The Priestly Robes of Heb 10:

Transcription

1 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: The Priestly Robes of the Incarnation: The Meaning of διὰ τοῦ καταπετάσματος, τοῦτ ἔστιν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ and the Inauguration of the Eschatological Temple in Heb 10: Mark A. Jennings Marquette University Milwaukee, Wisc. USA mark.jennings@marquette.edu

2 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: One of the most fleeting, yet alluring, statements in the entire epistle to the Hebrews is διὰ τοῦ καταπετάσματος, τοῦτ ἔστιν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ (through the curtain, that is, his flesh) of Heb 10:20. 1 Such a fleeting, yet provoking, statement leaves the reader with a litany of questions. In what sense is Christ s flesh related to the veil? What is the appropriate background for understanding this reference? How does Christ s flesh/veil function in the opening of this new living way that gives a believer access to God s presence? Finally, how does one locate this phrase in the early teachings of the church? In answering these questions, the dominant opinion has been that the context of Heb 10:19-20 has the Day of Atonement in view. 2 It has been commonly assumed by many that the author of Hebrews, in referring to Christ s flesh and the veil, is building upon the tradition that Christ s death tore the veil of the Holy 1 As this presentation is the initial stage of a developing argument, please contact Mr. Mark Jennings (mark.jennings@marquette.edu) before referencing, as some changes may have occurred. 2 For example, Paul Ellingworth (The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text [NIGTC; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1993], 520) writes of this passage, the image is clearly that of the curtain between the two parts of the tabernacle, through which the high priest passes once a year. In agreement with Ellingworth are Craig Koester, Hebrews: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 36; New York, N.Y.: Double Day, 2001), 443; William Lane, Hebrews 9-13 (WBC 47B; Dallas, Tex.: Word, 1991), 284; and Harold Attridge, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hermenia; Philadelphia, Penn.: Fortress, 1989), 284.

3 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: of Holies (Mark 15:38, Matt 27:51, Luke 23:45) thus indicating the separation between God and His people had ended by virtue of Christ s consummate sacrifice on the cross. However, this essay will demonstrate that the traditional understanding is significantly flawed. 3 Contrary to the traditional viewpoint of the Day of Atonement as the appropriate background to the text, this essay will argue that the author has the inauguration of the eschatological Temple in view. It is within this background that Jesus σάρξ as the καταπέτασμα should be seen, not as a reference to Christ passing through the inner veil to offer atonement by means of his death on the cross, but rather as a reference to his Incarnation, when, as the eschatological high priest, he passed through the veil that separated the heavens and the cosmos in order to inaugurate the eschatological Temple. In so doing, he took upon the priestly robes that, like the veil of the Temple, symbolized the material universe. These robes that identified Christ s role as the high 3 The four main arguments for the traditional understanding are: (1) The immediate context of Heb 10 is that of Christ s self blood-letting. (2) The use of καταπέτασμα elsewhere in the epistle (Heb 6:19, 9:3) seems to refer to the inner veil that the priest entered once a year on the Day of Atonement. (3) The blood of Jesus in Heb 10:19 is parallel with the his flesh in Heb 10:20, so the latter must be part of the sacrificial imagery of the former. (4) The early Christian tradition frequently associated Christ s death with the subsequent nullification of the veil that separated the presence of God within Holy of Holies from the rest of the world.

4 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: priest of the cosmos, are not of cloth, but rather, they are his very flesh. 4 Thus, for the author of Hebrews, the culminating act of Jesus as High Priest, namely the offering of his blood-sacrifice on the cross, was part (albeit the ultimate part) of the process by which Christ mediated between God and humanity. This process of bringing the people of God into His presence began at the Incarnation, when Christ passed through the veil of the heaven and entered the material world. 5 Difficulties with Traditional Understanding Indeed, it does seem, at first glance, that the author of Hebrews is continuing his discussion from Heb 9:11-15 upon how the Day of Atonement explains the significance of Christ s eschatological priesthood. But, there is good reason to reject this widely accepted interpretation. 6 Since the conclusions of this study rely heavily on identifying 4 This study owes a great deal to Marquette University s Andrei Orlov. His teaching on the importance of exploring the relationship between apocalyptic imagery of the cosmos and anthropology played no small role in the development of my thinking on the epistle to the Hebrews. 5 The author of Hebrews, as early as the prologue, introduces an incarnational aspect to his eschatology. The new eschatological age is identified with the presence of the consummate mediator in Christ. This proclamation of salvation wasn t something that occurred only after the resurrection of Christ, but rather was part of the ministry and message of Christ (Heb 2.3, 9). 6 A brief mention on the fluidity in which the author of Hebrews moves between images is worth commenting. One of the main reasons for supporting the traditional

