Part I<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Book of Hebrews<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ONE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Introduction<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A. Authorship<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is not known who wrote the Book of Hebrews since the author chose not to identify himself. The recipients of this letter obviously knew who he was, and over the centuries, the following authors have been suggested: Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, Clement of Rome (however Clement makes no mention of it in his own letters), Luke, Silas, Phillip, John Mark, and Aristion. This is the short list and other names can be added. One writer argues strenuously that it was Priscilla who wrote the epistle, but this argument is negated by Hebrews 11:32 where the author used a masculine participle to describe himself. The fact is: the author of this book cannot be determined.
\nWhile it is unknown who the author was, two things can be known about the author. First, the author was a Jew because it was to Jews that the oracles of God were committed (Romans 3:2). Furthermore, the author had special, intimate knowledge of Judaism that only a Jewish person would have. Not only was the author Jewish, he was also a Jewish believer in Jesus. Second, in Hebrews 2:3\u20134, the author indicates he was a second-generation Jewish believer, meaning that he was not an eyewitness of the ministry of Jesus. He excludes himself from being among the Apostles who were eyewitnesses, which may indicate that Paul was not the author. However, if this statement only refers to the Twelve Apostles, it would not exclude Paul.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
B. The Readers<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are seven things about the readers that can be deduced from the epistle.
\nFirst, according to Hebrews 2:3\u20134, they, like the author, were second-generation believers. The readers and the author are united by the us in verse 3 and distinguished from those who were eyewitnesses.
\nSecond, they were Jewish. Since the readers were respectful of Old Testament authority, the writer heavily quotes the Old Testament. The quotation from the Old Testament settles the argument, which indeed it would do for a Jewish audience.
\nThird, the readers were Jewish believers. The main danger the author warns against is that of going back into Judaism. This would not have been a temptation for Gentile believers. The entire backdrop and frame of reference from which the author writes are Jewish history and the Jewish religion. Some commentators believe the people in the audience to whom the author is writing are not believers because of statements he makes here and there, but he clearly treats them as believers. For example, in 3:1 and 12, he calls them brethren; in 6:9, beloved; in 3:1, they are partakers of the heavenly calling, which is unique to believers; in 3:14, they are partakers of Christ or the Messiah. Finally, certain warnings, such as falling away due to an evil heart of unbelief and a hardening by the deceitfulness of sin as found in 3:12\u201313, are only applicable if the readers are believers. The so-called problem passages can be dealt with in a way other than assuming that they were not believers.
\nFourth, as stated in verse 12, the readers have been believers for a long time and they should now be teachers of the Word (5:11\u201314).
\nFifth, although they have been believers for a long time, they have remained spiritually immature and have not progressed in the faith (5:11\u201314).
\nSixth, the readers are wavering in their faith because of persecution (10:32\u201338).
\nSeventh, they are readers who know the author (13:19, 23).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
C. Location of the Readers<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are as many suggestions as to where the recipients of the epistle were residing as there are about who authored the epistle. These suggestions include Jerusalem, Caesarea, Samaria, Antioch, Lycius, Valley of Colosse, Cyprus, Galatia, Perea, Corinth, Ephesus, Alexandria, and Rome, among others. Nevertheless, only three of these suggestions have any possible validity.
\nThe first suggestion is that it was written to believers residing in Jerusalem. There are three reasons to reject this view. First, in 2:3\u20134, the readers did not personally hear Jesus speak, but it is very unlikely that there were persons within the Church of Jerusalem who had not heard Jesus speak. Second, the readers are known for their charity (6:10; 10:34), but the Church of Jerusalem was known for its poverty. Churches around the ancient world sent contributions to the Church in Jerusalem (Acts 11:29; Rom. 15:25\u201327; 1 Cor. 16:1\u20138). Third, the author mentions that none of the readers have suffered martyrdom (12:4), but this was not true of the Church of Jerusalem. Jerusalem lost Stephen (Acts 7:59\u201360), James the Apostle (Acts 12:2), and James the brother of Jesus, who had been killed by the time this book was written.
\nA second suggestion is that the readers were Jewish believers residing in Rome, but there are two reasons to discard this suggestion. First, according to 2:3\u20134, these believers were evangelized by eyewitnesses of Jesus who heard Him speak and saw His works. However, the Church of Rome was not evangelized by eyewitnesses. In Romans 1:1\u201314; 15:20, Paul writes that the Church of Rome was not established by an apostle; therefore, if he came to Rome, he would not be building on another man\u2019s (apostle\u2019s) foundation. Second, the Jewish believers to whom he wrote felt a very strong pull to return to the sacrificial system. This would not be true of the Jews of Rome who lived too far away from Jerusalem to be tempted so strongly to return to the sacrificial system of Jerusalem.
\nThe third suggestion is the best one. This letter was written to Jewish believers of the Churches of Judea (Gal. 1:22) located outside of Jerusalem. These believers were undergoing tremendous persecution, short of martyrdom, at the time the letter was written. Nevertheless, they were residing close enough to Jerusalem that there was great incentive to go back into the entire sacrificial system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
D. Date<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There is no date given but it can be narrowed to a period of time. First, one of the early church fathers, Clement of Rome, wrote letters in A.D. 96 in which he quoted from the Book of Hebrews. This shows it was written sometime before A.D. 96. Second, in 13:23, the author mentions Timothy. This shows that the book had to be written after A.D. 50, the year Paul led Timothy to the Lord (Acts 16:1\u20133). Third, it was written before Timothy died, for the writer talks about Timothy in the present tense in 13:23. Fourth, according to the Book of Hebrews, the recipients were second-generation believers (2:3), and they have been believers long enough to be teachers (5:11\u201314). Fifth, when the author writes of the sacrificial system, he uses the present tense (7:8; 8:4; 10:1\u20132, 8, 11) showing that the Levitical system was still functioning. This means the epistle was written before the year A.D. 70 when the entire Levitical system was destroyed by the Romans. Sixth, in 3:17, the author implies it has been almost forty years since the crucifixion, which occurred in A.D. 30. Seventh, in 12:26\u201329, he makes statements of a shaking in the Land, which had already begun. He implies that the seeds of the Jewish revolt were being sown. The revolt began in A.D. 66, but there was a two-year prelude during which there were a series of attacks against the Jews from A.D. 64\u201366.
\nBased upon all these clues, the book was probably written between A.D. 64 and 66. The seeds of the Jewish revolt were beginning during these years, but the full-scale revolt had not yet begun.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
E. The Historical Background<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The author of Hebrews builds his case on a number of theological examples from the Old Testament. The following will be a summary of the details that will be discussed in the main body of the commentary in the same order as they appear in the epistle.
\nFrom the Book of Genesis, the author chooses Esau as an example of one who made an irrevocable decision and, once having made it, there was no turning back. Instead, Esau lost out on temporal blessings and no amount of tears could change history. By the same token, the readers of the Book of Hebrews are also in danger of making an irrevocable decision and, if they make it, there will be no turning back for them either. They will be subject to divine discipline in this life and loss of reward in the next one.
\nFrom the book of Exodus, the author selects two items as examples: the Tabernacle and the Priesthood. From the Tabernacle, he draws a lesson from the means of access to God. From the Priesthood, he derives the concept of a mediator between God and Man.
\nThe author also picks out two examples from the Book of Leviticus: the blood sacrifices of chapters 1\u20137 and the Day of Atonement sacrifice of chapter 16. From the former, he teaches animal blood only covered sin; it did not take sin away. Animal blood only accomplished ritual cleansing. From the latter, he points out this was a day of national atonement. The sin sacrifice for the occasion was unique in that the priest could not partake of this sin sacrifice although he could partake of all the other sin sacrifices. The portion of the Day of Atonement sacrifice that was not burned on the altar was taken outside the camp and burned there. The author makes a comparison between burning the sacrifice outside the camp to the crucifixion of Jesus outside the gate.
\nFrom the Book of Numbers, the author again picks out two items as examples. The first item is the description of Moses as found in chapter 12. Moses was faithful, but the Messiah is greater in faithfulness than Moses. A one-time defection took place under faithful Moses (chapter 14); now a greater-than-Moses has come. Will there be another defection?
\nThe second item the author takes from the Book of Numbers is the sin of Kadesh Barnea found in chapters 13\u201314. Here, too, is the issue of making an irrevocable decision. Israel had finally arrived at the border of the Promised Land. From that oasis, Moses sent out twelve spies who came back forty days later. They all agreed on one thing\u2014the Land was all God said it was\u2014a land flowing with milk and honey. The spies then came to a crucial point of disagreement. Only two of the spies believed the Land could be taken with the help of God. The other ten declared that due to the numerical superiority and the military might of the Canaanites, there was no possibility of taking the Land. The people made the common mistake of believing the majority was always right and rebelled against the authority of Moses and Aaron. The two were almost killed by the mob before God intervened. That was the Israelites\u2019 tenth act of rebellion since the Exodus began, and, at that point, God proclaimed judgment on the Exodus generation. God decreed they would not enter the Promised Land but would wander in the desert until forty years passed. During that time, all who came out of Egypt would die except for the two righteous spies and those Israelites presently younger than the age of twenty. The Exodus generation had reached a point of no return. They had made an irrevocable decision and lost out on the blessing of the Promised Land.
\nIn God\u2019s dealings with His covenant nation, once a generation reaches a point of no return and makes an irrevocable decision, no amount of repentance can change the fact of coming physical judgment. In fact, the passage states the people repented, and Numbers 14:20 states God forgave their sin. This did not affect anyone\u2019s individual salvation, but they still had to pay the physical consequence of their irrevocable decision. The physical consequence was physical death outside the Land. Thus, the Promised Land was withdrawn from the Exodus generation and was later reoffered to the Wilderness generation.
\nThe consequence of their irrevocable decision did not mean they had to return to Egypt and become slaves again. They remained a physically redeemed people, but it meant they would not progress to the Promised Land. They were under divine discipline and it resulted in their physical death outside the Land. The application to the readers is that they, too, are in danger of making an irrevocable decision. While it does not mean they are in danger of losing their salvation, it does mean they are in danger of failing to progress to spiritual maturity, which in turn will bring on divine physical discipline in this life and loss of reward for the Messianic Kingdom. As Pentecost has observed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Several aspects of this judgment are significant. The unbelief of that generation did not cancel God\u2019s eternal, unconditional covenant promises. Their rebellion did not change the relation of the nation to God; they were still His redeemed people (Isa. 43:1\u20133). What they forfeited by their unbelief was the enjoyment of their blessings as a redeemed covenant people. They surrendered the joys of the land and the life of peace and rest. After forty years a new generation would respond to God\u2019s promises in faith and would enter and possess the land (Num. 14:31). Rebellion neither canceled God\u2019s promises nor changed the status of the nation before God. However, that generation did lose the blessings that God promised to provide.\nWhen the people heard God\u2019s judgment, they realized the enormity of their rebellion and coveted the blessings they had forfeited. They were determined to ignore the judgment and to \u201cgo up into the place which the Lord hath promised\u201d (14:40). They concluded that the confession \u201cwe have sinned\u201d (14:40b) would erase the results of their rebellion. Moses forbade them to attempt to enter the land (14:41\u201342), but they persisted, only to be turned back by the Amalakites and Canaanites (14:45). Their one act of unbelief and rebellion permanently excluded them from enjoyment of the promised blessings. The Kadesh experience teaches the necessity of believing God and of obeying God in all circumstances in spite of the obstacles. God is faithful and is to be believed and obeyed at all costs. Disobedience will not bring about loss of position, but certainly will result in the loss of blessings.\nThe psalmist refers to the essential lesson of Kadesh in Psalm 95. After exalting the Lord because of His great power, the people are exhorted to \u201cworship and bow down\u201d before Him (v. 6). The psalmist sees the possibility that his generation might respond to this revelation of the glory of God as their forefathers had done at Kadesh. He exhorts, \u201cHarden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your fathers tempted me\u201d (vv. 8\u20139). The writer suggests that his generation could enter into discipline through disobedience and could forfeit the blessings as their forefathers had done. The principle is an ongoing truth: unbelief that leads to disobedience will bring discipline. The result is not loss of position but loss of blessing.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAnother key example taken from the Old Testament is Melchizedek. The author builds a large theological comparison based on the limited information about Melchizedek as recorded in Genesis 14:18\u201320 and the prophecy found in Psalm 110:4 that the Messiah will be a priest after the Order of Melchizedek.
\nThe Law of Moses is another example the author uses as a background. The main thing he notes is the fact that while there were blood sacrifices available for some sins, there were no sacrifices available for others. For certain sins there was only physical death.
\nThe last item used from the Old Testament is the distinction the Prophets made between the Remnant and the non-Remnant. In the Old Testament, the two groups were distinguished from one another in that the Remnant believed what God had revealed through Moses and the Prophets but the non-Remnant did not believe and pursued idolatry. In the New Testament, the point of division was that the Remnant believed in the Messiahship of Jesus but the non-Remnant rejected Him. The readers of the epistles were members of the Remnant of that day.
\nThe importance of the Old Testament is also noted by Gleason:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The author\u2019s use of the Old Testament in the Epistle to the Hebrews is indispensable to understanding the warning in Hebrews 6:4\u20138. He used the Exodus generation and particularly the events of Kadesh-barnea to exhort Jewish Christians who had retrogressed in their spiritual life and were considering a return to the rituals of Judaism to avoid persecution from the Jews. Pressure from their Jewish countrymen arose from the growing patriotism resulting in the Jewish revolt of A.D. 66. The author\u2019s allusions to Kadesh-barnea show that the sin of \u201cfalling away\u201d refers to a final decision to return to Judaism and to remain in a state of spiritual retrogression. Once they made that choice, they, like the Exodus generation, would be beyond repentance and would face the inevitable judgment of God resulting in the forfeiture of blessings and ultimately the loss of physical life.\nIn an age of spiritual apathy and moral compromise within the church, and often among its leadership, this passage delivers a severe warning to all who take their commitment to Christ lightly.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\n- The Gospel Background<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The key passage to understanding the issue in the Book of Hebrews is Matthew 12:22\u201345. This chapter records the account of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and the unpardonable sin. In this passage, the leadership of Israel rejected the Messiahship of Jesus on the basis of His being demon possessed. At that point, Jesus withdrew the offer of the Messianic Kingdom from that generation and declared they were now under a divine judgment. This divine judgment was a physical judgment of destruction fulfilled by the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. By way of definition, the unpardonable sin is the national rejection by Israel of the Messiahship of Jesus, while He was present, on the grounds of His being demon possessed. For the Jewish generation of Jesus\u2019 day, that was their irrevocable decision. Judgment was now inevitable because this sin was what Jesus called it: unpardonable. No matter how many Jews came to believe, and myriads did, it would not change the fact of coming judgment. As at Kadesh Barnea, when the offer of the Land was withdrawn from the Exodus generation, the offer of the Kingdom was withdrawn from the generation of Jesus\u2019 day. As the Land was reoffered to the next generation (the Wilderness Generation that accepted it), by the same token, the Kingdom will be reoffered to a future generation that will accept it. This will be the generation living in the Great Tribulation (Mat. 24\u201325). The Jewish believers to whom the author was writing were members of the same generation that was guilty of the unpardonable sin and facing the coming judgment of A.D. 70.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The Book of Acts<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
In light of the nature of the unpardonable sin and the judgment on the generation of Jesus\u2019 day, as discussed above, and the fact that the unpardonable sin was a national sin, not an individual sin, the message to that generation is the message of Acts 2:38\u201341. In order to escape the judgment on that generation, individual Jews had to do two things. First, they had to repent, a Greek word that means \u201cto change your mind.\u201d They had to change their minds about Jesus. The generation of Jesus\u2019 day believed Jesus was demon possessed. The readers needed to change their minds (repent) and believe that Jesus was the Messiah. This act of repentance (or change of mind) would lead to their spiritual salvation.
\nHowever, this alone would not save them physically from the coming judgment. In order to be saved physically from the judgment, they would have to be baptized. Baptism would separate them from the generation and the Judaism that rejected the Messiah. The act of baptism would save them physically. Hence, Peter declares, save yourselves \u2026 Obviously, no one can save themselves spiritually; therefore, from what are they to save themselves? Peter continues: \u2026 from this crooked generation. Water baptism will separate them from this crooked generation. That in turn will save them physically from the judgment of the unpardonable sin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
F. The Occasion and Purpose<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The overall context of Hebrews is dealing with Jewish believers who were undergoing tremendous, severe persecution. Because of this persecution, they were seriously considering going back into Judaism, but that was not the totality of their thinking. As will become evident in the exposition of the epistle, they thought they could temporarily lay aside their salvation and go back into Judaism until the persecution subsided. Once the persecution subsided they could then be saved again later. This new salvation would erase the sin of their earlier apostasy and they could start their spiritual lives anew. This is the option they thought they had. The author of the epistle will point out that they do not have this option. They do have two options, but starting their spiritual lives anew is not one of the options because that would require a re-crucifixion of Jesus.
\nThe writer wants to warn the readers against going back into Judaism. The Judaism warned against includes the Judaism of the Levitical system, Rabbinic Judaism, and the Judaism that rejected the Messiahship of Jesus. The writer is writing within the context of the coming judgment of A.D. 70, which was the judgment for the unpardonable sin. This was a national sin, not an individual one, and is only applicable to the Jewish generation of Jesus\u2019 day, not to subsequent Jewish generations. The judgment of the unpardonable sin was the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the world-wide dispersion of the Jewish people. The writer\u2019s warning is this: If the readers go back into Judaism now, they will re-identify themselves with the generation guilty of the unpardonable sin and will place themselves back under the judgment of A.D. 70. When the judgment strikes, they will die a physical death as a divine discipline. The only way they have of escaping the coming A.D. 70 judgment\u2014the judgment of the unpardonable sin\u2014is to make their break from Judaism once-and-for-all complete. For Jews of that day, as well as for Jews today, the complete break from Judaism comes by water baptism. Unless they undergo water baptism, they will be included in the A.D. 70 judgment.
\nThe writer is dealing with a physical judgment. The book is being written to Jewish believers still living before the A.D. 70 judgment. They can escape the judgment or they can fall prey to it. The choice is theirs to make. The writer warns them because they will suffer intense consequences if they do not repent.
\nThe five warning passages are often used to teach the loss of salvation, but rather, these passages are always dealing with physical death. The readers are encouraged to refrain from returning to Judaism and, thus, escape the judgment. On the positive side, they are encouraged to press on to spiritual maturity (5:11\u201314; 10:33\u201339), and at the same time, the writer wanted to combat the danger of apostasy (2:1\u20134; 10:19\u201325).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
G. The Author\u2019s Methodology<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The author\u2019s method was to show the superiority of the Messiah over the system of Judaism. That which they have in the Messiah supersedes what they had in Judaism. The contrast is not between what is good and bad because the whole sacrificial system was given by God. The contrast is between that which is good and that which is better. Biblical Judaism was good, but Messiah is better. As the author expounds on the good and the better, he takes the three main pillars of the Judaism of that day\u2014angels, Moses, and the Levitical Priesthood\u2014and shows that what the readers now have in the Messiah is superior to all three pillars of Judaism. This is a concept also found in the Midrash:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Epistle to the Hebrews attempts to demonstrate that Jesus is the Messiah, that he is greater than Abraham (7:7), than the angels (1:4) and than Moses (7:7). A parallel, later Midrash is found in Tanhuma (Buber\u2019s edition, Toldot 134\u2013135; Vulgar edition, Toldot 14). The Midrash is on Isaiah 52:13: \u201cBehold my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.\u201d The Messiah will be more \u201cexalted\u201d than Abraham, more \u201cextolled\u201d than Moses and more \u201chigh\u201d than the angels. This Midrash is found in a late collection; but it is clear that the Epistle to the Hebrews proves that it had existed already at the time of the Second Temple or soon after its destruction. The antiquity of this Midrash is also demonstrated by a Tannaic Midrash, namely Sifre, on Numbers 12:3\u20137. There, Rabbi Jose says that Moses is greater than the Patriarchs and the angels. Hence originated the Midrash which attempted to prove that the Messiah is greater even than Moses, than the Patriarchs, including Abraham, and the Archangels. This is a Midrash we find in both Tanhuma and the Epistle to the Hebrews in the New Testament. It is interesting that a medieval Jew who converted to Christianity, Friar Paul Christiani, noticed the affinity between the Tanhuma Midrash and the Epistle to the Hebrews and tried to prove on this basis, and on the basis of other problematic arguments, that the Talmudic Sages had known the Christian truth, but had concealed it from the Jews. In his disputation with the Jewish Rabbi Nachmanides, this convert to Christianity said: \u201cIndeed, your own Sages have said of the Messiah that he has more honor than the angels, the which cannot be but of Jesus.\u201d He then quoted what was written in the Midrashic legend: \u201cExalted and extolled and very high: exalted more than Abraham, extolled more than Moses and higher than the Archangels.\u201d Nachmanides, of course, had his answer ready to hand. (The Writings of Rabbi Moses ben Nahman, Chavel\u2019s edition, Vol. I, p. 311.)<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author of Hebrews basically gives a very logical and theological development of the material, but five different times he deviates from his logical development to give a warning. The warning is always based upon what he has just stated. Some people believe a believer can lose his salvation because of what the author said in these five warnings. This belief is due to a failure to realize that in the Jewish usage of the terms \u201csave\u201d and \u201csalvation,\u201d the terms are not always used in a spiritual sense. More frequently, they are used of physical salvation. It is because of these five warnings that some teach it is possible to lose one\u2019s salvation. Others, who do not believe in the possibility of losing one\u2019s salvation, teach the Book of Hebrews was not written to believers. They teach it was written to people who had come very close to believing yet had never made the choice to trust in the Messiah. Understanding that the Jewish usage of \u201csave\u201d and \u201csaving\u201d can mean either the physical or the spiritual will clarify what these five warnings are about. The warnings all have to do with physical judgments. Every example and comparison the writer uses from the Old Testament deals with a physical judgment and a physical death. The judgments are physical not spiritual.
\nAlthough, the author gives the readers warnings and theological discourses, he also comforts and encourages them in their present persecution (11:1\u201312:13). The readers have a great cloud of witnesses to help them through this persecution. The Lord chastens His sons, but the end result will be peaceable fruit. Through faith, they can run the race before them with patience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
H. Key Words<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are five key words in this epistle. One is perfection, not meaning sinlessness but meaning maturity in contrast to immaturity (2:10; 5:9; 6:1; 7:11, 19, 28; 10:14; 12:1\u20132). The second key word is eternal in contrast to what was temporal such as the Law, sacrifices, Aaronic Priesthood, and so on (5:9; 6:2; 9:12, 14\u201315; 13:20). The third key word is forever, which is a corollary to eternal (1:8; 5:6; 6:20; 7:14, 26; 8:1; 9:24; 12:25\u201326). The fourth key word is heavenly in contrast to what is earthly (3:1; 6:4; 8:5; 9:23; 11:16; 12:22). The fifth key word is better in contrast to what is good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I. The Two Main Divisions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first main division, 1:1\u201310:18, focuses on the pre-eminence of the Son in His person and work. This section is primarily theological with some application. It is in this section that the author shows the Messiah is superior to the three pillars of Judaism: angels, Moses, and the Levitical Priesthood.
\nThe second main division, 10:19\u201313:25, focuses on the practical application of the pre-eminence of the Son in the walk of the believer. This section is primarily application with some theology. In other words, after showing the superiority of the Messiah to the three pillars of Judaism in the first section, the author answers the question: What difference does it make?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
J. The Theme<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The theme of the Book of Hebrews is the superiority of the Son.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
TWO<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Pre-Eminence of the Son in His Person and Work\u20141:1\u201310:18<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A. The Theme\u20141:1\u20133<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by diverse portions and in diverse manners, 2 has at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds; 3 who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAs the author introduces his theme, he also introduces his basic method of contrasting. The Book of Hebrews brings a contrast between the old and new revelation both in substance and in the way in which it came\u2014its medium and its means. He contrasts the old and new in three ways: method, time, and agent.
\nIn verse 1, he begins dealing with the means of revelation. In the old times, God spoke in two ways: diverse portions and diverse manners. In Greek, there is a play upon words here. The author begins by stating the source. The source is always \u201cGod spoke.\u201d God is the source, not man. He used man to reveal; man is an agent, but God is always the source of these revelations.
\nDiverse portions deals with God\u2019s revelation quantitatively. In the past, revelation came in successive portions. God did not choose to give His whole revelation at one time. He chose to give it in portions over a span of 1,600 years. Sometimes He gave a little portion as in Obadiah, which is only one chapter long; at other times He gave a large portion as in Isaiah, which is sixty-six chapters long. And, although Jeremiah has fewer chapters, it is longer than Isaiah. Diverse portions can also be understood another way. Some prophets ministered for one month. An example of this is Haggai, who gave four prophecies all in one-month\u2019s time and that was his whole prophetic ministry. Others, such Moses and Daniel, gave prophecies that covered a lifetime. The point is that it was always progressive. God revealed so much and then stopped. Every time God gave some revelation, He answered certain questions and then left some question unanswered. Revelation was never final, but it was always progressive.
\nNot only did revelation come in diverse portions but also in diverse manners dealing with the quality. It came in various ways and means. Sometimes God revealed Himself through creative acts and sometimes through Patriarchs, angels, or prophets. His revelation came in different forms: sometimes in visions; sometimes in rules and regulations and laws; sometimes by types; and sometimes by prophecies. Nevertheless, however it came, it was never final; it was always incomplete.
\nThis verse also states that when God revealed them to the fathers, it was in the prophets. The prophets, who received the direct revelation from God, were indwelled by the Holy Spirit. First Peter 1:11 makes the same point. The prophets were the means of divine revelation and the prophets spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21). That is why the Scriptures are God-breathed (2 Tim. 3:16). The prophets spoke exactly what God wanted them to speak down to the very words. The word prophets is plural because there were many. Now he will make a contrast between these many prophets and the one Son. In times past, in contrast to now, God spoke in various ways, various portions, and various styles. The fathers is not just the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the term covers the whole sweep of Old Testament revelation (Jn. 6:56; 7:22). The fathers were the recipients of the Old Testament revelation.
\nNow, in verse 2a, the author begins another contrast: at the end of these days. Here he emphasizes finality. The Old Testament was progressive, but this one is final. The word end primarily means \u201ctermination\u201d and refers to the end of the final period of revelation, but it can also mean \u201cgoal.\u201d In other words, the New Testament revelation was the goal of Old Testament revelation. It marks a termination period in which God is speaking to men. The expression, at the end of these days, was a common rabbinic term for the messianic days. The prophets often spoke of the Messianic Age as \u201cin the last days.\u201d It is now the messianic times because the Messiah has come, and He was the focal point toward whom all this previous revelation was pointing. The Apostles, of course, wrote the New Testament after Jesus left, but the content of what they wrote had to do with His life, His ministry, His words, and His teachings. What they wrote had to do with the significance of His coming.
\nThis verse goes on to say that in these days, these messianic days, He has spoken unto us not in prophets or Patriarchs but in his Son. The word his in some translations is in italics because it is not in the Greek text. Some translations may not read in his Son but in the Son. However, the definite article the is not in the Greek text either. The text simply says in Son. In Greek, the absence of the definite article means there is an emphasis on nature or quality rather than on personality. In other words, earlier He spoke through prophets, but now, He is speaking in a \u201cSon-ness,\u201d which is unique. Here the writer is not stressing what God said, but he is stressing the means by which it came: a Son. This time revelation did not come by a mere man. This time it did not come by an angel. This time it came by a Son. Son is singular in contrast to many prophets; He now spoke through one Son. He spoke unto us because the New Testament believers are the recipients of New Testament revelation.
\nHaving stated the difference between the means and the manner of Old Testament revelation as compared with New Testament revelation, the writer now makes seven statements in verses 2b\u20133. The purpose of these seven statements is to show why this Son is eligible to be the final revealer and the authenticator of divine revelation.
\nFirst, He was made the heir of all things. This points to His being the focal point of the universe because He is the goal of history; He is the end of all things. He is an heir, and heirship entails lordship. He is exercising the Father\u2019s authority, and so being made heir of all things means He is exercising universal lordship. To be able to exercise universal lordship over all creation means He cannot be less than God. He came as a man, but He came as the God-Man, and He was appointed heir in keeping with Psalm 2:7.
\nSecond, the Son is through whom he also made the worlds. The Greek word for worlds here means \u201cages.\u201d Literally it reads, \u201cthrough whom He made the ages,\u201d meaning that He was in control of God\u2019s plan and program during the aspect of time. This statement points to the Messiah as being the beginning point of the universe, the beginning point of history. He is the beginning of all things. This statement includes everything that exists under the aspect of time. Everything in God\u2019s program in the aspect of time is in His control, and the Son is the One who operates the universe through its successive ages and dispensations. As the Bible shows, times and ages are the means by which God reveals His plan and program. The times and ages through which the purpose and plan of God are revealed and unfolded are controlled by Him. He is the One who brought time into being and He controls all things connected with time. Time is His creation and subject to Him.
\nThird, He is the effulgence of his glory or He is the \u201cbrightness\u201d of His glory. This points out that He has the co-essence of deity; He possesses deity. This is His role before all history. The Son reveals the fullness of God\u2019s attributes because this One has an unbroken connection with the Father. He is the out-raying or the out-shining of God\u2019s glory. This is known among the Jews as the Shechinah Glory: the visible manifestation of the presence of God. The Shechinah Glory is always a visible glory and He is the brightness of that visible glory. The word effulgence or brightness means \u201cto shine forth,\u201d \u201cto shine out,\u201d \u201cto radiate.\u201d This One is the out-shining of deity. This is the same point made by John in John 1:1\u201314: the Messiah is the Shechinah Glory Who became flesh and \u201ctabernacled\u201d with the people of Israel.
\nFourth, He is the very image of his substance. The word image means \u201can expressed image.\u201d The Greek word used here is the origin of the English word \u201ccharacter.\u201d He is the very character of God\u2019s substance. The Greek word means to have a perfect representation of the divine essence. It is a Greek word that was used of the engraving tool from which the coin die was made. When the die was pressed against the metal and lifted off, the coin had the exact representation of what was on the die. Therefore, the Son is the true personality of deity. Everything true of God the Father is true of God the Son in every respect. He is the precise reproduction of God the Father. He has all the same attributes of deity that the Father has. This again points to His position before all history. All that is in the Father is in the Son. This same point is made in Colossians 1:15 where He is the image or the exact reproduction of the invisible God. It is a different Greek word, but the emphasis is the same.
\nFifth, He upholds all things by the word of his power. He is the sustainer and the governor of the universe. This is His role throughout all history. The picture is that He is in the middle of all things. It concerns the Messiah as being the governor of the universe and He upholds it, He sustains it, He is carrying it, and He is moving the whole universe to a predetermined goal set by God the Father. The word \u201cupholding\u201d does not mean just to hold it, but to carry it towards a goal. The present tense means that He is continuously doing it, even now. All creation has a goal to accomplish a specific purpose and program of God, and the Son will make sure creation reaches that goal. He controls everything through providence and by His Word. The Greek term is reima, which means the \u201cspoken word.\u201d By means of His spoken command, creation will reach its goal. The picture of the Son sustaining the universe is also brought out by Colossians 1:15\u201317.
\nSixth, he had made purification of sins. This emphasizes the Son as being man\u2019s redeemer. This is His role in history. The words made purification refer to a priestly work. With that expression, the writer is already introducing Jesus in terms of the priesthood. This is something he will develop extensively in chapters 5\u20137. The Son made purification for sin by dying. There are four specific aspects to this purification: (1) It was exclusive, for He made it by Himself and no one else provided this redemption; (2) It achieved a sacrificial work of cleansing, because He made purification; (3) It is a finished work as seen by the use of the Greek aorist participle, which emphasizes something already done, and there is nothing more He needs to do to provide purification for man; (4) It is not merely an outward cleansing but a purification of sins.
\nSeventh, He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. This shows Him as the sovereign of humanity. This, too, is His role in history. His sitting down emphasizes His finished work (10:12). The fact that He is at the right hand of God the Father emphasizes Him as equal to the Father and having absolute authority (1 Pet. 3:22). His present work at the right hand of the Father is to intercede for us (Rom. 8:34).
\nThese seven things about the Son show that the Son is qualified to be a unique revealer superior to the prophets. That makes Him qualified to be the final revealer bringing the goal of the Old Testament prophecy to its finality in Him. Not only does this qualify Him to be the final revealer, it also qualifies Him to be the authenticator of all previous revelations that God gave by diverse portions and in diverse manners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
B. The Superiority of the Son to Angels\u20141:4\u20132:18<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now the author begins dealing with the first of the three pillars of the Judaism of his day: angels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- His Deity: The Proof from the Scriptures\u20141:4\u201314\n\u2026 4 having become by so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they. 5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time,
\nYou are my Son,
\nThis day have I begotten you?
\nand again,
\nI will be to him a Father,
\nAnd he shall be to me a Son?
\n6 And when he again brings in the firstborn into the world he says, And let all the angels of God worship him. 7 And of the angels he says,
\nWho makes his angels winds,
\nAnd his ministers a flame a fire:
\n8 but of the Son he says,
\nYour throne, O God, is for ever and ever;
\nAnd the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of your kingdom.
\n9 You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity;
\nTherefore God, your God, has anointed you
\nWith the oil of gladness above your fellows.
\n10 And,
\nYou, Lord, in the beginning did lay the foundation of the earth,
\nAnd the heavens are the works of your hands:
\n11 They shall perish; but you continue:
\nAnd they all shall wax old as does a garment;
\n12 And as a mantle shall you roll them up,
\nAs a garment, and they shall be changed:
\nBut you are the same,
\nAnd your years shall not fail.
\n13 But of which of the angels had he said at any time,
\nSit you on my right hand,
\nTill I make your enemies the footstool of your feet?
\n14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nThe point of this section is to show that because He is deity, because He is God, He is superior to angels. The writer begins with a statement of fact in verse 4\u2014the statement of superiority: having become by so much better than the angels. In rabbinic theology, the Jewish rabbis had a high regard for angels; however, the Son is better. In His deity, of course, He always was better (superior). But when he states, having become, he means that even in His humanity, in some way, He has become better than the angels. Because the King James Version translated this as \u201cbeing made,\u201d some cultic groups claim that this shows that the Son was created, given that He was made. The writer does not use the Greek word \u201cto make\u201d here but the Greek word \u201cto be,\u201d meaning having become. When God became man in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, when He became incarnate at the Incarnation, He became a little lower than the angels (2:9). Nevertheless, when He ascended back into Heaven and entered His state of Exaltation, when He returned to Heaven in that way, He became better than the angels again. In His deity, He always was superior to them. When He became a man, He became lower than the angels, but when He returned to Heaven, with His exaltation, He again became better, even in His humanity, than the angels. Then He received a more excellent name; He received a special name bestowed by God the Father on the Son because of the Son\u2019s perfect obedience. Revelation 19:12 makes a reference to this same thing. When He returns, He will have a name written that no man can know but Himself. Philippians 2:9 states that He has received the name which is above every name. We know Him as Yeshua, Jesus, among other titles. When He entered into Heaven, God the Father gave Him a more excellent name, a name that He alone knows, which we may never know.
\nAfter making the statement of the superiority of the Son, the author will prove it in verses 5\u201313 by using seven citations from the Old Testament. The purpose of quoting these seven passages is to prove his statement: the Son is superior to angels.
\nThe first quotation, found in verse 5a, is from Psalm 2:7, which points to the Son as being an heir; He has a special Sonship, positional relationship to the Father. Psalm 2:7 is a declaration of Sonship emphasizing the positional dignity of the Son. He is the only begotten. The expression the \u201conly begotten\u201d does not emphasize birth or origin, and it does not emphasize to come into being as some cultic groups claim. The term \u201conly begotten\u201d is a legal term that stresses the rights of the firstborn, and this One has the rights of the firstborn. This was never said to an angel. While He always had a Sonship relationship to God the Father, He was appointed a Son in a unique way at His Resurrection. In the Roman culture of that day (Paul deals with this concept in Gal. 4), a Roman son who was born into a Roman family was positionally always a son. However, only when he reached the age of maturity was he declared a son by the father. That is the same picture here. He always was the Eternal Son in His relationship to God the Father, but at a certain point, He was declared a Son. He was declared a Son at His Resurrection (Acts 13:33; Rom. 1:3\u20134). Angels are also called the \u201csons of God\u201d in the Old Testament, but angels are always called sons of God collectively, never individually. No single angel throughout Old Testament history was ever called \u201ca\u201d son of God. Angels collectively were called sons of God (Gen. 6:1\u20134; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps. 29:1). Believers are called the sons of God in the New Testament by virtue of their adoption, yet He is the only begotten Son in the sense that He has a unique relationship not true of angels and not true of believers. He was declared the unique Son of God, and this came out several times during His lifetime. For example, when Gabriel spoke to Mary, he declared that her son would be the Son of God (Lk. 1:35). The next time He was publicly declared the Son of God was at His baptism (Mk. 1:11). A third time was at His transfiguration (Lk. 9:35). Paul points out in Romans 1:4 that, by virtue of His Resurrection, He was declared to be the unique Son of God. There is something different about the Messiah\u2019s Sonship that is not the same as for angels or believers.
\nThe second Old Testament passage he quotes, in verse 5b, is 2 Samuel 7:14. It is part of the Davidic Covenant emphasizing His position as the fulfiller of the Davidic Covenant. Not only was He declared the Son of God, but He continues in that position as the Son of God. This establishes the Messiah Jesus as the fulfillment of the covenant, as the covenant head. The key promise of the Davidic Covenant is that the God-Man descendant of David is destined to rule over a saved and restored Israel from Jerusalem and from the Throne of David (Is. 9:6\u20137; Jer. 23:5\u20136). Therefore, this One, by virtue of the Davidic Covenant, is destined to rule over Israel. No angel will have the privilege of ruling over Israel in the Messianic Kingdom.
\nIn verse 6, there is a third quotation from either Deuteronomy 32:43 or Psalm 97:7. These two passages say the same thing in the Septuagint version; they call all angels to worship Him. The context of the passage emphasizes the Son at the final revelation of the Son in judgment. Some day He will return and, when He returns at His Second Coming in judgment, all angels will worship Him. It is obvious that the One who is worshipped is superior to those who worship Him. Since angels will worship the Son at His Second Coming, then obviously they are inferior to the Son who is being worshipped. The statement: And when he again brings in the firstborn into the world is a statement of His Second Coming. The term firstborn is a messianic title used in Psalm 89:27. It appears in the New Testament in Romans 8:29 and Colossians 1:15, 18. The very fact that He is worshipped by the angels shows that He is deity, but they are not and, therefore, they are inferior.
\nIn verse 7, the fourth quotation is from Psalm 104:4, which stresses the fact that angels are servants. It also calls attention to the transitory nature of the ministry of angels in contrast to the eternal character of the Son. Since angels are only servants, and servants are subject to masters, and the Master in this case is the Son, then He is seen to be superior in this aspect also. The Greek word used for servants here is not the normal Greek word but a word that means \u201creligious devotion.\u201d They are His servants in the sense of being religiously devoted to Him; angels were created to serve the Son religiously.
\nThe fifth quotation, in verses 8\u20139, is of Psalm 45:7\u20138 where two things are emphasized: the deity of the Son and His authority in the Messianic Kingdom. Again, the contrast is between the eternality and the deity of the Son and the transitory nature of the angels. He is God and, therefore, both the Creator and Master of all the angels. He also has an eternal throne, which no angel has. He is anointed with the Holy Spirit; they are not. The Messiah is characterized as One who loves righteousness, hates lawlessness, and is above your fellows or is above His associates; the \u201cassociates\u201d are the angels. He is anointed and He received that anointing at His baptism (Acts 10:38). In this quotation, there are five specific ramifications combining the Old Testament context and what the writer says here: (1) The Father addresses the Son as O God, showing His deity and co-equality with the Father; (2) The Son is destined to have an eternal throne and kingdom; (3) His reign will be righteous; (4) The reason His reign will be righteous is because He loves righteousness and hates iniquity; and (5) The Son is exalted above all.
\nIn verses 10\u201312, the writer quotes a sixth passage: Psalm 102:25\u201327. This points out several things: (1) Jesus is superior in His basic existence; (2) He is the Creator of the universe; (3) The Son is sovereign over the changes in the universe; (4) The Son is the unchangeable Lord in the midst of a changing universe; (5) The Son is eternal; and (6) While He is eternal, the universe will some day be discarded like an old piece of cloth. In the words of Revelation 6:14: You will roll them up. In 2 Peter 3:10, the universe is destined to be dissolved; while He is eternal, the universe is temporal.
\nIn verse 13, the seventh and last citation is Psalm 110:1, which predicted the Messiah\u2019s enthronement in glory and His seat at the right hand of the Father. The Son is a partner with the Father in the Father\u2019s work. Because He is sitting, His work is completed. In the ancient world, the one who sits on the king\u2019s right hand has to be the king\u2019s equal. When one king came to visit another, he would sit at the host king\u2019s right hand. The very fact that Jesus is seated at the right hand of God means that He is equal with God.
\nThe author concludes this part of the argument in verse 14 by describing the status of angels. While He is seated, showing His work is finished, angels, on the other hand, are still busy doing their work. Their work is not finished. Rather, they are ministering spirits. He does not use the Greek word that normally means \u201cservant\u201d or \u201cslave,\u201d because he pictures angels here as free agents voluntarily working in the employ of another. Here, again, the author uses the word that means \u201creligious devotion.\u201d These angels are servants to those who inherit salvation. This is as close as the Bible comes in showing that believers have guardian angels. Angels are ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation. They are assigned specifically to care for us, and this care begins at infancy (Mat. 18:10) and continues throughout our lives (Ps. 91:11). The existence of guardian angels does not mean they make sure nothing bad happens to believers for bad things will happen to believers. They are guarding in the sense that nothing will happen to believers outside the will of God. One angelic role is to observe us: angels observe what we say (Eccl. 5:6); angels observe our sufferings (1 Cor. 4:9); and angels even observe what we wear (1 Cor. 11:10). When a believer dies, his soul is escorted to Heaven by angels (Lk. 16:22).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The First Warning\u2014Parenthetical Warning on the Danger of Drifting\u20142:1\u20134\n1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest haply we drift away from them. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; 3 how shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation? which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed unto us by them that heard; 4 God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
It is at this point that the author goes into the first of those five deviations to give the first of his five warnings. This warning is based upon what he has previously shown: the Messiah is superior to angels. Before he goes on to show another line of evidence, there is a parenthetical warning on the danger of drifting. Thus, in verse 1 he begins with the word Therefore introducing the application of the previous truth he has just dealt with: because Jesus is superior to angels, for this reason we ought to give [special attention] lest haply we drift away. The Greek word for \u201cdrifting\u201d here is used of a boat that has been untied from its mooring and is now drifting, and it means \u201cto flow beside or past,\u201d \u201cto slip off,\u201d \u201cto slip under,\u201d \u201cto slip into the wind,\u201d \u201cto disappear from memory.\u201d The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses the same Greek word to translate Proverbs 3:21, which says that a father\u2019s counsel should not \u201cslip away.\u201d The Septuagint also uses the same word in Isaiah 44:4 concerning running water. The emphasis is: that which the recipients of this epistle have learned, they must not let flow away, disappear from memory, or slip away. The point of the application is that revelation that comes through the Son carries far more solemn obligations for the recipients than revelation mediated through angels or men. Angels are superior to man and revelation that came through angels carried obligations, but the Son is superior to angels; Therefore, the revelation that came through the Son carries heavier obligations and a heavier judgment if it is ignored. The expression, the things that were heard, refers to the body of doctrinal truths to which these believers have been exposed. They must pay special attention to the new revelation given by means of the Son.
\nNext, in verses 2\u20133a, the author points out the impossibility of escaping (from receiving the just recompense) if we neglect so great a salvation. He gives the reason why the readers should pay more attention to this new revelation: For if the word spoken through angels proved stedfast. This is what is called in Greek a first-class condition, which, in this case and according to the context, means the statement is true: if the Law through angels proved steadfast, and it did prove steadfast. Nowhere in the Mosaic Law is there a clear statement that Moses received the Law through angels. There are two Old Testament intimations of a possibility of angelic mediation of the Law: Deuteronomy 33:2 and Psalm 68:17. Even though these passages do not clearly state it, this teaching was a part of rabbinic tradition. Now and then the New Testament authenticates a rabbinic teaching, and this is one of those cases. That Moses received the Law by means of angels is authenticated by the New Testament three times: here; Acts 7:53; and Galatians 3:19. God used angels in the divine work of revelation, including the Mosaic Law. The Word spoken by angels has proven to be steadfast; it proved to be sure and firm. How much more will this be true of revelation that came by means of One who is superior to angels: the Son!
