The Context of the Crux at Hebrews 5, 7-8 107 In the interpretation being suggested here, Heb 4,12-13, with its use of lovgo~ as a designation of Jesus, acts as a pivot in the section 3,7 – 6,20. Heb 4,12 sums up the first part, 3,7 – 4,11, which discusses the spiritualized promise of land, i.e., God’s rest, and prepares the way for the following part, about Christ’s priesthood. By portraying Jesus as divine (oJ lovgo") the author implicitly indicates why entrance into the spiritualized land of God’s rest is possible: Jesus, who is equal to God, is able to effect the spiritual circumcision of the heart needed for such an entrance 29. Further, by portraying Jesus as divine (oJ lovgo"), the author implicitly indicates why entrance into this spiritualized land of God’s rest will be infallibly achieved by the group as a whole: again, the divinely-effected spiritual circumcision is certain in its effects unless thwarted by individual acts of disobedience 30. Thus the lovgo~ makes possible the attainment of the promise of land for those who remain partakers in Christ, as the transition verse 3,6 introducing 3,7 – 6,20 states 31. Heb 4,13, on the other hand, introduces what is to follow by its imagery of sacrifice and intercession which are associated with priesthood (Heb 4,14 – 5,10). c) Hebrews 4,8-16 The division of 4,12-13 into two parts, one looking to what precedes and one looking to what follows, makes possible a suggestion about the structure of the immediate context of these verses: Heb 4,8-11 is the immediate paraenetic antecedent of Heb 4,12, and Heb 4,14-16 is the immediate paraenetic consequence of Heb 4,13 32. Heb 4,8-11 is the immediate paraenetic antecedent for Heb 4,12, for these verses focus on the contrast between Joshua and the lovgo~ as of Scripture—cf. Heb 9,19] is a strong argument against seeing the lovgo~ of Heb 4,12- 13 as referring to Scripture: if the lovgo~ of Scripture [cf. Heb 3,7] was unable to effect an entrance for God’s people under Joshua, why should it do so for Christians?) 29 Cf. above, n. 20. The section Heb 1,5 – 2,4 was dedicated to showing the full divinity of the Son. Cf. Swetnam, «Heb 1,5-14», 61-62. 30 Cf. J. Swetnam, «A Suggested Interpretation of Hebrews 9,15-18», CBQ 27 (1965) 383. 31 «Unfortunately scholars who take the lovgo~ of vs. 12 to be the divine Logos (Bruce, F. W. Farrar, T. H. Robinson, etc.), tend to create discontinuity in the thought of 3:7 – 4:13, by pointing to theoretical considerations which are not there» (G. W. Trompf, «The Conception of God in Hebrews 4:12-13», 127, n. 16). The present writer will leave to the judgment of the reader whether the considerations about form and con- tent offered in this paper are ‘theoretical considerations which are not there’ or not. 32 The inferential particles are helpful indicators: the gavr of 4,12 points to what is previous, just as the ou`n of v. 14 points to what is previous but in the context of a parae- nesis, as at 4,1.11.16; 10,19.35; 13,15 (cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 138, n. 20).