SECTION ONE Hebrews 1:1-14 and Hebrews 2:1-4 In this section, the Apostle endeavors to persuade and encourage his Hebrew brethren in Christ to persevere to the end in their begun Christian course, by presenting to them sundry motives drawn chiefly from the Divine nature, glory, and dignity of Christ, considered as the Creator, Preserver, and Governor of all things. I. He concedes that God had in ancient times, in divers parts and ways, spoken to the Fathers by the Prophets. But then he claims that the same God did in the end of these days, or at the close of the Jewish age, speak to us by his own Son (Hebrews 1:1). But who is this Son of God? There is by the common consent of all, a very close and intimate connection between the character of the messenger and the weight and importance of his message. And hence the Apostle next proceeds to answer this question: to speak particularly of the incomparable majesty, glory, and perfec¬tions of Jesus Christ, as the Son of God. He says, 1. That he is the heir, or Lord, of all things (Hebrews 1:2). 2 That through him, God made the worlds (Hebrews 1:2). 3. That he is the effulgence of the Father’ s glory (Hebrews 1:3). 4. That he is the exact image or likeness of the Father’ s essence (Hebrews 1:3). 5. That he supports all things by the word of his power (Hebrews 1:3). 6. That by means of his own blood, he has made purification for our sins (Hebrews 1:3). 7. And that having done this, he now sits, as King of kings and Lord of lords, on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens (Hebrews 1:3). II. In the remaining portion of the first chapter, the Apostle further expands and amplifies this subject, by comparing Christ with angels. He proves chiefly from the Old Testament Scriptures, that he (Christ) is superior to the angels. 1. In that he has obtained by inheritance a more excellent name than they (Hebrews 1:4-5). 2. The angels are all required to worship him (Hebrews 1:6). 3. True, indeed, the angels are very powerful and exalted beings. Before them the enemies of Jehovah melt away, as wax or stubble before the flame. And endowed, as they are, with all the strength and purity indicated by the symbolic use of the word spirit, they are of course far removed from all the infirmities and imperfections of the flesh. But by the appointment of the Father, as well as by his own essential Divinity, the Son is exalted far above all the angels of Heaven. As God, he sits on the throne of the universe, judging and governing it in truth and in righteous-ness (Hebrews 1:7-8). 4. He has been anointed with the Holy Spirit and with power, far above all kings and princes (Hebrews 1:9). “ The Father giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.” 5. He is from everlasting to everlasting. By him the founda¬tions of the Earth were laid, and the heavens are the work of his hands. They will all finally perish; and he will roll them up and recast them, as a worn-out garment; but he is himself still the same, yesterday, today, and forever. This cannot, of course, be said of the angels, or of any other creature (Hebrews 1:10-12). 6. The angels are all ministering spirits, sent forth under Christ to minister to the heirs of salvation. But Christ sits on the right hand of God, waiting until, according to the promise of the Father, his enemies shall be made his footstool Hebrews 1:13-14). III. From these premises, then, our author concludes that we Christians, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, should give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard from God through Christ and his holy Apostles and Prophets; lest at any time we should be carried away from them by the evil influences of the world, and so making shipwreck of our faith, we should finally come short of the eternal inheritance. For, 1. It is a principle of the Divine government, as well indeed as of all just human governments, that wherever much is given, there also much is ever expected and required (2: 1, 2). 2. But even under the Law, in an age of comparative darkness, there was no pardon for the willfully disobedient (Hebrews 2:2). 3. And hence it follows that there is no possible way of escape for those who now neglect the great salvation that is offered to us in the Gospel (Hebrews 2:3-4). From this analysis, it is obvious that the whole section may be properly divided into the three following paragraphs: I. Hebrews 1:1-3. The fact that God has spoken to us through his Son, with a statement of the Son’ s rank and dignity. II. Hebrews 1:4-14. The Son of God compared with angels.III. Hebrews 2:1-4. Danger of neglecting what God has revealed to us through his Son. Title.—In the oldest manuscripts, such as the Sinaitic, the Vatican, the Alexandrian, etc., the title is simply, “ To the Hebrews ” In the editions of Stephens, it is, “ The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews” ; and in the “ Received text” of Elzevir, it is, “ The Epistle to the Hebrews.” Some other slight variations occur in a few of the manuscripts; but the first form, “ To the Hebrews,” is sustained by the best authorities; and was probably prefixed to the Epistle in the Apostolic age, by some of the inspired Fathers; or, at least, with their consent and approval. See Introduction Hebrews 3:1. Hebrews 1:1 --God who—This is a very striking and remarkable introduction. Full of his subject, and earnest in his desires to communi¬cate to his desponding Hebrew brethren the word of life, the author indulges in no unnecessary preliminaries, but enters at once on the discussion of his sublime theme. He concedes what had indeed been often demonstrated, and what the Jews then all confidently believed, that God had anciently (palai) spoken to the Fathers by the Prophets: but then he also claims with equal confidence and on equal authority, that the same glorious and infinitely perfect Being did, “ at the end of these days,” or near the close of the Jewish age, speak unto us by his own Son. True, indeed, he had, for some time previous to Paul’ s writing this Epistle, been generally known by a name that would have appeared somewhat barbarous to the ancient Hebrews. To them he was primarily revealed as Eloheem, a word in the plural number which means powerful ones; persons of great authority and influence; because in the beginning, the power of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, was most eminently displayed and illustrated in creating and garnishing the heavens and the earth. his is therefore the only name by which the Deity is made known to us in the first chapter of Genesis. But in the second and following chapters, he is called also Jehovah, the existing One; the Being absolute; because he only has life and immortality in himself; all other being is derived from him and depends on him. These are the proper names by which the Deity is commonly designated in the Old Testament. But in the New he is called Theos, which, according to Herodotus, means one who places, disposes, or arranges (from titheemi, to place); because, says he, the gods were supposed to have fixed all things in the world, in their proper places. According to Plato, theos means one who runs (from theo, to run) ; because the Sun, Moon, and stars, which he regarded as the primary gods, run their course daily from east to west, as if exercising a watch-care over the Earth and its inhabitants. But it is now generally believed by the ablest critics, that both Herodotus and Plato were in error; and that the Greek word theos and the Latin deus are of the same family as Zeus, and cognate with the Sanscrit dyu,— a word which means splendor, brightness, the bright sky. Any and all of these Greek conceptions would, of course, for a time, seem somewhat barbarous and repulsive to the pious and superstitiously sensitive Hebrews. But a change of names does not of necessity imply a. change of nature, essence, or character. The Creator, Preserver, and Governor of the universe, whether known as Eloheem, Jehovah, Theos, Deus, Dyu, or God, is ever the same, yesterday, today, and forever; without any variableness or shadow of change. (James 1:17.) The Author of the Old Testament is the Author of the New. And hence it follows that the Bible is a unit; and that it is throughout perfectly consistent in all its parts. For “ all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doc¬trine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17.) Hebrews 1:1 --at sundry times—The word that is here rendered, at sundry times” (polumezos), means properly in many parts. It refers to the well known fact, that God’ s plan of mercy through Jesus Christ, was revealed to the ancients gradually and in fragments. To Eve, it was promised indirectly, that through her Seed the Old Serpent should be crushed (Genesis 3:15); to Abraham directly, that through his Seed all the nations of the Earth should be blessed (Genesis 12:1-3); to Judah, that Shiloh (the Pacificator) should come, before the scepter should depart from him (Genesis 49:10) ; and to all Israel, that God would raise up to them, from among themselves, a Prophet like unto Moses, to whom he would require all to hearken (Deuteronomy 18:18). David, in one of his Psalms (Psalms 22:11-21), speaks of the sufferings of the Messiah; in another (Psalms 16:7-11), of his resurrection, and his deliverance from the power of Hades; and in another (Psalms 110), of his priesthood, reign, and triumphs. And so also it may be said of all the other Prophets. Through them, God gave to his people, as their wants and circum¬stances required, “ precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little.” (Isaiah 28:10-14.) But when in the fullness of time, He came, who is himself the Light of the world (John 8:12, and John 9:5), then the whole plan of redemption was speedily revealed to mankind in all its fullness. This was done, partly through his own personal ministry, and partly through the ministry of his Apostles; “ God also bearing them witness, both with signs, and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will.” Hebrews 1:1 --and in divers manners—This expression denotes the various ways (polutzopos) in which God made his will known to the ancients. This he did sometimes by dreams; sometimes by visions; sometimes, by symbols; sometimes, by Urim and Thummim; sometimes, by audible voices; and sometimes, by inspiration or prophetic ecstasy: all of which served to mark, in some measure, the comparative imperfection of the Old Economy. They severally indicate that so long as it continued, there was a wide breach— an unhappy state of alienation and separation between man and his Maker. (Numbers 12:6-8.) But in Christ, God and man are united. He (Christ) has slain the enmity, and taken it out of the way, by the blood of his cross (Colossians 1:20-22), so that through him, not only can God now consistently speak more freely and directly to man, but man can also speak with more freedom and confidence to God. See Hebrews 4:16 Hebrews 10:19-22. In this respect, then, there is a very great contrast between the Old and the New Economy. God never before spoke to the people, even from the Mercy-seat of the Tabernacle, as he did in and through his own Son during his earthly ministry. Hebrews 1:1 --spake in time past unto the fathers—This phrase is understood differently by commentators. Some think that it embraces all time, from Adam to Christ, including even the ministry of John the Baptist. But it is most likely, that the Apostle has here in view only the revelations of God to the Hebrew fathers, from Abraham to Malachi; or perhaps to Simon the Just. This explanation accords best with the context and also with Hebrew usage. The Jews all looked upon Abraham, as the father and founder of their nation; and Malachi wrote the last book of the Old Testament ; though it seems probable, that the spirit of prophecy did not wholly cease among the Jews, till the time of Simon the Just, about 300 years B.C. He is called by the Jews “ One of the remnants of the Great Synagogue,” said to have been founded by Ezra for the revision and completion of the Old Testament Canon. See “ Reason and Revelation,” p. 207-219, by the author. The word here rendered, “ in time past” (palai), means properly in ancient times; and it can therefore hardly have reference to the ministry of John. Hebrews 1:1 --by the prophets;—literally, in the Prophets. God first worked in the Prophets, and then through them, in making known to the Hebrew Fathers the various messages of his grace. The English word prophet is now generally used to denote one who foretells future events. And this is sometimes the meaning of the original word (propheroph) in Hellenistic Greek. But in Classic Greek it means one who speaks for another; and especially, one who speaks for a god and interprets his words to men. Thus, for instance, Mercury is called the prophet of Jupiter; and in the same sense, the poets are called the prophets of the Muses. The corresponding Hebrew word is ndvee (from the root, to boil up as a fountain), and means literally one who boils over. The name was given to the ancient prophets, because, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, they seemed to pour out their inspired utterances, as a fountain pours out its waters. (Psalms 45:1.) And hence it was always God who spoke in and by the Prophets: for says Peter, “ No prophecy of the Scripture is of private interpretation; but holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20-21.) Hebrews 1:2 in these last days—or rather, according to our best authori¬ties, at the end of these days (epi eschatou ton heemeron touton). This is the reading given in MSS. A, B, D, K, L, and M. Three different views have been taken of these words. It is alleged (1) that they refer simply to the closing period of the Jewish age (Moll); (2) that they refer exclusively to the Christian age (Stuart); and (3) that they refer to the closing period of the prophetic era, embracing both the ministry of Christ and of his Apostles (Luther). The first of these hypotheses is favored (a) by the use of the aorist tense of the verb (elaleesen) he spoke, not he has spoken; (b) by the fact that during the last three and a half years of the Jewish age, God did actually speak to the people in the per¬son of his own Son; and (c) by the current use of this phrase among the Jews. They were wont to divide all time into two ages, viz., “ the present age” (ho aion houtos) and “ the coming age” (ho aion mellon). By the former, they meant the age then existing before the coming of Christ; and by the latter they meant the age subsequent to his coming. (Matthew 12:32.) And hence it was, that in the Hebrew dialect “ these days” came to signify the Jewish age; and “ the last days ” the coming age. The dividing line of these two ages was never drawn very distinctly by the Jews. But as Christ put an end to the Law, nailing it to his cross (Colossians 2:14), his death, of course, serves to define this boundary, fixing definitely the end of the Jewish age, as well as the beginning of the Christian age. So that the days of Christ’ s personal ministry on earth, previous to his death, were according to the Hebrew “ usus loquendi,” the end of “ these days.” The second hypothesis is favored by the reading of the “ Textus Receptus,” and also by several of the ancient versions, which have “ in these last days” (epi escha ton ton heemeron). That “ the last days” is a phrase in Hebrew literature, equivalent to “ the coming age,” is plain from sundry passages in both the Old and the New Testament. See, for example, Isaiah 2:2; Jeremiah 23:20; Micah 4:1; and Acts 2:17. The third hypothesis is supposed to receive some support from the fact conceded in Hebrews 2:3; viz., that the things “ which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord” himself, were afterward confirmed unto us by his Apostles and Prophets, during the opening period of the Christian age. The fact here stated, no one of course denies who believes the Bible to be the word of God; but whether it has any bearing on the question before us, may be doubted. On the whole, it seems most probable that the Apostle is speaking here simply of Christ’ s personal ministry on Earth; and that he refers only, as the tense of the verb indicates, to the last days of the Jewish age. Hebrews 1:2 --by his Son,—literally, in Son (en hui) ; the word son being used without the article or possessive pronoun, as a quasi-proper name. So also the word son is used without any limiting epithet in Psalms 2:12. But our English idiom requires an article or a possessive pronoun before the word son, as in our Common Version. But why is Christ called the Son of God? To this question, three answers have been given: (1) Because of his supernatural birth by the virgin Mary. (2) Because of his being begotten from the grave, as the first-fruits of them that slept. And (3) because of his being eternally begotten of the Father. In proof of the first hypothesis, we have the direct testimony of the angel Gabriel. According to Luke, this ambassador of God, when sent to announce to Mary the birth of the coming Messiah, said to her, “ The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35.) And in proof of the second, we have given the tes¬timony of Paul in Acts 13:33. Speaking by the Spirit, he says, “ And we declare unto you the glad tidings, that the promise which was made unto the Fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second Psalm, Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee” ; that is, this day I have begotten thee from the dead. (Revelation 1:5.) That Jesus Christ, then, is called the Son of God, because he was miraculously begotten by the Holy Spirit of the virgin, and also because he was the First-begotten from the dead, there can be no doubt. But is it true that he is called also the Son of God, be¬cause he was eternally begotten of the Father? So many believe and testify (Origen, Athanasius, Augustine, etc.). And in proof of their position, they appeal with much confidence to what is said of the Son in this connection. (1:2, 3.) For how, say they, could God make the worlds by his Son, if he had no Son for thousands of years after the worlds were created? But in reply to this, it may perhaps be enough to say, How could God create all things by Jesus Christ (Ephesians 3:9), four thousand years before the Word be¬came incarnate? And how could Jesus say to his disciples (John 6:62), “ What, and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” Was the Logos known as the Son of man before he became incarnate ? Surely not. Here, then, we might pause, relying on the correctness of the old logical adage, that “ Whatever proves too much, proves nothing.” But the question is of easy solution. We all know that it is very common to use names and titles acquired at a later period of life, to designate the same persons even in their childhood, youth, and early manhood. We say, for example, that Abraham left Ur of Chaldea and went to Haran, when he was seventy years of age; though he was really not called Abraham, but Abram, until about twenty-nine years after his departure from Ur. And just so it is, with respect to the titles given to the eternal Logos after he became incarnate. These may all be used, in like manner, to designate his Divine personality before he became flesh and dwelt among us. Thus we say with all propriety, that in the beginning the Logos created all things; that Jesus Christ created all things; that the Son of God created all things; and that the Son of man created all things. And hence we conclude that whatever may be true of Christ’ s eternal sonship, the doctrine is not taught in this passage of Scripture. It does not follow, however, as, some have erroneously supposed, that the name, Son of God, is applied to Christ in the Scriptures, with reference merely to his human nature. Certainly not. On the contrary it is always used with special reference to his Divine nature, in the new relations which he sustains to the Father, as our Immanuel. This is the sense in which the name son, as applied to Christ, is used throughout this entire chapter. This is the sense in which Christ himself speaks of his sonship in relation to the Father (John 5:17-27); and this is the sense in which Paul uses the term son, when he contrasts the human nature of Christ with his Divine nature (Romans 1:4). He (Christ), says Paul, “ was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh [that is, according to his human nature] ; and declared to be the Son of God, with power, according to the Spirit of holiness [that is according to his holy spiritual or Divine nature], by his resurrection from the dead.” See also Matthew 16:16. Hebrews 1:2 --whom he hath appointed heir of all things,—Here again the verb (etheeken) is in the aorist (the indefinite past) : whom he appointed Heir of all things. But when did God appoint or constitute his Son the Heir of all things? No doubt this was done in purpose, when in the eternal counsels of Jehovah, it was also de¬creed that the Logos should become the Son of God, incarnate. So it appears from the second Psalm, in which reference is made to this appointment. “ I will declare the decree,” says the Messiah, speaking by the Psalmist, “ Jehovah hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day I have begotten thee. Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance; and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” It is manifest from this passage, that the heirship of Christ is made to depend on his sonship; and that both are the result of God’ s eternal purpose (Ephesians 3:11) ; though it was not until after Christ’ s resurrection, that he assumed in fact, the dignity, glory, and dominion, which belong to him as the Son of God and the Heir of all things (Isaiah 9:6-7; Matthew 28:9; Acts 2:36; Philippians 2:5-11). The Greek word (kleeronomos) here translated heir, means (1) one who acquires anything by lot; and (2) one who inherits anything by the will and appointment of another. In this latter sense, that is, by the appointment of God, Christ, as our elder brother, is made Heir of the universe. And as he has made us (Christians) heirs with himself (Romans 8:17), we too may be said to inherit all things (1 Corinthians 3:21-23). Hebrews 1:2 --by whom also he made the worlds;—that is, by his Son, the Logos, before he became incarnate. (John 1:2.) It would be vain and useless to speculate here, as many commentators have done, on the relations which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, sustained to each other in the work of creation. Such themes are too high for us; and we must not therefore pretend to be wise concern¬ing such matters, beyond what is written. “ Secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children.” (Deuteronomy 29:29.) The proper meaning of the word here rendered worlds (aiones) is still a matter of controversy. The singular number aidn means (1)endless duration; (2) any age or period of time; and (3) by metonymy, anything that lives or exists forever. Some have taken the word, as it occurs here, in its second or metaphorical sense; and they suppose that it means simply the several ages of the world, such as the Patriarchal, the Jewish, and the Christian. But this meaning does not well accord with the context; and in Hebrews 11:3, it is clearly inadmissible. We must therefore look to the third or metonymical meaning of this word, for a sense that will harmonize with the conditions of the context, and the design of the writer. What, then, are the aiones, or aeons, to which Paul here refers? The ancient Gnostics used this word to denote certain emanations from the Deity, of which they supposed that Christ himself was the chief. The Christian Fathers applied it to the angels, both good and bad. And even the Greek philosophers were wont to designate by it their demigods and other beings superior in rank to man. (Mosh. Eccl. Hist. vol. 1, p. 63.) And hence some commentators, as Wolf and Frabicius, suppose that by the word aeons, in this connection, the Apostle means simply the higher created spiritual intelligences. But in Hebrews 9:3, this word manifestly embraces the material universe. The author says, “ By faith we understand that the worlds (adones) were framed by the word of God; so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” That is, God did not, by his Son, make the material and visible universe, as a carpenter makes a house, out of preexisting materials; but, ex nihilo, out of nothing. From this passage, then, it is manifest that the aeons, or at least some of them are visible to the eye. And hence it seems most probable that under this word, the Apostle intends to embrace the entire created universe, both rational and irrational, material and immaterial. But it is the universe, not as the mere aggregate of all things (ta pant a); nor even as the beau¬tifully adorned and organized cosmos (kosmos) ; but as a system of powers and agencies which will endure forever. If this view is correct, then our author not only says with John (John 1:1), that through Christ all things began to be (egeneto), but he goes even further, and indicates the comparative perfection and perpetuity of his works. For he has not only created all things “ which are in Heaven and on Earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, principalities or powers” (Colossians 1:16), but he has also made them aeons, the imperishable elements of a system which, under certain modifications, will endure forever. Hebrews 1:3 --Who being the brightness of his glory,—This has reference to the Son of God, incarnate; in whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9); and through whom the glories of the Father are now so fully revealed to mortals. The word apaugasma means radiance, effulgence, light beaming from a luminous body: and it is here used by the Holy Spirit, as a very beautiful and ex¬pressive metaphor, to indicate an existing relation between the Father and the Son. The analogy may be stated thus: as the radi¬ance of the Sun is to the Sun itself, so is Christ, the Son of God, to the Father. And hence we see the Father through the Son (John 14:9), just as we see the Sun itself through its effulgence. For “ no man,” says John, “ hath seen the Father at any time; [but] the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:18.) This, then, is but a partial presentation of the doctrine of Christ’ s mediation between God and man; a doctrine which abounds in all parts of the Holy Scriptures. Previous to his fall, man, no doubt, sustained to his Maker the most direct and intimate relations. He often saw him, and conversed with him as friend with friend. But sin broke off all such intercourse, and drew a veil of impenetrable darkness between them. Now, no man can see God in his essential glory and live. (Exodus 33:20.) But, nevertheless, through Christ, who is the way, the truth, the resurrec¬tion, and the life (John 11:25 John 14:6), God has graciously given us such a display of his own glorious perfections, as our sin¬ful nature can bear; and such as is, in all respects, best adapted to our present wants and circumstances. Hebrews 1:3 --and the express image of his person,—This, in connection with the last expression, forms a sort of Hebrew parallelism, both the members of which have reference to the Divine nature of Christ. But they serve to describe him, not as the Logos, but as the Son of God incarnate. This view is most in harmony with the object of the Apostle, which is to encourage his brethren to perse¬vere to the end in their fidelity to Christ. And this he does by presenting Christ to us, not as he was in the beginning, but as he is now, “ God manifest in the flesh.” (1 Timothy 3:16.) The word charakter means (1) an engraver, an engraving or stamping instrument; (2) the figure or image made by such an in¬strument, as on coins, wax, or metals; (3) the features of the face or countenance; and (4) any characteristic mark by which one thing is distinguished from another. The word hupostasis, here rendered person, means (1) a foundation, that which stands under and supports a superstructure; (2) well grounded trust, firmness, confidence; (3) the subject-matter of a discourse or narrative; and (4) the essence or substance of anything; that which underlies and supports its phenomena. Previous to the Arian controversy, in the beginning of the fourth century, this word was seldom used in the sense of person (prosopon). But then, Athanasius and other leaders of his party so explained it, because they thought it necessary to make a distinction between the ousia (esence, being) of the Deity, and his hupostasis. They alleged that in the Godhead there could be but one essence, that the essence of the Son is of necessity the same as the essence of the Father and of the Holy Spirit, though they supposed that each might have his own proper personality. And hence they inferred that it is the personality, and not the essence or substance, of Christ which is here compared with that of the Father. But it is now very generally conceded that in this they were in error; and that the word hupostasis here means the essence or substance of the Father; and consequently that the word charak ter expresses the exact likeness of the Son to the Father in all the essential elements of his being, as well as of his personality. When the Father is represented as a Sun, then Christ is called his radiance or effulgence. But when the former is rep-resented to us as a substance whose essential being underlies all the pure and unsullied phenomena of the universe, then the latter is represented as the exact likeness of that substance, being in his own person all the essential rparks and characteristics of the Deity. Is the Father represented as being omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent— infinitely wise, holy, just, and good; so also is the Son. For, says Christ, “ I and my Father are one” (John 10:30); and again he says, “ He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father” (John 14:9). Hebrews 1:3 --and upholding all things by the word of his power,—It is difficult to say what is the exact meaning of the word upholding in this connection. Christ, by the word of his power, created all things in the beginning. “ He spake, and it was done; he com¬manded, and it stood fast.” (Psalms 33:6 Psalms 33:9; compare with Genesis 1:3 Genesis 1:6 Genesis 1:9, and John 1:2.) Is the word upholding used here to denote that Christ, by his word, so supports all things as to keep them still in existence ? Does it mean that unless supported by his word, all things would at once sink into annihilation ? Or does it mean simply that, by his word, he still maintains the order, harmony, and well-being of the whole creation, so as to bear all things forward to their appointed destiny ? The influence, whatever it is, is all-pervading and universal. It extends to all things created, whether they be angels, men, suns, moons, stars, comets, systems, or atoms; so that by it the hairs of our head are numbered (Matthew 10:29-30), and the revolutions of the planets are constantly regulated. This much is certain. But is this all? What is it to create, and what is it to annihilate? What is it to give life, and what is it to take it away ? By what means and agencies are the flowers caused to bloom, and the fields to yield an abundant harvest? Who can properly estimate the mediate and immediate energies and influences by which Christ preserves, upholds, regulates, and governs all things throughout his vast dominions? If he is himself the fountain of life (Psalms 36:9; John 4:14 John 5:26), then who can say how much and how constantly all things animate depend on him for life, and breath, and all things ? If we live, and move, and have our being in him (Acts 17:28), then who is able to estimate aright the degree and the extent of that influence by and through which our adorable Redeemer supports every creature and even every atom to which he has given being? The context does not enable us to answer these questions; and none of the parallel passages throw much light on the subject. True, it is said in Colossians 1:16-17, that “ by him [Christ] were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in Earth, visible and invisible; whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers— all things were created by him and for him; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” But what, again, is the meaning of the word consist (sunesteeke)— or, as it may be rendered subsist, held together? Manifestly, this is a subject which rises far above the conception of finite minds. The expression, “ word of his power ,” is commonly regarded as a Hebraism for “ his powerful word.” But any change in the arrangement of these words would very greatly weaken the force of the expression. It is not by his word in the abstract, but in the concrete as it proceeds from and is supportd by his omnipotent power and energy, that Christ upholds, sustains, and governs all things. The word of God is but an expression of his will, and must always be taken in connection with the power which gave it utterance. God said, “ Let there be light,” because he so willed it; and instantly his creative power was exercised in harmony with his will, as expressed in his word. And just so it is still. Christ has but to speak, and the rains are withheld, the flowers wither, and all nature languishes. Again he speaks, and “ the wilderness and solitary parts of the earth are made glad, and the very deserts rejoice and blossom as the rose.” What further need, then, have we of testimony to prove that Christ is Divine? If he upholds all things by the word of his power; then, indeed, beyond all doubt, he is “ God with us.” Hebrews 1:3 --when he had by himself purged our sins,—Or as it may be more literally rendered, Having by himself made purification for sins. In reading this Epistle, we should never forget that it was written primarily for the Hebrew Christians; and that its words and phrases should therefore be generally interpreted according to Hebrew usage. But in the law of Moses, nothing is made to stand out more prominently than the fact, that moral defilement could be removed only by means of sacrifice; and that without the shedding of blood there could be really no “ purification of sins.” In the law prescribing and regulating the services of the day of atone¬ment, for instance, it is said, “ Then shall he [the High Priest] kill the goat of the sin-offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the Veil; and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the Mercy-seat, and be¬fore the Mercy-seat; and he shall make an atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins; and so shall he do for the Tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness.” (Leviticus 16:15-16.) And again, in the twenty-ninth and thirtieth verses of the same chapter, it is said, “ And this shall be a statute forever unto you; that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger that sojourneth among you: for on that day shall the Priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord.” So God testified to the people through Moses. Without the shedding of blood there could be no atonement (Leviticus 17:11) ; and without an atonement there could be no purification from sin (Leviticus 16:30). But the atonement made by the High Priest, under the Law, was but a shadow of the atonement which Christ made by the offering of his own blood for the sins of the people. (Colossians 2:16; Hebrews 10:1.) “ For what the law [of Moses] could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God [has done by] sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and [by an offering] for sin, has condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness required by the law might be fulfilled in us who walk, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8:3-4.) And hence says John, “ If we walk in the light, as he [God] is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Christ, his Son, cleanses us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7.) And again he says, that Jesus has washed us from our sins in his own blood. (Revelation 1:5.) It was not, then, as the Socinians allege, merely by his moral example and his very instructive teachings, but by “ his own blood,” that our blessed Savior made expiation and purification for the sins of the people. On this point the following very just remarks of Ebrard will be instructive to the reader, and serve to develop still further the pro¬found significance of the words of our text. He says, “ They are entirely wrong who understand the words, to make purification (katharismou poiein), to denote simply moral amelioration; as if the author wished to set forth Christ here as a moral teacher, who, by precept and example, excited men to amendment. . . . The whole law of purification, as given by God to Moses, rested on the assumption, that our nature, as sinful and guilt-laden, is not capa¬ble of coming into immediate contact with our holy God and Judge. The mediation between man and God, in that Most Holy Place separated from the people, was revealed in three forms: (1) in sacrifices; (2) in the priesthood; and (3) in the Levitical laws of purity. Sacrifices were typical acts or means of purification from guilt; priests were the agents for accomplishing these acts, and were not themselves accounted purer than the rest of the people, having consequently to bring offerings for their own sins, before they offered for those of the people. And lastly, Levitical purity was the condition which was attained positively by sacrifice and worship; and negatively by avoiding Levitical pollution— the condition in which the people were enabled, by means of the priests, to come into relation with God without dying (Deuteronomy 5:26) : the result of the cultus which was past, and the postulate of that which was to come. So that that which purified was sacrifice; and the purification was the removal of guilt. . . . And hence a Christian Jew would never, on reading katharismou poiein (to make purification), think of what we call moral amelioration; which if not springing out of the living ground of a heart reconciled to God, is mere self-deceit, and only external avoidance of evident transgression. But the purification (katharismos) which Christ brought in, would, in the sense of our author and his readers, be understood only of that gracious atonement for all guilt of sin of all mankind, which Christ, our Lord and Savior, has com¬pleted for us by his sinless sufferings and death; and out of which flows forth to us, as from a fountain, all power to love in return, all love to Him our heavenly pattern, and all hatred of sin which caused his death.” It matters not, then, whether the words “ by himself” (dia heau tou) are genuine or spurious. If they were not expressed in the original, they are at least fairly and necessarily implied in it. This may be clearly shown by a reference to many parallel passages in both the Old and New Testaments. See, for instances, 7: 27; 9: 12, 26; 10: 10; John 1:29; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 3:5. Hebrews 1:3 --sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:—The word majesty is used here to denote God himself; it means simply the Majestic One. “ On the right hand” is a phrase indicating the place of highest honor and authority. See 1 Kings 2:19; Psalms 45:9 Psalms 80:17 Psalms 110:1; Matthew 20:20-23 Matthew 26:64, etc. And “ on high” denotes a sphere far above all created heavens (Ephesians 4:10), where now dwells our Elder Brother filled with all the fullness of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9). In the beginning, “ he was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God” ; but, for the sake of redeeming mankind from the dominion of sin, death, and the grave, “ he made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was found in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and be¬came obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in Heaven, and things in Earth, and things under the Earth; and that every tongue should confess that Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:6-11.) Now, therefore, all authority in Heaven and on Earth is given to him (Matthew 28:18); and he will reign over the entire universe (God the Father only excepted), until he shall have put down all rule and all au¬thority and power (1 Corinthians 15:24). Then, and not till then, will he deliver up the kingdom to the Father, “ that God may be all and in all.” How infinitely glorious, then, is the Son of God, our Immanuel, through whom the Father has spoken to us “ in the last of these days” ! He is the Heir of all things; the Creator of all things; the effulgence of the Father’ s glory, and the exact likeness of his substance. He upholds all things by the word of his power. And having in infinite condescension and love made expiation and purification for our sins by the sacrifice of himself, he now reigns over the entire universe as King of kings and Lord of lords. These are all plain and simple words; but who is able to comprehend their full and proper import ? Under such thoughts of the Infinite, the brain staggers, and the mind itself becomes bewildered as it tries in vain to comprehend the extent and magnitude of their immeasurable fullness. But here, as in other cases, “ the Spirit helps our infirmities.” Knowing our incapacity to comprehend these matters aright, it has still further amplified and explained them in the fol¬lowing paragraph. THE SON OF GOD WITH ANGELSHeb_1:4-14 The object of the Apostle in this paragraph is twofold: (1) to develop and illustrate still further the infinite perfections of Jesus as the Son of God; and (2) to show as a consequence of his many excellencies, the paramount obligations that we are all under to ob¬serve and respect the revelation which God has so graciously made to us through him. This will appear more obvious as we proceed with the consideration of the several points that are brought out in the following comparisons. Hebrews 1:4 --Being made so much better than the angels,—This clause is very nearly related to the last part of the preceding verse; and it is added for the purpose of defining and illustrating more fully the infinite power, majesty, and dominion of our Redeemer. The reference here is still of course chiefly, though not exclusively, to the Divine nature of Christ. It is not of the man Jesus alone, nor of the Logos alone, but of the Logos incarnate, that our author speaks in this, and in the following verses of this chapter. And be it ob¬served that here, as well as in the clause immediately preceding, the exaltation of Christ is spoken of as a result and consequence of his humiliation and his obedience unto death. The idea of the Apostle is, not that he was made better than the angels by his in-carnation, but that having by himself made purification for our sins, and having been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of them that slept, he then became (genoemnos) in rank, dignity, and au¬thority, superior (kreitton) to them: he was then exalted to a sphere of glory, dignity, and authority, which is as far above that of the highest angels, as the name which he inherited is superior to theirs. Hebrews 1:4 --as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.—Whenever God gives a name to anyone, he gives it in harmony with the rank and character of the person so designated. Previous to his incarnation, Jesus was called the Logos (John 1:1), because he was himself both the medium and the substance of all the revelations which God had ever made to fallen man. But after his resurrection, when by virtue of his sufferings and death he was made the Heir of all things, it became necessary that he should receive a name corresponding with his new rank and official dignity, as the First-born from the dead (Colossians 1:18), the Begin¬ning of the creation of God (Revelation 3:14)— then it was that by right of inheritance he was called the Son of God. This name, as the Apostle proceeds to show, indicates that Christ, in his new re¬lations, is far superior to the angels. Hebrews 1:5 --For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?—That God the Father said this to Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 1:20), is evident from the second Psalm, and also from Paul’ s address at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13:33-34). But never was this name given in its full and proper meaning (John 5:18) to any of the angels. True, indeed, they are all called sons of God (Job 33:7) ; and so also are pious men and women called “ the sons and daugh¬ters of the Lord God Almighty” (2 Corinthians 6:18). But no mere creature, however pure and exalted, was ever so singled out and distinguished from all others, by the Father of spirits. This is the peculiar honor of Him who is, not only one with the Father (John 10:30), and who is himself God equal with the Father (John 5:18), but who is also the First-begotten from the dead, the Prince of the kings of the Earth” (Revelation 1:5). On him this title was repeatedly bestowed by the Father, with reference to both his incarnation and his resurrection. See Psalms 2:7; Matthew 3:17 Matthew 17:5; Acts 13:33, etc. But in this case, the Spirit refers particularly to his resurrection from the dead, when the Father not only gave him a name indicative of his Divinity and oneness with him¬self, but also at the same time exalted him “ far above all principal¬ity, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come; and put all things under his feet, and give him to be the Head over all things to the Church, which is his body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all” (Ephesians 1:21-23) ; angels, and authorities, and powers being made subject unto him” (1 Peter 3:22). Hebrews 1:5 --And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?—This is a quotation from 2 Samuel 7:14, introduced here for the purpose of illustrating the very near, dear, and intimate re¬lations which exist between the Father and the Son; with the view of showing still further the very great superiority of the Son over the angels. But there is an apparent difficulty in applying this passage to Christ; for it is quite obvious from the context, that pri¬marily it had reference to Solomon. David, it seems, had pur¬posed in his heart to build a house for the Lord God of Israel. But while he was meditating on the matter, God sent Nathan the Prophet to him, saying, “ When thy days are fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy Fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, who shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will his Father, and he shall be my Son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.” There can be no doubt, then, that this whole passage refers to Solomon; and so Solomon himself understood it, as we learn from 1 Kings 8:17-21. How, then, can it with propriety be ap¬plied to Christ ? It is usual with many commentators to explain such passages on the principle of accommodation. But this will not do. No exposition of this passage of Scripture is at all admissible which does not make its meaning extend through and beyond Solomon to him who is, par excellence, the Seed of David according to the flesh; and who, as such, is to sit on David’ s throne, “ to order it, and to establish it, with justice and with judgment, from henceforth even forever.” (Isaiah 9:7.) And hence the only way of explaining it properly is on the principle of double reference. As a knowledge of this principle is essential to a proper understanding of much that is contained in this Epistle, the learned reader will excuse the following attempt to make it plain and intelligible to even mere beginners in the study of sacred literature. It is one of the very few principles of interpretation, which are peculiar to the Holy Scriptures. Generally, the Bible is to be interpreted like other books. But in the use of this principle, it is unlike any and every other document. The nearest approach to it may be found in the instructions which a skillful educator gives to his pupils by means of pictures and diagrams. For the purpose of illustrating the unknown or the abstract, he draws a visible outline or representation of it, by means of which he is enabled to impart to his pupils a more accurate knowledge of the object to be illustrated than he could possibly communicate to them by any mere combination of words and sentences. In his verbal remarks and explanations, he may sometimes refer exclusively to the pictorial illustration; and sometimes he may refer only to the object or thing that is to be illustrated; but not unfrequently he will pur¬posely so arrange his remarks as to make them applicable to both the sign and the thing signified. He presents the picture to the eye of sense, as a sort of medium through which the eye of the under¬standing may perceive more clearly and distinctly the various qual¬ities and properties of what he wished to describe and illustrate. Very much in this way has God explained to mankind the more abstract and recondite realities of the economy of redemption. To do this successfully in the early ages of the world, in any way and by any means, was a very difficult problem; a problem which God alone was then capable of solving. But all things are possible with him. He resolved to give to mankind a revelation of his purpose of mercy concerning them; and he resolved to do it in such a way as would not only be best adapted to the purposes of instruction; but also, it would seem, in such a way that it could never be successfully imitated or counterfeited by any impostor. For this purpose, he called Abraham out of Ur of Chaldea, and made him the Father of two families; the one according to the flesh, and the other according to the Spirit. The former was related to the latter, as the type is related to the antitype; or as the picture is related to the reality which it is designed to represent. And hence it is that many things said of the former in the Old Testament, have reference also to the latter. Sometimes, indeed, there are promises of an exclusive nature, made in reference to each of these. But not unfrequently what is said of the type, has reference also in a still higher sense, to the antitype. Of this we have many impressive examples in nearly all the books of the Old Testament. In the seventy-second Psalm, for example, David has given us a most graphic and interesting description of the peaceful and prosperous reign of Solomon; but throughout this beautiful ode there is also constant reference to a greater than Solomon. And just so it is in the quotation made from 2 Samuel 7:12-16. The primary reference here is to Solomon; and in part of the narrative it is to Solomon only; for certainly God would never, even hypothetically, impute iniquity to Christ. But in the expression, “ I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son,” God speaks both of Solomon as a type and of Christ in a far higher sense as the antitype. The relation of Solomon’ s sonship was, in fact, to that of Christ, just as the shadow is to the substance (Colossians 2:17) ; so that the meaning of the passage, properly understood, is in perfect harmony with the sentiment of the preceding clause. They both serve to present to us our blessed Savior in a relation that is peculiar to himself. Hebrews 1:6 --And again, when he bringeth, etc.