\nFurthermore, every sin under the Law mediated by angels received a just punishment, meaning a physical punishment. For example, in Leviticus 10, the two sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, disobeyed the Mosaic Law by burning the incense improperly and they were smitten physically dead. In Numbers 16, three rebels, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, led a revolt against the supremacy of Aaron as being the High Priest, and God judged them by having the earth open up and swallow them and their families. In Joshua 7, Achin disobeyed the Law and he was stoned to death. The Law was given by God to Moses through angels but, although it came through angels, anyone who disobeyed it received a just punishment. How much more will this be true if they neglect a salvation mediated through the Son. The word used here for neglect means \u201cto have an attitude of indifference.\u201d It means complete indifference to what one has and indifference in carrying out what faith demands. These are people who have salvation; salvation is in their possession, but they are neglecting it. They are becoming indifferent to it. The Greek word means \u201cto have no care or concern for it,\u201d \u201cto become apathetic,\u201d and God does not tolerate believers becoming apathetic to their salvation. The fact that they are thinking about going back into Judaism and into the Levitical system shows they are becoming indifferent to the salvation they have. Therefore, the author writes, \u201cHow can anyone escape if they neglect a salvation mediated through the Son?\u201d The phrase, how shall we escape, implies that there is no escape possible from a just recompense of reward. It will mean discipline in this life, according to Hebrews 12:5\u201311, and it will certainly mean physical death in the coming judgment. If a believer develops a complete indifference to the salvation that has been received, if he becomes indifferent in carrying out what faith demands, then he is subject to divine discipline. The point is that salvation is in their possession, but they are neglecting it or becoming indifferent to it. By neglecting their salvation, believers may put themselves into a position requiring divine discipline. Under the Law, divine discipline came upon Israel as the Covenant People of God. However, because they are the Children of God, under Grace, divine discipline comes upon individual believers who continue in a state of disobedience. Therefore, the warning is that they must give heed to revelation given by the Son because He is superior to angels. Disobedience will not result in the loss of spiritual salvation; disobedience will mean the loss of physical life.
\nIn verses 3b\u20134, he shows the superiority of the gospel to the Mosaic Law in three specific ways. First, in its original announcement, it was spoken through the Lord. This was initially declared by the Son Himself, not an angel, but the Son. Second, it had a continuous convincing proclamation in that it was authenticated by those who heard Him speak the Word, meaning the Apostles. What Jesus taught has continued to be spread by those who heard Him speak. The author excludes himself from that group: was confirmed unto us [that would include the author] by them that heard. The author, unlike the other Apostles, was not an eyewitness to what Jesus said. Third, it was further authenticated as to its truthfulness through signs, wonders, power, and gifts. There were manifold, divine authentication of its truths, and God authenticated the message of the Apostles through these four ways. Signs refer to miracles that reveal and have a divine purpose and bear witness of a person\u2019s claims. Wonders emphasize the fact that they attract attention and cause amazement. Manifold powers show that these miracles came through the source of divine power. Gifts are divine enablements. A common misconception is that in the Book of Acts all the believers were doing all kinds of miracles, signs, and wonders, but that is not true. The only ones who performed miracles were the Apostles or apostolic legates (those who were appointed to do so by the Apostles by the laying on of the Apostles\u2019 hands). Even so, in this passage, he clearly states that these signs, wonders, and so on, were done by the eyewitnesses, not by the next generation of believers. These spiritual gifts were according to his own will because God decides who gets which gifts (1 Cor. 12:7\u201311). The gifts are distributed sovereignly as God wills.
\nConsequently, in light of the uniqueness of the One who gave this revelation, and in light of the uniqueness of how it was tested and authenticated and how it came to those who were the readers of this epistle, the author warns them to be careful not to neglect this revelation to the point of becoming indifferent or apathetic. If God did not tolerate indifference to His revelation that came through angels, He certainly will not tolerate it to His revelation that came by means of the Son.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- His Humanity: Proof from His Sovereignty\u20142:5\u20139\n5 For not unto angels did he subject the world to come, whereof we speak. 6 But one had somewhere testified, saying,
\nWhat is man, that you are mindful of him?
\nOr the son of man, that you visit him?
\n7 You made him a little lower than the angels;
\nYou crowned him with glory and honor,
\nAnd did set him over the works of your hands:
\n8 You did put all things in subjection under his feet.
\nFor in that he subjected all things unto him, he left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we see not yet all things subjected to him. 9 But we behold him who has been made a little lower than the angels, even Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God he should taste of death for every man.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nThe writer\u2019s first argument, in 1:1\u201314, was to show the superiority of the Son to angels in His deity. Here, he will look at the other side of the coin to show that, even in His humanity, in some way He is superior to angels. In 1:14, he showed that angels are servants; that means they cannot be rulers. Now in verse 2:5, the writer points out that to no angel did He give authority of the world to come. The Greek word for world here is the \u201cinhabited world.\u201d To no angel did He give the inhabited world, and in this case it is the world to come, the Millennium, the Messianic Age. By saying the world to come, the author uses the most common rabbinic term for the Messianic Kingdom. In other words, the Messianic Kingdom will not be ruled by an angel; God did not give the authority of the earth over to any angel, either in the present or in the future.
\nIn verses 6\u20138, he quotes Psalm 8:5\u20137, showing that, although man was created lower than the angels, God gave the authority over this earth to Adam. Man lost his dominion and right to rule when he sinned. Satan usurped the authority over this earth, and presently this earth is being ruled by fallen angels: Satan, the prince of this world, and his demons. They rule this earth not because God gave it to them but because they usurped the authority from man when man fell. God\u2019s original purpose for man was that he be created a little lower than the angels as far as his being is concerned yet be crowned with glory and honor. God crowned man the king of nature, and He gave to him authority over the physical world. God gave sovereignty of this world over to man; He put all things into subjection to him. While God gave the authority over this earth to man, man has never had the opportunity to practice it because of his fall. The dominion given to man is not yet fulfilled, but it will be fulfilled in the Millennium through the Ideal Man, the Messiah. The fact is: But now we see not yet all things subjected to him; it has not yet happened that man is ruling sovereignly over the physical earth. He lost it when he fell, and because of his sin, he does not have the power to regain it.
\nIn verse 9, it was Jesus who regained dominion for man, and He will exercise man\u2019s rule over the earth in the Messianic Kingdom. God\u2019s original goal for Adam will be fulfilled by the Last Adam. The author of the Book of Hebrews uses the name Jesus, emphasizing His human name, because now he is emphasizing the humanity of Jesus. By means of His humiliation He became a man. The writer teaches five lessons in this verse: (1) The recipient of His humiliation is humanity, man; (2) The extent of His humiliation is that He became lower than the angels, for while in His deity He was superior to the angels, in His humanity He Who was the Lord of the angels became lower than the angels; (3) The purpose of His humiliation was to taste of death for every man (The word taste here does not mean \u201cto nibble,\u201d but \u201cto appropriate,\u201d He appropriated death, He experienced it for every man); (4) The motive of His humiliation was the grace of God; and (5) The result of His humiliation is that He eventually was crowned with glory and honor in His exaltation when He returned to Heaven at the Ascension. Because He was resurrected from the dead, in the future all things [will be put] in subjection under his feet.
\nTo summarize his argument in verses 5\u20139: (a) The sovereignty over this planet Earth was promised to man, not to angels, in Genesis 1:26\u201327; (b) Man\u2019s sovereignty and right to rule was lost because of the Fall; although man still has the title deed, he no longer has the authority to exercise it; (c) The Messiah, as the Ideal Representative Man, has won back this sovereignty for man because He defeated Satan at the cross; (d) He will eventually exercise this sovereignty in the Messianic Kingdom; (e) This was never promised to angels; (f) As far as sovereignty is concerned, in His present humanity by virtue of His sovereignty on earth, He is superior to angels. In this one sense\u2014the fact that He is destined to rule the earth and angels are not\u2014even in His present humanity, as He was previously in His deity, He is superior to angels. He will rule the world; they will not.
\nJesus won back for man the sovereignty to rule by dying. There are five ramifications to his death: (1) He underwent the sufferings of death, emphasizing the physical agony; (2) He was crowned with glory and honor because of what He had accomplished on the cross; (3) In this way, He manifested the grace of God by becoming a man to die for every man; (4) He experienced death, He tasted death for every man; and (5) It was substitutionary; it was for every man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Proof from His Salvation\u20142:10\u201318\n10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For both he that sanctifies and they that are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 saying,
\nI will declare your name unto my brethren,
\nIn the midst of the congregation will I sing your praise.
\n13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold, I and the children whom God has given me. 14 Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same; that through death he might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 and might deliver all them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16 For verily not to angels does he give help, but he gives help to the seed of Abraham. 17 Wherefore it behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that he himself had suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nIn this section, the author deals with the purpose of the Messiah\u2019s death; He had to die in order to bring many sons to glory. In providing salvation for fallen man, God chose to by-pass angels. The death of Jesus was in harmony with the grace of God and He became a Saviour through the death on the cross. He became Jesus the Man so that, as a man, He was able to die. He had to die in order to provide salvation. The argument is that the Redeemer is superior to the redeemed. However, in a sense, the redeemed are superior to those for whom no redemption was provided. No redemption was provided for fallen angels. In that sense, the redeemed are superior to fallen angels. That is why, according to 1 Corinthians 6:3, a day will come at the Great White Throne Judgment when believers will judge fallen angels. Thus, in the kind of salvation Jesus provided, human and not angelic, He is superior to angels. The writer proceeds to give four reasons for the Incarnation and the cross.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a. To Bring Many Sons to Glory\u20142:10\u201313<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first reason for Jesus\u2019 death on the cross was to bring believers into a state of glory. In verse 10, his point is that the Father intended to perfect Jesus by means of suffering. When he states that Jesus is the author of [our] salvation, he uses a compound Greek term that means both \u201cto rule\u201d and \u201cto lead.\u201d He is our ruler, He is our leader, and He is our pioneer. The author of the Book of Hebrews points out that Jesus is our salvation-author, the pioneer of our redemption. He presents three features concerning Him as the pioneer of our redemption. First: He was made perfect through sufferings. The word perfect means \u201cto reach a goal,\u201d \u201cto attain a goal.\u201d His sufferings attained a desired end, a desired goal. The means of completing His humanity was by means of His sufferings. His humanity was perfected, completed through His sufferings. Second: He will bring many sons unto glory. Third: This was according to God\u2019s purpose: For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things; it was God\u2019s plan and program for Him to be a man and to suffer these things. He is our salvation-author and leader. If all believers will be glorified (Romans 8:28\u201330), why would the author state many sons and not \u201call sons\u201d? Given that the author is writing to Jews, then in a sense all Jews are sons of God (Exodus 4:22\u201323). However, only those sons who believe will be glorified.
\nIn verse 11, He is also our Sanctifier. Because the Sanctifier and the sanctified are one, He can call them brethren. The Sanctifier is the Messiah (10:10; 13:12); the sanctified are the believers (10:14). Believers are sanctified by this One, the Sanctifier, and because the ones sanctified are sanctified by the Sanctifier, they would become one with Him. God made them both one in their humanity, and now both the Sanctifier and the sanctified can call God, Father. It is this very process of sanctification that will lead to the final glorification.
\nIn verses 12\u201313, the author quotes three Old Testament passages to show the Messiah\u2019s identification with man and, at the same time, emphasize the humanity of Jesus. First, he quotes Psalm 22:22, which emphasizes the relationship of the Messiah to Israel following His Resurrection. The second quotation is of Isaiah 8:17, pointing out that Isaiah the Prophet put his trust in God to deliver Israel. Here the writer quotes that passage showing the relationship of the Messiah to the Father as He now waits for His enemies to be subdued. The third quotation is of Isaiah 8:18, where Isaiah points out that he and his two sons are signs to Israel. The application in this context concerns the future relationship of the Son when He comes to claim His own. The point is the same: this One is our Sanctifier. In that context Isaiah the prophet was making a distinction between the Remnant and the non-Remnant. The author of the Book of Hebrews was also addressing the Remnant of his day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. To Overcome the Prince of Death\u20142:14<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The second reason for the Incarnation and the cross was to overcome the prince of death. The author starts out by showing what the object of the Incarnation was: Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood. The Greek word sharers is the word koinonia, which means \u201cto have in common with.\u201d In this case, what He had in common with humanity was flesh and blood. God as God does not have flesh and blood, but He became man to have a common element with humanity, which is flesh and blood. At the Incarnation, He took hold of human nature as manifested by flesh and blood but without its sin. This was not in place of His deity, but it was something additional to it. He still had His deity but, in addition to His deity, He took on human nature. The Greek word for partook means \u201cto be in the middle of something\u201d taking hold of something that is not natural to one\u2019s nature. It is not natural to God\u2019s nature to have flesh and blood, but He added to His divine nature flesh and blood. Therefore, He could die and, by means of His death, render Satan\u2019s power inoperative. The King James Version reads \u201cdestroy,\u201d but the Greek word is katargeo and it does not mean \u201cto destroy\u201d but \u201cto render inoperative.\u201d The same word is used concerning the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law was not destroyed, but it was rendered inoperative and, as a result, it does not hold any legal authority over the believer anymore. Satan is still around, he still has his power, but insofar as the death of a believer is concerned, he has been rendered inoperative; he cannot put a believer to death.
\nThroughout Old Testament history, Satan did have authority over the physical death of both believers and unbelievers. Today, he still has that authority over unbelievers, but he no longer has the authority of physical death of believers. His power in that realm has been rendered inoperative. There is one exception given in 1 Corinthians 5:1\u20135 and that is in the case of an excommunicated believer. When a believer is excommunicated, it means that he is put back under Satan\u2019s authority as far as his physical life is concerned. Satan could put a believer to death if he was excommunicated. The same passage goes on to say that his spirit is still saved, but his physical life is killed by Satan. This is the only exception where Satan has any authority over the death of a believer. Until Jesus died, Satan\u2019s weapon was physical death, but Jesus took that away from him rendering the weapon inoperative. Messiah\u2019s counter weapon is eternal life, and He attained this by the means of His death. Satan is still in existence, but believers are freed of any necessary obligation to obey him. Jesus is not only our pioneer and salvation, He is not only our Sanctifier, but He is also our Satan-Conqueror.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. To Free the Believer\u20142:15<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The third reason for the Incarnation and the cross was to free the believer. The fear of death enslaves man, but the believer is freed both from the fear of death and from death itself, because, for the believer, death is no longer a punishment, but the means by which he enters Heaven. For the unbeliever death is punishment, but for the believer it is not punishment but a way of entering into Heaven (1 Cor. 15:55; Phil. 1:21).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
d. To Help Man\u20142:16\u201318<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fourth and last reason for the Incarnation and the cross was to help man. In verse 16, the sphere of the Messiah\u2019s work was men, not angels. There were angels who fell, but God did not choose to provide salvation for fallen angels; He only chose to provide salvation for fallen man. That is why the writer states: not to angels does he give help. To provide salvation, God had to become like the ones He is providing salvation for. That is why God became man: to provide salvation for man. That is why the Messiah never took on \u201cangelanity\u201d (to coin a word); He never became an angel because God never intended to provide salvation for fallen angels. He did become man to provide salvation for man. He became human, and not just any human, but of the seed of Abraham; He became a Jewish man.
\nThe scope of His work, in verse 17, is redemption. He was made like unto his brethren. He was made a Jewish man for three purposes: (1) To become merciful, an attribute of humanity; (2) To become faithful in the administration of His priestly functions; and (3) To become a high priest, because, as the author will point out in 5:1, only a man could be a priest. By becoming a priest, He made propitiation. The word propitiation means \u201cto satisfy the wrath of God.\u201d By means of Jesus\u2019 death, God was propitiated; the wrath of God against sin was satisfied. God\u2019s righteous demands were satisfied by the substitutionary payment of the blood of the Son for the sins of the people.
\nThe background of verses 14\u201317 is the Old Testament concept of the \u201ckinsman-redeemer.\u201d Under the Law of Moses there were many ways that a Jew could get himself into trouble, and one of these was to fall into a state of indebtedness beyond his ability to repay naturally or normally. If a Jew under the Law found himself in that kind of situation, there was only one option left. He had to sell himself into slavery and work as a slave for six years. He would be released on the seventh year. However, once he had sold himself into slavery, there were two options available to him. One alternative was to serve his six years and then be released. A second possibility was the option of the kinsman-redeemer: if a kinsman would pay off his indebtedness, he could be released from slavery before his six years were up. To qualify, the kinsman-redeemer had to meet three requirements. First, he had to be a kinsman or a blood relative; a stranger could not do it. Second, he had to have the price of redemption; he had to have the means to pay off his relative\u2019s debts. Third, the kinsman had to be willing to pay the price; it was not a mandatory role.
\nThe Bible teaches that those who sin are slaves to sin. This is true of all humanity; all are sinners. Yet, the Jews were also enslaved to the curse of the Law due to their inability to keep the Law. Jesus, the Kinsman-Redeemer, fulfilled all three requirements. First, He was a kinsman. By becoming human, He had a blood-relationship to all humanity in general. Since He came as a member of the seed of Abraham, He had a blood-relationship with Jewish humanity in particular. Second, He had the price of redemption. In this case, the price of redemption was innocent human blood. Because He was the only Jew who ever lived that kept the Mosaic Law perfectly, He had innocent blood. Third, He was willing to pay the price. He Himself said: no man takes my life from me, I lay it down of myself (Jn. 10:18).
\nFinally, in verse 18, the author makes the application of Jesus\u2019 work to individual men in the conflict of life. This verse shows that which was involved in becoming like his brethren. It meant suffering and temptations. There are two reasons why He can help: He was tempted and He also suffered. Because He was tempted and because He suffered, He is now able to aid those who are tempted. The word translated as succor is a compound Greek word that means \u201cto run to the cry of.\u201d When believers are in need and cry, He runs to help. He runs to assist them in their temptations, in their sufferings. Jesus is not only the Author of salvation, He is not only Jesus the Sanctifier, He is not only the Satan-Conqueror, but He is also Jesus the Sympathizer. He is able to sympathize with those who are now being tempted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
C. The Superiority of the Son to Moses\u20143:1\u20136<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The author now goes on to the second pillar of Judaism: Moses. The background to this section is Numbers 12:5\u20138. The brother and sister of Moses challenged his authority and God intervened. God pointed out Moses\u2019 faithfulness and his uniqueness as a prophet with whom He spoke face to face. Scott answers the possible question as to why the author did not begin with Moses in the first place:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At first, comparing Jesus to Moses may seem anticlimactic after the author of Hebrews established Jesus\u2019 superiority to angels. \u201cIt would seem to go without saying that he is greater than Moses.\u201d However, in first-century Jewish thought Moses was held in almost God-like esteem, even higher than angels. So contrasting Jesus to Moses is a step beyond 1:5\u201313, not a step backward. The comparison \u201cwas not simply a literary exercise that enabled the writer to speak of the excellence of Jesus or to exhibit his own exegetical skill.\u2026 He [the writer] chose to acknowledge the faithfulness of Moses because this appears to have been a significant consideration to the men and women whom he addressed.\u201d\nThe comparison was also bound to arise in the minds of first-century Christians, for the name of Moses appears more times in the Old Testament and in fact in all of the Bible (847 total times: 762 in the Old Testament and 85 in the New Testament) than any other proper name except for Jesus and David. Indeed the comparison may go back to Jesus Himself (Matt. 5:21\u201348; Mark 10:1\u201312; 14:24), in addition to early Christian preaching (Acts 3:22\u201323; 7:17\u201344), Paul (2 Cor. 3; Gal. 3:19), and John (John 1:17; Rev. 15:3).<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\n- In His Person and Work\u20143:1\u20134\n1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, even Jesus; 2 who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also was Moses in all his house. 3 For he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by so much as he that built the house has more honor than the house. 4 For every house is built by some one; but he that built all things is God.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
In verse 1, the point of the comparison is the faithfulness of Moses. Moses was faithful, but defection in the Old Testament took place under faithful Moses. Now that one greater than Moses is here, will there be yet another defection? There are two terms that clearly show the author is writing to true believers: holy brethren and partakers of a heavenly calling. He is not writing to people who came close to believing, but to those who were true believers. The term heavenly calling refers to the effectual calling to salvation, and they are partakers of that calling. The word partakers means that \u201cthey are part of it.\u201d In 3:14, they are partakers of Messiah; in 6:4, partakers of the Holy Spirit; and in 12:8, partakers of divine discipline. They are partakers because they are real believers. Because they are real believers, the writer calls upon them to consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. The Greek word for consider means \u201cto make a careful study or investigation of.\u201d They had already made their confession, but after they had confessed that Jesus was the Messiah, the next step, Jesus said in Matthew 11:29, was to learn of me. They needed to gaze on Him, the Messiah, not on the Levitical system that was trying to pull them back. Here the author gives the Messiah two titles: Apostle and High Priest. This is the only place where these two titles are used of Jesus.
\nFirst, He is an Apostle. In this sense, Jesus is like Moses. An Apostle, like a prophet, represents God to man. In this case, the writer is not using the term Apostle in the same sense as the Twelve Apostles, but he is using the word Apostle in the sense of a messenger through whom a new dispensation came into being and by whom a covenant was made. As John 1:17 points out, this was true of both Moses and Jesus. Through Moses, the Mosaic Covenant was made and the Dispensation of Law was brought in. Through Jesus, the New Covenant was made and the Dispensation of Grace was brought in. The very word Apostle means \u201cone who has been sent.\u201d God sent Moses (Exodus 3:1\u20136). The Messiah Jesus was someone who had been sent (Jn. 3:34; 5:36\u201337; 17:3; 20:4).
\nSecond, He is also the High Priest. A high priest represents men to God. In that sense, Jesus is like Aaron. These two titles are given to Jesus: Apostle, which makes Him like Moses; and High Priest, which makes Him like Aaron. The apostolic theme will be developed in 3:1\u20134:13. The high priestly theme will be developed in 4:14\u20137:28. This is the High Priest of our confession. The word confession means the readers have publicly confessed their faith. The content of their confession was that Jesus is the Messiah (4:14; 10:23). These are believers who have already confessed Jesus as the Messiah. Now they need to consider who He is as the Apostle and High Priest of their faith.
\nIn verse 2, the author points out that Moses is the highest example of human faithfulness building upon Numbers 12:7 in that \u201cMoses was faithful in all of his house.\u201d The house is the House of Israel. Moses was faithful in his work in the House of Israel. Jesus was greater in faithfulness than Moses because even Moses failed occasionally, but Jesus never failed. Jesus was faithful to God the Father who appointed Him to this position.
\nTo prove his claim that Jesus is superior to Moses in faithfulness, in verses 3\u20134a, the writer states that he who built the house is superior to the house he built. Moses was in the House of Israel, but the Messiah built the house: For [this One] has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses. The reason is that He who builds the house is more honorable than the house itself. Furthermore, in verse 4b, the Messiah is viewed as the builder of everything. Every house is built by someone: but he that [has] built all things is God. In conclusion, in His person and work, Jesus is superior to Moses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- In His Position\u20143:5\u20136\n5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all his house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken; 6 but Christ as a son, over his house; whose house are we, if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
In verse 5, the author states that Moses was faithful in all his house, but his position in the house was that of a servant. The Greek word used for servant means \u201cto heal.\u201d It emphasizes Moses as ministering to the moral and spiritual needs of Israel; he had a ministry of moral and spiritual healing in his lifetime with Israel. Nevertheless, Moses\u2019 ministry was preparatory: for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken, meaning in reference to the Messiah.
\nIn verse 6, Moses and Jesus are compared. While Moses was a servant in the house, Jesus as the Messiah was over the house, whose house these believers now are. The house that the writer refers to could be the Church because, in Ephesians 2:19, the Church is viewed as a household. It could also refer to the house of the Israel of God (Gal 6:16), which in this context is more likely. Either way, the Messiah is Lord over the house. Whereas Moses was a servant, the Messiah is a son. As the Son, He is the owner and heir of this house. He is the Son of the Lord of the house, but Moses is only a servant to the Lord of the house. The closing statement shows the mark of a true believer: if we hold fast our boldness and the glorying of our hope firm unto the end. This does not mean that believers are saved only if they just hold on to the end. That would mean salvation is attained by works, not by faith. The point here is that the continuance in faith is the evidence that a person actually believed. Lack of continuance in faith does not mean the person is not saved; it only means that the person does not have the evidence that faith exists.
\nScott has a fitting summary of this passage:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Three parallels serve as a background to the Jesus\/Moses comparison: Moses delivered the Israelites from the bondage of slavery and Egypt, while Jesus delivered all believers from the bondage of sin and damnation (2:14\u201315). Through Moses, God constituted the Israelites as the people of God, while Jesus constitutes all believers as the sons of God (2:10). Moses brought the Israelites the Old Covenant, whereas Jesus brings all believers into the New Covenant, establishing a greater access to God for them (4:14\u201316), which had been only for Israel until Jesus came. In Jesus\u2019 superiority He replaced\u2014and exceeded\u2014all Moses did.\nHebrews 3:1\u20136 points to Jesus\u2019 supreme honor, faithfulness, and access to God the Father as a High Priest, and His position as Apostle and Son. Therefore in view of His superiority, believers, having entered a New Covenant with God, have gained greater access to Him than was ever possible under the Old Covenant. In response believers should be faithful to Him and should hold fast to their confession of, their hope in, and their faith in \u201cJesus the pioneer and perfecter of faith\u201d \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nD. The Second Warning: Parenthetical Warning on the Danger of Disobedience\u20143:7\u20134:13<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The background to this section is Numbers 13\u201314: the sin of Kadesh-Barnea, which was a crucial turning point in the history of Israel in the Wilderness. The Israelites had finished one year of journeying in the Wilderness, a great portion of the Mosaic Law had been given, and the Tabernacle had been built. They were now at the oasis of Kadesh-Barnea located on the border of the Promised Land. Before the conquest could begin in earnest, Moses sent out twelve spies to survey the territory. When they returned forty days later, the twelve men gave a report. Two of them, Joshua and Caleb, declared that with God Israel could take the Land. The other ten claimed that, due to the numerical superiority and the military strength of the Canaanites, it would be impossible to conquer the Land. The masses of the people decided to follow the majority vote. There was widespread revolt against God and Moses, and the Israelites came close to the point of killing Moses and Aaron until God intervened. This was a major, crucial turning point.
\nThe children of Israel had rebelled and murmured previously, but this was so unique that it was referred to as \u201cThe Provocation\u201d in Psalm 95. God then declared a judgment on that generation. The Exodus Generation that came out of Egypt would not be allowed to enter the Land. They had to continue wandering for forty years until every person, except Joshua, Caleb, and those under the age of twenty died in the Wilderness. Forty years later, it would be a new nation, a new generation, the Wilderness Generation that would enter the Promised Land under Joshua. This new generation that had not been born as slaves in Egypt but as freemen in the Wilderness would be the one entering the Promised Land. The Jewish generation that left Egypt for the Land, the Exodus Generation, would not enter the Promised Land. They had reached the point of no return and their decision was now irrevocable. The judgment was one of physical death outside the Land.
\nThe application of this section is that these believers (the readers of the Book of Hebrews) are in a similar danger. They could make an irrevocable decision and also be subjected to physical death. The principle in Scripture is that once a point of no return is reached, the offenders are subject to divine judgment. This judgment is physical, not spiritual; it does not mean loss of salvation. In fact, Numbers 14:20 does say that the people repented; it even goes on to say that God forgave the sin. It did not affect anyone\u2019s individual salvation, but the physical consequences of their sin did need to be paid. Once a point of no return is reached, no matter how much repenting one does thereafter, the fact of coming physical judgment cannot be changed. That is what happened in this case. Even Moses had to die outside the Land because of a specific sin he committed. Although this did not affect his individual salvation, he had to pay the physical consequences of his sin. Here, again, the correlation is: in the Old Testament, the issue is physical death and loss of temporal blessings but not loss of salvation.
\nThe author uses the term rest frequently in this section, but he will distinguish between three different types of rest. The first is Canaan Rest, which means to cease struggling with the enemy. It is a symbol of consecration rest. It has to do with the subjection of one\u2019s mind, one\u2019s will, and one\u2019s heart to God\u2019s power. This type of rest enables the believer to conquer sin. The second is Creation Rest, which emphasizes a completed work. God finished His work after six days and then rested. This rest deals with a cessation of activity. There is a present aspect to Creation Rest; it is a type of salvation or redemption rest. It means to trust in the finished work of the Messiah and not to return to the works of the Law. There is also a future aspect to Creation Rest; it is the final facet of salvation when the believer gets to Heaven or the Messianic Kingdom. It is the rest a believer enters into when he dies, his work on earth is finished, and he goes to Heaven. The third type of rest is Sabbath Rest, which refers to a spiritual rest. It symbolizes the spiritual rest of spiritual maturity sometimes referred to as \u201cthe faith rest life.\u201d This is the type of rest he is encouraging them to enter into.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Admonition Against Disobedience\u20143:7\u201319<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
Gleason makes the following observation about the Jewish background of this section:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Several characteristics of the use of the Old Testament by the author of Hebrews are important to this study. The first is the author\u2019s application of early Jewish exegetical principles in his treatment of Old Testament texts. For example the author utilized Hillel\u2019s exegetical rule known as gezera shawa (\u201cverbal analogy\u201d) by appealing to rest in Genesis 2:2 in order to explain the meaning of rest in Psalm 95. Furthermore the author followed the midrashic practice of selective editing in his citation of Psalm 95:10. By changing the demonstrative pronoun from \u201cthat [ereine] generation,\u201d as found in the Septuagint, to \u201cthis [taute] generation\u201d (Heb. 3:10), he was able to apply more forcefully the warning of Psalm 95 to his readers\u2019 situation. This minor modification produces a rhetorical effect without altering the meaning of the original verse. Another example is the author\u2019s repeated use of \u201ctoday\u201d (semeron) from Psalm 95:7 in order to modernize the Old Testament text as well as stress the urgency of its warning to his audience (Heb. 3:7, 13, 15; 4:7). In summary, the author sought to reorient Old Testament texts to the situation of his readers by using common rabbinical practices without violating or altering their actual sense to their original audience.\nA second characteristic is the author\u2019s pattern of using extended expositions of Old Testament passages in a fashion surprisingly rare among other New Testament writers.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\na. The Old Testament Lesson\u20143:7\u201311<\/p>\n\n\n\n
7 Wherefore, even as the Holy Spirit said,\nTo-day if you shall hear his voice,\n8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation,\nLike as in the day of the trial in the wilderness,\n9 Where your fathers tried me by proving me,\nAnd saw my works forty years.\n10 Wherefore I was displeased with this generation,\nAnd said, They do always err in their heart:\nBut they did not know my ways;\n11 As I sware in my wrath,\nThey shall not enter into my rest.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe Old Testament lesson is based upon the greatness of the Son and the fact that the Son is greater than Moses. The admonition here is: do not apostasize through disobedience; do not do to this One what they did to Moses. The verse begins with Wherefore, pointing to the application. In light of the fact that the Son is superior to Moses, they must not apostasize through disobedience. Throughout these two chapters, the word To-day emphasizes a sense of urgency; the present moment. Do it now!
\nIn verses 7\u201311, the author quotes Psalms 95:7\u201311, ascribing the passage to the Holy Spirit. The Psalm 95 passage makes reference to two earlier situations: Exodus 17:1\u20137 and Numbers 20:1\u201313. This marked the beginning and toward the end of the wilderness journey. He calls it the provocation or the rebellion, because it was a significant turning point. The Greek word for the provocation is used only three times in the entire New Testament and, all three times, it is used in this chapter in verses 8, 15, and 16. Altogether, Moses writes, the children of Israel provoked God ten times (Num. 14:22\u201323), but the one occasion at Kadesh-Barnea was the turning point. That was the provocation of all provocations. Verse 9 mentions the forty years of wanderings. The mention of forty years in the Wilderness is significant, because, by the time this book is being written, it has been almost forty years since the crucifixion. In verse 10, God\u2019s reaction to their unbelief was anger. The Greek word for displeased means that God was \u201cvexed,\u201d He was \u201cincensed.\u201d He was angry with the generation that came out of Egypt because they always go astray in their heart and they do not know my ways. The writer will draw a parallel betwe en that generation of Jews in the Wilderness and the generation of Jews of his day. Verse 11 shows the result of this provocation at Kadesh-Barnea: they failed to enter into rest. God has the option of manifesting His wrath against His people for continued disobedience; therefore, they failed to enter into Canaan rest.
\nIn many hymns, the Promised Land is a picture of Heaven. In Scripture, the Promised Land is not a picture of Heaven but a picture of rest and of ceasing to struggle with the enemy. The point is that a redeemed people can lose blessings intended for them because they do not continue in faith to enjoy them. Israel had been redeemed from slavery in Egypt, but they lost out on the blessing of the Land because they did not continue in faith. They failed to enter into Canaan Rest. Canaan Rest in the Old Testament is mentioned in Deuteronomy 1:34\u201336; 12:9\u201310; and Joshua 23:1. Even in the Old Testament, they viewed Canaan Rest as being a picture of consecration rest. It means rest that comes from the subjection of the mind, the will, and the heart to God\u2019s power, which enables believers to conquer sin. Joshua did give Israel rest from their enemies when he conquered them and brought the believers into the Land. Joshua mentions this three times in his own book: 21:24; 22:4; and 23:1. Nevertheless, this was a different Jewish generation for the Israel that left Egypt was a different generation than the Israel that entered the Land. The Exodus Generation, which came out of Egypt, was never able to enter the rest of Canaan that Joshua provided. This rest was for the Wilderness Generation. Again, a redeemed people may lose blessings that could be enjoyed if they had continuous faith. Although the Exodus Generation was forgiven for the sin of unbelief, as Numbers 14:20 clearly states, it suffered the physical consequences of unbelief and forfeited the rest it could have enjoyed in the Promised Land. The judgment was a physical judgment, a physical death. Once again, the issue is not eternal salvation but rather, that disobedience may result in temporal, physical judgment and the loss of future rewards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Application of the Lesson\u20143:12\u201315<\/p>\n\n\n\n
12 Take heed, brethren, lest haply there shall be in any one of you an evil heart of unbelief, in falling away from the living God: 13 but exhort one another day by day, so long as it is called To-day; lest any one of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin: 14 for we are become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end: 15 while it is said,\nTo-day if ye shall hear his voice,\nHarden not your hearts, as in the provocation.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe application has both a negative and a positive side. The negative side is found in verse 12. The author of Hebrews again calls the readers brethren, showing that he is writing and speaking to believers. The warning is: Take heed or \u201cbeware.\u201d The warning is to not develop an evil heart of unbelief, which will be evidenced by departing from the living God. The Greek word used here for falling away is the origin of the English word \u201capostasy.\u201d The writer is saying, \u201cdo not apostasize or depart from the living God;\u201d \u201cdo not stand off or away from your former beliefs.\u201d Otherwise, these believers will end up corrupting and bringing down other believers.
\nThe positive side of the application is found in verse 13. Believers are to exhort one another daily. The Greek word for exhorting means \u201cto come alongside in order to help.\u201d In John 14:16, the Holy Spirit is given the term \u201cParaclete\u201d or Comforter. The word in John 14 is used as a noun, and the same word is used here as a verb. The Holy Spirit comes alongside and helps. Believers are also to come alongside each other and help, especially if they see another believer in trouble or drifting spiritually. They should try to counteract the deceitfulness of sin. The Greek text shows that it is a specific sin; it is this sin. If they see a brother about to apostasize from the faith, they must come alongside and help him. This sin is deceitful because it tricks them into thinking this is the best way out of their present situation; they are being persecuted for the faith. The antidote for developing a hard heart is a caring and encouraging community of believers.
\nIn verse 14, the author explains the reason and the need for the exhortation. The issue in discussion is not the retention of salvation based upon the persistence of our faith, but that the possession of salvation is evidenced by the continuation of faith. The \u201cif\u201d clause in this verse does not mean believers become sharers if they hold fast long enough. The perfect tense is used and, therefore, it means the readers have already become partakers of Christ. Yet, how can someone else recognize that they have already become partakers of Christ? If they hold steadfast unto the end, if they maintain their faith to the end, it will prove that they really were partakers of the Messiah. They were already partakers, but continuing to do so unto the end would be the final evidence of it. In verse 15, the writer quotes Psalm 95:7. He reemphasizes the admonition of verse 13. The application is \u201cdo not apostasize.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Interpretation of the Lesson\u20143:16\u201319<\/p>\n\n\n\n
16 For who, when they heard, did provoke? nay, did not all they that came out of Egypt by Moses? 17 And with whom was he displeased forty years? was it not with them that sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that were disobedient? 19 And we see that they were not able to enter in because of unbelief.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe writer gives the interpretation of the lesson by asking three questions. The first question is in verse 16, \u201cWho were the provokers?\u201d Who provoked God in the provocation? The answer is, the provokers are the very ones whom God rescued from Egypt. The very ones who started off in faith for the Promised Land missed the Land of rest and the life of rest because of unbelief. The ones whom God rescued provoked Him.
\nIn verse 17, the second question is, \u201cWho was it that sinned?\u201d The answer is, the provokers are the same ones who sinned. They sinned and suffered the consequences. Theirs was not a one-time sin. Their unbelief manifested itself throughout the forty years of wilderness wanderings, and, consequently, their bodies fell in the wilderness. It should be noted that this is, again, dealing with physical judgment. This verse is not dealing with spiritual judgment. The punishment was physical death. Not everyone who died in the wilderness was spiritually lost. Moses was not allowed to enter the Promised Land because of a sin he committed. He was punished by physical death outside the Land, but he was not punished spiritually by loss of salvation. The same was true of Aaron, Miriam, and many others. The punishment was physical death; it was not spiritual death. While Joshua and Caleb were sinners, they were not guilty of a specific act of disobedience worthy of death. They were allowed to enter the Promised Land alive. It is important to recognize that the emphasis the author gives about punishment here is physical death. This is true throughout this book. The issue is the physical consequences of going beyond the point of no return.
\nThe third question is in verse 18, \u201cTo whom did He say they would not enter into rest?\u201d The answer is, He said it to the very same group of people. Disobedience brought rejection, and it was these people who disobeyed.
\nIn verse 19, the conclusion is that because of unbelief, they could not enter into the rest they were promised. The rest is that of the Promised Land. Rebellion meant the loss of promised blessings. Notice that Israel did not lose its status as a redeemed people; they did not go back to become slaves of Egypt again. They were still the redeemed, chosen people of God. Nevertheless, they did lose the blessing of the Promised Land and a life of peace and rest in the Land.
\nTo summarize his argument of verses 16\u201319, the Exodus Generation that was redeemed from Egypt failed to enter into the Promised Land because they failed to continue in faith. Their failure underwent a three-stage progression. The first stage was that they fell into unbelief. The second stage was that unbelief led to active disobedience. The third stage was that active disobedience led to wide-scale, open sin. This sin brought an irreversible judgment: forty years of wandering and physical death outside the Land. That was true of the Exodus Generation. Now, the generation to whom the Book of Hebrews was written is in a similar situation that entails a similar danger. It has been almost forty years since the Messiah died. The judgment of A.D. 70 will occur at the end of these forty years. Many died after the forty years in the wilderness. If the readers of this epistle go back into Judaism, they, too, will die a physical death. Gleason reaches the same conclusion:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some have mistakenly equated the Exodus generation\u2019s experience of \u201cfalling in the wilderness\u201d (Heb. 3:17) and \u201cnot entering My rest\u201d (3:11, 18\u201319; 4:6) with \u201ceternal damnation.\u201d This conclusion is unwarranted for several reasons. First, this would imply that Moses, Miriam, and Aaron were also included among the condemned, since they too died in the wilderness and forfeited their entrance into the rest of Canaan. Few if any would agree that the greatest of all the prophets, Moses, along with the founder of the Levitical priesthood, Aaron, were excluded from the world to come because of their disobedience. Moses\u2019 appearance on the Mount of Transfiguration with Jesus (Matt. 17:3; Luke 9:30) should remove any doubt regarding his life in God\u2019s presence.\nSecond, the oath that the Lord made in response to Israel\u2019s sin at Kadesh-barnea contains two inseparable parts. The first is the declaration that God \u201cpardoned them according to [Moses\u2019] word\u201d (Num. 14:20). This can only mean that the people were forgiven of the iniquity of the sin they had just committed (v. 19). In the same breath the Lord uttered the second part of His oath, denying them entrance into the land (v. 23). As if to reinforce his oath (\u201cas I live\u201d), the Lord then stated three times in five verses that their \u201ccorpses shall fall in this wilderness\u201d (vv. 28\u201333; cf. v. 35). Both their forgiveness and their failure to enter into the land are declared as part of one oath. Since forgiveness and eternal condemnation are mutually exclusive, neither their failure to enter the rest of Canaan nor their untimely death can be equated with damnation. However, before the nature of their judgment can be determined, the Old Testament concept of rest must be understood.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\n- Argument Regarding the Rest of Faith\u20144:1\u201310<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
In verse 1, there is the danger of falling short of the rest:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Let us fear therefore, lest haply, a promise being left of entering into his rest, any one of you should seem to have come short of it.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nNotice again the word therefore. In light of what the author just said in 3:17\u201319, in light of Israel\u2019s failure to enter into Canaan Rest, there is now a danger for these believers. They might fall short of entering into a rest that God is offering. It is possible that the faith of these Jewish believers will be tried because of the persecution they are experiencing at the time this epistle is written to them. Because of their present situation, they, too, might fall short of attaining all God wants them to attain in this life. The promise of rest is still available because it was never totally fulfilled. The promise of rest in the Old Testament was unfulfilled, but it was not withdrawn; it is available to those who want it now. The entire purpose of this letter to the Hebrews is to get the Jewish believers to enter the fullness of rest.
\nThe writer uses two different words for rest in this chapter. The one he uses the most is katapartheis, which is used eight times in chapters three and four: 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3 (twice), 5, 10, and 11. Outside of the Book of Hebrews, this word is used only once in the entire New Testament (Acts 14:18). It is unique to this writer. The word means \u201ca cessation of activity.\u201d It means rest in the sense of ceasing. He states: Let us fear. This is the attitude believers must have when they realize that there are spiritual consequences for making the wrong decision. In this case, these Jewish believers will fall short of the promise. They will miss out on things available to them for failing to believe the promise and entering into it. Pentecost comments:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In Hebrews 4 the author has recognized that the Christians to whom he is writing are in a situation parallel to that of Israel at Kadesh. Their intense persecution paralleled the opposition Israel faced from the inhabitants of the land. These Jewish believers had severed their relationship to the established systems by identifying with Christ in baptism (Heb. 10:22\u201323). Their renunciation of established Judaism had incurred the wrath of the religious community. They were undergoing intense persecution (vv. 32\u201334), but had not yet been martyred (12:4), even though they faced that possibility.\nOn the other hand, these believers lived close enough to Jerusalem to attend the appointed feasts that were observed there. This proximity provided a possible solution to their sufferings. If they, without renouncing their faith in Christ, were to mingle with the observers of established rituals in the temple, those persecuting them might forget the fact that they had previously renounced it by their baptism. After all, Paul had observed Jewish rituals as memorials to Christ during his ministry (Acts 20:16; 1 Cor. 5:7). Thus many were not assembling with the believers, but were seeking to re-identify themselves with established Judaism in order to escape persecution (Heb. 10:25).\nIn the second place, like their ancestors at Kadesh, the recipients of the epistle had a promise from God \u201cof entering into his rest\u201d (Heb. 4:1). This is not the rest of salvation, for they are recognized as believers already (3:1). Nor is it the future millennial rest in which all persecution will cease. Such a future expectation would neither provide a solution to their present problems, nor follow the imagery of the rest laid before Israel at Kadesh, which was a faith\/life rest to be entered in their present experience. Thus we conclude that the rest referred to in Hebrews 4:1 is that faith\/life rest into which a believer enters by faith, and in which he enjoys the promised blessings that God gives to those who believe and obey Him.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nVerse 2 describes the state of the readers of this epistle:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us, even as also they: but the word of hearing did not profit them, because it was not united by faith with them that heard<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author states that these readers are without excuse because they have had the gospel preached to them. Again he draws a parallel with Numbers 13\u201314. Twelve men came back from the Promised Land and gave a report. The Exodus Generation received a report from the twelve spies. The children of Israel made a wrong decision as a result of that report. The writer of Hebrews is addressing people in a similar situation. These Jewish believers have received a message from the Twelve Apostles. What will they do with this report? The emphasis is on the necessity of faith to attain spiritual blessings that come with salvation.