5 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: the correct imagery, some time needs to be devoted to establishing the appropriate background. In the traditional understanding, a parallelism is drawn between Heb 10:19 and Heb 10:20. Since the blood of Jesus of Heb 10:19 refers to the means by which a believer has access to the holy place of God, so should his flesh be understood as the means for Christ s passing through the veil. But, the grammar of the passage does not support such a reading. To argue for an instrumental understanding of τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ requires a good deal of grammatical gymnastics. 7 The δία clearly governs both interpretation is the claim that since the author has been discussing the atoning sacrifice in Christ in earlier verses, the same background is likely in view in 10:20 as well. However, the style of Hebrews does not support such an a priori assumption. The author of Hebrews has clearly indicated his willingness to create a virtual symphony of images by moving fluidly in and out of various motifs with little or no transition. Therefore, while immediate context should of course be given a great deal of weight, an abrupt change in images, or more correctly, a conflation of images, would not be out of keeping with the style of Hebrews. A good example of this is the prologue of Heb 1:1-4 where the author utilizes a plethora of images to open his epistle. In these brief four verses, Christ is presented as the eschatological prophet, priest, the image of God, and the Son who is superior to the angels. 7 Some of the prominent scholars that argue that the δία of Heb 19:20 switches from a locative use (when referring to the curtain) to an instrumental use (when referring to flesh) include: Ellingworth (Hebrews, 521); Lane (Hebrews, 275); and Koester (Hebrews, 443). Attridge (Hebrews, 286) supports the appositional argument presented in

6 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: καταπέτασμα and τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ. Since the διὰ τοῦ καταπετάσματος has a locative meaning, in order to argue that διὰ τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ is being used instrumentally, one has to assume that the author chose to continue the use of the single δία, but did so with the intention changing its meaning. It seems highly unlikely that the author would have expected the audience to notice such a subtlety. However, there is ample reason to see the author presenting τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ in apposition to τοῦ καταπετάσματος. First, if the author intended to draw an instrumental parallelism with his blood in 10:19, one would have expected the author to use ἐν (or equivalent). While this argument from silence does not establish definitive proof, it does indicate that the argument for a parallelism is not as obvious as often argued. Second, and more critical, is the author s use of τοῦτ ἔστιν. Throughout the epistle to the Hebrews, whenever the author uses this construction, it is always used to designate apposition. 8 Grammatically, the intention of the author is clear. The veil and the flesh of Jesus are considered to be the same. Any understanding of διὰ τοῦ καταπετάσματος, τοῦτ ἔστιν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ must incorporate the grammar accordingly. The traditional argument that Christ s flesh is the means by which access to the sanctuary through the veil was accomplished (regardless of how that is explained) is not supported by the grammar. this discussion. See also N. H. Young s essay ( ΤΟΥΤ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΤΗΣ ΣΑΡΚΟΣ ΑΥΤΟΥ (Heb 10:20): Apposition, Dependent, or Explicative, NTS 20 [1973]: ) for a good discussion of the various grammatical arguments. 8 Heb 2:14, 7:5, 9:11, 11:16, 13:15

7 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: In addition to the difficulties that the grammar presents against the traditional argument, the terminology of the passage also does not support such a reading. Most commentators view σάρξ working in tandem with αἷμα to describe the sacrificial offering of Christ. However, while αἷμα is certainly used in Hebrews as part of the sacrificial economy, the same cannot be said about σάρξ. Throughout the epistle, σάρξ is primarily used with regards to the outer covering of human or beast. Σάρξ in Hebrews predominantly refers to the physical appearance (the fleshiness ) of a person. 9 It is critical to note that none of these uses of σάρξ in Hebrews were made in reference to the sacrifice given on the Day of Atonement. 10 Even in the two Heb 9 9 Heb 2:14 σάρξ refers to the outer portion of Christ s humanity (with blood being the inner portion). In Heb 5:7, σάρξ is used to refer to Christ s time on earth as a human. In Heb 9:10 and 9:13, the reference is to the skin of person that is ceremonially washed. Here again, like Heb 2:14, it is the exterior part of a human, that which is seen by the world, that is in view. In Heb 12:9, σάρξ indicates which parents are in view, namely the human ones. The point is that human parents were evident by their fleshy appearance while the heavenly father is characterized by his spiritual aspect. 10 Ellingworth (Hebrews, 520) mistakenly cites Heb 10:5 as proof that σάρξ is used in tandem with Christ s self-offering. However, σάρξ is not used in Heb 10:5. The term used is σῶμα. Ellingworth, like Attridge (Hebrews, 287) incorrectly sees the two terms as interchangeable within the epistle. Lane (Hebrews, 284) takes σάρξ to be a reference to Christ s obedience. Even if the instrumental use was correct, as Lane argues, σάρξ is not

