Westminster Theological Journal 61 (1999) 209-25.

Copyright © 1999 by Westminster Theological Seminary, cited with permission;

   digitally prepared for use at Gordon College] 

 

 

READING HEB 6:4-6 IN LIGHT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

 

                                                DAVE MATHEWSON

 

                                                       I. Introduction

 

PERHAPS the most significant, yet perplexing, feature of the book of

Hebrews is the so-called warning passages which dot its literary land-

scape (2:1-4; 3:7-4:13; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-39; 12:14, 29). While all of these

warning passages have elicited a variety of commentary and discussion,

Heb 6:4-6 has attracted most of the scholarly attention and remains one of

the most puzzling and enigmatic for interpreters.1 The bulk of attention

devoted to these verses has focused on the issues of the precise identification

of the status of those in vv. 4-5 and the nature of the sin they have committed

in v. 6. Therefore, scholars continue to debate whether the subjects of the

warning are genuine members of the faith community, who through falling

away (v. 6) subsequently lose this status, or whether this falling away only

results in the loss of rewards, or whether failure to persevere is evidence that

the initial faith was not genuine in the first place, or whether the passage

should be understood at a corporate level, addressing the covenant community

 

Dave Mathewson is instructor in NT at Oak Hills Christian College, Bemidji, MN.

1 See the commentaries. Cf. also Herbert H. Hohenstein, "A Study of Hebrews 6:4-8,"

CTM 27 (1956) 433-44,536-46; Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, "Hebrews 6:4-6 and the Peril of

Apostasy," WTJ 35 (1973) 137-55; Roger R. Nicole, "Some Comments on Hebrews 6:4-6 and

the Doctrine of the Perseverance of God with the Saints," in Gerald Hawthorne, ed., Current

Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 355-64; D. Barn-

hart, "The Life of No Retreat: An Exegetical Study of Hebrews 6:1-12," Central Biblical

Quarterly 19 (1976) 16-31; David Gilbert Peterson, "The Situation of the Hebrews (5:11-6:12),"

Reformed Theological Review 35 (1976) 14-21; Leopold Sabourin, "'Crucifying Afresh for One's

Repentance' (Heb 6:4-6)," Biblical Theology Bulletin 6 (1976), pp. 264-71; R. Schoonhaven,

"The 'Analogy of Faith' and the Intent of Hebrews," in W. Ward Gasque and William

Sanford Lasor, eds., Scripture,Tr adition and Interpretation: Essays Presented to Everett

E Harrison by His Students and Colleagues in Honor of His Seventy-fifth Birthday

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 191-110; Verlyn D. Verbrugge, "Towards a New Interpretation

of Hebrews 6:4-6," CTJ 15 (1980) 61-73; R. C. Sauer, "A Critical and Exegetical Reexamination

of Hebrews 5.11 to 6.8" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester, 1981); William S.

Sailer, "Hebrews 6: An Irony or Continuing Embarrassment?," Evangelical Journal 3 (1985)

79-88; Thomas Kern

Oberholtzer, "The Thorn Infested Ground in Hebrews 6:4-12," BSac 145 (1988) 319-28; Scot

McKnight, "The Warning Passages of Hebrews: A Formal Analysis and Theological Conclu-

sions," Trinity Journal 13 (1992) 21-59; Wayne A. Grudem, "Perseverance of the Saints: A Case

Study from Hebrews 6:4-6 and the Other Warning Passages in Hebrews," in Thomas R.

Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware, eds., The Grace of God, Bondage of the Will (Grand Rapids:

Baker, 1995), 133-82; David Brent Armistead, "The 'Believer' Who Falls Away: Heb 6:4-6

and the Perseverance of the Saints," Stulos Theological Journal 4 (1996) 139-46.

209



210                 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

rather than individuals.2 One of the most insightful studies to appear in

recent years is the article by Scot McKnight, who surveys and interacts

with a variety of approaches to the interpretation of this passage.3 McKnight

provides a fresh, detailed formal analysis of 6:4-6 and the other warning

passages in Hebrews, suggesting that the warning passages, especially 6:4-6,

should be read synthetically in relationship to one another rather than

individually. Based on his analysis McKnight concludes that the warnings

address the sin of apostasy, and that although believers experience the

reality of salvation in the present, a failure to persevere to the end can result

in the cessation of that reality.

