Interpretation of the opening of Hebrews is vital to understanding the rest of the author's argument predicated upon his principal declaration. Commentators disagree about whether the introductory proposition of 1.1–2a contrasts revelation through the son with an assumed inferiority of earlier means of revelation, or merely compares them. The complete absence, however, of comparison language here makes sustaining either of those models difficult. A more natural reading is that the earlier stages of revelation referred to in 1.1 lead directly into the revelation in the son (1.2). In Hebrews, both of these forms of divine communication are affirmed.