8 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: references where the scene is sacrificial, it is still not the σάρξ that is being offered. Instead, it is the σάρξ that is being affected by the sacrifice. Σάρξ is consistently used to refer to the outer covering a person, the skin that provides the external appearance of a person. Since σάρξ is not part of the author s vocabulary when presenting the beast/person being sacrificed, it seems unlikely that the author would change his style and import a sacrificial meaning into σάρξ at Heb 19:20. This is further established by the fact that the author of Hebrews regularly employs σῶμα when referring to the beast/person being offered for sacrifice (10:5, 10; 13:11). If the author wanted to draw any sort of parallel structure between the blood of Jesus and the body of Jesus as being part of the same sacrifice, then one would have expected him to continue to use σῶμα.thus, rather than affirming the traditional view, it is actually the very presence of σάρξ in Heb 10:20 that should caution one against used in the epistle with regards to obedience. Attridge (Hebrews, 287) agrees with Lane that the meaning is one of Christ s obedience. In so doing, he not only steps away from the typical use of σάρξ in the epistle, but he also argues that the reference to veil should not be viewed with regards to any supernal value, but as a metaphor for contacting God. Attridge s (and others ) attempt to understand how Christ s flesh and the veil can be related is the result of a steadfast commitment to viewing the terms within the Day of Atonement image. Once freed from this imagery, the possibilities open up to allow one to see alternative views which do not require such semantic artistry to explain.

9 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: accepting the claim that the flesh of Jesus is parallel to the blood of Jesus in Heb 10:19. Alternative Setting: The Temple Inauguration In addition to the use of σάρξ, the author employs other terminology that is in conflict with a Day of Atonement setting. Most notably is his use of the verb ἐγκαινίζω in Heb 10:20. This term primarily means to bring something about, or to inaugurate. 11 In using ἐγκαινίζω, the author of Hebrews chose a term that was employed frequently within the LXX in those texts that detail the inauguration or the re-establishment of the Temple. 12 However, although this term is frequently used in the inauguration of the Temple in the LXX, it is never used in reference to any Day of Atonement rituals. Therefore, in Heb 10:20, when the author decides to talk about the new and living way now available for the faithful, he does not choose the language of Day of Atonement, but rather the language of Temple inauguration. Given the use of 11 See BDAG. Lane (Hebrews, 284) recognizes this typical meaning, but instead argues for a nuanced meaning of make available. Throughout this passage, Lane s interpretive decisions seem to be governed by Heb 6: Similarly, Koester (Hebrews, 443) makes several insightful comments about the language of inauguration, but fails to connect this language with the blood sacrifice of Christ and the entrance to the sanctuary. 12 For example, in the Pentateuch, this word is found four times, with each occurrence coming from the inauguration materials of Num 7. See also 1 Kgs 8:63, 2 Chr 7:5, 2 Chr 15:8, and Ezra 6:17, 17).

