Saturday, May 21, 2022

Albert Vanhoye on Hebrews 11:1 and ὑπόστασις

  

The etymology of hypostasis is ‘the act of standing under’; the derived senses are ‘military position’ (1 Sam 14.4); a ‘firm point’ which secures one’s footing (Ps 69.2); ‘foundation’ of one’s hope (Ps 38.8); ‘firm attitude’, ‘foundation’ of a building, ‘argument’ or ‘topic’ of a discussion. In the papyri (James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources [London, 1930], 659-60) hypostasis has a commercial meaning: it designates a ‘title deed’ and thus also simply ‘possession’ (cf. also Deut 11.6). Philosophers, since the time of the early Stoics, used the word for ‘underlying realty’, the ‘substance’ in contradistinction to the apparent. In Christian theology, the term chanted form meaning ‘essence’ to meaning ‘person’ (The Council of Nicaea treated hypostasis as synonymous with ousia, stating that the Son is not ‘of another hypostasis or ousia’, but of the same as that of the Father. The Second Council of Constantinople, however, treated hypostasis as synonymous with the prosopon and proclaimed ‘one single Godhead in three hypostasesin ēgoun prosōpois’).

 

In Heb 11.1 the Vulgate adopts the thoroughly objective philosophical meaning of ‘substance’, as in Heb 1.3 and 3.14. However, Erasmus proposed the subjective meaning firmam fiduciam [firm confidence], and many commentators, particularly Protestants, have followed him.

 

In regard to the other words, elenchos, the situation is different. This word has only an objective meaning, ‘proof’, ‘argument’ used to prove, often specifically the defence or the allegation, but also in a more general sense. We cannot attribute to it this word the subjective sense of ‘personal conviction’, ‘ein überführtsein’ [being convinced]. One does not find this in any text. We must therefore hold to the objective sense. Faith is a piece of evidence, a means to knowledge. The realities which are not see, which are not apparent, cannot be known save by indirect means. Reason is one of those means, faith another. Even on the human level, to believe what we are told by experts is the usual way of coming to knowledge. There is very little that we can verify personally. We must of necessity maintain our trust in other people.

 

If an objective sense is applied to the second word in the definition, one would naturally also choose an objective sense for the first, especially since hypostasis most commonly has this kind of sense. If we choose a subjective sense, the definition becomes lame. The Greek fathers in their exegesis adopted an objective sense, of a philosophical character. Some modern exegetes similarly adopt an objective sense. In the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Helmut Koester, at the end of a long discussion, decisively rejects the subjective sense; he writes, ‘there can be no question but that this classical Protestant understanding is untenable’ (Helmut Koester, ‘υποστασις’, TDNT 8.572-89, at p. 586). (Albert Vanhoye, “The Faith of Jesus? On Hebrews 12.2: ‘Jesus, Author and Perfector of Faith’,” in Vanhoye, A Perfect Priest: Studies in the Letter to the Hebrews [trans. Nicholas J. Moore and Richard J. Ounsworth; Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 477; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018], 264-65)

 

Further Reading:

 

Richard D. Draper and Michael D. Rhodes on the Problem of JST Hebrews 11:1 Rendering ὑπόστασις, (KJV: "Substance") as "Assurance"

 

Alan C. Mitchell on Hebrews 11:1 and  ὑπόστασις

 

Craig Koester on the Objective and Subjective Senses of ὑπόστασις ("assurance"/"substance") in Hebrews 11:1

Blog Archive