07_AN_Kibbe_282_286_282_286 10/07/15 12:22 Pagina 286 286 MICHAEL KIBBE In conclusion, then, neither syntactical nor contextual considerations support the argument that two different evaluations of two different mo- ments are in view in Heb 12,19 and 12,25. The repeated use of paraite,omai, alongside the other factors just discussed, demonstrates that the author of Hebrews views Israel’s fearful withdrawal from the Sinai theophany as a rejection of God that must not be imitated by those who hear him speak from Zion. Wheaton College Michael KIBBE Department of Biblical and Theological Studies 500 College Ave. Wheaton, IL 60188 U.S.A. SUMMARY This short note examines the three occurrences of paraite,omai in Heb 12,18-29 and suggests that the repeated use of the word demonstrates the au- thor’s evaluation of Israel’s “request” for distance from God at Sinai as a re- jection of his word to them. While some have distinguished the meaning (and referent) of paraite,omai in 12,19 from that in 12,25, this distinction is unsustainable in light of the use of paraite,omai outside of Hebrews and of the flow of thought in Heb 12,18-29.