Text -- Hebrews 2:16 (NET)

2:16 For surely his concern is not for angels, but he is concerned for Abraham’s descendants.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: Heb 2:16

Verily ( de pou ).

"Now in some way,"only here in N.T.

Robertson: Heb 2:16

Doth he take hold ( epilambanetai ).

Present middle indicative and means to lay hold of, to help, like boēthēsai in Heb 2:18.

Robertson: Heb 2:16

The seed of Abraham ( spermatos Abraham ).

The spiritual Israel (Gal 3:29), children of faith (Rom 9:7).

Vincent: Heb 2:16

Verily ( δήπου )

N.T.o . Doubtless , as is well known .

Vincent: Heb 2:16

Took not on him ( οὑ ἐπιλαμβάνεται )

Rend. he doth not take hold . Comp. Mat 14:31; Mar 8:23; Act 18:17. Absolutely, in the sense of help , Sir. 4:11. The Greek and Latin fathers explained the verb in the sense of appropriating . He did not appropriate the nature of angels. Angels did not need to be delivered from the fear of death.

Vincent: Heb 2:16

The nature of angels ( ἀγγέλων )

The nature is not in the Greek, and does not need to be supplied if ἐπιλαμβάνεται is properly translated. Rend. not of angels doth he take hold . It is not angels who receive his help.

Vincent: Heb 2:16

The seed of Abraham

The one family of God, consisting of believers of both dispensations, but called by its O.T. name. See Psa 105:6; Isa 41:8, and comp. Gal 3:29. The O.T. name is selected because the writer is addressing Jews. The entire statement in Heb 2:16, Heb 2:17 is not a mere repetition of Heb 2:14, Heb 2:15. It carries out the line of thought and adds to it, while at the same time it presents a parallel argument to that in Heb 2:14, Heb 2:15. Thus: Heb 2:14, Heb 2:15, Christ took part of flesh and blood that he might deliver the children of God from the fear of death and the accusations of Satan: Heb 2:16, Heb 2:17, Christ takes hold of the seed of Abraham, the church of God, and is made like unto his brethren, tempted as they are, in order that he may be a faithful high priest, making reconciliation for sin, thus doing away with the fear of death, and enabling his people to draw near to God with boldness. Comp. Heb 4:15, Heb 4:16. Christ gives that peculiar help the necessity of which was exhibited in the O.T. economy under which the original seed of Abraham lived. The fear of death, arising from the consciousness of sin, could be relieved only by the intervention of the priest who stood between God and the sinner, and made reconciliation for sin. Jesus steps into the place of the high priest, and perfectly fulfills the priestly office. By his actual participation in the sorrows and temptations of humanity he is fitted to be a true sympathizer with human infirmity and temptation (Heb 5:2), a merciful and faithful high priest, making reconciliation for sin, and thus abolishing the fear of death.

Wesley: Heb 2:16

He does not take their nature upon him.

Wesley: Heb 2:16

He takes human nature upon him. St. Paul says the seed of Abraham, rather than the seed of Adam, because to Abraham was the promise made.

JFB: Heb 2:16

Greek, "For as we all know"; "For as you will doubtless grant." Paul probably alludes to Isa 41:8; Jer 31:32, Septuagint, from which all Jews would know well that the fact here stated as to Messiah was what the prophets had led them to expect.

JFB: Heb 2:16

Rather, "It is not angels that He is helping (the present tense implies duration); but it is the seed of Abraham that He is helping." The verb is literally, to help by taking one by the hand, as in Heb 8:9, "When I took them by the hand," &c. Thus it answers to "succor," Heb 2:18, and "deliver," Heb 2:15. "Not angels," who have no flesh and blood, but "the children," who have "flesh and blood," He takes hold of to help by "Himself taking part of the same" (Heb 2:14). Whatever effect Christ's work may have on angels, He is not taking hold to help them by suffering in their nature to deliver them from death, as in our case.

JFB: Heb 2:16

He views Christ's redemption (in compliment to the Hebrews whom he is addressing, and as enough for his present purpose) with reference to Abraham's seed, the Jewish nation, primarily; not that he excludes the Gentiles (Heb 2:9, "for every man"), who, when believers, are the seed of Abraham spiritually (compare Heb 2:12; Psa 22:22, Psa 22:25, Psa 22:27), but direct reference to them (such as is in Rom 4:11-12, Rom 4:16; Gal 3:7, Gal 3:14, Gal 3:28-29) would be out of place in his present argument. It is the same argument for Jesus being the Christ which Matthew, writing his Gospel for the Hebrews, uses, tracing the genealogy of Jesus from Abraham, the father of the Jews, and the one to whom the promises were given, on which the Jews especially prided themselves (compare Rom 9:4-5).

Clarke: Heb 2:16

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels - Ου γαρ δηπου αγγελων επιλαμβανεται, αλλα σπερματος Αβρααμ επιλαμβανεται· Moreover, he doth not at all take hold of angels; but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. This is the marginal reading, and is greatly to be preferred to that in the text Jesus Christ, intending not to redeem angels, but to redeem man, did not assume the angelic nature, but was made man, coming directly by the seed or posterity of Abraham, with whom the original covenant was made, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed; and it is on this account that the apostle mentioned the seed of Abraham, and not the seed of Adam; and it is strange that to many commentators should have missed so obvious a sense. The word itself signifies not only to take hold of, but to help, succor, save from sinking, etc. The rebel angels, who sinned and fell from God, were permitted to fall down, alle downe, as one of our old writers expresses it, till they fell into perdition: man sinned and fell, and was falling downe, alle downe, but Jesus laid hold on him and prevented him from falling into endless perdition. Thus he seized on the falling human creature, and prevented him from falling into the bottomless pit; but he did not seize on the falling angels, and they fell down into outer darkness. By assuming the nature of man, he prevented this final and irrecoverable fall of man; and by making an atonement in human nature, he made a provision for its restoration to its forfeited blessedness. This is a fine thought of the apostle, and is beautifully expressed. Man was falling from heaven, and Jesus caught hold of the falling creature, and prevented its endless ruin. In this respect he prefers men to angels, and probably for this simple reason, that the human nature was more excellent than the angelic; and it is suitable to the wisdom of the Divine Being to regard all the works of his hands in proportion to the dignity or excellence with which he has endowed them.

Calvin: Heb 2:16

16.For verily, or, For nowhere, etc. By this comparison he enhances the benefit and the honor with which Christ has favored us, by putting on our flesh; for he never did so much for angels. As then it was necessary that there should be a remarkable remedy for man’s dreadful ruin, it was the design of the Son of God that there should be some incomparable pledge of his love towards us which angels had not in common with us. That he preferred us to angels was not owing to our excellency, but to our misery. There is therefore no reason for us to glory as though we were superior to angels, except that our heavenly Father has manifested toward us that ampler mercy which we needed, so that the angels themselves might from on high behold so great a bounty poured on the earth. The present tense of the verb is to be understood with reference to the testimonies of Scripture, as though he set before us what had been before testified by the Prophets.

But this one passage is abundantly sufficient to lay prostrate such men as Marcion and Manicheus, and fanatical men of similar character, who denied Christ to have been a real man, begotten of human seed. For if he bore only the appearance of man, as he had before appeared in the form of an angel, there could have been no difference; but as it could not have been said that Christ became really an angel, clothed with angelic nature, it is hence said that he took upon him man’s nature and not that of angels.

And the Apostle speaks of nature, and intimates that Christ, clothed with flesh, was real man, so that there was unity of person in two natures. For this passage does not favor Nestorius, who imagined a twofold Christ, as though the Son of God was not a real man but only dwelt in man’s flesh. But we see that the Apostle’s meaning was very different, for his object was to teach us that we find in the Son of God a brother, being a partaker of our common nature. Being not therefore satisfied with calling him man, he says that he was begotten of human seed; and he names expressly the seed of Abraham, in order that what he said might have more credit, as being taken from Scripture. ⁴⁹

TSK: Heb 2:16

verily : Heb 6:16, Heb 12:10; Rom 2:25; 1Pe 1:20

took not : etc. Gr. taketh not hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold

the seed : Gen 22:18; Matt. 1:1-17; Rom 4:16-25; Gal 3:16, Gal 3:29

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Heb 2:16

For verily - Truly.

He took not on him the nature of angels - Margin, "He taketh not hold of angels, but of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold."The word used here - ἐπιλαμβάνεται epilambanetai - means, to take hold upon; to seize; to surprise; to take hold with a view to detain for oneself. Robinson. Then it means to take hold of one as by the hand - with a view to aid, conduct, or succour; Mar 8:23; Act 23:19. It is rendered "took,"Mar 8:23; Luk 9:47; Luk 14:4; Act 9:27; Act 17:19; Act 18:17; Act 21:30, Act 21:33; Act 23:19; Heb 8:9; "caught,"Mat 14:31; Act 16:19; "take hold,"Luk 20:20, Luk 20:26; "lay hold,"and "laid hold,"Luk 23:26; 1Ti 6:12. The general idea is that of seizing upon, or laying hold of anyone - no matter what the object is - whether to aid, or to drag to punishment, or simply to conduct. Here it means to lay hold with reference to "aid,"or "help;"and the meaning is, that he did not seize the nature of angels, or take it to himself with reference to rendering "them"aid, but he assumed the nature of man - in order to aid "him."He undertook the work of human redemption, and consequently it was necessary for him to be man.

But he took on him the seed of Abraham - He came to help the descendants of Abraham, and consequently, since they were men, he became a man. Writing to Jews, it was not unnatural for the apostle to refer particularly to them as the descendants of Abraham, though this does not exclude the idea that he died for the whole human race. It was true that he came to render aid to the descendants of Abraham, but it was also true that he died for all. The fact that I love one of my children, and that I make provision for his education, and tell him so, does not exclude the idea that I love the others also - and that I may make to them a similar appeal when it shall be proper.

Poole: Heb 2:16

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels: the Spirit having asserted the deliverance of the children from their slavery to the devil, shows here the means by which it was effected, even by the gospel Prophet, being a man, and not an angel; he took their nature to himself, that by death he might deliver them: ou dhpou may signify no where, or in no wise; epilambanetai is read by some, to take hold of, and so make this work denied of God the Son, that he did not take hold of the falling angels, to save or recover them: but the Spirit speaks not one word of lapsed angels in either this or the foregoing chapter, and so it cannot refer to them; and for good angels, they never departed or fell, that he should stretch out his hand to save them. And it cannot be understood otherwise than affirmatively here, which must needs have another sense, because the same act is denied and affirmed. The word therefore signifieth to assume, or to take to one, to assume or take into union. He united not to his person the angelical nature, the individual substance of an angel, so as to redeem those sinning lapsed spirits.

But he took on him the seed of Abraham but he assumed into union with his person the seed of Abraham; which seed is not to be understood here collectively, for either his carnal or believing seed; but it is the one singular, eminent Seed of Abraham, in and by whom, himself, his seed, and all nations were to be blessed, Gen 22:18 , compare Gal 3:16 , the man Christ Jesus. This man, God the Son took of the virgin Mary, the offspring of Abraham, and united him to his person, and of God and this Seed united into one person, became our Lord Jesus Christ, so as he might bring the blessing of salvation to the chosen of God in all nations. The assumption of this eminent Seed into the unity of his own person, is here asserted by the Spirit, and denied concerning any angel, there being no promise ever made to them for it, Zec 13:7 Luk 1:31,35 Ga 4:4 1Ti 2:5 . If the verb signify no such assumption in human authors, as some cavil, it is because the matter to which it is here applied was never treated on among them; and it is common with the Spirit to make words which are ordinary with men, transcendent, when he applieth them to the great mysteries of God, as Trinity, Son, adoption, &c.

Haydock: Heb 2:16

For nowhere doth he take hold of the Angels. [4] Literally, that he apprehendeth, or layeth hold on the Angels; that is, according to the common interpretation, we nowhere find that he hath united their nature to his divine person to save them, though a great part of them had also sinned and fallen from heaven. But he taketh the seed of Abraham; i.e. he became man of the seed or race of Abraham, to redeem or save mankind. (Witham) ---

Nowhere, &c. That is, he never took upon him the nature of Angels, but that of the seed of Abraham. (Challoner)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Nusquam enim Angelos apprehendit, sed semen Abrahæ apprehendit, Greek: epilambanetai, assumit, vel assumpsit.

====================

Gill: Heb 2:16

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels,.... Good angels; for they are all along spoken of in this book; and it would have been impertinent to have said this of evil angels: and this is to be understood not of a denying help and assistance to the angels; for though they have not redemption from Christ, which they needed not, yet have they help from him; they are chosen in him, and are gathered together under him; and he is the head of them, and they are upheld and sustained by him in their being, and well being: but of a non-assumption of their nature; there was no need of it with respect to good angels, and there was no salvation designed for evil ones; and to have assumed the nature of angels, would have been of no service to fallen man; an angelic nature is not capable of death, which was necessary to atone for sin, save men, and destroy Satan: this negative proposition is very strongly put, "he never took", as the Vulgate Latin version more rightly renders it; at no time, in no place; nor is it said in any place of Scripture that he did; this is a certain truth, and not to be disputed. The Syriac and Arabic versions render it, "he took not of, or from angels"; he took not any individual from among them:

but he took on him the seed of Abraham; not all his posterity, but some individual, as the word seed is sometimes used, Gen 4:25. Christ assumed human nature as derived from Abraham; for the Messiah was to spring from Abraham, and is promised, as that seed of his, in whom all nations should be blessed; and he was particularly promised to the Jews, the seed of Abraham, to whom the apostle was writing; and it was with a view to Abraham's spiritual seed, the children of the promise, that Christ partook of flesh and blood: the word here used signifies to catch hold of anyone ready to perish, or to lay hold on a person running away, and with great vehemence and affection to hold anything fast, that it be not lost, and to help persons, and do good unto them; all which may be observed in this act of Christ's, in assuming an individual of human nature, in Abraham's line, into union with his divine person; whereby he has saved those that were gone out of the way, and were ready to perish, and done them the greatest good, and shown the strongest affection to them: and from hence may be learned the deity and eternity of Christ, who was before Abraham, as God, though a son of his as man; and his real humanity, and that it was not a person, but a seed, a nature he assumed; and also the union and distinction of natures in him: and Christ's taking human, and not angelic nature, shows the sovereignty of God, and his distinguishing grace and mercy to men.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

Geneva Bible: Heb 2:16

^{( 15 )} For verily he took not on [him the ^{( b )} nature of] angels; but he took on [him] the ^{( c )} seed of Abraham.

^{( 15 )} He explains those words of flesh and blood, showing that Christ is true man, and not by changing his divine nature, but by taking on man's nature. He names Abraham, regarding the promises made to Abraham in this behalf.

^{( b )} The nature of angels.

^{( c )} The very nature of man.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Heb 2:1-18

1 We ought to be obedient to Christ Jesus;

5 and that because he vouchsafed to take our nature upon him;

14 as it was necessary.

Combined Bible: Heb 2:14-16

Superior to Angels.   

(Hebrews 2:14-16)   

The closing verses of Hebrews 2 are so rich and full in their contents and the subjects with which they deal are of such importance that we feel the more disposed to devote extra space for the exposition of them. More and more we are learning for ourselves that a short portion of Scripture prayerfully examined and repeatedly meditated upon, yields more blessing to the heart, more food to the soul, and more help for the walk, than a whole chapter read more or less cursorily. It is not without reason that the Lord Jesus said in the parable of the Sower, "that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the Word, keep, and bring forth fruit with patience" (Luke 8:15). The only way in which the Word is "kept" or held fast is through prolonged meditation and patient or persevering study.  

The verses which are to be before us on this occasion form part of the apostle’ s inspired explanation of "the Son’ s" becoming Man and suffering the awful death of the cross. If the reader will turn back to the third paragraph of the preceding article he will there find five reasons (substantiated in verses 9, 10), as to why Christ endured such humiliation. In verses 11-13 four more are advanced. It was necessary for the second Person of the holy Trinity to be made lower than the angels if He were to have ground and cause for calling us "brethren" (verses 11, 12), for that is a title which presupposes a common ground and standing. Then, it was necessary for the Lord of glory to become "all of one" with His people if, in the midst of the church, He should "sing praise" unto God (verse 12); and this, the Old Testament scriptures affirmed, He would do. Again, it was necessary for Him who was in the form of God to take upon Him "the form of a servant" if He was to set before His people a perfect example of the life of faith; and in Isaiah 8:17, He is heard saying, by the Spirit of prophecy, "I will put My trust in Him" (verse 13). Finally, His exclamation "Behold I and the children which God hath given Me" (verse 13), required that He should become Man and thus rank Himself alongside of His saints.  

In verses 14-16 we have one of the profoundest statements in all Holy Writ which treats of the Divine incarnation. For this reason, if for no other, we must proceed slowly in our examination of it. Here too the Holy Spirit continues to advance further reasons as to why it was imperative that the Lord of angels should, for a season, stoop beneath them. Three additional ones are here given, and they may be stated thus: first, that He might render null and void him who had the power of death, that is, the Devil (verse 14); second, that He might deliver His people from the bondage of that fear which death had occasioned (verse 15); third, Abraham’ s children could only be delivered by Him laying hold of Abraham’ s seed (verse 16).  

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" (verse 14). "The connection between this verse and the preceding context may be stated thus: Since it became Him for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering; and since, according to Old Testament prophecies, the Sanctifier and the sanctified, the Savior and the saved, must be of the same race; and since the saved are human beings,— the Son of God, the appointed Savior, assumed a nature capable of suffering and death— even the nature of man, when He came to save, that in that nature He might die, and by dying accomplish the great purpose of His appointment, the destruction of the power of Satan, and the deliverance of His chosen people" (Dr. J. Brown).  

The opening words of our verse denote that the Holy Spirit is drawing a conclusion from the proof-texts just cited from the Old Testament. The Greek words for "forasmuch then" are rendered "seeing therefore" in Hebrews 4:6, and their force is, "it is evident hereby" that the Son of God became the Son of Man for the sake of those whom God had given Him.  

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" (verse 14). Here we have the eternal Word becoming flesh, the Son of God becoming the Son of man. Let us consider, First , the Wonder of it; Second , the Needs-be of it; Third , the Nature of it; Fourth , the Perfection of it; Fifth , the Purpose of it.  

The tragic thing is that, for the present, our minds are so beclouded and our understandings so affected by sin, it is impossible for us to fully perceive the wonder of the Divine incarnation. As the apostle wrote, "But now we see through a glass darkly" (1 Cor. 13:12). But thank God this condition is not to last for ever; soon, very soon, we shall see "face to face." And when by God’ s marvelous grace His people behold the King in His beauty, they will not, we think, be bewildered or dazed, but instead, filled with such wonderment that their hearts and whole beings will spontaneously bow in worship.  

Another thing which makes it so difficult for us to grasp the wonder of the Divine incarnation is that there is nothing else which we can for a moment compare with it; there is no analogy which in any wise resembles it. It stands unique, alone, in all its solitary grandeur. We are thrilled when we think of the angels sent forth to minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation: that those wondrous creatures, which so far excel us in wisdom and strength, should have been appointed to be our attendants; that those holy creatures should be commissioned to encamp round about poor sinners; that the courtiers of Heaven should wait upon worms of the earth! Truly, that is a great wonder. But oh my brethren, that wonder pales into utter insignificance and, in comparison, fades away into nothingness, before this far greater wonder— that the Creator of angels should leave His throne on High and descend to this sin-cursed earth; that the very One before whom all the angels bow should, for a season, be made lower than they; that the Lord of glory, who had dwelt in "light unapproachable," should Himself become partaker of "flesh and blood"! This is the wonder of wonders.  

So wonderful was that unparalleled event of the Divine incarnation that the heavenly hosts descended to proclaim the Savior newly-born. So wonderful was it that the "glory of the Lord," the ineffable Shekinah, which once filled the temple, but had long since retired from the earth, appeared again, for "the glory of the Lord shone round about" the awestruck shepherds on Bethlehem’ s plains. So wonderful was it that chronology was revolutionized, and anno mundi became anno domini: the calendar was changed, and instead of its dating from the beginning of the world, it was re-dated from the birth of Christ; thus the Lord of time has written His very signature across the centuries. Passing on now, let us consider the needs-be for the Divine incarnation.  

This is plainly intimated both in what has gone before and in what follows. If the "children" which God had given to His Son were to be "sanctified" then He must become "all of one" with them. If those children who are by nature partakers of flesh and blood were to be "delivered from him that had the power of death, that is the devil," then the Sanctifier must also "likewise take part of the same." If He was to be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, He must in all things "be made like unto His brethren." If He is to be able to "succor them that are tempted," then He must Himself, "suffer, being tempted"; and, as God Himself "cannot be tempted," He had to become Man in order to that experience.  

The needs-be was real, urgent, absolute. There was no other way in which the counsels of God’ s grace towards His people could be wrought out. If ever we were to be made "like Him," He first had to be made like us. If He was to give us of His Spirit, He must first assume our flesh. If we were to be so joined unto the Lord as to become "one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17) with Him, then He must first be joined with our flesh, so as to be "all of one" with us. In a word, if we were to become partakers of the Divine nature, He must be made partaker of human nature. Thus we perceive again the force of the apostle’ s reply to the objection which he is here removing— How could it be that a Man was superior to angels? He has not only shown from the Jews’ own scriptures that the Man Christ Jesus had been given a name more excellent than any pertaining to the celestial hierarchies, but here he shows us the needs-be for the Lord of glory to become Man. If we were to be "conformed to His image" then He must be "made in the likeness of sin’ s flesh." If the children of Abraham were to be redeemed, then He must take on Him the "seed of Abraham."  

The nature of the Divine incarnation is here referred to in the words "flesh and blood." That expression speaks of the frailty, dependency, and mortality of man. This is evident from the other passages where it occurs. The words "flesh and blood" are joined together five times in the New Testament: Matthew 16:17, 1 Corinthians 15:50, Galatians 1:16, Ephesians 6:12, Hebrews 2:14. It is a humbling expression emphasizing the weakness of the flesh and limitations of man: note how in Ephesians 6:12, "flesh and blood" is contrasted from the mightier foes against which Christians wrestle.  

"Flesh and blood" is the present state in which is found those children whom God has designed to bring unto glory. By their natural constitution and condition there is nothing to distinguish the elect from the non-elect. The Greek noun for "partakers" is derived from the root signifying "common": in Romans 15:27, Gentile believers are said to be "partakers" of Israel’ s spiritual blessings, that is, they enjoy them in common, one with another. So God’ s children are "partakers," equally with the children of the Devil, of "flesh and blood." Nor does our regeneration effect any change concerning this: the limitations and infirmities which "flesh and blood" involve still remain. Many reasons for this might be suggested: that we may not be too much puffed up by our spiritual standing and privileges; that we might be rendered conscious of our infirmities, and made to feel our weakness before God; that we might abase ourselves before Him who is Spirit; that the grace of compassion may be developed in us— our brethren and sisters are also partakers of "flesh and blood," and often we need reminding of this.  

In the words "He also Himself likewise took part of the same" we have an affirmation concerning the reality of the Savior’ s humanity. It is not merely that the Lord of glory appeared on earth in human form, but that He actually became "flesh and blood," subject to every human frailty so far as these are freed from sin. He knew what hunger was, what bodily fatigue was, what pain and suffering were. The very fact that He was "the Man of sorrows" indicates that "He also Himself likewise took part of the same." Thereby we see the amazing condescension of Christ in thus conforming Himself to the condition in which the children were. How marvelous the love which caused the Lord of glory to descend so low for us sons of men! There was an infinite disparity between them: He was infinite, they finite; He omnipotent; they frail and feeble; He was eternal, they under sentence of death. Nevertheless, He refused not to be conformed to them; and thus He was "crucified through weakness" (2 Corinthians 13:4), which refers to the state into which He had entered.  

The perfection of the Divine incarnation is likewise intimated in the words "He also Himself likewise took part of the same." These words emphasize the fact that Christ’ s becoming Man was a voluntary act on His part. The "children" were by nature subject to the common condition of "flesh and blood." They belonged to that order. They had no say in the matter. That was their state by the law of their very being. But not so with the Lord Jesus. He entered this condition as coming from another sphere and state of being. He was the Son who "thought it not robbery to be equal with God." He was all-sufficient in Himself. Therefore it was an act of condescension, a voluntary act, an act prompted by love, which caused Him to "take part of the same."  

These words also point to the uniqueness of our Lord’ s humanity. It is most blessed to observe how the Spirit here, as always, has carefully guarded the Redeemer’ s glory. It is not said that Christ was a "partaker of flesh and blood," but that "He likewise took part of the same." The distinction may seem slight, and at first glance not easily detected; yet is there a real, important, vital difference. Though Christ became Man, real Man, yet was He different, radically different, from every other man. In becoming Man He did not "partake" of the foul poison which sin has introduced into the human constitution. His humanity was not contaminated by the virus of the Fall. Before His incarnation it was said to His mother, "That Holy Thing which shall be born of thee" (Luke 1:35). It is the sinlessness, the uniqueness of our Lord’ s humanity which is so carefully guarded by the distinction which the Holy Spirit has drawn in Hebrews 2:14.  

The purpose of the Divine incarnation is here intimated in the words that "through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." It was with this end in view that the Son of God took part in "flesh and blood." In the several passages where the Divine incarnation is referred to in the New Testament different reasons are given and various designs are recorded. For example, John 3:16 tells us that one chief object in it was to reveal and exhibit the matchless love of God. 1 Timothy 1:15 declares that "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." But here in Hebrews 2:14 it is the destroying of him that had the power of death that is mentioned.  

The object of the Holy Spirit in our present passage is to display the glorious and efficacious side of that which was most humbling— the infinite stoop of the Lord of glory. He is pointing out to those who found the Cross such a stumbling-block, how that there was a golden lining to the dark cloud which hung over it. That which to the outward eye, or rather the untaught heart and mind, seemed such a degrading tragedy was, in reality, a glorious triumph; for by it the Savior stripped the Devil of his power and wrested from his hands his most awful weapon. Just as the scars which a soldier carries are no discredit or dishonor to him if received in an honorable cause, so the cross-sufferings of Christ instead of marking His defeat were, actually, a wondrous victory, for by them He overthrew the arch-enemy of God and man.  

"That through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." It is most blessed to note the bearing of this statement upon the special point the apostle was discussing. The Jews were stumbled by the fact that their Messiah had died. Here the Holy Spirit showed that so far from that death tarnishing the glory of Christ, it exemplified it, for by death He overthrew the great Enemy and delivered His captive people. "Not only is He glorious in heaven, but He hath conquered Satan in the very place where he exercised his sad dominion over men, and where the judgment of God lay heavily upon men" (Mr. J.N. Darby).  

"That through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." Three things here claim attention: First , what is meant by the Devil having "the power of death"? Second , what "death" is here in view? Third , in what sense has Christ "destroyed" the Devil? From the words of the next verse it is clear that the reference is to what particularly obtained before Christ became incarnate. That it does not mean the Devil had absolute power in the infliction of physical death in Old Testament times is clear from several scriptures. Of old Jehovah affirmed, "See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me: I kill, and I make alive" (Deut. 32:39). Again, "the Lord killeth, and maketh alive; He bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up" (1 Sam. 2:6). And again, "unto God the Lord belong the issues from death" (Ps. 68:20). These passages are decisive, and show that even during the Mosaic economy the giving of life and the inflicting of death were in the hands of God only, no matter what instruments He might employ in connection therewith.  

The particular kind of "death" which is here in view is explained for us in the words "that through death lie" etc. The death which Christ died was "the wages of sin"— the penal infliction of the law, suffering the wrath of a holy God. The point raised here is a deeply mysterious one, yet on it Scripture throws some light. In John 8:44, Christ declared that the Devil was "a murderer" (literally "man-slayer") from the beginning. In Zechariah 3:1, we are shown Satan standing at Jehovah’ s right-hand to resist Israel’ s high priest. Upon the subject Saphir has said, "But which death did Christ die? That death of which the Devil had the power. Satan wielded that death. He it was who had a just claim against us that we should die. There is justice in the claim of Satan.  

"It is quite true that Satan is only a usurper; but in saving men God deals in perfect righteousness, justice, truth. According to the Jewish tradition the fallen angels often accuse men, and complain before God that sinful men obtain mercy. Our redemption is in harmony with the principles of righteousness and equity, on which God has founded all things. The prince of this world is judged (John 16:11); he is conquered not merely by power, but by the power of justice and truth.... He stood upon the justice of God, upon the inflexibility of His law, upon the true nature of our sins. But when Christ died our very death, when He was made sin and a curse for us, then all the power of Satan was gone.... And now what can Satan say? The justice, majesty, and perfection of the law are vindicated more than if all the human race were lost forever. The penalty due to the broken law Jesus endured, and now, as the law is vindicated, sin put away, death swallowed up, Christ has destroyed the Devil."  

