266 clare k. rothschild
Conclusion
literary reliance of Hebrews on romans, set forth first on the basis of
the rare expression ἐφάπαξ in the first part of this essay, is supported
in the essay’s second half by the texts’ correlative claims that Jesus is
“mercy seat,” that his sacrifice is once-for-all, and that a relationship
exists between his death as a one-time sacrifice and a believer’s sinful-
ness. the essay concludes that Hebrews should be added to a growing list
of early christian writings understood—to greater and lesser extents—as
“guides” to pauline letter collections.97 although undoubtedly informed
by and interacting with other pauline letters as well, Hebrews offered
to early readers of a corpus Paulinum context, clarification, and devel-
opment of seminal ideas paul presents in concise, even definitional
forms in romans.98 Hebrews’ otherwise unknown author regarded
romans as requiring clarification and elaboration. He thus furnished a
tool designed to impact its interpretation. specifically, Hebrews offers a
dramatic expansion of the exquisitely terse antithetical maxim in rom
6:10 concerning Jesus’ once-for-all sacrifice, spelling out possible implica-
tions based on an earlier part of paul’s argument in romans 3 and tai-
loring these implications to his own historical exigencies.99 this type of
manuscript of the new testament outside the chester beatty papyri. an opisthograph, it
was written on the back of a papyrus containing an epitome of livy. some scholars think
the manuscript was brought to egypt by a roman official and left behind when he was
relieved of his post.
97 see, e.g., nicole Frank, Der Kolosserbrief im Kontext des paulinischen Erbes: Ein inter-
textuelle Studie zur Auslegung und Forschreibung der Paulustradition (wunt 2.271; tübin-
gen: mohr siebeck, 2009).
98 see robert matthew calhoun, Paul’s Definitions of the Gospel in Romans 1 (wunt
2.316; tübingen: mohr siebeck, 2011). In this highly recommended monograph, calhoun
argues that paul uses the sophistic method of brevity involving ambiguity in terminology
and syntax. this strategy has the effect of summarizing for contemporary readers what
they have already heard him say, but often disguising for later audiences his intended
meaning. whether, as “guide,” Hebrews qualifies as in some ways “isagogic” is a topic
worth discussing. see the interesting investigation of marcion by eric scherbenske, Canon-
izing Paul: Ancient Editorial Practice and the Corpus Paulinum (oxford: oxford university
press, 2013), 74–78.
99 Given the interconnectedness of romans and the rest of the corpus Paulinum, it is
further possible that Hebrews may be a guide for reading the entire collection. For exam-
ple, Gal 2:19–20 offers a probable precedent for paul’s argument in rom 6:10. at the very
least, it is a related argument. It is possible that Hebrews wishes to clarify this and other
such ideas as well. I wish to express my thanks to margaret m. mitchell for this point. 1 cor
5:7 may also have informed Hebrews’ interpretation: καὶ γὰρ τὸ πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύθη Χριστός