Ratliff, 1

Introduction

The use of the wilderness narrative by Paul and writer of Hebrews in 1 Cor 10:1-13 and Heb

3:7-4:11 raise questions on a theological and practical level. Both passages employ a midrashic tone at

times, but the content of this study will not focus primarily on intertextualization rather seeking to

formulate a theology emanating from the passage. With this goal in mind, it is of utmost importance to

recognize that both passages take place in the context of a warning. Paul, in 1 Cor, is warning believers

not to fall into idolatry (1 Cor 10:14) while the writer of Hebrews warns the readers not to shrink back

but to hold their “original confidence firm to the end” (Heb 3:14).

While the cultural settings and problems facing the Corinthians and the Hebrews differ in many

areas, it is worth noting similarities in the contexts from which such warnings arose. The Corinthians

dilemma was one of living in and engaging their culture yet at the same time remaining true to the

Gospel. Paul is insistent, as he warns in the context of the wilderness narrative, that they can have no

part in a ritual that has to with idolatry let alone eating meat that is explicated to have been involved in

such a ritual (1 Cor 10:14-33).1 As with all cultural mores that stand in opposition to the Gospel that

face any given generation, the Corinthians could easily have their passions divided and stray from

Christ. Their problems extend to many other areas, but the ones threatening them the most include the

topic under consideration as well as their “. . . radical misunderstanding of the gospel (1:18-2:16), and

of the church (3:5-17) and apostleship (4:1-13).”2

Just as the heart of the Corinthians problem concerns their response and interaction with the

Gospel, so it is also in the case of the Hebrews. Hebrews contains more explicit warning passages than

any other book of the NT.3 None express what is at stake any better than 2:1-4. Here, the writer

implies that the Hebrews were on the verge of neglecting the Gospel that had been delivered to them

1
Although, Paul permitted them to buy any type of meat and consume it just so long as they did not raise a question as to
its prior use (10:25).
2
Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Theology, vol. 2, 1 and 2 Corinthians (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 39.
3
Such passages include 2:1-4; 3:7-4:13; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-39; 12:1-29.
 Ratliff, 2
through the apostolic witness (v. 3). To know anything further about the specific situation of the

Hebrews is challenging in that the location of its recipients is uncertain, and the letter's author is

anonymous. However, some internal clues inform the modern reader as to what what type of situation

these warnings were pointed. Lindars argues that the historical context can be ascertained by closing

remarks in ch. 13. In v. 10, reference is made to “those who serve the tent”4 which is most definitely a

reference to Levitical priests. In v. 9, the Hebrews are admonished not to “be led away by diverse and

strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not

benefited those devoted to them.” This implies, when coupled with the exaltation of Christ above the

priesthood and sacrificial system in the rest of the epistle, that the Hebrews had a luring “felt need” to

return to their old system of worship.5 The problem is that these “strange teachings” were not

acceptable in context of the New Covenant. Besides the clear implications these verses have on the

dating of Hebrews (pre- A.D. 70 being very possible in that the temple sacrificial system seemed to be

still in existence), it also demonstrates the tension from which the warning passages arise like our text

in 3:7-4:11. There was much at stake in the theological controversy present in the Corinthians and

Hebrews, and we now move forward to answering how these warnings may apply to believers today.

More specifically, was it the case that the readers being warned were actually assumed to be regenerate

believers? If so, were these regenerate believers facing the potential peril of apostasy in which they

would be lost if they neglected the Gospel?

Literary Analysis: What do the Passages Say?

1 Corinthians 10:1-13

First Corinthians 10 opens up with a statement that is perhaps the most important to our

understanding of the passage. Paul makes reference to the fathers who had preceded them as the nation

of Israel in the specific context of the wilderness wanderings. Several phrases are used to describe the
4
All Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version.
5
Barnabas Lindars, The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1991), 10.
 Ratliff, 3
people being referenced in the wilderness in that they "all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in

the sea and all ate the same spiritual food . . ." (vv. 2-3). What is perhaps the most striking statement

comes in v. 4 where it is said " . . . and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the

spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ." This statement requires a great deal of

consideration and opens the door to multiple questions. It seems to imply that the people of Israel

before Christ were partakers of Christ though existing chronologically prior to his incarnation and

redemptive career.

