Constructing “Janus-Faced” Exhortations 403 Lane opines that “paraenetic instruction … calls for imitation of qualities of life and conduct exhibited in those who have proved to be models worthy of emulation” (11) and, with Hebrews having already found the pivsti" of the heroes of chapter 11 somewhat commendatory, their ongoing usefulness for the exhortations of chapter 13 seems perfectly appropriate, apposite and invited. Rather than being isolated, random, convenient examples, (as the consensus seems to imply), the figures appealed to in the opening verses of chapter 13 instead comprise a specific attempt to root present paraenesis in the actions of those who have gone before them. Whilst Hebrews strongly asserts that Christ is the one who models true faithful discipleship (3,1-6; 5,1-10), other figures from the past also exert an ideal function; the fact that Christ cannot fulfil the marriage exhortation of 13,4, for example, gives good reason for suggesting that the author has other exemplary figures in mind. Part of the argument for this approach is allied to, and invited by, the structure of these opening verses, and the approach of the paper is to consider 13,1-8 as the first unit of discourse. For most commentators, the unit is limited to 13,1-6 (12), or possibly 13,1-7 (13), but 13,1-8 remains a more persuasive unit; the otherwise uninvited liturgical declaration of 13,8 can be best explained when linked to the previous material, especially in the context of the use of the OT (14). Whilst the literary approaches offered by Vanhoye and others hold much weight, and draw some interesting parallels within 13,1-6 itself, another way of considering the evidence is to view 13,1 and 13,8 as bookends of a passage, their common theme of continuity being the theme that binds the whole section together. The desire of 13,1 that love should remain (menetw) matches the parallel claim of 13,8, that Jesus Christ himself remains v the same yesterday, today and forever. This “continuity” or “unshakeability” stands in direct opposition to the changeability expressed at the close of chapter 12 — the created, shaken things (12,26-27). Earlier in the letter, Jesus is said to declare the name of his brothers in the heavenly congregation (2,12), so it should come as no surprise that the continuous exercise of fraternal love (13,1) is connected with Jesus Christ himself. Including 13,8 within the pericope also yields explanatory power, for the juxtaposition of “yesterday” and “today” summarises the paraenetic concern of the author in the first eight verses of the chapter. The type of discipleship demanded today by Hebrews’ author is the very same type of discipleship as that exhibited by their forefathers yesterday. This same paraenetic principle is, of course, found earlier in the letter, in 3,7-4,11; Hebrews exhorts its audience to faithfulness today (3,7; 4,7), but the model for such pivsti" — or rather the negative embodiment of it — is that demonstrated yesterday, by a former generation of Israel (3,16-19; 4,11). Hebrews’ preference is to root its paraenesis in the actions of a group or individuals from the past; this is the (11) W.L. LANE, Hebrews 9–13 (WBC 47B; Dallas, TX 1991) 499. (12) LANE, Hebrews, 507-521; H.W. ATTRIDGE, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Philadelphia, PA 1989) 384-389; D.A. DE SILVA, Perseverance in Gratitude. A Socio- Rhetorical Commentary on the Epistle “to the Hebrews” (Grand Rapids, MI 2000) 485-493; R.P. GORDON, Hebrews (Sheffield 2000) 162-165. (13) L.T. JOHNSON, Hebrews. A Commentary (Louisville, KY 2006) 339-346. (14) N.T. WRIGHT, Hebrews for Everyone (London 2003) 167-171 also renders 13,1-8 as the unit of discussion.