\nVerse 3 states that some believers are entering the rest:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For we who have believed do enter into that rest; even as he had said,\nAs I swore in my wrath,\nThey shall not enter into my rest:\nalthough the works were finished from the foundation of the world.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe rest of this verse is Creation Rest. Because it says my rest, it is referring to God\u2019s rest. The rest of creation is a quality of life that God enjoys. The statement, we who have believed, uses the past tense and it refers to the writer and the readers. Then the author switches to the present tense we \u2026 do [now] enter into that rest; we are presently entering into the spiritual rest. In Hebrews 4:11, he will point out that the final facet of the rest is still future. The point is that they have believed, and because they have believed, they have begun to enter this Creation Rest though the final facet of it is still future. These Jewish believers must continue to exercise faith to enjoy what this rest has to offer. The writer again quotes Psalm 95:11. He points out that the Wilderness Generation did not enter that rest even though God has possessed it since Creation. In Psalm 95, God, through the psalmist, announced the existence of a future rest: salvation rest. This was true although God Himself began His own rest after Creation.
\nVerses 4\u20135 quote the Old Testament to show that the rest has been prepared:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4For he had said somewhere of the seventh day on this wise, And God rested on the seventh day from all his works; 5and in this place again,\nThey shall not enter into my rest.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nVerse 4 speaks of Creation Rest and quotes Genesis 2:2 showing that Creation Rest has already been prepared. Creation Rest points to a completed work. It is a type of redemption rest that was completed by the work of the Messiah. Believers will some day enjoy the fullness of Creation Rest when their work on earth is complete and they go to Heaven. Verse 5 draws the typology of salvation rest and quotes Psalm 95:11 to show that Israel failed to enter into the rest by divine decree.
\nThe application is found in verse 6:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Seeing therefore it remains that some should enter thereinto, and they to whom the good tidings were before preached failed to enter in because of disobedience, \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe argument is that certain ones were to enter this rest, but they failed. God still desired to fulfill His purpose and, therefore, He appointed another day when another invitation would be given. The hope of a future entrance into this rest was given by David, the author of Psalm 95, but this rest must be entered into by faith. Israel failed to enter this rest because of disobedience and unbelief. Nevertheless, the invitation to enter into God\u2019s rest is now given: \u201cit remains for some to enter into it.\u201d
\nVerse 7 is the re-offer:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2026 he again defines a certain day, To-day, saying in David so long a time afterward (even as has been said before),\nTo-day if ye shall hear his voice,\nHarden not your hearts.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThrough David, God has re-offered the rest to believers in Psalm 95:7\u20138. This time the writer of Hebrews ascribes the Psalm to David, whereas in 3:7, he ascribed it to the Holy Spirit. This shows the dual authorship of Scripture. God is the ultimate Author, but He uses human means to record it. The Holy Spirit inspired David to write Psalm 95. The author is now trying to encourage his readers to press on to spiritual maturity in order to enter into a faith rest life. He emphasizes the word To-day. They must respond to this immediately because some opportunities are limited to a specific time and a specific place. For Israel back then, that specific time and place was Kadesh-Barnea. For these Jewish believers, it is A.D. 70. Consequently, the author of the letter urges them to make a once-and-for-all decision to press on to spiritual maturity before they make an irrevocable decision and reach the point of no return. If they make a wrong decision, they will suffer the same fate as the Israelites in the Wilderness. They will experience physical death.
\nVerse 8 gives the illustration:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken afterward of another day.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe point of referring to Joshua is to illustrate that the present offer of rest is valid because Joshua did not bring the children of Israel to the rest of spiritual maturity. The Land of Israel was not the totality of rest that God had planned for His people. Joshua did indeed give them Canaan Rest; Joshua did give the Jewish people rest from their enemies (Josh. 21:44; 22:4; 23:1). Yet, he failed to give them the kind of rest that comes through spiritual maturity. This can only come through the Messiah.
\nIn verse 9, the author turns away from Canaan Rest to Sabbath Rest:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There remains therefore a sabbath rest for the people of God.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe writer here uses the second Greek word found in this chapter for rest. It is the word sabbatismos. This is a Greek word used only here in the entire New Testament. Gleason states the following regarding this word:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The writer of Hebrews called this primordial rest [sabbatismos] (4:9). Although found nowhere in Greek literature before Hebrews, this term occurs several times in other early Christian literature. In each case [sabbatismos] refers not to the Sabbath Day but rather \u201cto the Sabbath observance, or Sabbath celebration.\u201d The emphasis was not on the cessation of daily activities but rather on an unhindered opportunity for the people of Israel to celebrate God\u2019s life-sustaining presence among them (Exod. 31:12\u201316; cf. 2 Macc. 8:27). As such, Sabbath celebration was meant to be a time of festive praise including special sacrifices commemorating God\u2019s provisions (Lev. 23:27\u201332; 24:5\u20138; Num. 28:9\u201310; 1 Chron. 9:32; 23:30\u201331; 2 Chron. 2:4; 8:12\u201313; 31:3). Its origin in Creation suggests that this Sabbath celebration transcends the rest forfeited by the Exodus generation and enjoyed under David and Joshua. So this \u201crest\u201d remains available \u201ctoday\u201d to everyone who believes (Heb. 4:4).<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThis is the ideal rest. It is provided by God. It is available today and the readers of Hebrews can attain it by faith. It means reaching a definite stage of attainment after satisfactorily fulfilling God\u2019s purpose for their life. God finished His work and He entered into Sabbath Rest. Sabbath Rest is a type of spiritual maturity. It was destined primarily for Israel in Exodus 20:8\u201311. Its symbolic meaning is that it remains for the true believer, both Jew and Gentile. This is a promise of rest available for every believer. If a believer persists in his faith, he will reach a level of spiritual maturity when he ceases to constantly struggle over the basics of the spiritual life.
\nIn verse 10, there is the confirmation of the Sabbath Rest:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For he that is entered into his rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from his.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThis rest is the Sabbath Rest for the one who has entered into it. This person has ceased from his works as God ceased from His works. It means the believer ceased to rely on his own works and efforts, and by faith he trusted God to get him through the situation. The emphasis is on the future aspect of this rest. For Israel, the future aspect is the Kingdom. For the individual believer, it is Heaven. However, there is a position of rest the believer can enjoy right now. The author states, For he that is entered. He uses the past tense showing that some have entered into the spiritual rest of the abundant life, which is acquired by faith. This spiritual rest is acquired by appropriating the rest that God has provided. The believer must trust God for both the present and the future.
\nTo summarize this rest, he has been dealing with it in three tenses. The past tense is salvation. The future tense is Heaven or the Messianic Kingdom. The present tense is spiritual maturity. These Jewish believers have experienced the past tense already; they have become believers. There is a future hope awaiting them. The main emphasis for them is what they need right now. They need to learn to experience the present rest of faith: spiritual maturity. If they can mature in their faith, they will cease to go through these spiritual struggles. They will not be tempted to return to Judaism and they will cease to be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Exhortation to Enter into Rest\u20144:11\u201313\n11 Let us therefore give diligence to enter into that rest, that no man fall after the same example of disobedience. 12 For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart. 13 And there is no creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The exhortation itself is found in verse 11. In light of what the author has just said in 4:1\u201310, therefore, \u201clet us press on and enter into this present rest of spiritual maturity.\u201d The readers are to give diligence to enter into that rest. The word diligence gives a sense of urgency, a sense of eagerness or quickness. He is not talking about future glory. This is a present emphasis. The Sabbath Rest is the rest of spiritual maturity, and that is the one they now need to press on to. Because there is a danger in failing, he warns them against falling into the same example of disobedience. The example of Israel\u2019s disobedience that he gave earlier was the disobedience at Kadesh-Barnea. It resulted in physical death in the wilderness. Those readers who fail here could also suffer physical death. They will not lose salvation, but they will lose their physical lives.
\nHaving presented the exhortation to press on to spiritual maturity, verses 12\u201313 now give the reason for the exhortation: Unbelief will not go undetected. In verse 12, the need to give diligence is because detection for failure will be conducted by the Word of God. Because the Word of God is both living and working, it will one day call all into account before God. The writer describes the Word of God in five ways. First, it is living. Given that it is from the living God, it does partake in some measure of His nature. For example, the Word of God can make a spiritually dead sinner spiritually alive. Second, the Word of God is active. It manifests its life in some vigorous activity. The Greek word means \u201cpowerful.\u201d The Greek word energes is the origin of the English word \u201cenergy.\u201d It literally means \u201cin-working\u201d as mentioned in Colossians 1:29. It has a moral and a spiritual dynamic. The Word of God is so active that it transforms a person. Third, it is sharper. It has an incisive quality. It is like the sharpest of arms; it is sharper than any two-edged sword. The Word of God is often symbolized as a sword. For example, in Ephesians 6:17 it is the sword of the Spirit. Fourth, it is piercing. This adjective emphasizes the penetration. It is so penetrating that it can decipher a division between soul and spirit. The terms \u201csoul\u201d and \u201cspirit\u201d are used interchangeably in Scripture. They are not two separate entities in the being of man. They emphasize two facets of the immaterial part of man. The Word of God is able to pierce, penetrate, and discern even the believer\u2019s soul and spirit. While the soul and spirit are two facets of the immaterial part of man, the joints and marrow are two facets of the material part of man. Fifth, the Word of God is quick to discern. It has discrimination and judgment. The Greek word kritikos is the origin of the English word \u201ccritic.\u201d The Word is a critic to the point where it can discern between the thoughts and intents of the heart. The word thoughts points to what a man is thinking; it is the objective aspect of the thought process. The word intents points to why the man is thinking it; it is the subjective aspect of the thinking process. The Word of God can discern between the two: what a man is thinking and why he is thinking it. Because the Word of God is all these things, and because the Word will call believers into account some day, these Jewish believers need to give diligence to press on to spiritual maturity.
\nThe writer of Hebrews closes his train of thought, in verse 13, by emphasizing the completeness of the revelation made through the Word of God. There is no creature that will not be manifested in His sight; all things are naked and laid open before Him. Ultimately, the detection will be by the Lord to whom all must give account for everything.
\nGleason\u2019s summary of this section supports this commentary\u2019s conclusion:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Epistle to the Hebrews is addressed to Jewish Christians who retrogressed in their spiritual life and considered returning to Judaism in order to avoid persecution from the Jews. Through an exposition of the Old Testament concept of rest the author exhorted them to \u201chold fast\u201d to their confidence in Christ (Heb. 3:6, 14). This was meant to \u201cencourage\u201d them to face hardships boldly as \u201cthe day\u201d approached (3:13; cf. 10:25) when the land would be burned (6:7\u20138) and temple worship would \u201cdisappear\u201d (8:13). Using Psalm 95 the author warned that their lack of faith and confidence in Christ could jeopardize their rest, similar to what happened to the Exodus generation, potentially resulting in their loss of physical life (Heb. 3:17\u201319). In Psalm 95 God\u2019s rest refers to Israel\u2019s worship before the personal presence of Yahweh (vv. 2, 6), which could be forfeited by hardened, rebellious hearts like those of the Exodus generation (vv. 8\u201310). The readers could still \u201center His rest\u201d (Heb. 4:1, 3) by continuing to place their faith in the life-sustaining presence of God (4:4). The offer of rest was not limited to the Exodus generation, because it was first experienced by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden after God \u201crested\u201d (Gen. 2:7\u20139; 15\u201322; cf. Heb. 4:4, 10). Neither was it limited to the occupation of the land under Joshua because David offered the same rest in his day (4:7\u20138).<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nE. The Superiority of the Son to Aaron\u20144:14\u201310:18<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After his parenthetical warning on the danger of disobedience, the writer now turns to the third major pillar of Judaism, the Levitical Priesthood. Twice earlier, the author mentioned in passing that Jesus is a High Priest. The first time was in 2:17:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Wherefore it behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe second time was in 3:1: consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. Now he will deal with this aspect extensively. He will prove the priesthood of Jesus is superior to the Levitical Priesthood by the use of five contrasts between the two: Jesus has a better position; Jesus is a better priest; The New Priesthood is based on a better covenant; the New Priesthood functions in a better sanctuary; and, the New Priesthood is based on a better sacrifice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- A Better Position\u20144:14\u201316\n14 Having then a great high priest, who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we have not a high priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but one that had been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and may find grace to help us in time of need.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The first contrast is that Jesus has a better position than had the Levitical priest. The author\u2019s point, in verse 14, is that believers need to take advantage of the kind of high priest they have: Having then a great high priest. In the Greek text, the word Having is emphatic and it emphasizes a continuous availability. Believers have a high priest who is always available. The Levitical priest, like Aaron, went into the Holy of Holies and after he finished his duties, he came out. A year later, he went in and out again. That is not the case with this One. This One has passed through the heavens, He has passed through the first and second heavens and entered into the third Heaven, and He has remained there. The use of the Greek perfect tense emphasizes that He has passed through and has been there ever since. The place of this High Priest\u2019s ministry is in Heaven, not on earth, and being in Heaven is a superior position. The high priesthood of Aaron or Levi operated here on earth, but this One in Heaven has a better position. Because the place of His ministry is in Heaven, He is able to bring the ones He represents directly into the presence of God. The person of this high priest is Jesus the Son of God. Jesus is His human name and it emphasizes His humanity. His human nature allows Him to be sympathetic; yet, He is also the Son of God and this emphasizes His theistic nature. By emphasizing His deity, the writer shows Jesus has a power that the earthly high priest does not possess. The application is let us hold fast our confession in light of all this. The writer has already mentioned the content of our confession in 3:1: Jesus is the Messiah. The readers made this confession when they first became believers. Now he states, Let us hold fast to this confession. To hold fast means \u201cto grasp and cling to that which we attach ourselves.\u201d
\nOne reason these Jewish believers should hold fast to their confession is found in verse 15, which explains the kind of high priest they have. They do not have an ordinary high priest. He is both official and personal in that He suffered all the same points of temptation they have suffered, but he did not sin. The Greek word for touched is the origin of the English word \u201csympathy.\u201d It means \u201cto suffer along with.\u201d Because He suffered these things, He is able to be sympathetic with others who suffer the same things. He has \u201cfellow-feelings\u201d with those who suffer in their humanity what He suffered in His humanity.
\nJesus can be sympathetic for two reasons. First, He suffered the feeling of our infirmities. This means He suffered all the limitations of humanity. When there are social, spiritual, or financial problems, He knows what that feels like. When one cuts a finger and bleeds, He knows what that feels like since He was trained to be a carpenter.
\nSecond, He is sympathetic because He was tempted in all points as men are. Like these believers, He was tempted. He was tempted in virtue of His likeness to humanity and, because He was once tempted, He can now be touched. He was tempted like all are with the exception that He was without sin. He had no connection with sin; he had no relationship to sin, but He was tempted in all points. The expression \u201ctempted in all points\u201d has sometimes been misunderstood. It does not mean that Jesus suffered every type of temptation men do, and it does not mean that men suffer every type of temptation He did. Other people are not tempted to change stones into bread because Satan will not tempt people to do something they are totally powerless to do. For others that would not be a real temptation, but for Jesus it was a real temptation because He had the power to do just that. On the other hand, Jesus was never tempted to waste His entire day watching soap operas or football on television. The expression tempted in all points means \u201cin all areas.\u201d First John 2:16 states there are three areas of temptation: the lust of the flesh; the lust of the eyes; and the pride of life. Every specific type of temptation will fit into one of these categories. Jesus had completed a forty-day fast when He was tempted to change stones into bread. By then His flesh was hungry and crying out to be satisfied. This was a temptation in the area of the lust of the flesh. While it was the Father\u2019s will at that point for Him to satisfy His hunger, it was not the Father\u2019s will for Him to use His messianic power for self-gratification. Next, Jesus was shown a satanic vision in which He could see all the kingdoms of the world, and He was told that He could have authority over all these kingdoms by worshipping Satan only once. With His eyes, He could see the power and the glory He could have and bypass the cross. This fell under the temptation of the lust of the eyes. It is the Father\u2019s will for this One to rule over the kingdoms of the world, but it was the Father\u2019s will for Him to obtain it by the means of the cross. Finally, He was placed on top of the pinnacle of the Temple and told, \u201cIf you really are the Son of God, prove it by throwing yourself down for Psalm 91 did promise that the angels will catch you so you cannot be hurt before your time.\u201d This was a temptation in the area of the pride of life. Satan was basically telling Him, prove that you are who you claim to be. Jesus suffered temptation in all three areas, just as all believers do. In that sense, He suffered the temptations in all points. Therefore, Jesus does understand what it feels like to be tempted. That is why He can be a sympathetic High Priest.
\nThis leads, in verse 16, to the application. The word therefore indicates that in light of the fact the readers have a High Priest in the third Heaven\u2014One who has suffered both infirmity and temptation, and therefore is a sympathetic High Priest\u2014they need to use Him. They have a compassionate High Priest in Heaven and they need to use Him. The use of the Greek present tense means \u201clet us keep on drawing near to Him.\u201d Believers are to do so with boldness and with confidence. They have the freedom to speak and to state their needs to this One. The purpose for drawing near and using this High Priest is that they may receive mercy, and may find grace to help us in time of need. In other words, the purpose is to appropriate grace. The solution to the great struggles and persecutions these Jewish believers were experiencing was not to return to Judaism. The solution was to boldly and confidently make use of Jesus, their High Priest, and to appropriate grace to get them through this period. Whenever a believer stumbles in his spiritual life, it is not because there is insufficient grace but because he failed to appropriate the grace available to him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- A Better Priest\u20145:1\u20137:28<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The second of the five contrasts is that believers have a better priest. The Priesthood of Jesus is after the Order of Melchizedek, which is superior to the Order of Aaron. As he develops this argument, the author will interrupt it to give his third warning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a. The Prerequisites of Priesthood\u20145:1\u20134<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 For every high priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: 2 who can bear gently with the ignorant and erring, for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity; 3 and by reason thereof is bound, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. 4 And no man takes the honor unto himself, but when he is called of God, even as was Aaron.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author of the Book of Hebrews points out that there are four prerequisites for priesthood. First, in verse 1a, a priest must be human: For every high priest, being taken from among men. To be humane, he had to be human. A priest represents man to God; therefore, he himself must be a man and must be human. The word every emphasizes that the principle is true in all orders of the priesthood. He is taken from among men. His origin is human. No angel, as an angel, nor even God, as God, could function in this role. To be a High Priest, God had to become a man. Not only is every high priest taken from among men but, also, being human he is appointed for men. He must also represent man. Man is the object, and the high priest must represent man to God.
\nSecond, in verse 1b, the high priest must function in a priestly order in which he offers both gifts and sacrifices for sin. The word sacrifices refers to blood-offerings while the word gifts refers to meal-offerings used with sacrifices. Every priest functions in some type of a priestly order; an example is the Levitical Order.
\nThe third prerequisite is in verses 2\u20133. He must be compassionate and sympathetic; that is the advantage of his humanity. He has experienced infirmity. He must have experienced some of the things that the people he represents have experienced. That is the reason he can deal gently; he has suffered the temptations as all true humanity will. The Greek word for bearing gently means \u201cto suffer without harshness,\u201d to treat others with kindness and moderation. It means \u201cto be in the middle of something, to bring balance.\u201d It means to be fully involved and bring balance. He must be able to avoid the twin extremes of apathy and excessive feeling. He is able to bring balance to the ignorant and erring. Ignorance is a source of sin; there are sins of ignorance. Erring is the result of sin. With such, both the ignorant and erring, the High Priest must deal gently and bring balance. He is sympathetic not necessarily because of infirmity or sin but because of common testing; He suffered the same things. However, there was one disadvantage with the human priest here on earth. He himself had to offer sacrifices for his own sins. That was the disadvantage of his humanity. On the one hand, he could be compassionate because he realized that he himself had weaknesses. On the other hand, he had the same problem of moral insufficiency. Because he had the same problem, before he could sacrifice on behalf of those he represented, he first had to sacrifice for his own sins. He had to obtain purity. While the earthly Levitical priest was in sin and had to obtain purity, the Heavenly High Priest had no sin and, therefore, always had purity.
\nThe fourth prerequisite is in verse 4. The high priest had to be appointed by God because he had to represent man to God. No priest could take the office for himself; God had to call him. He had to be appointed by God as was Aaron. Aaron was singled out by God in Exodus 16:33 to be a priest. He was officially called into the priesthood in Exodus 28:1. He was reconfirmed in that office in Numbers 17:8. Anyone who tried to be a priest without God\u2019s appointment was rejected by God. For example, Korah led a rebellion against Aaron. God killed him by having the earth swallow him up (Num. 16:1\u201315). King Saul\u2019s attempt to take the role of the priest and perform his own sacrifice, because he would not wait for Samuel to arrive, led to God\u2019s rejection of Saul as king and to the anointing of David (1 Sam. 13:5\u201314). When King Uzziah tried to burn the incense, which he had no right to burn because he was not a priest, God struck him with leprosy (2 Chr. 26:16\u201323). Hence, negatively, no man takes this honor unto himself, but positively, a priest must be called of God and the example he gives is, even as was Aaron.
\nThe above are the four prerequisites of priesthood. In order for Jesus to become priest, He had to fulfill all four prerequisites. In summary, these are: a priest must be human; he must function in a priestly order offering gifts and sacrifices for sin; he must be compassionate and sympathetic; and he must be appointed by God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Qualification of the Son\u20145:5\u201310<\/p>\n\n\n\n
5 So Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but he that spoke unto him,\nYou are my Son,\nThis day have I begotten you:\n6 as he said also in another place,\nYou are a priest for ever\nAfter the order of Melchizedek.\n7 Who in the days of his flesh, having offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and having been heard for his godly fear, 8 though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 and having been made perfect, he became unto all them that obey him the author of eternal salvation; 10 named of God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn this section, the author shows that Jesus fulfilled the same four prerequisites, but he does not deal with them in the same order. First, in verses 5\u20136, the author points out that Jesus was divinely appointed. With the words, So Christ also, he compares the appointment of Jesus with the appointment of Aaron. Like Aaron, Jesus did not glorify Himself to become a High Priest; God appointed Him to that office. The writer then quotes Psalm 2:7 to show that the Messiah\u2019s priesthood is related to His Resurrection. Only a Son of God could serve in the kind of priesthood the author will describe later. To that One, God said, You are my Son, This day have I begotten you: \u2026 In verse 6, to that same One He also said, in Psalm 110:4, You are a priest for ever After the order of Melchizedek. This shows divine appointment; Jesus was divinely appointed by God the Father. Not only was Jesus divinely declared a Son of God in Psalm 2:7, but He was also divinely appointed to the priesthood. Moreover, He was not appointed to the Levitical Priesthood, but to the Melchizedekian Order (Psalm 110:4).
\nThe second prerequisite for priesthood Jesus fulfilled is found in verse 7. Jesus was human; every high priest had to be human. The statement, in the days of his flesh, covers the whole period from His Incarnation until His Resurrection (2:14). The same point is made in John 1:14 and 1 Timothy 3:16. In the days of his flesh He offered up both prayers and supplications. The word for prayers means \u201cdefinite requests in general,\u201d and it includes expressions of need. The word supplications means \u201ca cry from one in need of protection,\u201d \u201ca cry from one in need because of overwhelming calamity.\u201d Supplications are expressions of urgency. Jesus offered up prayers in general and supplications of urgency, and He did so in two ways. First, with strong crying. The word for strong crying means \u201ca loud, vocal outcry of one who is greatly disturbed.\u201d This summarizes His Gethsemane experience. It emphasizes intensity of suffering. Second, He did it with tears. Tears are visible manifestations of grief. They show intense emotional strain, such as that described in Luke 22:44 where his sweat became as it were great drops of blood falling down upon the ground. Jesus addressed those great, strong emotional cries to Him who was able to save him from death. He prayed to the Father. He asked the Father to deliver Him out of death, to bring Him out of death into new life. This could be taken in two ways: He was praying that He would be rescued out of physical death by physical resurrection; or, more likely, in the context of the Gethsemane experience, He was praying to be delivered from spiritual death by spiritual resurrection. He died spiritually on the cross for three hours and then He was resurrected spiritually before He ever died physically. The author points out that Jesus was heard because of his godly fear. His prayer request was granted and He was resurrected spiritually. If one prefers to interpret this as physical death, His request was also answered by physical resurrection. Either way, the prayer was answered. It was answered because Jesus feared God. All the things He experienced\u2014strong crying, tears, offering up prayers and supplications, and agony\u2014show His humanity.
\nIn verse 8, the author shows Jesus fulfilled the third prerequisite for priesthood. He was compassionate; He was humane. He learned to be compassionate by learning obedience because, experientially, He also suffered. Though He was the Son of God, He still had to partake of discipline. Since discipline is part of Sonship, He partook of discipline to be further identified with man. The expression learned obedience does not mean that Jesus disobeyed; it means that He learned what obedience cost Him. It cost Him suffering. Philippians 2:8 makes the same point. He learned what obedience costs by means of the things He suffered. There was no self-seeking for this office. For Him, this office of priest meant suffering and death. These things made Him compassionate.
\nThe fulfillment of the fourth prerequisite, found in verses 9\u201310, is that Jesus does function in a priestly order. In verse 9, the author comes to the conclusion of his argument: and having been made perfect. The Greek word for perfect means \u201cthe completion of a process or goal.\u201d His sufferings were completed on the cross. The Greek word for perfect has the same root as the word that was used on the cross: It is finished (Jn. 19:30). The cross marked the end of His sufferings for sin, therefore He could cry, It is finished. The author repeats the point he made in 2:10. Because Jesus was perfected by means of His suffering, and the sufferings on the cross brought Him to the goal He was aiming for, Jesus became to all that obey Him the author of eternal salvation. Although from God\u2019s side His work is complete, from the human side He became. What He became was the result: the author of eternal salvation. He became the author of eternal salvation because, by means of His sufferings and death, He was the final effectual sacrifice. This is true only to those who obey Him. The obedience addressed here is not the obedience of works because salvation is never by works. This obedience is the obedience of faith (Jn. 6:29; Acts 6:7; Rom. 1:5; 6:17; 10:16; 16:25\u201327; 2 Thes. 1:8).
\nThe specific priestly order in which Jesus functions (verse 10) is the order of Melchizedek. This was His formal call to the office: named of God a High Priest. This occurred after His death and Resurrection at His Ascension. Jesus was called to the order of Melchizedek.
\nHaving mentioned this unique order of priesthood, the order of Melchizedek, the author has much to say about Melchizedek, but he is afraid that his readers, because of their spiritual immaturity, will not understand what he is talking about. Therefore, having mentioned that Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, he drops the subject and he will pick it up again in 7:1. He now goes into his third digression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Third Warning: Parenthetical Warning of the Danger of Failing to Progress to Maturity\u20145:11\u20136:20<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(1) The Fact of Stagnation\u20145:11\u201314\n\n11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard of interpretation, seeing ye are become dull of hearing. 12 For when by reason of the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need again that some one teach you the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of solid food. 13 For every one that partakes of milk is without experience of the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. 14 But solid food is for fullgrown men, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAll four of these verses are rich in content and each verse carries a specific obligation. The previous teaching he has just given in verses 1\u201310 brings with it specific obligations. Whenever new truth is revealed, all must submit to it. The revelation of truth is to produce fruit in the believer\u2019s life as it is being perceived. There is always an ever-present danger of resting in previous attainments. What has happened to his readers is that they have reached a certain level and now they are resting on past attainments; they have failed to progress to spiritual maturity. In verses 11\u201314, he deals with the fact of stagnation and spells out specific spiritual problems these believers have.
\nFirst, in verse 11, the author deals with the issue of things which are hard of interpretation. He starts out, Of whom we have many things to say. The whom is Melchizedek and the Order of Melchizedek of verse 10. He has a lot he wants to teach them about Melchizedek. The problem is that the doctrine of the Melchizedekian Order belongs to the category of meat, not milk. What he is afraid of is that his readers, because of their stagnation and failure to progress, will not be able to understand what he will say about the Melchizedekian Order. He is afraid they are not prepared to meet the difficulties that the mention of Melchizedek has caused. That is why he will temporarily drop the subject to scold them. Later, he will pick it up again. For now, he states that it is difficult for him to explain to them what this Melchizedekian Priesthood is about because of their spiritual dullness; they have become dull of hearing. The Greek word for dull means \u201cto have no push.\u201d It means to be lazy or sluggish in hearing. That is what makes it so difficult for him to teach them about Melchizedek. Furthermore, they have become dull. They were not this way at one time, but now they are different and they have become dull of hearing. Because the Melchizedekian doctrine is hard of interpretation, difficult to explain and to understand, he is afraid he will lose them because they will not understand it. The obligation contained in verse 11 is that every believer must develop a sensitive hearing of things which are hard of interpretation. Every believer must mature in order to handle the deeper things of biblical doctrine.
\nIn verse 12, he gives the reason. These are not new believers. If they were new, baby believers, their inability to understand would be excusable. Every believer starts out as a baby believer when new to the faith, and it is expected that he drinks milk. However, these Jewish believers have been saved for some time because, by this time, they should be teaching the Word. This shows they are not new believers. While not every believer has the gift of teaching, every believer should be able to teach to some degree one-on-one. What has happened to these readers is that they need to be re-taught the first principles, the ABCs of the oracles of God, the ABCs of the divine revelation of Scripture. This means the ABCs of the faith. Melchizedek has to do with meat, but they need milk. That shows their immature state because milk is for the immature believer. Milk has to do with the first principles. Milk has to do with the ABCs of Scriptures. The meat of the Word of God has to do with advanced doctrinal truth and its application in the issues of life. One example of this is the Melchizedekian Priesthood. That is meaty doctrine. For the second time the author uses the term become. They were not always this way; they became this way. This shows regression. If believers do not advance or progress spiritually, they will regress. The obligation of verse 12 is they need to develop spiritually in order to show ability in teaching instead of being re-taught the same things over and over again.
\nIn verse 13, he spells out further what constitutes babyhood in the spiritual life. It is failing to make practical use of the knowledge they possess. That makes them unskillful. One who partakes of milk is one without experience of the word of righteousness. As long as a believer fails to apply what he learns, he will remain a baby. The principle is \u201cuse it or lose it.\u201d In their case, these believers knew the Messiah was the final sacrifice and, yet, they thought there was nothing wrong with returning to sacrifices and symbols. Their problem was not a lack of knowledge, but a lack of exercising that knowledge in real-life situations. They needed to learn how to apply the Word to properly discern right from wrong. The obligation of verse 13 is they must use skill in applying the Word to resolve the major problems in biblical doctrine.
\nIn verse 14, he spells out what maturity means. A mature believer has an unrestricted diet and can partake of solid food. A mature believer is one who is of full age spiritually. The Greek word for fullgrown men is \u201cgoal.\u201d A mature believer has attained the goal of his spiritual life because he did apply what he knew and was, therefore, open to learning more. Spiritual maturity is a result of careful exercise: for fullgrown men, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil. A mature believer has the ability to make responsible decisions. The obligation of verse 14 is for all believers to make proper use of what they know.
\nThis is a summary of the spiritual state of these believers. They have been believers for a long time; they have been taught sound doctrine in the past because by now they are to be teachers. However, they have not retained or used the truth they have been taught and need to relearn the first principles of the oracles of God. They have reverted from adulthood back to infancy in spiritual things. They have lapsed from maturity to immaturity and from \u201cmeat\u201d to milk. Although the spiritual adult and the spiritual babe both have the Word of God, only one knows how to use the Word. Usage of the Word causes believers to progress from immaturity to maturity; a lack of usage means regressing from maturity to immaturity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(2) The Need for Progression\u20146:1\u20138\n\n1 Wherefore leaving the doctrine of the first principles of Christ, let us press on unto perfection; not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, 2 of the teaching of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this will we do, if God permit. 4 For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. 7 For the land which has drunk the rain that comes often upon it, and brings forth herbs meet for them for whose sake it is also tilled, receives blessing from God: 8 but if it bears thorns and thistles, it is rejected and nigh unto a curse; whose end is to be burned.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nTheir previous spiritual condition shows that they need to grow. If they fail to grow, there is a great danger of a relapse. This section contains one of the most debated passages in biblical studies. Therefore, it is wise to keep certain principles in mind when interpreting this passage.
\nThe first principle is that these eight verses need to be interpreted in light of the Book of Hebrews as a whole. That is why it is always better to handle chapter 6 after dealing with the first five chapters. This book, as a whole, was written specifically to a body of believers, and the author of the book speaks to them and treats them as real believers. Furthermore, it was written specifically to Jewish believers who seriously contemplated going back into Judaism and the Levitical system in order to escape the persecution they were suffering at the time. These Jewish believers felt they could go back into Judaism and be saved again later when the persecution subsided. The new salvation would erase the sin of their apostasy.
\nThe second principle is that this section must be interpreted in light of the immediate context. The immediate context, which began in 5:11, is that the author is trying to get them to press on to spiritual maturity. That is his goal. They must leave babyhood and milk, and press on to meat and maturity. The danger is that if they do not, they will make an irreversible decision that will permanently keep them in a state of spiritual immaturity.
\nThe third principle is the fact that Scripture does not contradict itself and, consequently, this passage must be interpreted in harmony with biblical truths taught elsewhere in Scripture. If the thrust of Scripture is eternal security, one verse cannot negate the many. The difficult passages must be interpreted by using the clear ones.
\nIn verses 1\u20133, he emphasizes the first principles that now must be left behind. The word Wherefore connects this section with what just preceded it (5:11\u201314): Wherefore, for that reason, they need to leave these basics of Scripture and move on to the more important, meatier things of Scripture. They were already believers, but they were babes. Nevertheless, because they were babes, they did possess spiritual life. As he pointed out in the preceding four verses, at this point they do not need more knowledge. What they need to do is to use the knowledge they already have and then press on for more. As he has already pointed out, they have lapsed into dullness because of disuse of that knowledge. They failed to push ahead and to learn more truth. Again, they were real believers; otherwise, the author would not have expected them to be teachers by then. He admonishes, let us press on unto perfection. The Greek word for perfection means perfection in the sense of maturity. It comes from the Greek root that means \u201cto attain a goal\u201d and that goal is spiritual maturity. This is the goal God intends for every believer including these to whom this epistle is written. That, in turn, is the emphasis of Hebrews: press on to spiritual maturity. The emphasis is upon their need to progress spiritually because of the peril of relapse. They need to press on because of the impossibility of repeating the past, and the author will use nature in verses 7\u20138 to exemplify this impossibility. These are immature, baby believers, not because they have been recently saved, but because they failed to mature after being saved for some time. These immature believers need to leave the ABCs of biblical doctrine and go on to maturity. The Greek word for leaving means \u201cto abandon,\u201d \u201cto forsake,\u201d \u201cto put away,\u201d \u201cto put out.\u201d It means passing from one phase of contemplation to another. They must leave behind the ABCs; these things must be settled in their minds once-and-for-all so that they can press forward to the meat.
\nIn verses 1\u20132, he lists some of the first principles or ABCs of the faith. There are six things, but they come in three sets of twos. The first pair deals with conversion; the second pair with ceremonial elements; and the third pair with eschatology.
\nThe first basic doctrine to be left behind is, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works. The repentance factor emphasizes the negative aspect of the conversion process, a turning away from. In this case, it refers specifically to the Levitical system. It has become dead works because life in the Levitical system was temporary. It had already come to an end with the death of the Messiah. While it was still being practiced by unbelievers, it was no longer looked upon by God as being in any way effectual. The Greek word for dead works is used only here and in 9:14.
\nThe second basic doctrine was faith toward God. This is the positive side of conversion, a turning to. It refers to their once-and-for-all commitment to the Messiah, which brought them into the salvation state.
\nThe third basic doctrine is the teaching of baptisms. The word baptisms is plural. The word means \u201cimmersions\u201d or \u201cwashings\u201d by immersions. It probably refers to the ceremonial cleansings of the Levitical systems as mentioned in 9:10. If it refers to baptism, it would have a special application to the readers because he is writing to Jewish believers, and among Jewish believers baptism marked the final point of separation from Judaism.
\nThe fourth basic doctrine is the laying on of hands. In the Old Testament, the laying on of hands was a means for imparting blessings. This was carried over into the New Testament in Matthew 19:13 and Acts 8:17. Also, in the Old Testament, the laying on of hands meant the appointment to an office or work. A priest was appointed to his office by the laying on of hands. It carries over in the New Testament in that elders and deacons are appointed by the laying on of hands (Acts 6:6, and others in 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:25). A third way the laying on of hands was used in the Old Testament was in the sense of identification. When the priest laid his hands upon the head of the sacrifices, this identified the sacrifice with Israel (Lev. 1:4; 16:21).
\nThe fifth basic doctrine is the resurrection from the dead. That, too, is something that should have been settled in their mind, for that, too, is an Old Testament doctrine (Job 19:25; Is. 26:19; Dan. 12:2).
\nThe sixth basic doctrine is that of eternal judgment such as the Great White Throne Judgment and the Lake of Fire.
\nThese six things are the ABCs of the faith. These principles are milk and they should be settled once-and-for-all in the believer\u2019s early spiritual life. These are the things that must be left behind in order to press on to maturity.
\nIn verse 3, he deals with the importance of maturity, And this will we do. That means \u201cwe will leave these things behind.\u201d The goal can be achieved if the will of the believer and the will of God agree. It is God\u2019s will for them to go on to maturity. When the author says, if God permit, he uses a first class condition in Greek, which assumes it to be true. It means \u201cif God permit this, and He does.\u201d It is God\u2019s will; He wants them to leave behind the ABCs and press ahead to maturity, but God will not force or compel them to go ahead to maturity. Nevertheless, they cannot move forward without leaving behind the indifference of 5:11\u201314. Since it is God\u2019s will for them to press on, their lack of pressing on, their lack of maturity, their failure to press on is not God\u2019s fault but their fault. This shows their dullness is not yet irrevocable or irreversible; these believers can still choose to go on to maturity. They have not yet made the decision to go back to Judaism. However, it is still possible for them to regress so far that it will be impossible to make progress toward maturity; it is possible for them to go beyond the point of no return.
\nIn verses 4\u20136, the author deals with the danger of relapse and the impossibility of going back. He begins in verse 4a with an affirmation, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance. They do have certain spiritual privileges he will list, yet a lapse is in danger of taking place. This lapse will not accomplish what they think. They think they can, by lapsing, be renewed later, but he is going to show that it is impossible to renew. It is important to understand that in the Greek text the word translated it is impossible is in verse 4a. Some English translations have it in verse 6 depending upon the perspective of the translator, but in the Greek text, the word it is impossible is in the beginning of the sentence. The author affirms that something is impossible. In the Greek text, verses 4\u20136 comprise one long sentence. The basic thrust of that sentence is, It is impossible \u2026 to renew.
\nThen in verses 4b\u20135, he points out that the readers have experienced five spiritual privileges. There is something impossible for those who have experienced these five spiritual privileges to do. The five spiritual privileges are in the Greek aorist tense, which emphasizes completed action.
\nThe first experience is once [and-for-all] enlightened. This refers to the decisive moment when they were witnessed to and the light was grasped. They understood and believed. It refers to regeneration. The same word is used in Hebrews 10:32. It refers to taking hold of the knowledge of the truth. It means to understand to the point of applying it (Jn. 1:9; Eph. 1:18; 3:9; 2 Cor. 4:4\u20136; 2 Tim. 1:10). The text does not just say enlightened, but once enlightened. The Greek word for once here emphasizes something that is not repeated. The author uses this word several times in his epistle (9:7, 26\u201328; 10:2; 12:26\u201327). The readers were enlightened by the knowledge of the gospel. They received the illumination to understand it (10:32). They were regenerated and saved.
\nThe second spiritual privilege they had is that they tasted of the heavenly gift. The word tasted means they had a real experience (Acts 10:10; 1 Pet. 2:3; Heb. 2:9). Those who believe the recipients of this epistle were people who were not saved claim they only tasted salvation or \u201cnibbled\u201d at it, but did not swallow it, and therefore did not appropriate salvation. That is not what the word tasted means. For example Hebrews 2:9 states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But we behold him who has been made a little lower than the angels, even Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God he should taste of death for every man.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nDid Jesus merely \u201cnibble\u201d at death and not really experience it? By no means! He actually did die. The word tasted means He really did experience it. They did not merely nibble at the heavenly gift; they truly experienced it. They actually appropriated the heavenly gift. The word taste means to hold something in common with something else or with someone else. The word gift can either refer to the Messiah Himself as it does in John 4:10 and 2 Corinthians 9:15 or it can refer to salvation itself as it does in Ephesians 2:8\u20139. Either way, these are saved people. Tasted of the heavenly gift means they had a real, conscious enjoyment of the blessings, of grasping this gift and its true nature. They had possession of real spiritual life.
\nThe third spiritual privilege is they were made partakers of the Holy Spirit. The word partaker means \u201cto have real participation.\u201d This word partaker is used several times in Hebrews. In 2:14, Jesus became a partaker of flesh and blood. It does not mean He just came close to it; He actually became flesh and blood. It is also used in 3:1, 14 and 12:8. It always emphasizes real participation. These are not people who only came close to seeing the Holy Spirit work. They were real participants in the Holy Spirit. They had a vital relationship with the Holy Spirit; it was the kind of relationship that comes from being indwelled. The Holy Spirit indwelled them.
\nThe fourth spiritual privilege is they tasted the good word of God. The Greek term for word is reima or \u201cthe spoken Word.\u201d This is not simple participation, but this brings out the personal character and the personal experience in it. These Jewish believers did hear special utterances which they realized came from God as in the case of 1 Peter 1:23; and 2:3.
\nThe fifth spiritual privilege is they tasted the powers of the age to come. They once-and-for-all tasted of the power that will be manifested in the Messianic Kingdom, the Millennium. The word powers is the same one used of miracles in 2:4. The author again says they tasted of it; it means they experienced real rebirth in their lives. They were able, to some degree, to experience the powers of the age to come in their lives. The age to come was the common Jewish term for the Messianic Kingdom. These powers will ultimately be manifested in their entirety in the Messianic Kingdom.
\nThese are five spiritual experiences the readers of Hebrews have had. These five spiritual experiences show they are real believers. As Pentecost states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Present failure to apply the Word is not necessarily a permanent state as indicated by the exhortation, \u201clet us go on unto perfection\u201d (Heb. 6:1). The word \u201cperfection\u201d here looks back to Hebrews 5:11\u201314 and has the thought of \u201cmaturity\u201d or \u201cadulthood.\u201d Hebrews 6:1 is an exhortation similar to Caleb\u2019s (\u201cLet us go up at once and possess it,\u201d Num. 13:30), and an exhortation to enter into the faith\/life rest promised to the author\u2019s generation, as well as a repeat of Hebrews 4:11, \u201cLet us labor therefore to enter into that rest.\u201d The writer has confidence that his readers will so respond because of the spiritual privileges they have previously enjoyed. These believers have been enlightened (have entered into a knowledge of God\u2019s truth), \u201chave tasted of the heavenly gift\u201d (received eternal life as a gift from God), were \u201cmade partakers of the Holy Spirit\u201d (were indwelt by the Spirit at the time of their salvation), have \u201ctasted the good word of God\u201d (experienced blessings from God through the Word), and have experienced \u201cthe powers of the world [age] to come\u201d (entered into the joys of the faith\/life rest which Messiah will introduce when He establishes His kingdom here on earth). These terms are never used of mere profession, but always of reality. In spite of all this, these believers were failing to move ahead in their experience of God\u2019s blessing. Christian experience never is a permanent plateau but a path to be followed, a race to be run, a course to be pursued.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIt is impossible for those who have had these five spiritual experiences to do something the author presents in verse 6. Some translations read and then fell away giving it a past tense, though the word itself is a simple aorist participle meaning \u201cfalling away\u201d without indicating any time element or necessarily any actual event. The Greek for \u201cfalling away\u201d is found only here and never again in the New Testament, but it comes from a root which has the concept of apostasy meaning a falling away from an accepted standard or path. Some translations read if they fell away, but the Greek text does not imply a conditional element. The aorist participle simply states, after falling away. Whatever may be unclear about this verse, one thing is clear: if they fall away, to renew them again unto repentance, it is impossible. Whatever the impossibility mentioned in verse 6 may refer to, he gives two reasons why it is impossible for them to do it. The first reason it is impossible for them to do something is because it would mean they would have to crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh. The reason it is impossible for them to do this is that it requires a re-crucifixion of the Messiah. Jesus is never coming back again to be re-crucified. That is impossible. The second reason why it is impossible for them to do something is because it would put Jesus to open shame. Because it requires crucifying Him afresh (or a re-crucifixion), because it would put Him to open shame, this is something impossible for them to do. Therefore, if this passage teaches a believer can lose his salvation, then it also means he can never regain his salvation: It is impossible to renew them again to repentance.
