The structure of Hebrews : a fresh look

Abstract

The publication of Harold W. Attridge's commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Hermeneia series is a major event in New Testament scholarship and in the study of the epistle. The meticulous attention given to textual matters, the impressive control of the secondary literature, the expertise in the relevant non-biblical material, the crisp clear style - all of these qualities and more indicate that a classic commentary on fIebrews has arrived, fully on a par with Spicq and Michel and Moffatt. In the future, anyone writing on any aspect of Hebrews will have to consult Attridge. It is as simple and impressive as that. This praise is not meant to indicate complete agreement with all the opinions which Attridge ventures, of course. No one who has worked extensively on the epistle could be expected to concur with all the positions which he takes. The epistle itself is simply too complex, study of it is simply not far enough along, and Attridge is simply too honest in facing problems. (He is not chary about opinions, nor is he ambiguous in giving them, and this is one of the strengths of the work.) But the reviewer must confess to a major disappointment after working through the commentary, a disappointment which Attridge's own remarks helped create: disappointment in the structure which he has adopted.