— To what does the ad¬verb again (palin) here refer? Is it used here, as in the last part of the fifth verse, merely to indicate that this is another citation from the Old Testament? Or does it refer to a second introduc¬tion of the First-born into the world? On this point the critics are about equally divided. It is, however, generally conceded that the latter view is most in harmony with the Greek idiom and construc¬tion: and on this ground it is advocated by De Wette, Liinemann, Tholuck, Delitzsch, Alford, and most of the ancient interpreters. But it is urged as an objection to this interpretation, that our author has not spoken elsewhere, in the preceding verses, of the first introduction of the First-born into the world; and that it is therefore not probable that he would here refer to the second, as such. And hence the former view (that the adverb again serves merely to introduce another quotation) is, on the whole, preferred by Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bleek, Ebrard, Stuart, and others, who think that there is really nothing in the Greek construction which seriously militates against this interpretation. According to their notion, the passage may be freely rendered as follows: “ But when, on another occasion, God speaks of bringing the First-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” And according to the second mode of constructing the ad¬verb, the meaning runs thus: “ But when God speaks of bringing the First-born a second time into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” To my mind there is nothing in the latter rendering which is in any way inconsistent with either the Apostle’ s reasoning in the case, or with the general tenor of the Psalm from which he quotes. And I therefore see no reason for departing from what is generally conceded to be the most simple and natural construction of the Greek text. The First-born refers of course to Christ. The same word (prototokos) occurs in Colossians 1:18 and Revelation 1:5; in both of which passages, it means “ the First-born from the dead” ; having refer¬ence to the fact that Jesus was the first who rose from the dead to die no more. Others, as Lazarus (John 11), had risen before him; but not as he rose, above death and superior to it. They were still under the dominion of death, and soon returned again to the dust to see corruption. But Jesus rose a conqueror over death, and also over him who has the power of death. (2: 14.) And to this same thought there may be some allusion in our text, and also in such parallel passages as Psalms 89:27; Romans 8:29; and Colossians 1:15. But in these cases, the primary reference is to the laws and customs of primogeniture; according to which the first-born was entitled to preeminence in all things. “ For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell” ; and “ that in all things he should have the preeminence.” (Colossians 1:18-19.) Hebrews 1:6 --into the world,—The term world (oichoumenee) means properly the inhabited earth; the habitable globe. But to what bring¬ing in of the First-born does the Apostle here refer ? Some say to his incarnation (Chrysostom and Calvin) ; some to his entering on his public ministry, after his baptism, when the Holy Spirit de¬scended on him like a dove, and the Father himself proclaimed from Heaven in the audience of the people, “ This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” ; some say that the reference is to his resurrection from the dead (Brentius and A. Clark); some, to his coming in power to set up his Kingdom on Earth, on the Pen-tecost which next followed after his resurrection (Grotius and Wetstein); and some again, to his second personal coming, when he will raise the dead, purify the Earth by fire, judge the world, and deliver up the Kingdom to the Father (De Wette, Lunemann, Tholuck, Hofmann, Delitzsch, Alford, etc.). These several hypotheses, save perhaps the second, have all been maintained by men of learning and ability, and I therefore think it proper to introduce them to the reader. But to my mind, it is evident that it is to Christ’ s coming in power to set up his Kingdom and begin his reign on Earth, on the fiftieth day after his resurrection ; and that it is to this alone, that the Holy Spirit here refers. To this view, I am led chiefly by the following considerations: (1.) It is most in harmony with the construction and scope of both the text and the context. The adverb again (palin), as we have seen, indicates most naturally a return of the First-born into the world. And the scope of the Apostle’ s argument clearly indicates, that this second manifestation of the Lord Jesus would be with great power and authority. When he came into the world the first time (Hebrews 10:5), he came in humility and weakness (Luke 2) ; for then it was necessary that he should by his own death make purification for sins (Hebrews 1:3). But having done this once for all, it was then fit that he should enter on his mediatorial reign over Heaven and Earth; which he did on the Pentecost which next fol¬lowed after his resurrection. To this reign our author has con¬stant reference in this part of his argument. His object here is, not to show what Christ was previous to his coronation; nor is it to show what he will be after that he shall have delivered up the Kingdom to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24); but it is to show what he is now, and what are now our obligations to love, serve, and obey him in all things. And hence we are required by the force of the Apostle’ s argument to understand this second coming of Christ as having reference to the beginning of his mediatorial reign. (2.) This view is most in harmony with the scope of the ninety-seventh Psalm, from which this citation, in proof of Christ’ s su¬periority over the angels, is made. The Psalmist begins by calling on the whole Earth, even on the isles of the Gentiles, to be glad and rejoice on account of the universal reign of Jehovah (verse 1). In the second paragraph (verses 2-5), he describes the majesty of Jehovah as the Lord of the whole Earth; speaks of the justice and righteousness of his administration, and of the awful manifesta¬tions of his power and judgments, before which the Earth melts and his enemies are consumed. In the third (verses 6, 7), he speaks of the manifestations of God’ s glory, as it were, from the very heavens; predicts the embarrassment and confusion of all idolaters; and then calls on all in authority, all Eloheem, whether men or angels, to fall down and worship him. In the fourth (verses 8, 9), he speaks of the joy of all the saints, on witnessing the judgments and the glorious exaltation of their sovereign Lord. And finally (verses 10-12), he admonishes the pious to abstain from all evil; and encourages them to trust in the Lord and give thanks to him, on account of his gracious care over them, and the great abundance of the provisions which he has made for them. The whole Psalm, therefore, clearly indicates that it has reference to the long expected reign of the Messiah. And this is the view that was taken of it by many of the ancient Rabbis, as well as by most Christian expositors. Raschi and Kimchi say that all the Psalms, from 93 to 101, refer to the reign of the Messiah. It is no objection to this interpretation, that the universal reign of Jehovah is the proper subject of this beautiful and triumphal ode; and that the name of the Messiah does not, in fact, occur in it. This is equally true of many other passages in the Old Testament, which, in the New, are applied directly to Christ. Take, for exam¬ple, the following from Isaiah 40:3-5 : “ The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be ex¬alted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it to¬gether ; for the mother of the Lord hath spoken it.” Here, too, as well as in the ninety-seventh Psalm, it is Jehovah Eloheem that is spoken of by the Prophet. And yet, in Matthew 3:3, this passage is applied to Christ; who, in Jeremiah 23:6, is called Jehovah our righ¬teousness. But it is alleged by some, that our author cannot have reference here to the ninety-seventh Psalm; because, say they, the proper rendering of the last clause of the sixth verse is, “ Worship him all ye gods, and not all ye angels (angeloi).” This is plausible; but it is by no means a valid objection against the view taken. For in the Septuagint the word Eloheem is rendered angels in this very passage; and better still the same word Eloheem in Psalms 8:5, is by the author of our Epistle rendered angels in 2:7. “ Thou hast made him a little lower,” he says, “ than the angels.” Here the word rendered angels is in the Hebrew Eloheem, the same as that which occurs in Psalms 97:7. So also Philo says, “ The angels are the servants of God; and they are esteemed actual gods by those who are in toil and slavery.” (Philo on Fugitives, Section 38.) It is wholly unnecessary, therefore, to refer to Deuteronomy 32:43, for the quotation given in our text. True, indeed, the identical words, “ Let all the angels of God worship him,” are there found in the Septuagint; but they are wholly wanting in the original Hebrew; and are of course without canonical authority. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 1:2. Last days means the closing days of the Jewish Dispensation, since that was when Jesus lived in his personal ministry. The Son gave the words of the Father to the apostles (John 17:8) and they to us, and that is the way in which we of this age have been spoken to of God. Appointed heir of all things. Heir is used in the sense of possessor (John 17:10) because God turned all things pertaining to the new dispensation over to Him (Matthew 28:18). By whom also he made the worlds. This refers to the cooperation which Jesus showed in all of God's works. See the plural "us" in Genesis 1:26 Genesis 3:22; also read John 1:3. Hebrews 1:3. Thayer defines brightness by "reflected brightness," meaning that when Jesus was on earth he reflected the glory of his Father. Express image is from which Thayer defines at this place, "A mark or figure burned in or stamped on, an impression; the exact expression (the image) of any person or thing, marked likeness, precise reproduction in every respect." God is not composed of substance as that word is commonly used, hence the word person as in the King James Version is a good translation. It means that when Christ was on earth, he had the form or image of his Father. That is one reason why He said, "he that hath seen me hath seen the father" (John 14:9). All of this agrees with the words of God that the man was to be created in "our" (God's and Christ's) image (Genesis 1:26). Upholding all things by the word of his power. All power (or authority) being given to Christ (Matthew 28:18), the arrangement of all things pertaining to the new system of salvation was disposed of according to His will and direction. By himself purged our sins. This took place when He died on the cross, thereby making the supreme sacrifice that was sufficient to purge all men from their sins who would accept it. By the death on the cross, the plan was made completely efficient, which is why He said "it is finished" (John 19:30). By coming alive from the grave, Jesus validated the purchase price of man's salvation, and then He was ready to return to his Father. He did so and was seated at the right hand of the throne of God, having been welcomed by the angelic hosts in the city of everlasting glory. (See the wonderful reception given Christ in Psalms 24:7-10.) Hebrews 1:4. Better does not apply to the personal character, for the angels who are living in heaven are perfect in that respect. Thayer defines the original word, "It is more advantageous." The meaning of the phrase is that Jesus was given a greater advantage in the great plan of God than the angels. The word excellent is to be understood also in the sense of advantage. By inheritance means that Jesus received this mentioned advantage through his relationship with God. It was not merely given to him as a man might see fit to give something to a stranger, but this was his by right of being the Son of God; he inherited it. While the favors or honors that the angels enjoy were given to them by the Creator of all things. Hebrews 1:5. The more excellent name mentioned in the preceding verse is that of Son, as we may observe by the argument of this verse. God never said Thou art my San to a single one of the angels, as he did to Jesus. This day have I begotten thee occurred when Mary conceived of God by the services of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:27-38). The angels were not brought into being by any personal relations between God and another being as was Jesus, but was created directly by the power of God. The rest of this verse restates the same relationship already mentioned. Hebrews 1:6. When Jesus was born of the virgin Mary, God directed all the angels to worship him. That word in the Greek New Testament comes from several different words, and has a variety of meanings, depending on the connection in which it is used. In the present passage it means to "do homage" or manifest great respect for one. There are myriads of angels, and all of them were told to render homage to the babe in Bethlehem. The argument the apostle is making is that if such great beings as the angels were commanded to acknowledge the superiority of the babe that was laid in a manger, He certainly is to be ascribed a great giver of law. (If angels worshipped the humble babe thus posed in the city of David, common mortals like us should regard it an honor to be permitted the act of worshiping him today, when He is sitting at his Father's right hand, reigning as King of kings and Lord of lords.) Hebrews 1:7. But even this contrast with angels would not mean so much, unless the angels themselves were important beings. Accordingly, Paul says God makes his angels ministering spirits, thus being very important personages in the great scheme of grace. Hebrews 1:8. The superiority of Christ over all other beings (except his Father) is still the main subject. Thy throne 0 God. Jesus is called God because that is the family name of the Godhead. He is called God in Acts 20:28, where his blood is mentioned as the purchasing price of the church. The throne of Christ is declared by his Father to be for ever and ever because He is to reign to the end of the age (1 Corinthians 15:24-26). A scepter is a rod or instrument that a ruler holds that is a token of his authority. The scepter connected with the kingdom of Christ is a righteous one, because it requires the citizens of the kingdom to live a life of righteousness only. Hebrews 1:9. Loved righteousness and hated iniquity. This phrase expresses two completely opposite terms. Hated is from a Greek word that sometimes has a milder meaning than it does here. In the present passage it is defined by Thayer, "To hate, pursue with hatred, detest." Because Christ had these qualities, He was given the great honor that the verse states. The specification, God, even thy God, is made because the name "God" is the family name of the Deity, and Christ had that name by virtue of his being a member of the family. But in the work assigned to Him as head of the kingdom, He was to be a king and the Father was to be God over him (1 Corinthians 11:3). In old times it was customary to anoint kings with oil at their coronation. Christ was figuratively anointed with the oil of gladness or exultation. Above thy fellows means that Christ was exalted higher than any other ruler that had ever been on earth. Hebrews 1:10. This and the following two verses are quoted from Psalms 102:24-27. David was the famous ancestor of Christ, yet he recognizes him as his Lord (Matthew 22:43-45). The work of creation is ascribed to Christ because he was associated with his Father in that work. It is so taught in John 1:1-3, and it is indicated likewise by the plural pronoun "us" in Genesis 1:26 Genesis 3:22. Hebrews 1:11. The main subject of this epistle is the superiority of Christ over all other persons or things (except his Father). The works of creation, in the making of which He had a part, will cease to be even though He will continue. They means the things of creation mentioned in the preceding verse. Wax old as cloth, a garment is an illustration drawn from a garment that has reached the end of its usefulness. When a garment gets into that condition, it is discarded and treated as the next verse states. Hebrews 1:12. A vesture is a covering piece, to be folded up or discarded when no longer useful. Changed is from ALLASSO which Thayer defines, "To exchange one thing for another." This is said with reference to the earth and the other parts of the material universe related to it. They are finally to be discarded and dissolved, and other things will be used in their place. (See 2 Peter 3:10-13; Revelation 21:1.) Thou art the same. Not that Christ will never change his position in the great plan of God, for He will cease to be the king after the judgment day (1 Corinthians 15:24-27). But He will never cease to be (as will the material universe), and in that sense His years shall not fail. Hebrews 1:13. The second part of this verse is a quotation from Psalms 110:1, in which David states something that God said of Christ. The point that Paul is making is that since nothing like this was ever said to any one of the angels, Christ is to be regarded as superior to them. Making His enemies his footstool is equivalent to subjecting all things to him, which is the thing predicted in 1 Corinthians 15:25-26. Hebrews 1:14. Unless the angels also are important beings, there would not be much significance in being made superior to them. Paul recognizes this point by the statement made here in question form. Angels are among the instruments or agencies which God uses, in his treatment of and care for His own. (Read the following passages. Genesis 24:7; Daniel 6:22; Matthew 2:13; Acts 12:11 Acts 27:23.) Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 2DANGER OF WHAT GOD HAS TO US THROUGH HIS SONHeb_2:1-4 Hebrews 2:1 ---Therefore we ought, etc.—The word therefore (dia ton to) is illative, and forms the hinge of the Apostle’ s argument. It is the connecting link between the conclusion which follows, and all that he has said in the preceding chapter, touching the revelation which God has made to us through his only begotten Son. He argues that since it is an indisputable fact, that God has spoken to us by his Son, who is himself the Heir of all things, the Creator of all things, and the Upholder of all things; the brightness of the Fa¬ther’ s glory and the express image of his essence; and since he is himself the expiator of our guilt, endowed with all the attributes of Divinity, and infinitely exalted above all angels, it follows, of course, that “ we should give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard” from the Father through him and concern¬ing him. The Apostle proceeds here on the assumption that wher¬ever much is given, there also much is always justly expected and required. (Luke 12:47-48; Matthew 11:20-24.) And hence he mea¬sures the greater extent of our obligations to give heed to the things spoken, both by the greater fullness of these revelations and also by the greater dignity of him through whom they have been made to us. According to our author, there is resting on every man who hears the Gospel, an obligation to receive and obey it, that is commensurate with the infinitely exalted character of Christ.. Hebrews 2:1 ---the things which we have heard,—By these are meant simply the facts, precepts, promises, warnings, and threatenings of the Gospel. They are of course very numerous; but the following brief summary of the main points may suffice for illustration. It seems, then, (1) that God made man upright, in his own image and after his own likeness; pure, holy, and happy. (Genesis 1:26-27; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:9-10.) (2) That Adam fell by disobedience, bringing death upon himself and on his entire posterity. (Genesis 3:1-19; Romans 5:12 Romans 5:18-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22.) (3)That in this fallen condition, man was morally helpless, unable to do anything whatever either to please God (Romans 8:8), or to save himself from the incurred penalty of God’ s violated law. (Romans 3:20 Romans 8:13-25.) (4) That while mankind were all in this deplorable and helpless condition, God mercifully interposed in their behalf, and provided for them a remedy; a remedy perfectly suited to their wants; and which at the same time meets the requirements of his own government so far that he can now be just in justifying everyone who truly believes in Jesus. (John 3:16; Romans 3:21-31.) (5) That for the purpose of perfecting this plan of Divine mercy, and carrying it into effect for the salvation of the world, the Son of God himself became incarnate (John 1:14) ; tasted death for every man (2 Corinthians 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:6); was buried and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4); reascended to the heavens (Acts 1:9) ; offered his own blood in the Holy of holies not made with hands (Hebrews 9:12 Hebrews 9:24) ; and was then crowned Lord of all, “ angels, and authorities, and powers being made subject to him” (1 Peter 3:22). (6) That he then, according to his promise, sent the Holy Spirit to qualify the Apostles for the work of their mission (John 16:13; Acts 1:8) ; to convince the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment (John 16:7-11) ; and to dwell in his saints as their comforter and sanctifier (Romans 8:11; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 4:18), helping their infirmities (Romans 8:26), and strengthening them with might even into the inner man (Ephesians 3:16). (7) That salvation from all past personal transgressions is now promised to all who truly believe in Christ; confess his name before men, repent of their sins; and who, in obedience to the authority of Christ, are baptized into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Romans 10:10.) (8) That all who are thus received into the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, and who continue to give all diligence in walking soberly and righteously and godly in this present world, will ultimately be admitted into the everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-11.) (9) That those who neglect the Gospel, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, will be finally banished with an everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power. (2 Thessalonians 1:9; Revelation 20:11-15.) Such is a very brief summary of the things which we have heard from God through his Son and his own chosen Apostles; and to which our author would have us give the more earnest heed. Hebrews 2:1 ---lest at any time we should let them slip.—Or rather, lest perchance we should be drifted away from them (pararruomen aor. 2, sub. pass); “ as a ship,” says Luther, “ shoots away into de¬struction.” Our author represents us all as on a stream, the natu¬ral tendency of which is to carry us downward to ruin. If it is any one’ s purpose to go there with the devil and his angels, it is an easy matter for him to do so. No exertion on his part is at all necessary. Like a man that is afloat above the falls of Niagara, he has but to fold his arms, give himself up to the natural current, and very soon he will be beyond the reach of mercy. But the man who would reach the haven of eternal rest must of necessity make an effort. He must lay hold of all the means and helps which God has graciously provided and offered to him in the Gospel; or other¬wise, he must soon perish forever. “ Strive,” says Christ, “ to enter in at the strait gate; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in and shall not be able.” (Luke 13:24.) Why not? Because they do not strive until it is too late; until they have allowed themselves to be carried away beyond the proper limits of safety and security. “ When once the Master of the house,” he says, “ is risen up, and has shut the door,” then all cries for help and mercy will be in vain. See Luke 13:25-28; Proverbs 1:24-28; and Matthew 25:11-13. And hence the necessity of making our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10) by now giving diligent heed to the things which we have heard. — Hebrews 2:2 ---For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast,—The Apostle now proceeds to give a reason for what he has so strongly urged in the preceding verse, viz., that we should give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard from God through his own well beloved Son. This he insists we should all do in view of our greater responsibilities. For if the law which God gave to the Israelites through the ministration of angels was steadfast, and every positive transgression (parabosis) of it, and even every mishearing or neglect (parachioee) of it received a just recompense (misthopodosia, a paying off of wages, a requital in the sense of either reward or punishment), then, how, he asks, can we escape unpunished, if we neglect the fuller and more gracious means of salvation which God has offered to us in the Gospel? This mode of reasoning is what logicians call “ a minori ad majus;” from the less to the greater. The argument rests on the assumption that an increase of light and privileges implies also an increase of respon¬sibility on our part. That “ the word spoken by angels” means the Sinaitic Law, is quite obvious from sundry other passages of Scripture as well as from the context. Paul, for example, writing to the Galatians, says, the Law “ was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator” (Gal. 3: 19); that is, it was promulgated through the intervention of angels, and by the hand of Moses acting as a mediator between God and the people. See also Deut. 33: 2; Psalm 68: 17; and Acts 7: 53. It is evident, therefore, that angels were present at the giv¬ing of the Law from Mount Sinai, and that they performed some part in its promulgation, as the Jewish Doctors believed and taught. (Joseph. Ant. 15: 5, 3). But in what that part consisted is not so clear. Nor is it at all necessary that we should understand this. (Deut. 29: 29.) It is revealed that the angels served as God’ s ministers, in some capacity, in the giving of the Law from Sinai; and it is further revealed that every objective transgression of that Law, and even every subjective neglect of it, received its just pun¬ishment. The man, for instance, who was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath-day, was stoned to death (Num. 15: 32-36) ; and the man who would presumptuously neglect to hear the instructions and warnings of the Priest, touching the requirements of the Law, even that man was to be put to death (Deut. 17: 12, and 27: 26). This, then, being so, how fearfully great are our responsibil¬ities under the superior light of the Gospel; and how very pene¬trating and heart-searching is the following interrogatory. Hebrews 2:3 ---How shall we escape, etc.—In what way, and by what means shall we escape the just recompense of our neglect? If there was no way by which the Jews could escape under the Old Economy, then how shall we escape under the superior light and increased responsibilities of the New? This question has been on file for the last eighteen hundred years; but as yet no satisfactory answer has been given to it. Indeed, the Apostle did not propose it as a prob­lem for solution. It is another case of erotesis in which the author affirms with strong emphasis the utter impossibility of any one’ s being saved who neglects the means of salvation which God has so graciously offered to us in the Gospel. The pronoun “ we” in this clause is emphatic, and comprehends all who have heard and re­ceived the offer of salvation through Christ. The object of the Apostle here is, not to contrast any one class of Jews with another, or any one class of Christians with another, but to contrast all Jews as subjects of the Old Covenant with all Christians as sub­jects of the New Covenant; and that, too, for the purpose of show­ing the greater obligations of the latter, and the consequent dan­gers of neglecting the provisions of the Gospel. And hence he in­cludes in this strong interrogation all the professed followers of Christ, whether they be of Jewish or of Gentile origin. Hebrews 2:3 ---if we neglect so great salvation;— It is not necessary that we should positively reject or despise God’ s offers of mercy and means of grace, in order to seal our final condemnation. To effect this, it is enough that we simply neglect (ameleesantes) the means of sal­vation which God has provided. “ He that believeth not on me,” says Christ, “ is condemned already, because he has not believed on the only-begotten Son of God.” (John 3: 18.) And again he says, “ He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3 : 36.) In all such passages the word believe implies not only faith subjectively considered, but also the obedience of faith as illustrated in the eleventh chapter of our Epistle. And hence Christ says on another occasion, “ He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathered not with me, scat­tered abroad.” (Matt. 12: 30.) A strict observance of all the commandments and ordinances of God, is therefore indispensable, not as a means of procuring salvation, but as a condition of enjoying what Christ has himself freely purchased for us with his own blood. There is an implied contrast here between the salvation which was offered to the Jews, on the conditions of legal obedience; and that which is now offered to all, on the conditions of Gospel obedi­ence. The former was relative; but the latter is absolute. The former was procured through carnal ordinances imposed on the people till the time of reformation; but the latter has been procured for us through the blood of Christ. The former was temporal; the latter is eternal. And hence it is properly called a “ great salva­tion,” involving as it does the free and full pardon of sin; the justi­fication and sanctification of the sinner; the redemption of the body from the corruption of the grave; and the eternal glorification of both the soul and the body in the everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Hebrews 2:3 ---which began to be spoken by the Lord.— The author does not mean that this salvation was wholly unknown to the ancients. The good news of redemption through Jesus Christ was enigmatically suggested even to our first parents before they were expelled from Eden (Gen. 3: 15); and the subject was afterward more fully re­vealed to Abraham (Gen. 12: 3; Gal. 3: 8) and the Prophets (Isa. 53; 1 Pet. 1: 10-12.) Nevertheless, it is certainly true in a very important sense that Christ by his appearing “ brought life and im­mortality to light through the Gospel.” (2 Tim. 1: 10.) He was the first to reveal to the people by his teachings, his sufferings, and his triumphs, the true economy of the grace of God which “ bring- eth salvation to all men.” And hence it is that the most ignorant subject of his Kingdom knows more of the way of life and salva­tion through the atoning blood of Christ and the renewing influ­ence of the Holy Spirit, than did even John the Baptist. (Matthew 11:11) How far Christ himself, while on Earth, revealed to his dis­ciples the plan of redemption, it may be difficult to say. But from sundry passages of Scripture (Matthew 28:20; John 14:26), it seems probable that he instructed them in nearly all, if not in quite all of the laws and principles of his Kingdom. And hence our au­thor says that this salvation which “ at the first began to be spoken by the Lord” was afterward “ confirmed unto us by them that heard him” ; that is, by the Apostles and Prophets who were eye and ear witnesses of his personal ministry. (Acts 1:8 Acts 1:21-22;. 1 John 1:1-3.)From this remark, it is inferred by Bleek, Alford, and others, that Paul is not the author of this Epistle. For it is manifest, they say, that the writer classifies himself with those who had not heard the Lord, in contrast with those who had heard him. But it ap­pears from Galatians 1:11-24, that Paul had not only heard and seen Jesus, but that he had also actually received from him his commis­sion and all his qualifications as an Apostle. This is a plausible objection against the Pauline authorship of the Epistle; but that it is not valid, will appear from the following considerations: (1) It seems probable that in the above remark, the author has reference only to Christ’ s personal ministry on Earth; and consequently that he speaks here only of those who saw Christ, heard him, handled him, and conversed with him, dur­ing the period of his earthly ministry. If so, then Paul may in fact have belonged to that class of Christ’ s ministers who did not hear and see him during the period to which our author refers. At all events, he certainly did not hear him in the full and pregnant sense in which the word hear is used in this connection. (2) It is not the author’ s purpose here to vindicate his own authority as an Apostle, or to give prominence to himself in any way; but just the reverse. He aims simply to vindicate the claims and the authority of the Gospel, and while doing so to keep himself in the back­ground as much as possible. And hence by a common figure of rhetoric (anacoenosis), he seems to have purposely associated him­self with his readers, as he often does in other parts of the Epistle (Hebrews 3:14 Hebrews 4:1-3 Hebrews 4:11 Hebrews 4:14-16 Hebrews 6:1 Hebrews 6:3, etc.), in order that he might have as strong a hold on their sympathies as possible. See Introduction Section I. Div. 2: 2. Hebrews 2:4 God also bearing them witness,— God himself is ever pres­ent with whatever agents or ministers he employs to work out any given end or purpose. “ My presence,” said he to Moses, “ shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest.” (Exodus 33:14.) “ I am not alone,” says Christ (John 8:16) ; “ the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (John 14:10). So also God was ever pres­ent with the Apostles, confirming their testimony with signs, and wonders, and divers miracles, and distributions of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will. There are not so many different kinds of miracles, wrought by God in attestation and confirmation of the truth; but they are rather the same miracles viewed under different aspects. It is plain, as Ebrard says in substance, that miracles may be regarded in a fourfold aspect; first, with regard to their design, as signs (seemeia), miraculous testimonies in behalf of the truth; secondly, with respect to their nature, as wonders (terata), supernatural acts calculated to excite wonder and amazement in the minds of those who witnessed them; thirdly, with respect to their origin, as manifestations of supernatural powers (dunameis) ; and finally, in their specifically Christian aspect, as gifts and distri­butions of the Holy Spirit (pneumatos hagios merismoi) imparted to the original witnesses and proclaimers of the truth, according to the will of God. (1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4:11.) These might be multiplied almost indefinitely. But it is hoped that the few suggested under each section will be sufficient to in­duce the thoughtful reader to reflect and meditate on the text for himself; and to draw from it such lessons of comfort and consola­tion, as are best adapted to his own immediate wants and circum­stances. The following are given but as a specimen: God has certainly spoken to fallen man (1:1). Of this we have very strong evidence in this first section of our Epistle; the thoughts of which are as far above the conceptions of the most gifted heathen poets and philosophers, as Heaven is above the Earth. Compare, for instance, the theology of this section with the theology of Homer and Hesiod; and mark the infinite contrast. But just as certain as God spoke to the ancients, first by the Prophets and afterward by his Son, so certain it is that he now speaks to us in and through every book, chapter, and verse of the Holy Scriptures. “ For whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning, that we through patience and com­fort of the Scriptures might have hope.” (Romans 15:4.) The canon of Holy Writ was framed for our benefit, on whom the end of the ages has come. And hence we should receive every word of the Bible as the living voice of Jehovah; for “ all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17.) The harmony of the Old and New Testament Scriptures is complete. As the Christian Fathers taught, “ The New Testament lies concealed in the Old; and the Old Testament lies patent in the New.” The one is but the complement of the other. The revela­tions of the New Testament are fuller and simpler, and conse­quently more encouraging than those of the Old; but together they serve to develop and illustrate one plan of mercy and grace for the salvation of the world. The Eloheem Jehovah of the Old Testament, is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of the New. Sometimes, indeed, these names are ascribed to the Father alone (Psalms 2:2 Psalms 2:7 Psalms 45:7 Psalms 110:1-2 Psalms 110:4) ; and sometimes to the Son alone (Psalms 45:6; Jeremiah 23:6) ; but generally, as in Genesis 1:26 Genesis 3:22-23, they each compre­hend the whole Godhead; the former expressing the infinite power, and the latter the essential being and eternity of the Deity. And hence it follows that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are the one eternal, immutable and omnipresent God. “ Hear, O Is­rael, Jehovah our Eloheem is one Jehovah.” (Deuteronomy 6:4.) The evidence of Christ’ s Divinity given in this section is full and complete. He is the Creator of all things; the Upholder of all things; the effulgence of the Father’ s glory and the exact likeness of his substance. He is associated with the Father in the govern­ment of the universe; is called God by the Father himself; and as God he is worshiped by all the holy angels. His throne is eternal; and though he will roll up the heavens as a curtain, and change and readjust them as a worn-out garment, he himself is still the same, “ yesterday, to-day, and forever.” If these facts are not suf­ficient to prove beyond all doubt the Divinity of the Lord Jesus, then will our Socinian friends have the kindness to tell us what ev­idence would be sufficient for this purpose ? We have also in this section abundant evidence of God’ s will­ingness to save sinners. The obstacles that lay in the way of his doing so were of course very great. Great indignity had been cast on himself as well as on his government, by the sin of man. Ail mankind had become enemies to him by wicked works (Colossians 1:20-21), and the human heart had itself become desperately wicked and polluted (Jeremiah 17:9; Matthew 15:19). To remove these obstacles out of the way, was of course a very difficult problem. But “ all things are possible with God.” He so loved the world, even when it was dead in trespasses and sins, that he gave his Son, his only Son, to make expiation and propitiation for the sins of mankind. (John 3:16; Romans 5:8 Romans 8:32.) He sent the Holy Spirit to con­vince the world of sin, and righteousness, and of judgment (John 15:26 John 16:8-11) ; and also to dwell in the hearts of his children as their Comforter and Advocate (John 14:16-17 John 16:7; Romans 8:26). He sent holy angels to minister to the heirs of salvation; and he has given to us the Holy Bible as the rule of our faith and practice. He created the Church and furnished it with all that is necessary for our edification and growth in the Divine life. Who, then, can doubt, that as a Father pities and loves his children, so also the Lord pities and loves those who earnestly en­deavor to serve him ? How transcendently great are our obligations to love and serve God, through Christ, for his abounding goodness to us poor miserable sinners. (Hebrews 2:1-4.) If, to redeem us from death, he spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all; if he has sent his Holy Spirit to enlighten, comfort, and sanctify us; if he watches over us with even more than a Father’ s care; and if he has promised to save us from our sins, to deliver us from the corrup­tion of the grave, and to crown us with honor, glory and immortal­ity in the everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, on the simple condition that we give him our poor hearts, and consecrate our lives to his service— then who can estimate the extent of our obligations to do this? And who can estimate the infinite remorse and agonies of those who live and die in the ne­glect of this great salvation! May Heaven save us from the folly and destiny of all such. SECTION TWOHeb_2:5-18The main object of the Apostle in this section is to encourage the believing Hebrews to persevere in their Christian course, by presenting to them sundry motives drawn chiefly from the human­ity of Christ; from his oneness with us, and his great love, conde­scension, sympathy, and sufferings for us. Having presented the origin and greatness of the salvation that is offered to us in the Gospel, as a reason why we should give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, the Apostle now passes with consummate skill to the consideration of some other matters looking in the same direction. He insists particu­larly that we should give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard: I. Because, he says, it is through the man Jesus and that system of grace of which he is author and the finisher, that we will regain our lost dominion over the world (Hebrews 2:5-9). When man was created, God said to him, “ Have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the Earth.” (Gen. 1: 28.) But in consequence of sin, man has, in a great measure, lost this dominion. (Gen. 3: 15-24.) Satan for a time got possession of this world (Psalm 68: 18; John 12: 31; 14: 30; 16: 11; 2 Cor. 4: 4; Eph. 2: 2; 1 John 5: 19; Rev. 12: 9) ; and by his cunning arti­fice and hellish malice, he not only enslaved man, but actually turned many of the elements of the world against him. Even the worm and the insect now luxuriate on his fallen remains. That this state of things is, however, only temporary, and that, according to God’ s purpose, man will again have at his com­mand the dominion of the world, is manifest from the eighth Psalm, in which David says, “ What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet^; all sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.” From this passage, then, it is quite evident that God intends that man shall possess and hold the world as his lawful and right­ful patrimony. But this, says Paul, has not yet been accom­plished : “ We do not yet see all things put under him.” But what do we see? “ We see Jesus,” says he, “ who was made a little lower than the angels, so that he by the grace of God might taste death for every man, crowned with glory and honor for the suffering of death.” All things are put under him as our Leader and Captain. And this is therefore to us a sure pledge that in due time the dominion of the world will be restored to man; that he will enjoy the whole habitable Earth as his home, and that he will rule over it as his rightful patrimony, even as Adam ruled over Eden before he fell. II. But just here arises another thought that requires further development and illustration; the consideration of which occupies the remainder of this section (Hebrews 2:10-18). The Apostle has said in the ninth verse that Jesus was made a little lower than the angels, so that he by the grace of God might taste death for every man. The question, then, naturally occurs here, Why was this? Why did the Logos assume a nature that is a little lower than that of the angels, with the view of tasting death for every man ? 1. The reason assigned by our author is, that it became God the Father, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings (Hebrews 2:10). The full meaning of this remark he does not stop to develop. But in the light of what follows in this section, and what is clearly taught in many parallel passages, it is evident— (1.) That this was required by the nature and government of God. Without an atonement adequate to meet and satisfy all the claims of Divine Justice against man, there could be no pardon; no emancipation from the dominion of sin and Satan; no recovery of man’ s lost dominion over the world; and of course no bringing of many sons unto glory. (2.) This was required by the nature, wants, and circum­stances of mankind. None but a suffering, bleeding, dying Savior, uniting in his own person all the elements of humanity, as well as all the attributes of Divinity, could take hold of the affections and so control the hearts and lives of men as to bring them back again to God, and make it possible for him to restore to them their for­feited inheritance. (3.) When Christ became a man, it was then necessary that, as a man, he should be educated and qualified for the great work that was before him. He had to grow in knowledge and in experience, like other men. (Luke 2:52.) And hence we see that it became God to make Jesus perfect through sufferings— (a) with reference to the claims of his own government on man; (b) with reference to the condition and wants of mankind; and (c) with reference to the educational wants and requirements of Christ’ s human nature. 1. And now to show that this was no new device, but that God had so decreed from the beginning, the Apostle makes sundry quo­tations from the Old Testament Scriptures, clearly demonstrating that even under the Law, it was God’ s revealed purpose that the Messiah should be one with his brethren (Hebrews 2:11-13). 2. And hence it was that, in harmony with God’ s ancient pur­pose, the Logos became flesh; and thus, as a man, was made a little lower than the angels; so that by his death he might be able (1) to destroy Satan, who has the power of death; and (2) that he might deliver those who had been made captives by Satan, and who through the fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bond­age (Hebrews 2:14-15). 3. The necessity of Christ’ s being made a little lower than the angels by becoming a man— a suffering, bleeding, sorrowful man — is still further amplified and illustrated by the fact that he came to help fallen men, and not angels. And hence it behooved him to become like unto his brethren in all things (sin only excepted), so that, as their officiating High Priest, he may the more readily and fully sympathize with them in all their trials, temptations, and suf­ferings (Hebrews 2:16-18). This section, therefore, comprises the two following subdivi­sions : I. Hebrews 2:5-9. Man’ s lost dominion over the world to be restored through Jesus. II. Hebrews 2:10-18. Why the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.I. MAN’ S LOST OVER THE WORLD TO BE THROUGH JESUS Hebrews 2:5-9 Hebrews 2:5 ---For unto the angels— The logical connection here is not very clear; and hence the critics are not agreed as to what is the proper antecedent clause of the conjunction "for'* (gar). Some find it in Hebrews 1:13; and others in Hebrews 2:4. But it seems most probable that the object of the Apostle is to introduce another line of argument co­ordinate with that which is given in the first chapter, and leading to the same general conclusion found in Hebrews 2:4. And hence he beau­tifully and with great rhetorical skill and propriety, makes the ex­hortation given in Hebrews 2:1-4, the connecting link between the two. In view of what is stated in the first chapter, he says, ‘‘ We ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest haply we should be drifted away from them.” And this, he says by implication, we should do also from the further consideration, that God has made it the business of Christ, and not of angels, to restore to mankind their lost dominion over the world. Hebrews 2:5 ---the world to come, whereof we speak.— The world to come (hee oikoumenee hee mellousa) means, not the coming age (ho aion ho mellon) as in Matthew 12:39, etc., but the habitable world under the reign and government of the Messiah. (1:6.) It is the world in which we now live; and in which, when it shall have been purified from sin, the redeemed will live forever. For man, it was at first created (Genesis 1:28-31); and to man, it still belongs by an immutable decree of Jehovah. This is manifest, as the Apostle here shows, from what is recorded in the eighth Psalm, to which in the popular style of his age, our author here elegantly refers. It consists of two parts; in the first of which (Psalms 8:1-2), David celebrates the praises of God for the marvelous manifestations of his wisdom, power, and goodness, displayed in all his works. These manifestations of the Divine perfections are so very plain that even babes and sucklings perceive and acknowledge them (Matthew 11:25 Matthew 21:16), and thus put to silence the profane scoff - ings of ignorant and foolish men, who say in their hearts, “ No God.” (Psalms 14:1.) In the second part (Psalms 8:3-9), the author speaks particularly of God’ s favor and goodness to man: “ When I consider thy heav­ens, the work of thy fingers, the Moon and the stars which thou hast ordained,” then he says I am constrained to exclaim, Hebrews 2:6 ---What is man, that thou art mindful of him?