Inasmuch as the Devil is the one who brought about the downfall of our first parents, by which sentence of death has been passed upon all their posterity (Rom. 5:12); inasmuch as he goeth about as a roaring lion "seeking whom he may devour" (1 Pet. 5:8); inasmuch as he challenged God to inflict upon the guilty the sentence of the law (Zech. 3:1); and, inasmuch as even the elect of God are, before their regeneration, under "the power of darkness" (Col. 1:13 and cf. Acts 26:18), dead in trespasses and sins, yet "walking according to the Prince of the power of the air"; the Devil may be said to have "the power of death."  

The word "destroy him that had the power of death" does not signify to annihilate, but means to make null and render powerless. In 1 Corinthians 1:28 this same Greek word is rendered "bring to naught"; in Romans 3:3 "without effect"; in Romans 3:31 "make void." Satan has been so completely vanquished by Christ the Head that he shall prevail against none of His members. This is written for the glory of Christ, and to encourage His people to withstand him. Satan is an enemy bespoiled. Therefore is it said, "Resist the Devil, and he will flee from you" (James 4:7). To such as believe there is assurance of victory. If the Devil gets the upper hand of us, it is either because of our timidity, or lack of faith.  

"To ‘ destroy him that had the power of death’ is to strip him of his power. It is said by the apostle John, ‘ for this purpose was the Son of God manifested, to destroy the works of the Devil,’ i.e. ignorance, error, depravity, and misery. In the passage before us, the destruction is restricted to the peculiar aspect in which the Devil is viewed. To destroy him, is so to destroy him as having ‘ the power of death’— to render him, in this point of light, powerless in reference to the children; i.e., to make death cease to be a penal evil. Death, even in the case of the saints, is an expression of the displeasure of God against sin; but it is not— as but for the death of Christ it must have been— the hopeless dissolution of his body: it is not the inlet to eternal misery to his soul. Death to them for whom Christ died consigns, indeed, the body to the grave; but it is ‘ in the sure and certain hope of a glorious resurrection,’ and it introduces the freed spirit into all the glories of the celestial paradise" (Dr. J. Brown).  

This stripping Satan of his power of death was accomplished by the laying down of the Savior’ s life, "that through death He might destroy." "The means whereby Christ overcame Satan, is expressly said to be death. To achieve this great and glorious victory against so mighty an enemy, Christ did not assemble troops of angels, as He could have done (Matt. 26:53), nor did He array Himself with majesty and terror, as in Exodus 19:16; but He did it by taking part of weak flesh and blood, and therein humbling Himself to death. In this respect the apostle saith, that Christ ‘ having spoiled principalities and powers, made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in the cross’ (Col. 2:15), meaning thereby, His death. The apostle there resembleth the cross of Christ to a trophy whereon the spoils of enemies were hanged. Of old conquerors were wont to hang the armor and weapons of enemies vanquished on the walls of forts and towers." (Dr. Gouge.)  

"That through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." A striking type of this is furnished in Judges 14:12-19— will the reader please turn to this, before considering our brief comments. The riddle propounded by Samson prefigured what is plainly declared here in Hebrews 2:14. The greatest "eater" (Jud. 14:14), or "consumer," is Death. Yet out of the eater came forth meat: that is, out of death has come life; see John 12:24. Note in Judges 14 how, typically, the natural man is, of himself, utterly unable to solve this mystery. The secret of the death of Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, must be revealed. Finally, note how that a change of raiment was provided for those to whom the riddle was explained— a foreshadowment of the believer’ s robe of righteousness!  

"And deliver them who through fear of death were all their life-time subject to bondage" (verse 15). It needs to be carefully borne in mind that throughout this passage the apostle has in view a particular class of persons, namely, the "heirs of salvation," the "sons" of God, the "brethren" of Christ. Here they are described according to their unregenerate condition: subject to bondage; so subject, all their unregenerate days; so subject through "the fear of death." It was to deliver them from this fear of death that Christ died. Such we take it is the general meaning of this verse. 2 Timothy 1:7 gives the sequel: "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind."  

The opening "And" and the verb "deliver" (which is in the same mood and tense as "destroy" in the previous verse) intimate that Christ’ s death had in view these two ends which cannot be separated, namely, destroying the Devil, delivering us. Just as Abraham destroyed those enemies who had taken Lot captive together with the other inhabitants of Sodom, that he might "deliver" them (Gen. 14:14), and as David destroyed the Amalekites, that he might "deliver" his wives and children and others out of their hands (1 Sam. 27:9), so Christ vanquished the Devil, that he might "deliver" those who had (by yielding to his temptations) fallen captive to him. What thanks is due unto Christ for thus overthrowing our great adversary!  

To the "fear of death," i.e., that judgment of God upon sin, all men are in much greater bondage than they will own or than they imagine. It was this "fear" which made Adam and Eve hide themselves from the presence of God (Gen. 3:8), which made Cain exclaim, "my punishment is greater than I can bear" (Gen. 4:13), which made Nabal’ s heart to die within him (1 Sam. 25:37), which made Saul fall to the ground as a man in a swoon (1 Sam. 28:20), which made Felix to tremble (Acts 24:25), and which will yet cause kings and the great men of the earth to call on the mountains to fall on them (Revelation 6:15, 16). True, the natural man, at times, succeeds in drowning the accusations of his conscience in the pleasures of sin, but "as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool" (Eccl. 7:6). It is from this fearful bondage that Christ delivered His people: through His grace, by His spirit filling them "with all joy and peace in believing" (Rom. 15:13).  

A beautiful and most complete type of the truth in our present verse is to be found in 1 Samuel 17. Will the reader turn to that chapter and note carefully the following details: First , in verses 4-8 there we have, in figure, Satan harassing the Old Testament saints. Second , where was David (type of Christ) during the time Goliath was terrifying the people of God? Verses 14, 15 answer: In his father’ s house, caring for his sheep. So through the Mosaic economy Christ remained on High, in the Father’ s house, yet caring for His sheep. Third , Goliath defied Israel for "forty days," verse 16— figure of the forty centuries from Adam to Christ, when the Old Testament saints lived in fear of death, for "life and immortality" were only brought "to light through the Gospel" (2 Tim. 1:10). Fourth , next we see David leaving his father’ s house, laden with blessings for his brethren, verses 17, 18. Note the "early in the morning," verse 20, showing his readiness to go on this mission. Fifth , mark the sad reception he met with from his brethren, verse 28: his efforts were unappreciated, his purpose misunderstood, and a false accusation was brought against him. Sixth , in verses 32, 38-49, we have a marvelous type of Christ defeating Satan in the wilderness: note how David went forth in his shepherd character (verse 40 and compare John 10). He took "five" stones out of the brook (the place of running water— figure of the Holy Spirit) but used only one of them; so Christ in the Wilderness selected the Pentateuch (the first five books of Scripture) as His weapon, but used only one of them, Deuteronomy. Note David slew him not with the stone! He stunned him with that, but slew him with his own sword: so Christ vanquished him that had the power of death "through death." Read again verse 51 and see how accurate is the figure of Christ "bruising" the Serpent’ s head. Finally, read verse 52 and see the typical climax: those "in fear" delivered. What a marvelous Book is the Bible!  

"For verily He took not on angels; but He took on the seed of Abraham" (verse 16). This verse, which has occasioned not a little controversy, presents no difficulty if it be weighed in the light of its whole context. It treats not of the Divine incarnation, that we have in verse 14; rather does it deal with the purpose of it, or better, the consequences of Christ’ s death. Its opening "for" first looks back, remotely to verses 9,10; immediately, to verses 14, 15. The Spirit is here advancing a reason why Christ tasted death for every son, and why He destroyed the Devil in order to liberate His captives; because not angels, but the seed of Abraham, were the objects of His benevolent favor. The "for" and the balance of the verse also, looks forward, laying a foundation for what follows in verse 17: the ground of Christ’ s being made like to His brethren and becoming the faithful and merciful High Priest was because He would befriend the seed of Abraham.  

The Greek verb here translated "He took on" or "laid hold" is found elsewhere in some very striking connections. It is used of Christ’ s stretching out His hand and rescuing sinking Peter, Matthew 14:31, there rendered "caught." It is used of Christ when He "took" the blind man by the hand (Mark 8:23). So of the man sick of the dropsy. He "took" and healed him (Luke 14:4). Here in Hebrews 2:16 the reference is to the almighty power and invincible grace of the Captain of our salvation. It receives illustration in those words of the apostle’ s where, referring to his own conversion, he said, "for which also I am (was) apprehended (laid hold) of Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:12). Thus it was and still is with each of God’ s elect. In themselves, lost, rushing headlong to destruction; when Christ stretches forth His hand and delivers, so that of each it may be said, "Is not this a brand plucked from the burning" (Zech. 3:2). "Laid hold of" so securely that none can pluck out of His hand!  

But not only does our verse emphasize the invincibility of Divine grace, it also plainly teaches the absolute sovereignty of it. Christ lays hold not of "the seed of Adam," all mankind, but only "the seed of Abraham"— the father of God’ s elect people. This expression, "the seed of Abraham," is employed in the New Testament in connection with both his natural and his spiritual seed. It is the latter which is here in view: "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, And to thy seed which is Christ" (Gal. 3:16)— not only Christ personal, but Christ mystical. The last verse of Galatians 3 shows that: "And if ye be Christ’ s then are ye Abraham’ s seed, and heirs according to promise."  

This verse presents an insoluble difficulty to those who believe in the universality of God’ s love and grace. Those who do so deny the plain teaching of Scripture that Christ laid down His life for "the sheep," and for them alone. They insist that justice as well as mercy demanded that He should die for all of Adam’ s race. But why is it harder to believe that God has provided no salvation for part of the human race, than that He has provided none for the fallen angels? They were higher in the scale of being; they, too, were sinners needing a Savior. Yet none has been provided for them! He "laid not on" angels.  

But more: Our verse not only brings out the truth of election, it also presents the solemn fact of reprobation. Christ is not the Savior of angels. "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day" (Jude 6). On this Dr. J. Brown has well said:  

"What an overwhelming subject of contemplation is this! He is not the Savior of angels, but of the elect family of men. We are lost in astonishment when we allow our minds to rest on the number and dignity of those whom He does not lay hold of, and the comparative as well as real vileness of those of whom He does take hold. A sentiment of this kind has engaged some good, but in this case not wise men, in an inquiry why the Son of God saves men rather than angels. On this subject Scripture is silent, and so should we be. There is no doubt that there are good reasons for this, as for every other part of the Divine determinations and dispensations; and it is not improbable that in some future stage of our being these reasons will be made known to us. But, in the meantime, I can go no further than, ‘ even so, Father, for so it hath seemed good in Thy sight.’ I dare not ‘ intrude into things, which I have not seen,’ lest I should prove that I am ‘ vainly puffed up by a fleshly mind.’ But I will say with an apostle, ‘ Behold the goodness and severity of God; on them that fell, severity’— most righteous severity; ‘ but to them who are saved, goodness’— most unmerited goodness." (Dr. J. Brown.)  

May the Lord add His blessing to what has been before us.  

  

  

MHCC: Heb 2:14-18

The angels fell, and remained without hope or help. Christ never designed to be the Saviour of the fallen angels, therefore he did not take their nature; and the nature of angels could not be an atoning sacrifice for the sin of man. Here is a price paid, enough for all, and suitable to all, for it was in our nature. Here the wonderful love of God appeared, that, when Christ knew what he must suffer in our nature, and how he must die in it, yet he readily took it upon him. And this atonement made way for his people's deliverance from Satan's bondage, and for the pardon of their sins through faith. Let those who dread death, and strive to get the better of their terrors, no longer attempt to outbrave or to stifle them, no longer grow careless or wicked through despair. Let them not expect help from the world, or human devices; but let them seek pardon, peace, grace, and a lively hope of heaven, by faith in Him who died and rose again, that thus they may rise above the fear of death. The remembrance of his own sorrows and temptations, makes Christ mindful of the trials of his people, and ready to help them. He is ready and willing to succour those who are tempted, and seek him. He became man, and was tempted, that he might be every way qualified to succour his people, seeing that he had passed through the same temptations himself, but continued perfectly free from sin. Then let not the afflicted and tempted despond, or give place to Satan, as if temptations made it wrong for them to come to the Lord in prayer. Not soul ever perished under temptation, that cried unto the Lord from real alarm at its danger, with faith and expectation of relief. This is our duty upon our first being surprised by temptations, and would stop their progress, which is our wisdom.

Matthew Henry: Heb 2:14-18

Here the apostle proceeds to assert the incarnation of Christ, as taking upon him not the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham; and he shows the reason and design of his so doing.

I. The incarnation of Christ is asserted (Heb 2:16): Verily he took not upon him the nature of angels, but he took upon him the seed of Abraham. He took part of flesh and blood. Though as God he pre-existed from all eternity, yet in the fulness of time he took our nature into union with his divine nature, and became really and truly man. He did not lay hold of angels, but he laid hold of the seed of Abraham. The angels fell, and he let them go, and lie under the desert, defilement, and dominion of their sin, without hope or help. Christ never designed to be the Saviour of the fallen angels; as their tree fell, so it lies, and must lie to eternity, and therefore he did not assume their nature. The nature of angels could not be an atoning sacrifice for the sin of man. Now Christ resolving to recover the seed of Abraham and raise them up from their fallen state, he took upon him the human nature from one descended from the loins of Abraham, that the same nature that had sinned might suffer, to restore human nature to a state of hope and trial, and all that accepted of mercy to a state of special favour and salvation. Now there is hope and help for the chief of sinners in and through Christ. Here is a price paid sufficient for all, and suitable to all, for it was in our nature. Let us all then know the day of our gracious visitation, and improve that distinguishing mercy which has been shown to fallen men, not to the fallen angels.

II. The reasons and designs of the incarnation of Christ are declared.

1. Because the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he must take part of the same, and he made like his brethren, Heb 2:14, Heb 2:15. For no higher nor lower nature than man's that had sinned could so suffer for the sin of man as to satisfy the justice of God, and raise man up to a state of hope, and make believers the children of God, and so brethren to Christ.

2. He became man that he might die; as God he could not die, and therefore he assumed another nature and state. Here the wonderful love of God appeared, that, when Christ knew what he must suffer in our nature, and how he must die in it, yet he so readily took it upon him. The legal sacrifices and offerings God could not accept as propitiation. A body was prepared for Christ, and he said, Lo! I come, I delight to do thy will.

3. That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil, Heb 2:14. The devil was the first sinner, and the first tempter to sin, and sin was the procuring cause of death; and he may be said to have the power of death, as he draws men into sin, the ways whereof are death, as he is often permitted to terrify the consciences of men with the fear of death, and as he is the executioner of divine justice, haling their souls from their bodies to the tribunal of God, there to receive their doom, and then being their tormentor, as he was before their tempter. In these respects he may be said to have had the power of death. But now Christ has so far destroyed him who had the power of death that he can keep none under the power of spiritual death; nor can he draw any into sin (the procuring cause of death), nor require the soul of any from the body, nor execute the sentence upon any but those who choose and continue to be his willing slaves, and persist in their enmity to God.

4. That he might deliver his own people from the slavish fear of death to which they are often subject. This may refer to the Old Testament saints, who were more under a spirit of bondage, because life and immortality were not so fully brought to light as now they are by the gospel. Or it may refer to all the people of God, whether under the Old Testament or the New, whose minds are often in perplexing fears about death and eternity. Christ became man, and died, to deliver them from those perplexities of soul, by letting them know that death is not only a conquered enemy, but a reconciled friend, not sent to hurt the soul, or separate it from the love of God, but to put an end to all their grievances and complaints, and to give them a passage to eternal life and blessedness; so that to them death is not now in the hand of Satan, but in the hand of Christ - not Satan's servant, but Christ's servant - has not hell following it, but heaven to all who are in Christ.

5. Christ must be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to the justice and honour of God and to the support and comfort of his people. He must be faithful to God and merciful to men. (1.) In things pertaining to God, to his justice, and to his honour - to make reconciliation for the sins of the people, to make all the attributes of divine nature, and all the persons subsisting therein, harmonize in man's recovery, and fully to reconcile God and man. Observe, There was a great breach and quarrel between God and man, by reason of sin; but Christ, by becoming man and dying, has taken up the quarrel, and made reconciliation so far that God is ready to receive all into favour and friendship who come to him through Christ. (2.) In things pertaining to his people, to their support and comfort: In that he suffered, being tempted, he is able to succour those that are tempted, Heb 2:18. Here observe, [1.] Christ's passion: He suffered being tempted; and his temptations were not the least part of his sufferings. He was in all things tempted as we are, yet without sin, Heb 4:15. [2.] Christ's compassion: He is able to succour those that are tempted. He is touched with a feeling of our infirmities, a sympathizing physician, tender and skilful; he knows how to deal with tempted sorrowful souls, because he has been himself sick of the same disease, not of sin, but of temptation and trouble of soul. The remembrance of his own sorrows and temptations makes him mindful of the trials of his people, and ready to help them. Here observe, First, The best of Christians are subject to temptations, to many temptations, while in this world; let us never count upon an absolute freedom from temptations in this world. Secondly, Temptations bring our souls into such distress and danger that they need support and succour. Thirdly, Christ is ready and willing to succour those who under their temptations apply to him; and he became man, and was tempted, that he might be every way qualified to succour his people.

Barclay: Heb 2:10-18

Here the writer to the Hebrews uses one of the great titles of Jesus. He calls him the pioneer (archegos, 747) of glory. The same word is used of Jesus in Act 3:15; Act 5:31; Heb 12:2. At its simplest it means head or chief. So Zeus is the head of the gods and a general is the head of his army. It can mean a founder or originator. So it is used of the founder of a city or of a family or of a philosophic school. It can be used in the sense of source or origin. So a good governor is said to be the archegos (747) of peace and a bad governor the archegos (747) of confusion.

One basic idea clings to the word in all its uses. An archegos (747) is one who begins something in order that others may enter into it. He begins a family that some day others may be born into it; he founds a city in order that others may some day dwell in it; he founds a philosophic school that others may follow him into the truth and the peace that he himself has discovered; he is the author of blessings into which others may also enter. An archegos (747) is one who blazes a trail for others to follow. Someone has used this analogy. Suppose a ship is on the rocks and the only way to rescue is for someone to swim ashore with a line in order that, once the line is secured, others might follow. The one who is first to swim ashore will be the archegos (747) of the safety of the others. This is what the writer to the Hebrews means when he says that Jesus is the archegos (747) of our salvation. Jesus has blazed the trail to God for us to follow.

How was he enabled to become such? The King James and Revised Standard Versions say that God made him perfect through suffering. The verb translated make perfect is teleioun (5048), which comes from the adjective teleios (5046) which is usually translated "perfect." But in the New Testament teleios (5046) has a very special meaning. It has nothing to do with abstract and metaphysical and philosophic perfection. It is used, for instance, of an animal which is unblemished and fit to be offered as a sacrifice; of a scholar who is no longer at the elementary stage but mature; of a human being or an animal who is full grown; of a Christian who is no longer on the fringe of the Church but who is baptized. The basic meaning of teleios (5046) in the New Testament is always that the thing or person so described fully carries out the purpose for which designed Therefore the verb teleioun (5046) will mean not so much to make perfect as to make fully adequate for the task for which designed. So, then, what the writer to the Hebrews is saying is that through suffering Jesus was made fully able for the task of being the pioneer of our salvation.

Why should that be?

(i) It was through his sufferings that he was really identified with men. The writer to the Hebrews quotes three Old Testament texts as forecasts of this identity with men--Psa 22:22; Isa 8:17; Isa 8:18. If Jesus had come into this world in a form in which he could never have suffered, he would have been quite different from men and so no Saviour for them. As Jeremy Taylor said: "When God would save men, he did it by way of a man." It is, in fact, this identification with men which is the essence of the Christian idea of God. When the Greeks thought of their gods they thought of them as Tennyson pictures them in the Lotos Eaters:

"For they lie beside their nectar, and the bolts

are hurl'd

Far below them in the valleys, and the clouds

are lightly curl'd

Round their golden houses, girdled with the

gleaming world:

Where they smile in secret, looking over wasted

lands,

Blight and famine, plague and earthquake,

roaring deeps and fiery sands,

Clanging fights, and flaming towns, and sinking

ships, and praying hands."

The basis of the Greek idea of God was detachment; the basis of the Christian idea is identity. Through his sufferings Jesus Christ identified himself with man.

(ii) Through this identity Jesus Christ sympathizes with man. He literally feels with them. It is almost impossible to understand another person's sorrows and sufferings unless we have been through them. A person without a trace of nerves has no conception of the tortures of nervousness. A person who is perfectly physically fit has no conception of the weariness of the person who is easily tired or the pain of the person who is never free from pain. A person who learns easily often cannot understand why someone who is slow finds things so difficult. A person who has never sorrowed cannot understand the pain at the heart of the person into whose life grief has come. A person who has never loved can never understand either the sudden glory or the aching loneliness in the lover's heart. Before we can have sympathy we must go through the same things as the other person has gone through--and that is precisely what Jesus did.

(iii) Because he sympathizes Jesus can really help. He has met our sorrows; he has faced our temptations. As a result he knows exactly what help we need; and he can give it.

Constable: Heb 1:1--3:1

I. The culminating revelation of God 1:1--2:18

Hebrews is a sermon reduced to writing (cf. 13:22; James). Indications of this fact are the writer's references to speaking and hearing (cf. 2:5; 5:11; 8:1; 9:5; 11:32). His epistle is more typical of speech than of writing.

Various stylistic devices enable the student of this book to identify the sections of the writer's thought. These devices include inclusio, linking words, the repetition of key terms, alternation between exposition and admonition, and others, which I shall point out where appropriate. These rhetorical devices were common in the writer's culture, and his use of them indicated to the original readers where his thoughts were moving.

There is an alternation in the genre of this epistle from exposition to exhortation to exposition to exhortation and so forth. Noting these major changes makes interpreting the book much easier. The blocks of material by genre are as follows. I shall note the changes in the notes that follow as well.

Exposition	Exhortation
ch. 1	2:1-4
2:5-18	3:1-4:14
4:15-5:10	5:11-6:12
6:13-10:18	10:19-39
ch. 11	chs. 12-1318

This writer customarily began with a brief statement that presented the theme of each major section of his discourse. The first such statement appears in 1:1-4 and introduces the theme of the culminating revelation of God, which continues through 2:18.¹⁹

Constable: Heb 2:10-18

E. The Son's Solidarity with Humanity 2:10-18

The writer next emphasized the future glory that the Son will experience to heighten his readers' appreciation for Him and for their own future with Him. He did this by reflecting on Psalm 8. He wanted his readers to appreciate these things so they would continue to live by faith rather than departing from God's will (cf. James 1; 1 Pet. 1). This section concludes the first major part of the writer's address and prepares his audience for the next one (3:1-5:10).

"The three thoughts quickly made in Hebrews 2:9 are . . . filled in by further theological reflection in 2:10-18. They are not taken up in distinct sections but are interwoven in the argument of the paragraph. . . .

"The first theme . . . is that Jesus as God's Son came to earth to share fully in our humanity and thus to establish His solidarity with all people. . . .

"The second theme . . . is that in God's plan Jesus had to undergo suffering and death in order to provide salvation for humankind. . . .

"The third theme . . . is that because of His obedience in carrying out God's redemptive plan despite severe temptation, Jesus has been exalted to the honored position in God's very presence as the believers' perfected High Priest."⁸⁸

2:10 The writer proceeded to give a commentary on the last clause of verse 9, particulary on the phrase "by the grace of God."⁸⁹

The Son of Man is not the only One God intends to glorify (v. 6). All of His sons, believers, will experience glorification. "Him" is God the Father. "Author" is Jesus Christ, the Son of Man. The unusual title "author" (Gr. archegos) describes Jesus as a file leader, pioneer, pathfinder, and captain of a company of followers (cf. 12:2; Acts 3:15; 5:31).⁹⁰ God perfected Jesus by charting His path to glory through suffering, and He does the same for Jesus' followers. We must go through suffering before we get to glory. By having experienced suffering Jesus can more perfectly help those of us who are suffering (v. 18). He was "perfected" in this sense.⁹¹

"Since His sinlessness is an accepted fact, it is clear that the perfection is viewed as a fitness for the fulfilling of the office assigned to Him."⁹²

"This representation of the achievement of Jesus was calculated to recall one of the more famous labors of Hercules, his wrestling with Death, the dark-robed lord of the dead' (Euripides, Alcestis, II. 843, 844 . . .). The designation of Jesus as archegos in a context depicting him as protagonist suggests that the writer intended to present Jesus to his hearers in language that drew freely upon the Hercules tradition in popular Hellenism . . ."⁹³

2:11 "He" is probably Jesus Christ. There is great unity between Jesus Christ and believers. The Old Testament taught this unity in Psalm 22:22 (v. 12), Isaiah 8:17 (v. 13a), and Isaiah 8:18 (v. 13b). Jesus will not feel ashamed to call sanctified believers His brethren when He returns and leads us to glory (vv. 5, 10).

2:12-13 These quotations illustrate that Jesus will not blush to identify Himself with the people of God. The emphasis in the first quotation is on the character that Jesus Christ and believers share. His death has made us holy (set us apart; cf. 10:10, 14). Consequently we can have intimate fellowship with Jesus who dwells among us (by His Spirit; cf. Exod 25:8; 29:46).

The point of the second quotation is that Jesus, as well as His followers, trusted God. This is the basis for intimate fellowship. The point of the third quotation is that believers are Jesus Christ's spiritual children. As such He will provide for us and prepare us for the future as a loving parent who has had greater experience travelling the same path (cf. John 14:1-3).

"The description of Christians as the children' or sons' of Christ is peculiar to this epistle among the New testament writings . . ."⁹⁴

2:14 We children share in flesh and blood with one another; we share the limitations of humanity. To free us from these limitations the Son had to assume the same limitations, which He did at the Incarnation. Jesus Christ broke Satan's power over believers by His death. Obviously Satan still exercises great power, but Jesus Christ broke his power to enslave believers (cf. Rom. 6:1-14). Furthermore Jesus Christ defeated Satan in the area of his greatest strength, his power to inflict death.

2:15 The fear of death enslaves unbelievers in that our fear of death leads us to behave in ways that please Satan (e.g., selfishly, living for the present, etc.). A believer need not have the same fear of death as an unbeliever (cf. Luke 11:21-22). Consequently we need not feel compelled to live for the present (e.g., put self first, do anything to save our lives, etc.) as unbelievers do. The fear of death tyrannizes many people both consciously and subconsciously.

"It is ironical that human beings, destined to rule over the creation (Ps 8:5-7 LXX, cited in vv 6-8), should find themselves in the posture of a slave, paralyzed through the fear of death (Kögel, Sohn, 80). Hopeless subjection to death characterizes earthly existence apart from the intervention of God . . ."⁹⁵

2:16 Here "the seed of Abraham" probably refers primarily to believers, the spiritual descendants of Abraham (Gal. 3:29), rather than to Jews, the physical descendants of Abraham (cf. Isa. 41:8-10). The original readers were both the physical and spiritual descendants of Abraham. The contrast is between angelic and human believers in the context. Jesus Christ does not give help to angels in the same way He does to Christians. He helps us uniquely as an elder brother and parent (vv. 11-15).

2:17 "All things" means in every way, specifically by experiencing human life and by suffering. Jesus Christ's identification with us made possible His ministry as high priest in which He would be merciful to us and faithful to God.⁹⁶ The basis for this ministry was His making satisfaction (propitiation, by atonement) for sin by His self-sacrifice.

". . . the concept of high priesthood, as applied to Christ, expresses both Christ's unity with mankind in a particular historical tradition (5:1) and his leadership of God's pilgrim people into the heavenly sanctuary."⁹⁷

"O laos ["The people"] is Hebrews' preferred term for the people of God."⁹⁸

2:18 As our priest Jesus Christ can help us because He has undergone the same trials we experience (in body, mind, and emotions) and has emerged victorious. The testing in view is temptation to depart from God's will, specifically apostasy. The picture is of an older brother helping his younger brothers navigate the pitfalls of growing up successfully. That is the role a priest plays.

"Think of it this way--which bridge has undergone the greatest stress, the one that collapses under its first load of traffic, or the one that bears the same traffic morning and evening, year after year?"⁹⁹

The writer developed these ideas more fully later. He only introduced them here.

"It is a characteristic of this Epistle just to touch upon a truth, and then to dismiss it for a time, taking it up later for full treatment."¹⁰⁰

". . . the writer composes like a musician intertwining one theme with another."¹⁰¹

The emphasis in 2:5-18 has been on Jesus Christ's present ministry whereas that of 1:5-14 was on His future reign. In both sections, however, there is a looking forward to the time when all things will be subject to Him. The writer focused on the future to encourage his readers to persevere faithfully rather than apostatizing.