In this article I do not wish to solve all the problems engendered by

Heb 6:4-6. Rather, the purpose of the present article is to suggest a further

element that has not yet sufficiently been considered in interpreting this

section of Hebrews in hopes of providing fresh exegetical insight into under-

standing this puzzling passage. More specifically, I wish to propose reading

Heb 6:4-6 in light of an OT background. In fact, I would contend that

much misunderstanding of this section of Hebrews stems from a failure to

appreciate its OT matrix.

Hermeneutically, one of the most significant observations for interpreting

Heb 6:4-6 has been articulated by McKnight. As mentioned above, the

warning passages in Hebrews should not be read in strict isolation from

one another, as is frequently the case, but should be read synthetically.4

McKnight helpfully suggests that formally each warning is comprised of

four basic components that provide a basis for comparison with the other

warnings: audience, sin, exhortation, and consequences.5 Based on this observa-

tion, a key feature comes into play which points to a neglected element in

interpreting 6:4-6. Scholars have frequently noticed that one of the com-

mon features of the warning passages in Hebrews is that each exhibits an

OT example to illustrate the warning in question. The following comparison

displays the warnings found in Hebrews along with the corresponding OT

examples contained in each warning.

Warning                     OT Example

2:1-4                           2:2 -                            disobedience to the Mosaic law

3:7-4:13                     3:16-19; 4:2 -                        the failure at Kadesh-barnea

10:19-39                    10:28 -                       disobedience to the Mosaic law

12:14-29                    12:16-17 -                 the failure of Esau;

12:25-26 -failure to listen to

God's voice at Sinai.

 

2 Cf. esp. McKnight, "Warning Passages;" Nicole, "Hebrews 6:4-6," Current Issues;

Oberholtzer, "Hebrews 6:4-12;" Verbrugge, "New Interpretation," respectively.

3 "Warning Passages."

4 Ibid., 22-23.

5 Ibid., 27-29. McKnight suggests the significance of this observation: "I will propose

that a synthesis of each component as revealed in each warning passage provides clarity on the

meaning of a given component in a single passage" (26).



HEB 6:4-6 IN LIGHT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT                                   211

 

Consequently, in addition to McKnight's enumeration of four components

of audience, sin, exhortation and consequences which comprise the warning pas-

sages, I would suggest a fifth component: OT example.

The only exception to this pattern, however, appears to be 6:4-6. Thus, Paul

Ellingworth observes that "This passage [5:11-6:12] is almost as remark-

able for what it does not say as for what it does. Like 3:7-4:13, it contains

only passing mention of Christ (6:1, 6), but unlike the earlier passage, it is

not based on any Old Testament passage either: The writer is appealing

 to his readers in his own words."6 Philip Edgcumbe Hughes admits that “the calamitous

history of the Israelites of old is repeatedly set before the readers as a

warning against the imitation of their evil example (2:lf; 3:12ff.; 4:1f., 11;

10:28ff.; 12:25ff.) . . .,"7 but Hughes does not include a reference to the

warning in 5:11-6:12. In his detailed and thorough analysis of the warnings

in Hebrews, McKnight makes no mention of any OT illustration in 6:4-6.

The recent discussion of the OT background to Hebrews by R. T. France

proposes that an exposition of Psalm 110 more broadly underlies Heb 5:5-

7:28, although this does not help us arrive at an answer to the question of

whether an OT illustration illuminates 6:4-6 in particular.8 More recently,

George H. Guthrie has discussed the use of the OT in Hebrews. Yet despite

the extensive nature of Guthrie's list of OT parallels for Hebrews, no OT

parallels are given for 6:4-6.9

However, I would propose that, like the other warnings in Hebrews, a

specific OT example can also be detected in the warning of 6:4-6, and that

this constitutes one of the keys to interpreting this warning. More specifically,

behind 6:4-6 lies a reference to the wildernes generation and the Kadesh-

barnea incident (cf. Numbers 13-14; Psalm 95) which featured prominently

in the warning in 3:7-4:13. In a footnote in his insightful commentary on

Hebrews, F. F. Bruce briefly entertained the possibility that in 6:4-6 "the

wilderness narrative [the failure of the Israelites to enter Canaan] is still in

our author's mind," although he fails to offer any substantiation for his brief

 

6 The Epistle to the Hebrews (Epworth Commentaries; London: Epworth Press, 1991),

42, italics mine. See also the comments of Erich GraBer, who concludes that the writer describes

the state of his readers "in eigener Terminologie" (An Die Hebraer [Heb7: 1-6], EKK, XVII/I

[Benziger/Neukirchener, 1990] 347).