—That this has reference to mankind in general, and not to Jesus Christ personally considered, as some have alleged, is evident from the Psalm itself, as well as from the scope of the Apostle’ s argument. It is God’ s care for the human race, as such, and not for any one person in particular, which so much excites the wonder and admiration of the Psalmist. When he looked upon the heavens as the work of God’ s fingers, and thought of the Moon and the stars which he (God) had created, he was amazed that a Being so exalted, so ex­cellent, and so glorious, should ever condescend to think of man and to supply his numerous wants. Hebrews 2:6 ---or the son of man, that thou visitest him?— This, in connec­tion with the preceding clause, is a case of synonymous parallelism. “ Son of man” (huios anthropou) in the latter clause is equivalent to “ man” (anthropos) in the first; and each of these terms is used generically for the race. The word visit, according to Hebrew usage, means to manifest one’ s self to another, for the purpose of either blessing (Genesis 1:1; Exodus 3:16) or punishing (Job 35:15; Psalms 89:32). In this connection, both the words, visit and remember, are used in a favorable sense, indicating God’ s special care over man, in that he provides for him, and, as Christ says, numbers even the hairs of his head. (Matthew 10:10.) Hebrews 2:7 ---Thou madest him a little lower than the angels,— Or as the Hebrew may be more literally rendered, Thou hast made him fall but little short of Eloheem; or, Thou has lowered him a little be­neath Eloheem. The word Eloheem in this passage means the an­gels. It is so rendered in the Septuagint, no doubt in harmony with Hebrew usage, and most likely on the authority of some of the ancient Prophets; and it is, moreover, so rendered by the au­thor of our Epistle. It is still a question with the critics whether the word little (Brachu ti) is expressive of time or of degree. Those who take this as a Messianic Psalm, and refer the words “ man” and “ son of man” to Christ, generally construe the word “ little” as a particle of time (Bleek, Ltinemann, Macknight, Clarke); and so also do some others, as Ebrard, who take these words as referring to mankind generally. But I agree with Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others, that both the Psalmist and our author refer here simply to the rank which God has assigned to man in the scale of creation. He has made him, they say, a little inferior to the angels; and there is no intimation given here or elsewhere, that he will ever make him their superior. That man redeemed by the blood of Christ, will, in his glorified state, occupy a place of more tender care and solic­itude than the angels, is quite probable. This is in harmony with several scenes in the Apocalypse (Revelation 5:11-12 Revelation 7:9-12) ; and it is in harmony also with the teachings of Christ in the parables of the lost sheep, the lost piece of money, and the prodigal son (Luke 15). But in none of these passages is there any evidence that man will ever rise in rank above the angels. As a lost and recovered child, he will ever be an object of wonder and sympathy through­out the universe; and the angels will doubtless often lean on their harps, and listen in rapture to the more tender and transporting songs of the redeemed. But I know of no evidence in the Scrip­tures that the present rank of men and angels will ever be re­versed. Hebrews 2:7 ---thou crownedst him with glory and honor,— The two words here rendered glory and honor (doxee kai timee) are nearly syn­onymous in both the Hebrew and the Greek; and they are used, ac­cording to a well known Hebrew idiom, for the.sake of emphasis. Together, they express royal dignity; and in this instance, they in­dicate the fullness of the regal power and authority which God has bestowed, not on the first or on the second Adam merely, but on the race; or rather, on the loyal portion of it. By a decree as im­mutable as the laws of gravitation, God has ordained that man shall inherit the Earth and have dominion over it. Hebrews 2:7 ---and didst set him over the works of thy hands:— This clause is now generally rejected by the critics as spurious. See critical note above given by Bagster. But it is found in the original He­brew, in the Septuagint, and also in manuscripts, A, C, D, M1, etc.; and I am therefore inclined to retain it as genuine. Hebrews 2:8 ---Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet.—This, with the last clause, is another instance of Hebrew parallel­ism. It is not, however, synonymous, but constructive parallelism, which occurs here. The Psalmist first expresses the general thought, that God has placed man over the work of his hands. But he does not stop with this. To indicate still further the degree of man’ s sovereignty over the world, he adds, “ Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet.” The latter clause is, there­fore, more expressive than the former, as it indicates the perfect and entire subjection of all things earthly to the will of man; and so the Apostle reasons in what follows. For in that he put all things in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.— In these words, there is no reference whatever to angels, or to other worlds or systems. It is of the Earth, and of the Earth only, that the Holy Spirit here speaks. This is obvious from what follows in the latter part of the eighth Psalm. After saying that all things are by the decree of Je­hovah put under the feet of man, the Psalmist immediately adds, by way of explanation, the following specifications: “ all sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the. fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.” It is to this world as it was, as it is, and especially as it will be hereafter, that both the Psalmist and the Apostle have refer­ence. When God had renovated the Earth and filled it, as a vast storehouse, with all that was necessary for the well-being and hap­piness of its intended sovereign, he said, “ Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the Earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the Earth, So God created man in his own image; in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multi­ply, and replenish the Earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the Earth.” (Genesis 1:26-28.) This is the perpetual decree of Jehovah with respect to the domain and the dominion of man. True, indeed, Satan has for a time usurped the dominion of this world; and man has by transgression forfeited all claims upon it. The crown of glory and honor has fallen from his head because of sin; and now he is exposed and assailed by a thousand obstacles in earth, air, and sea. And hence the Apostle adds: Hebrews 2:8 ---we see not yet all things put under him.— From this, it is evi­dent that the eighth Psalm is prophetic. The Psalmist looks rather at the decree and purpose of Jehovah touching the final al­lotment of this world, than to the state of things which actually ex­isted at the time in which he wrote. He means to say, that al­though man’ s scepter is now broken, the decree of Jehovah con­cerning it is not broken. His purpose is unchangeable. And hence there can be no doubt but that mankind will yet regain their lost dominion over the Earth. How far this will be accomplished before the Earth shall have been renovated by fire (2 Peter 3), it may be now difficult to say. When Satan shall be bound for a thousand years (Revelation 20:1-6), and the saints of the Most High possess the Kingdom (Daniel 7:14 Daniel 7:18 Daniel 7:22), the prophecy of Isaiah (Isaiah 11:6-9) may be more literally fulfilled than we now anticipate. But whatever may be true of this blissful era, so long and so often foretold by the Apostles and Prophets, it is not at all probable that man’ s dominion over the world will be fully restored, until the new heavens and the new Earth appear, in which righteousness will forever dwell. (Revelation 21.) Hebrews 2:9 ---But we see Jesus,— The Apostle here makes a very striking contrast between “ Jesus” and “ man,” to whom by the decree of Je­hovah, the world is to be subjected. “ We do not yet,” he says, “ see all things put under man” ; but in the coronation of Jesus, as Lord of all, we see that the work is in progress; and this is, of course, to all Christians a sure pledge that in due time it will be fully consummated. Hebrews 2:9 ---who was made a little lower than the angels—We learn from the seventeenth verse of this chapter, that “ in all things it be­hooved Christ to be made like unto his brethren.” But they are all “ a little lower than the angels” (verse 7) ; and hence it was neces­sary that he too should, as a man, be made “ a little lower than the angels.” For otherwise, indeed, he would not be a man; would not be capable of suffering death for every man; and would not be such a merciful and faithful High Priest, as we all need to sympa­thize with us in our infirmities. That he is God, the Creator of both men and angels, is clearly taught in the first chapter; and that he is also a man is just as clearly taught in the second. Perfect Divinity and perfect humanity are both perfectly united in the per­son of the Lord Jesus. Nothing short of this, it seems, would make him just such a Savior as we need. Hebrews 2:9 ---for the suffering of death,—It is still a question with exposi­tors, whether this phrase is grammatically connected with what precedes, or with what follows. As rendered in our Common Version it is most naturally connected with what precedes; and seems intended to express the end or purpose for which Jesus was made a little lower than the angels: viz., in order that he might be capable of suffering death. If this is the proper rendering, then it follows that this expression forms a sort of parallelism with the last clause of the verse, and the whole sentence may be construed as follows: “ But we see Jesus (who was made a little lower than the angels, for the purpose of suffering death, so that he by the grace of God might taste death for every man) crowned with glory and honor.” This construction is in harmony with the Apostle’ s argument; but it does $ot altogether harmonize with the laws of grammatical arrangement. Had our author intended to express a parallelism by means of these two expressions, it is not probable that he would have separated them, as he has done in the original, by the intervening words, “ crowned with glory and honor.” And hence I am inclined to think with Delitzsch, Alford, and most modern expositors, that the words in question stand connected with what follows, and that the passage should be rendered thus: “ But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honor, for (dia, because of, on account of) the suffering of death” ; that is, on account of, and as a reward for, his sufferings. To this rendering there can be no grammatical ob­jection whatever; and in sense it harmonizes well with the follow­ing and other parallel passages: “ Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus; who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but made himself of no rep­utation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he hum­bled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in Heaven, and things in Earth, and things under the Earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:5-11.) " Hebrews 2:9 ---crowned with glory and honor,— The best explanation of these words may be found in the above passage from the Epistle to the Philippians. God had long before promised that Christ should be abundantly rewarded for his sufferings. (Isaiah 53:12.) And hence as we are told by Luke (Acts 1:1-11), after that he had borne the pains and agonies of the cross, and after he had risen from the dead and instructed his disciples for forty days in matters pertain­ing to the Kingdom of God, he was then taken up into Heaven, and in the presence of adoring millions (1:6) crowned Lord of all; “ angels, and authorities, and powers being made subject unto him” (1 Peter 3:22). This was first announced to the people, as a fact, by the Apostle Peter, on the following Pentecost (Acts 2:36) ; and afterward it was proclaimed to every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation under heaven. See; Ephesians 1:20-23; Colossians 1:23, etc. There can be no doubt, therefore, that Christ is now the anointed Sovereign of the universe; and that he will reign over all creatures in Heaven, and on Earth, and under the Earth, until he shall have restored to the saints their lost dominion over this world. Hebrews 2:9 ---that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.— Instead of the phrase “ by the grace of God” (chariti. Theou), we have in a few manuscripts, “ without God” (choris Theou). This reading was preferred by Theodoret, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and the Nestorians. But the evidence, both internal and external, is against it; and it is therefore now generally re­jected by the critics, as a marginal gloss. Conceding, then, that the common reading is genuine, let us next consider what is the proper grammatical connection of this clause with the rest of the sentence. It is manifestly a subordinate and dependent clause; but on what does it depend ? What was done so that (opos) Jesus “ might by the grace of God taste death for every man’ '? Was he crowned with glory and honor for this purpose? Surely not. His death preceded his coronation; and he was crowned, as we have seen, in consequence of it. What then? Was he made a little lower than the angels, so that he might by the grace of God taste death for every man ? Clearly, to my mind, this is the meaning of the passage. And I would therefore prefer the following arrangement of this very complex sentence, as being more in harmony with the less flexible rules of English syntax: “ But we see Jesus (who was made a little lower than the angels, so that he might by the grace of God taste death for every man) crowned with glory and honor, on account of the suffering of death.” The several words of this clause need but little explanation. The phrase, “ by the grace of God,” means simply that the incarna­tion, death, atonement, and mediation of the Lord Jesus, are all the offspring of Divine love. “ For,” as Christ says, “ God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” (John 3:16.) To “ taste death ” is the same as to experience death, or to suffer death. And the phrase “ for every man” is as plain as it can be made; clearly indicating that the atonement of Jesus Christ is for every human being, and that all men may therefore be saved by it. We have but to comply with the very plain and reasonable condi­tions on which salvation is offered to all, and then we will finallyreceive “ an abundant entrance into the everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 1:11.) From the given explanations, then, it is quite obvious that the main object of the Apostle in this paragraph (Hebrews 2:5-9), is to remind his Hebrew brethren, that by an irrevocable decree of Je­hovah this world belongs to man; and that although it has been forfeited by sin, and its dominion usurped by Satan, it is neverthe­less God’ s purpose to redeem it for the benefit of his saints; not, however, through angels, nor through the law given by angels (Hebrews 2:5); but through that scheme of grace, mercy, and truth of which Jesus is the Author and the Finisher. And so also this same Apostle testifies to his Roman brethren. Speaking of this very matter, he says, “ For the promise that he [Abraham] should be heir of the world (Kleeronomos Kosmou), was not to Abraham or to his seed through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if they who are of the Law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect. Because the Law worketh wrath; for where there is no law, there is no transgres­sion. Therefore it is of faith, ‘ that it might be by grace; to the end that the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the Law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abra­ham ; who is the Father of us all.” (Romans 4:13-16.) The promise that his posterity according to the flesh should inherit the land of Canaan, was given to Abraham and to his seed through law. But all these legal, carnal, and temporal arrangements were but a type or shadow of the more gracious provisions of the economy of re­demption through Jesus Christ; according to which it seems that Abraham and the whole family of the faithful will yet inherit the entire Earth, after that it shall have been purified by fire, and pre­pared for the descent of the New Jerusalem. See Psalms 37:9-11; Matthew 5:5; 2 Peter 3:10-13; Revelation 5:10 Revelation 21. How very important it is, then, that we should all give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest perchance we should be drifted away from them. For into this renovated Earth nothing can ever come that is impure or unholy. For “ the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whore­mongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone.” (Revelation 21 :1) How then, shall we escape if we neglect the great salvation offered to us in the Gospel, “ which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him” ? II.. WHY THE WORD BECAME FLESH AND DWELT AMONG USHeb_2:10-18 Hebrews 2:10 ---For it became him,—The Apostle aims here to meet and re­fute a Jewish objection founded on the humiliation and sufferings of Christ. “ We have heard out of the law,” said the Jews on one occasion, “ that Christ abideth forever.” (John 12:34.) This opinion was founded on such passages as Psalms 72:7 Psalms 72:17 Psalms 89:36-37 Psalms 110:4; Isaiah 9:7; Ezekiel 37:24-25; Daniel 2:44 Daniel 7:13-14; Micah 4:7; in which the Kingdom of the Messiah is described as an everlasting Kingdom; and his reign, as enduring throughout all generations. To many of the Jews, these passages of Scripture seemed wholly inconsistent with the humble life and the ignomin­ious death of the Lord Jesus. And it was therefore eminently proper to remove this objection as far as possible, by showing just at this point of the argument that the humiliation, sufferings, and death of Christ are, in fact, an essential part of the scheme of re­demption. This, our author does with great force and tenderness in the remaining portion of this chapter. He begins by saying that it “ became (eprepen) Him for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Cap­tain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.” God is here represented both as the final cause (dia on) and also as the efficient cause (dia ou) of all things. The universe is, in fact, but a manifestation and development of his infinite perfections. And hence its government is not with him a matter of caprice, or of ar­bitrary choice, but of divine propriety. As it became God to adapt means to ends in the work of creation, so also it becomes him to do the same in the works of providence and redemption. When he resolved to bring many sons unto glory, there was then imposed on him (if I may say it with reverence) a moral necessity, deep and profound as his own nature, to qualify Jesus for the great work that was before him: and this, it seems, could be done only by means of his incarnation, sufferings, and death. Hebrews 2:10 ---in bringing many sons unto glory,— To whom does the parti­ciple “ bringing” (agagonta) refer? To God the Father, repre­sented by the pronoun “ him” (auto in the dative case), or to Jesus, represented by “ captain” (archeegon in the accusative case) ? The grammatical agreement is in favor of the latter; but the scope of the passage and the general construction of the sen­tence are in favor of the former. And hence this is now generally regarded as a case of anacoluthon. See Winer’ s Gram. Section 63. The heirs of salvation are here called “ sons” in relation to God as their Father and supreme Leader; just as in the following verse they are called “ brethren,” in relation to Christ who is our Elder Brother and also our Leader by the Father’ s appointment. To bring many sons unto glory is the same as to bring them to Heaven. This world now abounds in sin and suffering, misery and death. But in Heaven all is light, and life, and love. (Revelation 21.) Hebrews 2:10 ---the captain of their salvation— The word here rendered cap­tain (archeegos) means properly a leader; one who at the head of an army or other company leads them onward to the goal or place of their destination. The word is applied by Philo to Adam, who, as Paul says, “ was a type of him that was to come.” (Romans 5:14.) These are both captains or leaders of the entire race. But they lead to different goals, and in opposite directions. The first Adam led all to death; whereas the second Adam leads all to life. “ For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22.) “ For as by one man’ s disobedience the many were made sin­ners; so by the obedience of one shall the many, be made righ­teous.” (Romans 5:19.) The phrase, “ many sons,” as used in our text, is not, however, strictly equivalent to “ the many” in Romans 5:19. The latter in­cludes the whole human race; but the former includes only those “ who by patient continuance in well going,” follow Christ wher­ever he goes. The latter, it is true, will all be raised from the dead, and forever saved from all the effects of the Adamic sin; but many of them will, on account of their own personal transgressions, be raised “ to the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:29), and banished “ with an everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power” (2 Thessalonians 1:9). The former, however, will all, without the loss of one, be brought home to the full enjoyment of honor, glory, and immortality. And these, be it observed, will not be a few, but a vast multitude which no man can number, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. (Revelation 7:9-10.) Hebrews 2:10 ---perfect through sufferings.—The word here rendered to make perfect (teleioo— from telos, an end, termination) means properly to be full, complete, wanting in nothing; and as applied to Christ in this connection, it means simply that he was by God fully qualified for the work that was before him; that in this respect he was com­plete and entire, wanting in nothing. In what this perfection consisted, it may be difficult for us to ex­plain. Perhaps none but God can understand this matter fully. But this much we may say in general: (1.) That it consisted in Christ’ s being fully prepared to honor God and to magnify his government, by making an adequate atone­ment for the sins of the world. God, be it reverently spoken, can­not without full satisfaction pardon any sin or transgression of his law. By an eternal moral necessity, the soul that sinneth must die, unless by adequate means the claims of Divine Justice can be fully satisfied. (Exodus 34:7.) Any attempt, therefore, to bring many sons unto glory without a ransom sufficient to atone for all their transgressions, would of necessity be a failure. And hence it was, that when no other means were found adequate, God set forth Jesus Christ, as a propitiatory sacrifice, for a demonstration of his justice in passing by the sins of his ancient people; and to show also how it is that he can now be just in justifying every one who believes in Jesus. (Romans 3:25-26.) It became God the Father, therefore, to make his Son a perfect Savior by the shedding of his blood, so that by means of it an adequate atonement might be made for the sins of the world. (2.) The perfection of Christ, as the Captain of our salvation, consisted also in his being relatively adapted to the nature, wants, and circumstances of those whom he came to redeem. It was not enough that he should come with a ransom sufficient to meet and satisfy all the claims of the Divine Government on the sinner. He had to look at the human, as well as at the Divine, side of the ques­tion. He had to lay hold of human nature as it was, and adapt himself to it in such a way as would best serve to enlighten the understanding, renew the heart, and control the will and the life of our sin-ruined race. But it is a law of the universe that “ Like loves its like.” And hence it is, that God has generally clothed himself and his angelic ambassadors in human form, whenever he has sought to manifest them and himself to mankind in compassion, tenderness, and love. (Genesis 18:1-2 Genesis 19:1 Genesis 19:12, etc.) But in the case of Jesus, the mere form of humanity was not enough. In order to reach the heart of a race at enmity with God by their own wicked works, and to change that enmity into love, it was neces­sary that the Word should become flesh, and by the grace of God taste death for every man. (Colossians 1:21-22.) In no other conceiva­ble way could the love of God be sufficiently manifested to our re­bellious race. True, indeed, the benevolence, as well as the wis­dom and power of God, is revealed in every law and ordinance of nature. It is seen in every star that twinkles in the firmament; it is seen in every flower that blooms on the landscape; and it is seen in every organ, and even in every element, of the human body. Nevertheless, our experience, as well as the light of history, goes to prove that in all nature there is not power sufficient to convert a single soul. We love God because he first loved us, and mani­fested his love to us in giving his own dear Son to weep, and bleed, and die for us. (1 John 4:10 1 John 4:19.) This, then, is manifestly an­other reason why it became God the Father, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. (3.) When Jesus became a man, he had to be perfected, as a man. He was, in his infancy, endowed with every element and at­tribute of human nature in its sinless state; and consequently these elements of humanity in the person of the Lord Jesus had all to be educated by a severe course of discipline and experience, such as is common to man. And hence Luke says, “ he [Jesus] increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52.) But no man is fully qualified to visit the sick, and to admin­ister to the wants of the afflicted, who has not himself drunk deep of the cup of human sorrow and of human suffering; and hence it was that Christ had to drink of it to its very dregs. And now that “ he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.” Hebrews 2:11 ---For both he that sanctifieth, etc.—The sanctifier is Christ himself; and the “ sanctified” are the same as the “ many sons” spo­ken of in the tenth verse. These and Christ, our author means to say, are very nearly related, being together properly called sons, “ for” they are all of one Father. The word sanctify (hagiazo) means (1) to make clean, to purify, to make holy; and (2) to con­secrate, or set apart from a common to a sacred use. In the latter sense, it is applied both to persons and things; in the former, only to persons. In the latter sense, it has reference to state or condi­tion ; in the former, to character. In the latter sense there are prop­erly no degrees and no progress; but in the former, we may and we should make constant progress. Very frequently this word is used in one of these two senses to the exclusion of the other; but in our text, it is used in its most comprehensive sense, so as to in­clude the idea of both consecration and moral purification; each of which is effected through the death and mediation of the Lord Jesus, “ who of God is made unto us wisdom, and justification, and sanctification, and redemption.” (1 Corinthians 1:30.) Hebrews 2:11 ---are all of one:—One what? Some say, One race (ex henos genous) ; some, One blood (ex henos haimatos) ; some, One seed or offspring (ex henos spermatos). But the idea that they are all of one Father (ex henos patros), not Adam or Abraham, but God, “ from whom, and through whom, and to whom, are all things,” seems to accord best with all the terms and conditions of the con­text. Hebrews 2:11 ---for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,—If the Sanctifier and the sanctified are all sons of God, having one and the same Father, they have also of course one common brotherhood, of which Jesus is not ashamed; and which, as our au­thor now proceeds to show, had long before the date of this Epistle been symbolically set forth in the types and shadows of the Old Testament. Hebrews 2:12 ---Saying, I will declare thy name, etc.—This is a quotation from the twenty-second Psalm, in the course of which, David, as a type of Christ, pleads for help (1) on the ground of his very near and intimate relations to God (verses 1-10) ; and (2) on the ground of his imminent danger and intense sufferings (verses 11­21). After this he changes his tone from the deepest despondency, and breaks out into exclamations of gratitude and praise to God for his signal deliverance and the many mercies bestowed on him (verses 22-31). In all this, David refers primarily to his own per­sonal experience, under the severe trials and persecutions which he endured from Saul. During the last seven or eight years of Saul’ s reign, he (David) was surrounded by enemies as by wild beasts; and his way to the throne was through the most violent and unrea­sonable opposition. But, trusting in God, he was delivered from all his foes; and afterward, on many joyful occasions, he declared the name of Jehovah to his brethren; and in the midst of the Church, or congregation of Israel, he often celebrated the praises of his Deliverer. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 2:2. Spoken by angels. There were times when God delivered some special messages to individuals through the services of angels (Genesis 16:9 Genesis 19:17, and others). But the main thing Paul has in mind is the use God made of the angels in delivering the Mosaic law to the people (Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19). Was stedfast means it was fairly established on the authority of Christ. Transgression denotes a going over and beyond an established law; not only the doing what it expressly says must not be done, but also the doing of what it does not give any authority to do. Disobedience means the simple failure to do what the law requires, regardless of the cause or motive for such failure. Rec-ompence of reward is all from one Greek word that means the treatment one receives on account of his conduct. Just signifies that what was done to those who transgressed or disobeyed the law of Moses, given through the services of angels, was proper and what they deserved. Hebrews 2:3. How shall we escape our just fate? If we neglect is fully as dangerous as to be guilty of active wrongdoing. So great salvation is said because of the greatness of the means by which it was made known to us, which means will now be described. Began to be spoken by the Lord. Jesus spent more than three years in the personal work of preparing the foundation or fundamentals of His kingdom among men. Was confirmed unto us by them that heard him. This refers to the apostles who were chosen by Christ to be with him all of the time between His baptism and ascension (Acts 1:21-22). The apostles had first-hand information from Christ when he was on earth, and they afterward received "all truth" pertaining to the Gospel as the plan of Christ for salvation (John 16:13). This word was confirmed by the miracles which they and their converts were enabled to perform (Mark 16:20). Hebrews 2:4. These miracles are to be attributed to God also, because He bestowed the Holy Ghost (or Spirit) on the apostles in answer to the prayer of Christ (John 14:16). Gifts according to Ms own will. The miraculous gifts which the disciples were enabled to perform in the early years of the church were regulated by the Lord in the best way for the good of the work of salvation (1 Corinthians 12:7). Hebrews 2:5. Paul is still considering the superiority of Christ over the angels, and of His law over that which was "spoken by angels." Those beings were inferior even to all men that they were not to have dominion over the earth at the time of creation, while it was given to man. (See Genesis 1:26-28.) The world means the inhabited part of the universe, and to come is said because when the dominion was given to man, the population of the earth was still in the future. Hebrews 2:6. One in a certain place means David in Psalms 8:4-6. Testified is a strong word in the original, and denotes a solemn and earnest declaration, as if the speaker felt surprise and admiration over something. What is man is not meant to lower the importance of man, except as a contrast with so great a Being as the creator of all things. That God would be mindful of such a creature to the extent of the facts referred to, caused David to express himself as it is in this passage. Son of man is virtually the same as the simple term man above, except that it indicates a being that is reproduced by another like himself, and hence that he is inferior to his Creator. Visitest is from which Thayer defines, "To look upon in order to help or to benefit, equivalent to look after, have a care for, provide for." Hebrews 2:7. Little lower than the angels This same thing is said of Jesus in verse 9, and the sense in which it is said is explained, namely, for the suffering of death. Hence we understand that this inferiority of man to the angels in the present verse refers to the nature of his body, that it is possible for him to die which the angels cannot do (Luke 20:36). Notwithstanding this humble status of man, God did crown him with the glory and honor of being placed over the works of His hands. Hebrews 2:8. Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. This is said in reference to what is declared in Genesis 1:26-28. From here on the apostle extends his remarks to Include Jesus, which is not considered in the original passage in the Psalms. This is not the only instance where a New Testament writer makes a second or extended use of an Old Testament passage. Hosea 11:1 is said regarding the departure of ancient Israel from Egypt, but Matthew 2:14-15 quotes it and applies it to Christ. Likewise Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 and applies is to Christ, yet the passage in Isaiah first referred to an infant born to the prophet and his young wife. See not yet all things put under him is said of Jesus, and the next two verses will indicate what it is that is not yet put under or been conquered by Jesus, and what he must first suffer before His final victory over all except his Father. Hebrews 2:9. Jesus was made lower than the angels in regard to his body only, as explained in verse 7; it is further explained in the present verse. In order to be able to taste death for every man, He must himself be able to die, which required such a body. It was by the grace or favor of God for mankind, that Jesus was enabled to die (and live again) for humanity. It was a glory and honor for Jesus to be crowned with such an exalted privilege as that of dying for the salvation of man. Hebrews 2:10. The pronoun him refers to God, and it became him or was befitting that He should do the things mentioned in the verse. Whom also is a pronoun standing for God, because all things were originally for and by Him. He planned to bring many (as many as would) persons unto the glory of spiritual service in this life, and eternal glory in the life to come. For such a grand accomplishment it was necessary to have a captain who could lead them in the manner. Such a captain was to be Jesus, and he was made perfect (completely qualified) by suffering. Such an experience was all that Jesus lacked before he came to the earth, and hence He was given a fleshly body that was capable of suffering and death. Hebrews 2:11. This verse and on through the chapter, carries the main subject of the oneness and fellowship that was designed to exist between Jesus and those whom he planned to save. To be sanctified means to be devoted to the service of God. Such a state of devotion is accomplished through Jesus who is he that sanctifieth. They are all of one in that both Jesus and his disciples are united in reverence for God who makes all. good things possible that exist. In this sense they are all brethren and Jesus is not ashamed in the happy relationship. Hebrews 2:12. Paul verifies his statement of the preceding verse by a quotation from the Psalms 22:22, which is a part of a chapter composed of predictions about Christ. In the midst of the church. In Matthew 18:20 Jesus promises to be present in every scriptural assembly, and in such a meeting He will be joining in the praises. Hebrews 2:13. This verse is a quotation from some Old Testament sayings, parts of them from David, pertaining to the close fellowship between the Lord and his disciples. Hebrews 2:14. The fellowship is continued in this verse. The motive for sharing in a nature of flesh and blood is the same as indicated in verse 9. Destroy is used in the sense of counteract, for the devil will never be literally destroyed. But lie had the power of causing death to come upon mankind. and Jesus died and rose again in order to bring all men to life again. Hebrews 2:15. Bondage is from DOULEIA which is literally defined by Thayer as follows: "Slavery, bondage, the condition of a slave." He then explains it to mean, "The slavish sense of fear." With no prospect of living again, mankind would have a feeling of dread for death that would be like the terror caused by a harsh master over his slaves. Such a fear of death would indeed be a cruel bondage, but the resurrection of Christ dispelled that fear in the minds of all who believe in Him. Hebrews 2:16. Nature is not in the original text because angels are not natural beings. The thought is that Jesus did not come into the world with a body like those of the angels, for then He could not have died (Luke 20:36). He came instead as a fleshly descendant of Abraham. Hebrews 2:17. It was necessary for Jesus to be like his brethren with regard to His body, in order to have a sympathetic interest in their trials and other tests. Being so formed, He could have a feeling of mercy toward them in their transgressions. One meaning of faithful is to be "worthy of trust; that can be relied on." Christ became such a high priest by partaking of the nature of fleshly man, while not surrendering His divine character and likeness to God. This qualified him to make reconciliation (satisfaction with God) for the sins of the people. Hebrews 2:18. Jesus was clothed with the flesh and was actually tempted (yet never yielded; Hebrews 4:15) as we are. This made Him able to succour (support) others who were taken in their sins, or who are in danger of being so taken. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 3Near the close of the last section (2: 17), the Apostle, while dis­cussing the question of Christ’ s humanity, refers for the first time to his priesthood. And hence we might reasonably expect that this would be made the next topic of discussion. But connected with this, and naturally and historically antecedent to it, is the apostle- ship of Christ. Moses preceded Aaron in the economy of the Old Testament; and Christ appeared as the Leader of God’ s people, be­fore he entered on the duties of his priesthood. And hence while our author blends together in some measure the discussion of these two functions of Christ’ s mediatorial office, he devotes the next section mainly to the consideration of his apostleship and such other matters as depend essentially on it. The following are the main points which he makes in the discussion and development of this part of his subject: I. He shows the great superiority of Christ over Moses, as the Apostle of God. (Hebrews 3:1-6.)1. In making this comparison between Christ and Moses, our author shows no disposition to disparage the latter in any way. He concedes that Moses was faithful to God in all his house (Hebrews 3:2). . .2. But then he argues that according to the Divine arrange­ment, Christ is as much superior to Moses as he who builds a house is superior to the house itself (verse 3). This argument may be briefly stated as follows: God built all things, including, of course, both the Jewish house and the Christian house. But Christ is God, one with the Father. (Hebrews 1:8.) And hence it follows, that Christ is as much superior to the Jewish or Old Testament house of God, including Moses himself and every other member of the 3. Theocracy, as he who builds a house is superior to it (Hebrews 3:4-5). 4. Furthermore, Moses was but a servant in the symbolical house of God; but Christ as a Son presides over the real house of God; which is to the symbolical house of the Old Testament econ­omy, as the substance is to the shadow (Hebrews 3:6). II. From this subject, the transition to the pilgrimage of the Is­raelites under Moses and ours under Christ, is easy and natural (verses 7-19). 1. According to Moses (Numbers 2:32-33), about six hundred thousand (603,550) Israelites, besides the Levites and the women and children, left Egypt with the fairest and most encouraging prospects of entering Canaan. 2. But, nevertheless, very few of them ever reached the Prom­ised Land. They provoked God in the wilderness, till he finally swore in his wrath that they should never enter into his rest. (Numbers 14:22-30.) 3. From this chapter of sacred history, the Apostle therefore solemnly warns his Hebrew brethren, and through them also all the followers of Christ, of their many dangers, and of the necessity of their giving all diligence in order to make their calling and elec­tion sure during their earthly pilgrimage (Hebrews 3:12-18). 4. It is true that our advantages and privileges are now, in many respects, greatly superior to those of the ancient Israelites. But human nature is still the same; our greatest enemies are still the same; the deceitfulness of sin is the same; many of our trials and temptations are the same; and hence what was “ written afore­time was written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.” It becomes all Chris­tians, therefore, to exhort and admonish one another daily Hebrews 3:13). I. From the pilgrimage of the Jews under Moses and ours under Christ, the Apostle is next led to consider the rest which re­mains for the people of God. (Hebrews 4:1-10.) 1. The idea of rest was a very pleasant and consoling thought to the Israelites. They had long been accustomed to reflect on the many pleasures and advantages of a sanctified rest. (1.) From the regular observance of the weekly Sabbath. (2.) From the habit of sanctifying many other days to the Lord; as, for example, the first day of every month; the first and last day of the feast of Unleavened Bread, etc. (3.) From celebrating the Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee. (4.) From the ease and repose which they enjoyed in Canaan, compared with the many toils and trials which their fathers had endured in the wilderness. From all of which it is manifest, that in an argument designed for the encouragement of the Hebrew brethren, it was particularly necessary to dwell on this element of the Christian religion, and to show that there is a rest remaining for the people of God, that far transcends in importance any earthly rest that was ever enjoyed by the seed of Abraham accord­ing to the flesh. 2. But just here the Apostle seems to have anticipated an objec­tion which might peradventure be urged by the judaizing party. That most of the Old Testament references to the heavenly rest were made through types and shadows there can be no doubt. And with some it might, therefore, be a question, whether in such portions of Scripture there is really anything more intended or implied than the mere temporal rest to which the ancient Prophets primarily referred. 