I think it worth comparing the work of Hebrews to St. Paul. Many of us are familiar with Paul’s thinking on atonement. At times the author of Hebrews thinking can feel foreign as his arguments at times seem removed from us. I find it useful to use St. Paul as an intermediary to help us understand Hebrews better at times. Renowned theologian Thomas F. Torrance produces a nice study in regards to New Testament views of atonement for Hebrews and Paul in his book Atonement: The Person and Work of Christ.
For Torrance the views of St. Paul and Hebrews are not in contrast, but simply different approaches.1 He believes that the whole of New Testament doctrine of atonement rests on Paul and Hebrew’s “twin foundation.”2
Torrance sees Christ’s atonement as a fulfillment of the Old Testament liturgy.
“As the incarnate Son of the Father Jesus Christ has been sent to fulfil all righteousness both as priest and as victim, who through his one self offering in atonement for sin has mediated a new covenant of universal range in which he presents us to his Father as those whom he has redeemed, sanctified and perfected for ever in himself. In other words, Jesus Christ constitutes in his own self consecrated humanity the fulfilment of the vicarious way of human response to God promised under the old covenant, but now on the ground of his atoning self sacrifice once for all offered this as a vicarious way of response which is available for all mankind.”3
For Torrance atonement is not simply external to his being or only an act, but also ontological4 providing an actual change to humanity, itself.5 This ontological change is grounded on the person of Christ. Torrance says of this, “whether we look at the teaching of Paul or that of Hebrews we find that the theology of atonement is grounded upon the person of Christ as mediator and intercessor.”6
There are some aspects that Torrance sees are the same in both St. Paul’s work and Hebrews.
“In both writers, atonement is the personal intervention of God in Christ reconciling the world and restoring it to oneness with God. In both, the main stress is upon the person of Christ atoning and reconciling, not upon an act of atonement in abstracto. There is no attempt anywhere to erect a liturgy of atonement or a sacrament of it in independence of Christ, the living incarnate Word of God. We are not saved by the atoning death of Christ, far less by sacramental liturgical action, but by Christ himself who in his own person made atonement for us. He is the atonement who ever lives and ever intercedes for us. He is, in the identity of his person and work, priest and sacrifice in one. His being mediates his great redeeming work.”7
For Torrance, the primary difference between the author of Hebrews and St. Paul is their approach rather than being contrary to one another. Torrance sees the approach of atonement within Hebrews as being focused on Old Testament Liturgy which is fulfilled in Christ. Little is said in regards to the resurrection, as there is no counterpart to the resurrection in the Old Testament Liturgy. St. Paul sees the resurrection as of primary importance in regards to the atonement.8
Finally, Torrance comes up with four buckets of interesting parallels between St. Paul in Galatians and Romans and Hebrews. I have illustrated them below. I think this could be of great help to someone who is trying to compare the theology of Paul versus the author of Hebrews.9
“The difference between the Pauline teaching and that of Hebrews is not one of contrariety but one of a different method of approach.”
Thomas F. Torrance, Atonement: The Person and Work of Christ, ed. Robert T. Walker (Milton Keynes: Paternoster; Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2009), 73.
Ibid., 73.
The Mediation of Christ (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1983), 86.
“Ontology. Ontology is the study (logos) of being (ontos). It is the study of reality. It answers the question ‘What is real?’ as ethics answers the question ‘What is right?’ as aesthetics answers the question, ‘What is beautiful?’ and epistemology answers the question, ‘What is true?’ Ontology and metaphysics are used interchangeably. Both study being as being or the real as real. They are the disciplines that deal with ultimate reality.”
Norman L. Geisler, “Ontology,” Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999), 564–565.
“I believe that it is very crucial for us to hold this truth, that the Savior took our fallen Adamic humanity upon him, but we must add that in the very act of taking it he was at work redeeming and sanctifying it in himself, which he continued to do throughout the whole of his sinless earthly life. Hence we must think of his incarnating and atoning activities as interpenetrating one another from the very beginning to the end of his oneness with us. Otherwise the humanity of Christ has to be thought of only in an instrumentalist way, and the atonement can be formulated only in terms of external moral relations or legal transactions. But if the incarnation is itself essentially redemptive and not just a means to an end, then atonement must be regarded as taking place in the ontological depths of Christ’s incarnate life, in which he penetrated into the very bottom of our fallen human being and took our disobedient humanity, even our alienated human mind, upon himself in order to heal it and convert it back in himself into union with God. Indeed, he even penetrated into and took our original sin upon himself in order to redeem us from it by bringing his atoning sacrifice and holiness to bear upon it in the very roots of our human existence and being.”
Thomas F. Torrance, Preaching Christ Today: The Gospel and Scientific Thinking (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1994), 59.
Thomas F. Torrance, Atonement: The Person and Work of Christ, ed. Robert T. Walker (Milton Keynes: Paternoster; Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2009), 75.
Ibid, 73.
Ibid., 73.
Ibid., 74-75.
A delightful exercise Matt; well done! Here is my tuppence worth using your chart somewhat:
The use of the word confidence, which in Greek is parrēsia, is key. “We may approach the throne of grace with confidence through the living way, which is Jesus, our great high priest.” This sums up Hebrews as I see it.
You are right to try and contrast the old and the new of course, which, for Hebrews, is more about Moses, and what he established, in relation to Jesus, the Son, and what he now sets forth.
I just love the climax of ch12 w its Jrm the New City stuff!!! 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🦋🦋🦋👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