Editing Epistle to the Hebrews (section)

==Audience==
{{See also|Reader-response criticism}}

German scholar [[Adolf Jülicher]] rejected the traditional view that the epistle was directed to a Hebrew congregation in Israel, concluding instead that the "only supposition that is really encouraged by the Epistle itself... is that Hebrews was addressed to the place where it first made its appearance, i.e. to Rome."<ref>[[Adolf Jülicher]], ''An Introduction to the New Testament'' ([[Janet Trevelyan|Janet Penrose Ward]], transl.), [https://archive.org/details/anintrodnewtesta00juliuoft/page/162/mode/1up?view=theater pp.162-163], (London: [[Smith, Elder & Co.]], 1904).</ref>

Scholars{{who|date=February 2013}} have suggested that Hebrews is part of an internal New Testament debate between the extreme [[Judaizers]] (who argued that non-Jews must [[Conversion to Judaism|convert to Judaism]] before they can receive the [[Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]] of Jesus' [[New Covenant]]) versus the extreme [[Antinomianism|antinomians]] (who argued that Jews must reject [[613 mitzvot|God's commandments]] and that [[Abrogation of Old Covenant laws|Jewish law was no longer in effect]]). [[James the Just|James]] and [[Paul of Tarsus and Judaism|Paul]] represent the moderates of each faction, respectively, and [[Saint Peter|Peter]] may have served as moderator.<ref>"The Canon Debate", McDonald & Sanders editors, 2002, chapter 32, p. 577, by [[James D. G. Dunn]]: "For ''Peter was probably in fact and effect the bridge-man'' (pontifex maximus!) ''who did more than any other to hold together the diversity of first-century Christianity. '' James the brother of Jesus and Paul, the two other most prominent leading figures in first-century Christianity, were too much identified with their respective "brands" of Christianity, at least in the eyes of Christians at the opposite ends of this particular spectrum. But Peter, as shown particularly by the Antioch episode in Gal 2, had both a care to hold firm to his Jewish heritage, which Paul lacked, and an openness to the demands of developing Christianity, which James lacked. John might have served as such a figure of the center holding together the extremes, but if the writings linked with his name are at all indicative of his own stance he was too much of an individualist to provide such a rallying point. Others could link the developing new religion more firmly to its founding events and to Jesus himself. But none of them, including the rest of the twelve, seem to have played any role of continuing significance for the whole sweep of Christianity{{snd}}though James the brother of John might have proved an exception had he been spared". [Italics original]</ref>

It sets before the Jew the claims of Christianity – to bring the Jew to the full realization of the relation of Judaism to Christianity, to make clear that Christ has fulfilled those temporary and provisional institutions, and has thus abolished them.<ref name="Dickson">"Introduction to Hebrews". ''The New Analytical Bible and Dictionary of the Bible (KJV). '' Chicago: John A. Dickson Publishing Co., 1950. p. 1387</ref> This view is commonly referred to as [[supersessionism]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.theopedia.com/supersessionism|title=Supersessionism {{!}} Theopedia|website=www.theopedia.com|language=en|access-date=2017-09-26}}</ref>
According to the theology of supersessionism,  the church replaces Israel, and thus the church takes the place of Israel as the people of God. The dominant interpretation  in modern Hebrews scholarship has been that the epistle contains an implicit supersessionist claim (that the Levitical sacrifices and the Levitical priests have been replaced/superseded by Christ's sacrifice).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schmitt |first1= Mary |title=Restructuring Views on Law in Hebrews 7:12 |journal=JBL |volume=128 |issue= 1|pages=189–201 }}</ref> Per Bibliowicz, Hebrews scholars may be divided into those that are supportive-sympathetic to the epistle's theological message,<ref>including D. DeSilva, D. Hagner, L. T. Johnson, W. Lane, B. Lindars, R. W. Wall</ref> those that are critical of the epistle's supersessionary message,<ref>including N. Beck, Bibliowicz, L. Freudman, J. Gager, and S. Sandmel</ref> and those attempting a middle ground.<ref>including H. W. Attridge, Koester, S. Lehne, S. G. Wilson, C. Williamson.</ref>

Due to the importance of Hebrews for the formation of future Christian attitudes toward Jews and Judaism, a distinction must be made between the author's intent and the way in which the text was interpreted by future generations.<ref>{{cite book |last=Williamson |first=  Clark M|date=1993 |title=A Guest in the House of Israel  |location=Louisville, KY |publisher= Westminster John Knox Press|pages=175–200 |isbn=0664254543}}</ref> The impact of the deployment and implementation of supersession theology  is difficult to convey and  grasp. The implementation of this theological claim eventually led to the negation and disenfranchisement of Jewish followers of Jesus, and later, of all non-Christian Jews.<ref>{{cite book |last=Bibliowicz |first=Abel M |date=2019 |title= Jewish-Christian Relations – The First Centuries |url=https://www.academia.edu/29628872  |location= WA|publisher= Mascarat|pages= 158–162|isbn=978-1513616483}}</ref>