7 A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 216.

8 "The Writer of Hebrews as a Biblical Expositor," TynBul 47.2 (1996) 245-76. France's

proposal is a modification of the suggestion of Richard N. Longenecker that Hebrews contains

five extended expositions of Old Testament texts (Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period [Grand

Rapids: Eerdrnans, 1975], 178-85). France postulates seven extended expositions: Ps 8:4-6 in Heb

2:5-18; Ps 95:7-11 in Heb 3:7-4:13; Ps 110 in Heb 5:5-7:28;Jer 31:31-34 in Heb 8:1-10:18;

Hab 2:3c-4 (LXX) in Heb 10:32-12:3; Prov 3:11-12 in Heb 12:4-13; the Mount Sinai motif in

Heb 12:18-29.

9 "Old Testament in Hebrews," in Ralph P; Martin and Peter H. Davids, eds., Dictionary

oj the Later New Testament and Its Developments (Downers Grove/Leicester: Inter Varsity Press,

1997), 841-50. See the helpful chart of Old Testament references in Hebrews (846-49).



212                 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

assertion or tease out the possible hermeneutical implications.10 This present

article will attempt to give further substantiation and shape to this suggestion

and briefly explore some of the implications of reading this warning in light

of this proposed OT background.

 

II. The OT Background for 3:7-4:13

The exhortation articulated in 6:4-6 follows on the heels of a previous,

lengthy warning embedded in chaps. 3-4; therefore this section requires

brief analysis in order to provide the context for the ensuing discussion. In

the second warning given in Heb 3:7-4:13 the Kadesh-barnea incident

from Numbers 13-14 is recalled via Psalm 95 (94):7b-11, which the writer of

Hebrews quotes in 3:7-11 and repeatedly recalls in 3:15; 4:3, 5, 7, as the basis

for his exhortation to his readers not to become hardened to the promise

of salvation.11 According to the Numbers 14 narrative, the Israelites were

camped at Kadesh-barnea, prepared to enter the land of Canaan which

constituted the goal of their Exodus from Egypt (cf. Exod 3:8; 6:4; Num 13:1).

However, because of unbelief and hard hearts the wilderness generation

refused to enter the promised land, and consequently incurred God's wrath

(Num 14:11-12). Psalm 95 recalls and interprets Israel's rebellion and unbelief

in the wilderness from Numbers 14, an event which became paradigmatic

of Israel's disobedience,12 as a warning not to emulate the catastrophe at

Kadesh-barnea. The writer of Hebrews appropriates Psalm 95 in order to

place the same warning before the new covenant community not to rebel

and refuse the promise of rest which lay before them as a present reality (cf.

Sh<meron, Heb 3:13; 4:7). According to Ceslas Spicq, the comparison between

Israel under the Mosaic covenant and the new covenant community

presupposes an exact correspondence between the successive generations

of the people of God. . . . Israel and Christians exhibit a certain symmetrical

relationship, as it were, designed by God. They are recipients of the same

promises, they

 

10  The Epistle to the Hebrews (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 120 n. 38.

See also implicitly Grudem, "Perseverance of the Saints," The Grace of God, 160-61.

11 See William L. Lane, Hebrews 1-8 (WBC, 47a; Dallas: Word Books, 1991), 84. Cf.

also Peter Enns, "The Interpretation of Psalm 95 in Hebrews 3.1-4.13," in Craig A. Evans and

James A Sanders, eds., Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations

 and Proposals (JSNTSS, 148; SSEJC, 5; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 352-63;

David A. deSilva, "Exchanging Favor for Wealth: Apostasy in Hebrews and Patron-Client Relationships,"

JBL 115 (1996) 91-116, who understands the warning in terms of a violation of a

patron-client relationship, where the people's response to the blessings provided by the patron

(God) was one of distrust and failure to fulfill the obligations of the relationship.