"With vv 17-18 the writer prepares to lead his hearers directly into the body of the discourse devoted to the exposition of Jesus as priest and sacrifice. Common to the concepts both of champion and of high priest are the elements of representation and solidarity with a particular people. The presentation of Jesus in 2:10-18 provided assurance that the exalted Son continues to identify himself with the oppressed people of God exposed to humiliation and testing in a hostile world."¹⁰²

College: Heb 2:1-18

HEBREWS 2

II. JESUS RESCUES MAN (2:1-18)

Chapter one introduced Jesus as towering over all of redemption history, far superior to angels. Chapter two shows how he joined the human race to rescue man. In two parts, the chapter warns us not to neglect his offer of salvation (2:1-4), then informs us how he achieved it (2:5-18). He who was far above angels came beneath them to unite fully with mankind (2:5-8). Then God crowned him with glory and honor, and through him is bringing many sons to glory (2:9-10). Jesus became like his brothers in every way including suffering and death. Some OT verses indicate this equality (2:11-14a). By his death he destroyed Satan, ended man's fear of death, and earned his status as our high priest (2:14-18).

A. WARNING NOT TO IGNORE SUCH

A GREAT SALVATION (2:1-4)

¹ We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. ² For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, ³ how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. ⁴ God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

After presenting the glory of the Son, our author pauses to warn about the practical consequences of our response to what he has done. The message of the OT covenant spoken by angels was sure and its punishments sure. The greater salvation Jesus brought was more secure, so its punishment was more severe. Jesus announced it; his hearers confirmed it; God added his witness to it. The system of Mt. Sinai brought a just punishment for violation. There is likewise no escape if we neglect this greater salvation personally brought by Jesus himself. The author is so elated at who Jesus is and what he has done (chapter one) that his literary skills are greatly elevated in the opening paragraph of chapter two. His descriptions use several rare words, heavy alliteration, a complicated sentence and an embellished list.

The paragraph contrasts the two systems. The Sinai covenant was (a) a message spoken by angels; (b) it was binding; and (c) it included a just punishment for every infraction. The covenant Christ brought was (a) announced by the Lord himself; (b) confirmed by hearers and by God himself; and (c) included no escape for ignoring or even drifting away.

In the first chapter all previous revelation from God was contrasted with the final revelation of God in his Son. In chapter two our author narrows this view to put the NT over against the single finest, fullest pinnacle of OT revelation, i.e., the covenant of Mt. Sinai. He says that the Sinai revelation was spoken through angels (2:2, di= ajggevlwn , di' angelôn ). Stephen mentioned this (Acts 7:53) and so did Paul (Gal 3:19; see 3:38), although it was only suggested in the Pentateuch (Deut 33:2). The thirteenth century rabbi, Nachmanides, claimed, "Though myriads of angels were present, the Torah was communicated to Israel directly by God." By contrast, the new message was much more significant, because it was given by the Son, who is much more significant than the angels.

2:1 We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.

This is the first of many exhortations in the book of Hebrews. Sometimes they appear in the second person plural, "you," where the readers are directly addressed. Sometimes the author stands beside his readers by using the first person plural, "we" or "us." One should especially notice the exhortations in 2:1-4; 3:6, 7:19; 4:1, 11, 14-16; 5:11-14; 6:1-12, 18-20; 10:19-39; 12:1-17, 25-28; 13:1-22.

We must pay more careful attention to what we have heard. We are prone to forget. Henry compares our minds and memories to a leaky vessel, "They do not without much care retain what is poured into them." What Jesus offers is far superior to what the OT system offered. Once we have heard this message, there are no other alternatives. There is no higher court to which we may appeal. We either live faithful to this offer or suffer a fate far worse than that of OT violators. Hebrews uses four different words to indicate necessity: ajnavgkh (anagkç ) and cognates ("compulsion;" 7:12, 27; 9:16, 23), dei' ( dei , "must;" 2:1; 9:26; 11:6), ojfeivlw (opheilô ) and cognates ("to owe;" 2:17; 5:3, 12) and prevpw (prepô , "to be fitting;" 2:10; 7:26). The third word evidently came from the financial world, and indicated owing a debt. The fourth carries the idea of necessity only in that something is most appropriate. The first two are more difficult to distinguish.

In view of the greater offer from a greater person with greater confirmation at a greater point in the history of redemption and greater evident consequences of improper response the author would certainly use the most powerful word he could to show the necessity of paying attention. We must ( dei ) pay attention. The same word will be used twice later. If Christ were to offer himself again and again like the repeated animal sacrifices, he " would have to suffer many times since the creation of the world" (9:26). Similarly anyone who comes to God " must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him" (11:6). In both of these instances there is not the tiniest possibility that either could be avoided. Compare other absolute necessities, "The Son of Man must suffer many things" (Mark 8:31), and "You must be born again" (John 3:7). Tiedtke finds the NT using this word to focus on three areas: apocalyptic contexts, Jesus' life and way as salvation history, and necessities in the life of the Christian.

The author of Hebrews finds that the law must (ajnavgkh , anangkç ) change when the priesthood changed (7:12); that unlike Christ OT priests had to offer sacrifices first for their own sins, then for the people (7:27); that the death of one making a will must be proven for a will to be put in force (9:16); and that the earthly tabernacle must be purified indicating that the heavenly things needed even better sacrifices for purification (9:23).

Accepting the task of becoming man's high priest carried with it the obligation (ojfeivlw , opheilô , "to owe") that Jesus be made like his brothers in every way (2:17). He owed that to them if he would become a merciful and faithful high priest. Without this total identification, he would still have been able to purify the heavens with his blood. He would still have been perfect. But we would not have understood that he understood. We would not have had immediate evidence of his caring or his ability to help. He may have performed his office satisfactorily, but we are more inclined to respond because of his total identification with us. This was unlike the OT priests who, because of their own sins, were obligated to make an offering for themselves before they could make the offering for the people (5:3). In a third application, the author states that his readers had been Christians long enough that the time alone obligated them to be teachers. Something was terribly wrong when in fact they still needed to be taught (5:12).

It was appropriate (prevpw , prepô ) that God should make Jesus complete through suffering, since he was the author of our salvation (2:10). Some things are appropriate for God. Some things are also proper and fitting for man. The NIV misses the idea of this word entirely in 7:26, "Such a high priest meets our need." The NRSV is better here, "For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest." The KJV phrase is old enough to be awkward today, "Such an high priest became us."

The word "better" could be written across the book of Hebrews; the word " more should be written across our response. Some things require greater (perissotevrw" , perissoterôs , "far more, to a much greater degree") diligence. We are prone to dangerous carelessness. Does he say to pay closer attention (1) than you have been paying; (2) than the Israelites paid (3:16-4:2); or (3) than anyone is normally inclined to do? The author also urged his readers to pray " particularly" (NIV; NRSV has "all the more;" KJV, "the rather") in order that he may be with them very soon (13:19). Likewise, they needed especially to pay more careful attention to the gospel (2:1). God's oath makes even clearer to us that he is totally committed to the universal promise he made to Abraham (6:17). Likewise, the unique priesthood of Melchizedek made Jesus' unique priesthood even clearer to us (7:15).

The phrase, " what we have heard ," is a single word, an aorist participle (lit., "what was heard"). The whole message is evidently in mind. "To hear" implies "to obey." The big problem lay not with the simplicity of the beginning, but with the difficulty of remaining faithful.

The author worries about his readers, afraid that they might drift away . Dods suggests that since prosevcw (prosechô , "to pay attention") "is commonly used of bringing a ship to land, this sense may have suggested the [use of] pararuw'men" ("to drift away"). Liddell and Scott defines the verb pararrevw (pararreô ,) " To flow beside, by or past ; II. to slip away, to slip from one's memory; III. to slip in unawares." Westcott found it used of things which slip away, as a ring from the finger, or of taking a wrong course, as a crumb of food entering the windpipe, or of an embarrassing subject arising among company. Then he observed, "We are all continuously exposed to the action of currents of opinion, habit, action, which tend to carry us away insensibly from the position which we ought to maintain." Regularly meeting together with other Christians (10:25) and daily encouragement from other Christians (3:13) combined with daily prayer and Bible reading (4:12-16) will greatly reduce the risk of drifting away.

BAGD says the word means, "flow by, slip away" or figuratively, "be washed away, drift away." Proverbs 3:21 says, "Son, do not let slip away, but keep my counsel and understanding." Isaiah 44:4 wrote of "running" water. Without the prefix para -, the verb rheô ("to flow") is found in John 7:38 to describe the abundant inner supply of the Holy Spirit, "Streams of living water will flow from within him." It is part of the common OT phrase describing the promised land as a land "flowing" with milk and honey. The main idea in our verse seems to be the unnoticed, gradual slipping away of one's salvation because of inattention.

In 13:22 our author calls the whole epistle "a word of exhortation." It may seem odd that the first exhortation of the epistle should warn against negligence. Does he have some reason to think that his readers have begun to let their first vigor as Christians diminish? It is a major emphasis of the book (3:12-14; 4:1-2, 11, 15; 5:11-6:12; 10:19-11:3, 6; 12:1-13:25). It is a perpetual concern in the church today. Nairne records that "In an ancient prologue to the Pauline epistles (in an Irish MS. of the Vulgate) Hebrews is described simply thus - 'To the Hebrews whom he exhorts like the Thessalonians that in the commandments of God they should more readily endure persecutions.'" With so many blessings available both now and later, it would be tragic for anyone to just drift away from them all.

2:2 For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment,

"If the message spoken by angels was binding . . ." Bruce reminds us that Hebrews reasons from the law to the gospel here and in 7:21f; 9:14 and 10:28f. Verse two begins with a condition that is assumed to be true. There are twelve such conditional statements in Hebrews (2:2; 3:11, 18; 4:3, 5, 8; 6:9, 14; 7:11, 15; 8:4, 7; 9:13; 11:15; 12:8, 25).

The message spoken by angels was binding. "If the message spoken by angels was binding, and it was , then . . ." Stephen (Acts 7:53) and Paul (Gal 3:19) explain that the law was "put into effect" by angels. Josephus has the same idea in Antiquities , XV. 136 (XV.v.3). Deuteronomy 33:2 indicates that angels were at Mt. Sinai with God, but does not specify what they did. Stephen said "the angel" spoke to Moses on Mt. Sinai and with our fathers "and he received living words to pass on to us" (Acts 7:38). This is one place where the NT adds further information about an OT event beyond the information recorded in the OT. A person's view of Scripture will greatly affect how this additional information is perceived.

The OT law was binding . BAGD calls bevbaio" ( bebaios ) "firm, permanent." The word is more frequent in Hebrews than in all the rest of the NT (2:2; 3:6, 14; 6:19; 9:17; Rom 4:16; 2 Cor 1:7; 2 Pet 1:10, 19). Cf. The verb bebaiovw (bebaioô , "to make firm, establish" - 2:3; 13:9) and the noun bebaivwsi" (bebaiôsis , "confirmation" - 6:16). Moulton and Milligan claim that the verb bebaioô is a very common legal term, and assert that "Deissman has shown very fully how much force the technical use of this word and its cognates to denote legally guaranteed security adds to their occurrence in the NT." For example, a will is "in force" only when somebody has died (9:17).

Every violation and disobedience received its just punishment. Spicq considers paravbasi" ( parabasis , "violation") a positive and parakohv (parakoç , "disobedience") a negative infraction, both of which involve one's will. These may come from either weakness or rebellion. Man cannot keep the law perfectly, but often he does not want to keep it. Louw and Nida caution that "For terms involving 'disobedience' or 'transgression,' there are often a number of subtle distinctions [in different languages] reflecting several different types of contrasts." Adam's sin in the garden of Eden is called both a parabasis and a parakoç in Romans 5:14 and 19. By using alliterations and rare words the very sounds of the words make the passage appear more ominous. Note the alliteration in verse one, PeRiSSoterôs PRoSechein . . . PaRaruômen ("we must pay more careful attention"), and in verse two, PAsa PARAbasis kai PARAkoç ("every violation and disobedience").

Punishment from God is always just . Dods says classical writers use the simpler form misqodosiva ( misthodosia , "payment of wages") whereas Hebrews (2:2; 10:35; and 11:26) has the longer form misqapodosiva ( misthapodosia , "payment of wages"). Here it is a penalty; in 10:35 and 11:26 it is a reward. Hebrews also uses the longer misqapodovth" (misthapodotçs , "one who pays wages, a rewarder") in 11:6 rather than the shorter misqodovth" (misthodotçs , "one who pays wages, a paymaster"). None of these four words occur elsewhere in the NT. The OT law gave proper rewards (2:2). The NT way will bring a rich reward (10:36). Moses knew enough of God's eventual reward to prefer it rather than to retain his high status in Egypt (11:26). Of course, in this imagery God is seen as the paymaster. The word "just" (e[ndiko" , endikos ) does not appear at all in the LXX, and only in the NT here and in Romans 3:8. Paul said the condemnation of the sinful world, who misrepresented the message of grace as one of license, was a "just" (NIV, "deserved") sentence. The prefix en- ("in") in the word en-dikos implies that the punishment is just in and of itself. No external authority is needed to endorse its validity.

2:3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.

There is no other sacrifice (Heb 10:26). There will be no escape. One might escape from a guarded city (2 Cor 11:32-33). One might escape from prison (Acts 12:1-19; 16:27). None will escape from an angry God who has been ignored (10:26-31; 12:29). Jesus told a parable of people who ignored a king's invitation to a wedding banquet for his son. He did not take this insult lightly (Matt 22:1-7). The verb ajmelevw (ameleô , "to ignore, to not care") only occurs five times in the NT (Matt 22:5; 1 Tim 4:14; Heb 2:3; 8:9; and 2 Pet 1:12) and four times in the LXX (Jer 4:17; 38[31]:32 [quoted in Heb 8:9]; Wisdom 3:10; and 2 Macc 4:14). Because Judah ignored God, she would be punished (Jer 4:17). In fact, God then ignored her for breaking his covenant (Jer 38[31]:32). In the Maccabean era priests ignored the sacrifices, turning to the Greek culture (2 Macc 4:14).

It is such a great (thlikauvth" , telikautes ) salvation, too great to be carelessly ignored. Paul used this word to describe his being delivered from "such a deadly" peril in Asia Minor when he nearly died fighting "wild beasts" (2 Cor 1:8-10; cf. 1 Cor 15:30-32). James contrasted the tiny rudders with "so large" ships which they steer (James 3:4). In his visions in Revelation John saw "so tremendous" an earthquake that none like it had ever occurred before (Rev 16:18).

The paragraph shows the greatness of this salvation by specifying its source and its confirmation. To these Dods adds the greatness of Him who mediates it (1:4), the method employed (2:10) and the results, i.e., bringing many sons to glory (2:10). The phrase "by the Lord" (diav , dia with a genitive case) matches the phrase in 1:2, "by his Son" (also dia with a genitive). Jesus was God's agent in bringing the final revelation and the great salvation. Dods remarks that this message was not delivered by angels or other delegates who might have misunderstood the message but by the Lord himself. The source is unquestionably pure.

Jesus first announced this salvation. Introduced by John the Baptist as the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, Jesus then spent three years explaining what this meant and preparing people for the greatest enterprise on earth. Believers and non-believers alike who heard him were enthralled at his words. Jesus himself said, "I have spoken openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said" (John 18:20-21). During his ministry Jesus used twelve (Matt 10:5ff.), later seventy-two (Luke 10:1ff.) to speak his message. He explained, "He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me" (Luke 10:16).

This salvation was confirmed to us by those who heard him . These words are understood by some to indicate that the author of Hebrews must have been a second generation Christian. How else could he say the message of Christ "was confirmed to us by those who heard him?" These scholars remind us that Paul, by contrast, strongly defended his firsthand information which he received directly from the Lord himself because he was an apostle. See 1 Cor 11:23; 15:1-3; 2 Cor 10:8, 13; 11:5-6, 10-12; 12:1-13; 13:2-3; Gal 1:1, 11-12, 16-17; 2:6-15.

However, Paul often used the editorial "we" (Rom 3:8; 4:9; etc.). Just as clearly some "we's" are not editorial, but include the perspective of all readers as he stood beside them speaking as one of them. For example, " We died to sin" (Rom 6:2); or, " We will judge angels" (1 Cor 2:12); or, "Because of his great love for us" (Eph 2:4). These and dozens of other examples show that Paul often placed himself among his readers as an equal. Similarly, the author of Hebrews used the editorial "we" (Heb 5:11; 6:9; 7:15; etc.). He also sometimes stood beside his readers and spoke from their perspective as one of them. For example, " We are his house" (3:6); or "the hope offered to us" (6:18); or, "a better hope . . . by which we draw near to God" (7:19). The statement in 2:3 does not close the door to apostolic authorship of the book of Hebrews.

2:4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

Confirmation by men assures the truth of the message (1 Cor 1:6); the testimony of God is far more assuring. Concerning the verb, sunepimarturevw , (synepimartyreô, "to testify at the same time") Ellingworth asserts that "both prefixes are to be given their due weight: the witness of events accompanies ( syn -) and adds to (- epi -) the witness of words." God undergirded the message from Jesus with signs, wonders and various miracles , and gifts of the Holy Spirit. To the testimony of eyewitnesses God himself added supernatural activity to make the message certain beyond doubt.

All three words may describe the same phenomenon, but from three different angles. As a "miracle" (duvnami" , dynamis , "power") the event is an unusual display of might. As a "wonder" (tevra" , teras , "prodigy, wonder") it excites the admiration of those who watch. As a "sign" (shmei'on , sçmeion , "sign, indication") it points to something beyond itself. By putting these together an event called a "miracle" would be an unusual display of power which is admired by beholders and points to something beyond itself. It is unfortunate that the word "miracle" has come to be used for wonder alone, i.e., anything which excites man's wonder, like a sunset or a birth or one's transformation at conversion. While these are certainly admirable events, they are in a totally different class from the events mentioned in the Bible as miracles.

It should be noted that in the beginning church miracles never replaced the telling of the gospel message. Instead, miracles drew attention to the human messengers and indicated that they had supernatural endorsement for what they said. In a similar fashion angels, as supernatural messengers, were never allowed to tell the story about Jesus. They could only bring together those seeking and those carrying the news of redemption.

To these three words for miracle our paragraph adds "gifts (merismov" , merismos , "apportionment") of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will." The ordinary word for these gifts would be charisma . ("gift"). Here the idea is rather that the Holy Spirit has given various people various assistance, "parting" or "distributing" to each as he chose. Cf. 1 Cor 12:11.

B. JESUS BECAME A MAN TO BRING MEN TO GLORY (2:5-18)

⁵ It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking. ⁶ But there is a place where someone has testified:

"What is man that you are mindful of him,

the son of man that you care for him?

⁷ You made him a little ^a lower than the angels;

you crowned him with glory and honor

⁸ and put everything under his feet." ^b

In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him. ⁹ But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

^a 7 Or him for a little while ; also in verse 9 ^b 8 Psalm 8:4-6

The first chapter established Jesus' deity, far above angels. The second chapter establishes his humanity, equal with man. He even suffered (2:9-10, 18) and died (2:9, 14-15). His superiority is seen in a new way. He who is rightfully above the angels came down beneath the angels to become fully identified with man. His newly created nature of god-man made Jesus able to perform a new role. He would be the high priest in this great salvation plan. When he returned to his rightful place above the angels he would "bring many sons to glory" with him.

Who has ever read this chapter for the Christmas story? Matthew chapter one and Luke chapter two are used. Rarely will anyone read Philippians two, though for variety some might dare to use John chapter one. But Hebrews two demonstrates its value to us in that while we were lower than the angels he came to rescue us. If Hebrews one is titled the grandeur of the Son, Hebrews two should be called the grandeur of the Savior.

2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.

" Not to angels ." In 1:14 angels were seen as servants of those who will inherit salvation. Next the readers were warned not to miss out on this salvation, which is greater than the OT offer brought by angels (2:1-4). Now it is explained that angels will not rule the world to come. Man is destined for that exalted position. Man will find his way to glory through The Perfect Man, Jesus, who entered the human race to rescue us. He earned this top position in the afterlife for us.

Jesus was no mere man of flesh and blood (v.14), inferior to angels (v.7), tempted (v.18), suffering (vv.10, 18), dying (vv.9, 14). There is something revulsive about one who demeans himself to live beneath his capabilities. There is something fascinating about a creator-God who demeans himself to join and lift his creatures who are incapable of lifting themselves. He identified so fully with his inferior creatures that he could lift them up out of their fear-filled frailty and bring them to glory with him. This is the story of chapter two.

It is interesting that the warning against neglecting this great salvation appears before the salvation is even described. The author has kept his audience gazing off into the distance at a person far superior to angels. Only a few loose strands have tied us to him. (a) We are related to the fathers through whom God spoke bits and pieces (1:1). (b) God's culminating message through Jesus was given to us (1:2). (c) Jesus made purification for our sins (1:3). He sternly admonished us not to ignore this great salvation (2:1-4). In 2:5 he says it is the world to come, about which we are speaking . What was only hinted before is now plainly stated. Heaven is the bottom line.

Flender says the word "world" (oijkoumevnh , oikoumene ) was used (a) for the lands inhabited by the Greeks as opposed to lands of the barbarians, then (b) for the whole inhabited world including lands of barbarians, finally, (c ) by the second century B.C. for lands under the Roman rule. This geographical political image is used twice in Hebrews: in 1:6 of this world into which Christ entered; and in 2:5 of the world to come into which he will bring believers. Kovsmo" ( kosmos ), the usual word for "world" in the NT, is used in Hebrews of the physical world which he created (4:3; 9:26) and of "the world as mankind" [LS] (10:5; 11:7, 38).

God controls the future. He has already subjected (uJpotavssw , hypotassô , "to subject, subordinate") the world to come to mankind, not to angels. One who can speak the world into existence (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, etc.) or one who can sustain it by his powerful word (1:3) can certainly determine the future of that world and all that is in it. God is orderly (1 Cor 14:34, 40). His creation is orderly. His law was designed to help people live orderly lives (1 Tim 1:8-11). He has appointed governments to enforce order (Rom 13:1-7). Lack of order leads to frustration (Rom 8:18-21). Eventually everything will once again be subjected to Christ (1 Cor 15:27-28; Eph 1:22; Phil 3:21; Heb 1:2; 1 Pet 3:22). Man will take his place beside the exalted Christ.

2:6 But there is a place where someone has testified: "What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him?

There is a place where someone has testified . Dods says the uniquely vague way of introducing this quotation is not because of doubt about authorship of the psalm nor because of quoting from memory, but is instead "a rhetorical mode of suggesting that his readers knew the passage well enough." Then he claims that Philo frequently used an indefinite form of quotation, and even this exact phrasing. This is the only OT quotation in Hebrews which refers to the human author. For example, "To which of the angels did God ever say" (1:5); or "Jesus . . . says" (2:11-12); or "as the Holy Spirit says" (3:7); or "just as God has said" (4:3). Even when David is mentioned in 4:7, God is the author of his words, "God . . . spoke through David" (4:7). Habakkuk 2:3-4 (in Heb 10:37-38) and Proverbs 3:11-12 (in Heb 12:5-6) are introduced without specifying either a divine or a human author. In 13:6 the author of Hebrews simply uses the words of Psalm 118:6-7 without naming its author to verbalize his own confidence in God.

Seybold notes the significance of the eighth Psalm, "After the Imago-Dei text of Gen. 1,26f. and the Yahwistic cornerstone, Gen. 2,7, Ps. 8 is the most important statement in the Old Testament on the position of humanity within the created order." Kirkpatrick refers to Paul's use of the terminology from Psalm 8:6 in 1 Corinthians 15:27 and Ephesians 1:22, then concludes, "If all things were subjected to the first Adam who failed through sin, not less must they be subjected to the second Adam who triumphs through obedience, and fulfils the destiny of the race." The text of Hebrews indicates that Psalm 8 was not intended to describe the exalted position of man in this world only, but also in the world to come.

In its customary parallelism the Hebrew poetry of Psalm 8 says the same thought twice. " What is man that you are mindful of him ," means the same as "[What is] the son of man that you care for him." The next lines describe the astonishingly high position in which God has assigned man, his most honored creature. Dods sees in this quotation three particular ways that illustrate the greatness of man: (1) God made him a little lower than the angels; (2) God crowned him with glory and honor; and (3) God put everything under his feet.

2:7 You made him a little lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honor

The word bracuv" ( brachys , "a little") may be used of (1) a little space, a little further on (Acts 27:28); (2) a little time, a little later (Luke 22:38); or (3) a little quantity, a small amount of food (John 6:7) or even a few words (Heb 13:22). The flexibility of this word opens the door to the commentaries' vacillation. Does the text mean that Jesus was lower than angels in degree or time? By entering the world of time he was "for a little while" lower. By descending from heaven to earthbound humanity he was "a little degree" lower. The Hebrew words in the Psalm are clear, "you made him lack a little." The Psalm is very physically oriented. It sees God's glory "above the heavens" in a world of praise and splendid power (Ps 8:1-3). But it sees man's puny place beneath majestic stars, ruling over flocks and herds, beasts and birds, and fish that swim the seas (Ps 8:4-8). This is the world Jesus entered when he became a man.

The LXX has "a little lower than angels" (a[ggeloi , angeloi ) where the Hebrew text had "a little lower than God" (myhwla , 'elohim ). Though the word 'elohim normally means Jahweh, the creator-god of the Old Testament, sometimes it is used differently. BDB gives references where 'elohim may mean angels. This is how the LXX translators understood Psalm 8:5. The author of Hebrews follows the LXX text. The NIV translates Psalm 8:5 "a little lower than the heavenly beings" and adds a note in its margin, "Or than God ." From the perspective of earthly things, either idea of heavenly beings, whether "God" or "angels," would show man's relative position. On earth man is above everything else which is on the earth. The only thing higher would be heaven and its inhabitants. A hint of the future world was seen in Hebrews 1:14 where angels are subservient to man. It is clear from 2:8 that mortals have not yet fully reached their promised potential. It will soon be explained that this full potential will only be achieved in Christ.

2:8 and put everything under his feet." In putting everything under him, God left nothing that is not subject to him. Yet at present we do not see everything subject to him.

The exalted position of mankind on earth is a preparation for a similarly exalted position in the world to come. Man and woman are set above all other creatures. Three passages describe man as made in the image of God (Gen 1:26-28; 5:1-3; 9:6). The first passage comes as a climax of creation. The second begins the genealogical list. The third makes this nature the reason for the death sentence on every murderer. Thus, the crowning of creation, the linking of all family heritage and the honoring of the sanctity of life are all traced to the image of God in man. C.F.H. Henry says, "Man is made for personal and endless fellowship with God, involving rational understanding (Gen. 1:28ff.), moral obedience (2:16-17), and religious communion (3:3)." Not even angels have this distinction. Henry explains further, "The creation-image was probationary; the redemption-image is not;" and again, "the NT also speaks of the divine image in the natural man (I Cor. 11:7; James 3:9). But its central message is redeemed man's renewal in the image of Christ." We have been recreated in the likeness of Christ through the new birth (Eph 2:10; John 3:3-5) with the capacity of copying his character and his deeds (1 Cor 11:1; Eph 5:1). Hebrews also urges the mimicking of the leaders whom God has set in the church (6:12; 13:7). This is like the exhortation from Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:1, "Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ."

The problem is that at present we do not see everything subject to man. Because of his sin, man's original position has been lost. Even his own impulses are as uncontrollable as a wild animal. His potential position, never attained, can only be realized in Christ (Rom 5:12-21; Rev 3:21; 22:4-5).

2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

This is the first mention of the name "Jesus" in Hebrews. When the church was first begun, Peter said Jesus was already reigning on the throne of David (Acts 2:29-36; 5:30-31. Cf. Ps 132:11; Isa 9:7; Mark 16:19; Luke 1:31-32; Rom 8:34; Phil 2:9; Col 3:1. See also Rev 3:21; 5:6; 7:17; 11:15; 22:1, 3, 5). Jesus did what we were supposed to do. Jesus became what we were supposed to become. We could almost call Jesus "the capital M man." Paul called him the "last Adam" (1 Cor 15:45; cf. Rom 5:12-21), for like the first Adam, he headed up a whole new world. How and why Jesus did what he did are explained in the rest of the chapter.

The word " crowned" (stefanovw , stephanoô , "to wreath with a crown, to crown") is a perfect participle. BAGD says the verb literally means "to crown the winner in an athletic contest." Jesus won. He was crowned as victor. Now he enjoys the glory of that new status. Many passages in the NT associate Jesus with glory and honor. Isaiah so often associated the glory of God with the Messiah that one could almost write "Jesus" every time "glory" is mentioned in his book. As a country basks in the glory that her athletes win in the Olympic games, so all men, as brothers of Christ (2:10-17), can enjoy the victory he won for mankind.

