46 Michael A. Rudolph the refrain75 ἕχοντεϛ οὖν76 in combination with a hortatory subjunctive77. While Guthrie divides this text after 10,23 in his discussion in order to accentuate repetition78, the text (10,19-25) forms one sentence and must be considered as a whole. It begins with a participial phrase/vocative serving a dual purpose: to signal a transition and to review the content of 5,1 – 10,18. The rest of the sentence consists of a threefold series of finite clauses (hortatory subjunctives) expanded by various modifying phrases. The first is a repetition of 4,16; the second is synonymous with 4,14 and captures the essence of 3,1 – 4,1479. It is not until the third, and most expanded, hortatory subjunctive that new information is introduced. While Guthrie is correct to note both the anaphoric and cataphoric nature of this sentence, his preference for inclusions and focus upon the expositional details of the text causes him to misjudge its hortatory framework. This text represents the transition one would expect of a great orator, ancient or modern, at this point in his or her message: i.e., a clear transitional signal and a brief review of the essence of his message (clearly stressing the two, previously stated, main points and building anticipation for the next) joined syntactically to the third point that represents new information and the topic of the subsequent section. 75 Harvey states, “Refrain is the use of repeated wording or formulaic phrases to open and/or close sections of a discussion. Although this pattern is close to ring-composition, it differs in that an opening statement may not be balanced by a closing statement, or vice versa. Refrain serves both to mark the beginning (or ending) of successive sections and to unify extended portions of a work”. Harvey, Listening to the Text, 284. 76 Cf., a similar phrase, although emphatically expanded, later in the text (12:1): τοιγαροῦν καὶ ἡμεῖϛ τοσοῦτον ἔχοντεϛ. 77 Hebrews has significantly more hortatory subjunctives (12) than any other New Testament book, especially when considered in light of its overall length (4953 words, or 1 for every 413 words). Only in 1 Thessalonians (4 total, 1 for every 370 words) did hortatory subjunctives appear more frequently. While Mark and John each have six, the length of those texts (11,304 and 15,635 words respectively) reduces their overall significance considerably. Data was obtained through a search on Logos Bible Software, version 2.1. 78 Guthrie, Structure, 79–82. 79 While the limits of the current study will not allow for thorough discussion of the suggested “overlapping transition” at 4,14-16, it should be noted that the metacommunicative clause at 3,1 (κατανοήσατε τὸν ἀπόστολον καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆϛ ὁμολογίαϛ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν, πιστὸν ὄντα) introduces the topic of this section, but the author’s point (i.e., comment: κρατῶμεν τῆϛ ὁμολογίαϛ) is not made until 4,14, after noting the faithfulness and superior status of Jesus, as a Son, compared with Moses, who was merely a servant in the house, and the faithlessness of those who followed him. A consideration of how the author has shaped the message, as well as the flow of information would further illuminate this transition.