12 See Lane, Hebrews 1-8, 85. Cf. Deut 1:19-35; Neh 9:15-17; Ps 106:21-27; CD 3:6-9;

Ps-Phil, Bib. Ant. 15; 4 Ezra 7:106; I Cor 10:5-10. Psalm 95 also recalls Israel's rebellion at

Meribah and Massah from Exod 17:1-7, although the climax of Israel's rebellion is the

Kadesh-barnea incident from Numbers 14.



HEB 6:4-6 IN LIGHT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT                                  213

 

go through analogous trials, they are exposed to the same dangers of apostasy,

they are exhorted to the same faithfulness, in identical terms.13

Thus, the relationship between the old and new people of God in Hebrews

is a typological one, where the experience of the wilderness generation in

Num 14 (cf. Ps 95) is recapitulated in and finds its climax in the situation

of the new people of God, the new Israel, in Heb 3:7-4:13.14 The story of

the wilderness generation in the Mosaic era, then, becomes the story of the

new community and the focal lens through which they are to view their

experience. This assumption underlies the direct application of the Ps 95

text to the present community in Hebrews.15 Further, that the wilderness

generation plays a crucial role beyond 3:7-4:13 can be deduced from the

fact that the tabernacle, rather than the temple, provides the predominant

model for the author of Hebrews (8:5; 9:1-10),16 and exodus typology is

confirmed more broadly with the emphasis on the incident at Sinai (12: 18-21,

25, 29) and the comparison between Moses and Christ (3:1-6).

 

III. The OT Background to Heb 6:4-6

Perhaps one of the basic reasons for the hesitancy to find an OT back-

ground for 6:4-6 is the propensity of scholars to focus attention principally

on citations and explicit OT references. However, recent research into the

use of the OT in the NT more generally has pointed to the importance of

giving due attention to allusions and echoes and more implicit and subtle

uses of Scripture.17 For those whose ears are attuned to the OT, even a

 

13 Ceslas Spicq, L'Epitre aux Hebreux (Paris: Gabalda, 1953),71-72. According to

Spicq, "la comparison personnelle Moise-Jesus [3.1-6] sepoursuit tres normalement entre

les Israelites et le peuple chretien" (71).

14 Enns, "The Interpretation of Psalm 95," Early Christian Interpretation.

15 See also Ibid., 352-53. For the typological relationship of the people of God in the Old

and New Testaments more generally see L. Goppelt, Typos (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982).

Moreover, in keeping with the typological nature of the analogy, the comparison between the

wilderness generation and the new community in Heb 3:7-4:13 is a fortiori ("if. .., how much

more"). In other words, if the wilderness generation incurred the wrath of God for refusal to

enter the promised land under the Mosaic era, how much more will the people of God in the

new era not escape God's wrath for refusal to appropriate God's promises as they stand on the

verge of their fulfillment. This a fortiori logic clearly underlies 2:2-3; 10:28-29; 12:25.

16 There has been some discussion over why the author appeals to the tabernacle rather

than the temple for his primary model. While this could indicate that the temple is no longer

standing when Hebrews was written (based on the recent work of Stanley E. Porter, Verbal

Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood [Studies in

Biblical Greek I; New York: Peter Lang, 1989], it can no longer be maintained on the basis of the

use of the present tense in the writer's description of the cultus that the temple is still standing), a better

explanation emerges from the observation that the author employs the wilderness motif through-

out Hebrews. Given the prominence of the wilderness motif the author has employed the

wilderness tabernacle as his dominant model to depict God's dwelling place in the OT in order

to provide a contrast to the heavenly tabernacle.