3. To this question he makes the following reply: (1.) He refers to Psalms 95:7, from which he proves that God in his wrath had sworn to the Israelites under Moses, that they should not enter into his rest. And hence he argues that this could not be the Sabbatical rest, because it was instituted in the begin­ning when God finished the work of creation (Genesis 2:2), and had been enjoyed by the Israelites throughout all their journeyings (Exodus 16:22-31). And hence it follows that there must be another rest for the people of God: a rest into which the rebellious Israel­ites under Moses never entered (verses 3-6). (2.) But lest it might be supposed that the promise of God guaranteeing rest to his people, was fulfilled in its fullest and ulti­mate sense when the Israelites under Joshua entered Canaan, the Apostle refers again to the ninety-fifth Psalm, and proves from it that even in the time of David, after the children of Israel had pos­sessed the land of Canaan for nearly five hundred years— even then there was danger that the living generation would, like their fa­thers, be excluded from the promised rest. From all of which, it clearly follows that there is still a rest remaining for the people of God. For as our author says, if Joshua had given the people rest in the land of Canaan, then most assuredly God would not after­ward have spoken of another rest by the mouth of his servant David (verses 7-9). II. The section closes with a renewed exhortation to labor ear­nestly to enter into the rest of God, especially in view of the heart-searching character of his word by which we are all to be judged at the last day (verses 11-13) 1. Here we may often deceive one another; and sometimes we may even deceive ourselves; but nothing can escape the eye of God and the all-permeating power of his word. 2. And hence the necessity of the most careful and constant self-examination, lest, like the Israelites, we too fall short of the promised rest. Under this section, we have therefore the four following para­graphs :I. Hebrews 3:1-6. Christ superior to Moses. II. Hebrews 3:7-19. Exhortations and warnings drawn from the exam­ple of the Israelites under Moses. III. Hebrews 4:1-10. Concerning the rest which remains for the people of God. IV. Hebrews 4:11-13. Renewed exhortation to strive earnestly to enter into God’ s rest, in view especially of the all-penetrating and heart­searching character of God’ s word. CHRIST TO MOSES Hebrews 3:1-6 Hebrews 3:1 ---Wherefore,—We have here a very beautiful illustration of the easy and natural manner in which our author passes from one sub­ject to another. The word “ wherefore” (hothen) is illative, and shows the very close and intimate connection of what follows in this verse, with what has been said of Christ in the two preceding chapters; and especially in the last paragraph of the second chap­ter. But what is here introduced as a consequence from premises considered, is made also a ground of transition to another subject. Hebrews 3:1 ---holy brethren,— These were the Hebrew Christians. They are addressed here by the Apostle, not as Jews, nor as brethren of Christ, but as his own brethren in Christ. And they are called holy brethren, not because they were all in possession of that holi­ness of heart which the Gospel requires, but because they had all professed to believe in Christ, to put on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and to be separated from the world as the peculiar people of God. In this sense, the Corinthian brethren are all called saints (agioi, 1 Corinthians 1:2); though we are assured by Paul in both his letters to the Corinthian Church, that some of them were very impure men. See references, and notes on Hebrews 2:11. Hebrews 3:1 ---partakers of the heavenly calling,— The word rendered calling (kleesis), means properly a call, a summons, an invitation; and hence by metonymy it means also the state or condition into which anyone is called. In 1 Corinthians 7:17-20, for example, Paul says to the Corinthian brethren, “ As the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk; and so I ordain in all the churches. Is any man called being circumcised? let him not be uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.” In this passage, the word calling evi­dently refers to the social rank and secular condition of each indi­vidual when he was called of God to partake of the “ heavenly call­ing” ; some were Jews and some were Gentiles, some were slaves and some were freemen. The “ heavenly calling,” according to Paul, is not designed to nullify and set aside arbitrarily and uncon­ditionally all such distinctions. The Jew, though converted to Christ, might nevertheless consistently remain in circumcision; and the Gentile, in uncircumcision. In this metonymical sense the word calling is used in our text to denote, not merely God’ s gra­cious invitation to sinners, but also and more particularly the bene­fits of this invitation; having special reference to the present state and condition of those who, in obedience to God’ s call, have put on Christ as he is offered to us in the Gospel. It is the high and holy calling of God in Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:14), to which our author here refers. And this is denominated a heavenly calling because it comes from Heaven, leads to Heaven, and fills with heavenly joys the hearts of all who are made partakers of it. Hebrews 3:1 ---consider the apostle and high priest— Meditate carefully and profoundly (katanoeesate) on the nature and character of Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. Our author makes here an earnest appeal to his Hebrew brethren to consider well all that he had said, and all that he was about to say, concerning Christ; to think of his Divinity, his humanity, his sufferings, his death, his burial, his resurrection, his ascension, his glorification, his universal dominion, his love, his sympathies, and every other attribute and perfection of his character. And this he does for the purpose of confirming and strengthening their faith, increasing their love, and guarding them against the sin of apostasy. The word apostle (apostelos) means one who is sent: a messen­ger of any kind. In this sense it is here applied to Christ, as the one sent by God for the redemption of mankind. “ The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” (1 John 4:14.) Christ is then the Apostle of God under the New Economy as Moses was his Apostle under the Old Economy. True, indeed, Moses is nowhere called the Apostle of God in the Holy Scrip­tures; but words equivalent to these occur frequently in the Old Testament. In Exodus 3:10, for example, God says to Moses, “ Come, now, therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou may- est bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.” And in the twelfth verse of the same chapter he says, “ And this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee.” See also Exodus 3:13-15 Exodus 4:28 Exodus 5:22 Exodus 7:16, etc. It is evident, therefore, that our author here applies this term to Christ as the Apostle, or Messen­ger, of the New Covenant (Mai. 3: 1), for the purpose of compar­ing him in this capacity with Moses the renowned and honored Apostle of the Old Covenant. They were both sent by God; and were therefore the Apostles of God. But the ministry of Christ, as Paul now proceeds to show, was far superior to that of Moses. In the fourth, sixth, and eighth sections of the Epistle, the priesthood of Christ is compared with that of Aaron, and shown to be supe­rior to it in every respect. Hebrews 3:1 ---of our profession,—The Greek word here rendered profession (homologia) means (1) an agreement or compact; and (2) an ad­mission, acknowledgment, or confession. It is God’ s prerogative to speak (legein), and it is man’ s duty and privilege to acknowl­edge homologein) the justice and propriety of what he says. Thus God spoke the words of the Old Covenant from Mount Sinai (Exodus 20-23), and the people then acknowledged his words, and consented to observe and do all that he had commanded (Exodus 24 :3) In like manner God has made known to us all the terms and stipulations of the New Covenant; and to these he requires us to give a hearty and unreserved assent and acknowledgment. But as Christ is himself the central truth, the Alpha and the Omega, of the New Covenant, it follows of course that all things pertaining to it are briefly summed up in the confession that “ Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16.) “ On this rock,” says Christ, “ I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:17.) This soon became publicly known as “ The Confession” of the primitive Christians; and hence it is that the Greek article is always prefixed to the noun which is used to express it. In Paul’ s first Epistle to Timothy, for exam­ple, he says to him, “ Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eter­nal life to which thou wast called, and didst confess the good con­fession (teen kaleen homologian) before many witnesses.” (1 Timothy 6:12.) And in the next verse he says, “ I charge thee in the sight of God who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ who before Pontius Pilate testified the good confession, that thou keep this commandment without spot and without reproach until the appear­ing of our Lord Jesus Christ.” See also Hebrews 4:14 Hebrews 10:23; 2 Corinthians 9:13. In all these passages the Greek article is used before the noun (homologia), as in 1 Timothy 6:12, to denote that the con­fession made by Christ and Timothy was the common and well- known confession that was then required of all, as a condition of church-membership. For as Paul says to the Roman brethren, “ with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:10). And Christ says, “ Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess before my Father who is in Heaven.” (Matthew 10:32.) When the confession is made publicly in the presence of wit­nesses, it may also be called, as in our text, a profession (profes- sio); which means simply a public avowal of one’ s belief and senti­ments. But the word confession or acknowledgment better ex­presses the meaning of the Apostle, and is also more in harmony with Greek usage. Hebrews 3:2 ---Who was faithful to him that appointed him,— More liter­ally, as being faithful to him that made him. The present participie being (onta) indicates that fidelity to God is an abiding and perpetual characteristic of Christ in his whole sphere of labor. He came to do the will of him that sent him. (John 4:34.) This he did while he tabernacled with us here on Earth; and this he is now doing in the discharge of the higher functions of his mediatorial reign. In his hands, the government of God and the interests of mankind are alike perfectly secure. Sooner will Heaven and Earth pass away, than even one jot or one tittle of the Divine law fail in his hands. He that appointed or made (to poieesanti) him, is, of course, God the Father. The reference here is not, as some think, to Christ’ s being eternally begotten of the Father (Bleek, Liine- mann); nor is it, as others allege, to his incarnation (Athanasius, Ambrose); but it is simply to his being officially appointed by the Father (De Wette, Delijzsch, etc.) ; to his being made the Apostle and High Priest of ou£ confession. “ It is the Lord,” says Samuel, “ that advanced Moses and Aaron, and brought your fathers up out of the land of Egypt.” (1 Samuel 12:6.) Here the Hebrew word rendered advanced means, literally, made, and it is so rendered in the Septuagint. (ho poieesan ton Mouseen kai ton Aaron.) It is, however, quite manifest that Samuel refers here, not to the crea­tion of Moses and Aaron as men, but to their official appointment as the Apostle and High Priest of the Old Covenant. See Mark 3:14. And so also the word (poieo) is used in our text. God has made Jesus both the Apostle and High Priest of our confes­sion ; and in the discharge of all the duties appertaining to these sacred functions, he (Jesus) has always been faithful. Hebrews 3:2 ---as also Moses was faithful in all his house.— That Moses was faithful in the discharge of all the duties of his office, God has him­self borne witness. “ If,” says he in his admonition to Aaron and Miriam, “ there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make my­self known to him in a vision, and I will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all my house. With him I will speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” (Numbers 12:6-8.) This much, then, is evident, that Moses was faithful to him that appointed him, in the discharge of all his official duties. But what is the meaning of the word house (oikos) in this connection? and to whom does the pronoun his (autou) refer? A house is a dwelling-place; and the word is manifestly used here to designate the Church of the Israelites, as God’ s ancient dwelling place. This is obvious (1) from the context. We learn from the sixth verse of this chapter, that the house over which Christ now presides and in which he officiates, is the Christian Church; which, as Paul says in his Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians 2:20-22), is a holy temple, fitly framed together, and designed as a habitation or dwelling-place of God through the Spirit. See also 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 1 Corinthians 6:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:5, etc. The same thing is made evident also from the consideration of sundry other parallel passages, in which God is represented as ac­tually dwelling among the ancient Israelites. In Exodus 25:8, for ex­ample, God says to Moses, “ Let them [the Israelites] make me a Sanctuary that I may dwell among them.” And in Exodus 29:45, he says, “ I will dwell among the children of Israel, and I will be their God.” See also Leviticus 26:12; 1 Kings 6:11-13, etc. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the house in which Moses was faithful as the steward of God, was the house of Israel; the same as the Church of God in the wilderness. (Acts 7:38.) Let us, then, next inquire for the proper antecedent of the pro­noun his \ Hebrews 3:1. Let the reader keep constantly in mind the leading thought in this book, namely, the superiority of the system of Christ over that of Moses. Holy brethren. Not that worshipers under Moses were not holy, for they were required to be so (Levit-icus 11:44, 45). But they did not become brethren by their holiness; they were born into that relationship regardless of their knowledge of God. (See 1 Samuel 3:7.) To be brethren of Christ requires a life of righteousness (Matthew 12:50), hence Paul calls these people by the term italicized. Heavenly calling is used mainly as a mark of superiority for the service under Christ over the old one. The word apostle means one who is sent on a mission with authority to speak and act. Jesus was sent from Heaven to earth to carry out a mission of salvation. After shedding His blood in a supreme sacrifice, Jesus was qualified to reenter the court of eternal glory, there to act as the High Priest for the Christians on the merits of His shed blood, even as the high priests in the Mosaic system entered the second court of the tabernacle and temple with the blood of animals. Hebrews 3:2. Who was faithful . . . as also Moses. All of the good points about Moses were equalled and some of them were excelled by Christ. They were equal as to being faithful over their own houses or religious institutions. Hebrews 3:3. This man means Christ, and a point in which he excelled Moses is stated, namely, that He was the builder of his own house (the church). The house over which Moses presided was the Jewish nation of which he was not the originator. Hebrews 3:4. The word man is not in the original and some is an indefinite pronoun. The idea is that as a rule, each house has its own particular builder whose activities are limited to the one house. On the other hand, God is the Master builder whose architectural powers include everything in the universe. Hebrews 3:5. Moses did not build the house (Jewish nation), but he was given the honor of being a servant over it. Since he was a faithful servant, his behaviour and teaching became a testimony or background for the things which were to be spoken afterward, meaning the ordinances under Christ. (See Romans 15:4.) Hebrews 3:6. Christ was even more than a faithful servant; he was a son, and was given the honor of presiding over His own house (the church), which his Father gave to him. Whose house are we refers to Paul and all others who are faithful. The faithfulness consists in maintaining our confidence or trust in Christ, which causes us to rejoice in the hope that such a divine house contains. It is necessary that our conduct in these matters be continued unto the end (of life). Hebrews 3:7. Paul now makes a quotation from Psalms 95:7-11, but strengthens it with the declaration that it is the Holy Ghost (or Spirit) that says it. That means that David was inspired to make the statement. Hear his voice means to hear God who speaks to us through his Son (chapter 1:1). Hebrews 3:8. Harden not your hearts is a warning not to set their minds against the teaching of Christ. As in the provocation refers to the disobedi-ence of ancient Israel by which they provoked God into punishing them. Paul specifies the circumstance to which he refers by mention of the days they were going through the wilderness. Hebrews 3:9. The apostle gives further explanation of his preceding warning by the words of this verse. Your fathers means the first heads of the Jewish nation. Tempted and proved occurred when the disobedience of the Israelites put the patience of God to a test. Such conduct on their part was without cause, for they had abundance of evidence that He was able to care for them under all conditions, and also that He would punish them for their rebellion. All of this was manifested to them during the forty years in the wilderness. Hebrews 3:10. To be grieved means God was "wroth or displeased with" them according to Thayer's lexicon. That generation has reference to the heads of the nation who were leaders in the rebellious actions. Their misconduct was due to a heart or mind filled with error. As a result of such an attitude toward God, they failed to become acquainted with His ways or the ways the Lord wished the people to follow. Hebrews 3:11. God swore or made a solemn decision against the disobedient people. This was caused by His wrath or grief as mentioned in verse 10. The decision was that they should not be permitted to enter into my rest. This rest refers to their settlement in the promised land, which the Lord had designed should come to his people after the weariness of the wandering. God calls it his rest because he designed it to be an antitype of the rest on the seventh day from His works of creation. Hebrews 3:12. Take heed is the same warning made in verse 8, for these Christians not to make the same mistake their Jewish forefathers made in the wilderness. Unbelief is shown to cause man to have an evil heart. Such a heart will cause a man to depart from the living God. This is the same warning Paul gave in his epistle to the church at Corinth (1 Corinthians 10:1-11). We should profit by the mistakes of others and thus avoid a like falling from the favor of the Lord. The record of these things is placed in the Old Testament for our benefit (Romans 15:4). Hebrews 3:13. To exhort means to insist on doing what we know to be our duty. These brethen knew it was their duty to listen to the teaching given by Christ, for they just had the instruction in this epistle. They were told to do the exhorting daily which would require frequent contact with each other. Such an intimacy was expected of the people of Christ, and it was even predicted that it would be so. In Malachi 3:16 we may read, "Then they that feared the Lord spake often to each other." While it is called to day is equivalent to saying, "While the days are going by." This teaching of Paul is not very favorable to the notion of half-hearted disciples who insist that Christians have no need to assemble except on Lord's Day to "partake of the communion." Hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. The Lord knew that frequent contact with each other was necessary to prevent disciples being deceived by sin. Hebrews 3:14. This verse is virtually the same as verse 6. To be a partaker of Christ is to have part in the good things He has in store for his faithful disciples. Hebrews 3:15. While it is said signifies that the admonition will not always be given, hence while it is to day is the time to heed the admonition given by the apostle. Hebrews 3:16 Hebrews 3:16. Again the apostle wishes his readers to profit by the mistakes of their forefathers. For some indicates that Paul has reference to a certain part of the Jewish people in the wilderness. We may often hear some such a remark as the following: "Of the vast congreation that left Egypt only two ever reached the promised land." This will be said in spite of the positive statement that the failure to go through did not happen to all that came out of Egypt by Moses. This kind of statement would indicate a greater number of exceptions than only two. Hebrews 3:17. This verse explains that the forgoing sad fate pertained only to the sinners---those able to be responsible for their actions. Those were the ones only whose carcases fell in the wilderness. The identity of the class that fell is made still more definite in Numbers 14:22-31. By considering these several verses it may be seen that only the men of war are considered when just two were to be permitted to enter the land of promise. We have no definite information as to how many women and children made the entire journey from Egypt to Canaan. Hebrews 3:18. The ones who were to be unable to enter the land of promise are again mentioned under the general description of them that believed not. Hebrews 3:19. All of the shortcomings the Israelites committed in the wilderness are charged up against unbelief. This is significant and teaches the fundamental truth that whenever professed disciples fail to do their duty, it may be laid to their lack of faith. THE REST WHICH REMAINS FOR THE PEOPLE OF GODHeb_4:1-10 Hebrews 4:1 ---Let us therefore fear,— The proper object of fear is danger. And as the Hebrew Christians were then in danger of falling away, the Apostle very properly appeals here to their sense of fear, for the purpose of exciting them to greater diligence in the Divine life. For he well knew that everything depended on their attaining to that rest which remains for the people of God. If they failed in this, they failed in everything. In that event, their confession would be all in vain, and life itself would be worse than an abor­tion. Hebrews 4:1 ---lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest,— The participle being left (kataleipomenees) is in the present tense, implying that the promise of entering God’ s rest is made sure to all Christians who, like Joshua and Caleb, continue faithful to the end of life. This the Apostle here assumes, for the present, on the grounds already stated. But lest anyone should doubt the reality of such a rest, he immediately takes up the consideration of this subject, and makes it his main theme in this paragraph. Hebrews 4:1 ---any of you should seem to come short of it.— Or more ex­actly, Lest any of you may seem (dokee) to have come short of it (hustereekenai). That is, lest it may appear at the end of your course or on the day of final reckoning, that any of you shall have failed to reach the heavenly rest, the sabbatism that remains for the people of God. The Apostle would, in a word, have his Hebrew brethren in Christ take heed, lest while there is remaining to them a promise of entering into God’ s rest, any of them should, like their fathers in the wilderness, fall short of it through their own obstinate unbelief. Hebrews 4:2 ---For unto us was the gospel preached, etc.— This is a very inaccurate translation of the original, and conveys to the English reader quite an erroneous impression. Literally rendered the passage stands thus: For we are evangelized (esmen eueengelis- tnenoi) as well as they. That is, the promise of entering into rest, on given conditions, has been made to us Christians, as well as to the ancient Hebrews. The assertion is designed to set forth more directly and categorically what is assumed in the first verse, viz., that there is really left to us a promise of entering into God’ s rest. The Apostle means to say that the joyful promise of entering into rest, made first to the Israelites, has respect to us as well as to them. Primarily, it had reference to the possession of Canaan; and secondarily, to that better rest of which the rest in Canaan was but a type. This same promise, in its second intention, still remains for the encouragement and consolation of all God’ s people. Into it they will all finally enter; unless, like the Israelites, they fall by the way on account of their own practical infidelity. Hebrews 4:2 ---but the word preached did not profit them,—Literally, the word of hearing are all of one holy brotherhood. (3:1.) It mat­ters not how much they may differ from one another in wealth, tal­ents, learning, and social advantages, they are nevertheless all one in Christ Jesus. The rich should not therefore despise the poor, nor should the poor envy the rich. But all should strive to main­tain “ the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” ; and to promote each other’ s good, as heirs of the grace of life and joint heirs of the eternal inheritance. To think much about Christ as the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, will be of great service to us in many ways (verse 1). It will serve, for instance, to increase our faith in him and our confidence in the perfection and efficacy of the gospel plan of salvation through him. It will increase our love for God, who has so tenderly loved us as to send his own Son to redeem us. It will correct and restrain our selfishness, and make us more zealous for the glory of God and the salvation of the world. And, in a word, it will make us all more humble, more prayerful, and more earnest in our endeavors to “ live soberly, and righteously, and godly.” How much, how very much may depend on the fidelity of God’ s ministers (verse 5). Had the servants of Christ all acted as did Moses, and observed faithfully the more full and encouraging instructions of the Holy Spirit that are given to us in the New Testament, how very different would be both the Church and the world today. How many that are now idolaters would be Chris­tians; and how many of those that are now eternally lost, might today be rejoicing among the spirits of the just made perfect. God still dwells with his people (verse 6). The Church of God is the house of God, as it is written, “ I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my peo­ple.” (2 Corinthians 6:16.) Why, then, do we not draw nigh to him who has come so very near to us? Why not, like Enoch and Moses, walk with him, as seeing him who is invisible? Why not avoid everything that is offensive in his sight, such as the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye, and the pride of life ? And why not, like Christ, humbly endeavor to do the will of God in all things? Surely this is but our highest happiness, as it is also our most reasonable service. Fidelity to the end of life is essential in order to the final en­joyment of the great salvation (verses 6, 14). With such warn­ings and admonitions before us as those which are given in this section, it is all folly to rely for happiness on the imaginary “ un­conditional decrees” of God; or on the once prevalent doctrine of “ final perseverance.” “ He that endures to the end shall be saved.” (Matthew 10:22.) Without this actual perseverance on our part, through the abounding grace of God, nothing can save us from the torments of the damned. It is not enough that God has sent his Son into the world to save it; and that Christ has sent the Holy Spirit to convince mankind “ of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.” It is not enough that we have confessed Christ, and that we have been actually washed from our past sins in his blood. We must also continue to persevere in well-doing, seeking for honor, and glory, and immortality, if we would enjoy eternal life. (Romans 2:7.) “ For if we sin willfully, after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more [a] sacrifice for sins.” (10: 26.) “ Let him [then] that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.” (1 Corinthians 10:12.) Let no one, then trifle with the commands of God, and with the promptings of an enlightened conscience; no, not even for a day or an hour (verses 7, 13). “ To-day, if ye hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as at Meribah, as on the day of Massah in the wilderness.” All unnecessary delay is dangerous, because it is sinful and serves to harden the hearts of those who yield to its se­ductive influence. And hence the law of the Kingdom of Heaven is (1) to hear; (2) to believe; and (3) to obey from the heart that form of doctrine which is delivered to us in the Gospel. The primi­tive Christians did this; and then went on their way rejoicing. See Acts passim. But the power of sin over the human heart is very great (verse 13). The unregenerate are slaves to its influence. See Romans 6:6-7 Romans 6:17 Romans 6:20 Romans 7:13-23. And even the Christian, enlight­ened and assisted as he is by the Holy Spirit, has need to be con­stantly on his guard, lest he too be ensnared and hardened through its deceitfulness. (1 Corinthians 9:27.) And hence the great importance and necessity of that mutual exhortation and encouragement which our author so earnestly recommends. “ Exhort one another daily,” he says, “ while it is called To-day, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” And again he says to the Gala­tian brethren, “ Bear ye one another’ s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” (Galatians 6:2.) God has made us all fellow-helpers one of another, by committing to us the word of reconciliation and exhortation. Why, then, are we so very unfaithful to the trust which God has committed to us in this particular? Why do we not exhort one another daily? Why are we so prone to talk about anything and everything else rather than about the one thing needful? When we meet with our brethren, we are all wont to ask for their welfare. We inquire very particularly about their prosperity in business, and also about their physical health, comforts, and enjoy­ments. But how many of us are in the habit of inquiring after the state and condition of their souls? How many mutual inquiries are made about one another’ s progress in the Divine life; and about the peculiar trials, difficulties, and dangers that beset us, and against which we have to contend in our feeble efforts to reach the heavenly rest? That there is a great want of fidelity among Chris­tians in this respect, admits, I think, of no doubt. But why is it so? Has it ceased to be true that “ Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh” ? Or does this habit of worldly conver­sation about secular matters, indicate an alarming want of spiritu­ality in our own poor unbelieving hearts? That public sentiment is a great barrier in the way of religious conversation in the social circle, I freely admit. It is really amazing to what an extent the Devil has succeeded in persuading the people, that it is impolite to speak of God, or of Christ, or of Heaven, in the parlor or on the public highway. And the fear of giving offense, no doubt, often constrains many a Christian to withhold his lips from speaking good, even when the fire of God’ s grace is burning in his soul. (Psalms 39:1-3.) But after making all due allowance for the bind­ing obligations of public sentiment within proper limits, it must, I fear, be conceded that this general delinquency on the part of Christians is fearfully indicative of our own want of faith in God and in the word of his grace. Christ, it is true, never cast pearls before swine; and in some cases he refrained from working mira­cles on account of the extreme wickedness and infidelity of the people. See Matthew 13:58, and Mark 6:5-6. But still, the main burden of his conversation, wherever he went, was “ the Kingdom of God and his righteousness.” May God grant us all grace to walk in his footsteps. Our greatest want has always been a want of faith in God and in the word of his grace (verses 18, 19). It was this that first brought sin into the world. (Genesis 3:6.) It was this that filled the antediluvian earth with violence, and brought in a flood of waters on the ungodly. It was this that caused the dispersion from Babel, and that soon after filled the world with idolatry. It was this that brought down fire and brimstone from Heaven on Sodom and Go­morrah, and made these cities of the plain a monument of God’ s hatred of sin. It was this that so often brought down God’ s judg­ments on even his own chosen people in the wilderness and in Ca­naan, and that has made their descendants a proverb and a by­word in every nation under Heaven. It was this that divided the Church of God, and that filled the dwelling-place of the Most High with all manner of Jewish and Gentile abominations. And it is this that now deprives us all of a thousand spiritual enjoyments, and that will hereafter shut the gates of Heaven against millions who, like the rebellious Israelites, will seek to enter into God’ s rest when it is too late. (Luke 13:24-30.) No wonder, then, that our blessed Savior so often sums up all sin under the head of unbelief. “ When he [the Comforter] is come,” says Christ, “ he will convict the world of sin, because they believe not on me.” (John 16:9.) See also John 3:18-21 John 5:39-47 John 8:24 John 15:22-25, etc. Let us, then, all beware, lest there be also in any of us an evil heart of unbelief in apostatizing from the living God. The main business of life is to labor to enter into God’ s rest. (4: 11.) Here we are all but strangers and pilgrims, traveling, like the Israelites in the wilderness, to the promised inheritance. What folly it is, then, to build costly mansions and monuments on these sandy foundations in the desert over which we are now pass­ing so rapidly on our way to the everlasting Zion! What folly it is to call our lands by our own names. (Psalms 49:11), and to lay up treasures here on Earth, where moth and rust are constantly corroding and corrupting. Let us all look rather to the end of our pilgrimage; and labor to enter into the everlasting rest which is now in reserve for every child of God. And let us rejoice, as did Paul, that it is better to depart and to be with Christ in those heav­enly mansions. How utterly vain are all the hopes and deceits of the hypo­crite ; and with what shame and confusion of face he will stand fi­nally before God, naked and exposed to the all-penetrating eye of him with whom we have to do (verses 11-13). Then, every ref­uge of lies in which he trusted will be swept away; and all the deep, dark, and hidden recesses of his whole spiritual being will be made manifest in the light of God’ s countenance, by means of the living energies of that word which pierces through to the dividing asunder of the soul and of the spirit, even to the extent of their joints and their marrows! May God save us all from such an or­deal on the day of his final reckoning. SECTION FOURHebrews 4: 14 to 5: 10 In Hebrews 3:1, the Apostle calls on his Hebrew brethren to consider attentively Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession. He then takes up the consideration of his apostleship, and speaks of it and other matters subordinate to it, to the close of the third section. (Hebrews 4:13.) But in doing so, he of course develops and illus­trates also, in some measure, the perfections of Christ as a High Priest. Indeed all that is said of Christ’ s Divinity in the first sec­tion, of his humanity in the second, and of his apostleship in the third, has some bearing also on his priesthood. And hence it is that, in the fourth section, he is at once presented to us so encour­agingly as our great prevailing and sympathetic High Priest. In the course of this section, the Apostle— I. Encourages his brethren to hold fast their confession; and relying on Jesus as their great and sympathizing High Priest, toapproach the Throne of grace, and ask for help with all confidence. (Hebrews 4:14-16.) This he exhorts and encourages them to do— On the ground that Jesus is a great High Priest; far above all created intelligences (Hebrews 4:14). That he has gone up through the heavens, to appear in the presence of God for us (Hebrews 4:14). That he is himself, as was shown in the first chapter, the Son of God, the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth (Hebrews 4:14). That he is a tender and sympathetic High Priest, having been tempted in all respects even as we are, but without sin (Hebrews 4:15). II. He next shows for what purpose a high priesthood was ap­pointed among men; and specifies some of the principal qualifica­tions that were required in all who would perform its sacred func­tions. (Hebrews 5:1-4.) 1. Every such priest taken from among men, is, he says, or­dained to officiate for men in things pertaining to God; and espe­cially to offer both gifts, and sacrifices for sins. The office was never intended to be a sinecure. But it was created and sustained for the benefit and encouragement of those who desired to worship and serve God acceptably (Hebrews 5:1). 2. It was necessary, therefore, that every High Priest should himself be a man of experience and sympathy; so that he might at all times be able to encourage, comfort, and instruct the erring and the ignorant (Hebrews 5:2). 3. That he should receive his appointment from God as did Aaron (Hebrews 5:4). III. After stating the object of the priesthood, and specifying some of the leading duties and qualifications of every High Priest chosen from among men, the Apostle next proceeds to encourage his brethren still further, by showing them how eminently Christ is qualified for all the duties of the sacerdotal office (verses 5-10). 1. He was constituted a High Priest by God himself, as David testifies in Psalms 110:4 (Hebrews 5:5-6). 2. He was, while in the flesh, a man of great sorrow and afflic­tion (Hebrews 5:7). 3. He was a man of prayer (Hebrews 5:7).4. He was heard and delivered from his greatest fears, showing that he had power with God (Hebrews 5:7). 5. His experience far transcended that of every other man. Though honored and exalted as the Son of God, he nevertheless went down into the lowest depths of human sorrow and suffering (Hebrews 5:8). 6. And being thus made perfect, as a High Priest, he is now able and willing to save with an everlasting salvation all who be­lieve and obey him (Hebrews 5:9). From the preceding analysis it is manifest, that this section may be divided into the three following paragraphs: I. Hebrews 4:14-16. Encouragement to persevere in the Christian life, and to approach with confidence the Throne of grace, drawn from the exalted position and the sympathetic love of Jesus, the great High Priest of our confession. II. Hebrews 5:1-4. Encouraging and benevolent design of the priest­hood ; and the necessary qualifications of those who would minister acceptably in the High Priest’ s office. III. Hebrews 5:5-10. Preeminent qualifications of Jesus to officiate as our High Priest; with further encouragements to believe and obey him. TO IN THE LIFE, AND TO WITH THE THRONE OF GRACE, DRAWN FROM THE EXALTED AND THE LOVE OF JESUS, AS THE HIGH PRIEST OF OUR Hebrews 4:14-16 Hebrews 4:14 ---Seeing then that we have a great high priest,— The main discussion of Christ’ s priesthood is to be found in what follows to the close of the eighth section. (10: 18.) But in the first three sec­tions there is enough said of him to warrant the conclusion that we have a great High Priest who has gone up through the heavens into the Holy of holies, there to appear in the prespice of God for us. And hence it is that the Apostle makes this the ground of another earnest exhortation to his Hebrew brethren to hold fast their confes­sion. The title high priest (hiereus megas) occurs first in Lev. 21 : 10, where it is used to designate Aaron and his successors, upon whose heads the anointing oil was poured, and who were severally consecrated to put on the holy garments. The corresponding word in the New Testament (archiereus) is used to designate (1) the High Priest proper; (2) the deputy of the High Priest; (3) any­one who had ever borne the office; and (4) the head of each of the twenty-four courses of the priesthood. (1 Chron. 24.) But here, as well as in Hebrews 2:17 Hebrews 3:1 Hebrews 5:5 Hebrews 5:10 Hebrews 6:20 Hebrews 7:26 Hebrews 8:1 Hebrews 9:11 Hebrews 9:25, it refers to Christ, who, as a Priest upon his throne (Zechariah 6:13), is ever ready to receive and bless those who come unto God by him. The adjective great megas) is used here, not in its technical sense, as it often is, to distinguish Aaron and his successors in office from Priests of the common order, but in its proper sense to denote the real, personal, and official greatness of Christ, who, as our author shows, is superior even to the angels, as well as to Moses and all the Priests of the Old Covenant. Hebrews 4:14 ---that is passed into the heavens,— More literally, who has passed through (dieleluthota) the heavens. That is, through the aerial and sidereal heavens, on his way to the Heaven of heavens, the Most Holy Place, not made with hands; where, as a Priest, Christ offered his own blood once for all, and then sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high (Hebrews 1:3) ; “ a minister of the Sanc­tuary and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not men” (Hebrews 8:2). Hebrews 4:14 ---Jesus the Son of God,— These words are added by way of ex­planation, to denote more definitely the power, glory, and dignity of our great High Priest. He is not of the house of Aaron; but he is the Son of God, by whom all things were created, and for whom all things were created; “ the brightness of the Father’ s glory and the express image of his person.” See notes on Hebrews 1:2-3 Hebrews 1:8. Hebrews 4:14 ---let us hold fast our profession.— Rather, our concession \ Hebrews 4:1. The word fear in this verse means anxiety or extreme caution, not to make the same mistake the Israelites made. There is a promise made to the disciples of Christ, to be considered a few verses below, and they might come short or miss it. Hebrews 4:2. The simple meaning of gospel is "good news," hence any announcement of good news or promises may rightly be termed gospel. The Israelites had good information that they were to be given a land of rest from their wanderings. The disciples of Christ are given the promise of a rest from their worldly cares after this life is over, provided they are faithful to the end. The promise did not profit the Israelites under consideration because they did not believe it. (See Hebrews 3:18-19.) Hebrews 4:3. We which have believed are the only ones who are promised the privilege of entering into rest. As I have sworn, etc., means God deals with all people on the same principle. That is that He declared to ancient Israel that their unbelief would keep them out of the promised land. Although the works were finished. A rest period implies a preceding one of work, and that took place in the beginning of creation. Hence the rest after the labor was established, which was to serve as a type of the next rest: the one in Canaan after the wandering in the wilderness. Hebrews 4:4. The certain place where this is spoken is Genesis 2:2-3, and that is where the Lord set the pattern of rest after labor that was to be a foreshadowing of another rest far into the future. Hebrews 4:5. But the ones whom God planned to enjoy that second rest made themselves unworthy of it, hence He aware that they should not enter into it. Hebrews 4:6. Remaineth that some must enter therin. God is sure to "have His own way" at last, even though certain ones may be rebellious and thus lose the benefits that He intended for them. Even if unbelief cuts off the ones first intended to have been favored, the Lord will find another outlet for the divine mercy. Hebrews 4:7. Limiteth is from a Greek word that means "to determine, appoint" according to Thayer. Saying in David means it is said in the writings or David, namely, in Psalms 95:7-8. The thought of this verse is that God "determined" to have another rest and caused David to write about it, and to exhort the ones living before it not to make the mistake the former ones did. Hebrews 4:8. The Greek word for Jesus is also defined "Joshua" in the lexicon, and should be so translated in this verse. Joshua led the few faithful ones across the Jordan into the Canaan rest, but God had already determined upon another rest, seeing so many of the candidates for the rest in Canaan had proved unworthy. In justice to the fathful ones at that time, they were permitted to be led by Joshua into the land of Canaan, but that circumstance was not to be regarded as the final arragement of the Lord for a better rest. That is why our verse states that Jesus (Joshua) did not give them rest, meaning he did not give them the third and final rest. This truth is further indicated by the Lord's statement afterwards that there was to be another day. Hebrews 4:9. This verse is the climax of the reasoning in the preceding verses. There remaineth signifies that the final rest is still in the future, and that is the one which Christians are warned not to miss on account of unbelief. It may be well to observe that three rests have been discussed by Paul, and he shows that God speaks of them as "my rest." That is because He originated them and determined the conditions affecting them. Briefly stated, the three rests are the seventh day after the creation, the national rest in Canaan, and the rest in Heaven after the judgement. Hebrews 4:10. This is a comment on the relation of the rest to work. The mere mention of rest implies a preceding period of work to be followed by the rest. Hebrews 4:11. Verse 9 (Hebrews 4:9) states the grand conclusion upon the line of reasoning the apostle has been giving. The present verse states the exhortion that would logically be given upon such a conclusive background. Since the term rest implies a preceding one of labor, the apostle makes his exhortation upon that basis. Disciples who are not willing to labor for the Lord, should not expect to share in His rest. If they at last "come short of it," the cause will be attributed to their disobedience or unbelief. Hebrews 4:12. The orginal Greek word for quick is defined in the lexicon as "alive" and that for powerful is "active." The meaning of the clause is that the word of God is alive and active. When it is absorbed as spiritual food its effect should be to make one a living and active servant of the Lord. A twoedged sword is extra sharp because such instruments are made of the best material. Likewise the word of God is composed of the best material, namely, the wisdom of divine inspiration. It would not indicate any unusual keenness for a knife to sever between things that do not resemble, or that are not closely adhering to each other. The ability of the "sword of the Spirit" to distinguish between the soul and spirit of man Is mentioned as a proof of its keennesss. This indicates that there is not much difference between them, and yet .that some difference exists. This subject is explained in t h e comments at 1 Thessalonians 5:23. Joints and marrow are other parts of the human system that pertain to the flesh, and are used figuratively for the same purpose as the preceding illustration, showing the sharpness of the divine instrument. Discerner is from which means a measuring rule or standard, by which things are measured and judged. The statement means that the word of God is the standard by which all our thoughts and intents are to be regulated. It is sometimes insisted that Christians may think whatever they please as long as they keep it to themselves. This verse condems such a notion, and it is contradicted also by Philippians 4:8-9 which tells Christians the subjects on which they have a right to think. Hebrews 4:13. The foregoing verse and remarks have special reference to the Word of God as an inspired volume. But if God can produce a book that has such qualities, then He certainly has a mind that is likewise able. Everything that we think (or do) is seen by the eyes of the Infinite One, because his "eyes are in every place, beholding the evil and the good" (Proverbs 15:3). Hebrews 4:14. Jesus is a great high priest because he is the Son of God. Another item of His greatness is his entrance into the heavens or the place where God is, whereas the high priests of the Mosaic system entered into the buildings on earth, which were only the figures or types of the ones above. Paul uses this truth as a basis for our holding fast or firm to our profession of faith; not going back to Moses. Hebrews 4:15. In taking on a body with the same nature as ours, Jesus was able to have the same experiences as we. Touched with the feeling means to sympathize with our infirmities. Whatever would be a temptation to us would be likewise one to Him, and he came in contact with all kinds of temptations which are on the earth, yet never yielded once to them. Hebrews 4:16. Come boldly denotes a feeling of confidence that we may have on account of such a sympthetic Intercessor. The Israelites came near the tabernacle or temple, relying on their high priest to officiate on their behalf, by making intercession for them before the mercyseat in the most holy place, which was a type of the throne of grace. Accordingly we as spiritual Israel may approach by faith unto this throne where Jesus is acting as our High Priest. Our prayers through Him will reach the ears of God, calling for grace or favor to help us in the time of need while in this world of temptation. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 5 AND DESIGN OF THE ; AND THE OF THOSE WHO WOULD IN THE HIGH PRIEST’ S OFFICE Hebrews 5:1-4 Hebrews 5:1 ---For every high priest, etc.— The object of the Apostle in this paragraph, as above indicated, is to further encourage his Hebrew brethren to draw near at all times to the Throne of grace, and there, in the name of Jesus, to seek for seasonable help. This he insists we should feel encouraged to do from the fact that God has himself appointed the priesthood for the very purpose of aiding and supporting us in the discharge of our religious duties. For every High Priest, he says, being taken from among men, is ap­pointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; being able to have compassion for the ignorant and erring, since he himself is compassed with infirmity; and on this account, he is under obligation, as for the people, so also for himself to offer for sins. Since, then, it was God’ s benevo­lent intention in the ordination of the priesthood to comfort and support us in the discharge of our religious duties, we should espe­cially feel encouraged to approach the Throne of grace in the name of Jesus, who, as our ever living High Priest, is so eminently qual­ified to help our infirmities, bear our weaknesses, and procure for us through the sacrifice of himself the pardon of our sins, and that full measure of grace which is necessary for our support under all the trials, temptations, and conflicts of life. Hebrews 5:1 ---is ordained for men— It was not for the benefit of God, but of men, that the priesthood was instituted. God does not need any such help, so far as it respects himself. He was infinitely happy before the sacerdotal office was created, and he would still be so, even if all the laws and ordinances of the priesthood were forever abrogated. Nevertheless, he so loved and pitied our poor, lost, and ruined race, that he gave his own Son to die for it; and in order to make the benefits of Christ’ s death available to all, God instituted the priesthood and many other ordinances as media of blessings to mankind. Surely, then, it is not the will of God that any should perish, but that all should be brought to repentance and to the en­joyment of the great salvation. “ He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” Hebrews 5:1 ---in things pertaining to God,— That is, in religious matters. Aaron and his son were not appointed to any secular calling. It was not their province to cultivate the soil, to carry on commerce, or even to investigate the laws and ordinances of nature. They were called to minister in holy things; and especially to “ offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.” The words gifts (dora) and sacrifices (tlmsiai) are sometimes used interchangeably, as in Genesis 4:3-5. But when contrasted, as they are in this case, and also in 8: 3; 9: 9, the former is used for bloodless offerings, and the latter for such as required the life of the victim. Hebrews 5:2 ---Who can have compassion on the ignorant,— The word rendered have compassion (metriopatheo) means to feel moder­ately. “ It comes,” says Delitzsch, “ from the mint of Greek ethical philosophy; and it was employed by Academics, Peripatetics, and Skeptics, to indicate the right mean between a slave-like passion­ateness and a stoical apathy. It is used by Philo to describe Abra­ham’ s sober grief on the loss of Sarah (volume ii. 37), and Jacob’ s imperturbable patience under afflictions (volume ii. 45). Trans­ferred from the language of the schools to general literature, it signifies the disposition of mind which keeps the right mean be­tween excessive feeling and sheer indifference; and here it indi­cates a pathetic judgment which is neither too severe nor too le­nient ; but reasonable, sober, indulgent, and kind.” Such a quality of head and heart was peculiarly necessary in every High Priest; for to him it belonged to decide, in any given case, whether or not a sacrifice could be legally offered for the sin committed. See Leviticus 10:8-11; Deuteronomy 17:8-13 Deuteronomy 24:8 Deuteronomy 33:10; Mai. 2:7. If a man sinned through ignorance or in error, that is, either without a knowledge of God’ s will in the case, or under such temptations as might serve to obscure for the time being his con­sciousness of guilt, then in that event and under such circumstances a sacrifice might be offered, and the sin might be forgiven. (Numbers 15:22-29.) But not so if the sin was committed with a high hand, that is, in a spirit of haughty insolence and open rebellion against God and his government. In that event, there was no room for repentance, and none for sacrifice. The presumptuous sinner was always to be put to death, “ at the mouth of two or three witnesses.” (Numbers 15:30-31; Deuteronomy 17:6.) See notes on 6: 4-6. But in many cases it might be difficult to determine the exact nature and character of the offense. What the Jews were wont to call, by a species of euphemism, a sin of ignorance, might under some cir­cumstances seem, for a time at least, to be a presumptuous sin. And hence the necessity under the Law, as well as under the Gos­pel, of using all lawful means to bring the offending party to re­pentance. This was especially the duty of the High Priest, who, as the head of the sacerdotal order, was charged, on the one hand, with faithfully executing the law of God against all high-handed transgressors; and, on the other, with exercising all due forbear­ance and compassion towards the ignorant and the erring. Hebrews 5:2 ---for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity.— A proper sense of our own infirmities enables us to bear with more becoming patience the infirmities of others. “ I have,” says Paul, “ great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart for my breth­ren, my kinsmen, according to the flesh; for I myself was once, like them, wishing to be accursed from Christ.” (Romans 9:2-3.) And just so it was with Aaron and his successors. They, too, like their brethren, were compassed about, and, as it were, clothed with all the weaknesses and infirmities common to our fallen nature. Aaron’ s folly in making the golden calf (Exodus 32:1-6) was to him­self, no doubt, a source of much grief and painful experience; but it served, nevertheless, to make him deal more tenderly with others who were afterward overcome by similar temptations. Hebrews 5:3 ---And by reason hereof, etc.