Jesus' rescue mission, though available for everyone, became available only by the grace of God . Using Esser's phrases one might say that the grace of God, as the undeserved gift of God, anchored in the purpose of God, and flowing from the power of God, makes the new man in Christ what he is. In the macro-history of redemption (Rom 5:15) the grace of God defines the mission of Christ (1 Cor 1:4; 15:10) so that it can reach every person in the entire world (Heb 2:9; Matt 28:18-20; 2 Cor 4:15). In the micro-history of redemption the grace of God justifies each individual freely (Acts 15:11; Rom 3:23-24; Titus 2:11) bringing him into a new way of life (Acts 13:43; 14:26; 2 Cor 8:7; Eph 2:5) where he finds whatever help is needed (Heb 4:16) to bring him to eternal glory (1 Pet 5:10).

When Jesus " tasted" death , he did not merely touch against it as though with his tongue only. This is a figurative expression for partaking of or enjoying something. Thus "tasting the supper" in Luke 14:24 means eating the whole meal. So Acts 10:10 and 20:11. To "taste death" in Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27 and John 8:52 means to experience death or as Liddell and Scott says, "to come to know something." Hence, in 6:4-5 "tasting" the heavenly gift, the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age means coming to know them. In this sense, Liddell and Scott mentions tasting the spear. This does not mean that Christ only sampled death, as Chrysostom suggested, by only remaining dead briefly before his resurrection. No. With a similarly powerful imagery one may say he fully "drank the cup" which the Father had given him (Matt 10:22-23; 26:39-42). BAGD says, "drink the cup = submit to a severe trial, or death," and claims that Matt 20:22f refers to "those who suffer the same fate." The concept of the substitutionary atonement is very important in the book of Hebrews.

¹⁰ In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. ¹¹ Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers. ¹² He says,

"I will declare your name to my brothers;

in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises." ^a

¹³ And again,

"I will put my trust in him." ^b

And again he says,

"Here am I, and the children God has given me." ^c

^a 12 Psalm 22:22 ^b 13 Isaiah 8:17 ^c 13 Isaiah 8:18

A new problem was introduced in 2:9. Jesus died. His death seemed to be clear evidence to the Jews that Jesus could not be the Messiah (1 Cor 1:23). Christians understand that the substitutionary death of the god-man Jesus frees man from sin. Jews in general do not accept this idea. For them the "Messiah" in Isaiah 53 must be someone else: the author, some other holy man, an idealized person, a holy remnant, or the entire Jewish nation.

The explanation in Hebrews 2 of the work of Jesus is that the Messiah comes to rescue fallen man, to bring "many sons to glory." He descended beneath the angels and became a full flesh and blood brother with the human family. While among them, he was tempted, suffered and died. His temptation and suffering made him able to help others who suffer and are being tempted. His death permitted him to break the fear and power of death, and Satan with it. Having finished his work on earth, he has been crowned with glory and honor, and now functions as our high priest in heaven making atonement for our sins.

Jewish ideas of the Messiah are very different from these. Cohen put his finger on the central issue, "The Talmud nowhere indicates a belief in a superhuman Deliverer as the Messiah." Jewish interpretations of OT prophecies about the Messiah and the Messianic era fluctuate widely. On the one side there is a virtual historico-grammatical rigidity that sees its meaning exhausted in the prophet's own day according to his human ability to see the future and understand it. Rabbi Hillel, not one of the famous pair, said the Messiah had already come in the days of King Hezekiah (Sanhedrin 98b). On the other side there is a fantastic literalism that washes out all figurative language of prophecy into a detailed prewritten history. This rivals the elaborate modern schemes of understanding prophecy as detailed pre-written history of the end times, which is always only weeks or months from beginning to unfold before us. There are all kinds of varieties between these two.

Speculations about the Messiah mushroomed among the Jews. The more they were persecuted, the more they longed for the promised mysterious deliverer. Unable to harmonize all the information from the numerous OT Messianic passages into a single person, some concluded that there must be two Messiahs. Thus we read of Messiah ben David, and later of Messiah ben Joseph as well.

God overcame many obstacles in bringing many sons to glory . (1) Man fell. (2) Man was inclined toward heavy sinfulness (Gen 6:5-7; Rom 3:10-20). (3) God's own holiness prevented his simply brushing man's guilt aside. (4) His unique son Jesus must die in man's place to bear the brunt of this wickedness. (5) Satan lured many angels away from God and encouraged man's sinfulness. Yet God was not content to lose man or even let him sink to a lesser role. He was determined to bring him all the way to the throne to be with him for all ages to come (Eph 1:3-2:10).

He persisted in his plan, doing what was fitting for God. Man fell? He would lift him. Man was inclined to sin? He would start him over in a new birth. He could not allow sin in his holy presence? He would wash away man's sin. There was no one to achieve all this? Yes, there was his Son Jesus. Satan stood in the way? Let him be destroyed forever. This would solve both man's sins and his sinfulness. This would pay for the past and safeguard the future. This would purge man's guilt and his nature. The first part was solved by sending Jesus to die for us. The second part was solved by recreating us in the image of Christ. It was a resolution fit for God. Bruce says we will learn what is worthy of God by considering what God has actually done. One who says he would have a high opinion of God who would or would not do this or that is not telling us about God, but about himself.

Everything (taΙ pavnta , ta panta ) exists for God and through God (2:10), who is the builder of everything (3:4). Everything is open before him (4:13). Jesus made everything, sustains everything and will be the heir of everything (1:2-3). Everything is forgiven and cleansed through his blood (9:22-28). Man was supposed to be over all of creation (2:6-8). Because man fell, Jesus entered the human race to become a man and rescue man. Like man he suffered and died. Unlike man his death broke the devil's death-grip on man. Like man he suffered when he was tempted. Unlike man he remained sinless and became able to help others who are being tempted. Like man he died. Unlike man he died for others.

At the center of his plan God would make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering . Ellingworth collects much useful information about the word ajrchgov" (archçgos , "author"). It only appears four times in the NT, but always of Jesus (Acts 3:15; 5:31; Heb 2:10 and 12:2). Elsewhere it is used of a leader or ruler, of the founder of a kingdom, of the originator of an art, and of a pioneer opening a path for others to follow. Ellingworth reminds us of Jesus' practice of calling disciples to follow him and of walking ahead of them. Bruce says, "The pathway of perfection which his people must tread must first be trodden by the Pathfinder." Hebrews also calls Jesus the source (ai[tio" , aitios , "cause, reason," 5:9) of eternal salvation.

In what sense was Jesus " made perfect ?" It certainly does not mean "flawless" as though he had faults or fractures making him blameworthy. He was without sin (4:15). Yet he added something to himself by becoming flesh and blood. In the incarnation Jesus became fully human. He was also divine, as his divine behavior during his ministry showed. Thus he became the only one who was both God and man at the same time. The church fathers struggled in trying to define exactly how these two natures were related in one person. He could participate in death fully, for he was man. At the same time, in his death he could carry the sins of all other men, for he was God. One could say that neither God the Father nor the Holy Spirit could die for man. They remained only God. No human being could perform this function. They remained only men. Jesus was made perfect, i.e., made complete, through suffering - death being only one form of suffering, though perhaps the worst form.

The word "sufferings" (paqhmavtwn , pathçmatôn ) is plural, perhaps to indicate the many different kinds of suffering which he endured besides his death. He faced exhaustion, loneliness, frustration, misrepresentation, in short, all the limitations of the human frame. He was tempted in every way just as we are (4:15). Perhaps it is plural here to match the many failures of the people (verse 17). Perhaps it simply expands on the singular of 2:9. The NIV of 2:9, "because he suffered death," is literally "on account of the suffering of death."

2:11 Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.

It is a unique unity - God and man bonded together in one family. Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family . There is some uncertainty about the precise meaning of the phrase, " of the same family" (ejx eJnov" , ex henos ). The KJV has "of one;" NASB "from one Father ;" NRSV "have one Father;" NRSVmg "Gk are all of one ." The problem is that the word henos is spelled the same whether masculine or neuter. If it is masculine, it may point to a person - (1) God, (2) Adam, (3) Abraham, (4) some unspecified person, (5) an idealized person, i.e., human origin in general - or (6) some masculine noun just given in the text, though qavnato" ( thanatos , "death") in v. 9 is the nearest masculine noun. If it is neuter, it may point to some neuter noun either in the immediate context - (7) pathematos ("suffering") also in v. 9 is the nearest neuter noun - or an assumed word, (8) ai{ma ( haima , "blood"), (9) spevrma ( sperma , "seed"), (10) gevno" ( genos , "race"), or (11) some other - or (12) it may be used absolutely as in John 10:30. See Ellingworth for discussion of these options. He says the majority of ancient and modern commentators and modern translations understand it as referring to God, i.e., "of one [that is, God]." Bartels says the phrase "points to the closest possible unity of believers with Jesus. It is interesting that Adam, the biological and sociological father of the whole human family, is not even named in Hebrews.

Jesus is the one who makes men holy , assisted by the Holy Spirit (Rom 15:16). BAGD defines the verb aJgiavzw (hagiazô ; NIV, "makes holy") to mean "to make holy, consecrate, sanctify." It is used of things and of people. Things are "made suitable for ritual purposes." Christians "are consecrated by baptism." BAGD then defines the adjective "holy," (a{gio" , hagios ) as " dedicated to God, holy, sacred , i.e., reserved for God and his service." In a similar sense a man's wife is "holy" to him, i.e., separated from all other women to be especially his. That separation does not make her better than others, but she has become special to him. Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to "set her apart" for himself. He gives all husbands the same challenge to make their wives special (Eph 5:25-27).

Ordinarily the present tense means a continuous activity, as Westcott says it means here, "the continuous, personal application of Christ's work," suggesting a steady stream of conversions as Acts 2:47 reports. Turner prefers to understand it as a " Gnomic Present used in generalizations or proverbs." Ellingworth examined the tenses of the word aJgiavzw (hagiazô , "sanctify") in Hebrews. He says the timeless present tense participles here are used like nouns. By using an aorist tense in 10:29, Christ's blood, i.e., his sacrificial death, is seen as a past event. In 10:10 the perfect tense shows that his death procured continuing effects. In 9:13-14 hagiazô and katharizô ("cleanse, purify") are used synonymously with the second verb appearing as a future tense to indicate our eventual total cleansing. Like the word "saved," the verb "being sanctified" has a past finished aspect, a present continuous aspect and a future anticipated aspect.

A person becomes sanctified, from the divine perspective, by the Holy Spirit (Rom 15:16); from the human perspective, by one's faith in Christ upon turning from Satan to God (Acts 26:18). This separates a person from the former wicked life. It is parallel to being washed and justified (1 Cor 6:9-11). Those who are sanctified will receive an inheritance (Acts 20:32). Sanctification makes a person useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work (2 Tim 2:20-21; cf. Eph 2:10). It is so important, because without sanctification (NIV, "holiness") no one will see the Lord (12:14). Today anyone can turn to him and become sanctified. There will come a day when one's condition will be made permanent; the wicked will remain wicked and the holy will remain holy (Rev 22:11). Jesus was "set apart" by God and sent into the world as the Messiah (John 10:36-38). In a similar way he prayed that his disciples would be "sanctified" and sent into the world (John 17:16-19). In one fascinating passage, Christians are urged to "sanctify" Jesus, i.e., to set him apart into a special place in their hearts. This will make them ready to give an answer to everyone who asks the reason for their hope (1 Pet 3:15).

The book of Hebrews reports that the blood of animals in OT times was sprinkled on the people to sanctify them to become outwardly cleansed (9:13). By contrast in NT times the blood of Christ, poured out when he died, sanctifies people (10:10, 14, 29; 13:12; see 2:11). They are "made perfect forever" (10:14). Hebrews normally used the adjective "holy" to refer to the Holy Spirit (2:4; 3:7; 6:4; 9:8; 10:15). It is also used of Christians ("holy brothers" 3:1), sometimes without a noun, i.e., "saint" (6:10; 13:24). The neuter adjective "holy" is used either of the OT tabernacle (9:1, 2, 3, (8?), 24, 25; 13:11) or of the true tabernacle in heaven (8:2; 9:8, 12; 10:19. See 9:23-25).

The reason why Jesus is not ashamed to call them "brothers" is because Jesus and redeemed humans are joined in the same family. Evidence for his family pride is immediately presented from three OT verses. The NIV " So Jesus is not . . ." lacks the fully worded clarity of the Greek connecting phrase (diaΙ h}n aijtivan [dia hç n aitian ], literally, "on account of which reason" or "for which reason"). This is the only place in Hebrews where the word aitia ("cause, reason") occurs. A similar word ai[tio" ( aitios ) appears in 5:9 in the phrase, "source of eternal salvation" (KJV, "author of eternal salvation") without any other NT occurrence. BAGD notes that aitia in Matthew 19:10 indicates a formal case or example in an argument, and functions as a legal technical term for a formal charge or accusation , even a reason for capital punishment , (John 18:38; 19:4, 6), the Latin causa capitalis . Since it is a unique phrase in Hebrews and carries these heavy connotations, it may be better to express the idea more fully. Verse eleven was linked to the previous verse with the simple, common word gar ("for, because"). The NIV does not express that connection at all. The verses are tied together this way:

(2:10) In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.

(2:11a) [Because] both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family.

(2:11b) [For this reason] (NIV, "So") Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.

Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers. Similarly, God is not ashamed to be called the God of the patriarchs (11:16). As the author of Hebrews often does, the longer form of the verb is used (ejpaiscuvnomai , ep-aischynomai , "to be ashamed") where the shorter form would suffice ( aischynomai , "to be ashamed"). The longer form is used mostly by Paul and Hebrews, whereas the shorter form is used by other NT authors as well. The LXX uses the short form generously, but the long form only three times. The intimacy of family bonding removes all shame regarding other family members. Hence, Jesus will not tolerate any shame of him. "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels" (Mark 8:38; contrast 1 John 2:28). The counterpart of shame is confidence or faith, a major emphasis of the book of Hebrews. It is more striking for variety to say he is not ashamed of them, than to say that he trusts them.

2:12 He says, "I will declare your name to my brothers; in the presence of the congregation I will sing your praises."

Pointing to his disciples, Jesus had said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother" (Matt 12:49-50; Mark 3:34-35). Three OT verses now follow in Hebrews to demonstrate Jesus' family solidarity with his people. Montifiore sees in these quotations three different proofs of family kinship: (1) Psalm 22:22, where Jesus calls them brothers; (2) Isaiah 8:17, where he shares with them the human attitude of faith in God; and (3) Isaiah 8:18, where he speaks of them as children of God. Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 are the two fullest OT descriptions of Jesus' experience on the cross. It is not surprising to hear the NT understanding words from those chapters as the words of Jesus.

2:13 And again, "I will put my trust in him." And again he says, "Here am I, and the children God has given me."

The verses from Isaiah 8 are more difficult for modern western students of the Bible to hear as the words of Jesus. Some think that Isaiah could predict nothing beyond human foresight. In this view, the author of Hebrews creatively put the words of the prophet in Jesus' mouth adapting them for his own purposes. In another view, the Holy Spirit inspired all Scriptures, Old Testament and New Testament. The Holy Spirit helped the writer of Hebrews know what application he intended when he first inspired Isaiah to write the words. What the Holy Spirit inspired Isaiah to write was designedly bigger than Isaiah's own circumstances. He expressed Jesus' own attitude about his unity with the family of believers. This would be like Caiaphas words which the Bible itself says reached beyond his own understanding,

Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

"What are we accomplishing?" they asked. "Here is this man performing many miraculous signs. If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation."

Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, "You know nothing at all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish."

He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

(John 11:47-52).

In the Isaiah context the words appear as the words of the prophet Isaiah. Isaiah did explain his family's role as "signs and symbols," "Here am I, and the children the LORD has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel from the LORD Almighty, who dwells on Mount Zion" (Isa 8:18). Motyer thinks Isaiah included his disciples or even a whole remnant with his family as signs, but he pays no attention to the inspired use made of the verses in Hebrews.

¹⁴ Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death - that is, the devil - ¹⁵ and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. ¹⁶ For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. ¹⁷ For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for ^a the sins of the people. ¹⁸ Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

^a 17 Or and that he might turn aside God's wrath, taking away

2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity.

Once again the NIV omits the conjunction, "therefore," which ties this verse to the preceding as a conclusion from it. The phrase taΙ paidiva ( ta paidia , " the children") is picked up from the last verse of the quotations. An additional step is now taken to show Jesus' full identity with humanity. People have " flesh and blood ." Jesus did, too. Actually the order of the words here is "blood and flesh" as in Ephesians 6:12, which NIV translates "flesh and blood." Three other NT instances of this pair of words all follow the normal English order (Matt 16:17; 1 Cor 15:50 and Gal 1:16). Even when discussed together, though not paired in the phrase, "flesh and blood," the word "flesh" normally is discussed first. See Deuteronomy 12:27; Psalm 50:13; Ezekiel 39:17-18; John 6:53-56; etc.

In the phrase "have flesh and blood" the word "have" looks innocent enough. Beneath it lies a perfect tense of koinwnevw (koinôneô , "to share, to have in common"). The perfect tense goes beyond the present tense by drawing attention to the effects or consequences of sharing flesh and blood, as well as to the deed itself. Being flesh and blood carried with it terrible consequences, for example, weakness, death, fear, dominance by Satan, and continued deterioration since Adam's fall away from God. The words koinov" ( koinos , "common") and koinwniva (koinônia , "fellowship") are related to it. It was the common plight of man.

A different word expresses that Jesus " shared" (metevcw , metechô , "to share, have a share") in their humanity. The word mevtoco" ( metochos , "partner") is related to it. To extend this metaphor one could say Jesus did not simply possess flesh and blood in common with man; he became a business partner with them in managing it. This verb is put in an aorist tense, since it is Jesus' whole sharing with humanity that is the point. It seems be too narrow to limit this to the incarnation, as Westcott does. That was the time when he joined humanity, but his participation extended far beyond his birth. By uniting with people in their predicament he made different consequences possible. He destroyed Satan, freed men from fear of death, and opened an avenue for continuous help in struggling against temptation.

The word paraplesiôs ("similarly;" NIV " too") is another word unique to the NT and the LXX. Its cognate paraplesios ("coming near, resembling") in Philippians 2:27 is also unique to the NT and the LXX. Their simpler companion plesion ("near, neighbor") is frequent in the NT as well as the LXX.

so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death - that is, the devil -

Two purposes are given in explaining why Jesus joined humanity. He came: (1) to destroy the devil; and (2) to remove man's fear of death. First, he came to destroy the devil . God has allowed Satan astonishing freedom (Luke 4:6; 1 Cor 10:13). Satan rebelled at the beginning and has always appeared in opposition to God and his people. He drew a large number of other angels away from God. He lures people into sin (Gen 3:1-19; 6:1-7), for example, Peter (Matt 16:23), Judas (Luke 22:3; John 13:27), Elymas (Acts 13:10) and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). He even tried to entice Jesus to sin (Matt 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). He hinders the gospel (Mark 4:15; Acts 26:18; 1 Thess 2:18) and spreads destruction (Matt 13:24-30, 36-43). He blinds the eyes of unbelievers (2 Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2; Col 1:13). His cunning ranges from fearsome lion-likeness (1 Pet 5:8) to beauty like an angel of light (2 Cor 11:14). He is the father of lies (John 8:44; Eph 6:11). His demise is sure (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; 16:11; Rom 16:20; Rev 20:1-15; 21:8). Satan probably did not understand what God was going to achieve through Jesus' death. None of the rulers of this age understood it or they would not have crucified Jesus (1 Cor 2:6-10). On the cross Jesus crushed the head of the serpent (Gen 3:15). As Jeremiah learned, good work is not entirely building things up. Some things must be torn down (Jer 1:9-10).

2:15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

Second, Jesus removed man's fear of death . He has not removed death yet, but the fear of it. By dying himself and rising to life again, he not only broke Satan's grip on death, but demonstrated to man that death was overcome. Paul declared,

Having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross (Col 2:14-15).

The famous chapter on the resurrection, 1 Corinthians 15, explains how Jesus' resurrection opened the way for man's resurrection (cf. Heb 10:20). That chapter concludes with the victory cry, "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting? . . . Thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ" ( vv. 55-57). God had already made his ultimate intention quite plain in Hosea 13:14, "I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death." As a Christian, Paul's fear of death was gone. He said that because he was in Christ, death was better than living. "To live is Christ and to die is gain. . . . I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body" (Phil 1:21-24). Thus, when Christians thought of fellow-believers who had died, they were urged not "to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope" (1 Thess 4:13).

2:16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants.

With the conjunction " for" the logic moves forward to reassert man's superiority over angels. Angels assist in Christ's redemptive deeds for man; they do not receive the benefit of those deeds as man does. Man is the focus of redemptive history. There is no hint in the Bible that angels ever were rescued from their sin like people are. Angels never die (Luke 20:34-38). A major part of Jesus' full identification with man was his death. A major part of Jesus' work as high priest revolved around his death. To redeem man he bypassed angels, descended beneath them (2:5-9) and became like man "in every way" (2:17). At the resurrection men will take on some of the traits that make angels different from man now (Matt 22:30). Had Jesus come to redeem angels, he could have taken on the nature of angels instead of the nature of man.

Jesus' work does not reach all of mankind, but only " Abraham's descendants ." The phrase "Abraham's descendants" is literally "seed of Abraham." In Galatians 3:15-18 Paul made a big point about the "seed of Abraham" in Genesis 12:7; 13:15; etc. being singular, hence referring to Christ. In the very next paragraph Paul uses the singular "seed" to refer to the many people who became "seed of Abraham" by faith in Christ, "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:29). Here in Hebrews the phrase is not quoting an OT passage, so the phrase is used of the many descendants of Abraham even though the word "seed" is singular. In the Christian era anyone who believes in Jesus becomes a "descendant of Abraham" by faith, not by flesh. Not everyone who was of the flesh line of Abraham was a "Jew," but only those whose hearts were given to God on God's terms (Rom 2:28-29).

The gospel is only potentially valuable for everyone. Although God loves all the world (John 3:16), only those who hear the gospel can believe it (Rom 10:17). The value of Christians' telling others about Jesus' work can hardly be overemphasized (2 Cor 5:17-20). God only redeems those who believe. Abraham "believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness. Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham" (Gal 3:6-7). Abraham "is the father of all who believe [both circumcised and uncircumcised]" (Rom 4:9-12). "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:29). Paul quoted Isaiah 28:16 to show this idea, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame. For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile - the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him" (Rom 10:11-12). Both the old covenant and the new covenant link believers to God with the faith of Abraham. How the new covenant replaced the old covenant, yet fulfilled promises recorded in the old covenant, is more fully explained in chapters six and eight.

The word dhvpou (dçpou , " surely") once again finds the author preferring a long word where a shorter one would suffice. Other editors of the Greek NT differ, as Moulton and Geden, who list dçpou here as two separate words, dç and pou . Otherwise the NT uses dç ("indeed") but five times (plus a variant reading in Acts 6:3); pou ("somewhere") but four; and dçpou ("of course, surely") only here. BAGD says of the enclitic pou , that after a negative it means "nowhere." Thayer thinks the word "is used when something is affirmed in a slightly ironical manner, as if with an affectation of uncertainty." Perhaps our author is saying, "I hardly think he helps angels!"

It is not angels he helps . The verb "helps" (ejpilambavnomai , epilambanomai ) normally in the NT means "to take hold of, catch." Ellingworth thinks the present tense points to Christ's present activity on behalf of his people, arguing on the basis of its being surrounded by aorist tenses about the incarnation ("shared," v. 14; see above) or the death of Christ and its effects ("might destroy," v. 14; "might free," v. 15). He took upon himself the nature of humans, not angels, to get hold of them and bring them to glory. He became like his brothers in every way (v. 17), except, of course, that he never sinned (4:15).

2:17 For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.

Jesus became like man " in order that" (i{na , hina , "that, in order that") he might help man. Christians will be eager to know Jesus' goals. Hebrews has four such statements expressing Jesus' goals (2:14, 17a; 10:9; 13:12). In 2:14 Jesus shared flesh and blood with man so that by dying he might destroy Satan's power and remove man's fear of death. In 2:17a his full identification with man is required in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest and make atonement for man's sins. In 10:9 he set aside the first covenant [in order] to establish the second. In 13:12 he suffered outside the city gate [in order] to make the people holy through his own blood.

What was his way of helping man? He became like his brothers in every way . He became a merciful and faithful high priest and in that role made atonement for the sins of the people. Much is made of copies and shadows in Hebrews, while this word "like" (oJmoiovw , homoioô , "to be like") is otherwise avoided, since it would put the work of Jesus and others on an equal footing. In one sense Jesus never did become exactly like any other person in the human family. No one else could live perfectly. No one else could remove other people's sins by dying for them. No one else had his kind of access to the Father in heaven. No one else had the power to burst death after being held by it. In struggling against sin, Jesus was truly tempted and suffered because of it (2:18).

The phrase "in service to God" (taΙ proΙ" toΙn qeovn , ta pros ton theon ) is literally, "the things toward God" or following BAGD "the things with reference to God." The exact phrase appears in 5:1 where the NIV translates "in matters related to God." Blass and Debrunner call this use of the accusative an "accusative of respect and adverbial accusative." They also found this precise phrase in Romans 15:17. There Paul boasts in Christ Jesus of "the things with reference to God." The NIV translates, "in my service to God." Much of the high priest's work was certainly liturgical, hence in "service" to God, that is, not terminolgy of a servant, but of a religious activity like a church "service." Ellingworth also found the phrase in Exodus 4:16; 18:19 and Deuteronomy 31:27. Josephus contrasted "the things with reference to God" with "the things with reference to men" (Josephus, Antiquities , IX:236 [IX.xi.2]).

The term " high priest" appears here for the first time in Hebrews (of Jesus in 2:17; 3:1; 4:14-15; 5:5, 10; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1; 9:11; and of Levitical high priests in 5:1; 7:27-28; 8:3; 9:7, 25; 13:11). Here alone the descriptions " merciful" and " faithful" are attached to it. In 4:14 he is called "a great high priest." Jesus was faithful in that he successfully completed his mission of providing atonement for the sins of the people (v. 17). He was merciful in that he suffered so that he could stand alongside of other sufferers and help them (v. 18). His faithfulness will be immediately compared to Moses' faithfulness (3:1-6) and contrasted with the Israelites' unfaithfulness (3:7-19). He offers mercy to all who cry out to him in need (4:16). However, for those who turn against him, the severity of punishment is much greater than the severity of OT punishment (10:26-31; 2:1-4).

The verb "to make atonement" (iJlavskomai , hilaskomai , "to propitiate, expiate") is a present tense, which Westcott explains as the one eternal act of Christ (10:12) here regarded in its continuous present application to men (5:1-2). The verb is again in the NT only in Luke 18:13; the noun hilasmos ("expiation, propitiation") only in 1 John 2:2 and 4:10; and the noun hilastçrion ("that which propitiates, the lid on the ark of the covenant") only in Romans 3:25 and Hebrews 9:5. There are many theories explaining in greater detail how the atonement works. The Bible explains that the atonement works to save man, but does not detail fully just how it works. The idea of Jesus' procuring salvation for believers by dying for them is so central to Christianity that church history is full of attempts to flesh out this skeletal concept.

Morris has summarized these theories under six major headings. (1) The subjective view or moral influence theory. Christ's death moves us to respond to the love of Christ. (2) The victory theory, also called the devil ransom theory, the classical theory, or the fishhook theory of the atonement. God offered Jesus as a ransom to free man. Satan agreed, but could not hold Christ in death. (3) The satisfaction theory. Sin was such an insult to the dignity of God that God must act to rectify it. Yet man did the sin, so man must pay for it. Hence, Jesus, being both God and man, was needed. (4) The penal substitution theory. Jesus took the sinners' place bearing the penalty of sin which we should have borne. (5) The sacrifice theory. Jesus died as a sacrifice for man's sin. (6) The government theory. As head of all government God passed a law that the soul that sins shall die. God did not want sinful man to die. Thus he accepted the death of Christ instead, while demonstrating the depth of sin and the lengths to which God would go to uphold the moral order of the universe.

One of the major concepts in Hebrews is sin . The book has much to say about its nature, its consequences and its removal through Christ. As a singular form, "sin" is seen as a debility of man. As a plural form, "sins" are the individual deeds of misbehavior, parallel to "wickednesses" (8:12) or "lawlessnesses" (10:17). Men are commonly careless (2:1-3), fearful (2:15) and hardened by sin (3:13). Ten verses mention "sin" (singular - three of these are of "sin offerings" - 10:6, 8; 13:11); sixteen mention "sins" (plural); one has both (9:28; cf. 10:17-18).

Singular " sin ." The nature of sin is pleasurable (11:25), deceitful (3:12), easily entangling (12:1), thus requiring a struggle to be overcome (12:4). Jesus alone of all men was free from sin (4:15), set apart from sinners (7:26), though opposed by sinful men (12:3). Thus he was able to sacrifice himself to bear the sins of others (9:26, 28; 10:18, 26; cf. Isa 53). The OT system required repeated sin offerings (10:6, 8; 13:11). Jesus offered himself once for all as God's full and final sin offering forever for man's sin. When he returns at his second coming, it will not be to bear sin again, but to bring salvation (9:28).