Paul utilizes multiple OT texts to illustrate his point, but the specific text alluded to in v. 4 is

found in Exod 17:1-7/Num 20:2-13, which is the well known story of water from the rock.

Witherington points out that Paul's interpretation of the story find its origin in the Wisdom of Solomon

11 where a deeper spiritual reality, as in Paul, is depicted. Here, “personified Wisdom provides the

water to the Israelites.”6 At this point, it is important to notice the connection here to what we read in

vv. 14-22. Paul argues against any participation in idol worship with regard to knowingly eating food

sacrificed to the idols. This, he implies, would make them participants in idolatry (v. 20). Paul is

comparing this participation in idolatry with participation in the sacrament of the Lord's supper (v. 16).

This idea of “participating in” objects employed in worship is also expressed in the pericope at hand

(vv. 1-5). Notice the somewhat sacramental way that Paul describes the congregation in the wilderness

as participants in a baptism into Moses and a consuming of spiritual food (vv. 2-3). In the same sense

and employing the same sacramental description as vv. 14-22, the wilderness congregation is depicted

as partakers of Christ through a prefiguring of the sacraments.

Christ is pictured as continually sustaining the wilderness congregation in that “they used to

drink” from the spiritual rock. The Gk. ἔπινον is in the imperfect tense insinuating that they

"customarily drank from the rock."7 The application to the Corinthians is not easily missed: Allow

6
Ben Witherington III, Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 219.
7
Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 447.
 Ratliff, 4
Christ to sustain you and do not falter in the wilderness as did the fathers.

This becomes especially clear in the verses that follow. Paul implores them to learn from their

example (v. 6), making sure not to fail as they did in idolatry (v. 7), in sexual immorality (v. 8), in

putting Christ to the test (v. 9), and in grumbling (v. 11). All of these warnings are then tied together by

the third person imperative in v. 12 βλεπέτω. Meeks points out that this pattern in which God is

gracious to Israel, especially in regard to the wilderness journeying, Israel's subsequent failure, and

then a conclusion warning the contemporary readers not to fail like forefathers is a very common one in

the historic Psalms, especially Ps 78.8 This last imperative in v. 12 is a warning for all to take heed that

they do not fall as well. The questions that arise from this analysis of the text concern those of

apostasy and what it could potentially mean for the believer today. If the fathers were said to have

drank from Christ, were they to be considered regenerate and/or elect? If so, what does this imply in

that they were "overthrown in the wilderness" not being allowed to enter the promised land? The last

important question that must be asked concerns the idea of participating in the sacraments: While it is

true that not all who take the Lord's Supper are regenerate, is Paul not assuming in vv. 14-22 that those

whom he refers to as participating in the body and blood are regenerate? This of course derives its

theological significance from the manner in which Paul interprets the wilderness experiences

sacramentally in a similar manner to the Lords Supper in vv. 14-22. These theological questions and

their practical implications will be discussed below.

Hebrews 3:7-4:11

The writer of Hebrews commences his warning by quoting from Ps 95:7-11. As

aforementioned, the readers were facing the temptation of return to Judaism and its covenantal rites.

The writer chooses to warn them against neglect of the New Covenant by comparing their present

situation to the congregation in the wilderness who were anticipating an entrance into the promised

rest. Because of their rebellion, the Israelites did not receive the promise of entrance into that rest (v.
8
Wayne A. Meeks, "'And They Rose up to Play': Midrash and Paraenesis 1 Corinthians 10:1-22," Journal for the Study of
the New Testament 16 (1982), 66.
 Ratliff, 5
11). The contemporary readers were made to understand that their promised rest was still pending

(4:1), and they were to take care not to fail at an entrance.

Verse 12-19 serves to warn the readers, referred to as "brothers", to hold on to their "original

confidence" (v. 14). The writer warns them in this manner with the hope that they will take heed and

enter the promised rest. Since entering the promised rest is contingent upon holding one's "original

confidence firm to the end," it is important to discern what the writer means by original confidence (cf.