\nThere have been at least ten suggested interpretations of this verse. First, these are merely professing believers but not real believers. They came in contact with believers, they enjoyed the fellowship, they became professors, but they were not possessors. As has been demonstrated earlier in the first five chapters, this cannot be. Second, these people were truly saved and truly lost. If so, once lost again, they can never be saved again. Third, the word impossible actually means \u201cdifficult.\u201d It is difficult to renew people who have fallen away. The problem with this interpretation is the Greek word does mean \u201cimpossible.\u201d The fourth interpretation says it refers to someone who habitually falls away and renews himself over and over again until finally God says, \u201cThat\u2019s enough, no more.\u201d However, the text states once a believer has fallen away, he cannot be renewed again to repentance at all. Fifth, this refers to the Old Testament sacrifices. Since nobody sacrifices anymore, and there is no Temple anymore, it is impossible to go back anyway. Yet, this was possible at the time the epistle was written. Sixth, the verse is hypothetical. It does not say it could happen. It simply states that if it should happen, these would be the results. However, if this is purely hypothetical, why does the author then give the warning? The presence of the warning means the verse is more than just hypothetical. The seventh interpretation is that it refers to rewards and works. This has some merit, but it is not enough to explain the full nature of the warning. Rewards do play a role in the later context but not in this verse. Eighth, it refers to loss of future earthly blessings as a result of falling away. A believer would not lose salvation, but he would lose future earthly blessings. This is also true but insufficient to fully explain the intent of the author. The ninth interpretation is similar to the first view. It says the readers of Hebrews are merely professors who are in danger of going back into Judaism once-and-for-all after receiving a full knowledge of the truth, and, as a result, they will die in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They are professors who are not real believers, but have associated with believers.
\nThe tenth interpretation is the preferred view. Based upon the wider context as well as the immediate context, the meaning of verse 6 would indicate two perspectives on their making a once-and-for-all irrevocable decision. In either case, the text is dealing with actual believers who are in danger of returning to Judaism. If they do, they will be physically destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70. Again, the term it is impossible is at the beginning of verse 4. If they go back to the Judaism that rejected the Messiahship of Jesus, there will be something impossible for them to do. There are two reasons why it is impossible for those who have had these five spiritual experiences to be renewed. First, it will require a re-crucifixion of the Messiah: Seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh; they thus condone, by their re-identification with Judaism, the decision of the nation that rejected Jesus on the basis of demon possession. Second, it will put him to an open shame. This phrase is used only here. It means the first death of Jesus was incomplete and provided an incomplete salvation. It means His first death does not save to the uttermost as it is supposed to do.
\nFor the tenth interpretation, there are two perspectives as to what it is impossible to do. The first perspective is that it is impossible for them to both fall away and be saved again later. This viewpoint is based on the wider context. What the author is basically telling his readers is they do not have the option they thought they had. They do not have the option of giving up their salvation to be saved again later. There is no new salvation that will erase their sin of apostasy and allow them to start the spiritual life all over again. Why? Because this would require a re-crucifixion and it would imply that Jesus\u2019 first death did not provide a total salvation. It would imply that He really did not save to the uttermost; He did not provide eternal life, but temporary life. Since they do not have the option they thought they had, they must choose another option. According to the first perspective, these Jewish believers do have one of two alternatives but giving up their salvation to be saved again later is not one of them. The first alternative they have is to press on to maturity. This is what the author has been encouraging them to do, and he will encourage them again. The second alternative is to return to Judaism. Even though this will not mean a loss of salvation, it will mean they will put themselves back under the A.D. 70 judgment\u2014the judgment for the unpardonable sin\u2014and they will die a physical death. Throughout the first five chapters, all the judgments the author has been dealing with have been physical judgments. Every judgment he relates to in the Old Testament is a physical judgment, not a spiritual judgment, and he will do this again in subsequent chapters. The perspective that it is impossible for them to both fall away and be saved again later gives natural force to the word for in verse 4. This view explains why they must press on. They need to go on because it is impossible to go back to an unsaved state. Since it is impossible to go back to an unsaved state, they either stay where they are and then regress, or they press on to maturity. This viewpoint is better in keeping with the wider context.
\nThe second perspective for the tenth interpretation is based on the immediate context. The readers of Hebrews must now choose to press on to maturity. If they go back to Judaism, this decision will be irrevocable. It will place them in a state of permanent babyhood and they will not be able to progress to maturity in the future. Earlier, in 5:11\u201314, the author spoke about babyhood and wasted years. The following section deals with the wasted years when the land brought forth thorns. Nothing can be done about wasted years. Now, they must quit producing thorns and begin producing good crops. Based upon the immediate context, which began with 5:11, this would be the meaning. He has been encouraging them to press on to spiritual maturity. If they go back into Judaism, they will make their immaturity permanent, and it will make it impossible to press on to maturity thereafter. The basic meaning of repentance is \u201ca change of mind.\u201d If they make the decision to go back, it will be irreversible, and they will not be able to repent or change their mind afterward. Decker makes the following comments on the terms falling away and repentance:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fifth participle in the chain occurs in 6:6. As noted above, this may not be translated as a conditional, adverbial participle (\u201cif they fall away\u201d), but must be parallel to the preceding four participles. The next question, however, is the meaning of the phrase. It is almost universally assumed that this falling away is, in some way, a soteriological fall. This is assumed by the hypothetical view, the professing believer view, and the conditional salvation view. Since there are no qualifiers attached to this word, and since it occurs only here in the New Testament, the context must determine the reference. \u201cOutside the Bible, [parapipto] may mean no more than \u2018go astray, become lost\u2019 or figuratively \u2018make a mistake.\u2019 \u201d The most common meaning in the papyri is simply \u201cbecome lost\u201d; Walter Bauer defines it as \u201cto fail to follow through on a commitment.\u201d\nThe assumption that salvation is the focus of this term is perhaps the single greatest mistake made in attempting to resolve the difficulties of the warning passages. That the first four participles do refer to salvation does not mean that the fifth must also have this reference. The point of the participle string is that people who are genuinely saved (participles 1\u20134) and who then fall (participle 5) face serious consequences. That is, Christians are accountable for their actions\u2014which produce either blessing or cursing (6:7\u20138), depending on whether those actions are obedient or disobedient.\nThis suggestion then raises the question of [metanoia]. Can repentance be properly related to Christian maturity or does it demand a soteric reference? Almost without exception discussions of Hebrews 6 assume that the discussion is soteriological and thus equate repentance with initial salvation. This is a frequent tendency in many discussions of repentance in other contexts as well.\nA survey of the semantic field of [metanoia] and [metanoeo] suggests that these terms may not be assumed to be soteric without contextual warrant. That these words do refer to soteriological matters in some (even many) contexts is obvious. A representative sample of non-soteric uses includes the following. Hebrews 12:17 refers to Isaac\u2019s refusal to change his mind when Esau attempted to reclaim his birthright. This has nothing to do with salvation or with sin on the part of the one who was not \u201crepentant.\u201d A similar use of [metanoia] is found in 2 Corinthians 7:9 which refers to the change of mind by the Corinthians as a result of Paul\u2019s letter. The verb [metanoeo] encompasses similar uses. Luke 17:3\u20134 records Jesus\u2019 instructions for forgiving a brother who sins and then changes his mind and (apparently) requests forgiveness from the one against whom he has sinned. Likewise 2 Corinthians 12:21 speaks of Christians who have not repented of particular sins (a representative list of sins for which Paul is concerned in the Corinthian assembly is included). Although they have a corporate reference, Revelation 2:5; 3:13, 19 also speak of believers repenting.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAs was true of the Exodus generation of Kadesh-Barnea, these believers are in danger of making an irrevocable decision after which it will be impossible to change their minds, and this decision will render them subject to physical judgment. It should be kept in mind that the meaning of repentance is \u201cto change the mind.\u201d The first perspective states it is impossible for these who are true believers, who have had those five spiritual experiences to both give up their salvation and be saved again later. However, the second perspective keeps the interpretation in the immediate context of 5:11\u201314. That is, the decision to return to Judaism will be an irrevocable decision, and this decision will render them permanently spiritually immature. It will be impossible to renew them again unto repentance; they will not be able to change their mind later and press on to spiritual maturity. In the wider context, the return to Judaism would be an irrevocable decision and it will be impossible to renew them again unto repentance. They will not be able to change their mind about the decision and will now be subject to physical death as a divine discipline. In either case, they will fall under divine discipline to the point of physical death in the judgment of A.D. 70. Gleason comments:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Proponents of this view maintain those described in 6:4\u20135 are genuine believers who became \u201cdull of hearing\u201d (5:11) and lapsed back into spiritual babyhood (5:13). They are warned not to \u201cfall away\u201d into a state of spiritual retrogression and rebellion. They could enter this state through \u201ca critical decision\u201d consisting of a decisive refusal to press on to maturity. At the time of writing, the author indicated that his readers had not yet reached this state. However, the danger was real, and if they continued to disobey they would face divine judgment. This interpretation makes good sense of 6:4\u20135, but it has difficulty with the description of judgment in 6:7\u20138 (cf. 10:26\u201331). Many have quickly dismissed this view because they fail to see the Old Testament allusions to the Exodus generation throughout the passage.\nUnderstanding [parapipto] as expressing a decisive refusal to trust God which results in a general state of spiritual retrogression parallels the experience of the Israelites at Kadesh-barnea. For example, when they arrived at Kadesh-barnea, they had already seen the pillar of fire and cloud over the tabernacle (\u201cbeen enlightened\u201d), eaten of the manna (\u201ctasted of the heavenly gift\u201d), experienced the Spirit on the seventy elders (\u201cmade partakers of the Holy Spirit\u201d), and witnessed the giving of the Law at Sinai and the miracles of Moses (\u201ctasted the good word of the Lord and the powers of the age to come\u201d). Like the readers of the epistle, the Jews of the Exodus were a redeemed people (Exod. 6:6\u20137; 14:31). And most significantly, the wilderness generation was guilty of refusing to press on (Num. 14:1\u201310) in a way similar to those described in Hebrews 6:6. When the Israelites arrived at Kadesh, they paused and sent spies into the land because they did not trust God\u2019s promise that the land was theirs to possess. When the scouts returned, the majority report was that Canaan was populated by giants who lived in cities with impregnable walls. In spite of the efforts of Joshua and Caleb, the people believed the worst. At that moment the people came to a critical point of decision in which they rejected Moses\u2019 leadership and refused to enter and possess the land. As a result God condemned that generation of adults to die in the wilderness. Though they attempted to enter the land, they were not permitted to do so. Their decision was irreversible.\nSimilarities between the Israelites and the readers of the epistle are numerous. As the Israelites refused to obey the voice of the Lord (Num. 14:22) and act according to His promises (Exod. 23:27\u201331; 33:1\u20132), so too these people were in danger of refusing to \u201cpress on to maturity\u201d (Heb. 6:1). Though the Israelites changed their minds and tried to enter the land the next day (Num. 14:39\u201345), they were not permitted to repent of their decision to return to Egypt. Similarly with the readers of Hebrews there was the question of whether God would permit them to go on to maturity (\u201cThis we shall do, if God permits,\u201d 6:3), for once they decided to \u201cfall away\u201d it would be \u201cimpossible to renew them to repentance\u201d (v. 6). As the wilderness generation was denied the right to the blessings of \u201crest\u201d in Canaan and died in the wilderness (3:17\u201319), these Jewish Christians, if they chose to turn away and return to Judaism, would forfeit the blessing of God\u2019s rest and would experience His temporal discipline.\nIn summary, like the Exodus generation, the initial readers of Hebrews were at their \u201cKadesh.\u201d They were faced with a decision. If they chose not to go on in maturity, severe judgment would fall on them (6:7\u20138). However, the author also knew that the readers had not yet made that final decision (vv. 9\u201310).<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nTo make this all more understandable, the following are five varieties of paraphrases of the passage. First, if they could fall away and then at a later time be saved again, this new salvation would erase the sin of their previous apostasy. However, since they cannot fall away and be saved again, they must press on to maturity and begin bearing spiritual fruit.
\nSecond, if it were possible to fall away and be saved again, which it is not, then it would be possible to start all over again and remove their past mistakes. Yet, since it is not possible, they must be warned about how they are now living and must press on to maturity. They will give an account of their lack of spiritual maturity at the Judgment Seat of Christ. It is impossible to fall away and to renew again because of their spiritual position and privileges which the author just listed. Because of these five spiritual privileges (once enlightened, and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come), because they have had these things, they cannot go back to their original state in the unsaved womb. Because they cannot fall away, they also cannot retreat. Therefore, their option is to remain where they are or to press on to maturity. The reason they cannot do what they think they can is because they cannot re-crucify Jesus.
\nThird, if it were possible to fall away (and it is not), they could begin the spiritual life all over again. Since they cannot begin the spiritual life over again, he warns them about the way they are now living.
\nFourth, it is impossible for those who are saved to fall away and so remove all the wasted years of failure and babyhood. This would require Jesus to die again and to put Him to open shame because His first death was not sufficient. Since all of this is impossible and they cannot remove the record of wasted years as a believer, there is only one thing for them to do: to go on to maturity.
\nFifth, leaving babyhood behind, let them go on to maturity. It is impossible for them to fall away and then be saved again and start with a new record by means of initial repentance through salvation. This would necessitate Jesus\u2019 dying again and making His first death of no avail and, therefore, a mockery to those looking on.
\nTo summarize: these Jewish believers did not have the option they thought they had. They did not have the option of giving up their salvation, going back into Judaism, and being saved again later because that requires Jesus\u2019 re-crucifixion. Moreover, Jesus will not be coming back to be re-crucified because He has already saved to the uttermost; He has already saved completely. They did have one of two options. The first option was to go back into Judaism. That will not mean the loss of salvation, but it will mean the loss of their physical lives in the judgment of A.D. 70. The second option was to make their break from Judaism once and for all complete. For Jewish believers, then and today, that comes by means of immersion of water baptism. After that, they need to press on to maturity. The rest of chapter six is trying to encourage them to do just that\u2014to press on to maturity. Pentecost\u2019s summary is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his statement \u201cif they shall fall away\u201d (Heb. 6:6), the writer is not speaking of the termination of their salvation, but rather of their failure to continue on the path toward maturity. In their case, maturity will demonstrate itself through their faith in God in their present trying circumstances. That faith will respond to the exhortation, \u201clet us hold fast our profession [confession]\u201d (4:14). They will find strength as they \u201ccome boldly unto the throne of grace\u201d and there \u201cobtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need\u201d (v. 16). Such a failure to avail themselves of the help so readily available would be tantamount to Israel\u2019s unbelief at Kadesh. This failure to walk by faith is the \u201cfalling away\u201d of Hebrews 6:6.\nA serious warning of the consequences of such a failure to walk by faith so as to enjoy the benefits of the faith\/life rest follows: \u201cIt is impossible \u2026 to renew them to repentance\u201d (Heb. 6:4, 6). Just as that generation in Israel permanently lost the blessings provided by God to those who demonstrated their faith in Him by their obedience to His command to enter the land, so these (by a definitive decision to return to the outward forms of the Judaism that they had renounced at their baptism) would permanently lose the blessings and privileges promised to those who walk by faith. Just as that generation in Israel was turned back into the wilderness for forty years, so those in the writer\u2019s generation who refused to continue to walk by faith would experience loss of blessings and privileges in another \u201cwilderness\u201d experience. Just as Israel rejected the God-given leadership of Caleb and Joshua, they would be rejecting the leadership of the Savior in whom they had trusted. Their identification with those who had crucified Christ would be tantamount to crucifying Him again, \u201cseeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame\u201d (v. 6). Such actions would bring about the forfeiture of blessing and privileges and would prevent them from enjoying the benefits of the faith\/life rest.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nDecker concludes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What then does it mean that it is impossible to renew them to repentance? In light of the conclusions summarized in the preceding paragraphs it would appear that this warning cautions against \u201cfalling away\u201d because once that line is crossed, God has determined that there can be no restoration\u2014only judgment may be anticipated. Several aspects of this conclusion must be qualified, however. First, the impossibility is not an ontological impossibility, but an economic one. That is, God has determined (for reasons of his own good pleasure) that such limits be set. Although it would be ontologically possible for God to restore one in \u201cworse straits,\u201d to do so would contradict His own decree (and thus His nature). This God cannot do. Second, it is probably not possible for an individual to know precisely when (and perhaps not even if) this line has been crossed. Third, this \u201cline\u201d refers to a point at which God imposes a sentence of inevitable and unavoidable judgment due to sin. It may thus include such things as \u201csin unto death\u201d referred to in 1 John 5:16. Fourth, such judgment does not result in loss of salvation. This is judgment of a believer, not condemnation. Such chastening is referred to again later in Hebrews 12:5\u201311. Fifth, the renewal of repentance refers to the believer\u2019s own change of mind regarding the sin that is involved. The believer will find it impossible to change his behavior or to ask for forgiveness. The text does not indicate whether this is a passive allowance of the believer continuing in sin, or an active, judicial hardening.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe point the author of Hebrews makes in verses 1\u20136 is illustrated in verses 7\u20138. In verse 7, he points out that the law of human life teaches condemnation follows the neglect of blessings. This is to be observed in nature. In nature, men look for certain results from certain conditions. When rain falls upon the earth and the earth drinks up the rain, people expect it to produce and bring forth herbs for those who have planted it and tilled it. In the same way, God\u2019s blessings fall upon all believers alike. The rain is like God\u2019s blessings. The earth is like all believers. Just as rain falls upon all kinds of lands, God\u2019s blessings fall upon all kinds of believers. Like the land, some believers do produce fruit and some do not. Eventually, all must be judged. This verse illustrates the warning and the exhortation of the previous section. Judgment will be the result of not going on to fruitfulness and maturity because the result for fruitfulness will be blessings, but the result for fruitlessness will be rejection or disapproval. The timing for this approval or rewarding will come at the Judgment Seat of Christ (1 Cor. 3:10\u201315). For the land which has drunk the rain that comes often upon it; by way of application, all believers receive positional blessings from God. The land brings forth herbs useful for those by whom it was cultivated. Some believers are fruitful for God and His glory. The result is they receive blessings from God; they are rewarded. Rewards are the product of fruitfulness. Believers who press on to maturity receive God\u2019s blessing of rewards for the Messianic Kingdom because they have lived a useful life for the Lord. Examples of a useful life for the Lord are the works of verse 10.
\nVerse 8 gives the result of fruitlessness, but if it bears thorns and thistles. Land bearing thorns and thistles is characterized by fruitlessness. In the case of a believer, these are the works of the flesh listed in Galatians 5:19\u201321. These are the fruits of carnality, not spirituality. This corresponds to those believers who have become dull of hearing in 5:11\u201314. They live a useless life for the Lord. The result is to be disapproved. The same Greek word translated as rejected is used in 1 Corinthians 9:27. Some translations read \u201crejection\u201d but the better translation is \u201cdisapproval.\u201d Those who are disapproved are near to being cursed. This does not mean \u201ca narrow escape.\u201d It means nearness of judgment that had not yet fallen. However, judgment is near. Furthermore, for those who wish to go back to the Law and to the sacrificial system, it means they place themselves back under the curse of the Law once again (Gal. 3:10\u201313). The end product is whose end is to be burned. The word end points to an eschatological perspective. This is the consequence of disapproval at the Judgment Seat of Christ; there will be works that will be burned. The fruitless land is not burned, but the fruit of the land is; the thorns, briars, and thistles are burned. At the Judgment Seat of Christ, the believer is not burned, but his works are burned. As in John 15:6, the wood, hay, and stubble of the believer are burned. If these Jewish believers remain in an immature state and fail to press on to maturity, they will be fruitless, their works will be burned, and they will be disapproved. But this does not mean that they lose their salvation, only their reward. On the other hand, if they press on to maturity, they will produce fruit, have good works, and they will be rewarded. Blessings from God may be used or misused in producing a useful or useless life for God.
\nTo summarize this section, the irreversible decision of going back to Judaism will result in two things: discipline in this life and loss of rewards in the next life. The Exodus Generation made an irrevocable decision and could not progress to the Promised Land. The generation to whom the Book of Hebrews was addressed could also make an irrevocable decision and fail to progress to maturity. They will reach a point of no return and remain in spiritual immaturity just as the Exodus Generation stayed in the wilderness. Israel did not go back to Egypt and to slavery to become an unredeemed people again. By the same token, these believers will not go back to an unsaved state but will remain in a state of spiritual immaturity. The result was discipline. Israel was disciplined by physical death outside the Land. These believers will be disciplined by physical death in this life and loss of rewards for the Kingdom. Gleason draws similar conclusions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In light of the Old Testament blessing-curse motif, the judgment in view in Hebrews 6:7\u20138 is best understood as the forfeiture of blessing and the experience of temporal discipline rather than eternal destruction.\u2026 Thus Paul indicated that it is possible for a believer to be \u201cunproved\u201d if he is not diligent. This is clearly his meaning in 1 Corinthians 9:27, \u2026 to describe a believer who fails to discipline his life in moral purity. Paul followed this warning with examples of the Exodus generation who acted immorally and were physically \u201cdestroyed\u201d (1 Cor. 10:1\u201311). Similarly the judgment of Hebrews 6:8 could be the fate of the Hebrew readers. If they refused to press on to maturity, they too could experience God\u2019s physical discipline resulting in death.\nThe expression \u201cclose to being cursed\u201d is not to be understood as a reference to eternal damnation but rather to the immanency of divine discipline culminating in physical death. The \u201ccursings\u201d of the covenant did not affect Israel\u2019s standing as God\u2019s covenant people but were temporal and disciplinary in nature. The expression \u201cit ends up being burned\u201d does not refer to \u201cfinal destructive judgment\u201d as some maintain. Since the \u201cland\u201d is what is burned, this parallels the curses on the land of promise in Deuteronomy 28\u201329.\nSome have suggested that Hebrews 6:8 refers to the agricultural practice of burning a field that was producing only weeds and stubble in order to clear the ground for further cultivation. However, it seems preferable to understand this \u201cburning\u201d as a forfeiture of blessing by the destruction of the land wherein the blessing is experienced. This form of divine discipline can ultimately result in the loss of physical life. The judgment in Hebrews 6:7\u20138 parallels the fate of the Exodus generation that rebelled at Kadesh-barnea. With the exception of Joshua and Caleb, they all died in the wilderness (Deut. 2:14). Their deaths are not an indication that they were unconverted, because Moses and Aaron also died in the wilderness. Though the \u201crebellion\u201d and \u201cunbelief\u201d of Moses and Aaron were not of the same magnitude as that of the Exodus generation, the same Hebrew words are used to describe the sin of them all (cf. Deut. 9:23\u201324 and Num. 20:12, 24). As leaders, Moses and Aaron were held to a higher standard and their fate was the same as that of the others. All, including Moses and Aaron, were prohibited from entering the land because of their unbelief. Their forfeiture of covenantal blessings was sealed by their physical death outside the land.\nThis kind of temporal discipline that could ultimately lead to physical death is also mentioned several times by the apostle Paul. He spoke of delivering certain ones within the church over to Satan \u201cfor the destruction of [their] flesh\u201d so that their \u201cspirit may be saved\u201d (1 Cor. 5:5; cf. 1 Tim. 1:20). Also because of their disregard for the Lord\u2019s table, several in the Corinthian church \u201cslept,\u201d a metaphor for death (1 Cor. 11:30). If the \u201csin to death\u201d (1 John 5:16) refers to a sin committed by a believer, then this is another example of judgment on a sinning believer resulting in loss of physical life. God may insure an unrepentant Christian\u2019s forfeiture of covenantal blessings by means of physical death.\n\n\n(3) The Certainty of Salvation\u20146:9\u201320<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThese verses spell out these believers\u2019 spiritual action and obligation. In verses 9\u201312, the author shows that the fact of danger does not exclude the consolation of hope. In these verses, he points out their responsibility is to do the works that accompany salvation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak: 10 for God is not unrighteous to forget your work and the love which you showed toward his name, in that you ministered unto the saints, and still do minister. 11 And we desire that each one of you may show the same diligence unto the fulness of hope even to the end: 12 that you be not sluggish, but imitators of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 9, the writer is persuaded of better things for his readers. The fact he calls them beloved shows they are believers. He is persuaded that they will move out of their babyhood and press on to maturity. They will begin to produce the works that accompany salvation. They already possess salvation, but they need to press ahead and do the works which are the evidence that accompany salvation. He is persuaded they will do these things even though he has been forced to speak to them in harsh language. The very fact he calls them beloved indicates they are believers. The previous, severe description of what they are in danger of has not yet happened to them. The readers have not yet reached that condition. He is persuaded they will produce better things; better than the thorns, briars, and thistles of verse 8.
\nFurthermore, in verse 10, the proof of their saved state is in their previous works. They have produced and are, to some extent, still producing good works. The warning is not given because these good works are not appreciated for God is not unjust to forget these things. He lists five things God will not forget concerning them: (1) He will not forget their work, their good works after salvation (Eph. 2:10); (2) He will not forget their labor of love. This word emphasizes both effort and the motivation behind the good works; (3) He will not forget those things which they have shown toward his name. This points out that the works they did in the past were for the glory of God; (4) He will not forget their past ministry to the saints; (5) He will not forget their present ministry to the saints. They have produced good works and they will continue to produce good works. The author\u2019s confidence of verse nine is based on their works, which served as evidence of their salvation.
\nNevertheless, in verse 11, he reaffirms his original desire for them to press on to maturity as stated in 5:11\u201314. There must be continuance and perseverance. They are not saved by perseverance, but they receive the full reward by persevering. They receive a full assurance of hope, and this hope provides a certainty unto the end. The word for end means until they reach maturity, which in turn will give them assurance of their salvation. Their life needs to reflect what they believe.
\nThe first of three desires he expresses here is for them to reach maturity. In verse 12, he gives the admonition not to be sluggish. They must press on to maturity as others have through faith and patience. The second desire the author conveys is that they do not remain sluggish. The word sluggish is the same word used in 5:11. They have become sluggish or dull of hearing. Now he wants them to leave their spiritual sluggishness. His third desire is for them to become imitators of [those] who through faith and patience inherit the promises. They need to continue in faith as believers. They need to exercise patience and endurance and realize that the promises, though they may be for another day, are attainable. The Greek word for imitate is mimic, which is the origin of the English word \u201cmimic.\u201d They are to mimic others who have obtained the promises by patient endurance. The promise, in this context, is to attain spiritual maturity in this life and rewards for the Kingdom in the next life. In the Book of Hebrews the word \u201cpromise\u201d is used eighteen times. Sixteen of those times it is used of the Kingdom. The people to imitate will be listed in chapter 11.
\nIn verses 13\u201320, he points out that God\u2019s promises can never fail. God\u2019s part is His immutable, steadfast promise. In verses 13\u201315, he starts by pointing out God\u2019s promise to Abraham:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
13 For when God made promise to Abraham, since he could swear by none greater, he sware by himself, 14 saying, Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you. 15 And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nGod\u2019s promises to Abraham implied a future fulfillment and this demanded the exercise of patient endurance. In verse 13, the reason Abraham had the assurance, and therefore could exercise patient endurance, was because of God\u2019s promises to him. God\u2019s promises can be trusted because of His Person.
\nIn verse 14, he quotes Genesis 22:16\u201317 to show God\u2019s promises can be trusted because of who He is. God reconfirmed the promises to Abraham after a long delay to reconfirm his patient endurance. God\u2019s promise can be trusted because of His purposes.
\nIn verse 15, he summarizes the long wait for Isaac. Between the promise God made to Abraham and the time Isaac was born in fulfillment of it, twenty-five years had passed. Abraham exercised twenty-five years of patient endurance to obtain the promise. Abraham is a good example to the faithful. While God\u2019s promises are not always immediate, they are always certain.
\nIn verses 16\u201318, he next points to the unfulfilled promises given to them that need to be waited for in confidence:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
16 For men swear by the greater: and in every dispute of theirs the oath is final for confirmation. 17 Wherein God, being minded to show more abundantly unto the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath; 18 that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us: \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThere are certain promises made to believers, and believers need to follow Abraham\u2019s example in patient endurance. In verse 16, he deals with God\u2019s affirmation. When God makes a promise, it does two things. First, it stops all contradiction and controversy and, second, it establishes that which is a trust. Now, men swear by something that is greater. Men will swear by the Altar and the Temple. For men, that is supposed to settle the issue. When a man swears by something greater, he pledges himself to fulfill the promise. It is the nature of swearing to appeal to a higher authority. God is the highest authority, so His Word settles and confirms. God made the same affirmation men make. Yet, God could not appeal to a higher authority; there is nothing higher or greater than God Himself. He is the greatest authority, and His Word confirms all. There is no argument against His Word.
\nIn verse 17, God made an oath in His own Name in conformity with the human method wanting to show more abundantly to the heirs of the promise; wanting to guarantee to Abraham and his seed that the promises would be fulfilled. That which He promises, He will fulfill. Because His counsel is immutable, meaning unchangeable, His promises are unconditional and eternal. God made an oath when He gave His promise. It means God put an oath between Abraham and Himself; He bound Abraham to Himself with an oath. The mere promise of God is sufficient. God gave His immutable Word in the promise. God did not need to give any more, but He chose to give more. As if His Word were not enough, He gave an oath. Thus, God\u2019s promise can be trusted because of His oath.
\nIn the end, in verse 18 there was not just one immutable thing, but two immutable [or unchanging] things. First, the promise given to Abraham in Genesis 12 was immutable. When Abraham was seventy-five years old, God promised him a son. The promise contained the content of the covenant. Second, the promise with an oath was given in Genesis 17. This was given when Abraham was ninety-nine years old. The promise and the oath were the unconditional guarantees of the covenant. God did not need to give the oath, but He gave the oath for two reasons. First, to show that His promise is immutable because it is impossible for God to lie. Second, to give a strong consolation or strong encouragement to those who have fled to Him for refuge. The word refuge is a reminder of the concept of the cities of refuge. The Old Testament concept of refuge is the background for this verse. Just as a man flees to a city of refuge, the believers have fled to the Messiah for refuge because that is where the hope [is] set before us, the Messianic Hope. Abraham patiently endured and the promise was fulfilled. Believers have a promise made by God that they can obtain spiritual maturity. They must gain it like Abraham did: by faith and patient endurance.
\nThe section ends in verses 19\u201320, concerning the entrance of Jesus into Heaven:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2026 19 which we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and stedfast and entering into that which is within the veil; 20 whither as a forerunner Jesus entered for us, having become a high priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nHow can the believer be certain that God\u2019s promise of obtaining spiritual maturity is going to come to pass? They can be certain because the Messiah, who is their city of refuge, has already entered into Heaven. He is in Heaven right now, and that is the basis of the certainty of the promise being achieved. In verse 19, this hope goes right into the presence of God because Jesus is there. Jesus is in the inner veil of the Holy of Holies in the Heavenly Tabernacle. What was true of Abraham is also true of them. What they believe, actually exists. Their need now is for patient endurance. Since they have fled to Him for refuge, they should remain there. For the hope set before us is hope of the coming expectation of seeing God\u2019s promise fulfilled in their lives. Their hope is as certain as the return of Jesus the Messiah. Four facts are given concerning this hope of God: (1) It is an anchor of the soul; it will help to keep them from drifting, avoiding the problem of 2:1; (2) Their hope is sure or indestructible; (3) It is stedfast; it provides inner strength; and (4) It is in the very presence of God; it is behind the veil in the Holy of Holies, in the Heavenly Tabernacle.
\nIn verse 20, the Messiah Himself is the guarantee that they will ultimately be there bodily. Not only do believers have a guarantee of spiritual maturity in this life, but they also have the guarantee of Heaven in the next life because Jesus is only the forerunner. Forerunner means the first of more to come later, and the believers are the \u201cmore\u201d who will come later! Jesus went to Heaven bodily and so will they. Jesus is there as their High Priest, and He is there in Heaven for ever. God\u2019s promise can be trusted because of His High Priesthood, having become a high priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. By mentioning the order of Melchizedek, the author picks up where he left off in 5:10. Earlier, he told his readers why they might not be able to understand these difficult truths. Having again encouraged them to press on to maturity, he is now ready to expound on the Melchizedekian Order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
d. The Priesthood of Melchizedek\u20147:1\u201328<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The writer will now make three major comparisons based upon the characteristics of Melchizedek as he appears in the Old Testament record. The comparisons will also be based on the very limited revelation concerning Melchizedek in the Old Testament. He is mentioned in only two passages\u2014one in an historical record and one in a poetical record. The historical record is Genesis 14:18\u201320. He suddenly appears on the scene and quickly disappears from the scene. There is no record of his origin, birth, life, death, or anything else. The poetic mention is in Psalm 110:4. The portrait of Melchizedek in the Old Testament is very limited. Based upon that very limited portrait, the author of Hebrews makes a number of comparisons, and he is able to make the resemblance very extensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(1) The First Comparison: Melchizedek and Jesus\u20147:1\u20133\n\n1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of God Most High, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 to whom also Abraham divided a tenth part of all (being first, by interpretation, King of righteousness, and then also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the Son of God), abides a priest continually.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe first comparison is between Jesus and Melchizedek. From the very limited portrait of Melchizedek, found in Genesis 14:18\u201320, the writer points out six similarities between Melchizedek and Jesus the Messiah.
\nThe first similarity, in verse 1a, is that Melchizedek was a priest-king; he was both priest and king. He was the king of Salem (Ps. 76:2), which is also known as Jerusalem. The last part of his name, zedek, was a Jebusite dynastic name. Many years later, when Joshua came into the Land, he fought against the King of Jerusalem whose name was Adoni-zedek (Josh. 10:1). Thus, Melchizedek\u2019s name was a Jebusite dynastic name. Not only was he the King of Salem, but he was also the priest of God Most High; therefore, he was both king and priest. His name and title characterized two things about his reign: he ruled in righteousness, which is what his name means; and he ruled in peace, which is what Salem means. These two characteristics are also mentioned of the future reign of the Messiah in Isaiah 9:6\u20137. The first similarity, then, is that Melchizedek was both king and priest as is Jesus the Messiah.
\nThe second similarity, in verse 1b, is that the Melchizedekian Priesthood issued in blessing in that Melchizedek blessed Abraham. How the Messiah\u2019s priesthood issues in blessing is revealed later in the chapter.
\nThe third similarity, in verse 2, concerns the giving and the receiving of tithes. The point here is that the giving of tithes was a recognition of superiority. Abraham, by tithing to Melchizedek, was recognizing Melchizedek\u2019s positional superiority. It is at this point that the writer defines the meaning of Melchizedek and the meaning of Salem. Melchizedek means the King of righteousness, and Salem means peace. The fact that Jesus functions as a Melchizedekian priest shows his superiority over any other priesthood.
\nThe fourth similarity, in verse 3a, is that Melchizedek was an independent high priest as is Jesus. Melchizedek\u2019s priesthood was individual in that, when he appeared on the scene, the text states only that he was the priest of the Most High God. There is no mention of a mother, no mention of a father, and no mention of his genealogy. This does not mean that he did not have a mother, a father, or a genealogical record. Insofar as the Melchizedekian Order of Priesthood was concerned, ancestry was not important in establishing his claim to priesthood. The appointment to Melchizedek\u2019s Priesthood was independent of human relations. This was not true of the Aaronic Order (the Levitical Order) because unless a person could prove he was a descendent of Aaron, he was disqualified from the priesthood. This was stated by the Law in Numbers 16\u201317. When the Jews returned from the Babylonian Captivity, many claimed the office of priesthood. Some could not prove they were direct descendants of Aaron and these people were disqualified (Ezra 2:61\u201363; Neh. 7:63\u201365). For the Levitical Priesthood, genealogy was very important, but it was not important for the Melchizedekian Priesthood. Thus, there is no mention of the beginning of days nor end of life; there is no record of the birth or the death of Melchizedek. Both events occurred, but there is no record of them.
\nThe fifth similarity, in verse 3b, is that the Melchizedekian Priesthood was timeless. There is no mention of the beginning or the end of his priesthood. While the Levitical Priesthood had a definite beginning and a definite end, there is no record of Melchizedek being succeeded by another priest in his office. Thus Melchizedek was made like unto the Son of God. As far as the biblical record is concerned, his priesthood was timeless; there is no record of it ending. Therefore, he abides a priest continually, while the Levitical priest could only serve from age twenty-five to age fifty (Num. 8:24\u201325).
\nThe sixth similarity, in verse 3c, is that the Melchizedekian Priesthood was all inclusive in that it ministered to all. The Levitical Priesthood had a limited ministry, only to the nation of Israel. Melchizedek\u2019s Priesthood was to all. The Melchizedekian Priesthood was universal, not national. Jesus also has a universal priesthood.
\nThe point of these six similarities is that Melchizedek was made like unto the Son of God. Some teach that Melchizedek was a pre-incarnate Christ, but this cannot be true for several reasons. (1) In this text he does not use an adjective that would describe Melchizedek in his being and essence to be like the Son of God; instead, he uses a participle, meaning that Jesus was similar to Melchizedek only in the likeness of the biblical statement. The word used for being made is found only here in the Greek New Testament. (2) He states that Melchizedek was like the Son of God; it does not say that he \u201cwas\u201d the Son of God in the Old Testament. (3) The second passage where he is mentioned, Psalm 110:4, distinguishes Melchizedek from the Messiah. (4) According to Hebrews 5:1, one of the prerequisites for priesthood was that the priest had to be human. Jesus did not become a man until the Incarnation when He was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary (Miriam). Before that time, Jesus appeared in the form of a man, but He was not an actual man. (5) Another reason why Melchizedek could not have been a theophany is that, in the Old Testament, theophanies appeared and disappeared; they held no long-term office. The Melchizedek of Genesis 14 was a king of the city-state of Jerusalem, which required a position and a permanent residency. Theophanies never held a position; they were always short and temporary manifestations.
\nSome believe that Melchizedek had to be Jesus because his name means \u201cthe King of righteousness.\u201d Nevertheless, to repeat what was stated earlier, the second part of Melchizedek\u2019s name, zedek, shows his name was a Jebusite dynastic name. The King of Jerusalem whom Joshua fought in Joshua 10:1 was a Jebusite named Adoni-zedek. The etymology of the name proves nothing because this same thing is true of Adoni-zedek. His name means \u201cmy lord is righteous\u201d but it was a Jebusite dynastic name. That was simply his name and it says nothing about his person. He was a pagan. He was one of the kings whom Joshua conquered and killed. Melchizedek was a real man. He was not the pre-incarnate Christ, but he was a type of the Messiah.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(2) The Second Comparison: The Order of Melchizedek and the Order of Aaron\u20147:4\u201310\n\n4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth out of the chief spoils. 5 And they indeed of the sons of Levi that receive the priest\u2019s office have commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though these have come out of the loins of Abraham: 6 but he whose genealogy is not counted from them had taken tithes of Abraham, and had blessed him that had the promises. 7 But without any dispute the less is blessed of the better. 8 And here men that die receive tithes; but there one, of whom it is witnessed that he lives. 9 And, so to say, through Abraham even Levi, who received tithes, had paid tithes; 10 for he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchizedek met him.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe second comparison is between the Melchizedekian Priesthood and the Levitical Priesthood. The writer\u2019s point is that the priesthood of Jesus is after the Order of Melchizedek, which is superior to the Order of Aaron.
\nVerse 4 begins: Now consider how great. This Greek word for consider means \u201cto have a constant contemplation with insight and discernment.\u201d The readers need to recognize certain historical facts and then deduce certain theological conclusions from them. Here, the writer will show the superiority of the Melchizedekian Priesthood to the Levitical Priesthood in four different ways. The emphasis here is on the Genesis 14:18\u201320 passage.
\nThe first superiority, in verses 4\u20135, is that Melchizedek accepted tithes. In verse 4, he emphasizes the positional dignity of Melchizedek because Abraham paid tithes to him. Furthermore, Abraham paid the best tithes; he paid it from the chief spoils. The writer calls Abraham the patriarch, which marks the dignity of the one paying. The fact that he was a Patriarch already put Abraham in a position of superiority. Yet, even as a Patriarch, Abraham recognized the superiority of Melchizedek and, therefore, he paid him a tenth of the spoils of war. In verse 5, the writer proves the superiority of Melchizedek over the Levitical Priesthood in the area of tithing. The Levitical Priesthood collected tithes from their brethren (from the other tribes of Israel), but Melchizedek, who had no racial connection with Abraham while the Levites did, received tithes from the father of the Levitical Priesthood. While the Levitical Priesthood collected tithes from their brothers, Melchizedek collected tithes from the patriarch, Father Abraham. In the area of who collects tithes from whom, it shows that Melchizedek is superior to Aaron and Levi.
\nTithing, as a command, was given under the Law of Moses. Since the Law has come to an end, there is no biblical basis or command for tithing today. A New Testament believer must give as God has prospered him. Some teach that believers must tithe today and they base it on this text. The reasoning is that Abraham paid tithes, which was before the Law; therefore, it shows that the tithing law was given before the Law; thus, tithing still applies. However, that reasoning fails in two areas. First, Abraham\u2019s tithe to Melchizedek was a one-time event; he did not give one regularly. Second, Abraham did not give these tithes from his income but from the spoils of war. He conquered a group of kings who had captured his nephew, Lot. Abraham rescued Lot and other citizens of Sodom, gathered all the spoils, and from these spoils of war, he gave a tenth to Melchizedek. Abraham\u2019s payment of a tithe is not a basis for teaching tithing today.
\nThe second superiority of the Melchizedekian Priesthood, in verses 6\u20137, is that of blessing. In verse 6, Melchizedek blessed Abraham. Although it says that Melchizedek\u2019s genealogy was not from them\u2014he had no racial connection to the Levites\u2014he received tithes from Abraham and then blessed Abraham. The blessor is superior to the one being blessed; Melchizedek blessed Abraham who had the covenant promises. In verse 7, the writer\u2019s point is that the blessor is superior. He states that this is beyond all contradiction; it was a recognized axiomatic truth of that day. The lesser is blessed by the greater. Abraham did not bless Melchizedek. Melchizedek blessed Abraham and he is therefore superior.
\nThe third superiority, in verse 8, is in respect to the Aaronic Priesthood in that it was administered by dying men. When a priest died, he no longer received tithes. The Levitical Priesthood was administered by dying men because sooner or later the priest died. This is why provision for succession after death was made under the Law. Nevertheless, this was not true for Melchizedek; there is no record of his death; there is no record of someone needing to succeed him. Melchizedek represents the living, not the dying. Insofar as the biblical record is concerned, he abides a priest continually; the Melchizedekian Priesthood is eternal.