Plural " sins ." The OT sacrifices of bulls and goats could never remove sins (10:4, 11). These were instead an annual reminder of sins (5:1, 3; 7:27; 9:7; 10:3). By contrast the sacrifice of Jesus successfully removed sins once for all time (5:1; 7:27; 10:12). It is described as providing purification for sins (1:3), making atonement for sins (2:17), or dying as a ransom to set us free from sins (9:15). Hence, believers are no longer guilty (10:2). Because of Jesus' death and work as high priest, God forgives sins (10:18). He no longer remembers any sins of one who is in the new covenant which Jesus made available (8:12). However, if a person keeps on sinning, there is no other sacrifice for his sins (10:26).

The book of Hebrews does not discuss how sin (singular) began, as Romans 5:12-21 does, but how it has been brought to an end by Christ. It does not make lists of sins (plural) like Romans 1:29-31 or Galatians 5:19-21, but treats them as a collection of misdeeds or a blight on human character which Jesus removed by his death and high priestly ministrations. The behavioral emphasis of the book is thus not on a wide range of good deeds, but is instead on faith, i.e., trusting God and remaining faithful. The central sin of all is not believing in Jesus (John 16:8-11). Sometimes those who are faithful are rewarded in this life. All of the faithful will be amply rewarded in the next (Luke 18:29-30).

2:18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Jesus' suffering came from temptation, as does our suffering. It made him able to help all of us who also suffer and are tempted. Knowing that he also suffered, we open ourselves to him. His suffering made him perfect, i.e., made him complete (teleiovw , teleioô , "to complete, bring to an end, bring to its goal") as the God-man who would bring us to glory (2:10). By his suffering he became the "source of eternal salvation" for all who obey him, the "high priest" in the new order, and the one who makes his people holy (5:8-10; 13:12). As he learned obedience in suffering (5:8; 13:11-13), we are to obey in the face of shame and suffering (5:8; 10:32-34; 12:1-12; 13:12-13). Our obedience despite suffering is encouraged by doctrine (5:9), example (11:8), and direct command (13:17). The statement that Jesus only suffered once, not many times, since the creation of the world, focuses on his death, his greatest suffering (9:25-28). It does not deny the reality of the many other occasions in his earthly life when his heart hurt (Matt 9:36; 23:37-39; Mark 10:20-22; John 6:67; etc.).

Jesus suffered when he was tempted . Was he tempted by his sufferings or did he suffer by being tempted? An aorist participle (here, "when he was tempted") normally precedes the time of the main verb (here, "suffered"). Thus, the temptation resulted in his suffering. Moses was tempted by pleasure (11:25). Jesus never succumbed, though tried in every way we are (4:15). Everyone else is overcome (Rom 3:23). The devil is called "the tempter" because he constantly tries to lead us away from God (Matt 6:13; Rev 3:10). Among his many lures (James 1:2) the Bible names probing questions (Matt 16:1; 19:3; 22:35), pleasure (Heb 11:25), deprivation of normal desires (1 Cor 7:5; 1 Tim 6:9; Heb 3:8-9; James 1:13-14), especially concerning wealth (1 Tim 6:9-10), and even helpfulness (Gal 6:1). Wrong desires lead to sin which brings death (James 1:15). Temptations can be useful. They can bring joy through growing (James 1:2-4), through proving our faith (1 Pet 1:6-7), and ultimately through winning the crown of life (James 1:12). God guards Christians against temptations that could overwhelm them. He provides a way of escape. "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it" (1 Cor 10:13). It is certainly not man's place to tempt God (Acts 15:10; Ps 78:18; Mal 3:13-15; Cf. Gal 2:14), nor Jesus (1 Cor 10:9), nor the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:9). Ahaz knew it was a big thing to tempt God, though he did it anyway (Isa 7:12). The Israelites' temptation of God will become the center of the extended discussion of Heb 3:7-4:11.

He is able to help those being tempted. He can save completely those who come to God through him (7:25). He offers mercy and grace on a continual basis to help in time of need (4:15). The word "help" is in Hebrews in three forms: a verb (2:18, bohqevw , boçtheô , "to help, come to the aid of"), a noun (4:16, bohvqeia , boçtheia , "help"), and an adjective (13:6, bohqov" , boçthos , "helpful, helper"). The Lord is a helper, able to help those being tempted in their time of need. Hagner says, "the writer cannot resist a brief pastoral note about the practical benefit of having Jesus as our high priest."

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

The Epistle to the Hebrews

By Way of Introduction

Unsettled Problems

Probably no book in the New Testament presents more unsettled problems than does the Epistle to the Hebrews. On that score it ranks with the Fourth Gospel, the Apocalypse of John, and Second Peter. But, in spite of these unsolved matters, the book takes high rank for its intellectual grasp, spiritual power, and its masterful portrayal of Christ as High Priest. It is much briefer than the Fourth Gospel, but in a sense it carries on further the exalted picture of the Risen Christ as the King-Priest who reigns and pleads for us now.

The Picture of Christ

At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Heb_1:1-3), this Son who is God’s Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in Phi_2:5-11; Col_1:13-20; John 1:1-18. This high doctrine of Jesus as God’s Son with the glory and stamp of God’s nature is never lowered, for as God’s Son he is superior to angels (Heb 1:4-2:4), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Heb_2:5-18). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God’s Son over God’s house (Heb 3:1-4:13), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Heb 4:14-12:3). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Heb 4:14-7:28), works under a better covenant of grace (Heb_8:1-13), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Heb_9:1-12), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Heb 9:13-10:18), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Heb 10:19-12:3). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. So W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, High Priesthood and Sacrifice (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mar_10:46; Mat_20:28; Joh_10:17; Mat_26:28; Rom_8:32; 1Pe_1:18.; 1Jo_2:1.; Rev_5:9, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.

The Style

It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: " It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" ( Light from the Ancient East , pp. 70f.). But Blass ( Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa , 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of " a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many " parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of " the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary Koiné rather than to the vernacular. Moulton ( Cambridge Biblical Essays , p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

The Author

Origen bluntly wrote: " Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul’s while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in Heb_11:32 ( me diēgoumenon ) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply Pros Hebraious as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

The Recipients

If the title is allowed to be genuine or a fair interpretation of the Epistle, then it is addressed to Jewish (Hebrew) Christians in a local church somewhere. Dr. James Moffatt in his Commentary (pp. xv to xvii) challenges the title and insists that the book is written for Gentile Christians as truly as First Peter. He argues this largely from the author’s use of the lxx. For myself Dr. Moffatt’s reasons are not convincing. The traditional view that the author is addressing Jewish Christians in a definite locality, whether a large church or a small household church, is true, I believe. The author seems clearly to refer to a definite church in the experiences alluded to in Heb_10:32-34. The church in Jerusalem had undergone sufferings like these, but we really do not know where the church was. Apparently the author is in Italy when he writes (Heb_13:24), though " they of Italy" ( hoi apo tēs Italias ) can mean those who have come from Italy. These Jewish Christians may even have lived in Rome itself.

The Date

Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between a.d. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between a.d. 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written Heb_10:1.: " Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in Heb_8:13 " nigh to vanishing away" ( eggus aphanismou ) is only intelligible with the temple service still going on. The author makes use of the tabernacle instead of the temple because the temple was patterned after the tabernacle. On the other hand, the mention of Timothy in Heb_13:23 as being " set free" ( apolelumenon ) raises an inquiry concerning Paul’s last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Ti_4:11-13). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero’s own death (June 8, a.d. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 a.d. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.

The Purpose

The author states it repeatedly. He urges the Jewish Christians to hold fast the confession which they have made in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour. Their Jewish neighbours have urged them to give up Christ and Christianity and to come back to Judaism. The Judaizers tried to make Jews out of Gentile Christians and to fasten Judaism upon Christianity with a purely sacramental type of religion as the result. Paul won freedom for evangelical and spiritual Christianity against the Judaizers as shown in the Corinthian Epistles, Galatians, and Romans. The Gnostics in subtle fashion tried to dilute Christianity with their philosophy and esoteric mysteries and here again Paul won his fight for the supremacy of Christ over all these imaginary aeons (Colossians and Ephesians). But in Hebrews the author is battling to stop a stampede from Christ back to Judaism, a revolt (apostasy) in truth from the living God. These Jews argued that the prophets were superior to Jesus, the law came by the ministry of angels, Moses was greater than Jesus, and Aaron than Jesus. The author turns the argument on the Jews and boldly champions the Glory of Jesus as superior at every point to all that Judaism had, as God’s Son and man’s Saviour, the crown and glory of the Old Testament prophecy, the hope of mankind. It is the first great apologetic for Christianity and has never been surpassed. Moffatt terms it " a profound homily."

JFB: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

CANONICITY AND AUTHORSHIP.--CLEMENT OF ROME, at the end of the first century (A.D), copiously uses it, adopting its words just as he does those of the other books of the New Testament; not indeed giving to either the term "Scripture," which he reserves for the Old Testament (the canon of the New Testament not yet having been formally established), but certainly not ranking it below the other New Testament acknowledged Epistles. As our Epistle claims authority on the part of the writer, CLEMENT'S adoption of extracts from it is virtually sanctioning its authority, and this in the apostolic age. JUSTIN MARTYR quotes it as divinely authoritative, to establish the titles "apostle," as well as "angel," as applied to the Son of God. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA refers it expressly to Paul, on the authority of Pantænus, chief of the Catechetical school in Alexandria, in the middle of the second century, saying, that as Jesus is termed in it the "apostle" sent to the Hebrews, Paul, through humility, does not in it call himself apostle of the Hebrews, being apostle to the Gentiles. CLEMENT also says that Paul, as the Hebrews were prejudiced against him, prudently omitted to put forward his name in the beginning; also, that it was originally written in Hebrew for the Hebrews, and that Luke translated it into Greek for the Greeks, whence the style is similar to that of Acts. He, however, quotes frequently the words of the existing Greek Epistle as Paul's words. ORIGEN similarly quotes it as Paul's Epistle. However, in his Homilies, he regards the style as distinct from that of Paul, and as "more Grecian," but the thoughts as the apostle's; adding that the "ancients who have handed down the tradition of its Pauline authorship, must have had good reason for doing so, though God alone knows the certainty who was the actual writer" (that is, probably "transcriber" of the apostle's thoughts). In the African Church, in the beginning of the third century, TERTULLIAN ascribes it to Barnabas. IRENÆUS, bishop of Lyons, is mentioned in EUSEBIUS, as quoting from this Epistle, though without expressly referring it to Paul. About the same period, Caius, the presbyter, in the Church of Rome, mentions only thirteen Epistles of Paul, whereas, if the Epistle to the Hebrews were included, there would be fourteen. So the canon fragment of the end of the second century, or beginning of the third, published by MURATORI, apparently omits mentioning it. And so the Latin Church did not recognize it as Paul's till a considerable time after the beginning of the third century. Thus, also, NOVATIAN OF ROME, CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, and VICTORINUS, also of the Latin Church. But in the fourth century, HILARY OF POITIERS (A.D. 368), LUCIFER OF CAGLIARI (A.D. 371), AMBROSE OF MILAN (A.D. 397) and other Latins, quote it as Paul's; and the fifth Council of Carthage (A.D. 419) formally reckons it among his fourteen Epistles.

As to the similarity of its style to that of Luke's writings, this is due to his having been so long the companion of Paul. CHRYSOSTOM, comparing Luke and Mark, says, "Each imitated his teacher: Luke imitated Paul flowing along with more than river fulness; but Mark imitated Peter, who studied brevity of style." Besides, there is a greater predominance of Jewish feeling and familiarity with the peculiarities of the Jewish schools apparent in this Epistle than in Luke's writings. There is no clear evidence for attributing the authorship to him, or to Apollos, whom ALFORD upholds as the author. The grounds alleged for the latter view are its supposed Alexandrian phraseology and modes of thought. But these are such as any Palestinian Jew might have used; and Paul, from his Hebræo-Hellenistic education at Jerusalem and Tarsus, would be familiar with PHILO'S modes of thought, which are not, as some think, necessarily all derived from his Alexandrian, but also from his Jewish, education. It would be unlikely that the Alexandrian Church should have so undoubtingly asserted the Pauline authorship, if Apollos, their own countryman, had really been the author. The eloquence of its style and rhetoric, a characteristic of Apollos' at Corinth, whereas Paul there spoke in words unadorned by man's wisdom, are doubtless designedly adapted to the minds of those whom Paul in this Epistle addresses. To the Greek Corinthians, who were in danger of idolizing human eloquence and wisdom, he writes in an unadorned style, in order to fix their attention more wholly on the Gospel itself. But the Hebrews were in no such danger. And his Hebræo-Grecian education would enable him to write in a style attractive to the Hebrews at Alexandria, where Greek philosophy had been blended with Judaism. The Septuagint translation framed at Alexandria had formed a connecting link between the latter and the former; and it is remarkable that all the quotations from the Old Testament, excepting two (Heb 10:30; Heb 13:5), are taken from the Septuagint. The fact that the peculiarities of the Septuagint are interwoven into the argument proves that the Greek Epistle is an original, not a translation; had the original been Hebrew, the quotations would have been from the Hebrew Old Testament. The same conclusion follows from the plays on similarly sounding words in the Greek, and alliterations, and rhythmically constructed periods. CALVIN observes, If the Epistle had been written in Hebrew, Heb 9:15-17 would lose all its point, which consists in the play upon the double meaning of the Greek "diathece," a "covenant," or a "testament," whereas the Hebrew "berith" means only "covenant."

Internal evidence favors the Pauline authorship. Thus the topic so fully handled in this Epistle, that Christianity is superior to Judaism, inasmuch as the reality exceeds the type which gives place to it, is a favorite one with Paul (compare 2Co 3:6-18; Gal 3:23-25; Gal 4:1-9, Gal 4:21-31, wherein the allegorical mode of interpretation appears in its divinely sanctioned application--a mode pushed to an unwarrantable excess in the Alexandrian school). So the Divine Son appears in Heb 1:3, &c., as in other Epistles of Paul (Phi 2:6; Col 1:15-20), as the Image, or manifestation of the Deity. His lowering of Himself for man's sake similarly, compare Heb 2:9, with 2Co 8:9; Phi 2:7-8. Also His final exaltation, compare Heb 2:8; Heb 10:13; Heb 12:2, with 1Co 15:25, 1Co 15:27. The word "Mediator" is peculiar to Paul alone, compare Heb 8:6, with Gal 3:19-20. Christ's death is represented as the sacrifice for sin prefigured by the Jewish sacrifices, compare Rom 3:22-26; 1Co 5:7, with Heb. 7:1-10:39. The phrase, "God of Peace," is peculiar to Paul, compare Heb 13:20; Rom 15:33; 1Th 5:23. Also, compare Heb 2:4, Margin, 1Co 12:4. Justification, or "righteousness by faith." appears in Heb 11:7; Heb 10:38, as in Rom 1:17; Rom 4:22; Rom 5:1; Gal 3:11; Phi 3:9. The word of God is the "sword of the Spirit," compare Heb 4:12, with Eph 6:17. Inexperienced Christians are children needing milk, that is, instruction in the elements, whereas riper Christians, as full-grown men, require strong meat, compare Heb 5:12-13; Heb 6:1, with 1Co 3:1-2; 1Co 14:20 Gal 4:9; Col 3:14. Salvation is represented as a boldness of access to God by Christ, compare Heb 10:19, with Rom 5:2; Eph 2:18; Eph 3:12. Afflictions are a fight, Heb 10:32; compare Phi 1:30; Col 2:1. The Christian life is a race, Heb 12:1; compare 1Co 9:24; Phi 3:12-14. The Jewish ritual is a service, Rom 9:4; compare Heb 9:1, Heb 9:6. Compare "subject to bondage," Heb 2:15, with Gal 5:1. Other characteristics of Paul's style appear in this Epistle; namely, a propensity "to go off at a word" and enter on a long parenthesis suggested by that word, a fondness for play upon words of similar sound, and a disposition to repeat some favorite word. Frequent appeals to the Old Testament, and quotations linked by "and again," compare Heb 1:5; Heb 2:12-13, with Rom 15:9-12. Also quotations in a peculiar application, compare Heb 2:8, with 1Co 15:27; Eph 1:22. Also the same passage quoted in a form not agreeing with the Septuagint, and with the addition "saith the Lord," not found in the Hebrew, in Heb 10:30; Rom 12:19.

The supposed Alexandrian (which are rather Philon-like) characteristics of the Epistle are probably due to the fact that the Hebrews were generally then imbued with the Alexandrian modes of thought of Philo, &c., and Paul, without coloring or altering Gospel truth "to the Jews, became (in style) as a Jew, that he might win the Jews" (1Co 9:20). This will account for its being recognized as Paul's Epistle in the Alexandrian and Jerusalem churches unanimously, to the Hebrews of whom probably it was addressed. Not one Greek father ascribes the Epistle to any but Paul, whereas in the Western and Latin churches, which it did not reach for some time, it was for long doubted, owing to its anonymous form, and generally less distinctively Pauline style. Their reason for not accepting it as Paul's, or indeed as canonical, for the first three centuries, was negative, insufficient evidence for it, not positive evidence against it. The positive evidence is generally for its Pauline origin. In the Latin churches, owing to their distance from the churches to whom belonged the Hebrews addressed, there was no generally received tradition on the subject. The Epistle was in fact but little known at all, whence we find it is not mentioned at all in the Canon of Muratori. When at last, in the fourth century, the Latins found that it was received as Pauline and canonical on good grounds in the Greek churches, they universally acknowledged it as such.

The personal notices all favor its Pauline authorship, namely, his intention to visit those addressed, shortly, along with Timothy, styled "our brother," Heb 13:23; his being then in prison, Heb 13:19; his formerly having been imprisoned in Palestine, according to English Version reading, Heb 10:34; the salutations transmitted to them from believers of Italy, Heb 13:24. A reason for not prefixing the name may be the rhetorical character of the Epistle which led the author to waive the usual form of epistolary address.

DESIGN.--His aim is to show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism, in that it was introduced by one far higher than the angels or Moses, through whom the Jews received the law, and in that its priesthood and sacrifices are far less perfecting as to salvation than those of Christ; that He is the substance of which the former are but the shadow, and that the type necessarily gives place to the antitype; and that now we no longer are kept at a comparative distance as under the law, but have freedom of access through the opened veil, that is, Christ's flesh; hence he warns them of the danger of apostasy, to which Jewish converts were tempted, when they saw Christians persecuted, while Judaism was tolerated by the Roman authorities. He infers the obligations to a life of faith, of which, even in the less perfect Old Testament dispensation, the Jewish history contained bright examples. He concludes in the usual Pauline mode, with practical exhortations and pious prayers for them.

HIS MODE OF ADDRESS is in it hortatory rather than commanding, just as we might have expected from Paul addressing the Jews. He does not write to the rulers of the Jewish Christians, for in fact there was no exclusively Jewish Church; and his Epistle, though primarily addressed to the Palestinian Jews, was intended to include the Hebrews of all adjoining churches. He inculcates obedience and respect in relation to their rulers (Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17, Heb 13:24); a tacit obviating of the objection that he was by writing this Epistle interfering with the prerogative of Peter the apostle of the circumcision, and James the bishop of Jerusalem. Hence arises his gentle and delicate mode of dealing with them (Heb 13:22). So far from being surprised at discrepancy of style between an Epistle to Hebrews and Epistles to Gentile Christians, it is just what we should expect. The Holy Spirit guided him to choose means best suited to the nature of the ends aimed at. WORDSWORTH notices a peculiar Pauline Greek construction, Rom 12:9, literally, "Let your love be without dissimulation, ye abhorring . . . evil, cleaving to . . . good," which is found nowhere else save Heb 13:5, literally, "Let your conversation be without covetousness, ye being content with," &c. (a noun singular feminine nominative absolute, suddenly passing into a participle masculine nominative plural absolute). So in quoting Old Testament Scripture, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews quotes it as a Jew writing to Jews would, "God spoke to our fathers," not, "it is written." So Heb 13:18, "We trust we have a good conscience" is an altogether Pauline sentiment (Act 23:1; Act 24:16; 2Co 1:12; 2Co 4:2; 2Ti 1:3). Though he has not prefixed his name, he has given at the close his universal token to identify him, namely, his apostolic salutation, "Grace be with you all"; this "salutation with his own hand" he declared (2Th 3:17-18) to be "his token in every Epistle": so 1Co 16:21, 1Co 16:23; Col 4:18. The same prayer of greeting closes every one of his Epistles, and is not found in any one of the Epistles of the other apostles written in Paul's lifetime; but it is found in the last book of the New Testament Revelation, and subsequently in the Epistle of CLEMENT OF ROME. This proves that, by whomsoever the body of the Epistle was committed to writing (whether a mere amanuensis writing by dictation, or a companion of Paul by the Spirit's gift of interpreting tongues, 1Co 12:10, transfusing Paul's Spirit-taught sentiments into his own Spirit-guided diction), Paul at the close sets his seal to the whole as really his, and sanctioned by him as such. The churches of the East, and Jerusalem, their center, to which quarter it was first sent, received it as Paul's from the earliest times according to Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (A.D. 349). JEROME, though bringing with him from Rome the prejudices of the Latins against the Epistle to the Hebrews, aggravated, doubtless, by its seeming sanction of the Novatian heresy (Heb 6:4-6), was constrained by the force of facts to receive it as Paul's, on the almost unanimous testimony of all Greek Christians from the earliest times; and was probably the main instrument in correcting the past error of Rome in rejecting it. The testimony of the Alexandrian Church is peculiarly valuable, for it was founded by Mark, who was with Paul at Rome in his first confinement, when this Epistle seems to have been written (Col 4:10), and who possibly was the bearer of this Epistle, at the same time visiting Colosse on the way to Jerusalem (where Mark's mother lived), and thence to Alexandria. Moreover, 2Pe 3:15-16, written shortly before Peter's death, and like his first Epistle written by him, "the apostle of the circumcision," to the "Hebrew" Christians dispersed in the East, says, "As our beloved brother Paul hath written unto you" (2Pe 3:15), that is, to the Hebrews; also the words added, "As also in all his Epistles" (2Pe 3:16), distinguish the Epistle to the Hebrews from the rest; then he further speaks of it as on a level with "other Scriptures," thus asserting at once its Pauline authorship and divine inspiration. An interesting illustration of the power of Christian faith and love; Peter, who had been openly rebuked by Paul (Gal 2:7-14), fully adopted what Paul wrote; there was no difference in the Gospel of the apostle of the circumcision and that of the apostle of the uncircumcision. It strikingly shows God's sovereignty that He chose as the instrument to confirm the Hebrews, Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13); and on the other hand, Peter to open the Gospel door to the Gentiles (Act 10:1, &c.), though being the apostle of the Jews; thus perfect unity reigns amidst the diversity of agencies.

Rome, in the person of CLEMENT OF ROME, originally received this Epistle. Then followed a period in which it ceased to be received by the Roman churches. Then, in the fourth century, Rome retracted her error. A plain proof she is not unchangeable or infallible. As far as Rome is concerned, the Epistle to the Hebrews was not only lost for three centuries, but never would have been recovered at all but for the Eastern churches; it is therefore a happy thing for Christendom that Rome is not the Catholic Church.

It plainly was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, which would have been mentioned in the Epistle had that event gone before, compare Heb 13:10; and probably to churches in which the Jewish members were the more numerous, as those in Judea, and perhaps Alexandria. In the latter city were the greatest number of resident Jews next to Jerusalem. In Leontopolis, in Egypt, was another temple, with the arrangements of which, WIESELER thinks the notices in this Epistle more nearly corresponded than with those in Jerusalem. It was from Alexandria that the Epistle appears first to have come to the knowledge of Christendom. Moreover, "the Epistle to the Alexandrians," mentioned in the Canon of Muratori, may possibly be this Epistle to the Hebrews. He addresses the Jews as peculiarly "the people of God" (Heb 2:17; Heb 4:9; Heb 13:12), "the seed of Abraham," that is, as the primary stock on which Gentile believers are grafted, to which Rom 11:16-24 corresponds; but he urges them to come out of the carnal earthly Jerusalem and to realize their spiritual union to "the heavenly Jerusalem" (Heb 12:18-23; Heb 13:13).

The use of Greek rather than Hebrew is doubtless due to the Epistle being intended, not merely for the Hebrew, but for the Hellenistic Jew converts, not only in Palestine, but elsewhere; a view confirmed by the use of the Septuagint. BENGEL thinks, probably (compare 2Pe 3:15-16, explained above), the Jews primarily, though not exclusively, addressed, were those who had left Jerusalem on account of the war and were settled in Asia Minor.

The notion of its having been originally in Hebrew arose probably from its Hebrew tone, method, and topics. It is reckoned among the Epistles, not at first generally acknowledged, along with James, Second Peter, Second and Third John, Jude, and Revelation. A beautiful link exists between these Epistles and the universally acknowledged Epistles. Hebrews unites the ordinances of Leviticus with their antitypical Gospel fulfilment. James is the link between the highest doctrines of Christianity and the universal law of moral duty--a commentary on the Sermon on the Mount--harmonizing the decalogue law of Moses, and the revelation to Job and Elias, with the Christian law of liberty. Second Peter links the teaching of Peter with that of Paul. Jude links the earliest unwritten to the latest written Revelation. The two shorter Epistles to John, like Philemon, apply Christianity to the minute details of the Christian life, showing that Christianity can sanctify all earthly relations.

JFB: Hebrews (Outline)

• THE HIGHEST OF ALL REVELATIONS IS GIVEN US NOW IN THE SON OF GOD, WHO IS GREATER THAN THE ANGELS, AND WHO, HAVING COMPLETED REDEMPTION, SITS ENTHRONED AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND. (Heb 1:1-14)
• DANGER OF NEGLECTING SO GREAT SALVATION, FIRST SPOKEN BY CHRIST; TO WHOM, NOT TO ANGELS, THE NEW DISPENSATION WAS SUBJECTED; THOUGH HE WAS FOR A TIME HUMBLED BELOW THE ANGELS: THIS HUMILIATION TOOK PLACE BY DIVINE NECESSITY FOR OUR SALVATION. (Heb. 2:1-18)
• THE SON OF GOD GREATER THAN MOSES, WHEREFORE UNBELIEF TOWARDS HIM WILL INCUR A HEAVIER PUNISHMENT THAN BEFELL UNBELIEVING ISRAEL IN THE WILDERNESS. (Heb. 3:1-19)
• THE PROMISE OF GOD'S REST IS FULLY REALIZED THROUGH CHRIST: LET US STRIVE TO OBTAIN IT BY HIM, OUR SYMPATHIZING HIGH PRIEST. (Heb. 4:1-16)
• CHRIST'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD; NEEDED QUALIFICATIONS; MUST BE A MAN; MUST NOT HAVE ASSUMED THE DIGNITY HIMSELF, BUT HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY GOD; THEIR LOW SPIRITUAL PERCEPTIONS A BAR TO PAUL'S SAYING ALL HE MIGHT ON CHRIST'S MELCHISEDEC-LIKE PRIESTHOOD. (Heb 5:1-14)
• WARNING AGAINST RETROGRADING, WHICH SOON LEADS TO APOSTASY; ENCOURAGEMENT TO STEADFASTNESS FROM GOD'S FAITHFULNESS TO HIS WORD AND OATH. (Heb 6:1-14)
• CHRIST'S HIGH PRIESTHOOD AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC SUPERIOR TO AARON'S. (Heb. 7:1-28)
• CHRIST, THE HIGH PRIEST IN THE TRUE SANCTUARY, SUPERSEDING THE LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD; THE NEW RENDERS OBSOLETE THE OLD COVENANT. (Heb 8:1-13)
• INFERIORITY OF THE OLD TO THE NEW COVENANT IN THE MEANS OF ACCESS TO GOD: THE BLOOD OF BULLS AND GOATS OF NO REAL AVAIL: THE BLOOD OF CHRIST ALL-SUFFICIENT TO PURGE AWAY SIN, WHENCE FLOWS OUR HOPE OF HIS APPEARING AGAIN FOR OUR PERFECT SALVATION. (Heb. 9:1-28)
• PROOF OF AND ENLARGEMENT ON, THE "ETERNAL REDEMPTION" MENTIONED IN. Heb 9:12 (Heb. 9:13-28)
• CONCLUSION OF THE FOREGOING ARGUMENT. THE YEARLY RECURRING LAW SACRIFICES CANNOT PERFECT THE WORSHIPPER, BUT CHRIST'S ONCE-FOR-ALL OFFERING CAN. (Heb. 10:1-39) Previously the oneness of Christ's offering was shown; now is shown its perfection as contrasted with the law sacrifices.
• DEFINITION OF THE FAITH JUST SPOKEN OF (Heb 10:39): EXAMPLES FROM THE OLD COVENANT FOR OUR PERSEVERANCE IN FAITH. (Heb. 11:1-40) Description of the great things which faith (in its widest sense: not here restricted to faith in the Gospel sense) does for us. Not a full definition of faith in its whole nature, but a description of its great characteristics in relation to the subject of Paul's exhortation here, namely, to perseverance.
• EXHORTATION TO FOLLOW THE WITNESSES OF FAITH JUST MENTIONED: NOT TO FAINT IN TRIALS: TO REMOVE ALL BITTER ROOTS OF SIN: FOR WE ARE UNDER, NOT A LAW OF TERROR, BUT THE GOSPEL OF GRACE, TO DESPISE WHICH WILL BRING THE HEAVIER PENALTIES, IN PROPORTION TO OUR GREATER PRIVILEGES. (Heb. 12:1-29)
• EXHORTATION TO VARIOUS GRACES, ESPECIALLY CONSTANCY IN FAITH, FOLLOWING JESUS AMIDST REPROACHES. CONCLUSION, WITH PIECES OF INTELLIGENCE AND SALUTATIONS. (Heb. 13:1-25)

TSK: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Heb 2:1, We ought to be obedient to Christ Jesus; Heb 2:5, and that because he vouchsafed to take our nature upon him; Heb 2:14, as it was necessary.