10 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: ἐγκαινίζω, it is quite likely that the author envisions the dedication of the Temple as the backdrop for his Heb 10:19-22 discussion. Since blood, as a cleansing agent, is present both at the atonement sacrifice and the inauguration of the covenant between God and the people of Israel, which blooduse stands behind Heb 10:19-20? 13 The immediate context favors the inauguration rituals over the Day of Atonement rituals. Though often seen as an anchor to the traditional atonement view, the reference to Christ s blood in Heb 10:19 is more likely a reference to the inauguration tradition. In Heb 9:7 (an obvious Day of Atonement setting), blood is offered (προσφέρω) as an atoning sacrifice. However, with regards to the inauguration of the covenant (Heb 9:19, 22), the blood is sprinkled (ῥαντίζω). It is this sprinkling (as opposed to offering ) that anchors the scene of Hebrews 10:19-20 to the inauguration imagery (Exod 24:8). 14 In Heb 10:22, the faithful can approach 13 It seems that most scholars arguing for the traditional interpretation have always assumed that any reference to purification by blood must automatically mean the atonement sacrifice. For example, Attridge (Hebrews, 285) argues that the phrase, explicitly recalls the instrument by which Christ entered the true heavenly sanctuary, the blood of his obedient self-sacrifice. 14 Context indicates that item being sprinkled in 10:22 is likely the blood mentioned in 10:19. Ellingworth (Hebrews, 523) prefers to focus only on the baptismal tradition in the passage, seeing the sprinkling as a reference to baptismal waters. Koester (Hebrews, 444) rightly recognizes the sprinkling as a reference to the blood sprinkled at the inauguration of the old covenant in Exod 24:8, but fails to connect it

11 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: God because they have been purified by means of a sprinkling of Christ s blood. Since both Heb 10:19 and 10:22 refer to the process of the faithful entering the presence of God, the author of Hebrews likely intends for his audience to understand that Christ blood was more than an atonement agent, but also served to indicate that the new covenant has begun. 15 Freeing Christ s blood-letting from a Day of Atonement only viewpoint would also resolves one of the more troublesome inconsistencies involved in traditional with the blood-letting of Heb 10:19. Furthermore, the reference to pure water in Heb 10:22, rather than being an overt reference to baptism, may refer to the tradition of blood and water flowing from Christ s body at his death. Lane (Hebrews, 287) also argues that the practice of Christian baptism is the obvious background for this passage. However, not only does the immediate context speaks against any baptismal teaching, it is unlikely that sprinkling had become such the norm for this practice that the author would refer to as such. 15 In fact, Heb 10:19 and 10:22 form an inclusio for the entire passage, indicating that the verses constitute a distinct unit. Mark A. Peters ( Hebrews 10:19-25, Int 53 [1999]: 62-64) argues that the entire passage, including the exhortations, refers to the gathering of the assembly of believers. In this vein, rather than blood defining how flesh should be understood in the passage, it is more profitable to allow flesh (along with other terms) to govern how blood functions in the passage.

12 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: understanding of Heb 10: The end result of the Day of Atonement ritual was not the allowance of the people to enter into the presence of God, but the forgiveness of the people by the one priest who could enter into the presence of God. 17 In Heb 10:19-20, it is the movement of the entire people into the sanctuary that is clearly the end result. The point here is not to remove forgiveness or cleansing by blood from the scene in Heb 10:19-20, but to show that the giving of blood for purification was not an act restricted to a Day of Atonement scene. The context of how the blood of Christ is presented in Heb supports the idea that the author of Hebrews is working with imagery from the inauguration tradition, rather than from the Day of Atonement. 16 Another difficulty is that the offering of Christ s blood as a means for purification occurred prior to his entrance into the Holy Place (Heb 1:3, 9:7). This is contrary to the process outlined in Lev 16 where the blood is given after Aaron enters into the Most Holies. For a good overview, see Felix Cortex, From the Holy to the Most Holy Place: The Period of Hebrews 9:6 10 and the Day of Atonement as a Metaphor of Transition, JBL 125 (2006): Peter H. Leithart, Womb of the World: Baptism and the Priesthood of the New Covenant in Hebrews 10:19-22, JSNT 78 (2000): Ellingworth (Hebrews, 521) fails to see this incongruity by stating that Christ s self-offering has done perfectly and in reality for us what the levitical high priests did imperfectly and figuratively: he gained access by a new way to the living God, non only for himself, but for all who through him will share in God s life. This statement assumes that the levitical practice had the intention, though imperfect, of allowing the people access to the living God.