3:6). The term ὑποστάσεως (confidence) appears here as it also does in 11:1 (ὑπόστασις). In each

case, it carries the idea of an under-girding of something. Given the connection in 11:1 with faith, I

would suggest that the implied object in 3:14 is exactly that—faith. This is reinforced when one sees

the term connected with our hopeful expectation for the future as in 3:6. Further, it is used in the

context of sharing in Christ (μέτοχοι τοῦ Χριστοῦ) in v. 14 which is a relationship consistently

portrayed in the NT as having its basis in faith. Lastly, faith is presented as the key to perseverance and

preservation of one's soul in 10:39. The theological questions that arise from this portion include: Is

this original confidence being described in the context of believers who already have saving faith?

Does v. 14 indicate that readers were already assumed to be sharing in Christ, and, if so, does this mean

that a true believer can apostatize and fail to share in Christ?

In vv. 16-19, it appears that the writer may be making a similar point that we see in Paul. He

asks, “Who were those who heard and yet rebelled?” The answer would be those who were once

delivered from Egypt but did not enter God's rest because of their unbelief. Chapter 4, in light of the

illustration of the wilderness congregation, begins by warning the readers to fear lest they fail to reach

the promised rest. How would this “rest” language have been taken by first century Hebrews? Rest

was used as a metaphor for salvation among Jewish and Christian sources and also the Gnostic Nag

Hammadi where rest came to be known as the “highest aeon.” The concept was picked up in 4 Ezra

(post A.D. 70) as depicting a final, awaiting place of rest (4 Ezra 7.36, 38).9 This idea is born out by
9
Marie E. Isaacs, Sacred Space: An Approach to the Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Journal for the Study of the
New Testament Supplement Series 73 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 85.
 Ratliff, 6
the context of the rest of the chapter where we read that Jesus, as our “great high priest” has passed

through the heavens. He is the forerunner who crossed into the rest ahead of us and acts as our

representative. His location is our goal—the heavenly places—where all of God's people are destined.

There are major differences to be pointed out between the readers and their OT counterparts or

at least the writer expresses his hope that his readers will be different. Verse 2 picks up on this

difference in what turns out to be a difficult grammatical construction. The main difficulty we face is

with the last clause, “μὴ συγκεκερασμένους τῇ πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν.” If the passage should read this

way (P13, P46, ABCD*, M, Vulgate MSS, Harclean Syriac, Bohairic, Armenian, Ethiopic,

Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia), then συγκεκερασμένους (accusative plural) finds as its

antecedent the preceding ἐκείνους. The translation comes out rather awkwardly as “. . .but the message

they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.” It is a

difficult interpretive task to determine where and to whom to assign these pronouns. Another reading (

‫א‬, d, the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate, Peshitta, some Sahidic texts, Lucifer, TR), μὴ συγκεκερασμένος τῇ

πίστει τοῖς ἀκούσασιν, is rendered as a masculine singular which would then agree with λόγος in the

preceding clause. This would cause the translation to be rendered, “ . . .but the message they heard did

not benefit them, because it was not united by faith with those who listened.” While this would

certainly be the most natural reading, the former is to be preferred in light of the difficulty as well as

the wide attestation. With this variation, however, it may come as refreshing to read that the erudite F.

F. Bruce states, “But the sense is plain enough; the good news had to be appropriated or assimilated by

faith if it was to bring any benefit to the hearers.”10 No matter the text tradition followed, it seems a

clear interpretation to say that the wilderness apostates failed to appropriate the word they received by

faith. This implies that when the “good news came to us” (v. 2), we in fact did appropriate the logos by

faith which is the main difference between the reader and those in the past. It is important to note at

this point that the same audience who is assumed to have this faith are the same readers being warned

10
F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 70.
 Ratliff, 7
about not entering into rest in v.1. This will be of great importance in our theological correlation

below.