\nThe fourth superiority, in verses 9\u201310, is shown in respect to Levi, who was the founder of the Tribe of Levi. He paid tithes to Melchizedek through Abraham. In verse 9, the point the writer makes is that Levi, who received tithes, paid them. But, Levi was not as yet living when the tithes were paid. How did he pay tithes through Abraham? The answer is: so to say, which is a theological deduction. Verse 10 contains a principle found in Scripture called the principle of imputation, which emphasizes a seminal relationship. It is true that Levi was not living at the time that Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, but he was in the loins of Abraham. Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek by means of imputation, for he was still in the loins of his father, Abraham, when Melchizedek met him. The writer\u2019s point is that, if the fathers like Abraham and Levi were obliged to recognize the superiority of the Melchizedekian Priesthood, the sons should also recognize this superiority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(3) The Third Comparison: The Levitical Priesthood and the Priesthood of Jesus\u20147:11\u201325<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe third comparison is between the Levitical Priesthood and the Priesthood of Jesus. The writer\u2019s point is to explain why the Levitical Priesthood could not perfect the worshiper and therefore had to be superseded by something else. Again, the Greek word for perfection means \u201cmaturity.\u201d In discussing the office of priest, he says two things about the Old Priesthood and two things about the New Priesthood. The emphasis here is on the Psalm 110:4 passage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(a) The Levitical Priesthood\u20147:11\u201319\n\ni The Old Priesthood was Changeable\u20147:11\u201314\n\n11 Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it had the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are said belongs to another tribe, from which no man had given attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord had sprung out of Judah; as to which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe first thing the author says about the Old Priesthood is that it was transitory, meaning it was changeable. Starting in verse 11 with a \u201ccontrary to fact\u201d condition, he declares there was simply no perfection\u2014no spiritual maturity\u2014attainable through the Levitical Priesthood. If the readers had truly discovered and learned that Jesus had superseded the Old Priesthood, then they could see for themselves that the Law had been done away with. The issue here is of bringing into perfection that which is in view. God did not intend for perfection to come through the Levitical system. Furthermore, there is an inseparable connection between the Levitical Priesthood and the Mosaic Law. For one to be done away with it would also require the other to be done away with. It was in conjunction with the Mosaic Law that the Levitical Priesthood had been established. The very prediction, in Psalm 110:4, of another priest to come who would be after the Order of Melchizedek meant that the Order of Aaron was changeable. That prophecy was given after the Levitical Order had been functioning for some time.
\nA change of the priesthood from the Levitical to the Melchizedekian required a change of the Law (verse 12). Since the Law did not perfect or bring an individual to spiritual maturity, the priesthood ministering under the Law had to be done away with. Again, to do away with the Levitical Priesthood required the doing away with the Law because there was an inseparable connection between the Levitical Priesthood and the Mosaic Law.
\nIn verse 13, he again reminds his readers that Psalm 110:4 spoke of a priest from David\u2019s line. This infers that the coming priest will not be of the Aaronic or Levitical Order: For he of whom these things are said [meaning Jesus] belongs to another tribe [meaning Judah], from which [that is the Tribe of Judah] no man had given attendance at the altar. According to the Mosaic Law, only a member of the Tribe of Levi could handle the functions of the Altar. No one from the Tribe of Judah could qualify under the Law.
\nFor that reason, in verse 14, the Messiah had to be of a different order than the Levitical Order: For it is evident that our Lord had sprung out of Judah; [and concerning this tribe] Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. The fact that there was a prediction in Psalm 110:4 that God was going to bring in one more priest after the Melchizedekian Order shows that the Levitical Priesthood was changeable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ii The Old Priesthood was Temporary\u20147:15\u201319\n\n15 And what we say is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there arises another priest, 16 who had been made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life: 17 for it is witnessed of him,\nYou are a priest for ever\nAfter the order of Melchizedek.\n18 For there is a disannulling of a foregoing commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a bringing in thereupon of a better hope, through which we draw nigh unto God.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 15, the author teaches that, if there were to be another priest after the Order of Melchizedek, then it would show that the old Levitical Priesthood was temporary. Of the two Greek words for another, this one means \u201canother of a different kind\u201d and not \u201canother of the same kind;\u201d Not another Levitical priest, but another of a different kind; a priest of a different order than the Levitical. He states that this is evident. It is evident by what he spelled out in the preceding verses.
\nIn verse 16, he draws a contrast between the old and the new. The old was based on the Law, and it was outward; the new is based upon inward power, and it is inward. The old system meant that a man was a priest only because his father was a priest, but it is different with the new system. This One had been made, using the Greek perfect tense which emphasizes the abiding nature: He has been made a priest and continues to be a priest. The basis was not according to the law of a carnal commandment. The word carnal is a Greek word that means \u201cfleshly.\u201d The Law, dealing with the Levitical system, was fleshly because it was based upon human birthright and human descendancy. One was a priest only because his father was a priest. This resulted in some very unholy priests in Jewish history. In the case of Jesus, the basis was according to the power of an endless life. Jesus became a priest after His Resurrection and, by virtue of His Resurrection, He lives forever.
\nIn verse 17, he quotes Psalm 110:4 emphasizing two things. First, the eternality of this priesthood: You are a priest for ever. Second, the character of this New Priesthood: After the order of Melchizedek. This was a prophecy given under the Mosaic Law.
\nEarlier, in verses 11\u201312, he already made the statement that for the priesthood to change the Law had to change. He makes that point positive in verse 18: There was a disannulling of a forgoing commandment. The Greek word for disannulling means \u201cto abolish.\u201d It is the very same Greek word he uses later in 9:26 where he talks about putting away sin. Just as His death put away sin, in the same way, His death put away the Law. Furthermore, the Law was set aside for two reasons. First, because of weakness; it was weak in that it could not impart strength to the man to fulfill its commands and could not produce justification. Second, because of unprofitableness; it could not bestow life. This is a clear statement that the Law has been put away. This was essential for Jesus to be allowed to function in His New Priesthood. If the Law were still in effect, He could not be priest; He could be priest only because the Law has been put away.
\nIn verse 19, he says the Law never brought perfection. That is why there was the need for a New Priesthood with a new priest. The Law could not bring one to spiritual maturity. What the Law could do, was to point to One who could perfect. This is the same point that Paul makes in Galatians 3:23\u201325. One of the purposes of the Law was to be a tutor; to lead people to the Messiah. The Law could only point to One who could perfect, and so He brings us unto a better hope, the new High Priest. Finally, the result of the new Priest\u2019s ministry is access; because of His Priesthood, they have access to God\u2019s presence. Therefore, through this Priesthood, one can draw near to God. In 4:14\u201316, they were encouraged to draw near and approach the throne of grace boldly. The reason this is possible is because of this Priesthood.
\nThe Old Priesthood was both changeable and temporary. Now the author will state two things concerning the New Priesthood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(a) The Priesthood of Jesus\u20147:20\u201325\n\ni The New Priesthood is Unchangeable\u20147:20\u201322\n\n20 And inasmuch as it is not without the taking of an oath 21 (for they indeed have been made priests without an oath; but he with an oath by him that said of him,\nThe Lord swore and will not repent himself,\nYou are a priest for ever);\n22 by so much also had Jesus become the surety of a better covenant.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe first thing the author states about the New Priesthood is that it is immutable or unchangeable because of the oath of God (verses 20\u201321). The Aaronic Priesthood\u2014the Levitical Priesthood\u2014was without an oath. Under the Aaronic Priesthood system, a person became a priest because of his descendancy. However, the Melchizedekian Priesthood came with an oath, and that is why the Melchizedekian Order is superior. Again, the author quotes Psalm 110:4 to prove that God made an oath: The Lord has sworn and will not repent. The fact that God took an oath proves that the promise of a future Melchizedekian Priest will be eternal, permanent, and unchangeable.
\nThe result, in verse 22, is that the Messiah has become the surety [the guarantor] of a better covenant between God and man. This is the first of a total of seventeen times that he uses the word covenant in this epistle. The word covenant is used a total of thirty-three times in the entire New Testament, and half occur in Hebrews alone. This emphasizes the unique Jewish nature of the Book of Hebrews. The One who is the surety or guarantor of this covenant assumes the responsibility that the imposed obligations will indeed be carried out; He will guarantee the fulfillment of the New Covenant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
ii The New Priesthood is Uninterrupted\u20147:23\u201325\n\n23 And they indeed have been made priests many in number, because that by death they are hindered from continuing: 24 but he, because he abides for ever, had his priesthood unchangeable. 25 Wherefore also he is able to save to the uttermost them that draw near unto God through him, seeing he ever lives to make intercession for them.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 23, the writer again reminds the believers about the weakness of the old system: eventually, death prevented the priest from continuing. That is why there were many priests in the Levitical system.
\nIn verse 24, he gives the contrast. Jesus, however, abides for ever and the new priesthood remains uninterrupted. Therefore, there is only one High Priest in contrast to the many. The others were interrupted by death, this One will not be. The word unchangeable means \u201cunalterable, permanent, indivisible.\u201d
\nIn verse 25, he draws his conclusion and the result: Wherefore or hence, meaning that this is the result of the argument in light of the kind of High Priest this One is. The basis of eternal security is that He can save forever because His Priesthood is forever. He saves to the uttermost. That is a condition, not a locality. The Greek word for uttermost means \u201cto arrive at a final destination with all these various aspects completed.\u201d It means \u201cto be saved completely and to be saved forever.\u201d It is a good verse for eternal security. They have been saved to the uttermost; saved forever, saved totally, saved completely. Jesus guarantees that the believer will arrive at his final destination. Because there is a future facet of salvation which is the redemption of their bodies at the resurrection, and because the believer has already been saved to the uttermost, their resurrection is guaranteed. Earlier, it was shown that Jesus has the ability to sympathize. Now, it is shown that He is able to save and He has the power of salvation. These believers are saved and, therefore, they can draw near unto God. The objects of salvation are those who have drawn near by grace through faith. He states that it is through him that they come near to God. He is the means of salvation. Finally, he ever lives to make intercession for them. This is one of the reasons why they are right now saved to the uttermost. When they do sin, Jesus is already making intercession for them. He is ever living; He will not die; thus, this intercession is uninterrupted. The security of salvation is secure simply because salvation is not dependent upon them but upon Him. It is He who keeps them saved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(4) Conclusion\u20147:26\u201328\n\n26 For such a high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27 who needs not daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people: for this he did once for all, when he offered up himself. 28 For the law appoints men high priests, having infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was after the law, appoints a Son, perfected for evermore.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn these last three verses, the writer teaches by using contrast to show exactly what Jesus is in His Priesthood. He makes two major points. First, in verse 26, humanity needed a spotless priest and God has provided a spotless priest. To prove that Jesus is spotless, he says five things: (1) This One is holy; He has personal purity, and in His priestly relationship Godward, He is not capable of sinning; (2) He is guileless; He did not practice evil; He was without evil in His thought life. He was innocent and harmless in His relationship manward (the word guileless appears only twice in the Greek New Testament, here and in Romans 16:18); (3) This One was undefiled; He was unstained; He was free from all defilement; this is His relationship sinward and it refers to His sinlessness and moral purity in contrast to the Levitical priests who were concerned with ritual purity; (4) He is separated from sinners, which is His present ministry in the Holy of Holies in the Heavenly Tabernacle; (5) He was made higher than the heavens, which shows how Jesus became separated from sinners; He passed through into the Third Heaven.
\nThe writer\u2019s second major point is found in verse 27. Humanity needed a sufficient sacrifice. Because He is a spotless priest (verse 26), Jesus did not need to offer sacrifices for Himself as the Levitical priests did. While His own death was a priestly act, He was not a priest at the time of His death for it was God the Father who offered Him up (Ps. 22:15; Is. 53:10). Jesus did not become High Priest until the Ascension, and that is why His priesthood is continuous. The Levitical Priesthood was functioned by the many and it was replaced because it was insufficient. However, the sacrifice of Jesus was once-and-for-all when He offered Himself up. It was a sufficient sacrifice.
\nThe writer concludes, in verse 28, with a contrast between the weakness and the strength. The weakness is the Levitical Priesthood. It was officiated by men who were common persons. The system existed under the Law and was therefore temporary. It was weak, meaning physical weakness. The term weakness also has the meaning of \u201cfrailty\u201d and \u201cmoral frailty.\u201d The earthly priests of the Levitical Priesthood had infirmity both physically and morally. In contrast to the Levitical Priesthood, the Priesthood of Jesus is by an oath as proven by Psalm 110:4. It came after the Law because Psalm 110:4 was written after the Law was already given. Instead of being officiated by a common person, it was officiated by a Son, which is the uniqueness of this One Person. It is also eternally perfected. Because it is eternally perfected, the Levitical system has been comprehensively, totally replaced.
\nThis entire section can be summarized in the following eight points: (1) Jesus represents all while Aaron represented Israel only; (2) Aaron was only a priest while Jesus is both King and Priest; (3) While Aaron was concerned with sin and judgment, the priestly ministry of Jesus is characterized by righteousness and peace; (4) Jesus did not inherit or pass on His priesthood while Aaron did pass on his priesthood and his descendants inherited the priesthood from Aaron; (5) Aaron\u2019s priesthood kept those he represented in a state of infancy while the priesthood of Jesus brings to maturity; (6) The ministry of Jesus resulted in blessing while Aaron\u2019s only produced that which was weak and unprofitable; (7) The Aaronic priesthood was based on the Law of Moses which was functioned by an endless procession of dying men, while the priesthood of Jesus is based on a covenant that made Him a priest forever, unchangeable and permanent; (8) The priesthood of Jesus is based on the sinlessness of the priest while the Aaronic priesthood was carried on through sinful men.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- A Better Covenant\u20148:1\u201313<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The third of the five contrasts showing the superiority of the New Priesthood to the Levitical Priesthood is the fact that the New Priesthood is based on the New Covenant and not on the Mosaic Covenant. The Mosaic Covenant was temporary but the New Covenant is eternal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a. The Basis of the New Covenant: Better Promises\u20148:1\u20136<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 Now in the things which we are saying the chief point is this: We have such a high priest, who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is necessary that this high priest also have somewhat to offer. 4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, seeing there are those who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve that which is a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, even as Moses is warned of God when he is about to make the tabernacle: for, See, said he, that you make all things according to the pattern that was showed you in the mount. 6 But now had he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which had been enacted upon better promises.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verses 1\u20132, the author begins with a summary statement: We have such a high priest. This summarizes his main point throughout this section. The Priesthood of Jesus is after the Order of Melchizedek. This One is ministering in the true tabernacle, not in the earthly copy. The earthly Tabernacle Moses made was simply a copy of the Tabernacle already existing in Heaven. Furthermore, Jesus functions in a God-instituted Tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man, not in the fleshly one of ordinances. Jesus has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. At the present time, Jesus sits on the Throne of God the Father not upon the Throne of David. He now rules from the Third Heaven not from Jerusalem. Jesus can sit down on God\u2019s right hand because His work is finished.
\nIn verses 3\u20135, he presents the proof of the Messiah\u2019s exalted ministry with two syllogisms. A syllogism has a major premise followed by a minor premise which is then followed by a conclusion. The first syllogism is in verse 3. The major premise: the priest\u2019s office is to offer sacrifices. The minor premise: Jesus is a priest.Conclusion: therefore, Jesus must have something to offer. Exactly what Jesus has to offer will be discussed in detail in 9:11\u201310:18. The second syllogism is found in verse 4. The Heavenly Tabernacle is discussed in 9:1\u201310.
\nIn these two syllogisms he addresses two concepts, which he will develop in the next two chapters. For now, he goes on in verse 5 to discuss the true anti-type. Since Jesus was not a Levitical priest, He could not minister in the earthly Tabernacle. Therefore, the scene of His ministry must be in the heavenly one. The earthly Tabernacle ministry was circumscribed by rigid laws. These laws were so rigid that even Moses, the originator, could not break them. Yet, this earthly Tabernacle was only the copy; it was merely a pattern of the Heavenly Tabernacle. It was a shadow, and a shadow is something in contrast to substance. It was only a general outline without the details; it was a pattern, a type. Therefore, the earthly Tabernacle must give way to the Heavenly Tabernacle. The temporary Tabernacle must give way to the eternal one. The system that rested on a temporary, conditional covenant had to give way to a system that rested on an unconditional, eternal covenant.
\nIn verse 6, he draws his conclusion with the words: But now \u2026 Jesus serves in Heaven in a more excellent or better ministry. This ministry is based upon a better covenant, which is the theme for the rest of this chapter. Jesus has a superior priesthood because of the superior basis on which it rests. The superior basis is better promises which are found in the better covenant, the New Covenant. Any covenant made between God and man demands a mediator. Moses was the mediator of the first covenant and Aaron was the priest. However, Jesus is both the Mediator and the Priest of the New Covenant. The New Covenant is superior to the old covenant because it rests upon better promises. For example, the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, was based upon the Law. It brought blessing for obedience, but it brought cursing and even death for disobedience. In contrast, the New Covenant is based upon grace, and it is able to impart righteousness and provide empowerment to keep its demands. It is this New Covenant that is the basis for His high priestly ministry in a better sanctuary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Proof of the Superiority of the New Covenant\u20148:7\u201312<\/p>\n\n\n\n
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, he said,\nBehold, the days come, said the Lord,\nThat I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;\n9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers\nIn the day that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt;\nFor they continued not in my covenant,\nAnd I regarded them not, said the Lord.\n10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel\nAfter those days, said the Lord;\nI will put my laws into their mind,\nAnd on their heart also will I write them:\nAnd I will be to them a God,\nAnd they shall be to me a people:\n11 And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen,\nAnd every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord:\nFor all shall know me,\nFrom the least to the greatest of them.\n12 For I will be merciful to their iniquities,\nAnd their sins will I remember no more.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThese verses contain the evidence that the New Covenant is superior. The essence of the superiority of this New Covenant is that the old one was transitory or changeable and temporary, but this new one is unchangeable and eternal. His point is that the Jewish prophets of the Old Testament themselves recognized that one day the old covenant would be superseded by a New Covenant for it was the prophets who predicted the coming of a new and better covenant. The old covenant was faulty in that it could not produce the power for justification; therefore, it did not produce justification. In verse 7, he points out that if God intended the old covenant\u2014the Mosaic one\u2014to be permanent, then there would have been no room for another. If the old one were faultless, then there would have been no need to look for another; however, it was faulty because of its failure to produce righteousness.
\nIn verses 8\u201312, he quotes Jeremiah 31:31\u201334, which gave the content of the New Covenant. He quotes these verses to prove that the prophets anticipated an abandonment of the old covenant upon which the old priesthood rested and the introduction of a New Covenant upon which the New Priesthood would rest. Introducing his quotation of Jeremiah, he states: finding fault with them. The pronoun them shows the fault did not lie with the Mosaic Law. In Romans 7:12, Paul states that the Law was holy, perfect, and good as the righteous standard of God. The word them refers to those with whom the Law had to work. The problem lay with Israel, who had an incapacity to keep the Law, and the Law would not provide any power to keep it. The problem was not with the Law but with whom the Law had to work. Again, the very fact Jeremiah predicted the coming of a New Covenant that would be distinct from the old one shows the old covenant was never intended to be permanent. The author does not quote this passage to show that the church has replaced Israel or that the church is fulfilling the covenant. He quotes this passage only to prove it was already known in the Old Testament that the Mosaic Covenant was temporary. The content of the New Covenant has the promise of the forgiveness of sin causing an internal change and a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. Conclusion\u20148:13<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In that he said, A new covenant, he had made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxes aged is nigh unto vanishing away.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author\u2019s point is that as soon as Jeremiah said, new covenant, he rendered the Mosaic Covenant as the old one. Jeremiah announced the coming of a new covenant, and that made the old one temporary. The covenant that has become old is on its way to vanishing away. It became old under Jeremiah, and it vanished away when Jesus died.
\nThere are two different Greek words for old. The first is archaios, which is the origin of the English word \u201carchaeology.\u201d This word means \u201cold in point of time.\u201d If something is only old in the point of time, it may still be usable. For example, an old jacket or car may still be useable. That is not the word used here. The second Greek word, the word used here, is paleios, which is the origin of the English word \u201cpaleontology.\u201d It means \u201cold in the point of use,\u201d it is \u201cworn out,\u201d \u201cuseless,\u201d \u201cobsolete.\u201d It is in the Greek perfect tense meaning it has been made old in the sense of uselessness and continues to be so. The New Covenant permanently antiquated the old covenant. It is obsolete, it is aged, and it has been rendered inoperative.
\nTo summarize: the priesthood of Jesus is better because it rests upon a better covenant that contains better promises. Instead of being temporary and transitory as the Levitical Priesthood and Mosaic Covenant were, this covenant is permanent, eternal, and unchanging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- A Better Sanctuary\u20149:1\u201310<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The background to verses 1\u201310 is Exodus 25\u201331 and 35\u201340. The fourth of the contrasts showing the superiority of the New Priesthood to the Levitical Priesthood is that the New Priesthood functions in Heaven not on earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a. The Parts of the Furniture of the Tabernacle\u20149:1\u20135<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 Now even a first covenant had ordinances of divine service, and its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world. 2 For there was a tabernacle prepared, the first, wherein were the candlestick, and the table, and the showbread; which is called the Holy place. 3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of holies; 4 having a golden altar of incense, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was a golden pot holding the manna, and Aaron\u2019s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; 5 and above it cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy-seat; of which things we cannot now speak severally.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 1, the author introduces the old order. Even though it was man-made, earthly, and faulty, it was still valuable as a teaching tool. Now, he will give a rapid review of the lay-out of the Tabernacle and certain regulations concerning its worship.
\nIn verse 2, he deals with the Holy Place or the first room, listing two things: (1) The Menorah, the seven-branched candlestick or lampstand (Ex. 25:31\u201339; 37:17\u201324) and (2) the table of showbread (Ex. 25:23\u201330; 37:10\u201316).
\nIn verses 3\u20135a, he describes the second room, the Holy of Holies. In verse 3, he notes that the Holy of Holies was separated from the Holy Place by the second veil. The first veil was the entry from the courtyard into the first room, the Holy Place. The first veil separated the Holy Place from the Inner Court. The second veil separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies (Ex. 26:36\u201337; 36:37). This second veil was the veil in the Temple that was torn from top to bottom when Jesus died (Mat. 27:51).
\nIn verses 4\u20135a, he deals with the contents of the Holy of Holies and begins with the altar of incense (Ex. 30:6; 40:5). The statement is troubling since the Altar of Incense was located not in the Holy of Holies, the second room, but in the first room, the Holy Place. It actually stood inside the first room in front of the second veil. Although located in the first room, its purpose and ministry were for the second room, the Holy of Holies. He is not emphasizing the place where it stood but its liturgical function. This is made obvious in the Greek text, which does not contain the word \u201caltar.\u201d The Greek simply reads \u201cthe incense thing.\u201d It refers to something connected with the incense, but it does not state exactly what that something is. The author does not say that the Altar actually stood in the Holy of Holies; he simply states that the Holy of Holies had \u201cthe incense thing\u201d since the purpose of the incense was for the Holy of Holies. As the smoke from the incense went up, it went through the veil into the Holy of Holies where the presence of God was located. He next deals with the ark of the covenant and its contents (Ex. 25:10\u201318; 26:33). The Ark of the Covenant contained the three things mentioned: the golden pot of manna (Ex. 16:33\u201334); Aaron\u2019s rod that budded (Num. 17:8\u201311); and the two tables of the covenant (Ex. 25:16\u201321; 40:20). Finally, he describes how it was overshadowed by the cherubim; two cherubs, one on each side (Ex. 25:18\u201322).
\nThe author, having quickly described the basic structure of the Tabernacle and its furniture, in verse 5b, spells out his intent. His intent is not to speak of these things point-by-point, severally, individually. His aim is to simply contrast between the old and the new. His purpose is not to fill in the details but to provide an outline of the way of approach to God pictured by this Tabernacle. For him, the important thing was the typology and the reality to which it led. He is not concerned in detail with the type itself; he is only concerned with the type as it pointed to reality. The Tabernacle is a type of the Messiah in its basic outline not in every point of detail. There are books on the Tabernacle that give the Christological significance of every detail. Much of this is subjective and pure guesswork. Meanings are given for every little detail, every color, every nail, and so on. In the Bible, the Tabernacle is not treated as a type in every detail but only as a type in its basic outline. This is the proper way to interpret the Temple and its sacrifices. To avoid resorting to guesswork, if there is no biblical statement stating this item represents that item, it is best to treat the Tabernacle and Temple as a type in general outline. They should not be treated as a type in a detailed analysis.
\nThe point of the whole overview is to show that the old system consisted of a system of barriers between the worshipper and God. The Outer Court separated Gentiles from Jews. The Inner Court separated Levites from non-Levites. The first veil separated priests from non-priests. The second veil separated the High Priest from common priests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Priestly Service\u20149:6\u20137<\/p>\n\n\n\n
6 Now these things having been thus prepared, the priests go in continually into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the services; 7 but into the second the high priest alone, once in the year, not without blood, which he offers for himself, and for the errors of the people: \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nWhat the writer calls the first tabernacle, in verse 6, refers to the first room, the Holy Place. The emphasis is on the continual, daily work of the Levitical priest who was to do the same thing each day. Every day, twice a day, the priest had to enter the Holy Place and burn the incense (Ex. 30:7\u20138). Every day, twice a day, the priest had to tend the lampstand (the Menorah) adding oil, trimming the wick, and making certain that the flame continued to burn (Ex. 27:20\u201321). Weekly, the showbread had to be changed (Lev. 24:5\u20138). The emphasis here is upon repetition. Every day, over and over again, the same thing took place. The Levitical priest\u2019s work was never finished.
\nIn verse 7, he moves to the second room, the Holy of Holies. Into that room, only one man\u2014the high priest\u2014could enter. Only one man, out of one family, out of one clan, out of one tribe, out of one nation, out of one race, out of all humanity ever had access to that room. And, even then, this one man could enter the Holy of Holies on only one day of the year: Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement). He entered in only once a year because there was only one annual observance. On that day, Yom Kippur, he entered into the Holy of Holies at least twice and perhaps as many as four times, but that was the only day he could enter. When he did enter, he could not enter without carrying blood for that was his means of entering the Holy of Holies; that was his ticket. The earthly High Priest who was making the offering in the earthly Tabernacle needed the same protection of blood as did all others. The Greek word used here for blood means that he needed \u201ca basin of blood.\u201d First, he had to go into the Holy of Holies to offer blood for his own sins. Only then, could he go in to offer blood for the sins of the people. Although the Holy of Holies offering was once a year, there was still repetition, year in and year out. The emphasis is on a very limited access to God: only the High Priest; only once a year; and only with blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Limitations of the Service\u20149:8\u201310<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2026 8 the Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holy place had not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle is yet standing; 9 which is a figure for the time present; according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that cannot, as touching the conscience, make the worshipper perfect, 10 being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIt is the Holy Spirit who is the authority and the interpreter of the Levitical system, and three lessons are taught concerning the limitations of the service. First, in verse 8, what the Holy Spirit taught about the Levitical system is that the first Tabernacle\u2014the earthly one\u2014was unable to provide a way of access to God because the holiest of all\u2014the Holy of Holies\u2014was limited to the High Priest. This was true as long as the old order existed. Moreover, there was a series of exclusions. The Outer Court separated Gentiles from Jews; The Inner Court separated non-Levites from Levites; The Holy Place separated non-priest from priest; and The Holy of Holies separated the High Priest from all common priests.
\nSecond, in verse 9, this old system was merely a figure for the time present; it was simply a historical type of something used as an illustration for the present generation. The weakness of the Levitical Priesthood is evident because it was not able to make the worshipper perfect in relationship to his conscience. When the priest walked away after offering his sacrifice, he knew that his sins were covered, but he left with a consciousness of sin. This was intended to be a figure for the time present. The Greek word for figure is the origin of the English word \u201cparable.\u201d The Tabernacle was simply an ongoing parable.
\nThird, in verse 10, he points out the grounds or the basis for the weakness of the Levitical system. It was based upon carnal ordinances \u2026 with meats and drinks and divers washings. When he calls them carnal ordinances, he is not passing an ethical judgment. He is saying the old system was dependant upon the strength of the flesh. It was fleshly; therefore, it was carnal. It was external only and that is why it was temporary. Why did God enact it? The purpose of its enactment was to serve as a temporary illustration until the time of the restitution or until a time of reformation. God provided an ongoing picture parable with the Tabernacle. It was intended to be temporary and, here, he emphasizes the temporary character, the inadequacy, and the insufficiency of this earthly system. It was temporarily imposed until the time of reformation; until the new age comes, which will bring a perfection; a total cleansing of the conscience. The Greek word for reformation is used only here and never again in the New Testament. The root means \u201cto make straight,\u201d \u201cto correct,\u201d or \u201cto make right.\u201d It means to restore again to a natural condition; to bring matters back to a satisfactory state. It means to set things right between God and man. The earthly Tabernacle could not do that; therefore, it was enacted temporarily until the final sacrifice was made. The final sacrifice came with the establishment of the New Covenant. With the New Covenant, the time of reformation arrived. The Messiah serves in a better sanctuary\u2014the one in Heaven not on earth. The one in Heaven was the original one; the earthly Tabernacle was only a copy. That is why Jesus is superior to Aaron.
\nTo summarize the basic points of this section: the earthly Tabernacle provided a very limited access to God; the earthly Tabernacle provided a very limited cleansing, showing its imperfection and inadequacy; therefore, it was intended to be a temporary arrangement. The Messiah functions in a better Tabernacle\u2014the Heavenly one\u2014which provides unlimited access to God (9:1\u201310) with an adequate sacrifice (9:11\u201310:18).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- A Better Sacrifice\u20149:11\u201310:18<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The fifth of the contrasts that shows the superiority of the New Priesthood to the Levitical Priesthood is that the New Priesthood is based on a better sacrifice. The Old Priesthood was based on animal blood, which only provided a temporary atonement, while the New Priesthood is based on Messiah\u2019s blood, which provides for an eternal redemption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a. The Superiority of the Messiah\u2019s Sacrifice\u20149:11\u201312<\/p>\n\n\n\n
11 But Christ having come a high priest of the good things to come, through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, 12 nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through his own blood, entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author shows the superiority of the Messiah\u2019s sacrifice in three ways. In verse 11, the first superiority of His priestly work is the place where He functions: a better sanctuary. He proves this by contrasting the earthly sanctuary that the Levitical priest entered with the divine or heavenly sanctuary that Jesus entered. The Heavenly Tabernacle is both greater and more perfect than the old earthly Tabernacle. The old Tabernacle was made by sinful, human hands. The heavenly one was not made with hands. The earthly one was of this creation and was \u201cearthy,\u201d but the heavenly one is not of this creation; it is heavenly. To summarize what the author has said: the Messiah came as a high priest of the good things to come. The good things to come were the messianic fulfillments. He came through the Heavenly Tabernacle, which is more perfect because it can bring the believer to spiritual maturity. The author draws a contrast between the work of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement and the work of the Messiah. The contrast is not between Jesus and the five Levitical offerings of Leviticus 1\u20137. It is between the most important day of the Levitical year and what the Messiah accomplished through His death, which became the basis for the ministry of the Great High Priest in Heaven: the Day of Atonement of Leviticus 16. The means is the contrast between the earthly sanctuary and the heavenly sanctuary into which Jesus entered. It is both greater and more perfect than the old sanctuary; not made with hands; not human; and, not of this creation; it is not earthly but heavenly.
\nThe second superiority of the Messiah\u2019s priestly work\u2014the nature of His offering\u2014is found in verse 12a. Again, the author draws a contrast. The focus is now specifically on the Day of Atonement Sacrifice as detailed in Leviticus 16. The earthly sacrifice was the blood of goats and calves [or bulls]. The blood of goats was for the people (Lev. 16:15) and the blood of the calves or bulls was for the priests (Lev. 16:11). Jesus did not come into the Heavenly Tabernacle carrying the blood of a goat or bull but entered through his own blood, which was a memorial of His sacrifice; His blood is a remembrance. Chapter 12 will show that His blood is still in the Heavenly Tabernacle and will continue to exist in the New Jerusalem for all eternity. Another contrast found here is that the priests entered into the earthly Tabernacle with blood, but Jesus entered the Heavenly Tabernacle through blood. The priest had to come carrying blood for his own sins, and the blood he carried was not his own. Jesus had no sins and, therefore, He went through blood, and this blood was His own. An additional contrast concerns frequency. The priest had to go into the Holy of Holies yearly, but this One, Jesus, entered once for all. This one entrance of Jesus left the way forever open for every believer. Just as bank notes have no intrinsic value since their value is based on the gold that is backing them, by the same token, animal blood has no intrinsic value because its value is based on Messiah\u2019s blood that is backing it.
\nThe third superiority of His priestly work, in verse 12b, is its abiding efficacy; it continues. By entering in through his own blood, Jesus obtained eternal redemption in place of a yearly temporary atonement. This is another good verse that supports eternal security.
\nIn these two verses there are three features concerning the Messiah\u2019s entrance into the Heavenly Tabernacle: (1) it was through His own blood; (2) it was once for all; and, (3) it resulted in His obtaining eternal redemption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Results of the Messiah\u2019s Sacrifice\u20149:13\u201328<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(1) Purification\u20149:13\u201314\n\n13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: 14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThere are three results of the Messiah\u2019s sacrifice. The first result of His sacrifice was purification. The Old Testament background is found in Leviticus 16 and Numbers 19. Verse 13 makes a logical connection: For\u2014in light of what he just said in verses 11\u201312\u2014he is about to show why the redemption is eternal. The Old Testament sacrifices were limited to outward cleansing; they only cleansed the flesh. But, the work of Jesus avails in the spiritual sphere and results in inward cleansing. Animal blood only cleansed ceremonial uncleanness. The blood of bulls cleansed the ceremonial uncleanness of the priests. The blood of goats cleansed the ceremonial uncleanness of the people. The ashes of the red heifer were used for the cleansing of corpse uncleanness (meaning someone who has touched a corpse) and other elements (Num. 19:1\u201322). The sprinkling of the water was for the unclean, the waters of separation (Num. 19:9). The result of the blood of bulls and goats, the ashes of red heifers, and the sprinkling of the waters of separation was only purification of the flesh. These sacrifices only cleansed outward ceremonial uncleanness.
\nVerse 14 states this is not true of the blood of Jesus. The author presents his own logical conclusion in the form of a contrast by using an example of rabbinic logic called kal ve-chomer, which is an argument from the lesser to the greater. If animal blood could do this much, how much more could the Messiah\u2019s blood do? If animal blood, through an earthly ritual, can cleanse the flesh, how much more can the blood of Jesus cleanse? His cleansing reaches up to Heaven. His cleansing is spiritual. His cleansing is not only the outward of the flesh\u2014external; it also cleanses the conscience. The blood of Jesus does exactly what the blood of the Mosaic Law could not do; it cleanses the conscience. This emphasizes blood as the source of purification; however, in the case of Jesus, it was better blood. Animal blood was under the curse, but Messiah\u2019s blood was not tainted by sin. That is why His blood is a better sacrifice. The offering of Jesus\u2019 blood was different than the offering of animal blood. This is seen in four ways: (1) in the case of Jesus, it was a voluntary offering and not constrained upon Him as it was with the animals; (2) the offering of Jesus was rational; it was not made without reason as it was in the case of the animals; (3) it was spontaneous and in obedience to a command whereas animals did not die voluntarily; they were commanded to die; and, (4) it was a moral choice; it was not the mere mechanical performance of a rite. In these four ways Jesus offered His blood through the eternal Spirit. In some translations the word spirit is capitalized to imply that it is the Holy Spirit, but more likely, it is speaking of Jesus\u2019 own human spirit; through His human spirit, He willingly laid down His life. His death not only removed defilement, but it also removed the source of defilement and, therefore, the conscience is cleansed.
\nThe author\u2019s argument, in verses 13\u201314, can be summarized in five points: (1) the means of cleansing was the blood of Jesus; (2) the basis of cleansing was the voluntary death of Jesus; (3) it was without spot or blemish since there was no moral failure on His part (Peter makes the same point in 1 Peter 1:19); (4) the object was to purge the conscience from dead works; these dead works were the works of the Levitical system; works which are now dead because they have come to an end as far as God is concerned; and, (5) the goal of Jesus\u2019 death was for the believers to serve the living God; they are not to return to the dead works of the Levitical system but to serve the living God.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(2) The Ratification of a New Covenant\u20149:15\u201322\n\n15 And for this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. 16 For where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him that made it. 17 For a testament is of force where there had been death: for it does never avail while he that made it lives. 18 Wherefore even the first covenant had not been dedicated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses unto all the people according to the law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to you-ward. 21 Moreover the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry he sprinkled in like manner with the blood. 22 And according to the law, I may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and apart from shedding of blood there is no remission.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe second result of Messiah\u2019s sacrifice is the ratification of a New Covenant. In chapter eight the author stated that the New Priesthood is based upon a better covenant. Now he will show how that covenant was signed. In verse 15, he begins with the reception of an eternal inheritance. And for this cause, that is, for the reasons he stated in verse 14, the cleansing of the conscience. Because the death of Jesus cleansed the conscience, certain things are true. First, he is the mediator of a new covenant. A mediator is one who intervenes between two people either to make peace and friendship or to ratify a covenant; in this case, ratifying the New Covenant in contrast with the Mosaic Covenant. While the Mosaic Covenant was able to point out transgressions, it could never bring in the inheritance of the promised blessing. That is why a New Covenant was needed and He is the mediator of this covenant. Second, the death of Jesus made atonement for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant. The truth is that the Old Testament sacrifices did not remove the sins of the Old Testament saints. The Hebrew word kippur for atonement simply means \u201cto cover.\u201d Animal blood could not remove the sins of the Old Testament saints; it only covered them. That is why, when an Old Testament saint died, he could not go directly to Heaven. He instead went down to the Paradise or Abraham\u2019s Bosom section of Sheol or Hades and waited for the death of Jesus, which is the time when the saint\u2019s sins were removed. When Jesus died, He did not simply die for all the sins to be committed after His death. He also died for the sins that were committed before His death; for sins committed under the first covenant. The same point is made in Romans 3:25. The phrase they that have been called shows that the Old Testament saints\u2019 sins were removed at a point in time after his salvation. When the Old Testament saint first believed, he was called or saved at that moment. However, his sins were merely covered; they were not removed. His sins would be removed the same way New Testament saints\u2019 sins are removed: by the death of Jesus. An Old Testament saint was called to salvation at one specific point in his lifetime and, at that time, he became a believer. Only later, did he receive the promise of eternal inheritance; he received the fulfillment of the promise only upon the death of Jesus. The death of Jesus provided atonement in the sense of taking away the sins for both the Old Testament saints and the New Testament saints. The death of Jesus removed the sins of the first covenant and provided the ratification needed for the New Covenant\u2014a covenant that brings blessings in the place of condemnation. The basis of the New Covenant is the death of Jesus: a death having taken place. Now, these Old Testament saints do have their eternal inheritance. Because their sins have been removed, they are now in Heaven having ascended into Heaven with Jesus (Eph. 4:8\u201310).
\nIn verses 16\u201317, he switches in his thinking from the concept of a covenant to the concept of a will. The connection between the two is the concept of inheritance; a will provides for an inheritance. He points out that a will cannot be executed until the death of the testator; until the one who wrote the will dies. Until the testator dies, the contents of the will, with its benefits and provisions, are only promises. In human relations, a will or testament is only in force after the death of the one who made the will. In the same way, in God\u2019s bequeathing salvation to the lost sinner, the bequest is only operative after the sinner dies; he enters Heaven only after he dies. They are saved now, but they enter Heaven only upon death (the only exception is if the Rapture occurs in their lifetime). After speaking of the Messiah as the mediator of the new covenant who made that covenant effective with His death, the author is pointing out another benefit to His death: believers are destined to inherit something. That something that has been willed is a heavenly home. His main point is that a testament or a will demands death. This helps to explain why, in verse 15, he speaks of the Messiah as the mediator of the New Covenant who made that covenant effective through His death and in the way lost sinners who accept salvation on the terms of the will or testament came into their inheritance.
\nIn verses 18\u201322, he illustrates the principle. Now he reverts back from the concept of a will and returns to the concept of a covenant. The Old Testament background for these verses is Exodus 24:3\u20138. In verse 18, the first covenant was ratified by blood. Here, too, a death had taken place, but it was the death of an animal. The Mosaic Covenant was ratified by the shedding of blood, but the blood was animal blood. Even though it was only animal blood, it was a pledge that the terms of the covenant would be fulfilled. The shedding of animal blood marked the immutability of the covenant terms that were laid down. Even though the old covenant was a blood-covenant, it could be done away with. From the beginning, it was a conditional covenant, but it was binding until it was done away with. The shedding and offering of blood proved that a covenant was ratified. In a blood-covenant such as the Mosaic Covenant, the terms could be changed up until the point that blood was shed. Once the covenant was ratified by the shedding of blood, the contents of the covenant were unchangeable even though it was only animal blood. Jesus ratified a blood covenant with His own blood. He did not ratify it with the blood of animals. He offered better blood. While it was not necessary for the one making the covenant to die but simply to shed blood, Jesus went further and offered His own blood, which was better blood. As in the case of the Mosaic ratification, where the death of the animal gave validity to the covenant and made the content unchangeable, the same thing is true of this ratification. In the Mosaic Covenant, the blood proceeded from the covenanting one, but it was animal blood. Jesus offered His own blood.
\nIn verse 19, Moses used a solemn blood ceremony to seal the covenant after he spoke the words of the Law, meaning after he spoke the commandments of Exodus 20\u201323. Then in Exodus 24:1\u20138, he ratified the covenant by sprinkling both the book [of the covenant] and the people with blood. He used the blood of the calves and the goats and he used water and scarlet wool and hyssop. The sprinkling of blood on both the book and the people meant two things: (1) the people were to obey; and (2) if they obeyed, God would bless them.
\nIn verse 20, the action of sprinkling pledged the life of the people if they failed to obey: This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to you-ward, Israel. The blood ratified the covenant that God made with the people.
\nIn verse 21, Moses sprinkled everything in the Tabernacle with blood. Everything in the Tabernacle had come in contact with man since it was all man-made; thus, it needed to be cleansed with blood. In Exodus there is no statement that says Moses sprinkled the Tabernacle with blood, but it is mentioned by Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews. Both Josephus and the New Testament confirm that Moses did sprinkle the Tabernacle and the vessels with blood.
\nIn verse 22, the author gives his conclusion: under the Law, almost everything was cleansed with blood. The reason he states almost is because some things were cleansed by water and some things were not cleansed at all. The principle is: and according to the law, as far as remission of sin is concerned, blood had to be shed for apart from shedding of blood there is no remission [of sin]. His point is that the forgiveness of sin demands blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(3) The Ministry in the New Tabernacle\u20149:23\u201328\n\n23 It was necessary therefore that the copies of the things in the heavens should be cleansed with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ entered not into a holy place made with hands, like in pattern to the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us: 25 nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entered into the holy place year by year with blood not his own; 26 else must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages had he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this comes judgment; 28 so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe third result of Messiah\u2019s sacrifice is His ministry in the New Tabernacle. In the preceding section, the author focused on the use of blood for the cleansing and remission of sin. Now, the use of blood in preparation for the way of approach is going to be enlarged. The author shows that Jesus cleansed the Heavenly Sanctuary through His own blood unlike Moses who cleansed the earthly one with the blood of bulls and goats.
\nIn verse 23, the cleansing of the heavenly typifies the cleansing of the earthly: It was necessary for the copies to be purged with animal blood. The copies are the earthly Tabernacle and all of its articles and furnishings, which he mentioned earlier; It was necessary to use animal blood to sanctify\u2014to cleanse the earthly Tabernacle. They were only copies and, therefore, animal blood was sufficient to sanctify them. However, the one in Heaven is the original, ideal Tabernacle and it was necessary to cleanse the Heavenly Tabernacle with better blood. The expression, It was necessary, emphasizes the absolute necessity of what he is describing in this verse; it was absolutely necessary that the heavenly things needed better sacrifices than these, meaning better than animal sacrifices. It could only be cleansed with the blood of Jesus. Although the sacrifice that Jesus made was a one-time sacrifice, the term sacrifices is plural: better sacrifices than these. It is a generic or intensive plural that shows all the Old Testament sacrifices of all kinds were fulfilled in the one sacrifice of Jesus. His sacrifice had to be better because the Heavenly Tabernacle required better cleansing in keeping with its better nature. This raises an obvious question: Why did the Heavenly Tabernacle need to be cleansed? First, when Satan rebelled against God, he did so while he was still in Heaven and, thus, Satan\u2019s rebellion brought sin into Heaven itself (Is. 14:12\u201314; Ezek. 28:11\u201319). The Ezekiel passage states that he defiled the Sanctuary in Heaven. For this reason, the heavens were not clean (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5). Second, man is united with creation. When man sinned, his sin reached even unto Heaven. That is why Colossians 1:20 teaches that when Jesus died He reconciled things in Heaven as well as on earth. For these reasons, the Heavenly Tabernacle needed the cleansing of better blood.
