A response on: Reading Hebrews and 1 Peter from Majority World Perspectives. Edited by Sofanit T. Abebe, Elizabeth W. Mburu, and Abeneazer G. Urga. Library of New Testament Studies 700. London: T&T Clark, 2024

This article offers a critical examination of the first section of ‘Reading Hebrews and 1 Peter from Majority World Perspective’ (Abebe, Mburu, and Urga, eds), with a particular attention to the African interpretation of Hebrews. While this article affirms the collection’s objective to challenge the predominance of Euro-American scholarship dominance within New Testament studies, it nonetheless contends that contextual readings must be undergirded by explicit and sustained methodological frameworks. Without such rigor, there is a risk that inculturation studies merely illustrate, rather than critically engage, with the biblical text. Beginning with a brief analysis of Ethiopian Orthodox tradition and Amharic translation debates, the discussion centres on Axolile N.M. Qina’s reading of Hebrews 10:1–18 through a Xhosa religious lens. There are several concerns that this article has with his analysis. First, inculturation approaches can sometime be anachronistic, in that it can sometimes let the cultural ideas control interpretation, rather than allowing the Biblical text to reshape the cultural ideas. Second, this article wants to highlight the ‘monolithic-danger’ that can be inherent in inculturation approaches, particularly, the insufficient sociological differentiation within the Xhosa Christian context as presented in Qina’s chapter. Qina lumps all Xhosa Christians under one label and doesn’t distinguish between the Christians communities who some maintained or modified ancestral worship while others completely rejected it. Third, this article also cautions against directly equating African ancestral mediation with the “ancestors” mentioned in Hebrews, it deems this as category error that obscures the epistle’s/ book’s covenantal and salvation-history argument. Most significantly, it argues that Hebrews’ presentation of Christ’s unique once and for all sacrifice and his exclusive mediation for believers in the heavenly sanctuary challenges models of ritual continuity assumed by some inculturation readings. Thus, this article calls for a much more text-guided approach to contextual interpretation, one where the biblical text not only resonates with culture but actively affirms it in areas where it is in agreement, but also actively critiques and transforms it when it is not in agreement with scripture.