrono, mon pa, ntwn and ev ka, qisen ev n dexia/ | th/ j megalwsu, nhj ev n uỳhloi/ j. 698 Ebert lays out the chiastic structure for Heb 1:1-4 as follows (italics ours for emphasis): A The Son contrasted with prophets, vv. 1-2 B The Son as messianic heir, v. 2b C The Son's creative work, v. 2c D The Son's threefold mediatorial relationship to God, vv. 3a-b C' The Son's redemptive work, v. 3c B' The Son as messianic king, v. 3d A' The Son contrasted with angels, v. 4 Ebert, "Chiastic Structure," 168. 699 Lane thinks the allusion to Psalm 110 in Heb 1:3 is a description of Jesus as "the royal priest." It seems, in our opinion, Lane has read too much into Heb 1:3 because the allusion to Psalm 110 only pertains to v. 1 of that Psalm and also the priestly notion comes (or develops) much later in Hebrews. See Lane, Hebrews 1-8, 6, 7, 9, cf. 15.
(early in the letter), paves the way for a later discussion of the priesthood according to Melchizedek, whose dual status as king and priest establishes the priesthood that Jesus resumes as a "royal"700 priesthood. This "royal" element in the priesthood notion can be further reinforced by the inclusio effect of the quotations of Ps 2:7 (in Heb 1:5) and Ps 110:1 (in 1:13).701 At any rate, we should note the kingly notion, which is embedded in the sonship theme in Heb 1:2-3, 5 and 13, will reappear in Heb 7:1-2.702 One can visualize the correlation of the theme/motif and allusions/citations of Psalms 2 and 110 in Hebrews in figure 9 as follows:

Hebrews
OT texts Theme  strengthened by an additional citation in 1:5b, quoting 2 Sam 7:14,705 another OT text that remarkably concerns the (Davidic) son.706 Note that this first quotation (Heb 1:5) in the catena of OT Scripture is put in the form of a rhetorical question, which echoes another rhetorical question in the last quotation (v. 13) of the catena of Scripture in vv. 5-13.707 Second, immediately following the double quotations in Heb 1:5, the author strengthens the sonship notion by using another key word, prwto, tokon ("the firstborn son"). After discussing its possible allusion to Ps 89: 28[27] (the LXX) and its possible parallel to God's having brought Israel into the promised land (as God brought his firstborn to th. n oiv koume, nhn),708 Lane comments that "'the title' prwto, tokon is appropriate to a context developing the theme of Son and heir."709 Third, although the rest of the catena of the OT passages in Heb 1:7-12 does not contain the word "son" (or its related words except the author's own word "son" in v. 8), there is some theological input of the sonship notion. Briefly, vv. 7-12 puts the , it is possible, in our judgment, that the author of Hebrews is familiar with the text of 2 Samuel 7. To support our opinion, we note that Heb 1:4 may contain an allusion to 2 Sam 7:13a (the LXX): cf. auv to. j oiv kodomh, sei moi oi= kon tw/ | ovno,mati, mou to keklhrono, mhken o;noma (italics ours for emphasis). Thus, Heb 1:4 alludes to 2 Sam 7:13a while Heb 1:5b cites 2 Sam 7:14a. Lane, like a handful of scholars, argues that the superior name in Heb 1:4 is based on Ps 2:7 quoted in 1:5 but we contend that the "name" in Heb 1:4 is based on the allusion to 2 Sam 7:13 instead. Lane , Hebrews 1-8, 17;  Son over angels (v. 7) and substantiates the nature of the sonship in his divinity and his eternality (vv. 8-9), his role in creation (v. 10) and his unchangeableness (vv. 11-12).710 Thus far, we have commented on the sonship notion in Hebrews 1 in view of the allusions and quotations of Psalms 2 and 110, and the rest of the material found there. Next, we will take a brief look at how this sonship theme is developed and serves as a "programmatic guide" to the rest of Hebrews (1-7).711 In the course of Hebrews' argumentative development, the Son is exalted (or superior, krei, ttwn, see 1:4 and et al.) above the angels (1:5-2:18) with Psalm 8 being cited in Hebrews 2. The Son is above Moses712 (marked by his faithfulness in Hebrews 3) with Psalm 95 being cited and also above Joshua (marked by his leadership to give people Sabbath rest in 4:1-11 although the rest was characterized as temporary; cf. 4:8-9).