17 See the discussions in Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul

(New Haven & London, 1989); Brian S. Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics: A Study of 1

Corinthians 5-7 (AGJU,



214                 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

single word or two can activate scriptural texts in the readers' memory. In

addition to alluding to specific texts, authors can sometimes develop Old

Testament concepts or themes which find expression in several OT texts.18

According to William Lane, in Hebrews “Every chapter is marked by

explicit or implicit references to the biblical text."19 I would contend that

the author's language in 6:4-6 is colored by OT references by means of allusion

and echo apart from direct citation. Initial justification for finding OT

influence behind 6:4-6, especially with reference to the wilderness genera-

tion, includes: 1) this era from the life of Israel has already played a promi-

nent role in the exhortation of 3:7-4:13; 2) this aspect of Israel's life serves

as a model throughout Hebrews more broadly; 3) as already observed, an OT

illustration can be detected behind all the other major warnings in Hebrews.20

Further substantiation comes from observing the linguistic and conceptual

parallels in the descriptive phrases in 6:4-6 (“having once for all been

enlightened," "having tasted the heavenly gift," "having become partakers of

the Holy Spirit," "having tasted of the good word of God and the powers

of the coming age") with descriptions of the wilderness generation found in

the OT, associations which "bleed over" from 3:7-4:13 into 6:4-6.21 Most

 

22; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994); Steve Moyise, The Old Testament in the Book of Revelation

JSNTS, 115; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995). For recent treatments of "echo" and the

literary concept of "intertextuality" see J. Hollander, The Figure of Echo: A Mode of Allusion in

Milton and After (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981); Jonathan D. Culler, The

Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction (London and Henley: Routledge & Kegan

Paul, 1981), 100-18. According to the latter work behind intertextuality lies the assumption

that any discourse is only intelligible with reference to a prior body of discourse “which it takes

up, prolongs, cites, refutes, transforms" (101). The recent trend among those who advocate

intertextual approaches has been to become reader-focused rather than author-focused. How-

ever, Hays offers a more balanced approach when he suggests that "a proposed interpretation

must be justified with reference to evidence provided by the text's rhetorical structure and by

what can be known through critical investigation about the author and original readers"

(Echoes of Scripture, 28).

18 See G. K. Beale, "Revelation," in D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson, eds., It is

Written: Scripture Citing Scripture. Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge:

University Press, 1988), 325-26 on the thematic use of the OT in Revelation.

19 Hebrews 1-8, cxv.

20 For discussion of criteria for discerning OT influence cf. Hays, Echoes of Scripture,

29-32; Dale C. Allison, The New Moses: A Matthean Typology (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993),

19-23; M. Thompson, Clothed With Christ: The Example and Teaching of Jesus in Romans

12:1-15:13 JSNTS, 59; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 15-36. For further methodological discussion

see Stanley E. Porter, "The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament: A Brief Comment

on Method and Terminology," in Early Christian Interpretation, 79-96. On the other hand, it

would be methodologically illegitimate to conclude that an OT illustration must lie behind

6:4-6 based on the fact that all the other warnings include one (kind of an 'argument from

silence' in reverse). However, the very fact that all the other warnings include an Old Testa-

ment example at least invites the interpreter to explore the possibility of finding one in 6:4-6

as well.

21 For the LXX as the text-form which underlies the author's use of the OT in Hebrews

cf. the discussion in Paul Ellingworth, Commentary on Hebrews (NIGTC; Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster, 1993), 37-42; Lane, Hebrews 1-8, cxvii-cxviii.



HEB 6:4-6 IN LIGHT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT                      215

 

of the parallels to the statements in 6:4-6 can be discovered in Exodus and

Numbers with their descriptions of the people as they traveled through the

wilderness on their way to Canaan, as well as in Nehemiah 9 (esp. vv. 13-15,

19-21) and in related Psalms, where the history of God's dealing with Israel

is rehearsed in somewhat extended fashion.22

 

I. 6:4a

Commentators frequently draw attention to plausible NT parallels for

the phrase "having once been enlightened," and several have suggested a

baptismal reference for this description.23 However, the following considera-

tions and analysis suggest that more attention needs to be paid to the

possible light that the OT might shed on the interpretation of this phrase.

Given the prominence of the wilderness generation as a model for the

author, the most important parallel is the light that God provided for the

wilderness generation in the desert. According to Exod 13:21, as the Israel-

ites traveled through the desert following their deliverance from Egypt,

along with a pillar of cloud during the day, God provided them with a pillar

of fire to enlighten their way at night. This specific event is recalled in

Nehemiah 9 in a section in which the author recites what God did for his

people on their trek from Egypt through the desert (v. 12), a section which

offers several important linguistic and conceptual parallels to Heb 6:4-6.