— On account of the infirmity which constantly beset him, and which rendered imperfect even his most solemn services, the High Priest was required to offer sacri­fices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people. This he did not only on special occasions and for special offenses (Leviticus 4:3-12), but also in all the regular daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices that were offered for the sins of the nation; in all these there was an acknowledgement of his own guilt, as well as of the guilt of his brethren. And on the Day of atonement, he was re­quired to go into the Most Holy Place, and there make an offering for his own sins, before he was allowed to offer for the sins of the people. This of course served to make him deal more tenderly and compassionately with the ignorant and the erring. Much of what is said in this paragraph is very beautifully and impressively illustrated by the symbolical dress of the High Priest; several parts of which indicate very clearly the holy and represent­ative character of his office, and also the righteous and benevolent design of his administration. These articles of clothing were (1) a pair of Drawers; (2) a long Coat or Tunic; (3) a Girdle; (4) a Mitre; (5) the Robe of the Ephod; (6) the Ephod; (7) the Breastplate; and (8) the Plate of the Mitre. The first four of these were called “ linen garments,” because they were made of fine white linen, which in all ages has been regarded as a symbol of purity and holiness. See 1 Chronicles 5:12; Revelation 19:8. And hence these were called also “ holy garments.” (Leviticus 16:4.) The four other pieces were also called “ holy garments” (Exodus 28:2 Exodus 28:4); and by the Jews they were frequently designated as “ The golden gar­ments,” because they all consisted more or less of gold, either plated or interwoven with their texture. See Exodus 28. The first of these, the Robe of the Ephod was a long, sky-blue robe, without a seam, and was worn directly under the Ephod. Around its lower border were tassels made of blue, and purple, and scarlet, in the form of pomegranates, alternating with golden bells. The Rabbis say there were seventy-two of each. See Exodus 28:31-35. The Ephod (from to bind) was a short coat worn over the Robe, and with its “ curious girdle” was made of “ gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work.” To the shoulder pieces were attached two onyx stones, on which were en­graved the names of the twelve sons of Jacob, “ according to their birth.” (Exodus 28:10.) This phrase, “ according to their births,” is differently understood by the Jewish Rabbis, as well as by Chris­tian writers. Some place the names of the six oldest sons on the right shoulder, and the names of the six youngest on the left, as follows: LEFT RIGHT GadReubenAsherSimeonIssacharLeviZebulunJudahJosephDanBenjaminNaphtali Others arrange them alternately on the right and left; placing first in order the six sons of Leah (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issa- char, and Zebulun) ; next, the two sons of Bilhah, Rachel’ s maid (Dan and Naphtali) ; next, the two sons of Zilpah, Leah’ s maid (Gad and Asher), and lastly, the two sons of Rachel (Joseph and Benjamin), as follows: LEFT RIGHT SimeonReubenJudahLeviZebulunIssacharNaphtaliDanAsher£adBenjaminJosephThe Breastplate was a sort of pouch or bag, half a cubit square. It was made of gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine- twined linen. To each of the four corners was attached a gold ring by means of which it was, fastened to the Ephod. On the inside of its face were four rows of precious stones set in sockets of gold, through which they were exposed to view on the outside. And on the external faces of these stones were engraved the names of the Twelve Tribes of the children of Israel, most likely according to their birth, as follows : CarbuncleTopazSardiusLeviSimeonReubenDiamondSapphireEmeraldNaphtaliDanJudahAmethystAgateLigureIssacharAsherGadJasperOnyxBerylBenjaminJosephZebulun In this Breastplate were placed the Urim and Thummim (Lights and Perfections) ; names which seem to have been given to the twelve stones, because of their being made, in some miraculous way, the medium through which God made known his will to the High Priest. See Numbers 27:21; Judges 20:27-28; 1 Samuel 23:9 1 Samuel 28:6; Ezra 2:63; and Joseph. Ant. iii. 8, 9. The fourth and last article of the High Priest’ s golden attire was the plate of gold which was fastened to the Mitre by a blue fillet. On this Plate was inscribed Holiness to Jehovah. These articles of clothing are mostly, except the drawers, which are of course con­cealed by the outer garments. Hebrews 5:4===And no man taketh this honor unto himself, etc.— Our au­thor refers here to another essential qualification of every High Priest. He must be “ called of God, as was Aaron.” And the man who claims this honor for himself as did Korah (Num. 16), though sustained by the highest human authority, is really not a High Priest, but a usurper (Acts 23: 5). It is hardly necessary to add that the honor which is here spoken of is simply the honor of being a High Priest, and that it has no reference whatever to the calling of the Christian ministry. PRE-EMINENT OF CHRIST TO AS OUR HIGH PRIEST, WITH FURTHER TO BELIEVE AND OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:5-10 Hebrews 5:5 ---So also Christ glorified not himself, etc.— He took not on himself the honor and glory of becoming a High Priest. This honor was bestowed by God the Father, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in heavenly places, thus demonstrating to the world that he was the Son of God, and of course also the promised Prophet, Priest, and King, who was to bring in everlasting righteousness and reign over the house of David forever. See Deuteronomy 18:18; Psalms 110:4; Zechariah 6:13; Isaiah 33:6-7; Daniel 9:24-27. That the citation from Psalms 2:7 has reference to the resurrection of Christ, as the first-born from the dead, is manifest from the application which Paul makes of it in Acts 13:33. See note on Hebrews 1:5. And it seems to follow, therefore, from our premises, that the beginning of Christ’ s priesthood, as well as the beginning of his mediatorial reign, was subsequent to his resurrection. Before he could be thus honored, he must by the grace of God taste death for every man. He must go down into the lowest depths of human suffering, before he could be raised to the royal and sacerdotal honors of the kingdom of grace which he came to inaugurate through the medium and efficacy of his own blood. These honors were in fact bestowed on him as the rewards of his sufferings; and must therefore of necessity come after them. But as already intimated in our notes on 2: 17, it will not do to infer hence that he had never, in any case, previous to his resurrec­tion, acted as a King or a Priest. We often embarrass ourselves by prescribing for the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit the same narrow and technical formulae which govern us in our im­perfect operations. It must not be forgotten that Christ was God, one with the Father, and that his whole earthly ministry was, in fact, but a preparation for his mediatorial reign and everlasting priesthood. During this period of preparation he performed some acts involving of necessity the exercise of both his royal and sacer­dotal prerogatives. But these acts were all preparatory and ex­traordinary, so that we may still without doing violence to the Scriptures, assume the resurrection of Christ as the beginning of those honors which resulted in his being made both the High Priest, and the King of the new Institution. See notes on Hebrews 7:17 Hebrews 7:27. Hebrews 5:6 ---As he saith also in another place, etc.— In quoting as above from Psalms 2:7, the Apostle makes no special reference to the honors of the priesthood. His object is more general. He aims simply to prove that God had honored Christ, as his own Son, by raising him from the dead and placing him at his own right hand as the anointed Sovereign of the universe. And from this it might, of course, be fairly inferred that the office of the priesthood, as well as all the other honors of the Son, was bestowed on him by the Father. But the special proof of this, the Apostle now brings for­ward in a quotation from Psalms 110, where David says, “ Jehovah said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand till I make thy enemies thy footstool.” Then addressing the Messiah whom he here calls his Lord, he says, Jehovah shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion; rule thou in the midst of thy enemies. Thy people shall be free-will offerings in the day of thy power; in ornaments of holi­ness ; from the womb of the morning shall be to thee the dew of thy youth. And then he adds, “ Jehovah has sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.” That this is a Messianic Psalm, and that the Holy Spirit speaks here of the priesthood of Christ, is manifest from the scope of the Psalm itself, as well as from the several references which are made to it in the New Testament. See note on 1: 13. And hence the evidence is conclusive, that Christ glorified not himself by assum­ing the honors of the priesthood, but that he has been made both a King and a Priest by the decree of Jehovah. The word forever means here, as in many other passages of Scripture, while time endures. As the duration of the Aaronic priesthood was coextensive with the Jewish age (Exodus 40:15; Numbers 25:13), so also is the duration of Christ’ s priesthood to be coextensive with the Christian age. But at the close of the Chris­tian dispensation, when he shall have delivered up the Kingdom to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24), then also he will doubtless cease to act as a Priest; for then the object of his priesthood, as well as of his mediatorial reign, will have been accomplished. In the New Jeru­salem there will be no sin, and of course no more need of a sin- offering. Hebrews 5:6 ---after the order of Melchisedec.— The proper import of this ex­pression is more fully and clearly set forth in the seventh chapter. Suffice it to say in this connection, that as Melchisedec was a king upon his throne, as well as a priest so also is Christ. (Zechariah 6:13.) In this respect, as well as in several others, the rank (taxis) of Melchisedec was superior to that of Aaron. See notes on Hebrews 7:1-10. Hebrews 5:7 ---Who in the days of his flesh,—That the pronoun “who” in this connection refers to Christ, as the proper subject of the dis­course, and not to Melchisedec, is quite obvious. But what is its proper predicate? What did Jesus do, when, in the days of his flesh, he offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears to him who was able to save him from death? The proper answer to this question is given in the eighth verse, as will be seen by simply omitting the pleonastic “ he” of the English Ver­sion. Thus, “ Who . . . though he was a Son, yet learned obedi­ence by the things which he suffered.” The object of the Apostle in these verses, is manifestly to show that Jesus was not only called of God from among men to officiate as a High Priest for men in things pertaining to God; but that having passed also through the deepest scenes of human suffering, and having thereby learned les­sons of practical obedience and submission to the will of his Father, he is now most eminently qualified to sympathize with us, and also to aid and comfort us in all our trials, temptations, and afflictions. But let us now look more narrowly into the meaning of the several words and phrases of this profoundly interesting pas­sage. “ In the days of his flesh” means simply the period of his humiliation, while he appeared here on Earth as a man. “ Flesh and blood,” we are told (1 Corinthians 15:50), “ can not inherit the Kingdom of God.” Christ’ s body is now glorified and freed from all the weaknesses and infirmities of the flesh. (Philippians 3:21.) But it was not so while he tabernacled here on Earth. Then, he had a body in all respects such as we now have, save that it was in no sense defiled and corrupted by sin. Hebrews 5:7 ---when he had offered up prayers and supplications, etc.— This expression restricts the meaning of the preceding remark to a particular period of Christ’ s earthly mission. True, indeed, during his whole life, and particularly during the period of his public min­istry, he learned obedience from what he suffered. But it is evi­dent that the Apostle has special reference here to his final suffer­ings, beginning with his agony in Gethsemane and ending with his greater agony on the cross. From these especially, he learned obe­dience. And while suffering in the garden, he poured out his prayers and supplications, no doubt, with strong crying and tears “ to Him who was able to save him from death.” Such at least is the natural inference from the following testimony of Luke. He says, “ when he [Jesus] was at the place [Gethsemane], he said unto them [his disciples], Pray that ye enter not into temptation. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’ s cast, and kneeled down and prayed, saying, Father, if thou be willing re­move this cup from me; nevertheless not my will but thine be done. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven strengthening him. And being in an agony, he prayed more ear­nestly ; and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (Luke 22:40-44.) From this it seems that his mental agony was so intensely great as to cause both his sweat and blood to issue from the pores of his oppressed body. Instances of a like nature, under excessive passion, are mentioned by Aristotle, Diodorus, Siculus, Galen, Sir John Chardin, Voltaire, and others. And hence it is reasonable to suppose, that under the extreme agony of the hour, the prayers and supplications of Christ would be mingled, as our author says, with loud exclamations and tears of the deepest anguish. The Greek words rendered prayers and supplications (deeseis te kai hiketerias) are often used interchangeably for prayers in gen­eral. But when used together, as in this instance, the former de­notes such petitions as flow from a sense of our wants; and the latter, such as are prompted by a deep sense of our own helpless­ness. The word hiketeria is properly an adjective; and with the noun elaia expressed or understood, it was used by the Greeks to denote the olive branch, borne by supplicants in token of their very humble and earnest entreaties. And hence it came, by metonymy, to signify the prayer of anyone, who, in an humble and servile manner, asks help of another. The following brief extract from Livy will serve to illustrate this passage: “ Ten delegates from the Socrians, squalid and covered with rags, came into the hall where the consuls were sitting, holding out in their hands olive branches covered with wool, according to the custom of the Greeks; and prostrated themselves on the ground before the tribunal with a lamentable cry.” (L. xxix. 16.) Their supplications were availing. By a decree of the Roman Senate, the consul, Q Pleminius, the oppressor of the Socrians, was arrested, loaded with chains, and con­fined in a dungeon, where he finally expired. Hebrews 5:7===to him who was able to save him from death,— These words are well explained by a remark which Jesus made to Peter, when he drew his sword to defend Jesus from the violence of the multi­tude. (Matthew 26:53-54.) “ Thinkest thou,” said he. “ that I can not now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled that thus it must be?” Ah, yes, that was the difficulty. “ How then shall the Scriptures be fulfilled?” Jesus well knew that either he himself must die for mankind, or otherwise that the whole race must perish forever. There seems to have been no other possible alternative. And therefore, bitter as the cup was, he did not hesitate to drink it to its very dregs. Hebrews 5:7 ---and was heard in that he feared;—This has long been a per­plexing passage to most expositors. Delitzsch renders the Greek text as follows: “ and having been heard because of his piety” ; Al­ford, thus: “ and he was heard by reason of his reverent submis­sion.” With these learned authors, agree substantially many other able commentators. But to my mind this rendering is not satisfac­tory. For (1) it gives a very unusual meaning to the Greek prep­osition apo, which generally corresponds with the Latin ab or abs, and means from. Winer says, “ It is used to denote simply the point from which motion or action proceeds; and hence it implies distance or separation.” (2) While it is, of course, conceded that the word eulabia may mean “ piety” or “ reverent submission,” I can­not think but that the rendering “ godly fear,” or “ reverential fear,” is more suitable to the occasion, and that it better harmonizes with the terms and conditions of the context. This, too, corresponds well with the etymology of the word and also with Greek usage. “ Eulabeia,” says Prof. Trench, “ which occurs only twice in the New Testament (Hebrews 5:7 Hebrews 12:28) and on each occasion signi­fies piety contemplated on the side on which it is a fear of God, is of course from eu lambanesthai the image underlying the word being that of a careful taking hold of, the cautious handling of some precious yet delicate vessel, which with ruder or less anxious handling might be broken. But such a carefulness and cautious­ness in the conducting of affairs, springing as no doubt it does in part from a fear of miscarriage, easily lies open to the charge of timidity. Thus Demosthenes claims for himself that he was only eitlabes [cautious], where his enemies charged him with being deilos [timid] and atolmos [cowardly]. It is not wonderful then that fear should have come to be regarded as an essential element of eulabeia; though, for the most part, no dishonorable fear; but such as a wise and good man might not be ashamed to entertain.” (Syn. of the N. Test.) (3) I am at a loss to see why the piety of Christ should be assigned as a reason for his being heard on this or any other particular occasion. This sounds too much as a mere truism. Who that believes in Christ as the Son of God ever doubted this? “ I know,” said he, addressing his Father, “ that thou hearest me always.” (John 11:42.) For these reasons chiefly I am constrained to think with Calvin, Beza, Erasmus, Bengal, Hammond, Wetstein, Storr, Ernesti, Kuinoel, DeWette, Stuart, Tholuck, Ebrard, and others, that the expression should be rendered substantially as in our Common Version, “ he was heard from his pious fear” ; that is, he was heard and so delivered from his pious and reverential fear. The word heard (eisakoustheis) is used in a pregnant sense, as in Psalms 22:21; where David, speaking as a type of Christ, says in reference to his last sufferings, “ Thou hast heard me from the horns of the uni­corns” ; which is equivalent to saying, Thou hast heard my suppli­cations, and delivered me from the horns of the unicorns. Such instances of brachylogy occur very frequently in the Holy Scrip­tures. We conclude, then, that Christ’ s prayers and supplications were heard, and that he was in a measure delivered from his reverential fear. But what was the object of this fear? Not death, as Calvin and others suppose; for from this he was not delivered in the sense of the context. He had to meet and suffer death in its most appall­ing forms, soon after his agony in the garden. But be it remem­bered (1) that Christ was a man; and that, as a man, he possessed all the sinless feelings and propensities of our nature. As a man, he had a heart to fear and tremble, like other men, in view of great undertakings and responsibilities. (2) That while in the garden, he was on the eve of incurring, not merely physical death, for that was only a circumstance, but a degree of mental agony, arising from his feelings of moral obligation, ^at which even the angels might have stood appalled. He was about to stand between God and man, and meet in his own person the claims of the Divine gov­ernment against the sinner. He knew that in a little while his Father’ s face would be hid from him; and that his frail human na­ture would be literally crushed under the tremendous weight of the responsibilities which he had incurred. And (3) it should also be remembered, that the hour of his adversaries had come, and that he was then delivered up to be most severely tried and tempted by the Evil One. (Luke 22:53.) Christ knew this; and he earnestly warned his disciples to be vigilant and to pray, lest indeed they should all be overcome by the Tempter. (Matthew 26:41; Mark 14:38; Luke 22:40.) But it was of course against Christ himself that Satan was about to direct most of his fiery darts. The Temp­ter came, and doubtless presented every motive that Hell could in­vent that might serve to terrify him; to weaken his trust and confi­dence in God; to make him apprehensive that he might not be equal to the occasion; and to induce him to shrink back from the appalling scene that was before him. The temptation to do so was no doubt very great, and his agony became most alarming. His whole physical frame was so impressed by his mental emotions that sweat and blood, as we have seen, issued from the pores of his op­pressed body. But his prayers were heard. An angel was sent to strengthen him. (Luke 22:43.) He was now in a measure deliv­ered from his pious and fearful apprehensions; and he rose from the ground, returned to his disciples, and calmly met the ruthless mob that were coming to lead him to the cross. But there a still more intense agony awaited him. Though some­what relieved from his pious yet fearful apprehension that, as a man, he would not be equal to the occasion; and that he might per- adventure fail to so meet and satisfy the claims of the Divine gov­ernment on man as to make it possible for God to justify penitent believers, he had nevertheless now to meet and endure the solemn and awful reality. He had to pass through such a spiritual ordeal as no creature had ever before experienced. The nails that pierced his hands and his feet were but as nothing. Persons of ordinary strength generally lived on the cross from one to four or five days, and sometimes even longer. But Jesus, though in the prime of manhood, survived but six hours after his crucifixion. The weight of our indebtedness to the Divine government fell like a mountain avalanche on his soul. The light of God’ s countenance was withheld; and a horror of appalling darkness overwhelmed his spirit. He could bear no more. He said, “ It is finished.” His heart broke under the weight of his mental agony; and he meekly bowed his head and expired! See Dr. Stroud’ s treatise “ On the Physical Cause of the Death of Christ.” Hebrews 5:8 ---Though he were a Son, etc.— Though he was the Son of God, he claimed no special privileges on that account; but as a loyal subject of the Divine government, he submitted willingly to all that was required of him as the Redeemer of the world. And thus he not only magnified God’ s law and “ made it honorable” ; but he also, as a man, learned experimentally both the duty and the necessity of obedience, from what he suffered. Hebrews 5:9 ---And being made perfect,— By means of these sufferings, he was made a perfect Savior; that is, he was thereby fully qualified in every respect to become the Redeemer of mankind. See note on 2: 10. And now he offers salvation freely to all them that obey him. It is not his purpose to save men in their sins, but to save them from their sins. And hence, though he has by the grace of God tasted death for every man and so made an atonement for all, he nevertheless bestows salvation only on those who obey him. “ Not every one,” says he, “ that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7 Matthew 21.) Hebrews 5:10 ---Called of God an high priest— This is the title of honor which the Father bestowed on the Son, when he set him at his own right hand in the heavenly realms. There he will reign as a King, and there he will intercede for his people as a Priest upon his throne, until he shall have perfected the redeemed, and delivered up the Kingdom to the Father. After that there will be no more need of either a Mediator or an Intercessor. There can be no doubt, therefore, that Jesus is eminently quali­fied to act as a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertain­ing to God. For (1) he has received his appointment directly from God as did Aaron. (2) Being the Son of God, he occupies a rank far above all created intelligences; and is able therefore to save to the uttermost all who come unto God by him. (3) He has borne temptations, trials, and afflictions, incomparably greater than those endured by any other man. And hence he knows well how to sympathize with the afflicted, and how to support and deliver those that are tempted. (4) He has by his own obedience unto death learned the necessity of a strict compliance with all the re­quirements of the Divine law. And hence he knows how to sup­port and save those that obey him. How very encouraging is the thought that we have now a great High Priest in the heavens, through whose efficacious atone­ment and intercession, the throne of the universe has become a throne of grace to all penitent believers. (4: 14-16.) Though in and of ourselves utterly unworthy of the least of all God’ s mercies, we can nevertheless now approach him in the name of Jesus, and through the rich merits of his atoning blood, find grace sufficient to supply all our wants. “ For this is the confidence that we have in him, that if we ask any thing according to his will he heareth us.” (1 John 5:14.) “ He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with him freely give us all things?” “ Ask,” then, “ and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” What a marvelous thing it is, then, that all men do not, in obedience to the Divine Call, approach the Throne of grace; and in the name of our ascended High Priest seek for those blessings which we all so much need. Like the poor thoughtless wayward prodigal, millions are perishing in a strange land, for want of the bread of life; while in our Father’ s house there is enough for all and to spare. “ Come now,” says God to his erring children, “ come, and let us reason together; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” (Isaiah 1:18.) And again he says, “ Ho, ev­ery one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters; and he that hath no money [come] ; come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.” (Isaiah 55:1.) And yet the poor demented sinner goes on in his follies, as careless and indif­ferent as if no blood had been shed for him, and as if no Throne of grace had been provided for his benefit! What a marvelous illus­tration we have in all this of the exceeding sinfulness and deceitful­ness of sin. Religion has been provided for the benefit of mankind. (Hebrews 5:1-4.) Not only is every High Priest, taken from among men, or­dained for men, in things pertaining to God; but the whole scheme of redemption has been provided for a like purpose. It is for our sake that Jesus became incarnate. For us, he suffered, and bled, and died. For us, he ascended to the heavens, and paid the ran­som price of our redemption. For us, he sent the Holy Spirit to be in us as a well of water springing up into everlasting life. For us, he has founded the Church, and endowed it with all the ordi­nances of his grace. For us, he has provided the Holy Scriptures and all things else pertaining to life and godliness. And hence it follows, that if we are straitened in any respect, it is simply in our­selves, and not in God, nor in the bountiful provisions of his grace. “ Ye will not come unto me,” says Christ, “ that ye may have life.” (John 5:40.) How infinitely great must have been the sufferings of Christ for us. (Hebrews 5:5-10.) These we shall never be able to comprehend fully. The claims of the Divine government on fallen man is a question that far transcends the reach and capacity of our finite reason. And hence we can never compute the ransom that was paid for our redemption. But we may form some faint conception of what Jesus suffered on our account from what is recorded in the last few pages of his memoirs. How very significant, for instance, were the loud exclamations which he uttered, and the briny tears which he shed in the garden of Gethsemane! How expressive were the drops of bloody sweat which then and there fell from his oppressed body to the Earth! And above all, what a world of mental agony is indicated by the rupture of his heart! Remember, dear sinner, that all this was endured for us. For what the Law of Moses could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God has done by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and by an offering for sin has condemned sin in the flesh; so that the righteousness required by the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:3-4.) Who, then, can withhold his heart and his affections from such a Savior ? Who that understands this matter as he should, is not constrained to give up his soul, his life, and his all to the service of him who has done so much for our redemption ? And this, be it observed, is just what every man is required to give, who would enjoy the great salvation that has been so freely procured for us through the atoning sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. He has become “ the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (verse 9). We are of course saved by grace through faith; and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God. (Ephesians 2:8.) But nevertheless, it has pleased God to make our enjoy­ment of the purchased blessings depend on a willing observance of all that is required of us in the Gospel. Thus it is that God per­mits and enables us to show our loyalty to him and to his govern­ment; to educate and prepare ourselves for Heaven; and at the same time, to do good to all men as we may have opportunity.SECTION FIVEHeb_5:11-14 and Hebrews 6:1-20In the preceding section, the Apostle has fully introduced and partially considered the priesthood of Christ, as one of the great and leading themes of the Epistle. On this point, he tells us, that he has still much to say. But there was a difficulty in the way of his doing so. The subject is in itself one of the most profound topics pertaining to the economy of redemption; and its full con­sideration is therefore adapted only to those who have made con­siderable progress in the study of Divine things. But here was the trouble: many of the Hebrew Christians, though in the school of Christ for some considerable time, were nevertheless still quite ig­norant of the more sublime and difficult themes of the Gospel. They had become slothful in the study of God’ s revealed will; and had now to be instructed again in even the elementary principles of the Christian Religion. And hence our author makes another di­gression just here from his main line of argument, and devotes this section to the giving of such admonitions, warnings, reproofs, andencouragements, as he saw were most needed under the circum­stances. I. He begins by admonishing his readers, in pretty severe terms, on account of their inertness and sl'othfulness in the study of God’ s word; and their consequent incapacity to receive and under­stand aright the revelations which he was about to make concern­ing the priesthood of Christ. (Hebrews 5:11-14.) 1. On this subject, he tells us, that he had much to say, which was hard to be explained on account of their dullness of hearing (Hebrews 5:11). 2. In order to amplify and illustrate this thought, he further adds, that while, in view of the length of time that had elapsed since their conversion, they should really have become teachers of others, they had, on the contrary, become, as it were, babes in Christ; and had need to be again instructed in the rudiments of the Gospel; or as he goes on to explain it metaphorically, to be fed on the milk rather than on the solid food of the Divine word (Hebrews 5:12-14). II. Having thus severely rebuked his Hebrew brethren for their neglect of God’ s Word, he next exhorts them to go on from first principles even to perfection in the study of the Christian Religion, and not to be like a man who is forever laying the foundation of a house, without attempting to complete its superstructure. (Hebrews 6:1-3.) The elements here enumerated are (1) repentance from dead Works, (2) faith toward God, (3) the doctrine of baptisms, (4) the laying on of hands, (5) the resurrection of the dead, and (6) eternal judgments. These are not of course to be wholly neglected at any time; but they should be left behind, as we leave the alpha­bet and the spelling book behind when we advance to the study of the higher branches of English literature. III. As a motive to his readers to do as requested, the Apostle now warns them of the dangers and consequences of apostasy (Hebrews 6:4-8). 1. It seems that in Paul’ s estimation there is no safety for the followers of Christ but in going on to perfection— sl'othfulness and inertness tending always to apostasy. But from apostasy there is no deliverance (Hebrews 6:4-6). If a Christian through his neglect of God’ s word or any other cause, allows his heart to be so far alienated from Christ, that he ceases to trust in him, and treats him as an impostor— for such a one there is no repentance. His doom is sealed; and nothing remains for him “ but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indig­nation which shall devour the adversaries.” 2. This, the Apostle further illustrates by a reference to hus­bandry. “ Land,” he says, “ which has drunk in the rain which cometh often upon it, and produceth herbage meet for them on whose account it is also cultivated, partaketh of blessing from God; but bearing thorns and thistles it is rejected, and is nigh unto a curse; whose end is for burning” (Hebrews 6:7-8). IV. From this gloomy aspect of things, our author now turns to what is more encouraging (Hebrews 6:9-12). 1. He does not, he says, regard his Hebrew brethren as apos­tates; and he furthermore expresses the hope that they will never become such (Hebrews 6:9). 2. This hope is founded on the conviction that God will remem­ber and reward their many acts of charity (Hebrews 6:10). 3. But Paul is anxious that they shall show the same zeal in everything else pertaining to the full assurance of hope, that they were wont to show in their works of benevolence; so that they might in fact be imitators of those who through faith and patience are now inheriting the promises (Hebrews 6:11-12). V. For the purpose of encouraging his readers still further, the Apostle now refers particularly to the case of Abraham, and to the oath of God as the sure foundation of the Christian’ s hope (Hebrews 6:12). 1. God, it seems, being anxious to give to Abraham a sure ground of hope, confirmed his promise to him with an oath (Hebrews 6:13-14). 2. Abraham relied on these two immutable things; trusted fully and confidently in the promise and oath of God; and finally, at the close of his earthly pilgrimage, he obtained the promised blessing, so far as it related to himself personally (Hebrews 6:15). And just so, Paul argues, it will also be with everyone who, like Abraham, proves faithful to the end of life. For the promise and oath of God are still the ground of our hope, which, like that of Abraham, reaches within the Vail, into the Holy of holies, whither Jesus has for us entered, and where as our great High Priest he ever lives to make intercession for us (Hebrews 6:16-20) The five main points and divisions of this section are, therefore, as follows:I. Hebrews 5:11-14. An admonition addressed to the Hebrew Chris­tians, on account of their inattention to the study of God’ s word. II. Hebrews 6:1-3. An exhortation to go on from the study of the rudi­ments of Christianity, to perfection in the knowledge of Christ. III. Hebrews 6:4-8. Danger and fearful consequences of apostasy. IV. Hebrews 6:9-12. Encouragement to greater zeal in striving after the full assurance of hope, drawn chiefly from the known justice of God and their own deeds of charity. V. Hebrews 6:13-20. Further encouragement from the example of Abraham, and from the promise and oath of God made to him and all his spiritual seed.AN TO THE HEBREW ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR TO THE STUDY OF GOD’ S WORDHeb_5:11-14 Hebrews 5:11 ---Of whom—(peri hou) concerning which. These words have been variously applied (1) to Melchisedec, (2) to Christ, and (3) to the priesthood of Christ after the order of Melchisedec, as the leading and proper subject of the discourse. The last of these views is adopted by Hofmann, Delitzsch, Moll, and others: and it is certainly the view which harmonizes best with the context. The reference to Christ, as Delitzsch justly remarks, is too remote; and the reference to Melchisedec is too narrow. It is not of Christ personally, nor is it of Melchisedec personally, that our author has so much to say; but is of the priesthood of Christ, the subject of the last section, about which he wishes to say much to his readers. This is obvious from what immediately follows this digression, in the course of the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth chapters. Hebrews 5:11 ---hard to be uttered,— (dusermenentos) difficult of interpretation. There is no profounder theme, nor is there any one that is more difficult of interpretation, than the priesthood of Christ. To treat of it fully involves the consideration of man’ s fallen and sinful state; his indebtedness to the Divine government; the shedding of Christ’ s blood and all that he endured for the sins of the world; the ransom which he paid for our redemption; the efficacy of his blood and his intercessions, through which the gates of Heaven have been opened wide for the reception of every poor penitent sinner who comes to God by 'him. Hebrews 5:11 ---dull of hearing.— The word rendered dull (nothroi) means sluggish, indolent, slow to move; and that which is rendered hear­ing (tais akoais) means the ears or perceptive faculties of the soul. These were sluggish and inert. Instead of quickening the powers of their understanding and the susceptibilities of their heart, by the regular and systematic study of God’ s word, many of the Hebrew Christians had become (gegonate) dull in their apprehension of spiritual things. Hebrews 5:12 ---For when for the time— From what is said in this verse, Mynster, Ebrard, and some others, confidently infer that the Epis­tle was not sent to the Church of Jerusalem. For this, we know, was the mother of all the churches; and as 3he enjoyed for some time the instruction of all the Apostles, and the instruction of James the Less, son of Alphaeus, till about A.D. 62, according to Josephus (Ant. xx. 9, 1) ; or even to A.D. 69, according to Hege- sippus and Eusebius (Eccl. Hist. ii. 23) ; it is thought that such ignorance of the word of God, as is here implied, could not be fairly ascribed to this most favored of all the primitive churches. This is certainly a very plausible objection against the commonly received hypothesis that the Epistle was addressed primarily to the saints living in and around Jerusalem. But be it observed (1) that there had evidently been a backward movement among the disciples for whom this Epistle was written. Ye have become (ge­gonate) dull in your hearing, says the Apostle; and ye have be­come such as have need of milk and not of solid food. They had evidently seen and known more prosperous times; but they had ceased to be diligent students of the word of God, and had therefore relapsed somewhat into the darkness and errors of the judaiz- ing party. (2) This is not at all wonderful, when we consider the very unfavorable state of affairs that was then prevailing in Jerusa­lem, and indeed throughout Palestine. The same spirit of persecu­tion that seized and imprisoned Paul in A.D. 58, continued to rage in Judea, until Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70. And hence it is not at all remarkable that, under such circumstances, many of the weaker brethren should become somewhat disheartened. (3) We are not to suppose that the Apostle here describes the actual condition of all the disciples to whom the Epistle was written. Perhaps no more than a minority of them are really included in this severe admonition. Paul often speaks in this general way, when he has really reference to only a part of those that are ad­dressed. See, for example, 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 1 Corinthians 5:2 1 Corinthians 6:5-6. This, he manifestly does in this instance. Some of the Hebrew converts had become discouraged. Their hands were hanging down, and their knees were feeble. (Hebrews 12:12-13.) They were almost ready to abandon the Christian conflict, and fall back again into the embrace of Judaism. Others were daily becoming more and more slothful; and there was therefore great need just at this crisis, of the severe rebuke which the Apostle here administers to them, as well as of the many encouragements with which he labors to sustain and sup­port them. But that many of his readers were still strong in the faith, and fully prepared to comprehend even the highest mysteries of the Gospel, when properly unfolded and illustrated, is evident from the fact, that after making this brief digression, he proceeds at once to the regular and systematic discussion of Christ’ s priest­hood. There seems, therefore, to be no just ground for the above allegation of Ebrard and others, that the Epistle was not addressed to the Hebrew Christians living in and around Jerusalem. Hebrews 5:12 ---ye ought to be teachers,— The Apostle does not mean by this, that the Hebrew brethren should all be teachers in a public and of­ficial sense; but simply that they should be able to explain the Gos­pel to others in their several places and relations, as parents, neigh­bors, and friends. The Church of Christ is a school for the im­provement of all its members; and while it is certainly impossible for everyone to become an efficient Elder or Evangelist, it is nev­ertheless the duty of all to “ grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” (2 Peter 3:18.) Hebrews 5:12 ---ye have need, etc.— Instead of going forward, they had, it seems, rather gone backward in their knowledge of Divine things; so that they had need to be instructed again in the very elements of the Christian Religion. Our author does not mean to say, as in our English Version, that his readers had need to be instructed again as to “ which be [are] the first principles of the Oracles of God.” It is not of their incapacity to distinguish between the rudi­ments of the Gospel and its more profound and mysterious princi­ples, but of their ignorance of the rudiments themselves, that the Apostle here complains. And 'hence with Luther, Calvin, Bleek, Alford, etc., I would render the passage as follows: “ Ye again have need that some one teach you the rudiments of the beginning of the Oracles of God.” The word oracle (logion) means simply a Divine utterance, a communication from God. It occurs but four times in the New Testament (Acts 7:38; Romans 3:2; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11), in all of which it clearly means the inspired utter­ances of God. In this instance, it has reference to the communica­tions of God made known to us in the Gospel; the elements of Which are given in Hebrews 6:1-2. Hebrews 5:13 ---For every one that useth milk, etc.— This language is of course metaphorical. As newborn babes in the kingdom of nature need to be fed on milk, so also it is with babes in the Kingdom of Christ. They, too, must be fed with “ the pure milk of the word” that they may grow thereby. (1 Peter 2:2.) And hence Paul says to the brethren in Corinth, “ I have fed you with milk, and not with meat [solid food] ; for hitherto ye were not able to bear it; neither yet now are ye able.” (1 Corinthians 3:2.) And so also he says here to the Hebrew brethren, “ Ye are become such as have need of milk [the mere rudiments, or elementary lessons, of the Christian Religion], and not of solid food [the more difficult and profound instructions of the Gospel]. “ For every one,” he says, “ that partakes of milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is but a babe in Christ.” By the “ word of righteousness/' the Apostle means simply the word of the Gospel, in which God’ s plan of righteousness by faith is revealed in order to faith (Romans 1:17) ; so that being justified by faith we may attain to the righ­teousness that is required of every believer. Hebrews 5:14 ---But strong meat belongeth, etc.— In both this and the preceding verse, there is a blending together of the literal and the figurative; but not to such an extent as to obscure in any way the sense of either passage. Indeed, the meaning is so very plain in both cases, that our author does not deem it necessary to complete the allegory; but having introduced his subject by means of an il­lustrating metaphor, he very beautifully and with laconic brevity combines the literal and the figurative in the same clause. The analogy may be stated fully as follows: As solid food belongs only to those who are of full age, and who, by reason of habitual exer­cise, have their senses so perfectly educated, as to be able to dis­cern through them the physical properties of bodies; so also the more profound and abstruse principles of the Christian Religion, such as the priesthood of Christ, his atonement, etc., are suitable only for those, who, from long study and experience in the school of Christ, have their inward senses so trained as to be able to dis­criminate accurately between the right and the wrong, the good and the evil. The idea is, that discipline of both head and heart is essentially necessary in order to qualify Christians for the right apprehension and just appreciation of the more difficult parts of the Christian system. Every faculty of man’ s intellectual and moral nature, as well as every part of his physical organization, is de­veloped, strengthened, and quickened, by means of a judicious course of exercise. And the disciple who habitually neglects this course of discipline, can never attain to the stature of a perfect man in Christ Jesus. By the necessities of his own nature, he will ever remain but, as it were, a babe in Christ; if indeed he does not ut­terly fall away from all the hopes and consolations of the Gospel. This neglect of study and moral discipline was the great error and misfortune of the Hebrews. Many of them, it would seem, had never progressed beyond the mere alphabet of the Christian Re­ligion. And hence they were but illy prepared to enter with the Apostle on the consideration of the many difficult and sublime themes that are discussed in the following chapters. The word rendered senses (aistheteria) means properly the physical organs of sensation, such as the eyes, the ears, and the fin­gers, through which we perceive the qualities and properties of things that are material. But metaphorically, it signifies, as in this connection, the faculties of the soul, by means of which we dis­criminate between those things which differ in their moral quali­ties. Hebrews Chapter FIveVerse 1 AND HONOR OF CHRIST'S ; A WITH ; TO THOSE WHO OBEY; REPROOF OF 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.(Hebrews 5:1) In the Jewish system, a tremendous weight of significance and emphasis was placed upon the glorious office of the high priest; and, for the encouragement of Christians tempted to revert to Judaism, it was therefore necessary to show that Christ was and is indeed a great high priest, not merely equal, but vastly superior to any of the high priests of Israel. In this and following verses, the author of Hebrews analyzes the high priesthood of Christ in such a manner as to prove that the Christians who had given up the priesthood of Aaron and his successors had, in Christ, received far more than they had lost. In every conceivable comparison, as to rank, character, quality of sacrifice, or whatsoever, the marvelous superiority of Christ is emphatically demonstrated. He begins with the ordinary qualifications of any high priest, namely, that (1) he should be taken from among people; (2) appointed by God; (3) have tender compassion for those whom he represented; (4) possess an adequate sacrifice; and (5) refrain from taking such an honor unto himself. Then he proceeds to show how, in all of these matters, Christ possessed the most extraordinary qualifications. Without doubt, the earthly splendor of the Jewish high priest was a factor of seductive influence on Christians, especially those of Jewish background. His rich robes, the extravagantly ornate breastplate, the unique privilege of entering the Holy of Holies on the day of atonement, his status as judge and president of the Sanhedrin, his dramatic influence as the official representative of the Jewish nation, more especially at a time when they had no king, the traditional descent of the office from the sons of Aaron and reaching all the way back to the Exodus, and the grudging respect paid to the office, even by Roman conquerors - all these things and many others elevated the Jewish high priest to a position of isolated splendor in the eyes of the people. "Gifts and sacrifices for sins" has special reference to the day of atonement and to the ceremonial offering of blood, first for the sins of the high priest and then for the sins of all the people. The separate mention of gifts and sacrifices is a distinction between the unbloody offerings and the bloody ones, both classes of which were offered on the day of atonement. Barmby called attention to this distinction in these words, "Though bloodshedding was essential for atonement (Hebrews 9:22), the unbloody [~minchah] formed part of the ceremony of expiation, and this notably on the day of atonement."