13 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: Sacrificial blood-letting had an essential role in the opening of the Temple and the provision of a place for the assembly of God to enter and worship. 18 Having been properly opened with the sprinkling of Christ s blood, the faithful are now able to enter into the eschatological sanctuary (not simply the inner chamber ) and thereby enjoy the presence of God. The author s choice to use ἅγιος in Heb 10:19 solidifies the argument that he is focused on the movement of the people into the new eschatological sanctuary as a whole, and not simply into the Holy of holies. Contrary to most modern interpretations of Heb 10:19, ἅγιος is not restricted to a reference to the most holy room only. 19 The term ἅγιος is the common LXX designation for the entire sanctuary as a unit. 20 While the Most Holy Place would certainly be a part of the sanctuary, ἅγιος should not be seen as a reference to the Most Holy place only. 21 Likewise, ἅγιος is rarely used in the Pseudepigrapha, Philo, or 18 This view, admittedly, requires that the οὐν of Heb 10:19 be viewed in reference to everything that follows, and not to the argument that has preceded. Contra Lane (Hebrews, 282) who sees the particle governing everything from 9:1. 19 Most likely these inaccurate translations are based on the assumption of the Day of Atonement as the background for the passage. NRSV rightly uses sanctuary. 20 One of the most valuable texts in this is Ex 26:33 (LXX) where the comparison is made between the ἅγιος (sanctuary) and the ἅγιος τῶν ἁγίων. 21 Curiously, Ellingworth (Hebrews, 517) admits that the term refers to the heavenly sanctuary without distinction between its parts, yet he titles his discussion on 10:19, We have free access to God s inner sanctuary, (emphasis mine).

14 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: Josephus to refer to the Most Holy place. It is unlikely that the author of Hebrews would have broken away from the common understanding of the term in such a way so as to restrict its meaning to the inner chamber only. 22 Since ἅγιος most likely refers to the sanctuary as a whole, it is to this that the faithful can now enter. 23 Therefore, for the author of Hebrews, what Christ accomplished was the opening/inauguration of the new way into the eschatological Temple much like Moses had done with the sanctuary of the first covenant. 24 Since the Day of Atonement ritual is hardly supported by the text, any definitive claims that καταπέτασμα must be viewed as the veil that separates the Most Holy of Holies from the rest of the sanctuary should also be summarily questioned. 25 Christ s flesh and the veil of the Temple 22 Contra Attridge, Hebrews, 284. The more difficult argument to make is why the author, if he was working within the Day of Atonement nomenclature, chose to use such a term that was not in keeping with the imagery. 23 Contra Koester (Hebrews, 442) who argues that the sanctuary in view is the inner chamber of God. 24 Given his discussion of how Jesus was greater than Moses in Heb 3, this brief reference to temple inauguration imagery is not out of step with the author s argument elsewhere in the epistle. 25 Richard M. Davidson, ( Christ s Entry Within the Veil in Hebrews 6:19-20: The Old Testament Background, AUSS 39 [2001]: ) provides a good discussion on the inauguration imagery behind the veil motif in Hebrews.

15 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: How does this background help us explain διὰ τοῦ καταπετάσματος, τοῦτ ἔστιν τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ? The primary benefit of this background, and the need to spend such a significant amount of time on it, is that it provides parameters by which to discern the correct interpretation of Heb 10:20. First, an interpretation of this text, in order to be valid, must be at home within an inauguration setting. Second, an interpretation must respect the consistent non-sacrificial use of σάρξ elsewhere in the epistle. Third, and most important, an interpretation must adequately, and plausibly, explain the appositional relationship between veil and flesh. The key to rightly understanding Heb 10:20 lies is in connecting the way σάρξ is used by the author of Hebrews (the skin that gives a person his/her appearance) with καταπετάσματος. As discussed previously, the general meaning of σάρξ refers to the outer covering of a person. The skin gives a person his/her appearance. If the phrase was rewritten as, through the veil, which is his appearance then the relationship between the two begins to become more apparent. In the economy of the Temple, there was a mode of appearance that was the same as that of the veil of the Temple - the robes of the high priest. 26 The images and colors on the robes of the high priest were identical to the images and colors of the Temple veil. These images and symbols of the veil of the Temple reflected, in turn, the material world of the universe, the cosmos. Both Josephus and Philo discuss how the 26 For a good summary on the relationship between the priestly robes and the temple see G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God (NSBT; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 2004),