Poole: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 2

MHCC: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

This epistle shows Christ as the end, foundation, body, and truth of the figures of the law, which of themselves were no virtue for the soul. The great truth set forth in this epistle is that Jesus of Nazareth is the true God. The unconverted Jews used many arguments to draw their converted brethren from the Christian faith. They represented the law of Moses as superior to the Christian dispensation, and spoke against every thing connected with the Saviour. The apostle, therefore, shows the superiority of Jesus of Nazareth, as the Son of God, and the benefits from his sufferings and death as the sacrifice for sin, so that the Christian religion is much more excellent and perfect than that of Moses. And the principal design seems to be, to bring the converted Hebrews forward in the knowledge of the gospel, and thus to establish them in the Christian faith, and to prevent their turning from it, against which they are earnestly warned. But while it contains many things suitable to the Hebrews of early times, it also contains many which can never cease to interest the church of God; for the knowledge of Jesus Christ is the very marrow and kernel of all the Scriptures. The ceremonial law is full of Christ, and all the gospel is full of Christ; the blessed lines of both Testaments meet in Him; and how they both agree and sweetly unite in Jesus Christ, is the chief object of the epistle to the Hebrews to discover.

MHCC: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(Heb 2:1-4) The duty of stedfastly adhering to Christ and his gospel.

(Heb 2:5-9) His sufferings are no objection against his pre-eminence.

(Heb 2:10-13) The reason of his sufferings, and the fitness of them.

(Heb 2:14-18) Christ's taking the nature of man, and not his taking the nature of angels, was necessary to his priestly office.

Matthew Henry: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Epistle to the Hebrews

Concerning this epistle we must enquire, I. Into the divine authority of it; for this has been questioned by some, whose distempered eyes could not bear the light of it, or whose errors have been confuted by it; such as the Arians, who deny the Godhead and self-existence of Christ; and the Socinians, who deny his satisfaction; but, after all the attempts of such men to disparage this epistle, the divine original of it shines forth with such strong and unclouded rays that he who runs may read it is an eminent part of the canon of scripture. The divinity of the matter, the sublimity of the style, the excellency of the design, the harmony of this with other parts of scripture, and its general reception in the church of God in all ages - these are the evidences of its divine authority. II. As to the divine amanuensis or penman of this epistle, we are not so certain; it does not bear the name of any in the front of it, as the rest of the epistles do, and there has been some dispute among the learned to whom they should ascribe it. Some have assigned it to Clemens of Rome; other to Luke; and many to Barnabas, thinking that the style and manner of expression is very agreeable to the zealous, authoritative, affectionate temper that Barnabas appears to be of, in the account we have of him in the acts of the Apostles; and one ancient father quotes an expression out of this epistle as the words of Barnabas. But it is generally assigned to the apostle Paul; and some later copies and translations have put Paul's name in the title. In the primitive times it was generally ascribed to him, and the style and scope of it very well agree with his spirit, who was a person of a clear head and a warm heart, whose main end and endeavour it was to exalt Christ. Some think that the apostle Peter refers to this epistle, and proves Paul to be the penman of it, by telling the Hebrews, to whom he wrote, of Paul's having written to them, 2Pe 3:15. We read of no other epistle that he ever wrote to them but this. And though it has been objected that, since Paul put his name to all his other epistles, he would not have omitted it here; yet others have well answered that he, being the apostle of the Gentiles, who were odious to the Jews, might think fit to conceal his name, lest their prejudices against him might hinder them from reading and weighing it as they ought to do. III. As to the scope and design of this epistle, it is very evident that it was clearly to inform the minds, and strongly to confirm the judgment, of the Hebrews in the transcendent excellency of the gospel above the law, and so to take them off from the ceremonies of the law, to which they were so wedded, of which they were so fond, that they even doted on them, and those of them who were Christians retained too much of the old leaven, and needed to be purged from it. The design of this epistle was to persuade and press the believing Hebrews to a constant adherence to the Christian faith, and perseverance in it, notwithstanding all the sufferings they might meet with in so doing. In order to this, the apostle speaks much of the excellency of the author of the gospel, the glorious Jesus, whose honour he advances, and whom he justly prefers before all others, showing him to be all in all, and this in lofty strains of holy rhetoric. It must be acknowledged that there are many things in this epistle hard to be understood, but the sweetness we shall find therein will make us abundant amends for all the pains we take to understand it. And indeed, if we compare all the epistles of the New Testament, we shall not find any of them more replenished with divine, heavenly matter than this to the Hebrews.

Matthew Henry: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter the apostle, I. Makes some application of the doctrine laid down in the chapter foregoing concerning the excellency of the person of Christ, both by way of exhortation and argument (Heb 2:1-4). II. Enlarges further upon the pre-eminence of Christ above the angels (Heb 2:5-9). III. Proceeds to remove the scandal of the cross (Heb 2:10-15). IV. Asserts the incarnation of Christ, taking upon him not the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham, and assigns the reason of his so doing (Heb 2:16 to the end).

Barclay: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTER TO THE HEBREWS

God Fulfils Himself In Many Ways

Religion has never been the same thing to all men. "God," as Tennyson said, "fulfils himself in many ways." George Russell said: "There are as many ways of climbing to the stars as there are people to climb." There is a well-known saying which tells us very truly and very beautifully that "God has his own secret stairway into every heart." Broadly speaking, there have been four great conceptions of religion.

(i) To some men it is inward fellowship with God. It is a union with Christ so close and so intimate that the Christian can be said to live in Christ and Christ to live in him. That was Paulconception of religion. To him it was something which mystically united him with God.

(ii) To some religion is what gives a man a standard for life and a power to reach that standard. On the whole that is what religion was to James and to Peter. It was something which showed them what life ought to be and which enabled them to attain it.

(iii) To some men religion is the highest satisfaction of their minds. Their minds seek and seek until they find that they can rest in God. It was Plato who said that "the unexamined life is the life not worth living." There are some men who must understand or perish. On the whole that is what religion was to John. The first chapter of his gospel is one of the greatest attempts in the world to state religion in a way that really satisfies the mind.

(iv) To some men religion is access to God. It is that which removes the barriers and opens the door to his living presence. That is what religion was to the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews. With that idea his mind was dominated. He found in Christ the one person who could take him into the very presence of God. His whole idea of religion is summed up in the great passage in Heb_10:19-23 .

"Therefore, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way which he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith."

If the writer to the Hebrews had one text it was: "Let us draw near."

The Double Background

The writer to the Hebrews had a double background into both of which this idea came. He had a Greek background. Ever since the time of Plato, five hundred years before, the Greeks had been haunted by the contrast between the real and the unreal, the seen and the unseen, the temporal and the eternal. It was the Greek idea that somewhere there was a real world of which this was only a shadowy and imperfect copy. Plato had the idea that somewhere there was a world of perfect forms or ideas or patterns, of which everything in this world was an imperfect copy. To take a simple instance, somewhere there was laid up the pattern of a perfect chair of which all the chairs in this world were inadequate copies. Plato said: "The Creator of the world had designed and carried out his work according to an unchangeable and eternal pattern of which the world is but a copy." Philo, who took his ideas from Plato, said: "God knew from the beginning that a fair copy could never come into being apart from a fair pattern; and that none of the objects perceivable by sense could be flawless which was not modelled after an archetype and spiritual idea, and thus, when he prepared to create this visible world, he shaped beforehand the ideal world in order to constitute the corporeal after the incorporeal and godlike pattern." When Cicero was talking of the laws men know and use on earth, he said: "We have no real and life-like likeness of real law and genuine justice; all we enjoy is a shadow and a sketch."

The thinkers of the ancient world all had this idea that somewhere there is a real world of which this one is only a kind of imperfect copy. Here we can only guess and grope; here we can work only with copies and imperfect things. But in the unseen world there are the real and perfect things. When Newman died they erected a statue to him, and on the pedestal of it are the Latin words: Ab umbris et imaginibus ad veritatem, "Away from the shadows and the semblances to the truth." If that be so, clearly the great task of this life is to get away from the shadows and the imperfections and to reach reality. This is exactly what the writer to the Hebrews claims that Jesus Christ can enable us to do. To the Greek the writer to the Hebrews said: "All your lives you have been trying to get from the shadows to the truth. That is just what Jesus Christ can enable you to do."

The Hebrew Background

But the writer to the Hebrews also had a Jewish background. To the Jew it was always dangerous to come too near to God. "Man," said God to Moses, "shall not see me and live" (Exo_33:20 ). It was Jacobastonished exclamation at Peniel: "I have seen god face to face and yet my life is preserved" (Gen_32:30 ). When Manoah realised who his visitor had been, he said in terror to his wife: "We shall surely die, for we have seen God." The great day of Jewish worship was the Day of Atonement. That was the one day of all the year when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies where the very presence of God was held to dwell. No man ever entered in except the High Priest, and he only on that day. When he did, the law laid it down that he must not linger in the Holy Place for long "lest he put Israel in terror." It was dangerous to enter the presence of God and if a man waited too long he might be struck dead.

In view of this there entered into Jewish thought the idea of a covenant. God, in his grace and in a way that was quite unmerited, approached the nation of Israel and offered them a special relationship with himself. But this unique access to God was conditional on the observance by the people of the law that he gave to them. We can see this relationship being entered into and this law being accepted in the dramatic scene in Exo_24:3-8 .

So then Israel had access to God, but only if she kept the law. To break the law was sin, and sin put up a barrier which stopped the way to God. It was to take away that barrier that the system of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices was constructed. The law was given; man sinned; the barrier was up; the sacrifice was made; and the sacrifice was designed to open the closed way to God. But the experience of life was that this was precisely what sacrifice could not do. It was proof of the ineffectiveness of the whole system that sacrifice had to go on and on and on. It was a losing and ineffective battle to remove the barrier that sin had erected between man and God.

The Perfect Priest And The Perfect Sacrifice

What men needed was a perfect priest and a perfect sacrifice, someone who was such that he could bring to God a sacrifice which once and for all opened the way of access to him. That, said the writer to the Hebrews, is exactly what Christ did. He is the perfect priest because he is at once perfectly man and perfectly God. In his manhood he can take man to God and in his Godhead he can take God to man. He has no sin. The perfect sacrifice he brings is the sacrifice of himself, a sacrifice so perfect that it never needs to be made again. To the Jew the writer to the Hebrews said: "All your lives you have been looking for the perfect priest who can bring the perfect sacrifice and give you access to God. You have him in Jesus Christ and in him alone."

To the Greek the writer to the Hebrews said: "You are looking for the way from the shadows to reality; you will find it in Jesus Christ." To the Jew the writer to the Hebrews said: "You are looking for that perfect sacrifice which will open the way to God which your sins have closed; you will find it in Jesus Christ." Jesus was the one person who gave access to reality and access to God. That is the key-thought of this letter.

The Riddle Of The New Testament

So much is clear but when we turn to the other questions of introduction Hebrews is wrapped in mystery. E. F. Scott wrote: "The Epistle to the Hebrews is in many respects the riddle of the New Testament." When it was written, to whom it was written, and who wrote it are questions at which we can only guess. The very history of the letter shows how its mystery is to be treated with a certain reserve and suspicion. It was a long time before it became an unquestioned New Testament book. The first list of New Testament books, The Muratorian Canon, compiled about A.D. 170, does not mention it at all. The great Alexandrian scholars. Clement and Origen, knew it and loved it but agreed that its place as scripture was disputed. Of the great African fathers, Cyprian never mentions it and Tertullian knows that its place was disputed. Eusebius, the great Church historian, says that it ranked among the disputed books. It was not until the time of Athanasius, in the middle of the fourth century, that Hebrews was definitely accepted as a New Testament book, and even Luther was not too sure about it. It is strange to think how long this great book had to wait for full recognition.

When Was It Written?

The only information we have comes from the letter itself. Clearly it is written for what we might call second generation Christians (Heb_2:3 ). The story was transmitted to its recipients by those who had heard the Lord. The community to whom it was written were not new to the Christian faith; they ought to have been mature (Heb_5:12 ). They must have had a long history for they are summoned to look back on the former days (Heb_10:32 ). They had a great history behind them and heroic martyr figures on which they ought to look back for inspiration (Heb_13:7 ).

The thing that will help us most in dating the letter is its references to persecution. It is clear that at one time their leaders had died for their faith (Heb_13:7 ). It is clear that they themselves had not yet suffered persecution, for they had not yet resisted to the point of shedding their blood (Heb_12:4 ). It is also clear that they have had ill-treatment to suffer for they have had to undergo the pillaging of their goods (Heb_10:32-34 ). And it is clear from the outlook of the letter that there is a risk of persecution about to come. From all that it is safe to say that this letter must have been written between two persecutions, in days when Christians were not actually persecuted, but were none the less unpopular with their fellow-men. Now the first persecution was in the time of Nero in the year A.D. 64; and the next was in the time of Domitian about A.D. 85. Somewhere between these dates this letter was written, more likely nearer to Domitian. If we take the date as A.D. 80 we shall not be far wrong.

To Whom Was It Written?

Once again we have to be dependent on such hints as we get from the letter itself. One thing is certain--it cannot have been written to any of the great Churches or the name of the place could not have so completely vanished. Let us set down what we know. The letter was written to a long-established Church (Heb_5:12 ). It was written to a Church which had at some time in the past suffered persecution (Heb_10:32-34 ). It was written to a Church which had had great days and great teachers and leaders (Heb_13:7 ). It was written to a Church which had not been directly founded by the apostles (Heb_2:3 ). It was written to a Church which had been marked by generosity and liberality (Heb_6:10 ).

We do have one direct hint. Amongst the closing greetings we find the sentence, as the Revised Standard Version translates it: "Those who come from Italy send you greetings" (Heb_13:24 ). Taken by itself that phrase could mean either that the letter was written from Italy or that it was written to Italy, the greater likelihood is that it was written to Italy. Suppose I am in Glasgow and am writing to some place abroad. I would not be likely to say, "All the people from Glasgow greet you." I would be much more likely to say, "All the people in Glasgow greet you." But suppose I am somewhere abroad where there is a little colony of Glaswegians, I might well say, "All the people from Glasgow send you their greetings." So then we may say that the letter was written to Italy; and if it was written to Italy it was almost certainly written to Rome.

But quite certainly it was not written to the Church at Rome as a whole. If it had been it would never have lost its title. Furthermore, it gives the unmistakable impression that it was written to a small body of like-minded persons. Moreover, it was obviously written to a scholarly group. From Heb_5:12 we can see that they had long been under instruction and were preparing themselves to become teachers of the Christian faith. Still further, Hebrews demands such a knowledge of the Old Testament that it must always have been a book written by a scholar for scholars.

When we sum it all up, we can say that Hebrews is a letter written by a great teacher to a little group or college of Christians in Rome. He was their teacher; at the moment he was separated from them and was afraid that they were drifting away from the faith; and so he wrote this letter to them. It is not so much a letter as a talk. It does not begin like Paulletters do, although it ends with greetings as a letter does. The writer himself calls it "a word of exhortation."

By Whom Was It Written?

Perhaps the most insoluble problem of all is the problem of its authorship. It was precisely that uncertainty which kept it so long on the fringes of the New Testament. The title in the earliest days was simply, "To the Hebrews." No authorname was given, no one connected it directly with the name of Paul. Clement of Alexandria used to think that Paul might have written it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it, for the style is quite different from that of Paul. Origen made a famous remark, "who wrote the Letter to the Hebrews only God knows for certain." Tertullian thought that Barnabas wrote it. Jerome said the Latin Church did not receive it as Pauland speaking of the author said, "the writer to the Hebrews whoever he was." Augustine felt the same way about it. Luther declared that Paul could never have written it because the thought was not his. Calvin said that he could not bring himself to think that this letter was a letter of Paul.

At no time in the history of the Church did men ever really think that Paul wrote Hebrews. How then did it get attached to his name? It happened very simply. When the New Testament came into its final form there was of course argument about which books were to be included and which were not. To settle it one test was used. Was a book the work of an apostle or at least the work of one who had been in direct contact with the apostles? By this time Hebrews was known and loved throughout the Church. Most people felt like Origen that God alone knew who wrote it, but they wanted it. They felt it must go into the New Testament and the only way to ensure that was to include it with the thirteen letters of Paul. Hebrews won its way into the New Testament on the grounds of its own greatness, but to get in it had to be included with the letters of Paul and come under his name. People knew quite well that it was not Paulbut they included it among his letters because no man knew who wrote it and yet it must go in.

The Author Of Hebrews

Can we guess who the author was? Many candidates have been put forward. We can only glance at three of the many suggestions.

(i) Tertullian thought that Barnabas wrote it. Barnabas was a native of Cyprus; the people of Cyprus were famous for the excellence of the Greek they spoke; and Hebrews is written in the best Greek in the New Testament. He was a Levite (Act_4:36 ) and of all men in the New Testament he would have had the closest knowledge of the priestly and sacrificial system on which the whole thought of the letter is based. He is called a son of encouragement; the Greek word is paraklesis (G3874); and Hebrews calls itself a word of paraklesis (G3874) (Heb_13:22 ). He was one of the few men acceptable to both Jews and Greeks and at home in both worlds of thought. It might be that Barnabas wrote this letter, but if so it is strange that his name should vanish in connection with it.

(ii) Luther was sure that Apollos was the author. Apollos, according to the New Testament mention of him, was a Jew, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the scriptures (Act_18:24 ; 1Co_1:12 ; 1Co_3:4 ). The man who wrote this letter knew the scriptures; he was eloquent; and he thought and argued in the way that a cultured Alexandrian would. The man who wrote Hebrews was certainly a man like Apollos in thought and in background.

(iii) The most romantic of all conjectures is that of Harnack, the great German scholar. He thought that maybe Aquila and Priscilla wrote it between them. Aquila was a teacher (Act_18:26 ). Their house in Rome was a Church in itself (Rom_16:5 ). Harnack thought that that is why the letter begins with no greetings and why the writername has vanished--because the main author of Hebrews was a woman and a woman was not allowed to teach.

But when we come to the end of conjecture, we are compelled to say as Origen said seventeen hundred years ago, that only God knows who wrote Hebrews. To us the author must remain a voice and nothing more; but we can be thankful to God for the work of this great nameless one who wrote with incomparable skill and beauty about the Jesus who is the way to reality and the way to God.

FURTHER READING

Hebrews

J. Moffatt, Hebrews (ICC; G)

W. Neil, Hebrews (Tch: E)

J. H. Robinson, Hebrews (MC; E)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

Tch: Torch Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The Salvation We Dare Not Neglect (Heb_2:1-4)

The Recovery Of Man's Lost Destiny (Heb_2:5-9)

The Essential Suffering (Heb_2:10-18)

Constable: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

The writer said that he and those to whom he wrote had come to faith in Jesus Christ through the preaching of others who had heard Jesus (2:3-4). Apparently those preachers had since died (13:7). The original readers had been Christians for an extended period of time (5:12). So probably the earliest possible date of composition was about A.D. 60.

Some scholars believe that the book must have been written before A.D. 70 since the writer spoke of the sacrifices as being offered when he wrote (7:27-28; 8:3-5; 9:7-8, 25; 10:1-3, 8; 13:10-11). However, the writer showed no interest in the temple but spoke of the sacrifices as the Israelites offered them when the tabernacle stood. He evidently used the present tense to give these reference a timeless quality rather than indicating that temple worship was still in practice. Nevertheless a date of composition before A.D. 70 seems probable.¹

"The best argument for the supersession of the old covenant would have been the destruction of the Temple."²

The reference to Timothy's release from imprisonment (13:23) appears to date the book later in the life of that outstanding man.³ No other New Testament writer mentioned his imprisonment. The imprisonment of Christians seems to have been a well-known fact of life (10:34; 13:3). This was true after Nero launched an empire-wide persecution in A.D. 64. All of these factors when taken together seem to point to a writing date near A.D. 68-69.

As to authorship, most students of this subject are not dogmatic or even certain for good reason.⁴ As early as Origen, the Alexandrian church father who died about A.D. 255, no one knew who the writer was for sure. After careful study of the authorship of Hebrews, Origen wrote, "But who it was that really wrote the epistle, God only knows."⁵

"The language of the Epistle is both in vocabulary and style purer and more vigorous than that of any other book of the New Testament.

". . . The vocabulary is singularly copious. It includes a large number of words which are not found elsewhere in the apostolic writings, very many of which occur in this book only among the Greek Scriptures . . ."⁶

"All that can be said with certainty is that Hebrews was composed by a creative theologian who was well trained in the exposition of the Greek Scriptures. . . . He was surely a hellenistic Jewish-Christian."⁷

Commentators have made cases for the writer being Paul, Apollos, Barnabas, Luke, Peter, Jude, Stephen, Silvanus (Silas), Epaphras (Epaphroditus), Philip the Evangelist, Priscilla, Mary the mother of Jesus, Clement of Rome, Aristion, and others.⁸ None of these suggestions has found enthusiastic general reception for various reasons. Probably we should be content to share Origen's agnosticism on this question and look forward to getting the answer in heaven.⁹

The early Christians originally accepted all the New Testament books as inspired by God because they contained apostolic teaching. For this reason the writer was probably either an apostle or a close associate of at least one of the apostles (cf. 13:23).

The original recipients of the epistle are also unknown. The title "The Epistle to the Hebrews" implies that they were Jewish Christians. This title is ancient and is probably a safe guide to the identity of the first readers. References in the epistle also suggest that the original readers were mainly Jewish. The writer assumed that they were very familiar with the institutions of Judaism. The warnings against turning away from Jesus Christ back to the Old Covenant also imply this identity. Other indications are the emphasis on the superior priesthood of Jesus and the many appeals to the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures. However the brand of Judaism in view seems to have been Hellenistic rather than Palestinian.

The reference to the generosity of the readers and their helping other believers (6:10) suggests that the original audience did not live in Palestine. The Palestinian churches had a reputation for needing material assistance rather than for giving it to other Christians (cf. Rom. 15:25-31; 1 Cor. 16:3). Probably they were Jews of the Diaspora therefore. This conclusion has support in the writer's consistent use of the Septuagint Old Testament version. Hellenistic Jews used this translation widely, but Palestinian Jews did not use it as much.¹⁰

In most of the New Testament churches there was a mixture of Jewish and Gentile believers. The appeal of this epistle would certainly have been great to Gentiles tempted to return to paganism as it would have been to Jews facing temptation to return to Judaism. However the writer's primary concern appears to have been that his Jewish readers were failing to appreciate that Christianity is the divinely revealed successor to Judaism. He did not want them to abandon Christianity and return to Judaism.

Probably the letter originally went to a house-church outside Palestine that had a strong Hellenistic Jewish population. This church may have been in or near Galatia in view of conditions that existed there that the Epistle to the Galatians reflects. However they may very well have lived in another area. Many scholars believe that the letter went first to a church in or near Rome.¹¹

In view of 13:24b it has seemed to some scholars that the writer was in Italy when he sent this epistle, perhaps in Rome. However the expression "from Italy" in that verse probably refers to those living outside Italy, such as Priscilla and Aquilla who were Jews forced to leave Rome by Emperor Claudius' edict in A.D. 49 (Acts 18:2).¹² This expression suggests that the writer was not in Italy when he wrote.

Purpose

Many students of the book have observed that Hebrews is more of a sermon in written form than an epistle in the traditional New Testament sense.¹³ The writer even described it as a "word of exhortation" (13:22). He urged the original readers to persevere in their faith rather than turning from Christianity and returning to Judaism. A note of urgency and pastoral concern permeates the whole letter. This tone comes through especially strongly in the five warning passages and in the encouragements that follow these warnings.

". . . the purpose of the writer to the Hebrews is not to give us an interpretation of Old Testament prophecy. . . . Using material not from the prophets but primarily from the Psalms, with other materials added to elaborate the argument, the writer's goal was to establish the superiority of the gospel in contrast to all that went before, particularly the levitical system. The primary evidence of the supremacy of Christianity is presented in its finality. Coming to Christ means final access to God without any barrier."¹⁴

". . . Hebrews is a sermon rooted in actual life. It is addressed to a local gathering of men and women who discovered that they could be penetrated by adverse circumstances over which they exercised no control. It throbs with an awareness of the privilege and the cost of discipleship. It is a sensitive pastoral response to the sagging faith of older and tired individuals who were in danger of relinquishing their Christian commitment. It seeks to strengthen them in the face of a new crisis so that they may stand firm in their faith. It warns them of the judgment of God they would incur if they were to waver in their commitment. Exhortations to covenant fidelity and perseverance are grounded in a fresh understanding of the significance of Jesus and his sacrifice."¹⁵

Message¹⁶

We could summarize the message of this epistle in the following words. We will only realize our full eternal reward as believers if we appreciate the greatness of Jesus Christ and continue to trust God rather than turning away from Him in this life.

The ultimate goal that the writer had in view was our full eternal reward as believers. I do not believe it was the conversion of the unsaved members of his audience. He addressed his readers consistently as believers. He wrote to encourage Christians to persevere faithfully so we will receive all that God wants to give us at the judgment seat of Christ. Our rewards are at issue in this letter. He did not want us to suffer loss but to enter into our full inheritance, our full rest, our full salvation.

To do this he wrote that we must know one thing and do two things, one positive and one negative.

We must know the greatness of Jesus Christ. In this epistle the writer presented Him as the greatest revelation that God has given mankind. God's revelation in His Son is superior to all other revelations He has given in three respects.

1. It supersedes all other revelations: God's revelation through angels (the Mosaic Law), His revelation through humans (the prophets), and His revelation through rituals (the Old Covenant). When Jesus Christ came to reveal God, He brought revelation that superseded what had preceded Him.

2. God's revelation in His Son is sufficient to meet every basic human need. God spoke through His Son, so the need for a prophet (a revealer of God) no longer exists. He established a new Covenant, so the need for a priest (a mediator for man) no longer exists. Moreover He exalted His Son to His right hand, so the need for a king (a righteous ruler) no longer exists.

3. God's revelation in His Son insures final victory in every basic sphere. The individual (the human order) attains perfection through the Son. Society (the social order) will experience perfection through the Son. The universe (the cosmic order) will reach perfection through the Son.

This is what we need to know objectively to do subjectively what is necessary to gain our full reward as believers.

What we must do is continue to trust God. Hebrews places great emphasis on the importance of living by faith. It teaches us three things about faith.

1. Hebrews defines faith. Faith is volitional surrender and obedience to God regardless of appearances. It is not just intellectual conviction. It is the action of the will that expresses intellectual conviction. This epistle regards unbelief as disobedience as does all of Scripture. People in the past who lived by faith made decisions and acted because they believed God in spite of appearances (ch. 11).

2. Hebrews also illustrates faith. It describes faith as doing, as suffering, and as waiting. These are the primary activities of faith that the writer of Hebrews emphasized. They are progressively more difficult. It is harder to suffer persecution for our faith than it is to obey God when obedience does not involve suffering. It is most difficult to keep on trusting God when suffering does not end. Waiting for God to fulfill His promises is hardest of all when our hopes do not materialize (e.g., Christ's return).

3. In addition, Hebrews vindicates faith. It assures us of the ultimate triumph of faith. People in the past who acted in faith achieved. People who suffered for their faith triumphed. People who waited in faith received their reward.

On the positive side we need to continue to trust God to realize our full reward as believers.

What we must not do is turn away from God. This is the negative responsibility that the letter also stresses. If we apostatize, we will lose our full reward. Hebrews teaches us three things about apostasy (as it does about faith).

1. This epistle defines apostasy descriptively. It is the opposite of faith. It consists of disobedience because of appearances (e.g., the 10 spies; cf. Jude). Apostasy for a Christian is turning away from faith having previously embraced faith. An apostate, however, can be a believer or an unbeliever.

