Hebrews
An unknown author's masterpiece — the highest exaltation language in the NT intertwined with the deepest theology of Christ's suffering humanity.
Overview
Hebrews is one of the most theologically sophisticated documents in the New Testament, yet its author remains unknown. Origen famously said "only God knows" who wrote it. What we do know is that this author was a masterful rhetorician, deeply versed in Jewish Scripture (particularly the Greek Septuagint), and capable of holding together Christological claims that seem to pull in opposite directions.
The opening verses of Hebrews set the tone with some of the most exalted language about Jesus found anywhere in the NT: he is the "radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being," the one through whom God made the universe and who sustains all things by his powerful word. Yet the same letter describes Jesus as one who "learned obedience through what he suffered," was "made perfect" through suffering, and was appointed as high priest by God.
This interplay between exaltation and humiliation is not accidental — it is the theological engine of the letter. Hebrews argues that Jesus had to be both exalted (to be an effective mediator between God and humanity) and genuinely human (to sympathise with human weakness and offer himself as a sacrifice). How one understands the relationship between these two dimensions determines everything about one's reading of the letter's Christology.
Christological themes
- Radiance and representation — Hebrews 1:3 describes the Son as the apaugasma (radiance/reflection) of God's glory and the charaktēr (exact imprint) of God's being. This language, drawn directly from the Jewish Wisdom tradition — apaugasma appears in Wisdom of Solomon 7:26, its only occurrence in the Septuagint, where it describes personified Wisdom as "a reflection of eternal light" — raises the central question: does it mean the Son is God, or that the Son perfectly reveals God? Trinitarian readers (Lane, Cockerill) argue apaugasma is ACTIVE radiance — light emanating from a source, not merely reflected — and that charaktēr tēs hypostaseōs means the Son shares the same divine substance, vocabulary later formalised in the conciliar creeds. Biblical Unitarian readers respond that every metaphor here is a metaphor of derivation, not identity: radiance comes from a light source and depends on it; an imprint derives from a seal and is not the seal. The NRSVue's "reflection" preserves this directional language. Wisdom of Solomon never makes the personified Wisdom a second God, and Hebrews is using its vocabulary — so reading the same vocabulary as crossing the line from supreme reflective representation into ontological identification requires arguments external to the language itself. The same chapter's grammar reinforces the BU side: v. 9 has the Father as "your God" who anoints the Son above his "companions" (metochous, fellow-participants — a category that requires a creaturely peer-group). Patrick Navas and Anthony Buzzard develop this reading at length.
- Superior to angels — The entire first chapter is an argument that the Son is superior to the angels, supported by a chain of OT quotations. Notably, one of these quotations (Heb 1:8–9, quoting Psalm 45:6–7) appears to address the Son as "God" — yet in the same quotation, the Son has a God who anoints him. This internal tension is a microcosm of the Christological debate itself.
- Made lower for a little while — Hebrews 2:9 describes Jesus as "made for a little while lower than the angels" so that he might taste death for everyone. Trinitarians read this as genuine divine pre-existence: the Son voluntarily took on human nature while retaining divine nature (the Chalcedonian two-natures framework), and the temporary lowering is the incarnation itself — a pattern similar to the Philippians 2 hymn. Biblical Unitarian readers note that 2:9 is itself a citation of Psalm 8, which is explicitly about humanity ("what is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little lower than the angels"). The author applies the Psalm to Jesus precisely as the representative human being — the second Adam to whom the original Adamic vocation has been entrusted (cf. Heb 2:6–8). On this reading, the "lower than the angels" describes Jesus's genuine human condition in solidarity with Adam's race, not the temporary downgrade of a pre-existent divine being. The temporary lowering is "for a little while" because Jesus, having fulfilled humanity's vocation, is now exalted — not because he is returning to a status he previously possessed. The same chapter says he had to be "made like his brothers in every respect" (2:17), which is a strange way to describe a divine person who had to become incarnate (you do not make a divine being like its brothers; you describe it as adopting humanity). The Psalm's own framework controls the reading.