[1]ENDNOTE: [1] J. Barmby, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 21, Hebrews I, p. 136. Verse 2 Who can bear gently with the ignorant and erring, for that he himself also is encompassed with infirmity.The need of compassion on the part of a high priest is stressed here, a qualification sadly lacking in many who held that position. Alexander Jannaeus, one particularly heartless priest, was singled out by Bruce, who said of him, "No man in Israel was less disposed to `bear gently with the ignorant and erring' - or anyone else." He further said that from the "fall of the house of Zadok to the destruction of the temple 240 years later, there were very few high priests in Israel who manifested the personal qualities so indispensable to their sacred office."[2] Also, the generation that first received Hebrews were close enough to remember the heartless Annas, remembered for his part in the crucifixion of Christ, and who had begun his career as high priest by putting a man to death, for which injustice he was deposed by Rome and the power to inflict death removed from his office. Regardless of the failure of many high priests to possess the virtue of compassion mentioned here, that virtue should nevertheless be held prerequisite to the exercise of any meaningful sacred ministry, and far more for that of such an office as high priest. No antidote for a proud and vindictive spirit is quite as effective as a penitent consciousness of one's own sins and shortcomings, an excellent example being Paul, who said, "I have great sorrow and unceasing pain in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake my kinsmen according to the flesh" (Romans 9:2-3). ENDNOTE: [2] F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), pp. 89-90. Verse 3 And by reason thereof is bound, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.Here the author touches on one of the great differences between the high priest of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ; whereas they were, through infirmity and sins, required to offer blood for themselves, Christ, being sinless and undefiled, was laid under no such necessity. Milligan pointed out that this acknowledgment of guilt by the Aaronic priests was not confined to such a special occasion as the day of atonement, but was all-pervasive. The high priest was required to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people. This he did not only on special occasions and for special offenses (Leviticus 4:3-12), but also in all the regular daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices that were offered for the sins of the nation; in all these there was an acknowledgment of his own guilt, as well as the guilt of the brethren.[3]Although there can be no analogy between the high priesthood of Israel and the office of Christian ministers and teachers, there certainly is, however, the same common bond of the need of forgiveness that unites every teacher of God's word with the people who hear him. Every minister of the truth stands squarely in need of the forgiveness he preaches for others, both the teacher and the taught requiring the same remedy in the blood of Christ and the same loving obedience that it might become their final possession. ENDNOTE: [3] R. Milligan, New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1962), p. 151. Verse 10 Named of God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek.Here the author picks up the thread of argument relative to the high priesthood of Christ, intending to return a few verses later with a further elaboration of it; but characteristically of the author, he interrupts himself to deliver the third of five great exhortations in the epistle. It is precisely this trait which suggests Paul as the author. Named of God indicates that Christ's being made a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek was none of the author's doing; it had not been conceived by any of Christ's followers, but it was an act of God himself; and there it was in the sacred scriptures, embedded as in a matrix, and only waiting for the fullness of time when the mind of inspiration would illuminate it with a finger of light, as is done in this very passage. The deduction that all were expected to make is quite obvious, namely, that Christ's high priesthood was no less of God than was that of Aaron, and over and beyond that, was in many remarkable particulars superior to it. THE THIRD The balance of Hebrews 5 and all of Hebrews 6 are given to an extensive exhortation for the purpose of arousing the disciples from their lethargy and setting their feet firmly on the road to spiritual maturity. They had simply not developed as should have been expected; and, although sufficient time had elapsed since their conversion that they should have been by that time able teachers of the word of God, such was far from being true of them. They had made themselves content with a knowledge of the rudimentary things of faith and of the first principles of the gospel and had not gone forward to acquire a genuine mastery of the faith. That elementary character of their faith looms in the writer's mind, at this point, as an actual impediment to their understanding of the marvelous things he was writing; and before proceeding with such advanced teaching, he takes time out to protest their incompetence to understand it! This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 5:2. The ignorant means those less informed than the priests who were better aquainted with the matters of the service. (See Leviticus 10:8-11; Deuteronomy 17:8-13; John 11:49-52.) Out of the way denotes those who err in their ways on account of their lack of knowledge. Can have compassion means the same as "being touched" as was explained by the comments on chapter 4:15. Compassed with infirmity means those priests had the same fleshly tendencies as others of the nation. Hebrews 5:3. This can apply to the high priests under the old law only, since Jesus had no sins to be atoned for. Hebrews 5:4. The apostle again takes up the points in which the high priests of both systems were similar. Numbers 16, 18 will clearly show that Aaron did not seek the office of high priest. but that he was called into that service by the Lord. Hebrews 5:5. Thou art my Son, etc., was not what made Jesus the High Priest of the Christian Dispensation. It is quoted as an identification of the One who did call Christ into that office. David is the one who wrote the statement by inspiration, and it was written many centuries before Christ was born. Hebrews 5:6. This verse cites another passage in David's writings (Psalms 110:4) that predicts the priesthood of Jesus, even specifying one of the particulars in which He was to be superior to the Levitical priests (which is another of the points of difference referred to above); being like Melchisedek in that it was not to be changeable as were the Levitical priests. Having been determined upon and predicted of God long before he was born, Jesus could not be accused of usurping the office. Hebrews 5:7. Days of his flesh means while Jesus lived on the earth before his crucifixion. He often prayed to his Father, but we are not always told what was the subject of the prayers. The one in the garden (Luke 22:41-44) is an instance of supplications with strong crying and tears. Our present verse indicates one subject of His prayers was to be saved from death. This could not mean that when He prayed in the garden he was asking God to shield him from death on the cross. Peter was rebuked for trying to shield his Master from death (Matthew 26:51-54; John:18 10, 11). But the prayer of our verse received a favorable answer, for it says He was heard. Save is from the Greek word sozo which Thayer defines. "To bring safe forth from." Jesus was saved from death in the sense that He was brought "safe forth from" the grave, hence the conclusion is established that He prayed for that favor from his Father, intensifying the prayers with the supplications and tears. Hebrews 5:8. Though he were a Son, Jesus was not excused from undergoing the program his Father planned for him. Jesus learned by practical experience what it means to obey his Father, when the trials of His life led up to his suffering and crucifixion. Hebrews 5:9. The word perfect means complete and fully qualified or equipped. The experience of suffering is what gave Jesus this completion. Author is from a Greek word that primarily means "cause." Jesus suffered many trials and finally went to His death on the cross. This qualified Him to cause a plan of eternal salvation to be effected for mankind. Eternal is from AIONIOS, which Thayer defines at this passage, "Without end, never to cease, everlasting." The salvation offered by Christ will go on endlessly after the world ceases to be. However, the important condition on which men may obtain this salvation is that they obey Him. Hebrews 5:10. Melchisedec had no successor in his priesthood, neither will Jesus have any, for He is now and will continue to be High Priest. Hebrews 5:11. Of whom has direct ref-erenec to Melchisdec because he was the last person named. But the apostle concluded his readers were not ready for the fine points in the comparison between this man and Christ. He drops that line of argument for the present, and will take it up again (in chapter 7) after giving them other instructions that may prepare their minds for the further study of types. Hard to be uttered means "difficult of explanation" according to Thayer's lexicon. Dull of hearing denotes a mind that is slow in apprehending what is said. Hebrews 5:12. These disciples had been in the church long enough time to have become teachers, but were still in need of being taught by others. There is no criticism to make merely because someone needs to be taught--all people need that. The fault is in being so indifferent as not to advance beyond the "kindergarten grade." The word first means "beginning," and principles denotes "steps or elements." The phrase means the beginning steps of the oracles of God. These steps include the types revealed in the Old Testament, that pointed forward to the institution of Christ. The system of the Levitical priesthood and that of Melchisedec were steps or elements that looked forward to Christ. Being unable to grasp the comparisons, Paul described them as being like babes who can partake of milk only. Hebrews 5:13. Unskilful is defined "inexperienced" by Thayer's lexicon. This does not mean that the lack of experience is due to their babyhood, but it is the other way around. They were still babes because they had not launched out after further activities or experiences, such as a normal babe will do. Hebrews 5:14. The Englishman's Greek New Testament renders strong meat as "solid food." Of full age means those who are adults instead of babes. By reason of use denotes the experience a Christian has in practicing the things taught in the "oracles of God." Senses is defined "Faculty of the mind" by Thayer, and he explains it further, "For perceiving, understanding, judging." The Bible is like an appliance that has been obtained for the home; it must be used to be understood and appreciated. But in order to make the proper use of it the owner must observe "instructions" that are given by one who furnished him the appliance. Likewise the Lord has provided instructions in the "oracles" for the proper use of the items making up the system of Christian living. By following these instructions the disciples will learn to make correct distinctions between the various situations in life, accepting the right and rejecting the wrong. (See 1 Thessalonians 5:21.) Robert Millogan Commentary On Hebrews 6 AN TO GO ON FROM THE STUDY OF THE OF , TO IN Heb_6:1-3 Heb 6:1 ---Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, — The word therefore (dio) is illative, showing the connection of what precedes with what follows. In the last paragraph, the Apos­tle avers that none but the perfect (teleioi) are capable of receiv­ing, digesting, and duly appropriating the more abstruse and diffi­cult themes of the Gospel. And hence he exhorts his Hebrew brethren to become perfect; to be no longer babes in Christ, but to go on with him to perfection in the knowledge of Divine things. Hebrews 6:1 --- But not laying again the foundation, etc.— The first thing neces­sary in building, is to lay a foundation, and to lay it well. And the man who neglects this, and who, without a proper foundation, be­gins to build an edifice, will never accomplish much in the way of churches, and communities. There are certain fundamental principles of architecture. But equally puerile and absurd is the course of the man who keeps forever laying the foundation, and proceeds no fur­ther. The foundation is of course necessary; but the superstruc­ture is equally necessary to complete the building. And just so it is with regard to the spiritual edification of individuals, families, belonging to the Religion of Christ, a clear and correct under­standing of which is essential to all future progress in the Divine life; just as a foundation is necessary to a building, or as a knowl­edge of the English alphabet is essential to the study of the higher branches of English literature. But having once properly under­stood these elementary principles of the Christian Religion, we should henceforth go on to perfection in the knowledge of Christ. These elementary principles of Christianity, as here laid down by our author, are: (1) Repentance from dead works,— The word rendered re­pentance (metanoia) means properly a change of mind. It im­plies, therefore, that the sinner has obtained new views of Christ, of sin, and of holiness. He is made to realize that it was for him that Jesus wept, and bled, and died. And this conviction begets in his heart a godly sorrow for his sins. As he now looks on him who was pierced for his transgressions and bruised for his iniqui­ties, he is himself greatly grieved in spirit; and he resolves that with the help of God he will henceforth “ cease to do evil, and learn to do well.” The resolution is no sooner formed than the change of life begins. His simple inquiry now is, “ Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” And having obtained an answer to this question, he no longer confers with flesh and blood; but with an humble, loyal, loving, prayerful, and obedient heart, he at once takes upon him the yoke of Christ, and submits in all things to his will and government. Here then we have (1) a change of the understanding, arising through Divine grace from the force of the testimony submitted; a change of feeling, a deep sense of conviction wrought in the heart, by the aforesaid change of the understanding; (3) a change of the will, effected by the antecedent change of the heart; and (4) a change of conduct, growing out of the change of the will. Which of these four elementary changes constitutes what is properly called true and genuine repentance ? They are all essential links in the same chain of causation; and it may therefore be conceded that they are all implied in the word repentance. But the question is, not what is implied in this word, but rather what is expressed by it in the inspired writings. That it denotes a change, subsequent to that which is effected in the understanding by means of testimony, and even to that which follows as an immediate effect of this in the region of the affections, is manifest from such passages as the fol­lowing: “ Now I rejoice,” says Paul, “ not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance (eis metanoian) ; for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of; but the sorrow of the world worketh death. For behold this self-same thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you; yea, what clearing of yourselves; yea, what indignation; yea, what fear; yea, what vehe­ment desire; yea, what zeal; yea, what revenge. In all things, ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.” (2 Corinthians 7:9-11.) From this, it seems that Paul had, by a prudent and judi­cious presentation of facts and arguments in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, wrought a logical change in their understanding; and this change of judgment produced in turn a corresponding change in their feelings. Their hearts were now filled with godly sorrow. But neither of these changes constitutes repentance. It is some­thing which follows after all this in the chain of causation. Fbr says Paul, “ Ye sorrowed to repentance” And again he says, “ Godly sorrow worketh repentanceGodly sorrow, then, is es­sential to repentance, as an antecedent cause is always necessary to an effect. But repentance follows godly sorrow, as godly sorrow itself follows a certain class of our moral judgments. Does repentance then consist in a change of the will, or in a change of conduct, or in both? Peter answers this question in Acts 3:19, where he says to the multitude, “ Repent then, and turn, in order that your sins may be blotted out, that there may come times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord.” Here the word turn (epistrephate) expresses all that appertains to the required change of conduct; and as repentance is antecedent to this, it follows as a logical necessity from our premises that repent­ance consists essentially, in a change of the will. That the word repentance is often used in a more comprehensive sense, so as to include godly sorrow and also reformation of life is, I think, quite obvious from sundry passages of Scripture. The latter of these (reformation of life) is, indeed, clearly implied in the expression, “ repentance from dead works.” But the essential element of re­pentance, in every case, is a change of the will. It consists simply in a perfect and unreserved submission of the will of the sinner to the will of God. This change is always the legitimate effect of godly sorrow in the heart, and always leads to a change of conduct, or a reformation in the life of the penitent believer. “ Dead works” are by many supposed to be the works of the Law. They are so called, it is alleged, because of their utter ineffi­ciency in the way of procuring life and salvation for the sinner. But is not this using the phrase in too limited a sense ? Are not all required to repent and turn from everything that is sinful and that leads to death, such as the works of the flesh enumerated in Galatians 5:19-21 ? The Apostle here seems to use the phrase “ repentance from dead works” in its widest sense, embracing everything from which the sinner is required to turn in his conversion from dark­ness to light, and from the service of Satan to the service of God. (2) Faith toward God.—“ Faith,” we are told, “ comes by hear­ing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Romans 10:17.) And hence John says, “ These [things] are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing, ye might have life through his name.” (John 20:31.) It is evident, there­fore, that the first element of Gospel faith is belief, a firm in­tellectual conviction, resting on the evidence submitted, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of the living God; and that there is, in fact, “ no other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12.) Under favorable cir­cumstances, this conviction begets, as we have seen, godly sorrow in the heart; and, at the same time, some degree of confidence and trust in Christ, as the Son of God and Savior of sinners. But however strong may be the belief, or intellectual conviction of the sinner, touching the person and character of Jesus as the Son of God, his trust (which may be regarded as the second element of faith) both in God and in Christ will of necessity be comparatively weak until he repents. This arises necessarily out of the condi­tions of offered pardon. The promise of salvation is to those who believe, repent, and reform. How, then, can the impenitent sinner trust confidently in God or in Christ? Manifestly, this is impossi­ble. He may indeed under the firm persuasion that Jesus has by the grace of God tasted death for every man, cherish some degree of hope, and repose some degree of trust in God, even before he fully repents of his sins, and resolves to reform his life; nay, in­deed, this he must do, if he ever repents. But it is not until the will of the sinner is wholly subjected to the will of God, that he can fully trust in God, and rely on him for every needed blessing. And hence it is that faith and repentance have a mutual and reflex influence on each other. Faith leads to repentance; while repent­ance again serves very greatly to increase our faith; and especially, that element of it which relates to the heart, and which we call trust in God. And hence it is perhaps, that in this summary of the rudiments of the Christian Religion, faith is placed after repent­ance; because it is the faith of the heart, to which the Apostle has here special, though not exclusive, reference— his main object in the whole Epistle being to persuade his brethren to repent from all dead works, and to trust in God through Christ for every needed blessing. As he says also in Rom. 10: 10, “ For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation/' And again he says in the same Epistle, “ But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” (Rom. 4:5.) It is scarcely necessary to add, that faith in God implies also faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Holy Spirit; for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God (Deut. 4: 4); so that he who honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father who sent him (John 5: 23); and he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit blasphemes against God (Matt. 12: 31, 32; Acts 5: 4). It is all folly to profess to believe in God, while we reject the claims of Christ as the Savior of the world. “ This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17: 3.) (3) Of the doctrine of baptisms,— This is given as the third elementary principle of the Christian Religion. But why does our author speak of baptisms (baptismoi) in the plural number? And how is this to be reconciled with what he says in Eph. 4:5: “ [There is] one Lord, one faith, one baptism” ? In answer to these queries, it is alleged (a) that the Apostle refers here not only to Christian baptism, as in Eph. 4: 5, but also to the baptism of John, the baptism of Jewish proselytes, and the divers Jewish washings referred to in 9: 10. (Bleek, Hofmann, Delitzsch, Alford). But with what propriety could all these be ranked under the head of Christian doctrine? Why should the baptism of John and the va­rious Jewish washings be treated as elementary principles of the Christian Religion? On the same principle, it seems to me, we might arrange and classify all the rites and ceremonies of the Law, as elements of the doctrine of Christ, (b) Some think that the plural is used here for the singular; and that nothing more is really intended than the one ordinance of Christian baptism, as in Eph. 4: 5. (Syr. Version, Stuart.) But if so, why does our author use the plural number, when he might have so readily used the singu­lar? Such an arbitrary use of words is not in harmony with the usual accuracy of the inspired writers, (c) Others suppose that our author has reference to the several acts of baptism, three thou­sand of which were performed on the day of the opening of Christ’ s reign on Earth. (Theodoret, Storr.) But in reply to this, it is enough to say that it is not of any special acts of faith, re­pentance, baptism, etc., that our author is here speaking, but of certain elementary and fundamental principles and elements of the kingdom of Christ, (d) Others again think that the allusion is to trine-immersion, or the threefold dipping of confessing penitents. (DeWette, etc.) But of such an ordinance, the New Testament knows nothing. The practice of trine-immersion is post-apostolic, and has no sanction whatever in the word of God. Is there then a plurality of baptisms under the reign and admin­istration of the Lord Jesus, and which may therefore be ranked with the rudiments of the doctrine of Christ? If so, what are they? That every believing confessing penitent is required to be bap­tized, or immersed, in water, is manifest from such passages as the following: Matthew 28:19; Acts 2:38 Acts 8:12 Acts 8:36-37 Acts 10:47-48, etc. This is always to be done, as appears from these Scriptures, in the name of the Lord Jesus; and the candidate is in all cases baptized into (eis) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. It is therefore one baptism, and but one. And hence Paul argues from this the necessity of there being but one body, ani­mated by one Spirit, and governed by one supreme Head. (Ephesians 4:3-16.) There is then unquestionably one baptism in water, and but one, in which all penitent believers put on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and are all immersed into the one body (1 Corinthians 12:13). But is this all? Is there no other baptism to be administered under the reign of Christ? In Matthew 3:12, we have the testimony of John the Baptist, that Christ would be a Baptizer, as well as himself. Speaking to the vast multitudes that came to be baptized by him, he said, “ I indeed baptize you in (en) water unto repentance; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you in (en) the Holy Spirit and in fire; whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” (Matthew 3:11-12.) John did not, and could not, unerringly know the hearts of the people. He was ever liable to be deceived; and he no doubt baptized some very un­worthy persons. But not so with the Baptizer who was to come after him. He would thoroughly separate the good from the bad; and the former, here represented by the wheat, he would baptize in the Holy Spirit (John 7:37-39; Acts 2:38; Ephesians 5:18) ; but the latter, represented by the chaff, he would baptize in fire. See 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; 2 Peter 3:7 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 20:15. We have then under the reign of Christ, as elementary ordi­nances of the New Economy (1) a baptism in water, in which all penitent believers who confess Christ are introduced into his body; (2) a baptism in the Holy Spirit, administered by Christ himself to all who are really begotten by the Spirit and born of water; and (3) a baptism in fire, by means of which the wicked will all be finally overwhelmed in sufferings. See references. Are not these, then, the baptisms of which our author here speaks? If so, it may be asked, Then why does he not use the word baptisma instead of baptismos? The former is the common term used for baptism in the New Testament; and the latter is used in both Mark 7:4 Mark 7:8, and Hebrews 9:10, for Jewish washings. There seems therefore to be some weight in this objection; but it is perhaps only in appearance, as these words are both derivatives from bap- tizo and each signifies a dipping or an immersion. And besides, Josephus uses baptismos in speaking of John’ s baptism. (Ant. xviii. 5, 2). I am therefore, on the whole, inclined to the opinion, that it is to these three baptisms that our author here refers. If this is not his meaning, then I think we must accept the first hypothesis as advocated by Bleek, Hofmann, and others. (4)And of laying on of hands,— The laying on of hands is a natural sign, indicating the bestowment of any gift, trust, or bless­ing. And hence we find that in the primitive Church, hands were imposed (a) in imparting spiritual gifts (Acts 8:17); (b) in healing the sick (Acts 28:8) ; and (c) in ordaining men to the work of the ministry (Acts 6:6 Acts 13:3 Acts 14:23; 1 Timothy 4:14 1 Timothy 5:22). The last only is an established ordinance of the Church. It is to be observed throughout the entire period of the regeneration, while the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, and while the Apostles shall sit on twelve thrones judging the redeemed Is­rael of God. And hence it is manifest that the doctrine of this or­dinance involves also the whole subject of ordination and church organization. For the command to lay hands suddenly on no man (1 Timothy 5:22), implies of necessity the consideration of the sev­eral classes of church officers, together with their prescribed func­tions and scriptural qualifications, as well as the condition of the Church itself, and the special fitness or unfitness of the individual for the work to which he is about to be consecrated. Most appro­priately therefore is this ordinance ranked among the rudiments of Christian doctrine. (5)And of resurrection of the dead,— In the original Greek, the word answering to resurrection (anastasis) is anarthrous, being sufficiently defined by the adjunct which follows. But the ar­ticle is required by our English idiom, and the whole phrase should be rendered, “ And of the resurrection of the dead.’’ This elemen­tary doctrine of the Christian Religion was denied by the Saddu- cees (Matthew 22:23), and by the heathen philosophers generally (Acts 17:32) ; but the Apostles often dwell on it as a fundamental doctrine of the Gospel, showing that through Christ all will be raised from the dead, to be judged for the deeds done in the body. See references. Hebrews 6:2 ---And of eternal judgment.— Many of God’ s judgments are now of only temporary duration; because they are designed for our correction and discipline. (2 Corinthians 4:17; Hebrews 12:6-11.) But not so with the final and general judgment. It will never be reversed; and hence it will in its effects and consequences endure forever. The decree of Jehovah touching the character and destiny of man­kind after the judgment, is given by the Holy Spirit as follows: “ He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still; and he that is holy, let him be holy still." (Revelation 22:11.) And accordingly, Christ closes his description of the general judg­ment, by saying that the wicked shall go away into everlasting (aionios) punishment; but the righteous, into everlasting (aion- ios) life. (Matthew 25:46.) Hebrews 6:3 ---And this will we do, etc.— That is, we will, with the help of God, go on to perfection. The Apostle well knew that without God’ s help, they could accomplish nothing. (John 15:5.) And hence while urging his brethren, by all the high motives of the Gospel, to greater diligence in making their calling and election sure, he is careful to remind them of the necessity of submitting to the will of God, and looking to him for help in all things. Hebrews 6:4 ---For it is impossible—The word “ /or” , like every other department of knowledge, has its elementary and its more advanced and recondite principles. (6: 1-3.) And hence care should always be taken to adapt our in­structions to the age and capacity of our readers, and also of our hearers, as the case may be. It is all folly to attempt to instruct in the principles of Grammar and Rhetoric children who have not studied even the alphabet, or to drill in the Calculus those who are ignorant of even the common rules of Arithmetic. And no less ab­surd is the practice of attempting to instruct in many things per­taining to the decrees of God, the priesthood of Christ, and the work of the Holy Spirit, such babes in Christ as have not mastered even the elementary lessons of Christianity relating to repentance from dead works, faith toward God, the doctrine of baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judg­ment. Much time and labor are vainly spent in attempting to feed the infants of God’ s family on the solid food of Christian doctrine rather than on the pure and simple milk of the word of truth. (1 Peter 2:2.) It is dangerous to rest satisfied with a knowledge of the mere rudiments of Christianity or to stop short of perfection in the knowledge of Christ. (6: 1-3.) Our course should be ever onward and upward in all that pertains to holiness and happiness. The time is short, the work is great, and the prize to be won or lost, is of infinite value. It becomes us, therefore, to give all diligence while life lasts, in adding to our faith knowledge, as well as tem­perance, patience, godliness, brotherly-kindness, and love. And after we shall have done this, to even the utmost extent of our abil­ity, how little we shall know of the length and breadth, the depth and height of the love of God which passes all understanding. But small as our attainments may be; we have nevertheless the satis­faction to know that they will be quite sufficient to prepare us for a joyful admission into the everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:11.) After that, when with Proph­ets and Apostles we stand on the heights of the everlasting Zion, we will be better qualified to make further and higher advances in the knowledge of Divine things. How very dreadful and alarming is the condition of the apos­tate (verses 4-8). Once enlightened and comforted by the good word of God, a partaker of the heavenly gift and of the Holy Spirit, but now fallen; dead in trespasses and in sins, without God and without hope; beyond the reach of mercy, even through the blood of the everlasting covenant wherewith he was once sancti­fied! “ Oh wretched state of deep despair!” What mind can fathom the abyss of woe that awaits such an abandoned reprobate ? And yet to think that such a doom may perchance be ours! The very thought of even such a possibility should constrain us to put forth every energy of body, soul, and spirit, to make our calling and election sure. To be banished from God as unfit for the society of Heaven; to have our portion with the devil and his angels; to weep forever, “ but not in Mercy’ s sight!” And all this for what? Simply because we would not accept of the great salvation, by ceasing to do evil, and learning to do well. Because we would not humbly, and in reliance on Divine grace, even try to do the will of him who made us, preserved us, and gave his own Son to re­deem us. May God save us from such folly and madness by helping and enabling us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. Any evidence of spiritual vitality is always encouraging (verses 9, 10). The sick may be revived, but the condition of the dead is hopeless. Every possible effort should therefore be made, and made speedily, to raise up the hands that hang down, and to strengthen the feeble knees. God never abandons any of his erring children while there is even a spark of spiritual life in their souls. It is only when they wholly apostatize from him, by going so far in sin as to sever the last cord of their spiritual union with him, that he gives them up to blindness of mind and hardness of heart. Till then he follows them with even more than a father’ s care and a mother’ s love. “ Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord, and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you. For I am merci­ful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever. Only ac­knowledge thine iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the Lord thy God, and hast scattered thy ways to the strangers under every green tree, and ye have not obeyed my voice, saith the Lord. Turn, O backsliding Israel, saith the Lord, for I am married unto you; and I will take you, one of a city and two of a family, and will bring you to Zion.” (Jeremiah 3:12-14.) While, then, God labors to reform and restore his backsliding children, we should feel en­couraged to do likewise, for God is not willing that any should per­ish, but that all should be brought to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9.) See also Matthew 18:12-15; Luke 15:4-7 Luke 22:32; Galatians 6:1; Hebrews 12:13; James 5:19-20; 1 John 5:16; Jude 1:22-23. The departed saints are now happy (verses 12, 15). They are inheriting the promises in a far higher and fuller sense than they did during their earthly pilgrimage (verse 12). True, indeed, it is said of Abraham, as well as of many of his children, that he was greatly blessed during his sojourn on earth. (Genesis 24:1 Genesis 24:35.) But all this was but as nothing in comparison with the blessing which he received after that he had patiently waited even to the end of his pilgrimage (verse 15). For “ he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise,” that is, of the same heavenly inheritance. (11: 16.) “ For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” (11: 9, 10.) And just so it was also with Isaac, and Jacob, and all the Prophets, Apostles, and other holy men of old, “ who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, and turned to flight the armies of the aliens.” (11:33, 34.) “ These all died in faith, not having re­ceived the promises, but having seen them afar off, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.” (11: 13.) These have all entered into the rest of God (4: 10), and are now heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17). The entire universe is now theirs, so far as they are now capable of enjoying it. (1 Corinthians 3:22-23.) Heaven is now their home, and the earth, when purified from sin, will be added to their possessions, and become the place of their abode. See notes on 2: 5-9. There, invested as they will be with their glorified bodies, they will probably enter on still higher degrees of enjoyment. There God will lead them to fountains of living water, and there he will make all things abound to their everlasting felicity. Surely, then, it is better to depart and be with Christ (Philippians 1:23); for “ while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord.” (2 Corinthians 5:6). It is right to make oath on grave and momentous occasions (verses 13, 17). This, it seems, has ever been a custom among men, and God himself is here represented as having acted in har­mony with this custom. But surely he would not have done so had the custom been in itself sinful, as some allege. That the practice of swearing has been carried to very great excess, even in our civil courts, I readily grant; and that there is in our depraved hearts a lamentable tendency to take the name of God in vain, is, alas, but too evident. All such profane trifling with the name and attributes of God is sinful (Exodus 20:7) ; and so also is the habit of swearing by Heaven, or by the earth, or by any other creature. All such profanity is wholly inconsistent with the spirit of our holy religion, and is most emphatically forbidden by Christ (Matthew 5:33-37), and also by the Apostle James (James 5:12). But to swear by God when the occasion requires it, that is, when nothing else would serve to remove doubt and give to society the necessary confidence, seems to be in harmony with the example of God himself on sun­dry occasions. See references. How wonderfully deep and profound are the counsels of Je­hovah (verses 13-18). Who without the aid of the Holy Spirit would ever have supposed that God’ s promise to Abraham compre­hended all that has been developed from it in the history of God’ s dealings with mankind? Who would have thought, for instance, that in that promise there was given to Abraham and to his seed a pledge that they should be the heirs of the world (Romans 4:13), and partakers of all the rights and privileges of the everlasting kingdom (Galatians 3:29) ? But it is even so. God’ s ways are not as our ways, nor are his thoughts as our thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8-9.) Well may we exclaim with Paul, in view of the whole plan of re­demption, “ Oh the depth of the riches, and of the wisdom, and of the knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counselor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things; to whom be glory for­ever. Amen.” The hope of the Christian rests on a sure foundation (verse 19). Unlike the hopes of the world, it will never make us ashamed by disappointing us; for even now we have here a fore­taste of the joys and felicities of Heaven, through “ the love of God that is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us.” (Romans 5:10.) This is a sure earnest of what is to follow. (Ephesians 1:14). And besides, Jesus as our forerunner has for us entered into that within the vail. There he has made an atonement for us with his own blood; there he has provided for us heavenly mansions, and there he ever lives and reigns to make intercession for us, and to supply all our wants. Surely this is sufficient ground of encouragement for those “ who have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us.” For if when we were enemies to God by wicked works, we were reconciled to him by the death of his Son,, much more being now reconciled by his death, we shall be saved by his life. (Romans 5:10.) Hebrews Chapter SixVerse 1 ; ON UNTO ; TO FAITH AND ; THE HOPE THAT IS SET BEFORE USWherefore 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, of the teaching of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.(Hebrews 6:1-2) Leaving ... the first principles is not enjoined in the sense of departing from those fundamental things, but in the sense of progressing beyond them, the overwhelming importance of the things mentioned being inherent in the fact of their being called "first principles" and "a foundation." Through use of a pronoun "us," the writer identifies himself with his readers, as more emphatically in Hebrews 6:3 following; and from this it should not be presumed that the inspired author of this epistle was himself deficient in the manner of his readers, nor that he, like them, was guilty of serious fault of omission. Just why a similar identification of the author with his readers inHebrews 2:3 should be hailed as proof that the author was denying his own apostleship has never been explained. See under "authorship" in the introduction for note on this, also under Hebrews 2:3. What the writer surely did here, he may have done in Hebrews 2:3; and the basis of dogmatic affirmations to the contrary, far from being evident, appears forced and unnatural. The "perfection" in this place refers to a more extensive and thorough knowledge of Christian principles, as contrasted with the mere acquaintance with the basic fundamentals. The goal of all Christian endeavor is absolute perfection, even as God is perfect, for Jesus said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Unattainable in the ultimate sense, perfection is nevertheless the goal of Christians. All should strive toward it. THE SIX Ironically, ours is an age that has indeed "gone on" to a very fanciful and indefinite kind of perfection so-called, categorically forsaking and denying the very principles outlined here as fundamental. For the generation that first received this letter to the Hebrews, a further stress of the fundamentals was not needed; but for this age, the opposite is true. Fundamental truth of the most basic nature is openly denied or presumptuously ignored by an age that seems to feel that it has outgrown such elementary things as these; and, therefore, we may be thankful indeed for the inspired outline of things which actually constitute fundamental Christian doctrine. Some study will be given to this extremely interesting list of the foundation principles of the Christian religion: repentance from dead works, faith toward God, the teaching of baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, the eternal judgment. There are two categories here, first the plan of salvation, as it has been called, including faith, repentance and baptism, and pertaining largely to alien individuals, and secondly, certain doctrines that concern all people collectively. Some make a triple division, grouping the three successive pairs to represent man's personal relations, his social relations, and his connection with the unseen world.[1]Objection to the view that the primary steps of Christian obedience, faith, repentance and baptism, are intended here springs from two things: (1) the order of their being mentioned (repentance first), and (2) the mention of plural baptisms. We shall note each of these. The order of faith and repentance in the steps of obedience does not depend on any word list, even of the apostles, for it is impossible for them to be reversed. No unbeliever in the history of the world ever repented; and the mention of repentance first in this sequence cannot possibly imply any priority of its appearance in the sinner's heart. The scriptures supply another example of clearly related actions being mentioned out of their natural sequence. Peter said of the crucifixion of Christ that it was he "whom they slew and hanged on a tree" (Acts 5:30), thus reversing the chronological sequence. The use of the plural "baptisms" doubtless sprang from the fact that no less than seven baptisms are mentioned in the New Testament, these being: (1) the baptism of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11); (2) the baptism of fire (Matthew 3:11); (3) the baptism of John (Matthew 3:16); (4) the baptism unto Moses (1 Corinthians 10:2); (5) the baptism of suffering (Luke 15:30); (6) the baptism for the dead (1 Corinthians 15:29); and (7) the baptism of the great commission (Matthew 28:18-20). The seventh of these is beyond question the "one" baptism of Eph 4:5; and the knowledge of these things was most certainly part of the elementary things that one had to know in order to become a Christian. Able scholars have rejected this view, Bruce, for example, insisting that "baptisms" in this place has no reference whatever to that Christian ordinance that stands at the gateway of the church; but in matters of this kind, one must be on guard against the natural bias that flows from the theological position of the commentator. Just how anyone can rule out Christian baptism as being included in "baptisms," especially when it stands in a list of fundamental Christian doctrines, must ever appear as a mystery indeed. Westcott, an incomparable master of the Greek text, allows the obvious meaning of the word to stand, stating that The plural and peculiar form (of the term "baptisms") seems to be used to include Christian baptism with other lustral rites. The "teaching" would naturally be directed to show their essential difference.[2]Repentance from dead works. Repentance is basic to salvation, on the part of both aliens and Christians, being a constant duty of all who would enter into life. It is an invariable condition of forgiveness of any sin whatsoever (Luke 13:3). "From dead works" is a reference to the class of deeds from which the conscience requires to be cleansed, as evidenced by the same description of them in Hebrews 9:14. All works are dead, in the sense intended here, except the ones motivated by faith and love of God. The works of human righteousness, the works of the flesh, the works of mortal achievement, and even the works of the Law of Moses, must all be included in the "dead works" mentioned here. And faith toward God. Faith as a fundamental is affirmed not only here but in Hebrews 11:6, and throughout the New Testament (Mark 16:15-16). It is rather strange that faith which has been elevated to a super-status by most of Protestantism should be revealed here among the simplicities, a rudimentary, fundamental, basic thing, which one is admonished to leave and go on unto perfection! What a contrast is between this and the view of the creeds which make it the "sole" basis of salvation. Nevertheless, it would be difficult indeed to overstress the importance of faith, without which no man can please God. It is a "sine qua non" of redemption. And the teaching of baptisms. This was noted above, but a few more thoughts are in order. Plainly, baptism is made to be in this verse a part of the fundamental teaching of Christianity; and therefore, it simply cannot be that baptism is in any sense an optional, non-essential, elective, or superficial duty; but it is a genuine obligation, as should already have been expected from the proclamation of it on so many solemn occasions as a commandment to be heeded by all people. See the accounts of the great commission in Matthew 28:18 ff and Mark 16:15 ff, and also the first sermon of the gospel age (Acts 2:38 ff). As regards faith and baptism, the theology of the Protestant era has exaggerated faith and diminished baptism; but in the index of Christian fundamentals, one finds them securely embedded side by side in the foundation of the Christian theology. Seeing then that the Holy Spirit has made them to be among the coordinates, it must be sinful indeed to disturb the place that either of them has in God's marvelous system of salvation. Let those who hail baptism as non-essential, or some superfluous accessory of the true faith, behold here its proper place in the foundation. Baptism is the burial in water of a believing, penitent candidate, and the raising up again to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12); only those who believe and repent can receive Christian baptism. The purpose of baptism is to bring the believer into Christ (Galatians 3:27; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Romans 6:3). The necessity of baptism lies in the mandate of Christ who commanded all people of all nations of all times to receive it and submit to it (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38 ff). The responsibility for being baptized rests upon every individual ever born into the world. Peter commanded his hearers to "repent and have yourselves baptized."