Vanhoye on Hebrews

In the book, Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Albert Vanhoye offers a detailed analysis of the
structure of that very important, and often misunderstood, epistle. He posits the following chiastic structure for
Hebrews1:
I The Name of Christ 1:5-2:18
II A. Jesus high priest worthy of faith 3:1-4:14
II B. Jesus merciful high priest 4:15-5:10
-- Preliminary exhortation 5:11-6:20
III A. High Priest after the manner of Melchizedek 7:1-28
III B. Made perfect 8:1-9:28
III C. Cause of an eternal salvation 10:1-18
-- Final exhortation 10:19-39
IV A. The faith of the ones of old 11:1-40
IV B. The necessary endurance 12:1-13
V The straight paths 12:14-13:21
David L. Allen, Dean of the School of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and author of two books
relating to the exegesis of Hebrews (the Lukan Authorship of Hebrews and The New American
Commentary: Hebrews), praises Vanhoye for his scholarly contribution, particularly because it launched the modern quest
for the structure of Hebrews.2 In this post, I want to express my gratitude as well for Vanhoyes highly detailed and
extensive work on this subject, but I especially want to focus upon one critical observation of his work which is often
overlooked in biblical commentaries, an observation which has also helped launch my own quest into understanding the
primary message of Hebrews. The critical observation of Vanhoyes which I want to focus upon is that he marks the very
center of the entire epistle as chapter 8:1 through 9:28 (notice section III, subsection B, titled Made perfect).
Have you ever viewed chapters 8 and 9 as the very center of Hebrews, or as the main focal point of the entire
epistle?
The general outline above is only the first step toward recognizing that there is a central focal point to the entire letter.
Further into his book, Vanhoye breaks down the center of the entire epistle (8:1-9:28) into smaller literary units, showing
that, not only is the entire letter structured chiasticaly, but more importantly, the central section is itself structured
chiastically, which no other literary unit within the epistle shares in common.
Below is a sketch of my own observations concerning the central chiasm of the entire epistle to the Hebrews. The
structure is similar to Vanhoyes outlines, but I have tweaked them a bit, and for those who have Vanhoyes books on
Hebrews to compare,3 the outline below is clearly different in a couple verse breaks as well in all of the descriptions (for
Vanhoye uses some scholastically nebulous jargon in a many of his descriptions):
A. Hebrews 8:1-5
B. Hebrews 8:6-13
C. Hebrews 9:1-10
C. Hebrews 9:11-14
B. Hebrews 9:15-22
A. Hebrews 9:23-284
A. The temporal, earthly level at which the Old Covenant priestly ministry of the Levites takes place (8:1-5)
B. Gods covenant with man and its association with the old and temporal ministry of mediation by the Levitical
Priesthood (8:6-13)
C. The organization of the old ministry and the unsatisfactory nature of priestly service in Gods
House as illustrated in the earthly priests need to continually enter through "the first tent", but only
through the "second" tent once every year (9:1-10)
C. The organization of Christs ministry and the satisfactory nature of priestly service in Gods House
because Jesus entered through the greater and more perfect tent, thereby
obtaining "eternal redemption" (9:11-14)
B. Gods covenant with man and its association with the new and eternal priestly ministry of mediation by
Jesus (9:15-22)
A. The eternal, heavenly level at which the New Covenant priestly ministry of Jesus Christ takes place (9:23-28)
There are a number of valuable insights to be noted within this central section of Hebrews, but I will have to save quite a
few of them for another post. For now, I want to highlight two things: First, notice that the central section of Hebrews is
focused entirely upon the transition of one priesthood to another. The author illustrates this transition with a variety of
parallel themes:
1. Transition from a temporary ministry of redemption to Jesus having obtained eternal redemption
2. Transition from an old covenant ministry to a new covenant ministry
3. And most importantly (by way of the central illustration), the laws pertaining to Levitical priests to enter through
the first tent continually, with the high priest only entering the second tent once a year, was symbolic (literally "a
parable" in Greek) of the unsatisfactory nature of the first (or "old") covenant ministry and the eventual need for a
transition into a second, truly satisfactory ministry. Jesus entered through the greater tent to obtain, once for all
time, eternal redemption, which the continual offering of Levitical priests could never accomplish. Therefore,
Jesus accomplished a truly satisfactory ministry, and is truly the High Priest.
And secondarily, notice that all of the theological jargon surrounding the use of covenant is intrinsically related to the
ministry of the priesthood as established in Mosaic law, which the author says in sections C and C is a parable for the
present age (9:9). This means, at the time in which the author lived and wrote this epistle, there was an age or period
of transition where the old and first ministry was becoming obsolete and growing old, ready to vanish away (8:13).
With this in mind, Vanhoyes comments seem to make a good finishing touch to this discussion. He writes:
The most meaningful subdivisions are those of the center, for they treat the main subject matter: the
sacrificial activity itself. The author recalls the old system of ritual separations A sacred place has been
established. It consists of a holy part, the first tent (9:2), and a most holy part (9:3), thought to be the
dwelling place of God or sanctuary. The people are not allowed to enter in either for they do not have the
holiness needed. The priests may enter into the first tent (9:6) which is like the way of access to the
sanctuary, but they may not enter in to the latter. Only the high priest is authorized to do that, by reason
of his special consecration, but even he functions under severe restrictions: he must limit his entrance to
once a year, and the condition for entering is a sacrificial offering (9:7). The ceremony to which the author
alludes is that of the Day of Expiation (Yom Kippur, Lev. 16), the high point of the Jewish liturgy.
The question which suggests itself is the mediation value of this solemn liturgy. From this depends the
judgment to be given about the system as a whole. If an authentic relation is established with God, then the
system is excellent. But if the contrary is true, then it can only constitute a provisional solution, one to be
set aside as soon as a better one is found.
The first tent, unfortunately, was unable to provide access [to the dwelling of God] A conclusion follows:
the way of the sanctuary was still not manifest as long as the first tent existed (9:8).5
1. Albert Vanhoye, Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews [Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico; Roma Italia, 1989] p. 33
2. David L. Allen, Lukan Authorship of Hebrews (NAC Studies in Bible & Theology)[B&H Academic; Nashville, TN; 2010] p. 163
3. He has two great books on the subject of Hebrews: Albert Vanhoye, Structure and Message of the Epistle to the Hebrews [Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico;
Roma Italia, 1989] pp. 36, 63-69, 92-95; and Albert Vanhoye, A Different Priest: The Epistle to the Hebrews [Convivium Press; Miami, Fl, 2011] pp. 225-258
4. Ibid. p. 225
5. Ibid. pp. 63-64