16 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: outer veil of the Temple was made to reflect the four elements of the universe (earth, air, water, and fire). 27 Josephus, in War , describes this curtain as presenting both the material universe and the heavens. Philo presents the veil as a depiction of the airy covering of the earth that separated the material world and the eternal world (QE 2:91). The veil, like most elements of the Temple, was designed so as to present the holy place of God as a microcosm of His created universe. Similarly, the priestly robes were also symbolically adorned. Like the veils, the robes of priest were of the same blue, purple, and scarlet material used to reflect the colors of the cosmos. 28 Furthermore, the jewels on the priest s breast piece, like the jewels of the veil signified the luminaries of the heavens. As they did with the veil, Philo and Josephus see similar symbolic significance in the garments of the high priest. 29 The priestly garments were considered to be a microcosm of the universe because their symbolism was grounded in the symbols of the Temple, the true microcosm of the universe. 30 In the Jewish traditions, the high priest wore the elements of the universe when serving outside the veil to indicate that he had upon him the nature of the material 27 Philo: Quaest. Exod. 2:85; Vit. Mos. 2: Josephus: War 5: ; Ant Ibid Philo: Vit. Mos. 2: , , 143. Josephus: Ant. 3:180, Beale, Temple, 48.

17 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: world. 31 However, when he was within the veil, in the presence of God, he wore the white linen of the angels, thus indicating he was within the heavenly realm. 32 The logic of the difference in vestments requires that some sort of transference occur when the priest passes through the veil. So, for example, when the priest leaves the presence of God, he passes through the veil that symbolically separates the material and the heavenly worlds. In this passing, the priest takes upon the elements of the material world that are present in the veil. The direction of the passing through the veil determines the nature of the garments that are worn. It is within this framework, that the manner in which the author equates Christ s flesh with the veil begins to unfold. A manner made even more clear by Philo s discussion of the Logos. In the Philonic writings, when the heavenly high priest (the Logos), upon whom the earthly high priest was based, passed through the veil, it was not into the presence of God, but from the presence of God. In On Flight, 110, Philo describes this heavenly high priest as one who took on the four elements of the universe as his visible. Especially important for our discussion is Philo s claim in On Dreams, that the high priest is the outward, visible image, who offers prayers and sacrifices with the intention being that the universe may join with man in the holy rites and men with the 31 M. Barker, The Gate of Heaven: The History and Symbolism of the Temple in Jerusalem (London: SPCK, 1991), See Ezek 9:2; Dan 10:5; 1 Enoch 87:2; 2 Enoch 22:8, 10.

18 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: universe. 33 For Philo, the garments of the Jewish priesthood symbolized what occurred cosmically when the Logos left heaven in order to serve as the ultimate high priest for the people of God. The cosmic veil bore the image of the universe and the image of the heavens. When the Logos moved from the latter to the former, he took upon himself the material of the cosmos. Therefore, given this background on the symbolism of the veil and the priestly garments, the reference of Christ s flesh, as being equivalent to the veil should not be surprising. Christ, as the heavenly high priest who eternally enjoyed being in the presence of God, could be understood to have passed through the veil that separated heaven from the universe in order to inaugurate the new way to the eschatological temple. In this passing, Christ, (like Philo s Logos) put on the elements of the physical world. For the author of Hebrews, this priestly clothing that Christ put on to indicate that he was currently serving in the material world was his flesh. When Christ passed through the cosmic veil at his Incarnation, he did so in order to become their eschatological high priest who understood what it meant to be human as well as divine. This understanding of σάρξ as the priestly garments of the Messiah is supported elsewhere in the epistle to the Hebrews. In Heb 5:7, the author writes of Jesus time on earth as the days of his flesh (σάρξ). Two important elements occur in the context of 33 The relationship between Philo and the author of Hebrews has frequently been hypothesized. While such a discussion is beyond the scope of this essay, the similar language about the Logos and Christ both passing through the veil as the heavenly high priest certainly supports a common tradition between the two.

19 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: this passage. First, this reference to Christ s days in the flesh comes during a discussion about Christ s priestly identity in the manner of Melchizedek (a figure that certainly has eternal nuances). Second, the activity associated with Christ s days in the flesh are the priestly activities of prayers and petitions. These prayers and petitions have a mediatoral role via their connections to the availability of salvation to the people (Heb 5.9). Like Philo s Logos, the author of Hebrews presents Christ as a figure who offered up meditoral prayers and petitions during the days in his material robes (his flesh). 34 In so doing, he not only was able to provide atonement for sins, but he was also able to purify the believers so they may enter the new Temple. 35 Therefore, it is only fitting 34 It is frequently assumed that Heb 5:7 refers to the Gethsemane prayer. This argument is primarily based on the reference to God as the one who could save Christ from death. However, this reference does not necessarily mean that the prayers being given by Christ are about his desire to be spared his upcoming death, but likely simply refers to God as the one who has such power over death. It seems more plausible to read Heb 5:7 as a reference to Christ s role as the mediator between God and humanity, and that this priestly mediation characterized not only his exalted status, but also his days on earth. The Gethsemane prayer, if it was known by the author, would have been a good example of such intercession, but not the only point in view. 35 Beale s (Temple, ) brief, but tantalizing discussion on Heb 10:19-20, theorizes that given cosmic symbolism of the priest, it is very possible that the author of Hebrews is wanting to present the flesh of Christ, as the new creation. It is also possible, that the author views Christ s flesh as an indicator that he is the perfect