This event is also referred to in Ps 105 (104):39, which is situated in a

catalogue of God's mighty actions on behalf of the Israelites. With this

"wilderness generation" background in mind, it appears that this aspect of

the Exodus narrative has provided a primary impetus for the author's

conception here, a proposal that receives further corroboration when the

subsequent statements in vv. 4-5 are examined. The author's reference to

"enlightenment" here probably corresponds to 10:26: "we have received

knowledge of the truth" (cf. v. 32).24

 

22 Nehemiah 9 constitutes a prayer by the Levites which recites the history of

Israel in terms of their apostasy. The idea behind Neh 9:16-25 is that God continues to

sustain his blessings upon Israel despite their rebellion. Cf. David J. A. Clines, Ezra,

Nehemiah, Esther (NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/London: Marshall, Morgan &

Scott, 1984), 195.

23 See Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1965), 148; Ellingworth, Hebrews, 320; Lane, Hebrews 1-8, 141. Cf. John

1:9, 12; 8:12; 2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:8; Col 4:5; 2 Tim 1:10; I Pet 2:9; Rev 18:1. The earliest

references for enlightenment as a reference to baptism are found in Justin, Apol. 61:12;

Dial. 39:2; 122:1-2,6. Against a baptismal reference here cf. Hans Conzelmann, "fw?j

ktl.," TDNT; IX, 355; Hughes, Hebrews, 208; Hans Windisch, Der Hebriierbrief (HNT,

14; 2nd ed.; Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck J, 1931) 51; Ellingworth, Hebrews, 320.

Barnabas Lindars concludes: "Their minds were 'enlightened' by the teaching which

culminated in baptism" (The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews [Cambridge:

University Press, 1991J, 67).

24 For "enlightened" as illumination from the Gospel see Lane, Hebrews 1-8, 141;

Harold W. Attridge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Hermeneia;

Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 169; Ellingworth, Hebrews, 320.

 



216                 WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

 

Heb 6:4b                                                        Neh 9: 12

tou>j a!pac fwtisqe<ntaj                        tou?  fwti<sai au]tou>j

Neh 9:19

                                                            fwti<zein au]toi?j

Psalm 105 (104):39

                                                            pu?r tou? fwti<sai au]toi?j

 

2. 6:4b

The second phrase in the repertoire of statements in 6:4-6, "having

tasted the heavenly gift," also resonates with overtones from the wilderness

incident. Although the verbal parallels are not as precise as the previous

instance, for those whose ears were attuned to the OT background, this

phrase, which occurs only here in the NT, would have recalled the manna

which God provided from heaven for his people during their sojourn in the

wilderness. According to Exod 16:4, God would rain bread down from

heaven for the Israelites' sustenance in response to their grumbling over

their perceived misfortune in comparison to what they had in Egypt (cf.

16:31, 33, 35; Num 11:7-9; Deut 8:3, 16). This provision of "heavenly bread"

became important for subsequent articulations of God's intervention on

behalf of his covenant people, and is explicitly recalled in the historical

recital of Ps 105 (104):40. In rehearsing the events following the incident at

Sinai, Neh 9 also draws on this description of heavenly bread which God

gave to his covenant people (9:15; cf. v. 20). Further, along with the Nehe-

miah 9 reference, in Exod 16:15 and Ps 78 (77):24 the bread is described as

something which the Lord gave (LXX e@dwke[n]) to his people to eat, sug-

gesting that the bread is a divine gift. Moreover, according to later exege-

tical traditions there was an expectation of a second, eschatological provision

of bread from heaven corresponding to God's provision in the past (2 Bar.

29:8; Eccl. R. 1:9; Sib. Or. 7:145).25 Thus, along with the Exodus narrative,

the retrospective lists noted above, which include mention of the provision

of heavenly bread as a gift from God to the wilderness generation, provide

plausible parallels to the writer's second statement in Heb 6:4, where the

readers have “tasted the heavenly gift" in the age of eschatological fulfill-

ment.26 While the reference to "tasting" may suggest a Eucharistic setting,27

 

25 See Johannes Behm, "a@rtoj," TDNT, I, 477-78; Rudolf Meyer, "Ma<nna," TDNT, IV,

463-65. This may be linked with the idea that the manna was hidden in the ark before the

destruction