Hebrews 11 : an interpretation

Abstract

The overriding tendency for an exegete of the Epistle to the Hebrews on entering into Chapter 11 is to play it straight. True, there are problems with this approach. But then almost everywhere one looks in Hebrews there are problems. True, the first three verses have complicated terminology - pistis, hypostasis, elenchos - and complicated imagery - "things not seen", "things invisible", "completing the aeons". But the overall meaning seems clear enough. True, some Old Testament people are mentioned but not others - why is Jephthah singled out, for example? But the author should be indulged an occasional idiosyncrasy. True, there is the occasional odd textual reading - where on earth, for example, did the best -attested text for v.11 come from, which has Sarah portrayed sexually in terms of a male? But this is clearly a scribal aberration; a slight correction will put things in order.