James Swetnam 110 author is thinking here of the patriarchs of Israel who received the announcement of the promises, but not what was promised 46. The recep- tion of what was promised is reserved to the Christians who imitate the faithful perseverance of the patriarchs 47. The prime example of receiving promises through persevering faith is Abraham (Heb 6,13-15). The texts cited from the Old Testament are from the aftermath of Abraham’s obedient offering of Isaac in Gen 22. On the occasion of his manifestation of persevering faith Abraham receives ‘the promise’ (ejpevtucen th`~ ejpaggeliva"). Coming as it does immedi- ately following the citation of God’s oath to bless and multiply Abraham, this promise can only be understood as referring to the promise of prog- eny. That the author of Hebrews had only one promise in mind is con- firmed by his repetition of the singular in 6,17 (. . . toi`~ klhronovmoi~ th~ ejpaggeliva"). ` In the context of the structure of Heb 3,7 – 6,20 being suggested here, the above texts involving ‘promise’ are significant. The author of Hebrews is thinking of the two promises made to Abraham: the promise of enter- ing into God’s rest (4,1) and the promise of progeny (6,15).48 Further, if the analysis of the structure being advanced in this paper is correct, he is thinking of them together in relation to the paraenesis which he is giving with regard to the entire section 3,7 – 6,20 (6,12). That the section 3,7 – 4,12 is thus about the promise of entering into God’s rest would seem to be evident. That the section 4,13 – 5,10 is about the promise of progeny is not evident at all. The problem here is to link the use of ejpaggeliva/ epaggeliai in 6,12.13.15.17 49, where the discussion is obviously about j v the promise of progeny, with what precedes. This is what the present article is attempting to do with a fresh view of the structure of 4,13 – 6,20 50. If the structure is valid, the corollary is that the priesthood of 46 Cf. Attridge, Hebrews, 176. 47 Ellingworth (Hebrews, 333) argues for a partial, temporal fulfillment of the prom- ises as a type of the definitive future fulfillment reserved for Christians. But it would seem preferable to regard the ‘receiving of the promises’ even in Heb 11,33 as the recep- tion of the original promises made to the patriarchs, and not the fulfillment of the prom- ises themselves, even in a partial, temporal guise. Thus the use of the word ejpitugkavnw in Heb 11,33 is consistent with its use in Heb 6,15. 48 «The divine promises to Abraham involved two major components—that the patri- arch would be the father of a great nation [cf. Gen 12:2-3; 15:5; 17:5] and that this nation would inherit the land [cf. Gen 12:7; 13:4]» (Attridge, Hebrews, 178). 49 Cf. the discussion of Heb 6,13-15 above. 50 The relation between priesthood, law and people in Heb 7,11-13 should also be noted. The ‘people’ (laov") in Hebrews never changes (cf. Ellingworth, Hebrews, 190), but the ‘promises’, ‘covenant’ and ‘priesthood’ do. «The concept of the new covenant is co-ordinate . . . with that of Christ’s priesthood [sc., in Heb 8,6], and serves to show that it is not an isolated phenomenon but part of a total re-ordering by God of his dealings with his people. Both here and in 7:20-22, Jesus’ status in relation to the new covenant is not arbitrary or accidental; it is by divine appointment attested in scripture. Within