[3] Baptism is a precondition of forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38 Acts 22:16); it corresponds to the marriage ceremony as applied to Christ and his bride, the church (Ephesians 5:25-27); it is the initiatory rite by which one is admitted to the church which is the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). Although the scriptures declare that we are saved by baptism (1 Peter 3:21), it is not baptism alone that saves. Baptism without faith, or without repentance, or without the newness of life following, is no baptism. Baptism is "for" the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), and for the purpose of being saved (Mark 16:15-16); and it is to be administered in the sacred name "of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:18-20). Therefore, let every man ask himself if this sacred and holy commandment has anything to do with him! The laying on of hands would seem at first glance to be misplaced in this list, but not at all. Absolutely essential to an understanding of the limitation upon the appearance in the early history of the church of truly inspired men who could do miracles and speak with divine authority in the church is the knowledge of the fact that such abilities came to those men through the laying on of the apostles' hands (Acts 8:18), and from no other source whatsoever. Out of such knowledge flow epic deductions which are of the utmost consequence to Christianity. The cessation of miracles and of directly-inspired teachers, and the closing up of the sacred canon of the New Testament, and such information as refutes the notion of any so-called apostolic succession - all these and many other truths of a most crucial kind are directly dependent upon just one little fact, namely, that it was through laying on of "the apostles' hands" that those wonderful gifts came to the church, and that that power was not hereditary, or transferable, by any other means whatever. Plenary power of a kind like that delegated to an ambassador is never transferable, but every new holder of it must be commissioned at the original source. Even the sorcerer understood this basic point (Acts 8:18 ff); and the possession of that information by such a person as Simon, after such a brief contact with the faith, proves both the fundamental or elementary nature of the doctrine, and its basic simplicity as well. It was in view of that knowledge that Simon tried to buy the gift, not from Philip who had baptized him and who also had the power, and who was personally known to Simon, but from Peter, an apostle! The resurrection of the dead is another fundamental sadly shunted aside in the materialistic age through which people are passing. This old fundamental doctrine should be hauled out of the cellar and presented anew to the secular and unbelieving society! An apostle once said, "If in this life only we have hope, we are of all men most pitiable" (1 Corinthians 15:19). The whole teaching of Christ was founded squarely on the premise of a resurrection of the bad and good alike, indeed of all people. He said, Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of judgment (John 5:28-29). Christianity's most successful missionary, the apostle Paul, never failed to stress this doctrine. On land or on sea, at home or abroad, in villages or in great cities, his message was always and constantly that of the resurrection of the dead. The importance of this fundamental teaching to the onward sweep of Christianity in the early centuries was marked by Gibbon in his epic history of the decline and fall of the ancient Roman empire. He wrote, Our curiosity is naturally prompted to inquire by what means the Christian faith obtained so remarkable a victory over the established religions of earth. To this inquiry an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned; that it was owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruling providence of its great Author. Gibbon then went on to list the factors which he called "the five following causes" which favored the rapid spread of Christianity; and the second on the list is "the doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth."[4] Without the doctrine of the resurrection, the whole fabric of Christian thought dissolves into emptiness and worthlessness. No marvel then that it is listed as fundamental. And of eternal judgment. This doctrine too, in these days, is more honored by its neglect than by its faithful proclamation. The whole concept of an eternal judgment, alas, has dropped out of the theological firmament, and from its rightful emphasis by gospel preachers. And why? Is not this also a part of the fundamental sub-structure of Christianity? Of course it is. The doctrine of the eternal judgment is taught in the Old Testament (Daniel 12:2); but it is in the New Testament that the magnificent scope and importance of it most vividly appear. Christ plainly stated that all nations would appear simultaneously before him in judgment, that he should sit upon the throne of God and separate the wicked from the righteous as the shepherd divides the sheep from the goats (Matthew 25:31 ff). He taught that all nations would appear simultaneously with that current generation in judgment, and that the citizens of Nineveh (Matthew 12:41) and the queen of the south (Matthew 12:42), separated by centuries of time, would appear in judgment with the contemporaries of Jesus. Efforts to spiritualize the resurrection and judgment (the two go together) by making "our age" the judgment day, or "the day of death" the judgment, or "every day" to be judgment day, or such things as "historical rejections of prior social wrongs" to be the judgment mentioned in scripture is nonsense. All such devices utterly fail in the light of the concise and dramatic statements in the word of God, one of them in this epistle. "It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment" (Hebrews 9:27). And as for the delusion that the second coming of Christ, accompanied by the general resurrection and final judgment, will all be realized in some vague spiritual sense such as a glorious era of world peace, social justice, and universal felicity among people, forget it. To be sure, all people would delightfully hail such a "judgment day" and such a coming of Christ; but the word of God details the second advent of our Lord in terms of a cataclysmic event of worldwide terror and destruction, an event that will not be, in any sense, "good news" for the great majority of Adam's race; for the Saviour himself said that "Then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" (Matthew 24:30). Great and terrible as the concept of eternal judgment admittedly is, the most profound necessity for it is evident. Most of the truly difficult problems connected with the life of faith, and with reference to the entire system of Christianity, are directly related to the doctrine of eternal judgment. Heaven, hell, eternal punishment, eternal joy, Satan, and the problem of evil - all these things pivot in the last analysis upon the scriptural teaching of the judgment. All of the problems, great and small, eventually fade into insignificance before the pressing question, "Is this universe just?" The underlying assumption of revealed religion as set forth in both the Old Testament and the New Testament is the concept of a just universe; and time and time again it is unequivocably declared to be just (Psalms 45:6-7). The father of the faithful, Abraham, idiomatically inferred it when he asked, "Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:25). The existence of laws in the natural realm, the moral law within people, and the sacred revelation all alike proclaim the justice of the universe; and if it is not so, life indeed becomes "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" (Macbeth, Act V). Sanity in any true sense turns upon the question of justice in the cosmos. If the righteousness and justice of God do indeed establish his throne and undergird all things, then WE ARE SAFE; and every man shall receive the reward of the deeds done in the body (2 Corinthians 5:10); if not, then any true security of the soul is a fool's dream, and man himself is but an infant crying in the night with no language but a cry! But if the universe is just; if the righteous shall be rewarded and the wicked punished, AN ETERNAL IS , a judgment in which all inequities and injustices shall be corrected, an eternal judgment presided over by infinite justice, wisdom, mercy, and love - in short, the judgment revealed upon every page of the sacred scriptures, or if not revealed, then certainly implied. The widespread neglect and apparent disbelief of this doctrine suggests that it is true of our generation, as it was of those to whom this epistle was first addressed, that we "have need again that someone teach us the rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God" (Hebrews 5:12) A foundation as applied to these six crucial teachings suggests some facts regarding foundations. No less than four foundations of Christianity are mentioned in the New Testament, and these are: (1) the foundation fact that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:13-19; 1 Corinthians 3:11); (2) the foundation authority, namely the sayings of Jesus Christ, called by him "these sayings of mine" (Matthew 7:24-27), "whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20); (3) the foundation personnel, the apostles and prophets of the New Testament (Ephesians 2:19); and (4) the foundation teachings as set forth in the place before us. The multiple nature of the foundation should not be confusing, since foundations, even of almost any building, are comprised of several different things. The eternal city that comes down from God out of heaven is said to have twelve foundations! (Revelation 21:19). [1] Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965), p. 143. [2] Ibid., p. 146. [3] Vine's Greek Dictionary (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1962), p. 97. [4] Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Philadelphia: H. T. Coates and Company), Vol. I, p. 508. Verse 3 And this will we do, if God permit.The pledge of the writer, and he graciously includes his readers, is to go on unto perfection, with no attempt on his part to re-teach his addressees on the subject of the fundamentals, the reason for this being that it would do no good anyway. This was true because of the impossibility of rekindling the cold ashes of a dead faith after its life-giving flame had been extinguished. He does, however, devote some little space to an explanation of that reason. Verse 4 For as touching those who were 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, 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.It is astonishing to behold the lengths to which people have gone in their writings to diminish the plain import of these words. The Calvinistic concept of the impossibility of apostasy, or the final perseverance of the saints, has always been nothing but a delusion. All efforts to resolve the matter by the judgment upon apostates to the effect that they were never really converted fail in the light of this passage, where there can be no doubt of the true conversion of them that later fell away. As Bruce noted, the passage can be abused in two ways. He said, This warning has both been unduly minimized and unduly exaggerated ... (as by them that say) the sin in question cannot be committed today ... The warning of this passage is a real warning against a real danger ... On the other hand, our author's meaning can be exaggerated to the point of distortion when he is understood to say that for sins committed after baptism there can be no repentance.[5]The most difficult word in this passage is "impossible," which seems to perplex most of the writers. Macknight wrote that "The apostle does not mean that it is impossible for God to renew a second time an apostate; but that it is impossible for the ministers of Christ (to do so)."[6] Allow that God might indeed do what is here called impossible does no violence to truth, since all things are possible with God, except that he should lie or deny himself; and if the renewing of an apostate is not an action included in that exception, it would, of course, be possible with God. But the practical impossibility still stands; and it appears likely that the state here described as "impossible" of renewal should be identified with the "eternal sin" of Mark 3:28. Barmby noted this, saying, The correspondence between the state here described and the consequence of "the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost" suggests itself at once; our Lord's words, in speaking of that unpardonable sin, being rightly supposed to point to obduracy in spite of experience of the Holy Spirit's power.[7]AN ETERNAL SINA careful reading of Mar 3:28 and context reveals that the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is designated as "an eternal sin," thus one of a class of sins that are called eternal and which are without forgiveness. In addition to the scripture before us, there are other New Testament passages bearing upon this important matter. The Thessalonians were warned, "Quench not the Spirit" (1 Thessalonians 5:19); the pleasure lover was described as "dead while she liveth" (1 Timothy 5:6); willful sin after knowledge of the truth results in there being "no more a sacrifice for sin" (Hebrews 10:26-27); "there is a sin unto death" (1 John 5:16) for which there is not even any need or commandment that people should pray; certain Corinthians were spoken of as being in a state of "sleep" (1 Corinthians 11:30); and Peter described a certain condition as being worse than lost (2 Peter 2:20-21); and the only condition that can answer to such a description is one from which recovery is impossible. All of these words of the Holy Spirit, and including the strong words of the Saviour (Mark 3:28), speak of a condition from which there is no recovery in this life or in the one to come. Yet in spite of terrible warning uttered here, no morbid fear should be allowed to fasten upon the soul as a result. What is spoken of may be simply stated as spiritual death, having its everyday counterpart in physical, or natural death. Once a man is truly dead, life cannot be breathed again into his body, death being final. Just so, once a Christian quenches the sacred Spirit within his soul, that too is final, the destiny of that soul being then and there fully determined. What then is THE SIN that can cause so fatal and final a result? The answer is ANY SIN engaged in, loved, and preferred over fellowship with God. The sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was the sin judged by Jesus to have been terminal with the Pharisees; but in making it "an eternal sin," Jesus clearly made room for the view that other sins as well could be just as disastrous. The unpardonable or eternal sin is thus any sin that results in the death of the spiritual life; and therein lies the danger of all sin. The counterpart is in the physical world where the fatal disease is the one inscribed on the death certificate and which varies with all kinds of circumstances. The Christian attitude toward sin should therefore be like that of a mother's concern over any threatened danger to a child. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 6:2. Baptisms is from the Greek word which Thayer defines "A washing, purification effected by means of water." It refers to the washing of animals prescribed by the Mosaic law. (See Exodus 29:4 Exodus 29:17 : Leviticus 1:9 Leviticus 9:14.) The word is never used for the ordinance o f Christian baptism. Laying on o f hands. Under the Mosaic system the priests or others laid their hands on the animals that were to be offered in the service (Leviticus 3:2 Leviticus 4:4 Leviticus 4:13 Leviticus 16:21). Resurrection of the dead . . . eternal judgement. These p h r as e s must be considered together, for they are connected with one of the erroneous theories that were maintained in those days, and were shared in by the Jews. The theory was false but Jesus never bothered about exposing it in His day. However, when the apostles came to induce the Jews to accept the Gospel, it was necessary to tell them they must give up such notions; that they must do "repentance from" such errors. The false theory referred to is known in historical literature as "Transmigration of sou1s," T h e doctrine taught that when a man dies his soul passes into the body of another, thus enabling him to live again or experience a resurrection. If the person had been unrighteous, he would be punished by being sent into some other being who was afflicted, or into an abnormal child then being born. (See John 9:1-3.) If necessary this form of punishment or judgement would be repeated again and again. (a form of "eternal judgement") as here expressed. Hebrews 6:3. If God permit. No passage should be interpreted so as to contradict another in the Bible. 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." The italicized phrase, then, does not imply that God will prevent any man from doing what is right. The thought is as if Paul would say, "We who are determined to be right, will go on unto maturity in the spiritual life, God being our helper." Hebrews 6:4. It is impossible. The thing that is impossible and the reasons for it will require a number of lines of the text to explain. After the simple announcement of an impossibility, the apostle drops the subject and gives a description of the characters concerning whom it is said, then tells what it is that is impossible. We shall carefully study this description before attempting to state the conclusion. Enlightened is from PHOTIZO which Thayer defines, "To enlighten spiritually, imbue with saving knowledge." Thayer defines the orginal for taste as follows: "To feel, make trial of, experience." It means to have experienced enough of the heavenly gift of Christianity to know how precious it is. The Holy Ghost (or Spirit) was bestowed upon the church (Romans 5:5 Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 6:19), hence when people become Christians they are made partakers of the Holy Ghost. Hebrews 6:5. Tasted the good word of God means to have "experienced" the help of that word enough to know what its benefits are. When a person knows by experience what effect for good the Gospel will have on one in preparing for the world to come, he may truly be said to have tasted of that coming power even in this life. Hebrews 6:6. To fall away means to desert or purposely turn away from a thing. It here applies to those who have had all the experience just described, then deliberately pull away from such a manner of life. Now we are ready to see what it is that is impossible, namely, to renew such a person to repentance. The impossibility is upon the part of the would-be restorer and not on the one who falls away. It does not say he cannot repent, but it is impossible for anyone else to iduce him to. The reason is that the apostate already knows as much about the subject as the one who wants to renew him, and hence the exhorter cannot offer any new arguments or reasons. On the basis of the foregoing statements of the apostle, it is proper to say that if persons fall away after all those experiences, then "It is impossible . . . to renew them again unto repentance." If they ever come back to Christ it will be on their own change of heart, which will always be possible for them. Paul describes this falling away as another crucifying of the Son of God, since it puts them outside the church and in the class of the enemies who actually did crucify Him. It is an open shame because the radical turning from a life of righteousness is apparent to the world about the apostate. Hebrews 6:7. Paul is making an illustration out of the earth and its products. Not all ground is desirable as the parable of the sower in Matthew 13 teaches. The blessing of moisture will fall on the earth regardless of the character of some particular spots. If any portion responds by producing useful herbs, it will be blessed of God and be worthy of additional showers. Hebrews 6:8. On the same basis as the preceding verse, if some spot receives the rain but yields only the thorns, such products will be burned, and that spot will be rejected by the owner as unprofitable. Hebrews 6:9. Paul expected his readers to understand the general lesson in the parable, but he does not mean for them to make a personal application of it as yet. Hence he makes the kindly remark that he is counting on a better showing from them than was indicated by the thorny ground. However, we are sure the apostle intended the illustration as an exhortation for them to be thoughtful and not fail at last. It is similar to the warning given in chapter 3:12 and 4:1. Hebrews 6:10. This verse is consistent with the preceding one. The Hebrew brethen were given credit for the good work they had done. We are not told the particulars of what they were doing, but it has the highly commendable credit of being a labor of love. An important part of their motive for the work is indicated by the statement that it was toward his name. Such a motive corresponds with Matthew 25:40. Hebrews 6:11. It is not enough to be doing one's duty just at intervals and then stop, but it must be persisted in until the end of life. Hebrews 6:12. To be slothful means to be sluggish or indolent. A follower is an imitator, but a person cannot, imitate those who are patient (persistent) if he is indolent. Hebrews 6:13. Persistence was the outstanding characteristic of Abraham, and he manifested it because of his faith in the promises of God. Until the Christian Dispensation there was no command against taking oaths. God made use of an oath in the promise to Abraham, but it was necessary to swear by himself because He is the greatest Being in existence. In making such a personally-supported oath it was similar to the statement of a man who says, "I give you my word of honor." Hebrews 6:14. The particular blessing promised to Abraham meant in this verse was that he was to have a son with whom the covenant was to be established (Genesis 17:19). Hebrews 6:15. He finally obtained that son as a reward for his patience (Genesis 21:1). Hebrews 6:16. The usual practice of men as to oaths is cited by the apostle by way of illustration. If a contract is bound under an oath it will prevent any dispute. Hebrews 6:17. God had no one greater by whom He could swear, yet he wished to provide some means of assurance to those interested in His counsel or promise. Immutability means that it is unchangeable--nothing can be done to change it. God accomplished the assurance by adding His oath to the promise thereby confirming it. Hebrews 6:18. The two immutable (unchangeable) things were the promise and the oath of God. It was impossible for God to lie concerning either the promise or the oath, and hence by applying both for the sake of the heirs, it gave them the more abundant evidence. As a further result, the heirs of that promise (meaning all who believe in Christ as the seed of Abraham that was promised) have a strong consolation for the future, because that is the direction toward which hope must look. Fled for refuge. This phrase is based on a provision under the Mosaic system whereby persons accused of crime (whether guilty or not) could "flee" to a place called a city of refuge. (See Numbers 35.) Today men are all under accusation, justly, of being sinners and in danger of punishment at the hands of the avenger of sins. But a city of refuge (the church) has been built and those who will hasten (flee) to enter this institution may be saved from their past sins. And if they will remain in that city as faithful citizens, they have the promise of salvation in the world to come. Hebrews 6:19. This prospect of eternal salvation is the hope that stimulates Christians in this work for Christ. It is fastened, like an anchor, to Christ who is our High Priest. He has entered within the veil, the phrase being based on the veil in the temple that enclosed the most holy place, which was a type of Heaven. Hebrews 6:20. Jesus is called the forerunner because he has gone on before us to be the intercessor for His people. For this purpose He was made a High Priest like the order of Melchisedec. The advantage of being after that order instead of the order of the Levitical form was predicted in the Old Testament (Psalms 110:4), and it will be discussed in the next chapter. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 7SECTION SIXHeb_7:1-28 and Hebrews 8:1-5Having by the admonitions and warnings given in the preceding section, excited his Hebrew brethren to greater diligence in the study of God’ s word, the Apostle again resumes the consideration of Christ’ s priesthood. His main object in this section is to set forth clearly and prominently its great superiority over that of Aaron and his successors. This he does— I. By showing that the priesthood of Melchisedec was of a higher order than that of Aaron. And as the priesthood of Mel­chisedec was only a type of the priesthood of Christ, it follows of necessity that the latter is even more than the former superior to that of Aaron. (Hebrews 7:1-10.) That the priesthood of Melchisedec was superior to that of the Levitical order, he proves— 1. From the fact that Melchisedec was a king as well as a priest (Hebrews 7:1-2).2. From the fact that Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, paid tithes to him (Hebrews 7:2). 3. From the fact that, as a priest, Melchisedec appears on the typical canvas alone, without predecessors and without successors. II. In this, the unity, immutability, and general perfection of Christ’ s priesthood are beautifully illustrated (Hebrews 7:3). 1. From the fact that Abraham himself acknowledged the supe­riority of Melchisedec (1) by giving him a tithe of the spoils, and (2) by receiving his blessing (Hebrews 7:2 Hebrews 7:7).2. From the fact that on the principle of federal representation, even Levi himself paid tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham (Hebrews 7:9-10). From all of which it follows that the priesthood of Melchisedec is of a higher order than that of Aaron, and conse­quently that the priesthood of Christ is greatly superior to the Levitical. III. The Apostle further demonstrates the superiority of Christ’ s priesthood over that of Levi, from the fact that God had promised by David that he would introduce a new order of priesthood. This, as our author shows, implies an imperfection in the Levitical order, and also in the whole law of Moses (Hebrews 7:11-19). For 1. If the Levitical priesthood had reached the end of God’ s be­nevolent purposes, then certainly he would not have thought of in­troducing another of a different order (Hebrews 7:11). 2. But this he has done. For in Psalms 110:4, as our author has shown in Hebrews 5:5-6, God promised to make his Son Jesus a High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. And as Jesus is not of the tribe of Levi but of Judah, it follows that the Levitical priesthood is abolished, and with it also the whole law of Moses, of which the Levitical priesthood was the basis (Hebrews 7:12-14). 3. This is further and still more manifestly implied in the stipu­lated terms and conditions of the new order of priesthood. Christ holds his office, not as did the Levitical Priests “ after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.” He is a priest forever according to the decree of Jehovah as given in Psalms 110:4. 4. The whole law of Moses, then, embracing the carnal com­mandment relating to the Levitical priesthood is abrogated, being, as it was, incapable of perfecting anything, and a new and better ground of hope is now brought in through the priesthood of Christ; so that we can now, at all times, draw near to God, as chil­dren to a father, and obtain from him seasonable help (Hebrews 7:18-19). IV. The Apostle makes a third argument in proof of the superiority of Christ’ s priesthood on the ground that it was instituted with an oath. “ Jehovah has sworn, and will not repent,” says David, addressing the Messiah, “ thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.” 1. But no such solemnities were observed in inaugurating the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:20-22). 2. Now when it is understood that God never makes oath, save on the most sol­emn occasions and in reference to the most important matters this argument is of very great force. V. The fourth argument is drawn from the frequent changes that occurred in the Levitical priesthood, occasioned by the death of the high priest (Hebrews 7:23-25). 1. From the inauguration of the Levitical priesthood to the birth of Christ, sixty-seven different persons held the office of high priest, and from the same epoch to the destruction of Jerusalem, eighty-one persons ministered in this office (Hebrews 7:23). 2. But no such imperfection exists in the priesthood of Christ; he ever lives to intercede for his people, and to save even to the uttermost those who come unto God by him (Hebrews 7:24-25). I. In the next place he proves the superiority of Christ’ s priesthood from his perfectly holy and sinless nature (Hebrews 7:26-28). 1. The Levitical high priests were all sinners like other men, and hence they had to offer sacrifices daily for themselves as well as for the people. 2. But Christ being without sin, had no need to offer sacrifice for himself. And so perfect was the one offering of himself which he made for the sins of the people that no further offering is re­quired. God can now be just in justifying all who believe in Jesus. II. Finally and chiefly, the Apostle proves the superiority of Christ’ s priesthood from his exalted position and his official dig­nity (Hebrews 8:1-5). 1. He sits enthroned on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens (Hebrews 8:1). 2. He is a minister of the Sanctuary and also of the true Taber­nacle, of which Jehovah himself is the supreme architect. In these archetypes of both the tabernacle of Moses, and the temple of Solo­mon, Jesus ever ministers as our high jpriest, dealing not with shadows as did the priests under the Law, but with the sublime realities of the economy of redemption (Hebrews 8:2-5). It appears, then, from the preceding analysis that the main thoughts and divisions of this section may be briefly summed up as follows: I. Hebrews 7:1-10. The Melchisedecian order of priesthood superior to the Levitical. II. Hebrews 7:11-19. The Levitical priesthood and law of Moses both abrogated on account of their insufficiency, and a better ground of hope brought in through the priesthood of Christ. III. Hebrews 7:20-22. The superiority of Christ’ s priesthood proved from the fact that, unlike the Levitical, it was inaugurated with an oath. IV. Hebrews 7:23-25. The frequent changes in the Levitical priesthood occasioned by the death of the high priest, contrasted with the ever-enduring and unchangeable character of Christ’ s priesthood. V. Hebrews 7:26-28. The great superiority of Christ’ s priesthood proved and illustrated from his own pure and spotless character, and from the perfection of the one offering which he made for the sins of the world. VI. Heb 8: 1-5. The superiority of Christ’ s priesthood further demonstrated from the higher and more exalted sphere of his min­istry.THE ORDER OF TO THE Hebrews 7:1-10 Hebrews 7:1 ---For this Melchisedec,—The Apostle expresses here in one compact sentence the main characteristics of Melchisedec as a type of Christ. His object is to amplify and illustrate the closing re­mark of the last section that Christ is “ made a high priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.” This he goes on to say is true, for Melchisedec being king of Salem, etc., abides a priest continu­ally, and so also does Christ. Who this Melchisedec was, has long been a question of interest with both the learned and the unlearned. Some say that he was Christ himself (Ambrose, Hottinger) ; some, that he was the Holy Spirit (Hieracas, Epiphanius) ; some, that he was an angel (Ori- gen, Didymus) ; some, that he was Enoch (Hulsius, Calmet) ; some, that he was Shem (Jerome, Luther); and some have conjec­tured that he was an extraordinary emanation from the Deity which suddenly appeared for a little while on the stage of action, and was then as suddenly removed from it. But all such notions are purely hypothetical, and are wholly inconsistent with the man­ifest purpose of God in making Melchisedec an extraordinary type of his own Son as the great high priest of our confession. For it is very obvious that the Holy Spirit has intentionally thrown an im­penetrable veil over both the birth and the death of Melchisedec, over both his parentage and his posterity, for the purpose of mak­ing him a more perfect type of Christ. He now stands before us on the typical canvas alone, without father, without mother, with­out genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life. He appears in the sacerdotal drama by himself, and in the prime of manhood, honored and respected by the most eminent servants of God “ as a priest upon his throne,” thus beautifully illustrating in his own person the royal dignity and the perpetual character of Christ’ s priesthood. But let it be once clearly demonstrated that he was Shem, the son of Noah, or any other person of known genealogy, and that moment the analogy fails, and he forever ceases to be a fit type of Christ. It was not, therefore, a matter of chance, or of accident, but of real design on the part of God, that so little is said in history of this truly great and mysterious person. He comes out suddenly from the dark, invisible background of the drama of human redemption; appears for a little while as a royal priest, and then retires forever without leaving behind him the slightest recorded evidence that he had either predecessors or suc­cessors ; that he had either beginning of days or end of life. And hence it is really more than folly to ransack the archives of antiq­uity with the view of discovering anything more concerning him than what is recorded in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis. Josephus, after the manner of Moses, represents him simply as the king of Salem, and says that “ he supplied Abraham’ s army in a hospitable manner, and gave them provisions in abundance.” (Ant. 10, 2.) So also Philo speaks of him as a real person. He says, “ God made him king of Salem,” and he calls him “ the priest of the Most High God.” (Legg. Alleg. Section 25, 26.) The name Mcl- chisedec, as our author defines it, means simply king of righteous­ness. Hebrews 7:1 ---King of Salem,— Some expositors, as Bohme and Bleek, think that we have in these words, as in Melchi-tsedek, a mere title (Melek-Salem) of this illustrious personage, and that there is really here no reference to any locality. Others, as Jerome and Ewald, suppose that the Salem of our text is the same as the Salim of Joh 3:23, near to which John was baptizing. But the com­mon opinion of both Jewish and Christian writers has always been that the Salem of our text is the same as Jerusalem. This was the view of Josephus (Ant. i. 10, 2; vii. 3, 2; Bell. vi. 10), and is prob­ably correct for the following reasons: (1) the name Salem is manifestly given to Jerusalem in Psalms 76:2. (2)The name Jerusalem is composed as some think of Jebus-Salem (Judges 19:10), or as others with more probability, suppose, of Jeru-Salem, which means foundation of peace. (3) The situation of Jerusalem corresponds well with the facts recorded in Genesis 14:17-20. (4) The name Melchi-tsedek is formed after the same analogy as Adoni-tsedek (lord of righteousness) the name of another king of Jerusalem. (Joshua 10:1.) And (5) since it was God’ s purpose to make Jerusalem prominent above all other places in bringing about the reign of the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6), it is most likely that he would select it in preference to any other locality for the sacer­dotal reign of the king of righteousness. Hebrews 7:1 ---priest of the most high God,— The Hebrew word kohen, ren­dered priest, occurs about seven hundred times in the Old Testa­ment, and like the Greek hiereus, is always used to denote one who offers sacrifice and ministers in other sacred things. It is first of all applied to Melchisedec in Genesis 14:18, who is there, as well as in our text, called “ priest of the Most High God.” The title “ Most High,” is given to God, as Philo says, “ not because there is any other God who is not most high, for God being one is in Heaven above, and the earth beneath, and there is none other be­side him.” (Legg. Alleg. Section 26.) Hebrews 7:1 ---who met Abraham, etc.— The account of this meeting is given in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, to which the reader is re­ferred for all necessary details. Suffice it to say here, that after Abraham had completely routed and vanquished the four kings whose names and places are there recorded, and was returning, laden with the spoils of victory to Hebron, the place of his sojourn about twenty miles south of Jerusalem, he was met on his way thither by Melchisedec, who refreshed him and his servants with bread and wine, and, as the priest of the Most High God, he blessed Abraham, saying, “ Blessed be Abram of the Most High God, possessor of heaven and earth, and blessed be the Most High God who hath delivered thine enemies into thine hand.” Hebrews 7:2 ---To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all,— This act of devotion on the part of Abraham, as well as the vow of Jacob (Genesis 28:22), clearly indicates that the custom of paying tithes to God for the maintenance of his worship and the support of true religion, was of very remote antiquity. Indeed, there is no reason to doubt that the paying of tithes, as well as the offering of sacri­fice, was of Divine origin, and that a law to this effect was given to Adam and his family soon after the fall. And accordingly we find traces of its observance not only among the Patriarchs, but also among many of the most ancient nations, such as the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans, and the Carthaginians. And hence Moses does not introduce tithing as a novelty, but finding it, as he found sacrifice, already in vogue, he merely gave new laws and regulations concerning it, making that now obligatory which was perhaps before somewhat voluntary. While, therefore, the offer­ings of Abraham to Melchisedec were most likely voluntary on the part of this illustrious Patriarch, it is but reasonable to suppose that he made them in harmony with what he knew to be an exist­ing religious ordinance, and also on account of the great respect which he had for Melchisedec as a priest of the Most High God. Hebrews 7:3 ---Without Father, etc.— The Greeks and Romans were wont to apply the epithets “ without father” (apator) and “ without mother” (ametor), (1) to their gods; (2) to orphans; and (3) to persons of unknown or obscure parentage. Thus, for instance, Livy says of Servius Tullius, that “ he was born of no father.” (Lib. iv. 3.) So also the Jews were accustomed to use these terms of persons, the names of whose parents were not given in the Holy Scriptures or in their genealogies. Philo, for example, speaking of Sarah, the wife of Abraham, says, “ She is said not to have had a mother, having received the inheritance of relationship from her father only” (DeEbriet, Section 14) : meaning evidently that her mother’ s name is not found in the sacred records. And to the same effect is the Rabbinical maxim which says of the Gentile pros­elyte that “ He has no father,” after his conversion to Judaism. In this popular sense, the Apostle manifestly uses these negative epithets in our text, to denote simply that the parentage of Mel- chisedec is unknown; that so far as the record goes, he was with­out father and without mother, and furthermore that he was with­out descent, or rather, without genealogy (agenealogetos). Nothing concerning either his ancestry or his posterity is recorded in the Holy Scriptures. There, he appears on the page of typical history isolated and alone. See note on verse 1. Hebrews 7:3 ---having neither beginning of days nor end of life;— This is but a part of the constructive parallelism which the Apostle frames here with the view of amplifying his description of Melchisedec in his typical relations to Christ as the great high priest of our con­fession. Christ, in the sense in which he is here contemplated by our author, had no predecessors, and he will have no successors. He himself will continue to officiate as our royal high priest during the entire period of his mediatorial reign. And so it was with Melchisedec. So far as the record goes, his priesthood, as well as that of Christ, was unbroken, uninterrupted by any changes of suc­cession. All that is here meant by his being made like unto the Son of God, and abiding a priest perpetually (eis to dienekes) is simply this: that like Jesus he completely fills up the entire era of his royal priesthood in his own proper person. This period, how­ever short, is intended to serve as a typical representation of the era of Christ’ s priesthood, and Melchisedec is thus made a more perfect type of Christ than was Aaron or any of his successors. The word perpetually (dienekes) and forever (aion) are relative terms, and are simply exhaustive of the period to which they are severally applied, whether it be long or short. And all that is therefore implied in the words of the text is simply this: that as the shadow, however small it may be, corresponds with the sub­stance which forms it, so also did the priesthood of Melchisedec correspond with that of Christ. Each of them was unbroken, un­interrupted, and relatively perfect in itself. Great care is therefore necessary in dealing with these relative terms and expressions, lest peradventure we give them an extension which is wholly beyond what was intended by the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 7:4 ---Now consider how great this man was,—The Apostle aims here to exalt the character of Melchisedec with the view of still further exalting the character and priesthood of Christ, of whom Melchisedec was an eminent type. This he does by comparing Melchisedec with Abraham, who, at that time, had apparently reached the very summit of human greatness. “ Of his own free­will, he had, from motives of pure benevolence, engaged in an en­terprise which resulted in the overthrow of four kings and the de­liverance of five, and now he was returning to his quiet home cov­ered with glory and the spoils of victory. But just at this moment, when raised above his fellow-men in deeds of prowess and works of mercy, he encounters the venerable form of the king of Salem, who steps forth for an instant from his mysterious seclusion, and as speedily retires again, but not before Abraham, at his highest exaltation, has acknowledged in Melchisedec one superior to him­self” Del. in loc.). This Abraham did (1) by paying to Mel­chisedec the tenth of all the spoils which he had taken, and (2) by receiving the blessing of Melchisedec as the priest of the Most High God. The Greek word rendered spoils (akdrothinion), means literally the top of the heap. It generally occurs in the plural number, and is variously used to denote the first fruits of the harvest, taken as they usually were from the top of the heap of corn, and also the best of the spoils of war, which the heathens generally consecrated to the honor and worship of their gods. In our text it means not the whole of the booty taken, but only those choice articles of it which Abraham selected and offered to Melchisedec as the tenth of all. Hebrews 7:5 ---And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, etc.— The Apostle goes on to demonstrate still further the very exalted per­sonal and official dignity of Melchisedec. This he does in the first place by drawing a broad line of distinction between Melchisedec and the Levitical priests. These, he concedes, were in official rank superior to the laity, as is clearly indicated by their receiving tithes from them. But this difference of rank between the priests and the people, is modified by the fact that they were all brethren, descend­ants of the common stock of Abraham, and also by the fact that the priests had a legal right to tax the people as a reward for ser­vices rendered. But not so in the case of Melchisedec and Abra­ham. Melchisedec bore no such relation to Abraham; he was not of the same kindred, nor had he, so far as we know, any legal right to tax Abraham for his services. And yet, so great was his per­sonal and official dignity, that even Abraham, the honored father of the whole stock of Israel, including the priesthood as well as the people, paid tithes to him and received his blessing. The whole sentence is well rendered by Delitzsch as follows: “ And, indeed, while the sons of Levi receiving the priesthood, have a command­ment to take tithes from the people, according to the law, that is, from their own brethren, although issued like themselves from the loins of Abraham; he, on the other hand, who hath no part in their genealogy, hath received tithes from Abraham himself, and be­stowed his blessing on the possessor of the promises.” Hebrews 7:5 ---have a commandment to take tithes of the people— The Apostle speaks here not of all the sons of Levi, but of those only “ who receive the office of the priesthood” ; that is, of the house of Aaron. (Exodus 28:1; Numbers 17:1-11.) These, he says, have a com­mand to tithe the people. But we learn from Numbers 18:22-32, that the people were required to pay a tithe of all their increase to the Levites, and that the Levites were in turn required to pay a tithe of this tithe to the priests. And hence some allege that there is a discrepancy between the requirements of the law and the statement that is here made by our author. But this, as in other cases, is only in appearance. It is owing simply to the very great brevity with which the Apostle makes reference to the provisions of the law. Had his object been to give us a critical analysis of the law, touching the mutual relations, duties, and obligations of the priests, Levites, and people, the case would have been very different. We would then have reason to expect that every point would be stated and discussed with clearness and precision. But in a general ref­erence, such as our author here makes to the law, it is perfectly legitimate to say, as he does, that the priests “ have a command­ment to tithe the people” ; that is, indirectly through the Levites. The priests tithed the Levites, and the Levites tithed the people. But in reality it was all done for the sake of the priesthood, for the Levites were the servants of the priests. (Numbers 18:2-6.) Hebrews 7:6 ---But he whose descent is not reckoned from them— that is, from the sons of Levi. In this verse the Apostle brings out fully the great contrast between Melchisedec and the Levitical priests. These, indeed, tithed their brethren, a fact which may well excite our surprise when we remember that these brethren were all the children of Abraham, the honored heirs of the promises. But stranger still by far is the fact that Melchisedec, of a wholly differ­ent stock, and without any legal authority, tithed Abraham himself, and blessed him who had the promises. In all this, the transcen­dent dignity of Melchisedec, as the honored priest of the Most High God, is abundantly manifested. Hebrews 7:7 ---And without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the better.— The words rendered less (elatton) and better (kreitton) are both in the neuter gender, thus indicating the general and proverbial character of the proposition. yThe Apostle expresses here a sort of axiomatic truth; a truth which is so very plain in itself, and which is so generally acknowledged that it is really be­yond dispute. “ Now beyond all controversy,” he says, “ the infe­rior is blessed by the superior.” The one who blesses is to the one who receives the blessing as the giver is to the receiver. So it was in the case of Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 27:27-29) ; so it was in the case of Christ and his Apostles (Luke 14:10-11) ; and so also it was in the case of Melchisedec and Abraham (Genesis 19:17-20). Hebrews 7:8 ---And here men that die receive tithes, etc.— The word “ here” (hode) refers to the Levitical economy; and “ there” (ekei), to the administration of Melchisedec, as given in the four­teenth chapter of Genesis. Under the Law, the death of the high priest was always made a matter of record; and so also was the inauguration of his successor. Aaron died and left his office to his son Eleazar; Eleazar, to Phinehas; Phinehas, to Abishua; Abi- shua, to Bukki; Bukki, to Uzzi, etc. (1 Chronicles 6:50-52.) And hence it came to pass, that under the Mosaic economy, the mortal­ity of the priesthood was one of its most prominent features. But not so in the inspired representation which is given us of the priesthood of Melchisedec. When we look at it as a pictorial de­lineation of the priesthood of Christ, we see no signs of death or mortality in it, or about it. Every feature of it beams with life and durability. It has in appearance neither beginning nor ending. And hence so far as the inspired representation goes, Melchisedec lives forever. He can never die. As Delitzsch very forcibly and justly remarks on this point, “ The witness of the Scripture con­cerning him is simply that he liveth. The actual historical Mel­chisedec no doubt died; but the Melchisedec of the second narra­tive does nothing but live,— fixed, as it were, by the pencil of inspi­ration in unchangeable existence; and so made the type of the eter­nal Priest, the Son of God. The sacred writer has here still only Genesis 14:17-20 in view: the abrupt and absolute way in which Melchisedec is there introduced is for him a testimony that he liv­eth.” This, and nothing more than this, I am constrained to think is the meaning of the author. True, indeed, there is a sense in which the type may be said to live in the antitype. David still lives in the person of Christ; and thus it is that his throne endures throughout all generations. (Psalm 89: 19-37.) And so also Mel­chisedec, as a royal Priest, still lives in Christ, and his priesthood endures forever. But to this view of the matter, I do not think our author makes any reference in this connection. He is here con­templating Melchisedec as a type of Christ, not with the view of exalting Melchisedec through Christ, but rather with the view of exalting the priesthood of Christ through that of Melchisedec. And hence he speaks of Melchisedec in his official relations, simply as a type of Christ. Hebrews 7:9 ---And as I may so say,—(kai hos epos eipein) and “ as the saying is” ; or “ so to speak.” This phrase is often used by Greek writers to modify or soften a paradoxical or apparently harsh ex­pression, which is liable to be pressed too far; and so the Apostle clearly uses it in this connection. So far as he has gone, his argu­ment might seem to be applicable only to Abraham. He has yet made no direct comparison between Melchisedec and the Levitical priesthood. But now for the purpose of covering the whole ground, so that no room might be left for Jewish objections, he proceeds to show still further that his reasoning applies to Levi and his descendants, as well as to Abraham. For, as he says, Levi also, so to speak, paid tithes through (dia) Abraham. How he did this, the Apostle goes on to show in the next verse. Hebrews 7:10 ---For he was yet in the loins of his father, etc.