2. Hebrews also illustrates apostasy in the same three ways it illustrates faith. Apostasy acts. It involves a deliberate turning away. It also suffers, not now but in the future because of what the apostate loses. It also waits, even though it lives for the present rather than for the future.

3. Likewise Hebrews condemns apostasy. It assures us of the ultimate tragedy of apostasy. Apostates may achieve what they want in the present, namely success, but they lose what is far more valuable in the future. They may avoid suffering now, but later they will be sorry. They may not want to wait for their reward now, but they will wait forever for it later and never get it.

This is the central message of the epistle. We will only realize our full eternal reward as believers if we appreciate the greatness of Jesus Christ and continue to trust God rather than turning away from Him.

The writer urged his readers to persevere in faith by using two appeals, one negative and one positive.

The first appeal is negative: the warnings. There are five warning passages in Hebrews. Each one warns of the danger of apostasy from a different angle.

1. The first passage (2:1-4) warns of the danger of drifting away from the truth (2:1). It pictures a ship dragging its anchor. The tides of our age can draw us away from our moorings. We need to keep on standing firm in faith (cf. Col. 1:23).

2. The second passage (3:7-19) warns of the danger of disbelief (3:12). Disbelief results in heart hardening (3:13). We need to keep on believing rather than ceasing to believe (cf. Luke 17:3).

3. The third passage (5:11-6:12) warns of the danger of immaturity (5:12). When we do not put truth into practice, we do not just remain in the same spiritual state. We regress. Therefore we need to keep on growing (cf. 2 Pet. 3:18).

4. The fourth passage (10:19-39) warns of the danger of willful sinning (10:26-27). If we abandon confidence in the efficacy of Jesus Christ's sacrifice, there is no other sacrifice that can protect us from God's judgment as believers. We need to keep on submitting to God (cf. Rom. 6:16).

5. The fifth passage (12:14-29) warns of the danger of unresponsiveness (12:25). The message of this letter demands positive response. If we do not respond positively, we will lose part of our reward (12:17). We need to keep on obeying God (cf. Titus 3:8).

The second appeal is positive: the encouragements. Accompanying each of the warning passages is at least one word of encouragement. The writer balanced his negative warnings with positive words of encouragement.

1. The first passage (2:1-4) encourages with a reminder of God's confirming His promises with miracles in the apostolic age (2:3b-4).

2. The second passage (3:7-19) encourages by reminding us of Jesus' example of faithfulness (3:1-6) and our resources as believers (4:12-16).

3. The third passage (5:11-6:12) encourages with a reminder of the readers' past faithfulness (6:9-12) and God's firm promises (6:13-20).

4. The fourth passage (10:19-39) also encourages with a reminder of the readers' past perseverance (10:32-39).

5. The fifth passage (12:14-29) encourages by reminding us of Jesus' example of perseverance (12:1-2) and the divine reason for discipline (12:3-11).

By way of application let me make three observations based on the three major revelations in the epistle.

1. An appreciation for Jesus Christ is foundational to faithful perseverance. The reason many Christians turn away from the Lord is that they do not appreciate His greatness. Preach Christ in your ministry.

2. We need to emphasize the Christian's hope more in our ministries. We live in a present oriented culture that values immediate self-gratification. Many Christians are apostatizing because they do not appreciate the reward they will receive if they remain faithful to the Lord. This life is preparation for the next.

3. We need to realize that God will judge Christians who apostatize. We will not lose our salvation, but we will lose much that we will wish we never gave up if we stop walking by faith.

Outline¹⁷

I. The culminating revelation of God 1:1-2:18

A. The agent of God's final revelation 1:1-4

B. The superiority of the Son 1:5-14

C. The danger of negligence (the first warning) 2:1-4

D. The humiliation and glory of God's Son 2:5-9

E. The Son's solidarity with humanity 2:10-18

II. The high priestly character of the Son 3:1-5:10

A. The faithfulness of the Son 3:1-6

B. The danger of disbelief (the second warning) 3:7-19

C. The possibility of rest for God's people 4:1-14

D. The compassion of the Son 4:15-5:10

III. The high priestly office of the Son 5:11-10:39

A. The danger of immaturity (the third warning) 5:11-6:12

1. The readers' condition 5:11-14

2. The needed remedy 6:1-3

3. The dreadful alternative 6:4-8

4. The encouraging prospect 6:9-12

B. The basis for confidence and steadfastness 6:13-20

C. The Son's high priestly ministry 7:1-10:18

1. The person of our high priest ch. 7

2. The work of our high priest chs. 8-9

3. The accomplishment of our high priest 10:1-18

D. The danger of willful sinning (the fourth warning) 10:19-39

1. The three-fold admonition 10:19-25

2. The warning of judgment 10:26-31

3. The encouragement to persevere 10:32-39

IV. The proper response 11:1-12:13

A. Perseverance in faith ch. 11

1. Faith in the antediluvian era 11:1-7

2. Faith in the patriarchal era 11:8-22

3. Faith in the Mosaic era 11:23-31

4. Faith in subsequent eras 11:32-40

B. Demonstrating necessary endurance 12:1-13

1. The example of Jesus 12:1-3

2. The proper view of trials 12:4-11

3. The need for greater strength 12:12-13

V. Life in a hostile world 12:14-13:25

A. The danger of unresponsiveness (the fifth warning) 12:14-29

1. The goal of peace 12:14-17

2. The superiority of the New Covenant 12:18-24

3. The consequences of apostasy 12:25-29

B. Life within the church ch. 13

1. Pastoral reminders 13:1-21

2. Personal explanations 13:22-25

Constable: Hebrews

Hebrews

Bibliography

Andersen, Ward. "The Believer's Rest (Hebrews 4)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):31-38.

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999.

Barclay, William. The Letter to the Hebrews. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1963.

Bateman, Herbert W., IV. "Two First-Century Messianic Uses of the OT: Heb 1:5-13 and 4QFlor 1.1-19." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:1 (March 1995):11-27.

Baylis, Charles P. "The Author of Hebrews' Use of Melchizedek from the Context of Genesis." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1989.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Black, David Alan. "A Note on the Structure of Hebrews 12, 1-2." Biblica 68:4 (1987):543-51.

_____. "The Problem of the Literary Structure of Hebrews: An Evaluation and a Proposal." Grace Theological Journal 7:2 (Fall 1986):163-77.

Blaising, Craig A. "The Fulfillment of the Biblical Covenants." In Progressive Dispensationalism, pp. 174-211. By Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993.

Bligh, John. "The Structure of Hebrews." Heythrop Journal 5 (April 1964):170-77.

Blomberg, Craig L. "Degrees of Reward in the Kingdom of Heaven?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 35:2 (June 1992):159-72.

Bornkamm, Gunther. Early Christian Experience. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.

Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Hebrews. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

_____. "The Kerygma of Hebrews." Interpretation 23:1 (January 1969):3-19.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Casey, J. M. "Eschatology in Heb 12:14-29: An Exegetical Study." Ph.D. dissertation, Catholic University of Leuven, 1977.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947-48.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, Okla.: The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

Cockerill, G. L. The Melchizedek Christology in Heb. 7:1-28. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms International, 1979.

Cole, Timothy J. "Enoch, a Man Who Walked with God." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:591 (July-September 1991):288-97.

Colijn, Brenda B. "Let Us Approach': Soteriology in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:4 (December 1996):571-86.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

____. "The Substitutionary Death of Christ in Hebrews." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1966.

Cosby, M. R. "The Rhetorical Composition and Function of Hebrews 11 in Light of Example-lists in Antiquity." Ph.D. dissertation, Emory University, 1985.

Cross, Frank M. "The Tabernacle." Biblical Archaeologist 10:3 (September 1947):45-68.

Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Translated by Shirley C. Guthrie and Charles A. M. Hall. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963.

Custer, Stewart. "The Awfulness of Apostasy (Hebrews 6)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):45-50.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Decker, Rodney J. "The Church's Relationship to the New Covenant." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):290-305; 608 (October-December 1995):431-56.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to the," by F. S. Marsh.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to," by A. B. Bruce.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dodds, E. R. Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety. New York: Norton, 1965.

Dunham, Duane A. "An Exegetical Examination of the Warnings in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Th.D. dissertation, Grace Theological Seminary, 1974.

Dunn, J. D. G. Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970.

The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilus. Twin Brooks series. Translated by Christian Frederick Cruse. Popular ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Ellingworth, Paul. The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; and Carlisle, England: Paternoster Press, 1993.

Elliott, J. H. Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981.

English, E. Schuyler. Studies in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1976.

Estes, Daniel J. "Looking for Abraham's City." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:588 (October-December 1990):399-413.

Fanning, Buist M. "A Theology of Hebrews." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 369-415.

Farrar, F. W. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge: University Press, 1894.

Filson, Floyd V. "Yesterday": A Study of Hebrews in the Light of Chapter 13. Studies in Biblical Theology 2nd series 4. Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1967.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gleason, Randall C. "The Old Testament Background of Rest in Hebrews 3:7-4:11." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:627 (July-September 2000):281-303.

_____. "The Old Testament Background of the Warning in Hebrews 6:4-8." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:617 (January-March 1998):62-91.

Glenn, Donald R. "Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2: A Case Study in Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Theology." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 39-51. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Gourgues, M. "Lecture christologique du Psaume CX et fête de la Pentecôte." Revue Biblique 83 (1976):5-24.

Govett, Robert. Entrance into the Kingdom. Reprint ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Conley and Schoettle, 1978.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert G. Stand Bold in Grace. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984.

Guthrie, Donald. Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, and Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Harrison, Everett F. "The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:484 (October-December 1964):333-40.

Hay, D. M. Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 18. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1973.

Hewitt, Thomas. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

Hodges, Zane C. The Gospel Under Siege. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. "Hebrews." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 777-813. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Hook, H. Phillip. "A Biblical Definition of Faith." Bibliotheca Sacra 121:482 (April-June 1964):133-40.

Horning, Estella B. "Chiasmus, Creedal Structure, and Christology in Hebrews 12:1-2. Biblical Research 23 (1978):37-48.

Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. "The Blood of Jesus and His Heavenly Priesthood in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):99-109; 519 (July-September 1973):195-212; 520 (October-December 1973):305-14; 131:521 (January-March 1974):26-33.

_____. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

_____. "Hebrews 6:4-6 and the Peril of Apostasy." Westminster Theological Journal 35 (1973):137-55.

Hughes, R. Kent. Hebrews: An Anchor for the Soul. 2 vols. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993.

International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Hebrews, Epistle to the," by T. Rees.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "The Promise Theme and the Theology of Rest." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:518 (April-June 1973):135-50.

Kendall, R. T. Once Saved, Always Saved. Chicago: Moody Press, 1985.

Kent, Homer A., Jr. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Lane, William L. Hebrews 1-8. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

_____. Hebrews 9-13. Word Biblical Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

Lang, G. H. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Paternoster Press, 1951.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol 11: Galatians--Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braume, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starbuck, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and The Epistle of James. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1976.

_____. The Problem of Pain. 1940. Reprint ed. London: Collins Press, Fontana Books, 1959.

Lindars, Barnabas. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Lovelace, Richard F. Dynamics of Spiritual Life: An Evangelical Theology of Renewal. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1979.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

_____. Hebrews. Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.

MacDonald, William. Hebrews from Shadow to Substance. Moody Correspondence Course series. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1962.

Mackay, Cameron. "The Argument of Hebrews." Church Quarterly

Review 168 (1967):325-38.

MacLeod, David J. "The Cleansing of the True Tabernacle." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):60-63.

_____. "The Doctrinal Center of the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:583 (July-September 1989):291-300.

_____. "The Literary Structure of the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):185-97.

_____. "The Present Work of Christ in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):184-200.

_____. "The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews: Introduction, Prolegomena, and Doctrinal Center." Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1987.

MacRae, G. W. "Heavenly Temple and Eschatology in the Letter to the Hebrews." Semeia 12 (1978):179-99.

Man, Ronald E. "The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 141:562 (April-June 1984):146-57.

Manson, W. The Epistle to the Hebrews: An Historical and Theological Reconsideration. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1951.

Marshall, I. Howard. Kept by the Power of God. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1969.

_____. "New Wine in Old Wine-Skins: V. The Biblical Use of the Word Ekklesia.'" Expository Times 84:12 (1973):359-64.

Master, John R. "The New Covenant." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 93-110. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Mauro, Philip. God's Pilgrims. Revised ed. New York: Gospel Publishing House, n.d.

McCullough, J. C. "The Impossibility of a Second Repentance in Hebrews." Biblical Theology 20 (1974):1-7.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Millar, Merland Ray. "What Is the Literary Form of Hebrews 11?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:4 (December 1986):411-17.

The Mishnah. Translated by Herbert Danby. London: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Moffatt, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. International Critical Commentary series. Reprint ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1963.

Montefiore, H. W. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Black, 1964.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. "Hebrews." In Hebrews-Revelation. Vol. 12 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Mugridge, Alan. "Warnings in the Epistle to the Hebrews." Reformed Theological Review 46:3 (September-December 1987):74-82.

Neal, Marshall. "The New Covenant (Hebrews 8)." Biblical Viewpoint 24:1 (April 1990):59-65.

Neighbor, R. E. If They Shall Fall Away. Reprint ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Conley and Schoettle, 1984.

Newell, William R. Hebrews Verse by Verse. Chicago: Moody Press, 1947.

Oberholtzer, Thomas Kem. "The Warning Passages in Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):83-97; 578 (April-June 1988):185-96; 579 (July-September 1988):319-28; 580 (October-December 1988):410-19; 146:581 (January-March 1989):67-75.

Parsons, Mikael C. "Son and High Priest: A Study in the Christology of Hebrews." Evangelical Quarterly 60:3 (July 1988):195-215.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. A Faith That Endures. Grand Rapids: Discovery House Publishers. 1992.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Ohio: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press, Victor Books, 1990.

Peters, George N. H. The Theocratic Kingdom. 3 vols. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1884; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1972.

Peterson, D. G. "An Examination of the Concept of Perfection' in the Epistle to the Hebrews.'" Ph.D. dissertation, University of Manchester, 1978.

_____. "The Prophecy of the New Covenant in the Argument of Hebrews." Reformed Theological Review 38 (1979):74-81.

Pink, Arthur W. An Exposition of Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Reich, Max I. The Glories of Christ in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Moody Correspondence Course series. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1960.

Rhee, Victor (Sung Yul). "Chiasm and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 11." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:619 (July-September 1998):327-45.

_____. "Christology and the Concept of Faith in Hebrews 5:11-6:20." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 2000):83-96.

Rice, George E. "Apostasy As a Motif and Its Effect on the Structure of Hebrews." Andrews University Seminary Studies 23:1 (Spring 1985):29-35.

Ridout, Samuel. Lectures on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 6th ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1943.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Robinson, S. E. "The Apocraphal Story of Melchizedek." Journal for the Study of Judaism 18:1 (June 1987):26-39.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):71-84.

Ross, Robert W. "Hebrews." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1401-27. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Ryken, Leland. The Literature of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. The Basis of the Premillennial Faith. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1953.

_____. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):239-47.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Scofield, C. I., ed. The Scofield Reference Bible. New ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1909.

Scott, Brett R. "Jesus' Superiority over Moses in Hebrews 3:1-6." Bibliotheca Sacra 155:618 (April-June 1998):201-10.

Scott, J. Julius, Jr. "Archegos in the Salvation History of the Epistle to the Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29:1 (March 1986):47-54.

Selby, Gary S. "The Meaning and Function of Suneidesis in Hebrews 9 and 10." Restoration Quarterly 28:3 (Third Quarter 1985/86):145-54.

Sharp, Jeffrey R. "Typology and the Message of Hebrews." East Asia Journal of Theology 4:2 (1986):95-103.

Smith, T. C. "An Exegesis of Hebrews 13:1-17." Faith and Mission 7:1 (Fall 1989):70-78.

Soden, John. "The Use of Psalm 45:7-8 (6-7) in Hebrews 1:8-9." Exegesis and Exposition 2:1 (Summer 1987):51-70.

Spencer, William David. "Christ's Sacrifice as Apologetic: An Application of Heb 10:1-18." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40:2 (June 1997):189-97.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Stedman, Ray C. What More Can God Say? Bible Commentary for Laymen series. Reprint ed. Glendale, Calif.: Gospel Light Publications, Regal Books, 1977.

Swete, H. B. The Ascended Christ. London: Macmillan and Co., 1916.

Swetnam, James. "Form and Content in Hebrews 1-6." Biblica 53 (1972):368-85.

_____. "Form and Content in Hebrews 7-13." Biblica 55 (1974):333-48.

Tenney, Merrill C. "A New Approach to the Book of Hebrews." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:491 (July-September 1966):230-36.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Fredrich. Translated and edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, 1964-74. S. V. "aphistemi, apostasia, dichostasia," by Heinrich Schlier, 1 (1964):512-14.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. Hebrews: A Devotional Commentary. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1984.

Thompson, J. W. The Beginnings of Christian Philosophy: The Epistle to the Hebrews. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 13. Washington: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "The Exchatology of the Warning Passages in the Book of Hebrews." Grace Theological Journal 3:1 (Spring 1982):67-80.

Trotter, Andrew H., Jr. Interpreting the Epistle to the Hebrews. Guides to New Testament Exegesis series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997.

Vanhoye, Albert. A Structureal Translation of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Translated by James Swetnam. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

Walvoord, John F. Major Bible Prophecies. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991.

_____. The Millennial Kingdom. Revised ed. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963.

Ware, Bruce A. "The New Covenant and the People(s) of God." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 68-97. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Wills, L. "The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity." Harvard Theological Review 77 (1984):277-99.

Wright, G. Ernest. "The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East. Part III: The Temple in Palestine-Syria." Biblical Archaeologist 7:4 (December 1944):65-77.

Wuest, Kenneth S. "Hebrews Six in the Greek New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 119:473 (January-March 1962):45-53.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

THE

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE HEBREWS.

INTRODUCTION.

The Catholic Church hath received and declared this Epistle to be part of the Canonical Scriptures of the New Testament, though some doubted of it in the first ages [centuries], especially in the Latin Church, witness St. Jerome on the 8th chap. of Isaias; Luther and most of his followers reject it, but the Calvinists and the Church of England have received it. Others, who received this Epistle in the first ages [centuries], doubted whether it was written by St. Paul, but thought it was written by St. Barnabas, or by St. Clement, or St. Luke, or at least that St. Paul only furnished the matter and the order of it, and that St. Luke wrote it, and St. Paul afterwards read it and approved it. It was doubted again, whether this Epistle was first written in Hebrew (that is, in Syro-Chaldaic, then spoken by the Jews) or in Greek, as Estius pretends. The ancient writers say it was written in Hebrew, but that it was very soon after translated into Greek either by St. Luke or St. Clement, pope and martyr. Cornelius a Lapide thinks the Syriac which we have in the Polyglot to have been the original; but this is commonly rejected. See Tillemont on St. Paul, Art. 46, and note 72; P. Alleman on the first to the Hebrews, &c. St. Paul wrote this letter about the year 63, and either at Rome or in Italy. See Chap. xii. 24. He wrote it to the Christians in Palestine, who had most of them been Jews before. This seems the reason why he puts not his name to it, nor calls himself their apostle, his name being rather odious to the Jews, and because he was chosen to be the apostle of the Gentiles. The main design is to shew that every one's justification and salvation is to be hoped for by the grace and merits of Christ, and not from the law of Moses, as he had shewn in his Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans, where we many observe this kind of difference: To the Galatians he shews, that true justice cannot be had from circumcision and the ceremonies of the law: to the Romans, that even the moral precepts and works of the law were insufficient without the grace of Christ: and in this to the Hebrews, he shews that our justice could not be had from the sacrifices of the old law. As to the chief contents: He exhorts them to the faith of Christ, by shewing his dignity and pre-eminence above the Angels, and above Moses, Chap. i, ii, iii.; that Christ's priesthood was above that of Aaron, from the 4th to the 8th chap. ver. 6; that the new law and testament is preferable to the old, form thence to the middle of chap. x.; he commends faith by the example of the ancient Fathers, Chap. xi. and in the beginning of the twelfth; then he exhorts them to patience, constancy, brotherly love, &c. The like exhortations are mixed in other parts of this Epistle. (Witham) --- We must here remark, that our separated brethren, relying solely upon tradition, admit in general this Epistle into their canon of Scriptures, though they are necessitated to allow that for some centuries great doubts were entertained on the subject. According to Mr. Rogers, in his Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, whilst several among the Protestants have rejected as apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the 2nd and 3rd of John, and Jude, others have as strenuously maintained that they ought to be admitted into the sacred canon. The Catholic Church admits them as deutero-canonical books, and of equal authority with the proto-canonical books....After the arguments had been justly weighed on both sides, they seem to have been admitted by the general consent of the Latin Church, as they had all along been admitted by the Greek Church. The canon, as it now stands, both of the Old and New Testament, we find enumerated in Pope Innocent's letter to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, an. 405 [the year A.D. 405], in St. Augustine, (lib. ii. de doct. christ. chap. viii.) and in the decrees of an African Council, an. 419 [the year A.D. 419], consisting of 217 bishops, who declare that in giving a catalogue of the Holy Scriptures, they only confirm and ratify what they have received from their Fathers. This canon is attributed to the third Council of Carthage, an. 397 [the year A.D. 397]. Dr. Cosin, an eminent Protestant divine, tells us in his canon of Scripture, p. 4, "that to know the books of Scripture, there is no safer course to be taken than to follow the public voice and the universal testimony of the Church." The sixth of the thirty-nine articles gives a similar rule, which excludes private judgment. And "what is this," asks Hooker, "but to acknowledge ecclesiastical tradition?" The mind of man, naturally fickle and unsettled, stands in need of a guide in the road to eternal life. I shall never hesitate, says a spirited author, to take for my guide the Catholic Church, which contains in herself the authority of past and future ages. The Syriac version of the Old and New Testament, which is deservedly allowed to be of greatest antiquity and authority, comprises the same deutero-canonical books as the canon of the Council of Trent; a convincing proof that the Church of Syria, immediately after the times of the apostles, considered them as part of the sacred canon, no less than the Catholics of the present day. For a very satisfactory account respecting the authenticity and inspiration of this Epistle, as also for an excellent commentary with notes moral, doctrinal, and critical, see a late work entitled, An Explanation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews, by the Rev. Henry Rutter. --- What can be the reason why Protestants admit the deutero-canonical books of the New and reject those of the Old Testament? --- This Epistle merits the particular attention of Christians of every denomination, since it points out to them their various duties in respect to the necessity of faith and the practice of a holy life. In opposition to the Socinians, it tends to shew not only the divinity of Jesus Christ, but also that his death was a true and real sacrifice of atonement for the sins of mankind. See Chap. i, ver. 5, &c. In opposition to other sectarists, it proves that the bloody sacrifice of Christ, once offered on the cross, though a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice of redemption, does not exclude the unbloody sacrifice of the Mass, by which he is a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech. See Chap. v, &c. It is no less applicable to Catholics, in order to confirm them in the faith once delivered to the saints, and to point out the dreadful consequences of abandoning that religion which Jesus Christ came to establish in the world. The just man lives by faith; but if he draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Let us, therefore, hold fast the confession of our hope, without wavering, or forsaking our assembly, the Catholic Church, as many have done to follow Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and other separatists. But we, says the apostle, are not of them who draw back unto perdition, but of them who have faith unto the saving of the soul. (Hebrews x. 39.)

====================

Gill: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS

That this epistle was written very early appears from hence, that it was imitated by Clement of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians, who took whole sentences out of it; and therefore it could not be a new work, as Eusebius ^a observes: it has been denied to be authentic by some heretics, as the Marcionites and Arians, but has been generally received as such by the orthodox: some indeed doubted of it, because it was not received by the Roman church, as an epistle of the Apostle Paul ^b; though others, who have thought it was not his, as Origen, yet looked upon it as genuine ^c. It has been ascribed to different persons, as to Barnabas, to Apollos, to Luke the Evangelist, and to Clement of Rome, but without any just reason. Clement of Alexandria, a very ancient writer, asserts it to be the Apostle Paul's ^d; and his name stands in the title of it, in all R. Stephens's exemplars, and in all Beza's copies, excepting one, and so it does in the Vulgate Latin and Arabic versions; and that it is his, is highly probable from the agreement there is between this, and other epistles of his; compare Heb 1:2 with Col 1:15 and Heb 5:12 with 1Co 3:1 and Heb 12:1 with 1Co 9:24 and Heb 13:7 with 1Th 5:11, and Heb 13:9 with Eph 4:14 and Heb 13:18 with 2Co 1:12 and Heb 13:20 with Rom 15:13 and many other places; and also from the order and method of it, first treating of doctrines, and then proceeding to practical exhortations, which is the common form of Paul's epistles: to which may be added various circumstances; as that it was written from Italy, where Paul was a prisoner; and the mention the author of it makes of his bonds, and of Timothy, as well known unto him, who was Paul's companion; besides, the token of his epistles appears in this, namely, his usual salutation to the churches; see Heb 13:23. But above all, the testimony of the Apostle Peter is greatly in favour of its being his, 2Pe 3:15 from whence it clearly appears, that the Apostle Paul did write an epistle to the Hebrews; for to them Peter wrote; see 1Pe 1:1 and what epistle could it be but this? and what Peter refers to is to be found in it; see Heb 10:25 and which is written with great wisdom; in none of Paul's epistles is there a greater discovery of his knowledge of divine mysteries than in this; and in it also are things hard to be understood, Heb 5:11. The common objections to its being his are, its not bearing his name, the diversity of its style, and the author of it seeming to be not an apostle, but a disciple of the apostle's: as to his not setting his name to it, the reasons might be, because he was the apostle of the Gentiles, and not so much of the Jews; and because of the prejudice of the Jews against him, both believers, and unbelievers; wherefore had his name been to it, it might have prevented the usefulness of it to the one, and have stirred up the rage of the other: as to the difference of style, different subjects require a different style; and yet in many things there is a likeness, as before observed: and as to the author's not being an apostle, which is concluded from Heb 2:3 the word "us" there is to be understood of the believing Hebrews, the disciples of the apostle, and not inclusive of the author, by a figurative way of speaking often used by Paul; and besides, the apostle received a confirmation of the Gospel from Ananias, who might have been an hearer of Christ, though he was at first taught it by Christ himself; add to this, that whoever was the writer of it, it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, and when several of the apostles were living, and therefore he could never design by those words to put himself in a succeeding generation. The persons to whom this epistle was written were Hebrews, or Jews; so called, as some think, from the name of Abraham, the father of them; or, as others, from his passing over the river Euphrates, when he came out of Chaldea into Palestine. So Abram the Hebrew, in Gen 14:13 is by the Septuagint rendered, perathv, "one that passes over", taking it to come from the word rbe, which signifies to "pass over"; with this compare Jos 24:3 and this is the opinion of some of the Jewish Rabbins ^e; though it seems rather that they were called so from Heber, who lived at the time of the confusion of languages; see Gen 10:21. And this is the sense of many Jewish writers, ancient and modern, of Josephus ^f, of Jonathan ben Uzziel ^g, of R. Nehemiah ^h, of Aben Ezra ⁱ, and Kimchi ^k, and others; 2Co 11:22. And these were the Hebrews that dwelt in the land of Judea, and particularly at Jerusalem; nor were they the unbelieving inhabitants of those parts, but believers in Christ, who were embodied in a Gospel church state, It was a tradition of the ancients ^l, that this epistle was written originally in Hebrew, and was translated into Greek, either by Luke the Evangelist, or by Clement of Rome. But for this there is no foundation; no Hebrew copy can be produced; Munster's edition of it in Hebrew is a translation from the Greek, in which it was, no doubt, originally written, that being the common language, and well known to the Jews; and which appears from the citations in it out of the Old Testament, which are made, not from the Hebrew text, but from the Greek version; and besides, had it been written in Hebrew, the writer would not have interpreted the Hebrew words, Melchizedek and Salem, as he does, in Heb 7:1. The time of its writing was before the destruction of Jerusalem, which in this book is signified by the coming of the Lord, and the day approaching; and after Timothy was released from prison, and some time within the two years of his own imprisonment at Rome; when he hoped for a release, as his epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon show. Dr. Lightfoot places it in the year 62, and in the eighth of Nero. And the occasion and design of it is, to set forth the superior excellency of Christ to angels and men, to Moses, to Joshua, to Aaron, and his sons, and the preferableness of his priesthood and sacrifice to the Levitical priesthood and its sacrifices; to teach the Hebrews the true knowledge of the mysteries of their law; to point out to them the design, use, and abrogation of its ceremonies; and to prepare them for what afflictions and persecutions they would be called to endure for Christ; and to exhort them to perseverance, and to strengthen them against apostasy, as well as to instruct them in the various duties of religion.