Furthermore, as the course of development moves into Hebrews 5 through 7following the transition of 4:12-16 -Ps 110:4 is quoted in juxtaposition with Ps 2:7 in Heb 5:5-6, where we can argue that the exalted sonship of Jesus is then transformed into the royal priesthood of Jesus. (Later, in our next chapter, we will elaborate on this transformation.) Suffice it to say that the allusions and citations of Psalms 2 and 110 provide the perceptive reader with a framework for the primary theme -the Son -of this letter.
Building on the above observations, we will further delineate the thematic notion of "sonship" -culminating in the appropriation of Psalms 2 and 110 by the author of Hebrews -woven into the first part of Hebrews, chapters 1-7 in the next section. Our focus is the rhetorical effect of the "son" to Hebrews 1-7 and the use of Psalms in Hebrews 1-7.
710 Motyer categorizes the OT quotations in Heb 1:5-13 into three categories: (1) texts definitely understood as messianic, (2) texts readily understood as messianic but which originally contained no messianic notion, and (3) texts being stretched and teased but extended into the same line of thought. Those quoted in Heb 1:8-9 belong to (2) while those in Heb 1:10-12 belong to (3). Note also those in Heb 1:5-6 belong to (1). See Motyer, "Psalm Quotations," 15-21. 711 G. Hughes takes a similar approach in his thesis (son as God's new form of address): he examines his thesis in the prologue, setting the prologue as the platform for the rest of Hebrews. Then he examines 1:5-2:4, 3:1-4:13 and 4:14-7:28. Idem, Hebrews and Hermeneutics, 5-16. Interestingly, his analysis stops at 7:28. 712 See a discussion by Lane on why Jesus as the son is first compared to angels, then Moses in Lane, Hebrews 1-8, cxxviii. It should be noted, however, that most commentators may not specifically use the word "son" when considering the comparison between him and the angels, Moses, and so forth in Heb 1:5-4:13.

Son as an "Inclusion" in Hebrews 1 and 7: Its Rhetorical Effect on Hebrews 1-7
The appearance of uiò, j in 1:2 and 7:28 is strategic or rhetorical: it serves, in our opinion, as an inclusio for Hebrews 1-7 and it dictates the sonship as an overarching notion for Hebrews 1-7. This inclusio can be explained in two ways.
First, when uiò, j appears in 1:2, it replaces the primacy of God in the prologue, as some scholars have noted. For instance, Black, through his syntactical analysis of Heb 1:1-4, discerns a clear progression from God to his Son. He then argues that God is not to be understood as the focal point of the argument because, even though God is the speaker, his ultimate revelation is in his Son, making the Son the main feature of 1:1-4713 (and by extension, to Hebrews 1-7).
The second explanation is that the last appearance of uiò, j occurs in 7:28, regarded by Lane as "a concluding contrast summarizing the argument of the entire chapter [Hebrews 7]"714 or, in our opinion, the entire section of Hebrews 5-7. According to Lane, there are three antitheses in 7:28: (1) the Levitical priesthood is by "the law" (o` no, moj) vs. the new priesthood (in Melchizedek's order), which is by "the word of oath" (o` lo, goj de. th/ j orkwmosi, aj); (2) the old priesthood is "human" (av nqrw, pouj) while the new priesthood is "the Son" (uiò, n); (3) the old priests are "plagued with weakness" (e; contaj av sqe, neian) but the new priest -the Son -has been "made perfect forever" (eiv j to. n aiv w/ na teteleiwme, nonÅ).715 For Lane (and we also agree), the emphasis in v. 28 is placed on the last phrase: uiò. n eiv j to. n aiv w/ na teteleiwme, non,716 referring to the Son's high priesthood conferred upon him based on Ps 110:4 (the phrase eiv j to. n aiv w/ na is an allusion to 110:4). In summary, the inclusio by the appearance of uiò, j strengthens our argument that the author of Hebrews intends to thematize Hebrews 1-7 with the notion of God's Son, Jesus. Nonetheless, this thematization should also be viewed in light of OT citations and allusions.

Citations and Allusions of Psalm 2 and 110 in Hebrews 1 and 7 as a Rhetorical Effect for the Son as the Overarching Theme
Previously, we have established that without a doubt Psalms 2 and 110 are alluded to and then cited in Hebrews 1. Do we detect both Psalms in Hebrews 7? It is quite obvious that a portion of Psalm 110 has been repeatedly cited in Hebrews 7,717 including the phrase eiv j to. n aiv w/ na alluded to in Heb 7:28. Nonetheless, Psalm 2 appears to be absent in Hebrews 7. We offer, however, two possible allusions to Psalm 2. First, the Son (uiò, n in 7:28), viewed from the broader context of Hebrews (that is in light of Hebrews 1), will remind the perceptive reader of Ps 2:7, alluded to and cited in Heb 1:2 and 5. Also, as we have established earlier in the above section, this inclusio technique in the word "Son" is one of the literary tools a skillful composer would use.718 Second, the phrase o` lo, goj th/ j orkwmosi, aj ("the word of the oath") not only reminds the reader of Psalm 110:4a (w; mosen ku, rioj kai. ouv metamelhqh, setai), but also of Ps 2:7b, found in the content of a divine speech in Ps 2:7a: ku, rioj ei= pen pro, j me. 719 We can visualize the rhetorical effect by the use of inclusio of the "Son" in the following figure (10): 717 See the list of citations of and allusions (in italics) to Psalm 110:4 (su. ei= ièreu. j eiv j to. n aiv w/ na kata. th. n ta, xin Melcisedek) in Hebrews 7 as follows: 7:3 me, nei ièreu. j eiv j to. dihneke, j (uncertain) 7:11 kata. th. n ta, xin Melcise, dek 7:17 su. ei= ièreu. j eiv j to. n aiv w/ na kata. th. n ta, xin Melcise, dek 7:21 :Wmosen ku, rioj kai. ouv metamelhqh, setai( su. ièreu. j eiv j to. n aiv w/ na 7:24 eiv j to. n aiv w/ na. 7:28 eiv j to. n aiv w/ na. One may want to add Psalm 110:1 as being alluded to in 8:1 immediately following Hebrews 7: ev ka, qisen ev n dexia/ | tou/ qro, nou, cf. to ka, qou ev k dexiw/ n mou (Ps 110:1, LXX). See Hay, The Right Hand, 46 (chart 3), cf. 87. 718 Admittedly, our argument (a possible allusion) here is based on one word (uiò, n in 7:28). By no means would we argue that every time the Greek word uiò, j occurs in Hebrews, it is an allusion to Psalm 2:7. Nonetheless, our argument is based on (1) the literary device (inclusio) used by the author of Hebrews as noted in this chapter and (2) the larger literary frame as observed in Hebrews 1 and 7 as noted above. 719 See the discussion in our analysis of the literary-thematic relationship between Psalms 2 and 110 in chapter 9, pp. 343-45: we have also argued that Psalm 2, though it is not cast in a divine oath, should be read in light of Psalm 110. At least some scholars view both Psalms as being cast in divine speeches or oracles; see Spieckermann, "Rede Gottes," 157-58. The above figure illustrates the notion that Psalm 2 and 110 provide a thematic structure of Hebrews 1-7 concerning the Son. Or, viewed from the main point of interest of our study, the Psalter, especially Psalms 2 and 110, seems to shape the structure and the message of Hebrews. Was the author of Hebrews reading the Psalter in its total canonical shape? We believe such possibility exists as we have delineated in our last two chapters of the message of the Psalter: Torah-pointing-to-the-messiah as God's divine Son. This possibility grows stronger when we highlight the juxtaposition of Psalms 2 and 110 in Heb 5:5-6, which is nearly the midpoint of Hebrews 1 through 7 (see the "Syntagmatic Use of the 'Son'" section in next chapter).
Our contention of the sonship notion as an overarching theme for Hebrews 1-7 may raise some questions. In the next section we will answer these questions.