\nIn verses 24\u201326, he deals with the Messiah\u2019s entrance once-and-for-all into God\u2019s presence for us and points out three key truths. The first key truth, in verse 24, is: the Messiah entered into Heaven. He draws a contrast between the Holy of Holies on earth as opposed to the presence of God, which it represented. This One went into the presence of God in Heaven and not into the Holy of Holies on earth: [He went] into heaven itself, now to appear [openly] before the face of God for us. This is in contrast with the earthly priest. On Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, the earthly high priest entered the Holy of Holies alone and, in essence, his work in there was a secret ministry. Furthermore, before he did so, the smoke from the incense preceded him into the Holy of Holies so that his face was hidden by the smoke from the Altar of Incense. That smoke protected him from looking at the Shechinah presence of God. While the earthly high priest entered into the Holy of Holies somewhat secretively and hidden by smoke, this One entered boldly into the Heavenly Holy of Holies: to appear openly. The Messiah did not enter the Holy Place made with hands. The one He entered into was not the man-made one which, in turn, was merely a copy of the true one, the one in Heaven. He entered into Heaven itself where the original Tabernacle is located. Now, Jesus appears before God, in the presence of God, on the behalf of believers.
\nThe second key truth, in verses 25\u201326a, is: He entered with a finished atonement. Again a contrast is made. This contrast is between the once-and-for-all offering and the year by year offering. Jesus did not go up there so that He should offer Himself many times: should offer himself often. The High Priest on earth had to offer yearly; he had to enter the Holy of Holies yearly carrying in blood not his own, that is, the blood of another. That was the problem. He went in by blood, but it was by animal blood. It was not even by sinful, human blood. For if it was his own blood, the high priest would have had to suffer many times since the foundation of the world because sinful human blood would not have been sufficient for a once-and-for-all sacrifice. If the one offering was sufficient, it would not have needed to be repeated. The fact that it was repeated shows that it was not eternally sufficient, but Jesus accomplished eternal efficacy. If the High Priest had to offer his own blood, then repeated offerings would require repeated sufferings, but the essence of physical death is, as a general rule, only once.
\nThe third key truth is found in verse 26b: having entered into Heaven with a finished atonement, Jesus has vanquished sin forever; but now once in contrast to the many earthly ones. The timing was: at the end of the ages. This expression means that it was the termination of a series of preparatory ages or dispensations similar to what Paul states in Galatians 4:4:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2026 but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nWhen God\u2019s timetable reached the proper moment, Jesus was sent. He appeared at the Incarnation. The key purpose was to put away sin. This time He would not merely achieve forgiveness, which the Old Testament saints achieved, but this time He would achieve a total disannulling. The Greek word used here is the same word used in 7:18 where the author declared the disannulling of the Law. In fact, these are the only two times this word is used in the New Testament. Just as the Law was disannulled or put away, so Jesus came to disannul or to put away sin. Unlike the work of the earthly priest, this One did a perfect work because it put away sin to the point that sin has been put away forever. It was a personal sacrifice: the sacrifice of himself. He put away sin, not by blood that was not His own but by His own blood. In place of achieving temporary atonement, this One achieved permanent atonement.
\nIn verses 27\u201328, the believers anticipate the expected return of the Priest to announce His finished work. When the earthly High Priest entered into the Holy of Holies to provide atonement and to sprinkle blood on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, he eventually came out of the Holy of Holies. The coming out of the Holy of Holies after sprinkling the blood of the goat was a witness that he had finished his work inside. At His Ascension, Jesus went into Heaven. He is presently still in Heaven, but one day He will return in like manner. He will come out of the Heavenly Tabernacle, and His return will witness a finished atonement. In verse 27, the author points out the principle that judgment follows death: And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this comes judgment. Even under the Mosaic system, there could be no more offering for sin after death. It is natural then that judgment follows death, and the judgment following death is the manifestation of what the one who died was. In other words, the judgment was determined by what he was while living. The phrase: it is appointed unto men once to die is a general principle not an absolute rule because there are two types of exceptions to it. The first exception is that some people have died twice. People who were resurrected before Jesus was resurrected died again later as did Lazarus. Lazarus died twice. A second exception to this principle is that some do not die at all. So far in history, two people, Enoch and Elijah, never died. Some misunderstand verse 27 to be an absolute rule and, therefore, teach that Enoch and Elijah must return some day to die. These people teach that the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 have to be Enoch and Elijah because they must come back to die. However, there is nothing in Revelation 11 that implies Enoch and Elijah are the Two Witnesses who will return to die. If this is an absolute rule, what about the many living believers who will be raptured? Paul stated: we shall not all die. Some will be living when the Rapture occurs and, therefore, will be caught up alive. If it is an absolute rule that Enoch and Elijah must return to die, it means that the living believers who are raptured will also have to return to die. Again, this is a general principle, not an absolute rule, and there are two types of exceptions. Some will die twice and others will not die at all.
\nThe judgment following death was the manifestation of what the person who died was, but in verse 28, in the case of Jesus, His coming is the manifestation of what the One who died was. He will show His perfection: so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time. He is going to come out of that Heavenly Tabernacle some day, and the next time He comes, He will come apart from sin. His return will not concern the sin question. His First Coming was for the purpose of dealing with the issue of sin and He dealt with it on the cross. His Second Coming will not be to deal with the question of sin; He is coming for them that wait for him, unto salvation. All the redeemed wait for His return: for Him to complete His redemption. The completion of the redemption process includes the redemption of the body, which will occur with the resurrection of the body. When He returns, it is unto salvation signifying, in this case, the full salvation including the future facet of salvation\u2014the redemption of the body. His point is that, since judgment follows death, either the one who died is judged or, if not, then there must be a substitute. For the believer, Jesus is that substitute.
\nThis section can be summarized in four points. First, the author emphasized the completeness of the one single act of Jesus; it was a once-for-all sacrifice, which was perfect and there is no need for repetition. Second, this is in contrast to the repeated work of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement; his work was never finished because he had to repeat it a year later. Third, Jesus is now present in Heaven and His presence in Heaven means three things: (1) the Heavenly Tabernacle or Sanctuary has been cleansed; (2) His presence means that sin for the believer has been put away forever; and, (3) His presence in Heaven insures God\u2019s favorable verdict and, when Jesus reappears, God\u2019s favorable verdict will be confirmed by the final aspect of salvation\u2014the redemption or glorification of the body. Fourth, he has dealt with three appearances of Jesus: (1) His appearance or coming at the end of the ages, meaning His appearance at the First Coming as their sin-bearer; (2) He appeared in the Heavenly Tabernacle in the presence of God with a finished atonement; and, (3) His appearance in the future for the second time, when He comes again to fulfill their salvation. At this time, the believer will receive the inheritance of 9:15, which is the Messianic Kingdom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Efficacy of the Messiah\u2019s Sacrifice\u201410:1\u201318<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(1) The Insufficiency of the Old Testament Sacrifices\u201410:1\u20134\n\n1 For the law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, can never with the same sacrifices year by year, which they offer continually, make perfect them that draw nigh. 2 Else would they not have ceased to be offered? because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn these four verses, the author makes it as clear as it could possibly be made that the Old Testament sacrifices were insufficient. There was something they could not do. In verse 1, he gives two facts concerning the Law. First, the Law was a shadow. With the word For, he begins the explanation of what he has been saying in 9:11\u201328. There are two different Greek words for shadow and this one means \u201ca pale shadow\u201d in contrast to a sharp, distinct one. That was the nature of the Law; it was merely a rough outline; a mere indication of the reality of what really existed in Heaven. It portrayed something real, but it was a rough outline of the good things to come. The good things to come is the finished work of Jesus the Messiah. Second, it was not the very image of the things. The Greek word image means \u201ca true representation.\u201d It was used of Jesus Himself in chapter 1. The Law was not a true representation; it could not be the true replica of what God was going to do about sin once-and-for-all. There was no reality in the Law because of its failure to permanently deal with the sin issue. The reality was yet to come. The Law could never accomplish this with the same sacrifices year by year, and that phrase looks at the repetition of the yearly cycle. It emphasizes the Yom Kippur sacrifice and, this, they did continually year after year. While doing this year in and year out, they never accomplished the ultimate. As long as it lasted, there was something the Law and the sacrifices could never do: make perfect, which in the context of the Book of Hebrews means to bring to spiritual maturity. That is the specific area in which the Law failed. It could never bring the Old Testament saints to a level of spiritual maturity; it could not make perfect them that draw nigh. Those that draw nigh were the Old Testament saints. Previously, it was already shown that the Law could not give them a complete cleansing of the conscience; they never enjoyed the consciousness of being thoroughly cleansed forever from the guilt of sin. For that reason, it could not bring perfection.
\nAccording to verse 2, the very repetition of the sacrifices shows their insufficiency. If the sacrifices had been sufficient, they would have ceased to be offered. The very fact they are repeated shows their insufficiency. If there had been perfection under the Levitical Priesthood, the sacrifices would have ceased. The author used a tense that shows the Levitical sacrifices were still continuing at this point. This shows this epistle was written before A.D. 70 at which time these sacrifices were stopped. The worshipers living under the Law never came away feeling thoroughly cleansed. If the worshipers had been cleansed, then they would have had no more consciousness of sins. However, that never occurred. Today, the believer no longer has to feel the guilt of sin. He might still be conscious of it but the consciousness of the guilt of sin is gone; the guilt of sin has been taken away.
\nWhat did the sacrificial system do? In verse 3, the sacrificial system merely continued to set forth a need. In those sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year by year. The sacrificial system reminded people of their sin. That is why they could never leave with a clean conscience. The sacrificial system not only reminded them of sin, but it also called sins to mind in a guilt sense. After the Yom Kippur sacrifice, as they walked away, their conscience reminded them that their sins were only covered but not removed. Under the old covenant, sins were only covered and, therefore, the sins were remembered. They knew the whole ritual would need to be repeated a year later. But under the New Covenant, as 8:12 pointed out, God said that He would remember their sins no more.
\nIn verse 4, the reason the law set forth a need it could never satisfy is: For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. Old Testament sacrifices never took away sin. That is why when Jesus died, He died for the sins of the Old Testament saints as well as for those of the New Testament saints. Animal blood is insufficient to take away sins. This was and is impossible; the Old Testament saints\u2019 sins were only covered. Kafar is the regular word for \u201ccovering.\u201d The same word is used when Noah was told to build his ark; he was told to cover the ark with bitumen. The gopher wood was not taken away; it was only covered by the bitumen. The blood-sacrifice of animals did not take away sin; it only covered them. The picture is that sin was out of God\u2019s sight so that He could forgive the Old Testament saint, but it was not removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(2) The Sufficiency of the Sacrifice of the Messiah\u201410:5\u201310\n\n5 Wherefore when he comes into the world, he said,\nSacrifice and offering you would not,\nBut a body did you prepare for me;\n6 In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you had no pleasure:\n7 Then said I, Lo, I am come\n(In the roll of the book it is written of me)\nTo do your will, O God.\n8 Saying above, Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you would not, neither had pleasure therein (the which are offered according to the law), 9 then has he said, Lo, I am come to do your will. He takes away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author contrasts what the animal sacrifices could not do to what the blood of Jesus could and did do. In verses 5\u20137, he points out what God considered the once-and-for-all acceptable sacrifice. The only acceptable sacrifice before God is one that comes through perfect obedience and faith (1 Sam. 15:22). Because animals did not offer their blood with perfect obedience and faith, it was necessary for Messiah to come: Wherefore; it is for that reason the Messiah had to come into the world by way of the Incarnation. He quotes Psalm 40:6\u20138 to show that only obedience brings perfection. Because Jesus obeyed, He could impart perfection. But this passage also shows that God never intended for the animal sacrifices to be permanent. This is shown by the fact that God prepared a human body for Himself so that He might be the One to die for man. This is not the only passage that clearly implies the animal sacrifices were temporary or is it the only passage that emphasizes the sacrifices are useless without faith. Other passages include Isaiah 1:11; Jeremiah 6:20; Hosea 6:6; and Amos 5:21\u201322. It was God\u2019s will to arrange the final sacrifice in this manner by preparing a body with which He could die for man.
\nIn verses 8\u20139, he draws a contrast with the Old Testament sacrifices. The sacrifice of Jesus was a voluntary sacrifice, and it came with obedience. The Old Testament sacrifices are contrasted with obedience. The animals did not obey, but Jesus did. Because the animals did not go to their death as an act of personal obedience on their own, these sacrifices did not please God: Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin you would not [have]. No obedience was involved on the part of the animals. These were the ones that were offered on the basis of the Law of Moses. When the Messiah, God the Son, said to God the Father: Lo I am come to do your will, He stated that He was coming, willingly and obediently, to be the final sacrifice for sin. The result was that He took away the first, the Mosaic Covenant, and He established the second, the New Covenant. Jesus\u2019 obedience to the will of God accomplished the purpose of giving perfection, which was the very thing the Law could not do. In order for Him to offer a sacrifice of this type, it was necessary that He takes away the first, that he may establish the second. By His death, the sacrifices of the Mosaic Covenant were taken away, and the second was brought in\u2014the one sacrifice upon which the New Covenant is based. By His shedding of blood, He inaugurated the New Covenant. He replaced, by His sacrifice, the old system and established the New Covenant. Here again, this is a clear statement that the Law had been done away with.
\nIn verse 10, believers are now partakers of the fruits of His obedience. By the Messiah\u2019s willingness to die, believers have been sanctified once-and-for-all. This is positional sanctification: because of the blood of Jesus, in God\u2019s sight believers are in a permanent, continuous state of sanctification, brought in positionally, because they are now in Him, in the Messiah, in Christ. In the Greek text, the author uses a perfect participle with a finite verb that grammatically emphasizes believers are in a permanent, continuous state of salvation and sanctification. They have been permanently made holy in the sight of God. His blood saves them and sanctifies them. Why? Because of the offering [up] of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(3) The Efficacy of the Messiah\u2019s Present Work\u201410:11\u201314\n\n11 And every priest indeed stands day by day ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, the which can never take away sins: 12 but he, when he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 henceforth expecting till his enemies be made the footstool of his feet. 14 For by one offering he had perfected for ever them that are sanctified.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author next emphasizes what Jesus is now doing in Heaven as over against what He has done in the past by shedding His blood. In verses 11\u201313, he contrasts the present position of Jesus with the Levitical position. In verse 11, the emphasis is on repetition: every priest, meaning what he is about to say is true of every Levitical priest; every Levitical priest is standing; their work was never finished. They stand day by day, which is a further emphasis of the unfinished state of their work. This time the focus is not on the Yom Kippur ritual but on the daily sacrifices and rituals. Day by day there were daily sacrifices, the same sacrifices, which, no matter how many times they were offered, could never take away sins. The Levitical priest did this day by day ministering and offering oftentimes.
\nIn verse 12, the Priesthood of Jesus is the opposite: but he, that is the One in contrast to the many Levitical priests, when he had offered; the Greek word here is an aorist and emphasizes a one-time offering in contrast to the repeated offerings of the Levitical priest. When He offered one sacrifice, in contrast to the same sacrifices being offered many times, His one offering dealt with the sin issue for ever. The Old Testament sacrifices did not remove sins, but the sacrifice of Jesus did. This shows His work is effective for ever. His sacrifice took away sins. Because He has finished His work, Jesus is now seated at the right hand of God. He can sit down because His work is finished. This is in contrast to the Levitical priests who are always viewed as standing because their work was never finished.
\nIn verse 13, His present position is that He is now in Heaven: henceforth expecting [waiting until all] his enemies [are] made the footstool under his feet in the fulfillment of Psalm 110:1. The reason Jesus can sit and wait for His enemies to become His footstool is because His work is finished. He does not need to repeat the sacrifice. He will remain in Heaven until He rises to judge at the Second Coming. At the Second Coming, when He will rise to judge, it will be to destroy His enemies.
\nIn verses 11\u201313, the author has made seven contrasts: (1) the many priests in contrast to the one Priest; (2) they are standing but He sat down; (3) they have to sacrifice daily but He sacrificed on only one day; (4) they sacrificed many times but He sacrificed only once; (5) they had to offer many sacrifices but He had to offer only one sacrifice; (6) they accomplished a temporary atonement but He, a permanent, eternal one; and, (7) their sacrifices covered sins but His sacrifice took them away.
\nIn verse 14, he gives the result: His one offering perfected the saints forever. Those now being sanctified, from God\u2019s viewpoint, have been perfected for ever. This is a verse that is good for showing the contrast between position and practice. Earlier, he dealt with positional sanctification: because believers are in Jesus, God views them as being permanently sanctified and they are already perfect in His sight. They are not perfect because of what they really are but because of what they are in Christ. Nevertheless, in practice they still sin; therefore, in practice, there is a work going on called practical sanctification. The Holy Spirit is within believers slowly conforming them more and more to the image of the Son of God. As believers grow in grace, their practices must be more and more conformed to their position. From God\u2019s viewpoint, believers have been perfected for ever. The very word for ever shows the result of His work is still abiding. Another reason that salvation is secure is because His work has already permanently sanctified believers for ever. In their standing before God, which is a positional truth, they are already perfect before God as far as the penalty of sin is concerned. His blood perfects the saints forever because the sacrifice is permanent, once-and-for-all, and His blood is better blood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
(4) The Enactment of the New Covenant\u201410:15\u201318\n\n15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after he had said,\n16 This is the covenant that I will make with them\nAfter those days, said the Lord:\nI will put my laws on their heart,\nAnd upon their mind also will I write them;\nthen said he,\n17 And their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.\n18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 15, he shows that the truth that sin was to be totally, effectively, and permanently dealt with was already testified to by the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament: the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us that these things are true. In verses 16\u201317, he quotes Jeremiah 31:33\u201334. In chapter 8, he quoted this in more detail, but now he does not need to quote the whole passage because he wants to point out only two things here: (1) under the New Covenant there is no more remembrance of sin; and (2) there is no more consciousness of sin. For that reason, under the New Covenant there is no more need for the Levitical sacrifices, and these Jewish believers can dispense with them without any loss. Jesus fulfills the promises of the New Covenant.
\nVerse 18 presents the conclusion of the entire discussion: Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. That is the last, decisive word on the matter. Since Jesus brought perfection and brought complete forgiveness, sin, as far as God is concerned, cannot even be remembered; what further need is there for Levitical sacrifices? The very fact that these Jewish believers possessed remission negates any further need for an offering for sin. With that statement, the author concludes the first major part of the book, which was primarily dealing with the theological issue and provided some practical application.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
THREE<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Practical Application of the Pre-Eminence of the Son in the Walk of the Believer\u201410:19\u201313:25<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the first major division (1:1\u201310:18), the author of Hebrews dealt with the theological issue. He showed the superiority, or the pre-eminence, of the Son to the three pillars of Judaism. These three pillars are angels, Moses, and the Levitical Priesthood. In the second part of the book, he is going to deal with the practical application of the pre-eminence of the Son in the walk of the believer. This practical application is based upon the theology previously discussed. In contrast with the previous section, this section is primarily application with some theology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A. Exhortations\u2014Warning\u2014Encouragement\u201410:19\u201339<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Exhortations\u201410:19\u201325\n19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the way which he dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 21 and having a great priest over the house of God; 22 let us draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience: and having our body washed with pure water, 23 let us hold fast the confession of our hope that it waver not; for he is faithful that promised: 24 and let us consider one another to provoke unto love and good works; 25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as the custom of some is, but exhorting one another; and so much the more, as you see the day drawing nigh.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The author begins by giving two bases for the exhortation followed by four specific exhortations. The first basis, found in verses 19\u201320, is free access to God. The passage begins in verse 19 with the word therefore, meaning in light of what he has said in the theological section (1:1\u201310:18) and in light of the fact the readers have entrance to the presence of God. This summarizes the entire theological section. Since they have this entrance, they need to learn to use it. He refers to his readers as brethren, showing them to be fellow-believers. They now have access to enter into the holy place; not the earthly one but the heavenly one. His argument in this chapter is based upon the fact that they have the privilege of access into the Holy of Holies in Heaven through the Melchizedekian High Priest. In other words, in a unique way, believers today are on the same plane of privilege as that of the Old Testament high priest. Not only do the readers have access, but they also have boldness, and they have the freedom to orally express the concerns of their hearts by means of Messiah\u2019s blood. The Greek word for new is used only here, nowhere else, and means \u201cto be freshly slain\u201d or \u201cfreshly slaughtered.\u201d Furthermore, the Greek word for freshness, a word found only here in the Greek text, is the kind of freshness that cannot grow old.
\nVerse 20 describes the way: by the way which he dedicated for us. The writer states two things about the way. First, it is a new way because it is based on the New Covenant. The readers have received a new way because they have entered this way by means of better blood. Second, it is a living way. It is living because it consists of a living fellowship with a living Person. This fresh, newly slain, and living way is something Jesus dedicated by the shedding of His blood. His own death conquered spiritual death and brought life. They have access to God through the veil, which is his flesh; the way consists of His flesh. His flesh emphasizes His true humanity. It is by the death of His humanity that they have attained the right to enter this way. His body was like the veil and the veil was torn; His body was broken. While He was living, His body served as a barrier to Him just as the veil was a barrier, but when He died, the veil (body) was torn. This is why they have access to God. The first basis for the exhortation is their access to God, which He has provided.
\nThe second basis for the exhortation is found in verse 21: the sovereign power of this High Priest. The readers have a great High Priest since, as the author has pointed out earlier, this is the Melchizedekian One. This is the High Priest, who is over the house of God. This High Priest is not over the earthly house but is over the heavenly one. Because of all the better things about the heavenly house, as discussed in the earlier chapters, the sovereign power of this High Priest now becomes the second basis for these exhortations.
\nAfter stating the two bases for the exhortation, the writer gives his four exhortations. The first exhortation, found in verse 22, is an exhortation to faith: let us draw near. The expression draw near is a ritual term that refers to worship as in let us draw near to God in the sense of worshiping Him. This is a Greek present imperative tense, meaning they should continue drawing near. The present tense emphasizes continuous action, but it is an imperative, which means it is also an obligation: \u201clet us keep on drawing near.\u201d This is a call to move away from lukewarmness for the same purpose as in 4:14\u201316, which is for the purpose of appropriating grace.
\nThe way to draw near to God in worship is twofold. First, they draw near to God with a true heart. The Greek word means \u201ca real devotion;\u201d \u201cto have sincerity without superficiality.\u201d Second, they draw near to God in fulness of faith. Worshiping with fullness of faith means a \u201cripe\u201d faith, a \u201cmature\u201d faith, a \u201cvigorous faith\u201d with full assurance. The believer lives by faith in that which God has promised because God is able to perform that which He has promised. Using two participles, the author describes the means of approaching God. First, the readers approach God having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience. This emphasizes their salvation, which has brought them into positional sanctification. When he states, our hearts sprinkled, he is using the imagery of blood because blood was sprinkled in the Levitical system. This facet of having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience looks at justification, which is when they were declared righteous and, therefore, they are free from guilt. It is the perfect tense. This means it happened in the past, when they first believed, and continues into the present; they are still positionally sanctified. In the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament, the same Greek word is used for the induction of a priest into his office (Ex. 29:21; Lev. 8:24).
\nThe second way to approach God is by having our body washed with pure water. This is practical sanctification. The Greek word means \u201cto bathe.\u201d This looks at the cleansing as a result of having been regenerated (Titus 3:5; Eph. 5:26). It is a perfect tense. The readers have been bathed and are still being bathed. Jesus is still washing them since sanctification continues throughout their earthly sojourn. This is practical, everyday sanctification. The Septuagint used this same word for the bathing of a priest for consecration purposes in preparation for his priestly work (Ex. 29:4; Lev. 8:6).
\nThe second exhortation, found in verse 23, is an exhortation of hope: let us hold fast the confession of our hope. The content of this hope is that Jesus truly is the Messiah. It is God who keeps them saved, and His continuous cleansing is the divine side of eternal security; however, to hold fast (or holding on) is the human side of eternal security. The writer is not saying the believers remain saved by holding on but, by holding on, they show they really are saved. Holding on is the outward evidence of salvation. A lack of holding on does not mean they were not saved to begin with, but it does show a lack of evidence of having salvation. They must hold on for the purpose that it waver not; that their hope does not become \u201cwishy-washy.\u201d To waver not means \u201cto be firm and unbending.\u201d Why should they hold on? Because he is faithful that promised. This means He has promised to keep them saved. He is faithful that promised is the divine side of eternal security. The reason their eternal security is safe is because it is dependant upon God\u2019s power, of which He has all. Because they are saved, God is holding them. In response, they should hold on to Him without wavering since that will provide the conclusive evidence of their salvation and give them personal assurance of their salvation.
\nThe third exhortation is an exhortation to love found in verse 24: let us consider one another. The Greek word for consider is the same word the author used in 3:1. It means to \u201cmake a very careful investigation\u201d or \u201ca careful study.\u201d In 3:1 it referred to the Messiah but here the objects are other believers. And for what purpose are the readers to consider this time? The purpose is not to find fault and to criticize but to provoke unto love and good works. Love is the inner attitude, but good works are the outward action. The way they show their love outwardly is by good works. Jesus said, If you love me, you will keep my commandments. The readers do not become lovers of Jesus by keeping His commandments, but they show their love for Him by keeping His commandments. The way to show the love of the brethren is by doing good works for them.
\nThe fourth and last exhortation is found in verse 25: not forsaking our own assembling together. The Greek word for forsake means \u201cto abandon completely.\u201d Do not abandon completely the gathering together as believers. The word used includes not only the act of assembling but also the assembly itself. The Greek word is episunagogei, which contains the word \u201csynagogue,\u201d but he is not referring to the synagogue as a place. The word simply means \u201cto gather together.\u201d The only other usage of this word is in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 where it is used of the gathering together of believers when Jesus returns. It is essential that believers gather together as believers. The church must meet, but the Bible does not dictate on what day of the week the church must meet. It is up to each individual church to make that decision. It is permissible to meet on Sunday, on Friday, on Saturday, or on any other day of the week; however, it is not acceptable for the church to stop meeting because they are commanded to gather together.
\nThe author sadly continues with the words, as the [custom] of some is. Some of the Jewish believers to whom he is writing have already begun to disassociate themselves from other believers due to persecution. They are already refusing to assemble together, but believers must gather together as fellow-believers for the purpose of exhorting one another. Gathering together is essential for the exhortation and encouragement of one another, especially in light of coming judgment. The exhortation to come together is for the purpose of fulfilling the first three exhortations. It is essential now, even more so at this time: and so much the more, as you see the day drawing nigh. The expression so much the more emphasizes the urgency. The reason for the urgency is the day drawing nigh; the day is a day of coming judgment, and the fact that the day is drawing nigh shows it is on the verge of happening. They are very near to the coming A.D. 70 judgment when Jerusalem and the Temple will be destroyed because of the national rejection of the Messiahship of Jesus on the basis of His being demon-possessed. Jesus warned them of its coming (Mat. 24:1\u20132; Lk. 19:41\u201344; 21:20\u201324).
\nWhile the A.D. 70 judgment is a prefigure of the final judgment, in this case, it is something the present generation will experience. The judgment is coming very soon. Having emphasized so strongly against the dangers of not meeting together, the writer uses this exhortation to introduce his fourth warning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The Fourth Warning\u2014Parenthetical Warning of the Danger of Willful Sin\u201410:26\u201331\n26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adversaries. 28 A man that had set at nought Moses\u2019 law dies without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of how much sorer punishment, think you, shall he be judged worthy, who had trodden under foot the Son of God, and had counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and had done despite unto the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know him that said, Vengeance belongs unto me, I will recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
Verse 26 gives a principle for those believers who reject the truth, especially the truth the writer has been dealing with up until now. The word For connects what he is about to say with what he has just said. He has just warned them about a coming judgment day, and his readers may fall in that judgment if they fail to heed what he is saying. The previous section dealt with the necessity of gathering together. He has already warned that, under such circumstances, apostasy may already have taken place because some refuse the assembling together. In light of the fact that some have already stopped associating with other believers, a warning must be given.
\nThe warning is: if we sin wilfully. The expression, if we sin, is a conditional, circumstantial participle in the present tense. If they keep on sinning willfully is a continuous action. The writer is not dealing with one simple, isolated act of sin but a certain sin habitually committed. In this context, the sin is to willfully and permanently return to Judaism. In the Greek text, the word wilfully comes before if we sin and is in the emphatic position. Literally, it reads \u201cwilfully if we sin.\u201d This is not a sin they will commit out of ignorance; they will commit it willfully. The Greek word means \u201cdeliberate intention.\u201d It is not a sin committed out of ignorance or weakness but is a sin planned out, determined, and committed with forethought. They preplanned the sin. They have been planning it, but at this point they have not yet committed it; therefore, he issues the warning: For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth. The readers already have the knowledge. The Greek word used here for knowledge does not just mean knowledge. It means \u201cfull knowledge.\u201d After reading this letter, the readers will have full knowledge of the truth, of the issues involved, of the circumstances involved, and of the results of their actions. If they insist upon going back wilfully after reading this letter, it will show the enormity and severity of their defection.
\nIn such a case, there will no longer remain a sacrifice for sins. This will be the first result of their apostasy. Since Jesus was rejected, they have no other sacrifice for their sins. He was their final sacrifice. This result, again, is based on the Old Testament principle that there were no sacrifices for certain sins including adultery, murder, and blasphemy. For these kinds of sins, the people could not offer a sacrifice. Instead, they were subject to the penalty of physical death.
\nOnce more, it will not be spiritual death but physical death. While the cross covers all sins for eternity, there is a sin here that the cross of Christ will not cover in this life. The question is: What sin is it that the cross of Jesus will not cover in this life? For eternity, their sins are forever removed, but what is this sin that the blood of Jesus will not avail them while they are living? The overall context shows the nature of the sin is that it is a voluntary sin they wilfully commit after they become believers and after they receive full warning. The use of the present tense shows it is a sin they continue to commit even though they know it is wrong. Contextually, it is going back to Judaism and remaining there. The action this sin involves is a total repudiation of all their former beliefs and actions that were good and right. The consequence of this sin is the repudiation of their previous confession that Jesus is the Messiah.
\nComparing what the writer said in verses 23\u201325 with verses 26\u201329, the sin involves separating themselves from other believers permanently. It means to return to Judaism, the Temple, and all that entails in order to escape persecution. Even worse, this sin involves a denunciation of the three elements of verse 29 that includes the work of the Son, the work of the Father, and the work of the Holy Spirit. For this kind of sin, there is no further sacrifice and the individual is therefore subject to judgment. The judgment is physical not spiritual. The nature of the judgment in this context means three things. First, it means physical death (vv. 28\u201329). Second, it means physical death in the A.D. 70 judgment (vv. 25, 27). Third, it means the loss of rewards in the next life (vv. 35\u201336). Here again, the background is Numbers 15:29\u201331, which shows that for some sins there was no sacrifice. The principle is that while, for the believer, all sins are forgivable for eternity, not all sins can be rectified in this life.
\nThe second result of their apostasy, found in verse 27, is a greater judgment: a certain fearful expectation of judgment. Judgment will be the sole result of rejecting the only way. There are no extra sacrifices for willful apostasy. Instead, they will receive the judgment, which is a fierceness of fire that will devour the adversaries. This will be the physical judgment of A.D. 70 when the city and the Temple will both be destroyed by fire.
\nIn verse 28, the writer reminds them that the Old Testament teaches the fact of physical judgment. Under the Mosaic Law, a man died on the word of two or three witnesses. At the word of two or three witnesses, a person could be executed. With what kind of judgment was a man judged at the mouth of two or three witnesses? He was judged with physical death. As in the three previous warnings, so also in the fourth warning, the issue is physical death. Under Moses, a person who disobeyed the Law died a physical death at the word of two or three witnesses. Now, those who turn their backs on the One greater than Moses will also suffer physical death in A.D. 70.
\nIn verse 29, punishment is more severe under grace than it was under Moses and for this reason they will suffer physical death: of how much sorer punishment, think you, shall he be judged worthy. The rejection of the Law of Moses brought punishment. If Jesus is greater than Moses, then rejecting Jesus by turning their backs on Him will bring even greater judgment. Here is the application of the doctrine. Jesus is greater than Moses. The Greek word for punishment is one of those unique words. It is used only here and is found nowhere else in the entire Greek New Testament.
\nIn this verse, the author shows exactly what is involved in the apostasy if these Jewish believers go back to Judaism. It means the rejection of the work of the Trinity. First, it involves trodding under foot the Son of God. Trodding under foot means \u201cflagrant contempt,\u201d \u201cto have scorn,\u201d and \u201cto count as worthless.\u201d It means to reject the work of God the Father who sent His Son and declared Him to be the Son of God.
\nSecond, if these believers go back into Judaism, it involves counting the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing. These people have already been sanctified by the blood. They are positionally sanctified, but now they are in danger of turning their backs on their sanctification by going back into Judaism. To consider the blood of the covenant \u2026 an unholy thing means to treat the blood of Jesus as being no better than the blood of ordinary men. It is treating His blood as common blood rather than better blood. This makes the blood of Jesus unholy and therefore implies that Jesus suffered justly for His own sins. Yet, this is the very blood by which these individuals have been sanctified. Again, this is positional sanctification, showing them to be believers, but this is a rejection of God the Son since it is the mistreatment of His blood.
\nThird, it involves an assault of insolence against the Spirit: having done despite unto the Spirit of grace. The word despite carries the idea of arrogance and willful injury. It is an insult against the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the One who does the work of regeneration and sanctification. By turning their backs upon the work of the Holy Spirit, the readers will identify themselves with the Jewish generation that is guilty of committing the unpardonable sin found in Matthew 12. The unpardonable sin was the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was making the claim that Jesus was not the Messiah on the basis of His being demon possessed. In essence, if these Jewish believers go back into Judaism, they will face physical death because, by going back, they are visibly rejecting the work of the Triune God.
\nIn verses 30\u201331, the author shows the reason for the judgment and why God must judge so severely. It is because of His character. In verse 30, the author proves that God will judge and quotes two passages. The first passage he quotes is Deuteronomy 32:35, which teaches vengeance is the sole prerogative of God. The second passage he quotes is Deuteronomy 32:36, which teaches God will judge his people. Because these believers are his people, He will judge them if they take this action. Thus, he concludes in verse 31: It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. The living God is aware if they commit the sin of apostasy; therefore, He will judge them. Again, the threatened judgment is physical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Encouragement\u201410:32\u201339\n32 But call to remembrance the former days, in which, after you were enlightened, you endured a great conflict of sufferings; 33 partly, being made a gazingstock both by reproaches and afflictions; and partly, becoming partakers with them that were so used. 34 For you both had compassion on them that were in bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your possessions, knowing that you have for yourselves a better possession and an abiding one. 35 Cast not away therefore your boldness, which had great recompense of reward. 36 For you have need of patience, that, having done the will of God, you may receive the promise.
\n37 For yet a very little while,
\nHe that comes shall come, and shall not tarry.
\n38 But my righteous one shall live by faith:
\nAnd if he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him.
\n39 But we are not of them that shrink back unto perdition; but of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nIn verses 32\u201334, the writer encourages the people and calls them to remember their former, courageous faith. In verse 32, he calls them to remembrance [of] the former days when they were first believers, when they were first enlightened, when they first apprehended the truth and were saved. As in 6:4, the word enlightened means enlightened in the sense of having salvation. Here, however, he refers to some definite period of time in the earlier stages of their faith. Back in the days when they first became believers, they endured great conflict of sufferings. In fact, they suffered as real believers. Since they suffered as real believers, it showed them to be real believers. The words, to remembrance, do not mean simply \u201cto recall.\u201d Remembrance is a Greek word that means to carefully think back and to entirely reconstruct in their minds and then to keep on remembering the reality of the past when they showed boldness. The first deterrent to apostasy is to remember one\u2019s earlier days in the faith.
In verse 33, he points out two aspects of their sufferings: direct and indirect. First, direct suffering was what they suffered personally: partly, being made a gazingstock or spectacle. The Greek word for gazingstock is the origin of the English word \u201ctheater.\u201d This pictures these Jewish believers as being brought on a stage and viewed as clowns to be mocked. They were mocked and they suffered in two ways. They suffered reproaches, meaning ridicule and mockery, and they suffered afflictions, meaning persecution in relation to their possessions. They lost their property. The second aspect of their sufferings was that they also suffered indirectly because of their associations with other believers. They became partakers with them that were so used. Even when they did not suffer direct persecution, they suffered indirectly by associating with those believers who were persecuted. In those days, they were not forsaking the assembling of themselves together.
In verse 34, the writer reminds them of the extent and the nature of the fellowship. They had compassion on those who were in bonds. The word compassion means \u201cinner agony.\u201d They had inner agony (compassion) on those who were in jails and in prison. They also took joyfully the spoiling of [their] possessions. This is outer deprivation. They suffered both inner and outer deprivation. Yet, they were willing to do this for two reasons: First, they had knowledge of a better possession, the one in Heaven; and, second, they knew the possession in Heaven was abiding or perpetual.
In light of the kind of faith they had exercised in the past, in verses 35\u201339, the author now encourages the readers to continue in the same patient endurance so as not to lose their crowns at the Judgment Seat of Christ. Again, there is nothing in these warnings that talks about losing their salvation. They will lose their physical lives and their rewards but not their salvation.
In verse 35, the exhortation is: Cast not away \u2026 your boldness; therefore, in light of what he just said above, they must not cast away their confidence. The lessons of the past are now used to encourage them to exercise patient endurance. The Greek meaning is stronger: \u201cDo not therefore fling away, as though it had no value, the boldness you once made as your own.\u201d The boldness in the passage is not just the attitude of boldness. It also includes the basis on which the boldness rested. They had a foundation of boldness, and they acted upon it. The result was assurance of victory. They had confidence because they had access to God\u2019s presence. The reason they must again exercise patient endurance is so they will not lose their rewards because there is great recompense of reward at the Judgment Seat of Christ. This is the second deterrent to apostasy: not to lose rewards.
Their need, stated in verse 36, is patient endurance: For you have need of patience. The readers need to know that trials are a part of the life of faith. They do not need more faith; they need more patient endurance. They need to exercise patient endurance because then they will do the will of God. Doing the will of God means they will receive rewards. Having kept the will of God, they will receive the promise. The promise involves two things. First, it involves spiritual maturity in this life. Second, it involves rewards at the Judgment Seat of Christ in the next life.
In verses 37\u201338, the writer quotes Habakkuk 2:3\u20134 to show that God will fulfill His purpose in due time, even if, from the human viewpoint, He seems to linger or delay. If the readers fully understand that God intends to fulfill His purpose in His time, this will give them hope during periods of persecution. Shrinking back in fear is the sign of an unbeliever. The sign of a believer is living by faith: The just shall live by faith.
In verse 39, he makes the application to these Jewish believers. They are the ones who have faith, not those who shrink back. But we [meaning the writer and the people to whom he is writing] are not of them that shrink back unto perdition. Those who shrink back to perdition are unbelievers; believers live by faith. Believers are not like Judas, who was the son of perdition (Jn. 17:12), and who, according to John 13:10\u201311, was never saved to begin with. Believers are of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul. They, the writers and his readers, have salvation faith. The point is that their sufferings will not last forever, but their salvation will last forever because they have saving faith.
The point in this segment is that they had exercised patience and endurance in the past. In light of this fact, they must continue exercising patience and endurance while knowing that in due time God will fulfill His purpose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
B. The Evidence of the Life of Faith\u201411:1\u201340<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By way of introduction, four observations can be noted concerning this chapter. First, the author\u2019s main point is that, since the Old Testament saints exercised faith, to depart from faith is to depart from the Old Testament saints. Second, in 10:35\u201339, he encouraged them to exercise patient endurance. In this chapter, he draws many examples from the Old Testament to show how people in the Old Testament exercised patient endurance. These Old Testament saints won the battle through patient endurance and, therefore, these believers must win the battle the same way. Third, in 6:12 he states, that you be not sluggish, but imitators of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. In this chapter, he will give many examples of those whom the readers can imitate. Fourth, the key word in this chapter is faith. It is used twenty-four times and always translated as faith except once where it is translated as \u201cfaithful\u201d and once where it is translated as \u201cbelieve.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The Endurance of Faith\u201411:1\u20133\n1 Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen. 2 For therein the elders had witness borne to them. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen had not been made out of things which appear.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
In verse 1, the author describes the characteristic of faith. This is not a definition of faith but a description of faith. He is not describing saving faith but describing faith as a principle that deals with what is still future and unseen. Future things are made sure by faith even as past things like Creation must be taken by faith. Faith looks forward to the future, to things anticipated and hoped for. Since the future with all its hope is not yet realized, then patient endurance is necessary. The one who lives by faith will patiently endure.
\nThe author uses two Greek words and each one can have two different meanings. The first key word hupostasis is translated as assurance; it is the assurance of things hoped for. This word was used twice before. In 1:3 it was translated as an exact reproduction and in 3:14 it was translated as assurance. It is used twice elsewhere, 2 Corinthians 9:4 and 11:17, where it has the meaning of assurance. The question here is: Does the author mean for this to have an objective meaning or a subjective meaning? If the intent of the author is objective, then the meaning is substance, that which gives real existence to a title deed; a real guarantee. It was used in ancient documents as evidence of title deeds and gave guarantee of ownership. It refers to the real essence, the real content, the reality; faith is the essence of a future reality. If the intent is subjective, then it means assurance or confidence, emphasizing results. The result is absolute certainty; a living faith that gives a living hope so real that it gives absolute certainty or assurance; absolute assurance of things hoped for such as spiritual maturity, the blessings of Messiah\u2019s return, the entrance into heavenly rest, the future glorification, and so on. All of these things he has spoken of are still future and unseen. Either way, substance or subjective, it gives reality to the blessings for which the readers hope. This hope is not a mere wish, or dream, or fantasy. It is a reality. Hope, in turn, must have a foundation and that foundation is Scripture; therefore, they must wait patiently until it comes to pass.
\nThe second key word is ellegos, which can also have two different meanings. It can mean proof or conviction. If the intent is proof, then it refers to the certainty of things not seen. If the intent is conviction, then it means the giving of the feeling of certainty. As a noun, it is used only here and in 2 Timothy 3:16. Either way, proof or conviction, the basic foundation is that the person of faith lives out his belief; he lives out his faith; what his mind and spirit are convinced is true. What he is convinced about is: things not seen but present such as the priestly ministry of Jesus, his access to God in prayer, assurance of spiritual maturity, and the full pardon of sins. While they cannot see these things, they know they are really there. The faith principle makes it certain that these things are true. This is equally true of things not seen but still future such as the Second Coming. These things can be made real through faith.
\nThe basic teaching of this verse is that faith gives substance to things hoped for and demonstrates provable reality to things unseen. Faith gives assurance that the other world, the unseen world, does exist. The life of the believer today is lived in the assurance of another reality; a reality outside the realm of the believer\u2019s experience. Although these future things are unseen, the person with faith is convinced of the reality of them.
\nIn verse 2, the author teaches that history proves it is possible to live this way: For therein [showing that this is not a new concept] the elders [these elders are the Old Testament saints to be listed shortly] had witness borne to them. In Greek, this statement is passive. This does not mean that the Fathers bore witness of the life of faith but that the faith of the Old Testament saints was observed by others, and there was a witness to the fact that their faith was genuine. They received a promise from God; they claimed that promise; and, they patiently endured until the promise was received. God also bore witness that their faith was genuine.
\nIn verse 3, one major example is given. Creation is something that must be accepted by faith for no man was present to observe it. Moses was not present to record it. Not only is faith to be exercised in a future event, which cannot be seen; not only is faith to be exercised in a present event, which is not seen; but faith must also be exercised in a past event which was not seen. Creation shows that something did come out of nothing, but the physical universe, the worlds, is something God controls. The Greek word means \u201cages,\u201d referring to all the times and administrations of the ages. Creation occurred. The believer did not see it, but he believes it. Believing that Creation occurred imposes a responsibility of faith in a Creator, Who is also not seen. Genuine faith produces genuine knowledge that the worlds [came into existence through] the word of God. The Greek word for word is reima, which means \u201cthe spoken word.\u201d God spoke and it appeared. The worlds came into being by the expression of God\u2019s divine will, and the things which are seen were not made out of things which appear, that is, which are visible, for they were created out of nothing. God\u2019s manifestation of power in Creation calls upon all to believe it by faith: By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the [spoken] word of God. Since the believer did not see Creation, he believes it by faith on the basis of the written Word of God (Job 38:4). Faith does not always look forward. Sometimes it looks back. Without having seen God, they know God exists and creation bears testimony to His existence. If faith is sufficient for what is past and unseen, it is also sufficient for what is future and unseen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- The Examples of Faith\u201411:4\u201340<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
a. Faith in the Pre-Patriarchal Period\u201411:4\u20137<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he had witness borne to him that he was righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts: and through it he being dead yet speaks. 5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God translated him: for he had had witness borne to him that before his translation he had been well-pleasing unto God: 6 and without faith it is impossible to be well-pleasing unto him; for he that comes to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek after him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned of God concerning things not seen as yet, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; through which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 4, Abel manifested faith through the recognition of an obligation. By faith, he offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Cain offered an offering of vegetables, but Abel offered a blood sacrifice, which is what God demanded. Cain is an example of one who thinks he can choose his own way to God. Abel is the example of one who chooses God\u2019s way to approach Him. Through this blood sacrifice, Abel demonstrated faith and, therefore, he had witness borne to him of his true righteousness. The blood sacrifice did not make Abel righteous. What made Abel righteous was his faith, and the evidence of his faith was that he offered the type of sacrifice God required. Abel brought a true sacrifice and demonstrated true righteousness. He is also an example of a true witness in that God bore witness of Abel in respect of his gifts. Through these gifts, which were the blood sacrifice, although he is now dead, Abel still speaks. He is still a witness of the life of faith seen by a three-stage progression. First, because he believed, he offered a better sacrifice. Second, because he offered a better sacrifice, it shows that he was righteous. Third, because he was righteous, he is a true witness of the life of faith. Abel is a good example of worshiping in faith.