In v. 3 the emphasis is placed on the believing community as “we who have believed.” This is

contrasted not only with the preceding multitude who did not appropriate the good news they heard, but

who also, as it is stated in 3:19, fell into unbelief. In vv. 3b-4, the writer equates the Sabbath rest

spoken of in Gen 2:2 with that rest which is our goal. God has been long engaged in this rest since the

creation event and it is pictured as the ultimate rest for the believer, yet not without further sober

warnings from the text in Ps 95:11, “They shall not enter my rest” (v. 5). Following a continued pattern

of Israel's failings followed by warning, v. 5 sets up the focus to come back to the contemporary reader

in v. 6 “Since therefore it remains for some to enter it. . .” Verse 7 proclaims that there remains time

described as “today” for the believer to hear God's voice and enter the rest of God. “It may be the last

'today' of the present age, since Hebrews 3:13 exhorts its listeners to hear as long as it is called

'Today'.”11

The object now moves in verse 8 from the apostates in the wilderness to those who entered the

Promised Land with Joshua. In order to emphasize the perfection of God's eternal rest, the writer

concludes that a plot of land could not possibly be the rest spoken of in Ps 95 in that God spoke of

“another day later on” to people who were actually living in promised Canaan. The conclusion is then

reached in light of this fact that there yet remains this perfect rest (v. 9). Verse 10 gives the sense that

there are some who may have already entered this rest. Given the fact of v. 11 which exhorts the reader

to “strive to enter,” v. 10 carries the idea that this striving and labor is complete connecting it most

likely with the death of a saint who persevered to the end.

The last section dealing with wilderness analogy is vv. 11-13. A final warning is given against

disobedience which will result in failure to enter the rest (v. 11). Then comes the oft-quoted v. 12

which explains that God's Word, no doubt the same word that fell on unbelieving ears in the wilderness

11
Peter T. O'Brien, The Letter to the Hebrews, PNTC (Grand Rapid: Eerdmans, 2010), 169.
 Ratliff, 8
(v. 2), was powerful and able to discern their hearts. This fact alone should cause one to tremble, but v.

13 adds that no one is “hidden from his sight.” We are “naked and exposed” before him and we will

give an account to him. This is an appropriate way to end a section that contains so many warnings. It

is a reminder that the God who has given his Word to those in the wilderness to believe and obey is the

same who gave us his Word. The same God who killed off a whole generation in the wilderness (minus

two) is the same who will judge us.

Theology of Apostasy

As discussed above, the use of the wilderness narrative by Paul and the writer of Hebrews raises

multiple theological questions. It has long been argued by Reformed commentators that warning

passages such as these, especially those found in Hebrews, are sincere warnings against apostasy.

However, according to them, they are only one means by which God perseveres the elect, and, if

anyone falls into apostasy, it is evident that they were never regenerate. Thus, the question that

obviously surfaces is as follows: Do the writers assume that those whom they are warning are

regenerate? As I argue below, I will suggest the affirmative.

Answering the Interpretive-Theological Questions of 1 Cor 10:1-13

The first question arising from this section actually has more to do with the nature and identity

of the wilderness apostates than it does the reader's assumed identity. If the fathers were said to have

drank from Christ , were they to be considered regenerate and/or elect? The question here is actually

one that depends on Paul's interpretation of the Lord's Supper. As noted above, Paul's description of

the acts in wilderness are compared to baptism (v. 2), eating spiritual food (v. 3), and drinking spiritual

drink (v. 4). Paul's readers would have immediately recognized allusions to the Christian sacraments.

In light of this, it is helpful to ascertain what Paul assumes about those in v. 16 who take part in

participation in the blood and body of Christ. Paul asks, “οὐχὶ κοινωνία ἐστὶν τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ

Χριστοῦ; τὸν ἄρτον ὃν κλῶμεν, οὐχὶ κοινωνία τοῦ σώματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐστιν;” Much attention must

be devoted here to the noun κοινωνία. Its lexical meaning is to share in common in something with
 Ratliff, 9
someone. While Fee argues that it is more of an emphasis on κοινωνία with other believers in worship

than a sacramental partaking in Christ,12 it is difficult to see this interpretation from the grammar and

context. Notice the phrase κοινωνία τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ. It seems best to interpret the

relationship between the substantive τοῦ αἵματος with κοινωνία as a genitive of apposition.13 In this

case, κοινωνία, being a common term, begs to be further defined. Paul makes it clear that this is

κοινωνία τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Simply, it is participation in Christ's blood. While κοινωνία

certainly can and does take on the nuance of a sharing in community with other believers in the NT,

neither the grammar nor the context indicates that here. The comparison intended by the author helps

us. Idolatry is a participation with demons (v. 22), and the Lord's Supper is a participation with Christ

(v. 16). To suggest that Paul intends an idea of corporate worship is unfounded. Thus, in answer to the

question raised above, participation in Christ likely refers to a true believer, and those who drank from

Christ in the wilderness generation were true believers as well.

