James Swetnam 104 2) The imagery is inconsistent. In v. 12 the image is about the pene- trating power of oJ lovgo~, whereas in v. 13 the image seems to refer to a sacrifice or, possibly, to a wrestling hold 15. 3) The description is inconsistent. It is not clear how a ‘two-edged sword’ is appropriate for a sacrifice, much less for a wrestling hold 16. 4) The language is inconsistent. The use of the illative particle ou\n in 4,14 is anomalous. In 4,12 the word gavr refers to what immediately pre- cedes: on the reading of lovgo~ as Scripture, the imagery involving the penetrating power of the ‘sword’ gives the reason why the hortative spou- daswmen is used in the preceding verse, and yields a tolerable sense. But v on the same reading, the particle ou\n in v. 14 is more difficult to account for. It would normally refer to what immediately precedes. But even if the assumption is made that it alludes to the distant discourse about the high priest in 2,13b-18—the only previous explicit mention of ajrciereuv~ in the epistle—the transition from v. 13 is abrupt, and, in the end, unintel- ligible, for nothing in v. 13 refers to Christ as high priest 17. Further, if oJ logo~ refers to scripture, the use of the participle zw`n (‘living’) modify- v ing oJ lovgo~ is inconsistent with the language involving zw`n elsewhere in Hebrews. In the epistle this word zw`n is used of God himself (3,12; 9,14; 10,31; 12,22), or of Christ (7,25; 10,20, or of human life (2,15; 7,8; 9,17; 10,38; 12,9), but never of non-personal life. Heb 4,12 is the only text in Hebrews where zw`n would refer to non-personal life if oJ lovgo~ refers to scripture. A coherent solution to these problems would be to take the word logo~ as referring to Jesus Himself, as in the Johannine prologue 18. The v above inconsistencies are thus resolved at one stroke: 1) The terminology becomes consistent. If the lovgo~ of the expres- sion oJ lovgo~ at 4,12-13 is understood as referring to Jesus Himself 19, it can have the same meaning in both verses. In v. 12 the allusion to Jesus as oJ lovgo~ would refer to his ability as divine to furnish a spiri- tual circumcision of the heart needed to effect a definitive entry into God’s rest. The idea of circumcision comes from 4,8 and the allusion to Joshua, who circumcised the Israelites on their entrance into the land 15 Attridge, Hebrews, 134-136. 16 Attridge, Hebrews, 136. 17 Ellingworth (Hebrews, 266) notes that ou\n does not draw an inference from what immediately precedes, and posits an interruption in the thought from 3,7 to 4,13. Attridge, too (Hebrews, 138-139), says that ou\n is a ‘resumptive particle’. But neither Ellingworth nor Attridge indicates why the author of Hebrews thinks it appropriate to resume his discussion of Christ’s priesthood precisely at this point. 18 Cf. J. Swetnam, «A Possible Structure of Hebrews 3,7 – 10,39», Melita Theologica 45 (1994) 128-135. 19 The title ‘Jesus’ is suggested by the word jIhsou`~ at 4,8 referring primarily to Joshua and indirectly to Jesus.