\nIn verses 5\u20136, Enoch manifested faith through a life that was well pleasing unto God. By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death. The means was: he was not found, because God translated him. This is an accurate translation of the Hebrew of Genesis that simply reads, \u201cHe was there and then he was not there any more.\u201d He was there and then all of a sudden he was gone because God translated him. God translated him from earth to Heaven. He, like Abel, had witness borne to him, and God bore witness to Enoch that he was well-pleasing unto God (Gen. 5:22\u201324). Enoch was well-pleasing unto God before his translation. The fact that he pleased God was evidence of Enoch\u2019s faith. The act of translation has the concept of being \u201craptured\u201d from earth to Heaven. It does not simply mean transferring geographically to Heaven, but it means a transformation of the body. It is a transformation whereby corruption puts on incorruption and mortality puts on immortality. Since Enoch was translated, it means that he will never return to die. That is why he cannot be one of the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11. The principle the author brings out in these verses is that without faith it is impossible to be well-pleasing [to God]. Enoch was well-pleasing [to God] and it is because he had faith. The one coming to God must believe two things. First, that he is; he must believe that God exists. This is the first step to faith. Second, one must believe that God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. This is the first step of faith. Enoch is a good example of walking in faith.
\nIn verse 7, Noah exercised faith through obedience in that by faith Noah prepared an ark to the saving of his house. The basis of the building of the ark was that he was warned of God. He was warned of God of things not yet seen. Until the time of Noah, it had never rained upon the earth and there had never been a flood. People had never seen water coming down from the heavens. Nevertheless, God said it would happen, and Noah believed God. He showed his faith by building the ark: By faith Noah, being warned of God concerning things not seen as yet, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house. The Greek word for godly fear means \u201cpious care,\u201d to have pious or religious concern. Through the building of the ark, Noah accomplished two things. The first thing he accomplished is that he condemned the world. The world was condemned by Noah\u2019s life and testimony. While he was building the ark, it was a visible sign of the people\u2019s unbelief. The second thing he accomplished is that he became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. This is a righteousness that came out on the basis of faith; God imputed righteousness to him. Noah is a good example of the obedience of faith or obeying in faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Faith of the Patriarchs\u201411:8\u201322<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Most of this section, verses 8\u201319, deals with the life of Abraham, who is a great example of the life of faith and who manifested faith in several ways. In verse 8, he showed faith by leaving the land of his birth:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe very act of departing from his country showed Abraham\u2019s faith. By faith he obeyed and went to a place he would afterward receive as a future inheritance. The word obeyed means Abraham immediately obeyed. The Greek text has a present participle, which means the action occurred at the same time as the main verb: while he was being called, Abraham obeyed immediately. While God was still speaking, Abraham was getting up to obey immediately thus demonstrating his faith. When he first left Ur of the Chaldees and later Haran, he did not know where he was going. He only knew that God was telling him to go. In the account of Genesis 12:1\u20133, God simply told Abraham to go to a land that He would show him. Abraham was to keep on walking until God told him to stop. Abraham shows the pilgrimage of faith.
\nAnother way Abraham showed faith, found in verses 9\u201310, is by becoming a foreigner:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
9 By faithBy faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land not his own, dwelling in tents, with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: 10 for he looked for the city which had the foundations, whose builder and maker is God.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 9, by faith Abraham became a sojourner in the land of promise, \u2026 dwelling in tents, with Isaac and Jacob. He came to the Land he was destined to own, and he came not as an owner but as a stranger. He came and lived as a sojourner in tents in the Land. The Greek word for dwelling means \u201cto live as a stranger in temporary dwellings.\u201d For the rest of his life, from the time he entered the Land until he died, he lived in tents. He lived in tents with the heirs with him of the same promise. Isaac and Jacob were fellow-heirs for the Abrahamic Covenant was sustained only through Isaac and Jacob. It was not sustained through the other sons. Abraham firmly believed that, no matter how long it took for the covenant\u2019s fulfillment, even if it meant it would be fulfilled beyond the grave and a future resurrection, one day he would own the Land. Nevertheless, for now, he was a stranger living in a tent in the Land.
\nIn verse 10, he looked [beyond the Land] for a city [that has] foundations which God has built. Abraham looked for the Heavenly Jerusalem of which God is both the builder and maker. There is not much detail given concerning the Heavenly Jerusalem. It is mentioned three more times in the Book of Hebrews (11:16; 12:22; 13:14), and it is mentioned again in some detail in Revelation 21:1\u201322:5. It was the Heavenly Jerusalem, which Abraham believed was his ultimate Promised Land. This was in addition to and not in place of the Land of Canaan. This was the secret of his patient endurance. Abraham illustrates the patience of faith.
\nIn verses 11\u201312, the writer deals with the faith of Sarah:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
11 By faith even Sarah herself received power to conceive seed when she was past age, since she counted him faithful who had promised: 12 wherefore also there sprang of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of heaven in multitude, and as the sand, which is by the sea-shore, innumerable.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 11, he deals with the faith itself: through faith Sarah received strength to conceive seed; Sarah\u2019s ability to conceive seed was by faith. This statement seems to contradict Genesis, which states that Sarah laughed out of unbelief. She laughed because she was not exercising faith. Did the writer of Hebrews 11:11 misinterpret Genesis? The Greek meaning for to conceive seed will help to clarify this, but it is a bit more graphic. The Greek literally reads: \u201cthe depositing of sperm.\u201d This is actually the male action though the word \u201ccasting\u201d is feminine. This shows that the faith to which the author is referring is not Sarah\u2019s faith. He is referring to Abraham\u2019s faith. It was Abraham\u2019s faith that gave Sarah the ability to conceive, and in that sense, she became one with Abraham by faith. Abraham, together with Sarah, received power to conceive seed when she was past age, since she counted him faithful who had promised. The emphasis here is not that Sarah herself had this faith but that her husband Abraham had faith. Because of her husband\u2019s faith, she conceived. The verb, conceive, should be taken as a dative of association; because of her association with Abraham, she was able to conceive. She conceived when she was past age, meaning she had already passed menopause. She had gone beyond the proper time for bearing children. She counted [God] faithful who had promised. She eventually learned that God was faithful to His promise when Isaac was born. Even her giving of Hagar to Abraham was an act of faith. It showed she believed the promise of God that Abraham was to have a son although she did not seem to have the faith that she would be the mother. It was after the giving of Hagar in Genesis 16, that the Theophany appeared in Genesis 18, with a twofold message: (1) Sarah would have a son (Sarah laughed [in unbelief] within herself when she heard this); (2) Sodom and Gomorrah would be destroyed. The second proclamation of the message was fulfilled very shortly thereafter. This produced faith in Sarah that the first proclamation would also be fulfilled.
\nVerse 12 gives the result: wherefore. The result of Abraham\u2019s faith was that there sprang of one, that is of Abraham, who himself was as good as dead, meaning that he himself by now had become sterile. Yet, from this one, sterile man were born so many as the stars of heaven in multitude, and as the sand, which is by the sea-shore, innumerable. By this time, Abraham had become not only the father of the Jewish nation but also the father of several other nations that now make up the present Arab States. His descendants are as innumerable as the sand by the seashore. This includes the body of Jewish believers to whom the author is writing.
\nVerses 13\u201316 describe dying in faith:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For they that say such things make it manifest that they are seeking after a country of their own. 15 And if indeed they had been mindful of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But now they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God; for he had prepared for them a city.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 13, the writer points out that the Patriarchs eventually died and the promises were not fulfilled in their lifetime. They did not see the fulfillment of these promises but they were willing to greet them from afar. They knew if they died and the promises were not yet fulfilled, the promises would be fulfilled in another lifetime. The Patriarchs were willing to live their present lives confessing they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth and willing to wait for their reward in the next life. As strangers, they were living in a foreign land without citizenship rights. As pilgrims, they had no permanent possessions.
\nAccording to verse 14, this shows they were seeking for a better city and a better country of their own. The very fact they called themselves pilgrims and strangers shows they desired a homeland during their lifetime. It was not God\u2019s will to give them the Land in their lifetime, but they were willing to receive it in another lifetime. In the Millennium, this promise will be fulfilled when Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will own the Promised Land. Jesus said that many will come from the north, south, east, and west to recline with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the Land (Mat. 8:11).
\nVerse 15 states that, if they had tired of waiting for God to give them the Land, they could have returned to where they came from at any time. The life of faith is a willingness to give up past achievements and comforts and live out the rest of life in discomfort for the sake of a better promise. While they did not receive much of the promise, they kept on looking.
\nIn verse 16, it is stated that the Patriarchs knew they would receive a better country \u2026 a heavenly [one]. They knew that one day they would be in the Heavenly Jerusalem, which is going to be far better than anything found on earth. Therefore, they stayed put, were willing to wait, and not go back to where they came from. Because of that, God was not ashamed to call them brethren. He was not ashamed to be called their God. God has already prepared for them the heavenly city that will be described in 12:22\u201324. They have a superior home, the New Jerusalem.
\nTo summarize all that has been said so far:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. The Patriarchs lived according to faith;\n2. They did not receive the totality of the promise in their lifetime;\n3. They saw the future fulfillment by faith;\n4. They believed that God would bring the promises to pass;\n5. They embraced or saluted the promises;\n6. They confessed that they were earthly strangers and pilgrims;\n7. They were seeking a heavenly country; and,\n8. They had no desire to return to Ur or Haran.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verses 17\u201319, Abraham showed faith again in the sacrifice of Isaac:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
17 By faith Abraham, being tried, offered up Isaac: yea, he that had gladly received the promises was offering up his only begotten son; 18 even he to whom it was said, In Isaac shall your seed be called: 19 accounting that God is able to raise up, even from the dead; from whence he did also in a figure receive him back.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe proof of Abraham\u2019s faith is found in verse 17: By faith Abraham, being tried, offered up Isaac. Abraham was the one who received the promise, and he knew by this time that the promise would only be transmitted through Isaac. The promise would not be transmitted through his other sons of whom he had several. Now, he was asked by God to kill the one son who was supposed to be the inheritor of the Abrahamic promises. He was asked to offer up his only begotten son. Obviously, Isaac was not his only biological son. At that time, there was another son, Ishmael. Later, Abraham had six more sons. The phrase only begotten emphasizes uniqueness; it does not emphasize origin. Isaac was the unique son in two ways: (1) he was the only son of Sarah; (2) he was the only son who would inherit the covenant. When Jesus is called the only begotten Son, it does not mean that God created the Son. It simply means that the Son of God is His unique Son. The Son of God is distinct from other sons the Father has, such as, the angels and believers. Angels are sons of God by creation and believers are sons of God by adoption, but Jesus is the Eternal Son of God. This is the mark of His uniqueness, hence, the phrase only begotten. Once again, the Greek structure points out that Abraham immediately obeyed: \u201cWhile being tried, he offered up.\u201d Abraham did not even pause to think it through. He received a command and he rose up to carry it out.
\nIn verse 18, Abraham carried out the command in spite of the fact that the Abrahamic Covenant was to be fulfilled in Isaac. It was to Abraham that God said: In Isaac shall your seed be called. No other son would inherit the covenant. If Isaac died without any seed (at this point, Isaac had no children), then the Jewish line would be terminated. Nevertheless, Abraham obeyed immediately.
\nWhy was Abraham willing to immediately obey and kill his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah? Verse 19 gives the answer. The content of his faith rested upon the creative power of God. Abraham knew that God was able to raise up [Isaac] even from the dead. Abraham firmly believed that if he had to kill Isaac before Isaac had children, then Isaac would be resurrected to have children and fulfill the promise. There is a principle contained in Scripture that, if God makes a promise to an individual and that person dies before the promise is fulfilled, then God is absolutely obligated to raise that person back to life to fulfill the promise. God had made promises concerning Isaac including the promise that Isaac would have children, which at this point he did not have. Abraham knew that if he had to kill Isaac, then God would have to raise Isaac from death to life.
\nThis principle lies behind the discussion between Jesus and the Sadducees concerning the resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in a physical resurrection from the dead as did the Pharisees. The Sadducees liked to ask the Pharisees tricky questions to make them look stupid, and one day the Sadducees tried one of those tricky questions on Jesus: A woman was married successively to seven brothers; in the resurrection, whose wife will she be? Jesus answered that the Sadducees did not understand God\u2019s power and they did not understand the nature of the resurrection. The resurrection is not just a re-awakening but includes a tremendous transformation; there will be no marrying or giving in marriage in the resurrection. Then to prove the resurrection, Jesus quoted Exodus 3:6, where God said: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. That one statement was enough to prove the resurrection. How did it prove the resurrection? The phrase \u201cI am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob\u201d was the Old Testament formula for the Abrahamic Covenant. In that covenant, God made specific promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but they all died without the fulfillment of those promises. Because God is a covenant-keeping God, His covenant with them requires (or obligates) God to resurrect Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to fulfill His promises.
\nThe principle is: if God makes a promise to an individual and that individual dies before the promise is fulfilled, God is obligated to resurrect that individual to fulfill the promise with him. Abraham knew this principle. That is why Abraham did not flinch in lifting the knife to slay Isaac; he knew that God was obligated to raise Isaac from the dead. In a figurative sense, Abraham did receive Isaac from the dead because as far as Abraham\u2019s mind, heart, and commitment were concerned, his son Isaac was as good as dead. Abraham was not going to hold back his hand from killing Isaac. He was going to stab Isaac if that is what God demanded. Abraham is a good example of the life of faith.
\nIn verse 20, the author deals with Isaac:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, even concerning things to come.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nBy faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau although he did not give the blessings to the one to whom he intended to give them. Nevertheless, Isaac knew the blessings he gave would come to pass; they were prophetic blessings. They were future blessings predicting future things for Jacob and for Esau. They were things that were still future and, therefore, it entailed waiting with patient endurance. Although Isaac blessed the son he did not want to bless and vice versa, nevertheless, by faith he knew that what was prophesied in those blessings would come to pass. This is an example of future faith.
\nIn verse 21, he spoke of Jacob:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By faith Jacob, when he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nJacob did this when he was dying. Like his father Isaac, Jacob also issued prophetic blessings concerning two sons. Jacob issued prophetic blessings concerning the two sons of Joseph. The fact that Jacob was dying shows he knew he would die before God\u2019s promises would be fulfilled. Yet, Jacob believed God was able to keep His promises, and he did not hesitate to give prophetic blessings to the two sons of Joseph. He worshipped, leaning on the top of his staff; he leaned on the top of his staff showing the weakness of age. But he knew as he worshipped, that in these blessings he was speaking the Word of God. As it is with Isaac, so it is with Jacob. These are examples of future faith; faith concerning future things.
\nIn verse 22, the author adds Joseph:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By faith Joseph, when his end was nigh, made mention of the departure of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nWhen Joseph reached old age, he realized that he would die in Egypt, and he left a command concerning his bones. He knew from his father, Jacob, that the sojourning of Israel in Egypt was temporal. Joseph knew God intended to bring the Jews back into the Land of Canaan. As he grew older and was dying, Joseph also realized the promise would not be fulfilled in his lifetime. Nevertheless, he believed it would be fulfilled; therefore, in his will, so to speak, Joseph left a commandment: when the Jews left Egypt, he wanted his bones carried with them. He wanted his body re-interred in the Promised Land. Joseph, too, is an example of future faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. Faith in the Wilderness Sojourn\u201411:23\u201331<\/p>\n\n\n\n
23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months by his parents, because they saw he was a goodly child; and they were not afraid of the king\u2019s commandment. 24 By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter; 25 choosing rather to share ill treatment with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; 26 accounting the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt: for he looked unto the recompense of reward. 27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of the blood, that the destroyer of the firstborn should not touch them. 29 By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were swallowed up. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they had been compassed about for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the harlot perished not with them that were disobedient, having received the spies with peace.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThis section primarily deals with Moses and shows various examples of the decisions of faith. In verse 23, there is the faith of Moses\u2019 parents. Moses was hidden by his parents for three months after he was born. Why did they risk their lives for three months to hide him? Because they saw he was a goodly child. What Jewish mother would not think that her child was a goodly child? However, the Greek word for goodly means much more than what the English implies. It means she and her husband both recognized that God had a special plan for their son. This word is only used twice. It is used here and in Acts 7:20, and both times it refers to the same individual, Moses. They hid their son because they knew that God had a special purpose for Moses. They did this in spite of the king\u2019s commandment. Faith works despite adversity and faith accepts God\u2019s plan.
\nIn verses 24\u201328, the writer deals with the faith of Moses and points out two things. First, in verses 24\u201326, his faith was personal. In verse 24: By faith Moses \u2026 refused to be called the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter. The time when he made this decision was when he was grown up. At a certain age (the age of 40), when he was grown, Moses made a decision. Moses\u2019 decision was that he would no longer be identified with the Egyptians but would now be identified with his own, the Jewish people. This decision was prompted by faith. The position he gave up was to be called the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter. He gave up the position of being the son of a royal princess; therefore, he gave up his position as a royal prince because faith will sometimes have to reject worldly honor.
\nIn verse 25, the choice was to share ill treatment with the people of God. This was the positive side of his choice. Moses chose to identify with the ill treatment of the people of God. The Greek word for ill treatment is used only here in the Greek New Testament. He recognized that, while the Egyptians had empire status and the Jews were slaves, it was not the Egyptians but, rather the Jews, who were the people of God. Thus, there was solidarity between Moses and Israel; therefore, he chose to identify with them. The negative side is that Moses rejected the enjoyment of the pleasure of sin for a season. He rejected his position in Egypt, a position that would have required him to repudiate God\u2019s calling of him as the redeemer of Israel. Had Moses retained the position in Egypt, he would have committed the sin of disobedience, which would have involved staying in the royal court and a place of privilege while the covenantal promise could only be fulfilled by leaving the royal court. He did leave the royal court, and his faith was shown in that he called Israel the people of God. Faith sometimes requires the rejection of the world\u2019s pleasures.
\nVerse 26 gives the reason for the choice that Moses made: accounting the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt. The word accounting here means \u201cto give careful thought.\u201d It deals with the circumstances that cause the act. It means Moses thought through the pros and cons of his decision before making it. He chose to identify with the reproach of Christ. The Greek word, \u201cChrist,\u201d means \u201cthe anointed one.\u201d It does not have to be a reference to Jesus. It may refer to Moses as the anointed one; Moses may have recognized himself as being the one whom God had chosen to bring Israel out of Egypt. Another option is that it may refer to Moses as a type of the Messiah who had to bear the same reproach, sharing ill treatment with the people of God, that Jesus would have to bear later (Ps. 69:9; Is. 53:9). Moses may have chosen to suffer the reproach that the Messiah would have to suffer later in place of the treasures of Egypt. The best option is that the Greek word, \u201cChrist,\u201d used here refers to Israel as the anointed nation (Ps. 89:50\u201351). Moses chose to suffer reproach with the people of God. Why? He looked for the recompense of [the] reward. He desired spiritual treasures rather than physical ones. Faith sometimes requires the rejection of the world\u2019s riches.
\nThe second thing the author points out about Moses\u2019 faith is found in verses 27\u201328: his faith was public. He showed his faith publicly in two ways. First, as noted in verse 27, By faith he forsook Egypt. Moses did not fear the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible. He knew the invisible God would help him. Faith rejects the world\u2019s pressures to conform. The statement that Moses did not fear the king seems to be a contradiction. The Exodus account seems to imply that the reason Moses fled was because Moses feared Pharaoh; however, a careful reading of the Exodus account makes it clear that Moses did not flee Egypt due to a fear of Pharaoh. Rather, he left Egypt because he was rejected by his own people when they said to him, \u201cWho made you a ruler and judge over us?\u201d (Ex. 2:14). Next, Moses showed his faith publicly when he kept the Passover in verse 28: By faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of the blood. Keeping the Passover meant that he slew the Passover lamb, and the sprinkling of the blood meant that he applied the blood of the lamb over the lintels and the door-posts. He firmly believed this would save the Jewish firstborn. He did this because the destroying angel would not touch them. He went through all the details of killing the lamb and applying the blood of the lamb upon the lintels and the door-posts because faith also obeys the details of God\u2019s Word.
\nIn verses 29\u201330, the author shows the faith of the Israelite people. Their faith was shown in two ways. First, he shows their faith in verse 29: By faith they passed through the Red Sea. By faith they overcame natural obstacles: they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land, but when the Egyptians tried to follow, they were swallowed up. This action began the Wilderness Wanderings. Faith is willing to do what is unnatural. It is unnatural to take God at His Word, step into the water, and watch it divide. Second, the writer shows their faith in verse 30: By faith the walls of Jericho fell. The author is showing that faith overcomes enemies. The Israelites defeated Jericho by encircling it and walking around it for seven days. That was not the normal way to attack a city, but faith will sometimes require one to do what seems unnatural and illogical. This event marked the end of the Wilderness Wanderings.
\nThe author uses the first act of faith, passing through the Red Sea, and the last act of faith, encircling and marching around Jericho until the walls of Jericho fell, to cover the whole period of the Wilderness Wanderings. This is all he needs to say because the Israelites showed faith at the beginning and at the end. Earlier, in chapters 3\u20134, he pointed out that there was widespread disobedience and lack of faith during the Wilderness Wanderings. The lack of faith in chapters 3\u20134 brought physical death and failure. Here, he points out that there was also faith during the Wilderness Wanderings. The presence of faith resulted in overcoming natural obstacles and enemies.
\nIn verse 31, he deals with the faith of Rahab the harlot, who showed her faith by receiving the Jewish spies with peace. This shows that others knew what she knew, but the others did not obey and they perished. The Canaanites, in general, knew about the events in Egypt, the Exodus, and the Wilderness Wanderings. Having this knowledge, the question is: How would they respond? Rahab did obey and, therefore, she and her family were spared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
d. Faith in Trials\u201411:32\u201338<\/p>\n\n\n\n
32 And what shall I more say? for the time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah; of David and Samuel and the prophets: 33 who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, waxed mighty in war, turned to flight armies of aliens. 35 Women received their dead by a resurrection: and others were tortured, not accepting their deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: 36 and others had trial of mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: 37 they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, they were tempted, they were slain with the sword: they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated 38 (of whom the world was not worthy), wandering in deserts and mountains and caves, and the holes of the earth.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe writer begins this section with a question in verse 32a: And what shall I more say? The use of the masculine participle, more say, here rules out Priscilla as being the author of this epistle. And what shall I more say? In other words, he could give many more examples, but he was running out of time. These people are all examples of the courage of faith. The point he is making in this chapter is that faith is associated with trials; it is natural for faith to be tested (this fact is a major point of the Epistle of James). Since it is natural for faith to be tested, trials should not nullify faith. Trials should strengthen faith for trials bring more faith.
\nIn verses 32a\u201334, he shows that faith extended throughout the entire history of Israel, and he picks out various representatives of faith. There were judges such as Gideon, Barak, Samson, and Jephthah. There were kings such as David. There were prophets such as Samuel. Then he presents three triplets.
\nThe first triplet consists of national victories: (1) they subdued kingdoms as did Joshua, the Judges, and David; (2) they wrought righteousness as did David and Samuel; (3) they obtained promises as did Gideon, Barak, and David.
\nThe second triplet deals with personal deliverance: (1) they stopped the mouths of lions as did Daniel, Samson, and David; (2) they quenched the power of fire as did the three friends of Daniel; (3) they escaped the edge of the sword as did Moses, Elijah, Elisha, Jephthah, and David.
\nThe third triplet deals with personal gifts and attainments: (1) those who from weakness were made strong as were Gideon, Samson, and David; (2) they waxed mighty in war as did Joshua, Barak, and David; (3) they turned to flight [the] armies of aliens as did David and Jehoshaphat.
\nIn verses 35\u201338, the writer points out that faith triumphs over death; it pinnacles over death. He starts out in verse 35a with a contrast. On the one hand, Women received their dead by a resurrection. Why women? In both Testaments, most resurrection miracles were on behalf of women. Some examples include the Widow of Zarephath, whose son was raised by Elijah; the Shunnamite woman, whose son was raised by Elisha; the Widow of Nain, whose son was raised by Jesus; and Lazarus, the brother of Martha and Mary, who was also raised by Jesus. On the other hand, in verse 35b, there were others to whom God promised a better resurrection because these resurrections were merely restorations back to natural life. Those who were raised from the dead died again later. The people God chose not to raise from the dead knew they would receive a better resurrection, an immortal one, as will others [who] were tortured [to the point of death], not accepting their deliverance, meaning they did not take the easy way out. They could have renounced their faith such as the three friends of Daniel could have done. They were given an option, but they did not seek the easy way out. They chose to die a physical death for the following reason: that they might obtain a better resurrection. This shows it was not God\u2019s will to save everyone physically. God does not work the same way in every case. There were some people He resurrected from the dead, but there were others He did not resurrect from the dead. There were some He rescued alive, while there were others He allowed to be tortured to death. Those who were tortured to death exercised as much faith as those who were rescued alive. All of these had faith, although the results of their faith varied as God willed.
\nIn verses 36\u201338, the writer shows that the triumph of faith unto death caused a higher victory, which was the triumph over death. He lists various ways that people suffered because of their faith. Some endured mockings and scourgings as did Jeremiah; some endured bonds and imprisonment as did Joseph; some were stoned as was Zechariah; some were sawn asunder as was perhaps Isaiah (Jewish tradition claims that Isaiah was sawed in half by Manasseh); some were tempted as was Joseph; some were slain with the sword as was Urijah; some wandered in sheepskins [and] in goatskins as did Elijah; some were destitute, afflicted, and tormented as were the prophets; and, some wandered in deserts and mountains and caves, and the holes of the earth as did Obadiah, the friend of Elijah. The author states that, of all these people, the world was not worthy. All of these people had points of similarity with the readers: they, too, had forfeited employment and were ostracized from society, reduced to poverty, mocked, imprisoned, and so on. Nevertheless, no one as yet had given his life for the faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
e. The Victory of Faith\u201411:39\u201340<\/p>\n\n\n\n
39 And these all, having had witness borne to them through their faith, received not the promise, 40 God having provided some better thing concerning us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThese two verses contain the summary and the conclusion of the entire chapter. All who have had faith and have shown their faith in these ways will have a share in the Kingdom. Those who died in the past will not live again until the Kingdom is established and, yet, they all anticipated the fulfillment of God\u2019s promise. They waited for it by faith with patient endurance. By way of application, the writer\u2019s readers, too, must have patient endurance until they see the fulfillment.
\nIn verse 39, the author states that the fulfillment is future: these all, having had witness borne to them [concerning] their faith really had faith although they did not receive the fulfillment of the promise in their lifetime. Certain personal promises were fulfilled in their day, but the Old Testament saints did not receive the national and Messianic promises and prophecies. Nevertheless, they had witness borne to them of their faith. They foresaw that these promises would be fulfilled in the future and they died in faith. They still possessed their faith when they died.
\nWhy did God allow the Old Testament saints to die before His promises were fulfilled? According to verse 40, the answer is that there is a unity in God\u2019s program: God having provided some better thing concerning us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect. If God had fulfilled all the Messianic Kingdom promises to the Old Testament saints in their lifetime, then there would be nothing for present believers to anticipate. Since the Messianic Kingdom promises have not yet been fulfilled, both Old Testament and New Testament believers can anticipate the same thing: the Messianic Kingdom. There is something waiting for all believers in the future. When the author states that apart from us they should not be made perfect, he means that Old Testament and New Testament saints should eventually reach their perfection together. Eventually, all will receive their ultimate sanctification (ultimate glorification) together at the Second Coming of Jesus. By then all the faithful will be resurrected since all believers are part of the First Resurrection. In 12:23, the author will refer to the Old Testament saints as just men made perfect, but the ultimate perfection will come with the Messianic Kingdom.
\nThe Old Testament saints are the people the readers are to imitate in keeping with 6:12. These saints persevered through their trials and disappointments by exercising patient endurance, which was the evidence of their faith. The author has pointed out many times that his readers possess faith. Now, they are to use their faith by showing patient endurance as did these Old Testament saints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
C. The Exhortation to Endurance of Faith\u201412:1\u201329<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Faith and Discipline\u201412:1\u201311<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
a. The Incentives to Endurance\u201412:1\u20132<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1 Therefore let us also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight, and the sin which does so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, 2 looking unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe writer gives two incentives for exercising patient endurance. The first incentive, in verse 1, comes from the list of the heroes of the faith found in chapter 11: Therefore let us also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses. Because of what he said in chapter 11, Therefore, the believers are now seen as contestants, striving to win a prize. While the believers are in the arena (in the stadium) these Old Testament saints are sitting in the bleachers like rows of spectators; not in the sense that they are watching the believers to see how well they are doing, but in the sense that they are witnessing to them concerning the life of faith. They are witnessing that, by the exercise of faith and patient endurance, the race can be won. It is not the spectators who are doing the looking; the contestants are the ones doing the looking. This verse does not teach that those in Heaven can see what is happening down here on earth. When the writer states, compassed about, he is saying the heroes of the faith noted in chapter 11 are to be in the minds of the contestants. The contestants are to be aware of what these heroes accomplished through faith and the exercise of patient endurance. Of the two Greek words for cloud, the one he uses here does not mean a single cloud but a mass, a dense group of clouds. This is why the text reads so great a cloud. The point is they are to keep in mind a large mass, a dense group of people, who should serve as witnesses that the race can be won by faith and patient endurance.
\nThe writer goes on to give three participles that show how to prepare for the race. These three participles emphasize the putting aside of everything that prevents one from running the race well. The first participle reads \u201chaving\u201d or seeing. It involves seeing the faith that the saints of chapter 11 had and seeing that this faith must now be imitated. The second participle is laying aside. This Greek word refers to anything that will keep one from freely running the race. Anything that will divert their attention away from freely running the race must be set aside. In the context in which he was writing, as already stated in 6:1\u20133, Judaism is now excess weight that needs to be set aside. This means they are to run the race with faith and patient endurance. The third participle (actually in verse 2) is looking. This is the manner in which they must run the race, and it will be discussed below.
\nThe phrase, the sin which does so easily beset us, gives insight into what these readers need to lay aside because the sin, if committed, will be the cause of their failure. This phrase has the definite article; it is not just any sin but the sin. It is a specific sin. For them it is the sin of apostasy; the sin is going back into Judaism (10:38\u201339). For others, it may be another sin that will throw them off the spiritual path. The obligation is to lay the sin aside and to keep on running. The race is long and they must run with endurance. How long is it? It is from the day of salvation until the day of death. It is a lifelong marathon. The Greek word for race is the origin of the English word \u201cagony.\u201d It is an agonizing race. The manner in which it must be run is with patient endurance. The word patience means \u201ca steady determination to keep going.\u201d They must continue in spite of a desire to slow down or quit, and they must keep running until the end of their lives.
\nIn verse 2, the writer gives a second incentive, which is the sufferings of the Messiah Himself. Here, he will emphasize the attitude they must have as they run this agonizing race. They must have the same attitude of patient endurance as Jesus Himself had. The third participle is looking, but the Greek meaning is stronger than simply looking. The meaning is \u201cto look away from all distractions.\u201d The readers must look away from anything that distracts and focus their eyes upon one thing\u2014the finish line. In this case, the finish line is unto Jesus. The writer uses Jesus\u2019 human name because the focus is on His experience as a man, especially His experience in the endurance of pain, humiliation, and the shame of the cross. The people listed in chapter 11 are good examples to follow but they failed at times. Jesus is the perfect example of obedience and patient endurance (1 Pet. 2:21\u201323). He is the ultimate example, not the witnesses, because Jesus is the author and perfecter of [their] faith.
\nThe word author shows Him to be the Pioneer, Chief, Leader of their faith. In 2:10 the writer of Hebrews used the same word when he emphasized Jesus to be the Author of salvation. Jesus is the Author of their spiritual salvation, which they gained by saving faith, but the faith the writer is now dealing with is the principle of faith with which the readers live the spiritual life. Jesus is also the Author of that kind of faith. This Greek word is actually used in different ways and can mean \u201cauthor,\u201d \u201cpioneer,\u201d \u201cchief leader,\u201d \u201cexample,\u201d and \u201coriginator.\u201d Jesus is all of these. Furthermore, He is also the perfecter of [their] faith. By perfecter, the writer means that Jesus is the Finisher of their faith. Jesus is the Finisher in the sense of completing it. He is the complete example of faith. The Greek word for perfecter means \u201cone who carries it through to completion.\u201d Not only is Jesus the Beginner of the faith they need to use in living out the daily spiritual life, but, if they patiently endure, He will bring it to completion.
\nAt this point, the writer shows how Jesus was the example: who for the joy that was set before him. Why did Jesus suffer? Jesus was willing to suffer all that He did because, in front of His eyes, in the distance, was the goal, which for Him was the joy \u2026 set before him. The joy set before him included two things: (1) He would sit at the right hand of the Father and be restored to glory (Jn. 17:5); and, (2) He would accomplish the salvation of the lost (Is. 53:11). Because He had this goal as His finish line, He therefore patiently endured everything in-between, which included the cross.
\nThe word cross in the Greek text does not have the definite article. It is not \u201cthe\u201d cross but simply, endured cross. This emphasizes not how Jesus died but the nature of His death\u2014Jesus died a shameful death. Of all the ways Jesus could have died, this type of death was the most shameful of all. This shameful death was in contrast to the joy He had in Heaven. When Jesus was on the cross, He both began and finished the work of salvation. The soteriological work of redemption, propitiation, and reconciliation was accomplished by Him on the cross. Jesus endured this shameful death on the cross because He knew what it would accomplish. He exercised patient endurance. The readers should be willing to endure suffering for Jesus because He endured the cross for them. Although He knew death on the cross was a shameful death, Jesus despised the shame and accepted this death willingly. Because He did all this, Jesus attained His joy and attained salvation for us. Then, He sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. The Greek tense used here for the word sat is a perfect tense that means He sat down in the past at the right hand of God, and He is still sitting there witnessing to an accomplished work; therefore, His joy is now complete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Measure of Endurance\u201412:3\u20134<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3 For consider him that had endured such gainsaying of sinners against himself, that you wax not weary, fainting in your souls. 4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin: \u2026<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nHere the writer points out to his readers how far they may and should be willing to go in their suffering on behalf of Jesus and in their exercise of patient endurance. He begins in verse 3 by giving the example of endurance: For consider him. The thought that came to the writer\u2019s mind in verse 2, as he thought about Messiah\u2019s sufferings, now leads to this exhortation of endurance.
\nThe Greek word for consider means \u201cto reason up.\u201d It is the origin of the English word \u201canalogy.\u201d It was used in Greek literature for adding up a column of figures to get a grand total. The writer uses the word consider to give the readers the total picture of Jesus\u2019 sufferings. Now and then, believers need to review, point by point, in detail, every part of the sufferings that led up to His death. They need to construct a mental analogy of the trials and sufferings of Jesus. At that point, they will note that Jesus endured vocal ridicule: He endured such gainsaying of sinners. They need to remember what Jesus endured because then they will not become weary, fainting in [their] souls. By contemplating the sufferings He endured\u2014what He suffered and how much He suffered\u2014they will realize their sufferings are quite mild. This will help to eliminate mental and psychological discouragement in the midst of suffering. This is especially true since He suffered as a sinless being and suffered on their behalf.
\nHow much should they be willing to suffer? Verse 4 spells out the extent of endurance: Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin. None of the group members to whom he is writing has yet suffered unto death. The Church in Jerusalem had experienced the deaths of James and Stephen; however, the author was writing to the churches of Judea, which were located outside of Jerusalem. While they had suffered a great deal, none had suffered as martyrs. The word \u201cresist\u201d is a military term that means \u201cto stand in opposition to the enemy on the battle line.\u201d The believers should each be willing to stand on the battle line and shed their blood. Even if it means they must die a physical death, they need to be willing to die striving against sin. The Greek word for striving is the word \u201cagony,\u201d and in its more complete form, \u201cantagonism.\u201d They need to be so antagonistic to sin that they are willing to die in their stand against it. The root word is the same as the word for race; they need to run this race, even to the point of being so antagonistic to sin that they are willing to be martyred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Purpose of Suffering\u201412:5\u201311<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2026 5 and you have forgotten the exhortation which reasons with you as with sons,\nMy son, regard not lightly the chastening of the Lord,\nNor faint when you are reproved of him;\n6 For whom the Lord loves he chastens,\nAnd scourges every son whom he receives.\n7 It is for chastening that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father chastens not? 8 But if you are without chastening, whereof all have been made partakers, then are you bastards, and not sons. 9 Furthermore, we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 10 For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed good to them; but he for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness. 11 All chastening seems for the present to be not joyous but grievous; yet afterward it yields peaceable fruit unto them that have been exercised thereby, even the fruit of righteousness.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe author\u2019s basic point is that the purpose of suffering is to bring about the maturity of God\u2019s children, and he gives specifics on how to attain that goal. Starting out in verses 5\u20136, he speaks against forgetfulness. The problem is that they have forgotten the exhortation which reasons with you as with sons. He affirms that they have forgotten. The word means \u201cmade of little account.\u201d He reminds them that they are sons of God, and he shows that discipline comes from a father-son relationship. The fact that he calls them sons shows they are believers; otherwise they are not the sons of God. But, it is because they are the sons of God that they will suffer discipline. This is a natural part of the father-son relationship.
\nThen, he quotes Proverbs 3:11\u201312 to prove two things: (1) the writer proves God disciplines those whom He loves; and (2) he proves that discipline is a sign of sonship. They must learn two lessons from Proverbs. The first lesson to be learned is that they must not regard this discipline lightly to the point of forgetting it and not allowing the discipline to teach them. The second lesson to be learned is that they should not faint\u2014in the sense of giving up and collapsing\u2014because of the discipline they receive from God. Punishment is the retribution for evil, and for the believer the punishment has already been received by the Messiah on the cross. Discipline, on the other hand, is moral training to conform the son to the expectation of the father. For believers, there will be degrees of discipline, not in kind but in intensity. The progression of discipline is from a lesser degree to a greater degree and the progression is weakness, sickness, and finally, death (1 Cor. 11:30).
\nIn verse 7, the author applies the Old Testament lesson to their situation: It is for chastening that you endure. The efficacy of the discipline God is giving them depends upon the spirit in which they are willing to receive it. The word chasten means \u201cmoral training,\u201d \u201cto train up a child.\u201d He reaffirms that God is dealing with them as with sons and sons are chastened. This is not punishment for the sake of punishment but punishment for the sake of correction. God disciplines because He needs to use corrective measures. They are suffering chastisement right now in their present situation. God is chastising them because they are sons, and they need to pass through this chastisement with patient endurance. The principle is for what son is there whom his father chastens not? Having set down this principle, the author next presents a two-step argument.
\nThe first step in the argument, beginning with the word But, is found in verse 8: But if ye are without chastening. If chastening is not present, if they are never disciplined, it will show them to be illegitimate and prove they are not true sons. However, they have all become partakers of sonship because of this chastisement. This is evidence that they are sons. For this reason, the chastening should be personally accepted and should permanently take effect in their day-to-day living. When chastening is absent, it shows they are illegitimate; they are not God\u2019s children. An illegitimate child does not have the rights of an heir. Illegitimacy leaves one without rights as an heir to the father\u2019s fortune and deprives him of his father\u2019s care. Under Jewish law, to be mamzer (to be illegitimate) meant three things: no right of inheritance; no right to marry into Jewish society; and no right to be buried in a Jewish cemetery.
\nThe second step in the argument is found in verse 9 and begins with the word Furthermore. Here, the writer wants to point out the spirit in which discipline must be borne. He gives an illustration of the human family. After all, we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us. Even human fathers discipline. In spite of that discipline, which was tough, the believers learned to give their human fathers reverence. The application of the illustration is and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? Since the believers were willing to subject themselves to human fathers, how much more should they be willing to subject themselves to their Heavenly Father and, therefore, exercise patient endurance by voluntary submission? The object of their submission is the Father of spirits, which emphasizes Him as the Creator of the immaterial part of man. It is the immaterial part of man that continues to live after physical death. The result is that they shall live. One product of divine discipline is the abundant life now enjoyed in fellowship with God the Father. There is enjoyment of life while the believer is still on earth. This is again a kal ve-chomer, a less-to-greater argument. The argument is that if they learned to respect human fathers when they disciplined them, how much more should they subject themselves to the Father of spirits, and live?
\nThe second product of God\u2019s discipline is holiness in this life. In verse 10, the writer makes a contrast between the two types of fathers\u2014the human one and the Heavenly One. Human discipline had two aspects. First, as it applied to the children, it was temporal; it was only for a few days, for the days they were growing up. Second, as it applied to the fathers, they practiced it as it seemed good to them. In the case of human fathers, their exercise of discipline was not always perfect; human fathers are not always right. Human fathers make mistakes and sometimes wrongly punish their children, but the Divine Father never makes mistakes. Every time He disciplines, it is for a purpose: for our profit. What is our profit? The writer answers: that we may be partakers of his holiness.
\nIn verse 11, the writer concludes this section of his argument by pointing out that God\u2019s divine purpose is accomplished through sorrow just as human discipline is accompanied by sorrow. After the believers endure divine discipline with the right spirit\u2014with patient endurance and faith\u2014there will be two results. The first result will be peaceable fruit; a rebellious spirit will change to a submissive spirit. The second result is that practical righteousness is produced in those who experience discipline. Here, the author uses the same word as in 5:14, which shows the purpose of divine discipline is to bring the believer to maturity. True, at the time of discipline, all discipline is painful but in the end it produces the peaceable fruit of righteousness in those who experience it. Discipline is not joyous; it is grievous when the believers suffer it. Nevertheless, the end product is a good thing and it will be the external evidence of the holiness of verse ten. This is the relationship of faith and discipline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Faith and the Believer\u2019s Obligations\u201412:12\u201329<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
a. The Obligations\u201412:12\u201317<\/p>\n\n\n\n
12 Wherefore lift up the hands that hang down, and the palsied knees; 13 and make straight paths for your feet, that that which is lame be not turned out of the way, but rather be healed.\n14 Follow after peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord: 15 looking carefully lest there be any man that falls short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby the many be defiled; 16 lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one mess of meat sold his own birthright. 17 For you know that even when he afterward desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected; for he found no place for a change of mind in his father, though he sought it diligently with tears.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verses 12\u201313, the author deals with the obligation to the weaker members of the assembly. He begins with the word Wherefore. In light of the fact that discipline is a sign of sonship and discipline is necessary to develop the peaceable fruit of righteousness, there are certain obligations toward the weaker members in the assembly. Since discipline is necessary and painful, the stronger members should make sure that discipline becomes effectual. The obligation is to strengthen the weaker members where it is possible and to remove stumbling blocks to the development of peaceable fruit as much as it is possible.
\nThe writer makes several illustrations utilizing the human anatomy. The first illustration deals with the hands: lift up the hands that hang down. The Greek emphasizes a reinvigoration. Reinvigorate the hands which are relaxed; lift up hands as did Moses in order to win victories for others. The second illustration deals with the knees: and the palsied knees. Reinvigorate the knees that have become feeble or paralyzed. They need to be strengthened for if they are not strengthened, they will not hold up in the day of battle. The third illustration deals with the feet: make straight paths for your feet. Make smooth the paths for weak feet in order that the limping may not be knocked out of joint but, rather, be healed.