With the fact in mind that Paul is referring simply to participation in Christ, I suggest it is safe

to conclude that regenerate believers are assumed. While all in the church know it is true that

inevitably some, likely even a large number of people, will partake in the elements of communion who

are not truly regenerate, it does not follow that Paul has these in mind. No doubt, this epistle goes out

to all in Corinth, whether genuine believer or not. However, Paul seems to be assuming, for the sake of

argument as well as the fact that he was not omniscient, that his readers are regenerate. Thus, the

warning against falling (v. 12) should be taken as a real and potential peril for regenerate believers. To

suggest otherwise one would have to conclude that an unregenerate person could actually be said to be

participate in the blood and body of Christ. Further, would we actually suggest that God is giving an

unregenerate believer, who is a slave to sin, power to overcome sin and temptation as he does in v. 13?

12
Fee, 467.
13
Wallace states, “Indeed, one of the chief reasons to identify a particular genitive as a genitive of apposition is that it is
related to a noun which begs to be defined. The ambiguity of the head noun is forcefully dissipated with the genitive
(Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996], 96.
 Ratliff, 10
My conclusion is that Paul's assumed addressees are regenerate believers who could potentially

apostatize if they forsake the Gospel by taking part in idolatry.

Answering the Interpretive-Theological Questions of Heb 3:7-4:13

No serious student of the Bible doubts that Hebrews contains a great number of warnings

against apostasy including this section. However, if the warnings against apostasy were a potential

peril for a regenerate believer, this idea would be destructive to a Calvinistic understanding. Thus,

attempts are made to demonstrate that warnings, like this one, are given to the covenant community,

but are only applicable to false converts in that no regenerate believer will ever fall away. This is

known as the phenomenological-false believer view.14

With that, it is extremely important to categorize who is being addressed—regenerate believer

or false convert? As pointed out in the analysis of the text above, the first question arises in v. 14.

After having given the example of the apostate wilderness generation, the readers are warned not to fall

away from the living God. First, notice they are addressed as “brothers” where the warning starts in v.

12. Perhaps even more convincing, though, is the fact that the writer includes himself in the group who

may potentially fail to “share in Christ” (v. 14). In 4:11, the writer uses the first person plural

subjunctive σπουδάσωμεν where he includes himself in the exhortation to strive to enter the rest and

also makes clear the possibility of failure in doing so. It is unlikely that the writer considers himself

anything other than a regenerate, true believer. Further, the people who are warned, including the

writer, all have an “original confidence (ὑποστάσεως)” which, as argued above, has at its assumed

object of that confidence faith. Here, we have presented one strong pillar for the argument that a true

believer faces the peril of apostasy and a very difficult obstacle for the phenomenological-false believer

view.

This also demonstrates that initial faith is not the finality or totality of salvation. The rest motif

that is the driving theme throughout the passage presents salvation as something yet to be obtained (v.
14
Scott McNight, “The Warning Passages of Hebrews: A Formal Analysis and Theological Conclusions” Trinity Journal
13NS (1992), 23. See this article for an excellent presentation of the phenomenological-true believer view.
 Ratliff, 11
6).15 If the salvation of the individual is contingent upon perseverance, as it appears in vv. 6 and 14,

and true believers are warned against failing to do so, it must follow that true believers could fail to

obtain salvation in the end.

