hebrews as an instructional appendix to romans 263
it is not uncommon for commentators to argue that—with the once-for-
all death of Jesus—rejection of second repentance is another primary
purpose of Hebrews.87 to defend its position on this issue, as paul does,
Hebrews turns to romans 3 (i.e., paul’s description of Jesus as “mercy seat”
as solution to human sinfulness). that is, to explain its interpretation of
romans 6 (i.e., baptism as the believer’s imitation of Jesus ἐφάπαξ death),
Hebrews calls upon romans 3, supplementing the logical conclusion of
paul’s argument (a conclusion implicit, not explicit in romans), namely
irremediable post-baptismal sinfulness even in the context of a delayed
parousia:
For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been
enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy
spirit and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of
the age to come, and then have fallen away, since on their own they are
crucifying again the son of God and are holding him up to contempt (Heb
6:4–6; cf. 10:26–27).88
Hebrews does not argue this point as systematically as paul in romans,
but makes the case nonetheless by weaving these themes into its expo-
sition and exhortation in the central section of the tractate (5:11–10:25).
Hebrews’ presentational style does not detract from its clear reliance on
romans for these critical theological points.
summarizing the argument thus far, we see in romans and Hebrews a
convergence of three ideas: (1) Jesus’ sacrificial act denoted as “mercy seat”
(rom 3:25; Heb 9:5); (2) Jesus’ death qualified as once-and-for-all (rom
6:10; Heb 7:27; 9:12; 10:10); and (3) a believer’s disassociation from sin after
entering the community through baptism. this tri-fold convergence of
ideas is unique to romans and Hebrews among early christian texts. It is
improbable that such a constellation of ideas arose in two independent
contexts. It is, rather, likely that one text borrowed it from the other, par-
ticularly given how seminal all three points are to both arguments.
the argument that Hebrews relies on romans for this triple con-
vergence commends itself, insofar as Hebrews both expands upon and
explains romans. Hebrews spells out for readers of romans: (1) how Jesus
as “mercy seat” should be understood in terms of Jewish sacrificial cult
(ambiguous in romans 3); (2) that, even as “mercy seat,” Jesus’ death is
87 e.g., ellingworth, Epistle to the Hebrews, 80.
88 nrsV. enlightenment in this passage refers to believers’ embracing the truth, most
likely as an aspect of baptism. attridge: “there may be an allusion to baptism” (Hebrews,
169; see also 167). whether baptism or not, it is parallel in Hebrews in paul’s concept of
baptism. cf. also Gräßer, An die Hebräer, 2:347–49.