20 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: that when the author of Hebrews discussed the inauguration of this new way opened in the entire eschatological sanctuary in Heb 10:19-22, he chose to make a reference to that climatic moment that began the eschatological age when the Christ descended through the veil in order to become a priest that is able to sympathize with humanity in everyway. This cosmic passing through the veil was made manifest in the vestments that it created, the vestments of the created order, Christ s flesh. For the author of Hebrews, the eschatological age finds its root not at Easter, but at Christmas. Echoes in the Christian Tradition The author of the Hebrews is not the only Christian writer to connect the Incarnation of Christ with the veil of the Temple. In the Infancy Gospel of James, the story of Mary s work on the veil in the Temple is told. In this story, Mary was given the task of spinning the colors of the cosmos (gold, white, scarlet, blue, and purple). As she was spinning, the angel of the Lord appeared to her telling her of her future son, Jesus. It was while Mary was making the veil, that the proclamation of the birth was made. This anthropos in that he bears both the image of God and the image of the cosmos. Furthermore, given this eschatological/protological restoration of creation, it is quite likely that the transformation that occurs which allows a believer to enter into the holy presence of God is the restoration of his/her own flesh so as to be dressed appropriately in the priestly garments of Christ. If the author has such a transference in view, he would certainly stand in accordance with the early Christian tradition (See the parable of the wedding feast, esp. Matt 22:11-13; and Paul s references to putting on Christ (Rom 13:14, Gal 2:27).

21 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: tradition of linking Christ s Incarnation with the veil of the Temple persisted throughout the centuries. St. Symeon of Thessalonike (15th century) explained the vestments of the Christian priesthood as signifying the descent of Christ from heaven to his humility. 36 They are the sacerdotal vestments of the Incarnation. Conclusion This essay has focused on Heb 10: During this discussion, it has been argued that the traditional viewpoint of the Day of Atonement is the appropriate background to the text has been challenged. Perhaps overly influenced by the Synoptic account of the tearing of the veil at Christ s crucifixion, most scholars have mistakenly assumed that the relationship between the veil and Christ s flesh of Heb 10:20 must refer to the impact of Christ s sacrifice had upon the inner veil. However, this traditional viewpoint should be rejected on the basis of grammatical, thematic, and linguistic evidence. A more plausible background is the inauguration of the Temple. This setting makes better use of the language and logic of the passage. Furthermore, the inauguration background places the focus of this passage on the start of Christ s eschatological ministry at his Incarnation.In so doing, the author of Hebrews shows the fluidity of his thought in that he was willing to combine images, moments, and ideas, to present the significance of Christ and the final days. For the author, both the Incarnation and the crucifixion (and ministry) could be conflated into a singular event that had a multiplicity of outcomes and implications. By being willing to conflate various events into one meta-event, the author of Hebrews was able to draw 36 Ibid. 212.

22 The Priestly Robes of Heb 10: upon a variety of images, echoes, and backgrounds to present the fullness of the coming of the consummate eschatological mediator. With this in view, it is more plausible to view the σάρξ of Christ as a reference to his priestly garments that he took upon himself when he passed through the veil of the heavenly temple. Such an understanding is not only consistent with the author s use of σάρξ elsewhere in the epistle, but also fits well within the traditions of Judaism. Quite helpful in this regard is Philo s interpretation of the Logos garments that he gained when he took upon the elements of the material world in passing from the presence of God, through the cosmic veil, onto earth. Within the early teachings of Christianity, there is also a tradition that connects Christ s Incarnation with the veil of the Temple. Therefore, there is good reason to support the claim of this essay that when the author of Hebrews spoke of Christ s flesh as the veil, he did so with a view to the Incarnation and Christ s priestly role in the inauguration of the eschatological Temple.