In 4:1-2, the recurring warning is repeated cautioning the believer to fear lest they fail to enter

the promised rest. As the analysis above indicated, v. 2 tells us that the assumed reader had once heard

the logos and upon hearing, responded in faith. This is adequate evidence for the state of the assumed

reader being a regenerate believer. Notice the very next phrase in v. 3: "εἰσερχόμεθα γὰρ εἰς [τὴν]

κατάπαυσιν οἱ πιστεύσαντες.” The term relevant to our discussion is the aorist participle οἱ

πιστεύσαντες (we who have believed). It's one other use in the epistle is found in 11:6 in the faith

chapter. Used here in its aorist infinitive form πιστεῦσαι, the context is most certainly saving faith in

that the entire chapter argues as faith for the basis of future hope (cf. 11:1). The statement is made that

for one to draw near to God, that person must “believe.” It's noun cognate is used here and over and

over in the chapter, always representing genuine faith. The conclusion is quite simple. If one is

confident that the OT saints of ch. 11 were regenerate believers, one can therefore be confident that the

writer assumes his audience to be regenerate believers in that he describes them in a manner consistent

with his usage of πιστεύω elsewhere.16

The evidence that the warnings are directed to those assumed to be regenerate believers is

staggering and sobering. Each warning passage in the epistle also includes evidence from the

immediate context that a true believer is being warned although it has been the purpose of this paper

15
See Mcnight's article for an explanation of how this is a concept that runs throughout Hebrews. “. . . Jesus' salvation
provides for final salvation for the final, eschatological perfection of the people of God (10:14; 11:40; 12:23). The
language of perfection in Hebrews speaks of bringing believes to their intended goal as worshipers who draw near to
God as an obedient people and is thus very close to the notion of glorification (cf. Esp. 12:2). Perhaps 9:28 expresses it
best: 'and he [Christ] will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.'
It is not surprising then to discover that the author, like many biblical writers, ties faith to hope” (Ibid, 57).
16
One difficult interpretive issue is the writers statement in 4:3 that “we who have believed enter that rest” as if the
promise is fulfilled now. Witherington argues that in light of v. 11 the rest in its fullness is God's rest in eternity, yet
there can be a sense in which that rest can be foretasted in the age that is called “today” (Ben Witherington, Letters and
Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Hebrews, James and Jude [Downers Grove, IL:
IVP, 2007], 180-1).
 Ratliff, 12
only to uncover the theology of apostasy as it is contained in the NT writers' use of the wilderness

narratives. Through interpretive correlation, I conclude that the writer assumes himself as well as his

readers to be true believers, and true believers can fail to be saved in the end.

Conclusion

This paper has been an attempt at drawing theological conclusions from the warning passages

of 1 Cor 10:1-13 and Heb 3:7-4:13 which draw on the wilderness narrative to stress their point. To sum

up the theology of both passages in one correlative statement: See that you do not fall away from the

grace of God through unbelief and forsaking of the Gospel as the wilderness generation fell through

their unbelief and rebellion. Both passages, as I have argued above, were delivered to all in the

congregation, but the warnings against apostasy had as their object those who were assumed to be true

believers. Above, I argued that the wilderness generation were assumed to be true believers in that they

were drinking from the rock that was Christ (1 Cor 10:4). From Heb, I concluded that the addressees,

who received warning, were also assumed to be true believers.

Different cultural situations characterize the setting and audience of each of the epistles, but

both faced the same peril (apostasy) through the same means (unbelief). The Corinthians were

undermining the Gospel by participating in idolatry which was sharing in demons, while the Hebrews

were considering a return to Judaism (cf. 13:7-16) and were in danger of spurning the son of God

(10:29). These are no doubt uncomfortable implications for many. However, one can take comfort in

the warning from 10:14, “For we share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the

end.” If our “original confidence” was comprehended fully in faith in Christ, one need only persevere

in that faith to enter God's rest.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Fee, Gordon D. Pauline Theology, vol. 2, 1 and 2 Corinthians. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
 Ratliff, 13
2002.

____________. The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Isaacs, Marie E. Sacred Space: An Approach to the Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Journal for
the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 73. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992.

Lindars, Barnabas. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews, New Testament Theology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1991.

McNight, Scott. “The Warning Passages of Hebrews: A Formal Analysis and Theological Conclusions”
Trinity Journal 13NS, 1992.

Meeks, Wayne A. "'And They Rose up to Play': Midrash and Paraenesis 1 Corinthians 10:1-22,"
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 16, 1982.

O'Brien, Peter T. The Letter to the Hebrews, PNTC. Grand Rapid: Eerdmans, 2010.

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Witherington III, Ben. Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and
2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

_________________. Letters and Homilies for Jewish Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on