- Faithful high priest — Hebrews' most distinctive Christological contribution is its portrayal of Jesus as the perfect high priest — not of the Levitical order, but of the order of Melchizedek. This high priest is both appointed by God (5:5) and "made perfect" through suffering (2:10, 5:9). Trinitarians resolve the difficulty of "made perfect" through the two-natures framework: it describes the Son's human nature's vocational completion, not a limitation on his divine nature (Attridge, Cockerill: "perfection" = consecration for priestly service). Biblical Unitarian readers note that Hebrews' priest-Christology requires a Jesus who is genuinely human in the unqualified sense: high priests are taken from among the people (5:1), are "beset with weakness" themselves (5:2), and offer sacrifices because they share the human condition. The author explicitly applies this pattern to Jesus — he can "sympathise with our weaknesses" because he was "tempted in every respect" as we are (4:15). A two-natures framework in which only the "human nature" is tempted while a co-existing divine nature stands aside makes the sympathy hollow: the divine nature cannot be tempted, and a "human nature" without a fully human subject experiencing the temptation is not what tempts and tries human beings. The straightforward reading — Jesus is a human being whom God appointed as priest, whose obedient suffering "perfected" him for that role — matches Hebrews' priestly logic at every point.
- Learning obedience — Hebrews 5:8 states that "although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered." Trinitarians appeal to the two-natures framework: "learned obedience" describes the Son's human nature, not a deficiency in his divine nature. Biblical Unitarian readers reply that the verse describes genuine learning by a real human person, not the choreographed appearance of learning by a divine being who already possesses all knowledge. If the subject of "learned" is the eternal Son who is omniscient by divine nature, then "learned" can only describe a script: the omniscient subject already knows everything that learning would teach. Hebrews 5:7's preceding clause — Jesus "offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission" — describes a real human being trusting a God greater than himself. He cried out for deliverance because he genuinely needed it; he was heard because he reverently submitted; he learned obedience because obedience required real choice in real circumstances. The verse anchors a Christology in which Jesus is the supreme exemplar of human faithfulness — which is precisely what makes him an effective high priest "for those who obey him" (5:9). On this reading, the difficulty for Trinitarian Christology is internal: a co-eternal omniscient person cannot meaningfully "learn" anything, and an unsuffering divine nature cannot pray for deliverance from death.
Key passages
What scholars debate
The primary debate about Hebrews' Christology is whether the opening chapter's exalted language implies ontological deity or supreme agency. Scholars like Luke Timothy Johnson and Harold Attridge argue that the Wisdom-language of Hebrews 1:1–4 places the Son within the divine identity, functioning as God's own self-expression. William Lane (Hebrews 1–8, WBC) and Gareth Lee Cockerill (The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT) reinforce this reading, arguing that the author's language goes beyond Wisdom personification to make genuine ontological claims. Others, like James D.G. Dunn, argue that the author is working within the Jewish Wisdom tradition, where Wisdom is a personification of God's activity rather than a distinct divine person.
The relationship between the exalted Son of chapter 1 and the suffering, learning, "made perfect" Son of chapters 2 and 5 is another contested area. Orthodox Christology resolves this through the two-natures doctrine — the exaltation language refers to the divine nature, the humiliation language to the human nature. But scholars debate whether the author of Hebrews would have thought in those categories. The letter may instead reflect a narrative pattern: the Son was in a state of glory, entered into genuine human experience, and was subsequently re-exalted — a pattern closer to the Philippians hymn than to Chalcedonian Christology. From the Biblical Unitarian perspective, Patrick Navas and Anthony Buzzard argue that the exaltation language of Hebrews 1 describes what God bestowed on the glorified Messiah rather than an eternally pre-existent second person of a Trinity.
For detailed Biblical Unitarian arguments on Hebrews 1, see the REV Bible Commentary and BiblicalUnitarian.com.