\nThe path must be made straight so they do not keep going in circles. The Greek word for lame means \u201cto be pulled out of joint,\u201d and it is the same Greek word used in the Septuagint version of 1 Kings 18:21 where Elijah said to the people: How long go ye [hesitate or] limping between the two sides? Either Jehovah is God or Baal is god. It is necessary that the readers\u2019 paths be made straight and smooth so that those who are following God may not be turned aside but may continue to walk down the straight path. In this way, they will be healed. The writer is talking about spiritual healing in this context. He is not talking about physical healing. This can be seen due to the fact that all of the illustrations used in this context refer to spiritual weakness.
\nIn verse 14, the writer deals with the believer\u2019s obligation to himself: Follow after peace with all men. The word, follow, means \u201cto make an eager pursuit.\u201d Eagerly pursue peace with all men insofar as it is possible but especially pursue the sanctification without which no man shall see the Lord. Several times in this book he has drawn a contrast between positional sanctification (what the believer is in the Messiah) and practical sanctification (sanctification in day-to-day living). The way to pursue the sanctification, which is positional, is by seeking practical sanctification in their day-to-day living. Without positional sanctification, one cannot see God. Those who have believed have already been positionally sanctified, but now they must make it practical in day-to-day living. One way to make sanctification practical is to seek peace among people, especially among fellow-believers.
\nIn verses 15\u201317, after spelling out two obligations, he gives some dangers of which to be aware: the dangers before the believer. In verse 15a, he begins with two words: looking carefully. The Greek is one word and it is the origin of the English word \u201cepiscopal.\u201d It means \u201cto see\u201d in the sense of having oversight by someone in the position of authority. There must be constant spiritual oversight by each one over his life and his attitudes. There is a danger of a three-stage progression downward if the readers fail to keep on the lookout as to where they are at spiritually.
\nIn verses 15b\u201316, the three steps each begin with the word lest. The first step downward is a failure to progress: lest there be any man that falls short of the grace of God. Falling short means \u201ca moral separation.\u201d It is more than a mere defect. It is the failure on the part of the children of God to apprehend or appropriate grace when something negative comes into their lives. They failed to heed the admonition of 4:16 to draw near to the throne of grace in order to receive mercy and find grace. Believers stumble in their spiritual lives because they fail to appropriate the grace that is available. The failure to appropriate grace is the first step downward for it means a failure to progress upward.
\nThe second step downward is positive infidelity: lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby the many be defiled. When the writer refers to a root of bitterness, he deals both with the root and with the product, which is bitterness. The failure to appropriate grace during a time of suffering or trial leads to bitterness resulting from the suffering. Bitterness will eventually result in the defilement of many others. This is how the root manifests itself. Bitterness in the heart leads to murmuring with the tongue; murmuring with the tongue means murmuring against other people. Others are defiled by the readers\u2019 murmuring, and the murmuring is caused by the root of bitterness. This phrase is found in Deuteronomy 29:18: lest there should be among you a root that bears gall and wormwood. It is used of Israelites in idolatry. They have become a root that produces poison. People with a root of bitterness cause divisions and split churches. They defile others by talking against the leaders of the church. The first step affects only the individual, but the second step begins to affect others as well. They fail to have peace with all men.
\nThe third step downward is the open contempt of duty and privilege: lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one mess of meat sold his own birthright. It is to become either a fornicator or a profane person. Esau was not a fornicator, but he was a profane person. The background for this example is found in Genesis 25:27\u201334. The Greek word profane applies to one who tramples upon spiritual matters. Esau was a profaner; he trampled upon spiritual things. There are two obstacles to holiness in everyday living. The first obstacle is personal impurity or fornication, and the second obstacle is a failure to lay hold of the blessings that are available. Esau is an example of the second obstacle. He had blessings available to him because of his birthright, but he failed to take hold of them. He sold his birthright and the blessings that went with it. The selling of his birthright for only one mess of meat shows how little he thought of God\u2019s blessings and his own privileges. The Jewish believers to whom this letter was written can also barter away the blessings available to them. They can throw away the blessings available to them in favor of going back to the Temple service. Esau is an example of a son who was rejected on the basis of a decision he made and that decision was irrevocable. The readers of this epistle are in similar danger of making an irrevocable decision that would cut them off from blessings. The issue here is divine blessing. Salvation is not the issue.
\nAccording to verse 17, Esau later desired to inherit the blessing, but it was too late. When Esau sold his birthright, it was a once-and-for-all irrevocable decision. From then on, he could no longer get the blessing of the covenant. He sold the blessing with the birthright and was rejected since his decision was irreversible. The Jewish believers to whom this letter was written are warned lest they also make an irrevocable decision that will cut them off from blessings. Here again, the author is dealing with blessings. He is not dealing with salvation.
\nIn most sermons dealing with Jacob and Esau, Esau is characterized as good and Jacob is characterized as bad. Jacob committed some sins, such as deceiving his father, but he did not trick his brother, Esau, into selling his birthright. People who preach that Jacob was bad take Esau\u2019s complaint, which was that he was going to die, too seriously. The Book of Genesis shows that by this time Isaac was a wealthy man. He had many tents and many servants. All Esau had to do was go to the next tent and he would have received something to eat, but he did not want to eat the food being prepared in the other tent. He wanted to eat the lentil soup Jacob was preparing.
\nEsau was willing to sell his birthright for one bowl of lentil soup. He made an irrevocable decision when he sold his birthright. Genesis clearly states that he did more than just sell his birthright; he despised it (Gen. 25:34).That is why he is called a profaner; he despised his birthright. He was aware of the blessings available to him, but he cared nothing about being used by God. Esau sold the birthright to Jacob, who cared very much about being used by God. Later, when Esau recognized that by selling his birthright he had sold some material blessings as well as spiritual blessings, he wanted his birthright back. Jacob did not steal the patriarchal blessing from Esau. When Isaac was getting ready to bless Esau, Esau should have told his father the blessing no longer belonged to him since he had sold the birthright to Jacob. Esau wanted the patriarchal blessing and it was he who was trying to steal the patriarchal blessing from Jacob. The blessing no longer belonged to Esau; it belonged to his brother. Jacob was wrong in deceiving his father, but he was not guilty of stealing the patriarchal blessing from his brother. Esau sold it to him.
\nAs for Esau, the verse states that afterward he desired to inherit the blessing. This shows that later Esau realized what the blessing involved\u2014material and spiritual blessings. He tried to get the blessing back without dealing with his sin for he found no place for a change of mind (some texts insert the words, in his father, but that phrase is not in the Greek text). There was no change of mind in Esau. In other words, Esau wanted the blessing but he was not willing to repent. He tried to get the blessing back without dealing with his sin. Natural birth does not bring blessing; faith brings blessing. He was rejected because he made an irrevocable decision. Having been rejected, there was no undoing the sin of despising his birthright because there was not found in him a change of mind or repentance. This verse is not dealing with the loss of salvation but with the loss of rewards in this life. Esau had neither faith nor patient endurance and was cut off from the place of blessing. He sought the blessing later with tears, but he had reached the point of no return.
\nThe application to these Jewish readers is that they, too, can make a once-and-for-all irrevocable decision by going back into Judaism. This will mean that they, too, will be cut off from the place of blessing; they will lose blessings available in this life and rewards in the age to come. In chapter 6, the writer already pointed out that, if they return to Judaism, they will make an irrevocable decision and they will be under the sentence of death in the A.D. 70 judgment. The author is dealing with the temporal consequences of sin and with the fact that it is possible to forfeit future rewards for present security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
b. The Believer\u2019s Position\u201412:18\u201324<\/p>\n\n\n\n
18 For you are not come unto a mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, and unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, 19 and the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard entreated that no word more should be spoken unto them; 20 for they could not endure that which was enjoined, If even a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned; 21 and so fearful was the appearance, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake: 22 but you are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 and to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better than that of Abel.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn describing the believer\u2019s position, the author draws a contrast between where they are not and where they are. The negative is in verse 18: For ye are not come; and the positive is in verse 22: but ye are come. To summarize what he says: if these Jewish believers go back to the old system, they are returning to a place that was inaugurated by utter terror (vv. 18\u201321). In contrast, they leave a place of privilege and grace as exemplified by the heavenly city (vv. 22\u201324).
\nFirst, negatively (vv. 18\u201321): For ye are not come. Negatively, the readers have not come to a place of terror. The author hearkens back to the Exodus and Mount Sinai experiences and makes several points: (1) they have not come to a mountain which cannot be touched (Ex. 19:12\u201325) as had the Israelites; (2) they have not come to a mountain burning with fire (Ex. 19:18); (3) they have not come to a place of darkness, blackness, and tempest (Ex. 19:16\u201318; Deut. 4:11; 5:22); (4) they have not heard the sound of a trumpet (Ex. 19:16\u201319; 20:18); (5) they have not heard the voice of words, the Words of God (Ex. 19:19; Deut. 4:12), which were such that the Israelites begged not to hear the voice of God again (Ex. 19:20). The Mosaic Law was inaugurated in the context of terror. To go back to the Law was to go back to a place of terror. In 2 Corinthians 3:2\u201318, Paul teaches that going back to the Law is returning to a ministry of death and condemnation. The writer of Hebrews then quotes from Exodus 19:12\u201313 to show that Mount Sinai, where the Law was given, was untouchable. Furthermore, in verse 21, Moses felt the terror more than anyone else. He quotes Deuteronomy 9:19 to show that even Moses was repelled by the scene on Mount Sinai and was not attracted to it. If the believers return to Judaism, they will return to the system of Law that brings terror, death, and condemnation.
\nSecond, as believers, they are not at Mount Sinai under the system of Law. Positively (vv. 22\u201324), they have come to a system of grace: but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. This is the city in Heaven that is destined to be the abode of all the redeemed. This is the city Jesus spoke about in John 14:2\u20133, where Jesus is now preparing a place. Paul spoke of this Jerusalem of God in Galatians 4:26 as being a city that is free and not in bondage. This is the city that Abraham sought in Hebrews 11:10. The writer will mention it again in Hebrews 13:4. This is the city that John describes in Revelation 21:1\u201322:5. This is the abode of all the redeemed of all time who enter it either by resurrection or translation. There are three names given to this city: (1) it is the Mount Zion in Heaven; (2) it is the city of the living God because that is where God dwells; and (3) it is the heavenly Jerusalem because it is in the Third Heaven.
\nThe author continues by listing six categories of occupants who live in this city. It is not a complete list (he does not mention the Holy Spirit but the presence of the Holy Spirit is stated in the Revelation passage) but a sample list. The first occupants are the holy, elect angels. These are myriads of angels, innumerable hosts of angels. These angels are also spoken of in Deuteronomy 33:2 and Daniel 7:10. The Greek word means that they are in \u201ca festive gathering.\u201d
\nThe second occupants who live in this city are the general assembly and church of the firstborn. He may be referring to the Church as a whole, but, because he specified the church of the firstborn, this may be a special reference to the Jewish believers of the first century. While they comprise only a part of the Church, they are the firstborn ones registered in Heaven. This would then be similar to James 1:18, where the Jewish believers are called firstfruits. The firstborn may be a special reference to Jewish believers of the first century, but again, they are merely representative of the Church as a whole. The Church, as a whole, will eventually be in the New Jerusalem.
\nThe third occupant of the city is God the Judge of all in Heaven. This specifically refers to God the Father and emphasizes His role as Judge. God the Father will someday judge all in Heaven.
\nThe fourth occupants living in the city are the spirits of just men made perfect. These are the Old Testament saints. The author calls them spirits, which points out that they are not yet united with their bodies because the resurrection of the Old Testament saints has not yet taken place. They are just men made perfect. They are just men because they were justified and saved when they believed. They are like Abraham. When he believed God, it was reckoned to him for righteousness and, at that point, Abraham was clearly a justified man just as the believers are justified. Nevertheless, the Old Testament saints could not be perfected by the blood of animals. When Jesus died, He died for and removed their sins (9:15). Only then were the Old Testament saints perfected. These are spirits of just men, who became just when they believed during their lifetimes, but they were made perfect later with the death of the Messiah. It should be noted that the author makes a clear distinction between Old Testament saints and Church saints.
\nThe fifth occupant living in the city is Jesus the mediator of a new covenant. The city is the home of God the Son who mediated the New Covenant of chapter 8. There are two different Greek words for new. Most of the time when the Bible mentions the new covenant, it uses the Greek word kainos, meaning \u201cnew in quality\u201d or \u201cnew in nature.\u201d This one time in the Book of Hebrews the writer uses a different Greek word, neos, which means \u201cnew in point of time.\u201d This is the new one, the new covenant. The New Covenant was recently made because Jesus had recently died. It emphasizes the fresh and recent revelation that came through the Messiah.
\nThe sixth occupant of the city is the blood of sprinkling that speaks better than that of Abel. This emphasizes the fact that the New Covenant was ratified by better blood\u2014His blood. Earlier (9:11\u201312, 23\u201324), the author related how Jesus brought His blood into the Holy of Holies of the Heavenly Tabernacle. Now he adds that the blood is still visibly there on the Mercy Seat in the Tabernacle in Heaven since that is where the original Ark of the Covenant is found (Rev. 11:19). This blood speaks better than that of Abel. In biblical history, Abel was the first person to offer a blood sacrifice. This is a testimony that, even though Abel is now dead, blood is still the only acceptable way to God. But now, there is better blood in a better place, and this better blood in this better place continually speaks to men. This is the blood of Jesus. His is the only blood that can bring one into God\u2019s presence; therefore, it is the only blood that is the means of acceptance and approach to God. While Abel\u2019s blood speaks continually on earth, the Messiah\u2019s blood speaks continually from Heaven. It testifies that He will some day come back, judge, and bring in the Millennial Kingdom with the full application of the New Covenant (vs. 25\u201327). While some commentators take the presence of the blood as being purely symbolic and not literal, there is nothing in the context that implies a non-literal meaning. Since the first five occupants are literal, there is no exegetical reason to deny the literalness of the blood.
\nThese Jewish readers, as believers, are identified with the Heavenly Jerusalem where these six occupants are living. If the readers go back into Judaism, they will not lose their citizenship in the New Jerusalem as such because of their position and their association with the New Jerusalem. Nevertheless, they will lose out on the blessings of this life. They will suffer the terror with which the Old Covenant was given while they are on earth. More specifically, they will suffer the terror of the judgment of the A.D. 70 destruction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c. The Fifth Warning: Parenthetical Warning Against Indifference in Light of Better Blood in a Better Place\u201412:25\u201329<\/p>\n\n\n\n
25 See that you refuse not him that speaks. For if they escaped not when they refused him that warned them on earth, much more shall not we escape who turn away from him that warns from heaven: 26 whose voice then shook the earth: but now he has promised, saying, Yet once more will I make to tremble not the earth only, but also the heaven. 27 And this word, Yet once more, signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that have been made, that those things which are not shaken may remain. 28 Wherefore, receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us have grace, whereby we may offer service well-pleasing to God with reverence and awe: 29 for our God is a consuming fire.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verse 25, the writer again reminds the believers of the past. They rejected an earthly dispensation, but the One now speaking is from Heaven. The exhortation is as follows: See that you refuse not him that speaks. The word See is in the emphatic position and the Greek is stronger than the English: \u201cBeware, lest.\u201d It emphasizes an obligation they have in light of what he previously said, especially in verses 18\u201324. The word refuse has the concept of \u201crejecting.\u201d The Greek word for refused is the same word found in verse 19 where the Israelites entreated or \u201cbegged\u201d that God would not speak to them again. The application is as follows: Do not stop your ears to the voice of God as the Israelites did at Mount Sinai. Beware, lest you refuse or lest you reject Him. When the writer says, him that speaks, he uses the present tense in that God is speaking even now. He is drawing a contrast between Heaven and earth: For if they escaped not when they refused him that warned them on earth, much more shall not we escape who turn away from him that warns from heaven. Once again the writer uses a kal ve-chomer argument. If the Son is greater than Moses, then those who would reject Him now (those who are rejecting the present voice) are guilty of greater sin than are the Israelite fathers of the Exodus. Again, he is not dealing with loss of salvation; he is dealing with temporal, physical punishment in this life. He is dealing with physical death. Those living under the Law did not escape temporal punishment for disobedience to the Law; therefore, how can one turn away from the New Covenant and hope to escape temporal punishment?
\nEarlier, the author showed that, when the Law was given on Mount Sinai, there was a great shaking. He reminds the readers of this in verse 26, but now he also points out that the shaking on Mount Sinai was symbolic of the future, final shaking of the heavens and earth. There was a shaking in history whose voice then shook the earth (Ex. 19:18; Judg. 5:4\u20135; Ps. 68:8\u20139; 77:18; 114:7), but there will also be a future shaking. He then quoted Haggai 2:6, which deals with that final shaking by referring to the shaking that will occur before the Second Coming. This final shaking consists of the judgments of the Great Tribulation that precede the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom. In Jewish apocalyptic literature, this verse was interpreted as speaking of the final eschatological earthquake involving the entire cosmos. In the past, God shook only the earth but, in the future, God plans to shake both the heavens and the earth. This will occur in conjunction with the Second Coming. From Haggai 2:6 he draws a present application because there is a shaking, which is soon to come. This shaking will destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. It is the shaking of A.D. 70. For the present time, the writer says that the One who spoke on Sinai and shook Sinai is now speaking from Heaven in grace. They are living in a time between two shakings. God is now speaking quietly in grace, but He will speak loudly in judgment and with shaking in the future. When He speaks loudly with shaking, it will be in judgment and will bring the present order to an end. The order of the Temple and the Levitical system will cease to operate. Eventually, there will be a final shaking in conjunction with the Second Coming.
\nIn verse 27, that final shaking before the Second Coming will introduce a final unshakeable order. He re-quotes a phrase from Haggai, Yet once more, to draw the application. The application is that which is shakable is temporary; that which is unshakable is eternal. The fact that this earth was shaken once and will be shaken again shows this earth is temporary. That is why the shaking signifies the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that have been made. The shakable is to be destroyed in order that those things which are not shaken may remain because those things which are unshakable are eternal. The present system is shakable and therefore it will be destroyed, but when the Kingdom is set up, it will be unshakable. In the Greek text the author uses the word \u201cnow.\u201d By using the Greek word nun rather than the word tote, he indicates the shaking has already begun. This epistle was written sometime between A.D. 64\u201366, and the First Jewish Revolt against Rome would break out in full force in A.D. 66. In the two years preceding A.D. 66, there were several mini-revolts in various cities located in the Land of Israel. These mini-revolts were a prelude to the big revolt. In this verse, the writer implies the shaking has already begun, but the current shaking is merely the prelude to the shaking that will bring an end to the present system. He anticipated a very imminent destruction of Jerusalem. The Temple and the Old Covenant are shakable and, therefore, they are temporary; but the New Jerusalem and the New Covenant are unshakable and, thus, they are eternal. According to Haggai 2:6, in that final shaking, the old will pass away and the new will be brought in. This action will give the saints a fit place to live for all eternity. The application to his audience is that to go back to the Levitical system is to go back to something that is about to be destroyed.
\nIn verse 28, the author draws his conclusion: Wherefore. Since the readers are destined to receive a kingdom [which] cannot be shaken (the Heavenly Jerusalem and the eternal Kingdom of God), the application is let us have grace. As Revelation 20\u201322 shows, the Millennial Messianic Kingdom will give way and usher in the Eternal Order. Again, he reemphasizes a point he made more than once\u2014the need to appropriate grace (4:16). The believers are in the midst of these trials, and this is not the time to think about returning to Judaism. This is the time to think about appropriating grace. The purpose of appropriating grace is so that we may offer service. The believers are to serve God in a well-pleasing way. Serving God in a well-pleasing way means serving God \u201cin an acceptable way,\u201d in godly fear with reverence and [with] awe. The blood sacrifices are no longer an acceptable way of appropriating grace.
\nWhy do they need to do this? They need to appropriate grace because, in verse 29, the writer says the alternative is divine judgment. He quotes Deuteronomy 4:24: for our God is a consuming fire. This phrase points out that, while God is a God of grace, He is also a God of judgment for those who fail to appropriate grace. If they fail to appropriate grace and instead return to Judaism, they will be judged with physical death. It is a warning of discipline in this life for those who return to Judaism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
D. Concluding Exhortations\u201413:1\u201325<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Social Obligations\u201413:1\u20136\n1 Let love of the brethren continue. 2 Forget not to show love unto strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. 3 Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; them that are ill-treated, as being yourselves also in the body. 4 Let marriage be had in honor among all, and let the bed be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge. 5 Be you free from the love of money; content with such things as you have: for himself had said, I will in no wise fail you, neither will I in any wise forsake you. 6 So that with good courage we say,
\nThe Lord is my helper; I will not fear:
\nWhat shall man do unto me?<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nThe first social obligation is found in verse 1: Let the love of the brethren continue. The four words in English, love of the brethren, are comprised of only one word in Greek, philadelphia. It means \u201cbrotherly love\u201d or love of the brethren. This word is unique to the New Testament. The writer is showing the relationship believers should have among themselves, one to another, because of a common Lord. When he admonishes the readers to let brotherly love continue, the implication is that some are in danger of breaking this bond of love. They need to continue exercising special love for the brethren as they were known to do in 6:10 (e.g. 1 Jn. 3:16\u201318).
\nThe second social obligation, hospitality, is found in verse 2: Forget not to show love unto strangers. Again, the words, show love unto strangers, comprise only one word in Greek. The Greek word literally means \u201clove of strangers.\u201d Love of strangers was important and necessary because of the absence of accommodations for strangers in those days. Also, as the author pointed out earlier in the Book of Hebrews, because of persecutions, some of these believers had lost their homes due to their faith. The way he phrases verse 2 indicates that some have neglected the love of strangers. One reason to love strangers is that some have entertained angels unawares. One person, who was in this category, was Abraham (Gen. 18\u201319). Abraham entertained what he thought were three men but two of them were actually angels. The Greek word for angels can also mean \u201cmessengers.\u201d The same Greek word is used of both celestial angelic messengers and human messengers. It is possible that the writer is simply saying that a stranger might be God\u2019s messenger to the host. The passage can be interpreted either way.
\nThe third social obligation, sympathy, is found in verse 3: Remember them that are in bonds. The readers are to remember them in prayer and in other ways. Believers are to remember them as bound with them; to identify themselves with those who are in prison because of their faith. One example of this is Onesiphorus in 2 Timothy 1:16\u201318. They are to identify with, show sympathy to, and remember two groups\u2014those who are in prison and those who are suffering adversity. There must be a sympathizing fellowship with those who are suffering persecution for the faith. The reason for this sympathizing fellowship is as follows: as being yourselves also in the body; it is needed because all believers are in the same Body (1 Cor. 12:26).
\nThe fourth social obligation, the sanctity of marriage, is found in verse 4: Let marriage be had in honor among all. This means the married person must be faithful to his or her mate: and let the bed be undefiled. The Greek word used here for bed is not the normal Greek word for bed. The actual word used is coite, which is the origin of the English word \u201ccoitus.\u201d The emphasis is not upon the bed itself but upon the sexual union between married partners on the bed. The emphasis is on sexual purity because God will judge fornicators and adulterers.
\nThe fifth social obligation, contentment, is found in verses 5\u20136: Be you free from the love of money. This describes the character of the person; he must be free from materialism: content with such things as you have. The basis is God\u2019s promise to provide their every need (Phil. 4:19). The writer then cites two quotations from the Old Testament. The first quotation is either taken from Deuteronomy 31:6 or Joshua 1:5. The point the author makes is that God will not leave them. The second quotation is from Psalm 118:6. This quote is used to teach the believers that man cannot hurt them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Religious Obligations\u201413:7\u201317<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The writer next gives three religious obligations. The first one is found in verse 7:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember them that had the rule over you, men that spoke unto you the word of God; and considering the issue of their life, imitate their faith.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nThe first religious obligation is to remember their first rulers, those who in the past exercised spiritual rule over them. The Greek word for Remember means \u201cto observe carefully.\u201d They need to observe carefully those who had governmental oversight over them in the past\u2014the elders of the churches. The writer says to remember the earlier rulers because in the past they had spoken the Word of God to them. They need to now consider the issue of their life, meaning \u201cthe manner of their lives.\u201d The purpose is to imitate their faith and the character of their lives. In chapter 11, he encouraged them to imitate the faith and patient endurance of the Old Testament saints. Here, he tells them to imitate the faith of the more recent saints who had been their previous teachers. These earlier rulers are people, who had been their spiritual rulers, but who have now died; they have finished their course and they have kept the faith with patient endurance. There are three characteristics of good teachers: they proclaim biblical truth; they are men of faith; and they live a spiritual lifestyle worthy of imitation. Now, these living saints need to continue to imitate those earlier rulers.
\nThe second religious obligation is to give complete devotion to the Messiah and is stated in verses 8\u201316:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to-day, yea and for ever. 9 Be not carried away by divers and strange teachings: for it is good that the heart be established by grace; not by meats, wherein they that occupied themselves were not profited. 10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat that serve the tabernacle. 11 For the bodies of those beasts whose blood is brought into the holy place by the high priest as an offering for sin, are burned without the camp. 12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered without the gate. 13 Let us therefore go forth unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. 14 For we have not here an abiding city, but we seek after the city which is to come. 15 Through him then let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of lips which make confession to his name. 16 But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nIn verses 8\u20139, the writer points out that Jesus must be the center of their faith. In verse 8, the author declares: Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to-day, yea and for ever. This verse is frequently pulled out of context today. It is important to remember that \u201ca text apart from its context is a pretext.\u201d This verse is often pulled out of context in certain circles and made to teach that, since Jesus did a certain thing in the Gospels, He must always do the same thing. Even within the Gospels, He did not always do everything in the same way. The context simply teaches that Jesus can give the believers victory in their trials. He brought victory for the distant saints of chapter 11 and for the more recent saints of verse 7. He has given victories in the past, He is giving victories in the present, and He will give victories in the future. Furthermore, Jesus is unchangeable in His nature as to both the divine and the eternal aspects of it. There are two ways in which Jesus is not the same yesterday, today, and forever. First, He is not always the same in His person. Until the Incarnation (for all eternity past) He existed only in the form of God (Phil. 2:5\u201311). God is a Spirit and Jesus existed only in the form of God for all eternity past. With the Incarnation that changed. Jesus did not cease to be God but, in addition to being God, He added human nature and also became a man. His person changed from being only God to being the God-Man. At that point, He became a mortal man, a natural man, subject to hunger and thirst, subject to fatigue and weakness, and subject to death. After His Resurrection, His person changed again. He is no longer the mortal God-Man. Jesus is the immortal God-Man. He is no longer subject to hunger, thirst, death, and so on; therefore, in His Person, He has not been the same yesterday, today, and forever.
\nSecond, Jesus has not been the same yesterday, today, and forever in His program. Foods that could and could not be eaten at various times can serve as an example here. From the time of Adam until Noah, God\u2019s will was for man to be vegetarian. From the time of Noah to Moses, anything that moved was food for them to eat. From the time of Moses to Jesus, Jews were permitted to eat only certain foods. Since the death of Jesus, all foods have become \u201cclean\u201d again. His program is not the same yesterday, today, and forever. Even in the Book of Hebrews, He showed a change of program. In the past, blood-sacrifices were necessary, but now they are no longer necessary; His program has changed. Chapter 11 shows that Jesus did not deal with every saint in the same way. He chose to save some saints from death, fire, and lions, but others were tortured to death. Both, those who were saved from death and those who were tortured to death, were exercising faith. Both groups are commended for their faith. In His program, Jesus has not been the same yesterday, today, and forever.
\nJesus is not unchangeable in His person and He is not unchangeable in His program; however, in His divine nature, He is unchangeable. Jesus has always been God and He always will be God. Throughout the Book of Hebrews, the author has emphasized the deity of the Son. In the immediate context, he has been emphasizing victory in persecution. Jesus will provide victory and spiritual maturity in the midst of persecution for those who exercise faith and patient endurance. That is unchangeable; that is still true. Verse 8 cannot be used to claim healing for everyone who is sick, and it cannot be used to claim that because Jesus did one thing at a point in time, He must always do it that way. Jesus did not always do things the same way within His own lifetime.
\nIn verse 9, the unchangeable Jesus is contrasted to human doctrine and teaching: Be not carried away by divers and strange teachings. Divers means in contrast to the unity of the doctrine that has been the author\u2019s emphasis in 1:1\u201310:18. The word strange means that it is in contrast to those found in Scripture (Eph. 4:19). Any teaching being spread that is not based on Scripture or found in Scripture, no matter how spiritual the movement may appear to be on the outside, is suspect. The author states: for it is good that the heart be established by grace. The heart should be established by grace as over against being established by the Law. Spiritual maturity will come by means of the teachings of the Messiah not by means of going back to the Levitical system. Furthermore, those who trust in meats will never attain the goal of spiritual fellowship with God. This is not the way to spiritual maturity. Those who trusted in meats were not profited themselves. Earlier, it was noted that good teachers are characterized by three things. Here, false teachers are also characterized by three things: they promote false, diverse doctrines; they emphasize the external rather than the internal such as eating certain meats, which becomes the basis of their spiritual life; and, their teaching fails to produce effective, spiritual results. It does not profit those who have been occupied with them.
\nIn verses 10\u201312, the writer adds that the Messiah is their sin-offering and continuous supplier. In verse 10, Jesus is the altar. Believers have an altar to which those who are still trusting in the Tabernacle have no right. By virtue of their service in the Tabernacle they are still bringing blood sacrifices, which shows they have not trusted in Jesus as the final sacrifice. The word used for altar is not just the altar but includes the altar and the food that was upon the altar. This food was the means of support for the Levitical priests. There is now only one sacrifice\u2014Jesus on the cross. There is only one food\u2014Jesus Himself. The writer reminds his readers that, while normally the priests could partake and eat of the sin sacrifices, there was one sin sacrifice the High Priest could not eat and that was the Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, sacrifice. The High Priest could not eat that sacrifice, but the believer can eat by partaking of the spiritual food\u2014Jesus. Jesus is the final Yom Kippur sacrifice. The believer has a greater privilege than the most privileged person in the Old Testament. Hence, these Jewish believers have everything Judaism has and more because Jesus is superior to the three Pillars of Judaism.
\nIn verse 11, the writer presents proof of the superiority of the believer\u2019s present privilege. According to Leviticus 16:27, the Yom Kippur sacrifice was not burned on the altar like other sacrifices. The body and the remains were taken outside the camp and burned in their entirety. The sacrifice could not be consumed for food. Taking the Yom Kippur offering outside the camp of Israel and burning it there portrayed the removal of sin. The writer\u2019s point is that the adherents of the Temple are excluded from the privileges of the Heavenly Altar. Neither the High Priest nor the people could partake of the sacrificial offering of the Day of Atonement.
\nThe principle of burning the Day of Atonement sacrifice outside the camp is given a present application in verse 12. The place where Jesus suffered was located outside the gate; Jesus died outside the city walls of Jerusalem. Here, the author plays with two words: camp and gate; camp meaning the Camp of Judaism, and gate meaning the City-gate of Jerusalem. The Yom Kippur sacrifice was burned outside the Camp of Judaism. Those who stayed inside the Camp of Judaism could not eat it. The application is as follows: Wherefore Jesus also. Based upon the previous statement, Jesus suffered outside the gate. He suffered and died outside Jerusalem for the purpose that he might sanctify the people. The means was through his own blood not animal blood. Since Jesus is outside the camp, He is there to receive His people and they should go outside the camp to receive Him. For now, this entails going outside the camp of Judaism; later it will entail going outside the City (gate) of Jerusalem.
\nIn verses 13\u201316, the author points out there are two requirements Jesus demands from the readers. These two requirements are commitment and service. The first requirement, commitment to Jesus, is found in verses 13\u201314. In verse 13, he says that, even now, the readers should be on their way outside the city, out of the camp, abandoning the city. Jesus is outside the Camp of Judaism and they should go forth unto him. The author views this as an immediate need. He uses the present tense \u201cLet us keep on going outside to Him.\u201d The readers are to go \u201coutside the camp.\u201d Now, they are to go outside the Camp of Judaism bearing his reproach and, later, they will need to go outside the City of Jerusalem. The readers must identify with His rejection. Since Jesus is outside the camp, He is still out there ready and waiting to receive His people. The Jewish believers need to keep from going back into the Camp of Judaism. They need to go outside the camp and identify with Jesus. There is an immediate application and a later application. The immediate application is that they must go outside the Camp of Judaism; later, they will need to go outside the Gate of Jerusalem. For now, Jewish believers need to abandon the religion that rejected the Messiah. Later, they will need to abandon the city because Jesus was sacrificed outside the camp. As long as they stay inside the camp, they cannot partake of the privileges of the Heavenly Altar.
\nIn verse 14, the writer gives the reason why the Jewish believers must go outside the camp and outside the city: For we have not here an abiding city. Jerusalem was destined to be destroyed. The readers knew from three prophecies given by Jesus that Jerusalem was to be destroyed (Matthew 24:1\u20132; Luke 19:41\u201344; and 21:20\u201324). They need to seek an abiding city that is to come and they have the assurance that one will come. The abiding city that is to come is the Heavenly Jerusalem, which will take the place of the temporary city and its present system. The author uses the definite article, the city. It is a specific city. It is the Heavenly Jerusalem written about in the preceding chapter. Thus, the first obligation, as previously stated, is commitment to Jesus; commitment even to the point of abandoning both Rabbinic Judaism and the City of Jerusalem.
\nThe second requirement Jesus demands from the readers, service, is found in verses 15\u201316. Jesus is the High Priest, but believers are fellow-priests. The job of a priest is to sacrifice. Today, believers do not sacrifice blood, but they do sacrifice two other things. The first thing believers sacrifice is found in verse 15. They sacrifice in word by offering up sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving. The means is through Jesus the Messiah: Through him then let us offer up a sacrifice. The word offer here means \u201cto offer up a sacrifice.\u201d In this verse, the author clearly puts the believer in a priestly ministry under the High Priest Jesus. Believers are to continually offer up the sacrifice of praise to God; they are to worship God for who He is and for what He does. The background is the Old Testament thanksgiving offering, which was given for favor graciously bestowed. They have received grace from God and now He should be thanked. The way of thanking Him is with the fruit of [our] lips which make confession to his name. This is to be done orally and the confession is that Jesus is the Messiah.
\nThe second thing believers sacrifice is noted in verse 16. They are to sacrifice in deed: do not forget to do good. The words, to do good, mean performing any kindly service. Performing any kindly service will fulfill the requirements of verse one (love of the brethren); the words, and to communicate (or share), specify giving alms to the needy. Giving alms to the needy will fulfill the requirements of verse 2 (showing love to strangers). These are sacrifices and with such sacrifices God is well pleased.
\nThe third religious obligation is to obey their present rulers and is found in verse 17:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit to them: for they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief: for this were unprofitable for you.<\/code><\/pre>\n\n\n\nAll of the privileges believers have do not release them from being obligated to spiritual oversight. Whereas they ought to remember their past rulers, they also ought to obey the present ones, to submit to them, because submission shows obedience. The reason they need to obey and submit is that they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account. Leaders of a local congregation are accountable to God (Jas. 3:1). The spiritual rulers of the congregation will be able to give an account to God with joy, and not with grief, as the congregation submits to their leadership. The words joy and grief relate more to the submission than to the giving of an account. The congregation has a responsibility to help the rulers (the leaders) to rule with joy and satisfaction. The believers will have joy and will be able to watch with joy because they receive such oversight (3 Jn. 4), but they will have grief if they do not submit to the oversight. The word for grief is a Greek word that means \u201cinner, unexpressed groanings.\u201d The believers will have grief (inner groanings), which will remain unexpressed if they do not submit to the leaders. If that happens, it will be unprofitable for you. This means it is the sheep and not the shepherds who will suffer the consequences. The believers will end up being like sheep tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine (v. 9).
\nThere are four reasons to obey their present leaders: (1) The leaders are responsible to watch over the moral and doctrinal health of the congregation; (2) The leaders will some day have to give an account of their stewardship of leadership at the Judgment Seat of the Messiah; (3) The leaders would like to exercise their ministry with joy, and not with grief; (4) A lack of submission is unprofitable for the rebels because they, too, will be judged at the Judgment Seat of the Messiah.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- Personal Obligations\u201413:18\u201325\n18 Pray for us: for we are persuaded that we have a good conscience, desiring to live honorably in all things. 19 And I exhort you the more exceedingly to do this, that I may be restored to you the sooner.
\n20 Now the God of peace, who brought again from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep with the blood of an eternal covenant, even our Lord Jesus, 21 make you perfect in every good thing to do his will, working in us that which is well-pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
\n22 But I exhort you, brethren, bear with the word of exhortation: for I have written unto you in few words. 23 Know you that our brother Timothy has been set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.
\n24 Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.
\n25 Grace be with you all. Amen.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\nThe writer now tries to show the believers\u2019 obligations to him and to his fellow-workers. He feels that if they reject the oversight of those at home, they will also reject his oversight. He wants them to profit from his oversight when he comes to see them.
\nThe believers\u2019 first personal obligation is found in verses 18\u201319. Verse 18 gives the specific request: Pray for us. The reason given for this request is for we are persuaded that we have a good conscience. The fact that the writer is persuaded over his own good conscience is the basis of his appeal for them to pray for him. It is a good conscience because it has been cleansed by salvation. He is confident they can pray for him because they are rightly related to the Messiah. Furthermore, he has a deep desire to conduct himself honorably in all things. If they are willing to submit themselves to their present rulers and if they are willing to read and learn from what he wrote, then they will receive correction. This verse shows three things about the author: (1) he has a good conscience; (2) he has a submissive will; and (3) he has the right goal. He desires to live honorably before God.
\nIn verse 19, the writer gives the exhortation: I exhort you the more exceedingly to do this, meaning to pray for him. It is very emphatic. The exhortation is a specific prayer request to pray for the release of the writer: that I may be restored to you the sooner. The writer apparently is writing from prison, but he hopes to be released by their prayers. The word restored shows he was previously with them but is now separated and hopes to be with them again soon.
\nIn verses 20\u201321, the author gives a lengthy benediction. In this benediction he reaffirms his own confidence that the God of peace can meet their present trials and present needs on the basis of the New Covenant, which gives them a sure standing. He makes nine statements in this benediction. First, Now the God of peace, points out that God is a God of peace and will answer their need for peace in the midst of trials and inner turmoil (Phil. 4:7). Second, this is the God who brought [up] again from the dead \u2026 our Lord Jesus. The point of this phrase is that it shows God\u2019s ability to meet their need. The fact that He can bring up from the dead as He did with Jesus\u2014the fact that He could restore Jesus from the depths of death itself\u2014clearly shows He can also meet their needs in their lifetime. The phrase brought up signifies the restoration as being made more emphatic by stressing the depths from which Jesus was brought up; it shows that victory was attained after the defeat of death was suffered. The author calls Him the Lord Jesus. The name Lord emphasizes His deity and the name Jesus emphasizes His humanity; therefore, He is the God-Man. Third, He is the great shepherd of the sheep, which shows the relationship of the Messiah to the flock. The job of a shepherd is to meet the needs of the sheep, and he can meet every need created by their trials. Fourth, their needs are met through the blood of an eternal covenant. This is the New Covenant which is the basis by (or the basis on) which God now deals with believers. He meets their needs on the basis of this covenant. Fifth, God can make you perfect in every good thing through the blood of Lord Jesus, which emphasizes the supply of what is lacking and the correction of what is faulty. God can equip them in every good thing and make them complete in order to bring them to maturity. Sixth, specifically, God wants to equip them to do his will. That is His purpose. Seventh, God is working in us that which is well-pleasing in his sight. This shows that God is working out His own good pleasure in the believers. Eighth, God does this through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the means through which God works out His own good pleasure. God is working His good pleasure in them but He is doing it through this One. Ninth, the writer gives a word of praise: to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
\nVerses 20\u201321 also show five features of perfection or maturity. First, as to sphere, there must be perfection in every good work. Second, the goal of maturity is to do the will of God. Third, the source is God working in them that which is well-pleasing in His sight. Fourth, the means is through the Messiah Jesus. Fifth, the end result is to glorify God.
\nIn verse 22, the writer calls to mind things that he said in the epistle concerning patient endurance: But I exhort you, brethren (that word again shows them to be believers), bear with the word of exhortation. This phrase characterizes the whole Book of Hebrews in which the author has given one exhortation after another, and it is related to the particular encouragement given to them in their present trials. The words bear with mean \u201cto receive with receptive minds.\u201d The writer states that he wrote to them in few words. He is not saying the words are few in number. Rather, he is saying an argument that could be continued at great length is being cut short.
\nIn verse 23, he makes the announcement of Timothy\u2019s release: Know you that our brother Timothy has been set at liberty. He gives them this news to encourage them since patient endurance has paid off for Timothy. Timothy has been set at liberty either from a specific charge that he was facing in a court of law or from imprisonment itself. The writer adds: with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you. Timothy was planning on coming, but there might be some hindrances that will keep him from doing so, hindrances that are unanticipated and are presently unknown. Nevertheless, Timothy will soon join the writer, and if the writer is also released, the writer, together with Timothy, will visit the readers of this letter.
\nIn verse 24a, he gives the second personal obligation: Salute the elders. The word Salute means \u201cto greet.\u201d The believers are to greet the rulers and all the saints. He separates the ones ruling from the ones being ruled. His suggestion in that phrase is that this letter was not being sent to the whole church but to a group within the church. It suggests that the rulers, the spiritual leaders, were following sound doctrine but a number of the people wanted to depart from the rulers\u2019 sound spiritual leadership due to persecution. The author wrote to support the rulers.
\nThen in verse 24b he states: They of Italy salute you. He has some Italians with him. Their greeting or salutation can be taken in two ways. First, it may mean those who are in Italy were with the writer for he may have been writing from Italy. Second, it may mean there are presently some Italian brethren with him at the location from which he is writing. Whichever way the salutation, They of Italy salute you, is taken, one thing is certain: They are present with the writer either inside or outside the geographical borders of Italy.
\nFinally, in verse 25, the writer closes with the inscription of grace to be with them all: Grace be with you all. Amen. This is a plea for God to grant grace to the readers and for them to appropriate the grace they need. Grace is necessary to get through to receive mercy and help in time of need and grace is the foundation of their new, spiritual lifestyle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
FOUR<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Postscript<\/p>\n\n\n\n
From the Book of Hebrews itself, it cannot be determined how the readers responded to the warnings of the writer. Fortunately, there are three ancient writings from which, if their material is pooled together, the readers\u2019 response can be documented. The first writer is Josephus, a first century Jewish historian and an unbeliever as far as Jesus was concerned. He was an eyewitness of the events of A.D. 70. The second writer was Heggisippus, a Jewish believer who lived in the second century. The third writer was Eusebius, a Gentile Christian who lived in the fourth century. All wrote concerning these events.
\nWhen these Jewish believers received this letter, they read it and they obeyed. They made their break with Judaism once-and-for-all complete. Within a two year period of time after the letter was written, the First Jewish Revolt broke out in A.D. 66. At that point, the entire community of Jewish believers, numbering tens of thousands strong (over twenty thousand alone lived in Jerusalem at that time), left the country, crossed the Jordan River to the East Bank, and went up to the city of Pella. Pella is located on the eastern side of the Jordan River, south of the Sea of Galilee, and outside the war zone. It was a Greek city, one of the ten cities of the Decapolis, and there they waited out the war. Four years later the war ended with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple as Jesus had predicted. A total of 1,100,000 Jews were killed in that Roman conflict. These three writers indicate that not a single Jewish believer lost his life in that conflict because of their obedience to the letter to the Hebrews.
\nThus, this book had a happy ending.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
@book{Fruchtenbaum_2005,
\nplace={Tustin, CA},
\nedition={1st ed.},
\ntitle={The Messianic Jewish Epistles: Hebrews, James, First Peter, Second Peter, Jude},
\npublisher={Ariel Ministries},
\nauthor={Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G.},
\nyear={2005}}<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Exportiert aus Verbum, 18:27 18. Oktober 2018.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Part I The Book of Hebrews ONE Introduction A. Authorship It is not known who wrote the Book of Hebrews since the author chose not to identify himself. The recipients of this letter obviously knew who he was, and over the centuries, the following authors have been suggested: Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, Clement of Rome (however … <\/p>\n