Gill: Hebrews 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO HEBREWS 2

In this chapter the apostle, from the superior excellency of Christ, by whom the Gospel revelation is come, discoursed of in the preceding, urges the believers he writes to, to a more diligent attention to the Gospel, and the doctrines of it; to which he adds another motive inducing thereunto, lest those things should be let slip, and be lost, Heb 2:1 and then, by another argument from the less to the greater, that if the law, which was given by angels, could not be broken with impunity, then how should such escape divine punishment that neglected and despised the Gospel, which is a doctrine of salvation, was delivered by the Lord himself, and confirmed by various testimonies and miracles, Heb 2:2. And besides the Gospel dispensation is not put into the hands of angels, but into the hands of Christ, to whom all things are subject, which is proved out of Psa 8:4 and which proof shows, that though Christ, on account of his sufferings and death, was for a while made lower than the angels, yet being now crowned with glory and honour, he is above them, and they are subject to him, since all things are, Heb 2:5. And this anticipates an objection that might be taken from hence against what the apostle had asserted in the foregoing chapter, concerning the superiority of Christ to angels; and this leads him on to observe the reason of the sufferings and death of Christ, and also of his incarnation; that the moving cause of Christ's sufferings and death was the grace and good will of God; that he did not suffer for himself, but for others, for everyone of those described in the context; that inasmuch as he was the surety of those persons, it was agreeable to the justice of God, and it could not be otherwise, but he must be made perfect through suffering; and this was the way to bring many sons to glory, Heb 2:9 and as for his incarnation, or his becoming man, that was necessary, that the sanctifier and the sanctified might be of the same nature, that he might be able to call them brethren and children, Heb 2:11 as he does, for which are cited Psa 22:22 and because the children he engaged to bring to glory were partakers of flesh and blood; and also that he might be capable of dying, and by dying destroy the devil, and deliver his timorous people, who, through fear of death, lived in a continual state of bondage, Heb 2:14 for which reason he did not take upon him the nature of angels, but of the seed of Abraham, Heb 2:16 And besides, it was necessary he should be in all things like unto his brethren, that he might be merciful to them, and faithful to God, and be in a state and condition capable of sympathizing with them, and succouring them under their temptations, which he was able to do by suffering through temptation himself, Heb 2:17.

College: Hebrews (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

It is difficult to overestimate the significance of Hebrews for understanding the nature of the new covenant. No other document in the New Testament canon comments as directly and extensively upon this covenant as does Hebrews. Its description of Jesus as the great high priest of the believer is a unique contribution to New Testament Christology.

Yet Hebrews is perhaps as well known for the difficulties it presents as it is for its distinctive contributions to our understanding of the ministry of Jesus and the nature of our salvation. It is difficult to be certain about who wrote it, when and to whom. It is a letter and not quite a letter. Many find its line of argument intricate and complex, its theology abstract and obscure, and its use of the Old Testament puzzling if not problematic. This commentary will begin by addressing some of these considerations.

AUTHORSHIP

Over the years, most of the debate about the authorship of Hebrews has focused on whether or not Paul wrote this letter. Arguments have been made for other possible authors as well. What we can know for certain about the author is best gleaned from the letter itself, but many will want to know how this debate affects our confidence in the authority and inspiration of the letter.

Did Paul write the Letter to the Hebrews?

Though few defend Pauline authorship of Hebrews today, in the past this view has enjoyed the support of significant church leaders and traditions. The earliest extant copy of Hebrews (early third century) has been received as part of a collection of Paul's letters, in which it was placed after Romans. Pauline authorship was defended by notable church fathers in the East, e.g., Clement of Alexandria (c.150-c.215) and Origen (185-253) who, despite reservations, defended it as essentially Pauline, at least in part on the weight of what was then received tradition. Later, Jerome and Augustine helped to shift opinion in the West and the Sixth Synod of Carthage (419) established a tradition of support for Pauline authorship which lasted until the Reformation.

However, the weight of the evidence - both historical and texual - is far from clear. Early church opinion was far from universal. In the West, prior to Jerome and Augustine, such leaders as Irenaeus and Hippolytus of Rome did not accept Hebrews as Pauline. The Muratorian Canon (a list of documents accepted as New Testament Scripture, c. 170) included thirteen letters identified as Pauline but excluded Hebrews. When reformers such as Calvin and Luther reexamined the question centuries later, neither concluded that Paul was its author. Contemporary critics consider Pauline authorship implausible in light of clear differences between the vocabulary and style of Hebrews and epistles known to be Pauline. Further, it has been argued as improbable for Paul to refer to himself as the author does in 2:3 ("This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him") in light of what he says of himself in Galatians 1:11-12 ("I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ").

Who else could have written the letter to the Hebrews?

As early as the second century, Tertullian identified Barnabas as the author of the letter. Barnabas was a Levite (Acts 4:26), and there is much about levitical ritual in the epistle. He was also a Hellenistic Jew, a member of the Jerusalem church and a missionary partner of Paul (Acts 9:27; 11:30; 12:1-14:28). All of this evidence is circumstantial, however, and nothing but Tertullian's opinion connects him to the letter directly.

Clement of Alexandria first suggested that Luke translated a Hebrew text written by Paul. Calvin affirmed this possiblity centuries later. There are some similarities in the Greek style of Luke-Acts and Hebrews. But there is little other evidence and there are also some differences in style. Calvin also suggested Clement of Rome as a possibility. However, Clement of Rome widely quoted from the letter himself. It is unlikely that he would quote himself and his use of the Old Testament is often at variance with that in Hebrews.

Luther was the first to suggest Apollos as the possible author of Hebrews, a view which continues to enjoy some popularity. He was a "learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures" who "vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ" (Acts 18:24-28). Presumably, he would have been capable of the careful handling of the LXX found in Hebrews. Also, he probably had some connection to the Pauline mission (1 Corinthians 1-4). But concluding that he was therefore the author of Hebrews is, at best, conjecture.

Among others, arguments have been made for Peter, Jude, Stephen, Aristion, Priscilla, Silas, Timothy, Epaphras, Philip and Mary the mother of Jesus as possible authors of Hebrews. Two other possibilities remain. An associate of Paul could have written the letter for him (a view first suggested by Origen in 220). It is also possible that Hebrews was written by some other anonymous Christian unknown to us. The letter itself does not clearly identify its author. Perhaps the fairest conclusion is that advanced by Origen, in spite of his inclination to defend Pauline authorship: "who wrote the Epistle, God only knows the truth."

How does the debate about authorship affect our view of the letter?

It is important to note that, although the debate over authorship has extended over the centuries, the question of the letter's canonicity (i.e., its inspiration and authority) has not. Even though church fathers in the East may have had doubts about its authorship, there is no evidence that they ever questioned its canonicity. Though the Muratorian Canon excluded Hebrews (as well as James and 1-2 Peter), all four books were included in the New Testament canon by the Synod of Hippo (393) and the Third (397) and Sixth (419) Synods of Carthage. Subsequent questions about its authorship during the Reformation had no effect at all upon the reformers' view of its authority or inspiration.

It is clear that apostolicity, as well as other issues such as universality and the "rule of faith," were important in the early decisions about the New Testament canon. We must keep in mind, however, that a document's "canonical" status is the result of a human process which does not bestow divine authority or inspiration upon a document but recognizes the authority and inspiration which it inherently possesses because it has been "God-breathed" (2 Tim 3:16). In other words, if it is true that Hebrews is a divinely inspired and authoritative document, its inspiration and authority remain factual in an objective sense apart from our own inability to clearly discern the identity of its author. In his providence, God bore witness to the inspiration and authority of this letter in a manner that left little room for doubt, as Hebrews persistently silenced the questions of men who soon found that it "is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim 3:16-17).

What do we know about the author?

Though the question of authorship is not determinative of either the letter's inspiration or authority, it is significant for our interpretation of Hebrews. Knowing as much as we can about the author can be helpful for discerning the meaning of a text. We may not be able to know the identify of our author with any degree of certainty, but there is much that we can know about him.

He was probably a Hellenistic Jew for he was both steeped in the LXX and possessed of an excellent vocabulary and a polished style for writing in the Greek language. Presumably, then, he was well educated. He was probably a second generation Christian (2:3) but one with direct connection to apostolic influence since he was a companion of Timothy (13:23) and thus possibly an associate of Paul. It is possible that he wrote from Italy, although 13:24 could also be taken to mean that the recipients were in Italy and some in his own party were from there as well. The rhetoric of the letter and his description of it as "my word of exhortation" (13:22) suggest that he was probably a preacher. His "short letter" reveals a compassionate pastor, a keen theologian and a superior logician who applies all the resources of revelation and rhetoric at his command so that his dear friends will "not drift away" (2:1).

DATE, DESTINATION AND PURPOSE

Three important facts suggest at least a general date for the letter. First, Clement of Rome cited Hebrews frequently. 1 Clement was written in A.D. 95 or 96 and thus Hebrews would not only have been completed but well circulated by this date. Second, there is thus little reason to doubt that the Timothy of 13:23 was the associate of Paul referred to elsewhere in the New Testament. Though we do not know how old Timothy was when he joined Paul in his work, it is unlikely that this reference would place the letter very late in the first century. Finally, much is made of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in A.D. 70. Although it is possible that the author would not have referred to this event if it had happened by the time of writing, it seems improbable that he would omit reference to an event that not only had a significant effect on the lives of first-century Jews (including Christians) but would have added great force to his own argument. Further, he refers to old covenant worship rituals in the present tense (8:4-5; 10:1-3).

Other considerations as to the probable date of the letter pertain to the identity and location of its recipients. The title "To the Hebrews" may have been added later and reflect later opinions about its contents but it accompanies the letter in all of the oldest Greek manuscripts and there is no evidence that the letter ever bore any other title. Some suggest that the phrase could be translated "against the Hebrews" but it is the same formula used in Paul's letters which were hardly "against" the Romans, Galatians, etc. The title of the letter thus suggests that its recipients were Jewish, and the content that they were both Jewish and Christian.

The letter itself indicates that its recipients were enduring persecution (10:33-34; 12:4; 13:3, 23). The more natural reading of 13:24 suggests that the author wrote to Italy rather than from Italy (for which the expression "those in Italy send you their greetings" would have been more appropriate). The Edict of Claudius had expelled Jews from Rome in 49 but many had returned by the time of the persecution begun by Nero in 64. Since our earliest quotes of Hebrews come to us from Clement of Rome, its circulation there was likely at an early date. The cumulative evidence thus suggests that the letter was addressed to Jewish Christians in Rome who suffered under the persecutions of Nero.

The combination of these circumstances and statements in the letter suggest its purpose. Though some have suggested that Hebrews was written foremost to combat an early Jewish perversion of Christian doctrine or as a generic tract to demonstrate the superiority of Christianity, key verses in the letter suggest that it was addressed to a particular community with a view to responding to an urgent need. The following verses are all suggestive:

Passage Exhortation End in View

2:1 We must pay more careful attention so that we do not . . . to what we have heard drift away

3:1 fix your thoughts on Jesus (cp. 12:2)

3:6 hold on to our courage and the

3:6 hope of which we boast

3:12 See to it . . . that none of you has a

. . . heart that turns away from the

living God

3:13 encourage one another daily so that none of you

may be hardened by

sin's deceitfulness

3:14 . . . if we hold firmly till the end the We have come to

confidence we had at first share in Christ . . .

4:1 let us be careful that none of you be

found to have fallen

short of it [rest]

4:11 Let us . . . make every effort to enter so that no one will

that rest fall

4:14 let us hold firmly to the faith we

profess

6:11 show this same diligence to the very in order to make your

end hope sure

10:23 Let us hold unswervingly to the

hope we profess

10:35 So do not throw away your it will be richly

confidence rewarded

10:36 You need to persevere so that when you

have done the will of

God, you will receive

what he has promised.

12:1 Let us run with perseverance the

12:1 race marked out for us

12:2 Let us fix our eyes on Jesus (cp. 3:1)

12:3 Consider him who endured such so that you will not

opposition from sinful men grow weary and lose

heart

Hebrews is, without doubt, a theologically valuable document which presents a well arranged argument in defense of the superiority of the new covenant. Yet these verses suggest that the author had an immediate purpose in mind for his theology and his rhetoric - the encouragement of Christian brothers and sisters who, suffering under persecutions which threatened even martyrdom, were tempted to abandon their strength. In the midst of their suffering, our author sends his "short letter" and "word of exhortation" (13:22) that they might fix their eyes on Jesus (3:1; 12:2), whose greatness he demonstrates from their own beloved Scriptures and cherished heritage.

FORM AND STRUCTURE

Since Hebrews includes some of the formal features of an epistle (e.g., personal greetings and closing formula) but not others (e.g., typical introductory greeting or address), there has been much debate as to whether it is more of a letter or a sermon. However, this particular formulation of the genre question probably reads a sharper distinction between written and oral communication back into an era when rhetoric rarely made such a rigid separation. Other epistles in the New Testament were clearly written in the knowledge that they would be read in the presence of congregations. It is thus possible to argue that, though written, they should be viewed primarily as oral documents. Writing lengthy treatises with significant oral features was a typical "rhetorical" practice for the ancients (e.g., the "template" or model speeches of Isocrates and others). Hence, Hebrews could well have been constructed as a "written homily," i.e., a letter with sermonic features.

This is to propose a variation of Deissmann's suggestion that Hebrews could have been an example of Christian literary art (i.e., a kind of treatise). Guthrie's criticism - that the writer's purpose was too serious to be regarded in this light - assumes that literary art cannot be addressed to particular communities and urgent occasions, when in fact, rhetoric is chiefly defined by (1) its "addressed" nature and (2) its "contingent" character. The fact that it is addressed to specific communities, their circumstances and the demands of those circumstances is precisely what, according to Aristotle, distinguishes "rhetoric" from its counterpart "dialect." It is quite in keeping with at least one significant ancient rhetorical tradition to regard Hebrews as a written homily - an extended written treatise with significant oral features, addressed to a particular community with a view to responding to an urgent need.

Of what import is this conclusion? There is little value in examining Hebrews for exact correspondence to any particular classical scheme of rhetoric as some have done for (1) a strong case has been made that there is no single classical tradition of rhetoric and (2) our uncertainty about the identity of the author makes it impossible for us to do anything more than speculate about the possible significance of any such similarities.

There are several values, however, in recognizing the "rhetorical" nature of the document. First, this encourages us to keep in mind that, above all, Hebrews is an attempt to persuade its recipients (to take action, i.e., a case of deliberative rhetoric). Close attention should thus be paid to its argumentative dimensions. Also, as we attempt to follow the writer's development of thought, we should be alert for the use of rhetorical devices which signal transitions from argumentative sections to hortatory sections that address the contingiences of the community's situation. Further, apart from the complexities which separated competing rhetorical traditions in the ancient world, it is not inappropriate to look for evidence of the kinds of topoi (argumentative commonplaces) more widely employed and with which a well educated author was likely to be familiar. This should aid our understanding of the nature of the proofs employed by our author. Finally, it reminds us to seek the relevance of the subject matter of Hebrews in relationship to particular sets of life circumstances (persecution, suffering, temptation, and discouragement among them).

Hebrews is organized around a series of quotations from the Old Testament which are not only presented as argument but also developed with a variety of exegetical procedures (see below). If we use these quotations as a guideline for discerning its structure, the following picture of Hebrews emerges.

Chapter One is an introduction. This chapter is full of Old Testament quotations demonstrating Jesus' superiority over angels.

Chapter Two appeals to Psalm 8. Jesus rescues man by coming down beneath angels, joining man in flesh and blood, dying, and then returning to his place of exaltation above the angels. All who cling to him in faith return with him to the throne.

Chapters Three and Four deal with Psalm 95. God offers rest to all who trust him. The land of Canaan was not that rest, for this Psalm spoke of a rest long after the Israelites who wandered in the desert hardened their hearts and lost the rest which God offered to them. God's rest is still available for all who believe him.

Chapters Five, Six and Seven are organized around Psalm 110. Jesus is a priest like Melchizedek, who was also superior to the priesthood of the old covenant. Jesus, in fact, is a priest forever by God's oath.

Chapter Eight introduces Jeremiah 31. The new covenant, created by Jesus our great high priest, is superior to the old covenant. It is founded on better promises than the old covenant, which was a mere copy and shadow of this new covenant.

Chapters Nine and Ten treat Psalm 40. Jesus' living sacrifice of himself through obedience is far superior to the Old Testament sacrifices of dead bulls and goats repeatedly offered in the old tabernacle. Jesus took this sacrifice into the very presence of God, thus fully taking away sins and cleansing our consciences.

Chapter Eleven develops a theme from Habakkuk 2, that the righteous will live by faith. This principle by which we live is illustrated by numerous examples of people living by faith.

Chapter Twelve treats Proverbs 3. We must accept the discipline God brings upon us, for God disciplines those he loves.

Chapter Thirteen is the conclusion. It is full of exhortations on how to give ourselves to God in the life of faith.

Remove the introductory and concluding chapters for a moment and an interesting picture of the structure of the main body of thought emerges. The new covenant (chapter 8) is central, tying together his priesthood (chapters 5-7) and his sacrifice (chapters 9-10). This is prepared for by the offer of rescue (chapter 2) and rest (chapters 3-4) and followed by the re

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aristotle. The "Art" of Rhetoric . Loeb Classical Library. Translated by J. H. Freese. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926.

____________ . On Rhetoric . Edited and translated by George A. Kennedy. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.

Attridge, Harold W. Hebrews . Hermeneia Commentaries. Edited by Helmut Koester. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989.

Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Translated by William Arndt and F.W. Gingrich. 2nd ed. Revised and augmented by F.W. Gingrich and F.W. Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. "Baptism." The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . Vol. 1. Edited by Colin Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Bietenhard, H. "Name." The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . Vol. 2. Edited by Colin Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Blass, F., A. Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Blowers, Paul. "Patterns of Perfection in Hebrews." Unpublished paper presented to a Fellowship of Professors at Johnson Bible College in Knoxville, Tennessee, September. 21, 1990.

Boatman, Don Earl. Helps From Hebrews . Bible Study Textbook. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1960.

Bromiley, Geoffery, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia . 4 Vols. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Brown, Colin, ed. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology . 3 Vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

Brown, Francis, et al . The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon . Lafayette, IN: Associated Publishers and Authors, Inc., 1980.

Bruce, F.F. The Epistle to the Hebrews . New International Critical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.

Calvin, John. The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews . Trans. by William B. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963.

Carson, D.A., Douglas J. Moo and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Chamberlain, William. An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1941. Reprinted 1979.

Crouch, Owen. God Has Spoken: Expository Preaching and Teaching - Hebrews . Joplin, MO: College Press, 1983. Reprinted 1990.

Davidson, A.B. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, n.d.

Dods, Marcus. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Vol. IV in The Expositor's Greek Testament. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1910.

Douglas, J.D., ed. The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd. Ed. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1992.

Ellingworth, Paul. Commentary on Hebrews . New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

Elwell, Walter, ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Enos, Theresa, ed. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication From Ancient Times to the Information Age . New York: Garland Pub., 1996.

Fant, Clyde E. and Pinson, William E., eds. Twenty Centuries of Great Preaching: An Encyclopedia of Preaching . 23 Vols. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1971.

Feinberg, C.L. "Tithe." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 5. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Fensham, F.C. "Oath." International Standard Bible Encyclopedia , Vol. III, ed. by G. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Fiensy, David. New Testament Introduction . The College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1994.

Gooding, D.W. and D.J. Wiseman. "Censer." The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd ed. Edited by J.D. Douglas. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1982.

Gregory, T.M. "Oath." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 4. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Guthrie, Donald. "Epistle to the Hebrews," International Standard Bible Encyclopedia , Vol. 2. Edited by G. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

____________ . Hebrews . Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

____________ . New Testament Introduction . 3rd ed. rev. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1970.

Hatch, Edwin and Henry Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint . Two Volumes including supplement. Graz, Austria: Akademische Druck - Univ. Verlagstalt, 1954.

Héring, Jean. The Epistle to the Hebrews. London: Epworth Press, 1970.

Josephus. Jewish Antiquities . Books I-IV. Loeb Classical Library. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1930.

____________ . The Jewish War . Books IV-VII. Loeb Classical Library. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1928.

Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament . 10 Vols. Translated and edited by Geoffrey Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-76.

Kistemaker, Simon. Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews . New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Konig, Eduard. "Tabernacle." The Jewish Encyclopedia . Ed. by Isadore Singer. New York: KTAV Publishing House, Inc., n.d.

Lane, William L. Hebrews 1-8 . Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A. Edited by David A. Hubbard, John D. W. Watts and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

____________ . Hebrews 9-13 . Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 47A. Edited by David A. Hubbard, John D.W. Watts and Ralph P. Martin. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

Lenski, R.C.H. The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James . Minneapolis: Augsburg Press, 1966.

Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon . 9th ed. Rev. and augmented by Sir Henry Stuart Jones. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940.

Lindars, Barnabas. "The Rhetorical Structure of Hebrews." New Testament Studies Vol. 35 (1989), pp. 382-406.

Louw, Johannes and Eugene A. Nida, eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains . 2 Vols. New York: United Bible Societies, 1988.

Martin, Ralph P. New Testament Foundations: A Guide for Christian Students . 2 Vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek Testament . New York, London: United Bible Societies, 1971, corrected edition, 1975.

Meyer, F.B. The Way into the Holiest: Expositions of the Epistle to the Hebrews . Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1982.

Milligan, R. Epistle to the Hebrews . The New Testament Commentary, Vol. IX. Cincinnati: Standard Pub., n.d.

Moffat, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews . The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1924. Reprinted 1968.

Montefiore, Hugh. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1964. Reprinted 1987.

Morris, Leon, et al. The Expositor's Bible Commentary , Volume 12. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Moule, Charles F. Idiom Book of New Testament Greek . 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.

Moulton, James H. and George Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1930. Reprinted 1980.

Moulton, James H., Wilbert F. Howard and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek . 4 Vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963-79.

Moulton, W.F. and A.S. Geden. A Concordance to the Greek Testament . Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897. 5th ed., 1978.

Nairne, A. The Epistle to the Hebrews . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921.

Paterson, J. H. "Sea." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 5. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-76.

Rahlfs, Alfred, ed. Septuaginta . 2 vols. in 1. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibel Stiftung, 1935.

Schiappa, Edward. "Protagoras." Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication . ed. by Theresa Enos. New York: Garland Pub., 1996.

Silva, Moises. "Perfection and Eschatology in Hebrews." Westminster Theological Journal . Vol. 39 (1976), pp. 60-71.

Singer, Isadore, ed. The Jewish Encyclopedia . New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., n.d.

Spicq, C. L'Épitre Aux Hebreux . Paris: Librairie Lecoffre, 1952.

Soulen, Richard. Handbook of Biblical Criticism . 2nd ed. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1976, 1981.

Swetnam, J. "Sacrifice and Revelation in the Epistle to the Hebrews: Observations and Surmises on Hebrew 9, 26." Catholic Biblical Quarterly Vol. 30 (1968), pp. 227-254.

Tenney, Merrill C., ed. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . 5 Vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974-76.

Thayer, Joseph. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament . 4th Edition. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1901.

Thompson, James. The Letter to the Hebrews . The Living Word Commentary. Edited by Everett Ferguson. Austin, TX: R.B. Sweet Co., 1971.

Trotter, Andrew H., Jr. Interpeting the Epistle to the Hebrews . Guides to New Testament Exegesis. Edited by Scot McKnight. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.

Waltke, B.K. "Melchizedek." The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible . Vol. 4. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-76.

Westcott, B.F. The Epistle to the Hebrews . 2nd Edition. 1892. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1994.

Wiseman, D.J. "Weights and Measures." The New Bible Dictionary . 2nd ed. Ed. By J.D. Douglas. Leicester, England: InterVarsity, 1982.

Zodhiates, Spiros. The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament . Rev. ed. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Press, 1993.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary

BAGD Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich-Danker Greek Lexicon (2nd. ed.)

BDB New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew and English

Lexicon

BDF Blass-Debrunner-Funk Greek Grammar

ISBE International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Bromiley)

KJV King James Version

LN Louw & Nida's Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains

LSJ Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek Lexicon

LXX Septuagint

MHT Moulton-Howard-Turner Greek Grammar

MM Moulton & Milligan's Vocabulary of Greek Testament

NASB New American Standard Bible

NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament

Theology

NJB New Jerusalem Bible

RSV Revised Standard Version

TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. by

Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich

ZPED Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: Hebrews (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. JESUS IS SUPERIOR TO THE ANGELS - 1:1-14

A. The Preeminence of the Son - 1:1-4

B. The Son Superior to the Angels - 1:5-14

II. JESUS RESCUES MAN - 2:1-18

A. Warning Not to Ignore Such a Great Salvation - 2:1-4

B. Jesus Became a Man to Bring Men to Glory - 2:5-18

III. GOD OFFERS REST TO ALL WHO TRUST HIM - 3:1-4:16

A. Jesus Is Superior to Moses - 3:1-6

B. Psalm 95:7-11 - 3:7-11

C. Hold Firm to the End - 3:12-15

D. Unbelieving Israelites Fell in the Desert - 3:16-19

E. A Sabbath-Rest for the People of God - 4:1-5

F. A Sabbath-Rest Remains - 4:6-11

G. The Message from God Does Its Part to Save Us - 4:12-13

H. Jesus, the Great High Priest - 4:14-16

IV. JESUS IS SUPERIOR TO THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE OLD COVENANT AND A PRIEST FOREVER BY GOD'S OATH - 5:1-7:28

A. Requirements of the High Priest - 5:1-4

B. Jesus Fulfills the Requirements and Offers Eternal Salvation - 5:5-10

C. [Excursus: Responding to God] - 5:11-6:12

1. Still Infants - 5:11-14

2. On to Maturity - 6:1-3

3. Those Who Fall Away - 6:4-8

4. Confident of Better Things - 6:9-12

D. God's Oath Makes His Purpose Sure - 6:13-20

E. Melchizedek Like the Son of God - 7:1-3

F. Melchizedek Greater than Abraham - 7:4-10

G. Jesus Is High Priest Based on His Resurrection which Introduces a Better Hope - 7:11-19

H. Jesus Is High Priest Based on God's Oath which Produces a Better Covenant - 7:20-22

I. Jesus' Resurrection Creates a Permanent Priesthood - 7:23-25

J. Jesus' Death Provides the Perfect Sacrifice - 7:26-28

V. THE NEW COVENANT BROUGHT BY JESUS OUR HIGH PRIEST IS SUPERIOR TO THE OLD COVENANT - 8:1-13

A. Our High Priest Reigns and Serves in the True Tabernacle, Prefigured by Old Testament Shadows - 8:1-5

B. Our High Priest Is Mediator of the New Covenant, Promised through the Prophet Jeremiah - 8:6-13

VI. JESUS' SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF IS SUPERIOR TO THE SACRIFICES OF THE OLD COVENANT AND SETS US FREE FROM SIN - 9:1-10:39

A. The Tabernacle and Its Tools - 9:1-5

B. The Day of Atonement - 9:6-10

C. Jesus' Sacrifice Cleanses Our Conscience - 9:11-14

D. Jesus' Death Inaugurates the New Covenant - 9:15-22

E. Jesus' Sacrifice Was Once for All - 9:23-28

F. Old Covenant Sacrifices Could Not Take Away Sin - 10:1-4

G. Christ Offered His Body to Make Us Holy - 10:5-10

H. Our High Priest Now Reigns - 10:11-14

I. Witness of the Holy Spirit through Jeremiah - 10:15-18

J. Let Us Draw Near to God and Spur One Another On - 10:19-25

K. The Judgment of God on Those Who Keep Sinning - 10:26-31

L. Reminder of Earlier Suffering - 10:32-34

M. The Need to Persevere - 10:35-39

VII. GOD EXPECTS US TO SHOW FAITH - 11:1-40

A. The Nature of Faith - 11:1-3

B. Faith Illustrated by Abel, Enoch, and Noah - 11:4-7

C. Faith Illustrated by Abraham - 11:8-19

D. Faith Illustrated by Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph- 11:20-22

E. Faith Illustrated by Moses - 11:23-28

F. Faith Illustrated in Israel - 11:29-38

G. God Planned to Make Them Perfect with Us - 11:39-40

VIII. GOD EXPECTS US TO ENDURE DISCIPLINE - 12:1-29

A. A Call to Perseverance - 12:1-3

B. The Word of Encouragement - 12:4-6

C. God Disciplines His Children - 12:7-11

D. Practical Actions - 12:12-17

E. Terrifying Mt. Sinai - 12:18-21

F. Mt. Zion, the Heavenly Jerusalem - 12:22-24

G. A Kingdom which Cannot Be Shaken - 12:25-29

IX. CONCLUDING EXHORTATIONS - 13:1-25

A. Keep Loving Each Other - 13:1-3

B. Stay Pure - 13:4-6

C. Remember Your Leaders - 13:7-8

D. Counterparts to Old Covenant Practices - 13:9-16

E. Obey Your Leaders and Pray for Us - 13:17-19

F. Benediction and Closing Exhortations - 13:20-22

G. Personal Greetings - 13:23-25

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV