Jon Laansma on the Future of Hebrews Scholarship: Theological Interpretation of Scripture

Jon C. Laansma, “Hebrews: Yesterday, Today, and Future; An Illustrative Survey, Diagnosis, Prescription.” In Christology, Hermeneutics and Hebrews: Profiles from the History of Interpretation. Library of New Testament Studies 423. Edited by John C. Laansma and Daniel J. Treier, 1–32. London, UK: Bloomsbury, 2012.

Christology Hermeneutics and HebrewsJon Laansma has provided a wonderful overview and contribution to the modern study of Hebrews. He provides a modern overview of history of interpretation and ways for scholarship to move forward.

I. Introduction

II. Survey: Hebrews in the Modern Period

III. Diagnosis: Hebrews within the Modern Research Program

IV. Prescription: Looking Ahead

Laansma observes modern approaches to Hebrews and concludes it is typically approached vis-a-vis historiography and historical research. Hence, it has not seen the amount of attention like James, or Paul, or the Gospels. Hebrews lacks an author, details about the audience, dating, etc. Therefore, historical questions have compartmentalized the document with the abundance of historical uncertainties. Continue reading

Review of Captain of Our Salvation: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Hebrews

Mohr Siebeck

Over the past month I have been critically engaging Rowan Greer’s Captain of Our Salvation: A Study in the Patristic Exegesis of Hebrews. It is an excellent book highlighting how Hebrews was used in the early Christological debates.

Regrettably, as I was reading this book, I found out Greer recently passed away. Here is a recent note by my supervisor, Michael Haykin, about his passing (see here).

Below is a review.
Continue reading

1892 Housh Talk — Did Early Communities Have a Pauline Reading of Hebrews?

1892 Logo

Each Wednesday PhD students and SBTS faculty engage in useful dialogue, enjoy pour-over coffee, and experience the euphoria of tasting exotic cheese. In this 1892 Club, we converse with current leaders and theologians in the field of theological studies. Our topics of discussion vary and range with diversity, from writing and publishing, to academic societal involvement, to pressing topics in academia. Each week presents itself with new and refreshing times as a PhD student. Some of my favorite times in our 1892 Club and “Housh Talks” are the championing of open ideas, free thinking, mentorship, and peer friendship. To say the least, the 1892 Club is one of the more enjoyable times as an SBTS PhD student.

At the end of each semester, we have “Housh Talks”. A “Housh Talk” is a 6 minute presentation on an idea pertinent to your studies, with an 8 minute response of intense and focused dialogue immediately following. This is a wonderful time to test ideas, to publicly entertain nuanced thoughts, and to hear from critical thinkers across multiple disciplines. The name comes from Housh, one of the first Th.D. graduates from Southern Seminary in 1894. To make the name more intriguing, he was blind too. Therefore, the administration named these TED-like talks after Housh.
Continue reading

Ambrose of Milan, Pauline Authorship of Hebrews, and Biblical Theology

In the myriads of current biblical theologies, some have focused on whole Bible theologies whereas others have only focused on authorial biblical theologies (i.e., Pauline Theology, Petrine Theology, Johannine Theology, etc.). Ambrose of Milan, a Late 4th century Western Father, provides an intriguing word to the inter-relationship of authorial thought. Especially in modern Pauline theologies, how many incorporate Hebrews into the worldview of Pauline thought? Not many, if at all.

There are few Ancient Homilies on Hebrews. Origen has the earliest known homily, though non-extant. Current researchers are familiar with it because Eusebius mentions the homily in Ecclesiastical History. In our Modern/Post-Modern era, Hebrews 6:4–6 continues to provide exegetes and Bible readers trouble. The same was in early Christendom as well. Even the Ancient Homilies and comments on Hebrews 6:4–6 prove troubling to early interpreters.
Continue reading