Rhetorical Effect of the Son in Hebrews 1-7: Answers to Some Possible Issues
Two issues, though related, will be raised at this point, which can be posed in two sets of questions: first, why do we argue that the notion of sonship serves as a thematic-rhetoric device only for the first seven chapters of Hebrews? Does this mean the sonship notion is unimportant for the remainder of Hebrews? Second, given the notion of sonship as an overarching theme for Hebrews 1-7, how then should Hebrews 8-13 be read? Our next two sections are dedicated to seeking answers to these two sets of questions.

Sonship: Overarching Thematic Notion in the Structure of Hebrews 1-7
The question why the sonship theme appears limited to Hebrews 1-7 calls for a twofold answer: first, the word uiò, j, referring to Jesus Christ, only appears in the first seven chapters of Hebrews (with the exception of one occurrence in 10:29). This word uiò, j, with a clear reference to Jesus Christ, occurs in the following verses:720 1:2, 1:5 (in quotation, 2 times); 1:8; 2:6 (in quotation);721 3:6; 4:14; 5:5 (in quotation); 5:8; 6:6;722 7:3; and 7:28 (plus 10:29). The occurrences of uiò, j without reference to Jesus mainly occur after Hebrews 7.723 The usage of uiò, j, suggests the author of Hebrews wants to stress sonship in the first seven chapters.724 Second, one can detect a thematic break between Hebrews 1-7 and 8-13.725 The author achieves this thematic break by employing at least two devices. The first device is a change of genre and subject matter from Hebrews 7 to 8. Looking at the structure of Hebrews from the perspective of genre, Stanley argues that there is a structural seam between Hebrews 7 and 8.726 Grässer, looking at the subject matter, comments: "Hatte chapter 7 die Person Christi beschrieben, so beginnt in 8,1 eine bis 10,18 reichende zusammenhängende Beschreibung seines hohepriesterlichen Werkes . 723 Other appearances of uiò, j not referring to Jesus are 2:10 (the sonship of Jesus resulting many "sons" into glory), 7:5 ("sons" of Levi), 11:21, 22, 24, 12:5 (twice), 6, 7 (twice), 8. 724 G. Hughes (Hebrews and Hermeneutics, 13) notices the absence of the term "son" after Hebrews 7. As we discussed earlier in the chapter, the sonship theme is further strengthened by the two strategic positions where uiò, j appears. 725 It is difficult to observe a thematic break between Hebrews 1-7 and 8-13, particularly in the materials between Hebrews 5-10, because in both segments the contents are closely related. Besides, most commentators outline Hebrews 5-10 or precisely 5:1-10:18 (some include 4:14-16 and/or 10:19-39) as one block of materials. See, for example, O. Michel, Der Brief, 6, cf. 204. 726 Stanley, "Structure of Hebrews," 258-60. For him, Hebrews 7 is a unit by itself while Hebrews 8-10, and 11-13 form two additional units. 727 Grässer, An die Hebräer: 7,1-10,18, EKKNT, vol. 17 (Part 2), (Zürich: Benziger, 1993), 77 (italics his). establishment of the high priesthood office for God's Son (Hebrews 5-7) to the ministry of this priesthood by Christ (Hebrews 8-10). 728 The second device is the transition passage of 8:1-2. While 8:1-2 poses a challenge to interpreters mainly due to the word kefa, laion,729 others, through text-linguistics, observe that these two verses function as a transitional device, or in Guthrie's term, "direct intermediary transition."730 Guthrie argues that these two verses stand between two blocks of materials: 5:1-7:28, about the Son's appointment as high priest and 8:3-10:18 about the heavenly offering or ministry of this royal high priest. 731 Thus far we have explained that the author of Hebrews sets in place the sonship theme as the overarching emphasis for the first seven chapters. First, the author of Hebrews, by means of allusion to and citation of Psalm 2 and 110 in Hebrews 1, anchors the notion of the Son being exalted. Noticeably there is a thematic break after Hebrews 7, detected by the change of genre, subject matter, and use of a transition paragraph (8:1-2).

Sonship: Overarching Thematic Notion, and the Rest of Hebrews (8-13)
Having justified sonship as the overarching theme of Hebrews 1-7, how then should we read Hebrews 8-13? The richness of the materials in Hebrews 8-13 warrants a detailed analysis to tie the sonship notion to the contents of these chapters. Yet constraints and the risk of over-generalization limit our attention here to a short epitome.