— This decla­ration is given in proof of the previous allegation, that Levi himself was tithed by Melchisedec through Abraham. The fact then is in­disputable ; but the sense in which this was done is still a matter of legitimate inquiry. To say with some, that this is simply an “ argu- mentum ad hominem” is to trifle with the word of God. Nothing short of an “ argumentum ad rem” will at all satisfactorily meet the case and fulfill the design of the Apostle. His object is not to il­lustrate, but to prove; it is not to remove an objection, but to es­tablish a fact. And hence any explanation of this difficult passage, founded on “ Jewish prejudices” or “ Rabbinical conceits,” is wholly out of the question. The context admits of no such evasion as this. And yet on the other hand there is danger of taking these words of the Apostle in too literal a sense; otherwise he would not have used the qualifying phrase, “ so to speak” That Levi did not personally and by his own voluntary act pay tithes through Abra­ham, as his appointed agent, is very certain for as the Apostle says, Levi was not then born: he was yet in the loins of his great grand­father Abraham, when Melchisedec met him. What then is the meaning of this passage? This will perhaps be best understood by considering a parallel case. Such a one occurs in Romans 5:12. Here the same Apostle says, “ By one man sin en­tered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed through upon all men, for that all sinned (hemarton).” That is, the fact that all men die, depends on the antecedent fact, that all men sinned. But how? “ Not,” says Paul, “ after the similitude of Adam’ s transgression.” He sinned in his own proper person; and the rest of mankind, so to speak, sinned in him. For the Apostle adds (verse 19), “ by the disobedience of the one the many were made sinners.” God created mankind in Adam (Genesis 1:26-27), and with him as the head and representative of the race he made a covenant, upon the keeping of which depended the life, not only of Adam himself, but also of his entire posterity. When he trans­gressed the covenant he died, and then also the race died in him; because, so to speak, they all sinned in him: for they were all still in the loins of Adam when he ate of the forbidden fruit. And hence it is that we are all by nature (phusei) under the curse of that broken law, and treated by God as children of wrath, until we are redeemed by the second Adam. Now just so it was with Abraham and his posterity. God made a covenant with him also, as the head and representative of his race. Their fortunes were therefore largely involved in his fortunes; their dignity, in his dignity; and their rights and privileges, in the honors which God bestowed on him as the father and founder of his own elect people. When Abraham therefore paid tithes to Melchisedec, Levi also and his posterity virtually paid tithes through him as their federal head and representative: for they were all yet in the loins of their father Abraham, when he met and honored Melchisedec as the Priest of the Most High God. This is the simple fact of the case, as it is here stated by the Apostle, and used by him as an essential element of his promises. And hence it should be received by all, as a fact, however incompetent we may be to understand the principle which underlies it in all its ethical and religious bearings. Infidels may scoff and sneer at this principle of federal representation as “ un­just and absurd” ; but it somehow happens that we cannot get rid of it, nor act independently of it even in secular matters. Individuals, corporations, and governments, are every day making arrangements, signing pledges, and sealing documents which in­volve largely the interests and fortunes of others, as well as of themselves. It would be much more becoming, then, in frail and fallible men, humbly to confess their ignorance in such cases, and to try to learn more of the infinite wisdom of God, as exhibited in the works of creation, providence, and redemption, rather than scoffingly and scornfully to reject as “ unjust and absurd,” matters about which they yet know but little, and into which the angels de­sire to look with reverence. (1 Peter 1:12.) Without then making any further attempt at explanation, we simply admit the fact as here stated, that Levi himself, and of course his whole posterity including the house of Aaron, virtually paid tithes to Melchisedec through Abraham, on the principle of federal representation. And consequently it clearly follows from the premises submitted that the Levitical Priests were all inferior to Melchisedec, and still more to Christ, of whom Melchisedec was but a type. THE AND THE LAW OF MOSES BOTH ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR ; AND A BETTER GROUND OF HOPE BROUGHT IN THROUGH THE OF CHRIST Hebrews 7:11-19 Hebrews 7:11 ---If therefore perfection, etc.— The Greek word for perfec­tion (teleiosis) means properly completion, consummation, perfec­tion. It may therefore be used to denote the end or consummation of any scheme, plan, or purpose. But here, it evidently means the full consummation of God’ s benevolent designs and purposes in ref­erence to the redemption of mankind; including of course pardon, justification, sanctification, and whatever else is necessary in order to our enjoyment of full and perfect blessedness. All this, the Jews were wont to believe, would be finally secured to the seed of Abraham through the Levitical priesthood and the other provisions of the Old Covenant. And hence it was, that rejecting God’ s plan of justification by grace through faith in Christ, they went about to establish their own righteousness by the works of the Law. (Romans 10:3.) To those who were in danger of being misled by this de­lusion, the Apostle here addresses himself. If, he says, perfection were attainable through the Levitical priesthood, then whence the necessity that another priest should arise of a wholly different order? If God’ s honor could be promoted and man’ s salvation se­cured through the services of Aaron and his successors, then why did God say by David that he would raise up another Priest after the order of Melchisedec? Manifestly, this implies that there was imperfection in the Levitical priesthood: for otherwise, God would certainly not have abolished it, and established another. He never would have required that the blood of his own dear Son should be shed and offered for the sins of the world, if these sins could have been expiated by means of the Levitical offerings. So Paul rea­sons very forcibly in his letter to the Galatians. “ If,” he says, “ there had been a law given which could have given life, then ver­ily righteousness would have been by law.” (Galatians 3:21.) God would never have set aside the Law and introduced the Gospel, as a means of justification, had the Law been adequate to save men from their sins. “ But now the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.” (Galatians 3:22.) Hebrews 7:11 ---for under it the people received the law.— (ho laos gar epi antes nenomothetetai), for upon it the people have received the law. The idea is that the priesthood was, so to speak, the basis of the whole Mosaic economy. It was the main object with reference to which the law was given, and consequently it was also the ground on which the law properly rested. Had no priesthood been contemplated, then indeed no law would have been given. But as a priesthood was necessary in order to the accomplishment of God’ s benevolent purposes, then it followed that the law was also necessary, not only to prescribe and regulate the several functions of the priesthood, but also to serve as a civil code, to convict men of sin, to restrain idolatry, and to support in various ways the wor­ship of the true God, till the Seed should come to whom the prom­ise was made. (Galatians 3:19.) It is obvious, therefore, that the ob­ject of the Apostle in introducing this parenthetical clause, was simply to keep prominent before his readers the fundamental bear­ings of the Levitical priesthood; to remind them that it was in fact the foundation of the Old Economy, and that the whole law of Moses stood or fell with it. Hebrews 7:12 ---For the priesthood being changed, etc.— This clearly fol­lows from the premises submitted. Concede that the priesthood was the basis of the law, the ground on which it rested; and then it follows of necessity that any change in the priesthood must have an effect also on the whole law. Take away the foundation, and the superstructure must fall to the ground. Remove from any system that which is central and fundamental, and then all that depends on it falls at once for want of the necessary support. The abrogation of the Levitical priesthood was therefore not a matter of small mo­ment. God would never have effected a change involving such consequences, for light and unimportant reasons. But this very change he has effected as our author now proceeds to show. Hebrews 7:13 ---For he of whom these things are spoken— The Apostle as­sumes here what was doubtless conceded by all his readers, and of which he has, in fact, already spoken with sufficient fullness (see notes on Hebrews 5:5-6), that Christ has been made a priest by the decree of him who said to him, “ Thou art my Son, this day have I begot­ten thee.” But this, our author insists, implies of necessity a transfer of the priesthood; and by consequence, the abrogation of the whole law. For it is evident, he says, that our Lord has sprung up as a branch out of the house of David (Jeremiah 23:5), and from the tribe of Judah. But according to the law of Moses, none but those of the house of Aaron were allowed to minister at the altar. (Num. 16:1 to 18: 7.) (See Numbers 18:7) And consequently it follows that in the decree given in Psalms 110:4, God contemplated a transfer of the priesthood, and also the abolition of the whole Sinaitic Covenant. Hebrews 7:14 ---For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah;—This is evident from the given references: see particularly the genealogies of Christ as recorded by Matthew and Luke. In the word “ sprang” (anatetalken), there is a beautiful allusion to the springing up of plants, as in Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5 Jeremiah 33:15; and Zechariah 6:12. Or it may be, as some have alleged, that the Apostle draws his imagery from the rising of the sun, as does the prophet Malachi (Mai. 4: 2) ; or from the rising of a star, as Balaam does in Numbers 24:17. But as he has here in view the genealogy of Christ, it is more natural to suppose that, in harmony with Hebrew usage, he refers to Christ’ s springing up as a branch from the roots of Jesse. Hebrews 7:15 ---And it is yet far more evident:— What is far more evident? In reply to this, it is alleged (1) that it is the distinction between the Levitical priesthood and that of the New Testament (Chrysos­tom) ; (2) that it is the fact that our Lord sprang out of Judah (Ebrard) ; (3) that the law of Moses is abrogated (Alford) ; (4) that perfection was not attainable through the Levitical priesthood (Delitzsch) ; and (5) that a change of the priesthood involves of necessity a change also of the law (Tholuck). The passage is con­fessedly a very difficult one, and where there is so great a diversity of views even among the ablest critics, it becomes us to be cau­tious and modest in giving our own judgment. I fully agree with Alford, however, in this, that the view of Ebrard is wholly inad­missible, and that “ his whole commentary on this verse is one of those curiosities of exegesis which unhappily abound in his other­wise valuable commentary.” But it seems to me that the more judicious Alford has also failed to perceive the exact point of the argument. The abolition of the law is indeed a necessary consequence of what is here uppermost in the mind of the Apostle, but it is certainly not the main thought which he here endeavors to set forth and support by a twofold argument. This, according to my understanding of the passage, is the fact, not merely that the Levitical priesthood was insufficient; but more particularly that, in consequence of this, there had been made such a change in the priesthood as in effect to abolish both the Levitical order of priesthood, and also the law which was given in reference to it. This the Apostle proves (1) from the fact that Christ, though of the tribe of Judah, is now a priest, contrary to the provi­sions of the law (Numbers 16:40 Numbers 17:1-9) ; and (2) from the fact that, according to the decree of Jehovah Christ’ s priesthood is of a wholly different order from that of the house of Aaron. This it is which makes the aforesaid change so very obvious. True, indeed, the transfer of sacerdotal functions from the tribe of Levi to the tribe of Judah, is very strong evidence of such a change, but not so strong as that which we gather from the transfer which was made according to the oath of Jehovah, from the order of Levi to that of Melchisedec. This thought our author now proceeds to develop more fully in the following verse. Hebrews 7:16 ---Who is made, not after the law of a carnal command­ment,—The Levitical priests were all so constituted. Their ap­pointment was made, not on account of any superior excellence on their part, but solely on the ground of carnal descent. It was made, therefore, as Paul says, “ according to the law of a carnal commandment,’’ but Christ received his appointment “ according to the power of an endless life.” These two clauses are placed in con­trast with each other, and they will therefore be best understood by comparing together the several antithetical words of which they are composed. Thus we find that law is opposed to power; carnal, to endless; and commandment to life. By the word law (nomos) in this connection, some understand the whole law of Moses (Chrysostom, Calvin, Bengel, Tholuck) ; but others, with more propriety, understand by it simply the rule of priestly suc­cession as prescribed by the carnal commandment. This is the view of Alford, T. S. Green, Moll, and others. In either case it had reference only to outward and perishable forms, and it was therefore wholly destitute of the internal power which com­mended Christ to the Father, and on the ground of which he received his appointment from the Father, as the high priest of our confession. The Levitical priests had all the form of god­liness, but many of them were wholly destitute of its power. But in Christ dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9.) And hence he is able to save, even to the uttermost, all who come to God by him. The word carnal (sarkinos) may have reference (1) to anything composed of flesh; (2) to anything re­lating to the flesh; and (3) to whatever has the properties, charac­teristics, or accidents of the flesh, such as frailty, weakness, cor­ruptibility, etc. As it is here used in contrast with “ endless” or imperishable (akatalutou) it seems to indicate externality, frailty, or perishableness. The idea is that the commandment was out­ward and perishable, liable at any time to be changed or abrogated, but the life of Christ is inherent and imperishable. It is this in­trinsic difference between the two orders of priesthood which makes them so very distinct from one another, and which, there­fore, serves to make the aforesaid change so very obvious. Hebrews 7:17 ---For he testifieth, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.— Or rather, Thou shall be a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. The verb is not expressed in either the Hebrew or the Greek, but the historical circumstances clearly indi­cate that the decree of Jehovah, as given in Psalms 110:4, has ref­erence to the future. Christ was not a high priest in the time of David, nor could he become a priest after the order of Melchisedec until after his death, burial, and resurrection. For if we draw a picture of the priesthood of Melchisedec, we see in it no beginning, no ending, no interruption by death or anything else. Nothing, in fact, appears in it but life— continued and uninterrupted life, crowned with royal and sacerdotal honors. And just so it must ever be with every correct representation of the priesthood of Christ. It must, in these respects, resemble the priesthood of Melchisedec, for they are of the same order, and are therefore similar in these essential points. That Christ acted, in some respects, both as a king and a priest while he was on earth we may readily grant. But such acts were only preparatory, and therefore extraordinary. His royal entrance into Jerusalem, for instance, and his giving himself up voluntarily to death, were but a shadow of what was to follow. The fact is, that the precise time when he was fully in­vested with the royal and sacerdotal honors and prerogatives of the new dispensation, is not known to mortals. The first manifestation of this was given on the day of Pentecost, just fifty days after his resurrection. But then he appeared, as Melchisedec appeared to Abraham, in all his royal and sacerdotal dignity, to bless all who would acknowledge his authority as the priest of the Most High God. And just so he ever lives, and reigns, and intercedes for his people. For like Melchisedec, he had no predecessor, and like him he will have no successor. As he is the only begotten Son of the Father, so also he is now the only king and high priest that is ap­pointed by the Father; and as such he will sit as a priest upon his throne until the purposes of God in reference to the redemption of mankind shall have been fully accomplished. Then, and not till then, will he deliver up both the kingdom and the priesthood to the Father. But that epoch, like the beginning of his administration, is concealed from the eyes of mortals. In the representation of his priesthood, therefore, as given by the Holy Spirit, there is neither beginning nor ending. Like Melchisedec, he abides a priest per­petually. See note on Hebrews 7:27. Hebrews 7:18 ---For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment— In this verse and the next following, we have the argument of the paragraph amplified and brought out to its legitimate results. In the twelfth verse, the Apostle speaks simply of a change or transfer (metathesis) of the priesthood and the law. But that change, as he now proceeds to show, results of necessity in a com­plete abrogation (athetesis) or setting aside of the commandment relating to the priesthood, and also of the whole law, in order to make way for the bringing in of a better ground of hope, through the Gospel of our blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The con­struction of the sentence is well given, and the main thought hap­pily expressed by Delitzsch as follows: “ For while there taketh place, on the one hand, a disannulling of the foregoing command­ment, because of its weakness and insufficiency (for the law had perfected nothing), there is, on the other hand, a bringing in, over and above, of a better hope, through which we draw nigh to God.” Hebrews 7:19 ---For the law made nothing perfect,— This parenthetical clause is thrown in here for the purpose of explaining on what ac­count the law was abrogated. It was an introductory arrange­ment, and had not the power to bring anything to perfection. Had it been sufficient to meet and accomplish God’ s benevolent de­signs in reference to the justification, sanctification, and redemp­tion of mankind, then indeed, as our author very clearly intimates in the eleventh verse of this chapter, and also in Galatians 3:21, perfec­tion would have been by the law. In that event, Christ would never have died for the salvation of the world (Galatians 2:21), and the New Economy would never have been inaugurated. But the fact is, as here stated, that owing to the weakness and imperfection of the flesh (Romans 8:3) the law perfected nothing. And hence when God had accomplished his benevolent designs in giving it to the Israelites, he then took it out of the way, and gave the Gospel to the world as the only efficient means of purifying our “ con­sciences from dead works,” and fitting us for his service here, and for the enjoyment of his presence hereafter. (Hebrews 9:14.) Hebrews 7:19 ---but the bringing in of a better hope did;— This is an erro­neous construction, and serves to mislead the reader. The idea which the Apostle wishes to convey to his readers is simply this: that, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of the Old Economy on account of its weakness and insufficiency; and on the other hand, there is the bringing in of the New Economy, by which we may all now, as priests, draw nigh to God and worship him in spirit and in truth. So Alford, Green, and others, rightly construe this passage, and this rendering is sustained by such other passages as Romans 5:1-2; Hebrews 10:19-22, and 1 Peter 2:5.THE OF CHRIST’ S PROVED FROM THE FACT THAT, UNLIKE THE , IT WAS WITH AN OATHHeb_7:20-22 Heb 7:20 ---And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:—I have in the analysis of this, as in that of every other sec­tion, endeavored to assist the reader by indicating the extent and scope of each of the several paragraphs of which it is composed. The change of thought at the close of each of these may, I think, be readily perceived by all who read the Epistle with even ordinary care and reflection. Caution, however, is necessary lest perchance we make the breach of thought greater than what is really de­manded or warranted by the construction and course of the argu­ment. The connection of thought is very close throughout this en­tire section; and the several parts of it are all very intimately con­nected together, as links of the same chain. In the first paragraph, we have discussed and demonstrated very clearly, the superiority of the Melchisedecian order of priesthood. In the second, the Apostle shows that it was God’ s purpose of old, even in the time of David, to set aside the Old Economy and introduce the New; thereby proving indirectly from Psalms 110:4, the very great supe­riority of Christ’ s priesthood over that of Aaron. But as yet, the meaning of this oracle of Jehovah is but partially developed. It furnishes indeed the main line of thought throughout the remain­der of the section, leading the Apostle to the sublime conclusion in which his whole argument finally culminates, that Jesus is now a High Priest and Minister of the Holy of holies, and also of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man. The third phase of thought in this line of argument is given, as indicated, in verses 20-22; in which the Apostle further demonstrates the supe­riority of Christ’ s priesthood from the fact that it was confirmed and its perpetuity guaranteed by the oath of God. The reasoning of the Apostle, says Dr. Macknight, “ is founded on the conceded fact that God never interposed his oath except to show the cer­tainty and immutability of the thing sworn. Thus he swore to Abraham, Genesis 22:16-18, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed; and to the rebellious Israelites, that they should never enter into his rest, Deut. 1: 34, 35; and to Moses, that he should not go into Canaan, Deut. 4:21; and to David, that his seed should endure forever, and his throne unto all generations, Psalm 89: 4. Wherefore, since Christ was made a priest, not without an oath that he should be a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec, that circumstance showed God’ s purpose never to change or abolish his priesthood; and never to change or abolish the covenant which was established on his priesthood. Whereas the Levitical priesthood and the Law of Moses being established with­out an oath, were thereby declared to be changeable at God’ s plea­sure.” Hebrews 7:21 ---For those priests were made without an oath: without the swearing of an oath.—(horkomosia from orchos an oath and om- nutni to swear). God simply said to Moses, “ Take unto thee Aaron thy brother and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest’ s office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar Aaron’ s sons.” (Exodus 28:1.) There was nothing extraordinary in the mode of their appointment. They were consecrated merely in the way of ordinary legislation, with becoming rites and ceremonies. See Exodus 24 and Leviticus 8, 9. But the manner of Christ’ s appointment was altogether extraordinary. God himself made oath on the occasion, as David testifies in Psalms 110:4, “ Jehovah has sworn and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Mel­chisedec.” It is therefore clearly indicated that God will never set aside the priesthood of Christ, as he did that of Levi, in order to make way for another of a different order. When God is said to repent, the meaning is that he simply wills a change; and when it is said that he will not repent, it means that he will never will a change. And consequently there is nothing beyond the priesthood of Christ, to which it will ever give place, as a means of accom­plishing God’ s benevolent purposes in the redemption of mankind. Christ himself will continue to officiate as a priest upon his throne, until the work of man’ s redemption shall have been fully consum­mated. Hebrews 7:22 ---By so much, etc.—The Levitical priests received their ap­pointment according to the law of a mutable and transitory Institu­tion ; an Institution which perfected nothing, because it was in its design wholly preparatory and introductory to a better state of things; and which was therefore finally set aside in order to make way for the inauguration of a new and better Institution, of which Christ is made the Surety. But as before intimated, this new ar­rangement embracing the priesthood of Christ and all else pertain­ing to the justification, sanctification, and redemption of mankind, can never be set aside in order to make room for anything else. God’ s oath is given as a pledge of this; and Christ himself being constituted a priest by the oath of God, now stands as security that this new covenant or arrangement will never be abrogated, until the benevolent designs of God shall have been accomplished in the salvation of all who believe and obey him. For as the Levitical priesthood was the basis of the Old Covenant (verse 11), so also is the priesthood of Christ the basis of the New Covenant; and as this will, according to the oath of Jehovah, endure to the final con­summation of all that God has promised by his holy Apostles and Prophets, so also will the New Covenant of which Christ is made the Surety, continue until God’ s eternal government is magnified in the everlasting salvation of the righteous, and the eternal con­demnation of the wicked. This, the oath of Jehovah clearly indi­cates showing, as Peter says, that this is the true grace of God in which we now stand. (1 Peter 5:12.) And hence the difference of being made a priest with or without an oath is very great; and just so great is the difference between the Old Covenant and the New. The Greek word rendered testament (diatheke) means properly a disposition or an arrangement. And it is accordingly used (1) to denote any arrangement made by a superior for the benefit of an inferior; such, for example, as that which God made for the Israel­ites at Mount Sinai. And (2) it is used in the same sense as sun- theke to denote a mutual agreement between equals; such as the covenant which Abraham made with Abimelech. (Genesis 21:22-32.) In our text, it is evidently used in the former sense, to denote God’ s gracious arrangement made through Christ for the salvation of the world on given conditions. But what shall we call this dia theke? The word arrangement, or disposition, is too generic; and the word will, or testament, is specifically different. For as our author says (9: 16), before a testament can be carried into effect, there must of necessity take place the death of the testator. In this sense, which is very common in the Greek classics, the word dia theke can never of course be literally and strictly applied to any of God’ s arrangements for the benefit of mankind. And to the word covenant there is this objection, that in its usual acceptation it rep­resents the parties as too much on an equality. It corresponds much better with the second meaning of diatheke than with the first. But as it is now used by our writers to represent diatheke in both senses, it is perhaps on the whole the best word that we can employ in this instance. This covenant is better than the old cove­nant in many respects (see notes, on 8: 6-13), but chiefly in this, that founded as it is on the everlasting and efficacious priesthood of Christ, it cannot fail to secure for all who accept of its condi­tions, free, full, and everlasting forgiveness. Of this better covenant, Christ is made the Surety \ Hebrews 7:1. This epistle was written for the special benefit of the Hebrews (or Jews) who had become Christians. The Judaizers in those days were very busy in trying to force the Mosaic system upon Christians, claiming it to be still in force. The argument of this book is based on both contrasts and likenesses between the t w o systems. But a special argument is made in connection with the priesthood of Melchisedec. All readers of the Old Testament know it was predicted that the "other priest" (verse 11) was to be more like Melchisedec than Aaron. The present argument, therefore, is concerning that remarkable character. Salem is a short name for Jerusalem (Psalms 76:2), where this man was located as both king and priest. The Jews made great claim of being related to Abraham, yet this verse (citing Genesis 14:18-20) shows that Melchisedec blessed Abraham. And since a person would need to be greater than another in order to be able to bless him (verse 7), this circumstance shows that even their father Abraham was not as great a person as Mel-chisedec. Proper nouns in Bible times often had distinctive meanings, and Thayer says that the name Melchisedec means, "King of righteousness," which is the statement in our verse. Salem is defined in this verse as King of peace, and the brief information given in Thayer's lexicon does not contradict it. Melchisedec is set forth as a type of Christ, hence it was fitting to connect him with a place signifying "peace." (See Isaiah 9:6.) Hebrews 7:2. Another fact showing Mel-chisedec to have been greater than Abraham, is that the latter paid tithes (a tenth) of his personal property to the former. Hebrews 7:3. The key to this misunderstood verse is in the meaning of the phrase without descent. It is from the Greek word which Thayer defines as follows: "Of whose descent there is no account." This was no accident nor is it due to a lack of custom or facilities for recording descent which means a record of family names. Many other persons of those times had their pedigrees or family names recorded in the Bible. (See Genesis 10.) This shows that God had a purpose in leaving out all record of Melchisedec's family, namely, so that he would appear in that sense to be like that "other priest" who actually was not to have any descendants. (See Isaiah 53:8; Acts 8:33.) In other words, the verse describes the situation of Melchisedec as God permitted it to appear in history, in order to form a type of Christ whose situation as to family relationship was to be actually that way. Withnut father and without mother means he did not obtain his priesthood from his ancestors as did the Levitical priests (Exodus 29:29-30; Numbers 20:28). The beginning of the days of Melchisedec and the end of life are all kept from the record for the purpose of carrying out the type, and it is to be understood on the same principle as "without descent" explained above. In this way he was made like unto the Son of God. This shows they were two separate persons, but were like unto each other in certain respects. If no record is given of the death or replacement of Mel-chisedec, then logically his priesthood was continous. This was true of him apparently, as it was true of Christ actually. Hebrews 7:4. Paul did not underestimate the greatness of Abraham; he emphasized it. However he used that fact in support of his reasoning, since it was made clear that notwithstanding his greatness, he was inferior to Mel-chisedec who was declared in so many points to be like Jesus in the priesthood order. Hebrews 7:5. This verse continues the argument based on likenesses and contrasts between important characters. It is evident that he who pays tithes is less than the one to whom he pays them. Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec hence was of less importance than he. But the Levite priests (who descended from the great man Abraham) took tithes from the people. The argument is that although the Levitical priests were great enough to receive tithes from the people, yet their great ancestor was not great enough to receive tithes from Mel-chisedec, but rather had to pay them to him. All this is according to the teaching, that the priestly order of this great man Melchisedec being more like that of Christ than was that of Levi, it follows that the priesthood of Christ should be accepted over all previous ones. Hebrews 7:6. The reasoning of this verse is virtually the same as the several preceding ones. There is one additional point on the greatness of Abraham, namely, he was the one to whom God made the first promise of Christ. Hebrews 7:7. Without all contradiction means it is so evident that it cannot be successfully disputed. Blessed is from EULOGEO which Thayer defines at this place, "To invoke blessings." In order for a good wish to have any assurance of fulfillment, it must be uttered by someone endowed with special knowledge and authority. Mel- chisedec had such qualification since he was the priest of the most high God. Hebrews 7:8. The word here stands for the Levitical priesthood, and there refers to that of Melchisedec. Men that die is said because the priests under the Levitical order ceased to serve because of death and the event was recorded. Whereas there is no record of the death of Melchisedec, and as far as the historical account is concerned he is still living. The point is that while the priests designated by here had tithes given them, yet they were subject to death. The priest designated by there also received tithes, but there is no account of his death. This makes him superior to the other priests notwithstanding both orders received tithes. Hebrews 7:9. Another contrast between Melchisedec over Levi is that the latter (though being given tithes), himself paid tithes to Melchisedec while in Abraham's body. Hebrews 7:10. Was yet in the loins, etc. Paul takes advantage of a common theory believed by the Hebrews concerning the seat of the reproductive function. The word for loins is OSPHUS which Thayer defines. "A loin . . . the (two) loins," and then explains it by, "The Hebrews thought the generative powers resided in t h e loins." Strong defines it, "The loins (externally), i. e., the hip; internally (by extension) procreative powers." There was a pure blood line from Abraham to Levi, who was only the fourth generation from his great ancestor. In this sense Levi was represented by Abraham as he paid the tithes to Melchisedec. This is a phase of the argument based on the superiority of Melchisedec over Levi. Hebrews 7:11. The law of Moses was inspired and served the purpose of the Lord, but it was not intended to be permanent as to the duration of its force. (See Galatians 3:18-25) The Judaizers (Jews who tried to force the law of Moses on Christians) maintained that it was to be permanent. Paul reasons that since the law was received under the Levitical priesthood, such law would necessarily be changed whenever the priesthood was changed. But it was well established that another priest was to arise like Melchisedec more than like Aaron (father of the Levities), therefore the point is made that the law was not longer in force. Hebrews 7:12. This is a repetition Of the argument in verse 11. Hebrews 7:13. These things refers to the statements about another priest who was to bring a change in the law. That priest belonged to another tribe, which had nothing to do with the altar service. Hebrews 7:14. Evident denotes something that is plainly established and understood. Juda is a short spelling of Judah, the tribe from which Christ sprang or was produced. The genealogies of Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show Christ to have descended from David, who all readers of the Bible know was a descendant of Judah the fourth son of Jacob. And the writings of Moses concerning the system of priesthood were completely silent about the tribe of Judah. Hebrews 7:15. Yet far more evident means the testimony on behalf of the priesthood of Jesus is still more clearly shown. Paul refers to the comparison made between Melchisedec and Him, and the point is made stronger by the fact that Melchisedec lived several centuries before the Mosaic system was started. And it was concerning Melchisedec that another priest was to arise; flint is, another besides him. Hebrews 7:16. Carnal means pertaining to the flesh; the Levitical priests received their office through their fleshly birth. Melchisedec was made a high priest by the Lord independent of any fleshly relationship to anyone. Endless life is used in the sense set forth in verse 3, namely, his life is still continuing as far as any record of his death is concerned. This makes Melchisedec's priesthood more like that of Christ than was that of the priests in the Levitical order. Hebrews 7:17. The pronoun he refers to God, who testified or declared that the Son was to be priest for ever (unchanging, throughout the age) after the order of Melchisedec. Hebrews 7:18. To disannul signifies to cancel the force of the law which went before. God declared that such an act would be done by changing the priesthood and also the commandment (law of Moses). The reason for this annulling was the weakness and un-profitableness thereof. This weakness was not through any failure of God. for it was not brought into the world with the idea of its being final and complete. (See Galatians 3:18-25.) Hebrews 7:19. Law made nothing perfect. The last word means something complete regardless of the quality of the thing spoken of. Since the law was added for a limited time only (see reference in Galatians cited above), it follows that God did not equip it with the entire requirements of a spiritual life. Better hope is a term used to designate the hope that is held out to those who serve under the priesthood of Christ in the place of the Levitical one. Hebrews 7:20. Another contrast in favor of Christ is that he obtained the priesthood under the oath of God (verse 21). Hebrews 7:21. Without an oath is a negative statement, based on the truths that are recorded in the books of Exodus and Leviticus. In all those passages where so much is said about the priesthood of the Levites, the reader will not find one instance of an oath in connection with their office. On the other hand we find a positive declaration (Psalms 110:4) that an oath was made in reference to the priesthood of Christ. Will not repent means that the Lord will never change his mind concerning the priesthood of Christ, namely, that it is to be after the order of Melchisedec. Hebrews 7:22. By so much refers to the oath by which Jesus was made a High Priest, and it enabled Him to make a testament (or covenant) that was better. The last word does not infer that the first one was not good as to its qualities or principles of righteousness. Paul elsewhere (Romans 7:12) declares the law to be good and holy, but the second is better in the sense of having more advantages and being more useful. Hebrews 7:23. The first system was served by priests whose terms were terminated by death, which made it necessary for it to have many priests. Hebrews 7:24. This man refers to Christ who continueth ever because He never died after becoming a priest. Unchangeable means the priesthood did not pass or change from one man to another, hence it necessarily was a stronger system. Hebrews 7:25. An advocate or representative may start pleading for a client, and be getting the case in good shape. Then if something makes it needful to change representatives, he may be unable to do as satisfactory a service as the previous one because of the break in the procedure. Christ never died and hence he is always on the case and is at all times "up to date" on the conditions. Hebrews 7:26. Became us means it was fitting that we of the last dispensation should have a High Priest having the best of qualifications. Holy, harmless, undefiled all means a character that is perfect, and Christ has such because He is separate from sinners; has no association with them. Higher refers to rank or importance rather than bodily position; Jesus is more lofty as a High Priest than all the heavens. Hebrews 7:27. There are two contrasts between Christ and the Levitical priests, namely, they had to offer sacrifices daily and also needed to atone for their own sins. Christ had to offer a sacrifice only once for the people, and not one time for Himself for he had no sins for which to make atonement. Hebrews 7:28. The priests made under the law were infirm in that they were subject to death. Word of the oath came after the law since David (to whom the oath was made) lived some centuries after Moses (through whom the law was given). The point is that since the oath came after the law, it proves that document was not considered absolutely perfect. This later act (the oath) maketh the Eon (High Priest). The grand total conclusion is our High Priest has a service that continues evermore. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 8THE OF CHRIST’ S FURTHER FROM THE HIGHER AND BETTER SPHERE OF HIS Heb_8:1-5 Hebrews 8:1 ---Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum. Or more literally: But the crown upon the things spoken [is this]; we have such a High Priest who sat down on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a Minister of the Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man.— The word rendered sum (kephalaion) means (1) that which is chief or principal; (2) the sum or result of numbers added together and set down at the head of the column; (3) the crown or that which gives completeness to anything, and (4) the division of a book, as a chapter or section. The object of the Apostle is not to give a summary of what was said before, for in the next verse, he states as an additional argument, the sublime fact that Jesus is now a Minister of the heavenly Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man. His idea therefore seems to be this: that in what follows we have not only the chief, but also the crowning point of the whole argument. It all culminates in the glorious and important fact that Jesus is now a High Priest and Minister, not of the typical economy, but of the real; not of the shadow, but of the substance. Hebrews 8:1---who is set on the right hand, etc.—Who sat down (ekath- isen) : that is, when he made his one offering in the heavenly Sanc­tuary. The best commentary on these words is given by the Apos­tle himself in Hebrews 10:11-13. “ Every High Priest,” he says, [belong­ing to the Levitical order] “ standeth daily ministering and offer­ing oftentimes the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies he made his footstool.” Hebrews 8:2 ---A minister of the sanctuary,— The word rendered minister (leitonrgos) means a public officer of high and honorable rank, whether civil, military, or religious. It is here applied to Christ, as the High Priest of the New Covenant. The word sanctuary (ta hagia) means Heaven itself, the archetype of the Most Holy Place of the ancient Tabernacle. In this sense, the same Greek words are used in Hebrews 9:8 Hebrews 9:12 Hebrews 9:24-25 Hebrews 10:19 Hebrews 13:11. Hebrews 8:2 ---and of the true tabernacle,— The adjective true (alethinos) denotes not only the real as opposed to the false (as alethes), but also, and more particularly, the perfect and substantial, as opposed to the imperfect and unsubstantial. The Tabernacle of Moses was a real structure, formed and fashioned according to the exact model which was shown to him in the mount. But nevertheless it was a mere shadow of the true; the type of that in which Christ now officiates as our High Priest. The former was made by human hands, and was constructed of perishable materials; but the latter is the workmanship of God himself, a Bethel that will never wax old. What, then, is this true Tabernacle, of which Christ has become the prime Minister? Some, as Moll and Kendrick, maintain that it is identical with the Sanctuary; and that the term true tabernacle is therefore but another name for Heaven itself, into which Christ has for us en­tered. They argue that the rending of the Vail, when Christ was crucified, was a virtual removal of all distinctions between the Holy Place and the Most Holy; and that henceforth they were to be regarded as one and the same; so that the name, true tabernacle, is used here but as an explanatory synonym of the word sanctuary. But to this it may be objected (1) that the rending of the Vail did not in any way change the local relations and objects of the two apartments. It only indicated that henceforth the way from the Holy Place into the Most Holy was made manifest. See 9: 8. (2) Moll’ s view is inconsistent with the most natural construction and obvious meaning of the sentence. The first impression of any one on reading the text would be that the Apostle refers here to two separate and distinct apartments. (3) It is opposed to the ttsus loquendi of the Hebrews, for whose special benefit the Epistle was written. Sometimes indeed the word tabernacle (skene) is used as the name of the whole structure, including both the Holy Place and the Most Holy; and sometimes it is used to denote ei­ther of these apartments. But when it is used, as here, in connec­tion with the word sanctuary (to hagion or ta hagia) it means simply the east room of the Tabernacle, or that of which this was a type. See Leviticus 16:16-17 Leviticus 16:20 Leviticus 16:23 Leviticus 16:33, etc. And (4) in 9: 11, 12, our author evidently keeps up a distinction between the Tabernacle and the Holy of holies; for Christ, he says, according to the most approved rendering of the passage, passed through the true or more perfect Tabernacle into the Most Holy Place. For these and other like reasons, most expositors justly maintain that there is still a difference between the Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. But if there is a difference, what is it ? Macknight, following Josephus and Philo, makes the whole Tab­ernacle a symbolical representation of the universe; alleging that the Most Holy Place was symbolical of Heaven, and that the Holy Place was a symbol of the whole Earth. See Jos. Ant. iii. 7.3. This hypothesis originated in an attempt on the part of Jose­phus, Philo, and others, to make the symbolical system of Moses harmonize with the tenets and speculations of Gentile philosophy. It has no foundation whatever in the word of God. Delitzsch maintains, as we have seen (Hebrews 7:26), that the Sanctu­ary was a symbol of the uncreated Holy of holies of the Divine na­ture, into which Christ entered when he ascended from Mount Olivet; and that the Tabernacle proper or Holy Place was a sym­bol of the highest created heaven, where dwell the angels and the spirits of the just made perfect. But this again is too fanciful, and without scriptural support. A more plausible hypothesis is that of Hofmann and others, who maintain that by the true Tabernacle is meant here the glorified body, or, as some say, the human nature, of Christ. In support of this hypothesis it is alleged (1) that in John 1:14, it is said, “ The Word was made flesh and dwelt (eskenosen, tabernacled) among us” ; (2) that in John 2:21, Christ himself speaks of his body as a tabernacle or temple (3) that in Hebrews 10:20, the Vail of the Temple is represented as a symbol of his flesh; and (4) that in Ephesians 2:19-22, Christ and the Church are together compared to a holy temple. All this is quite plausible, but by no means conclusive. That Christ's body may be properly compared to a tabernacle, no one, of course, doubts who believes the Bible to be the word of God. But this is not the question. The point to be determined is, not whether there is any analogy between the body of Christ and a tabernacle, but whether it is the antitype for the symbolizing of which the Jewish Tabernacle was constructed. That it is not, seems probable for several reasons; but chiefly for this, that the true Tabernacle is here represented not as a part of Christ, but simply as the sphere in which he, in his full and proper personality performs his ministry. Is then the Church of Christ the true Tabernacle? In favor of this hypothesis it may be said (1) that the Church sustains the same relation to Heaven that the Holy Place of the Tabernacle and Temple did to the Most Holy. God’ s only re­vealed way of entering into Heaven is through the Church. (2) The Holy Place of the Tabernacle had ordinances corresponding with the ordinances of the Church. In it was the Table supplied constantly with the twelve loaves emblematical of the bread of life, of which we partake, not in, but through, the ordinances of the Church, particularly the Lord’ s Supper. See John 6:33 John 6:35 John 6:48 John 6:50 John 6:53-56. There, too, was the Altar of incense, corresponding with the altar of prayer (Psalms 141:2; Luke 1:9-10; Revelation 5:8 Revelation 8:3-4) ; and there was the light of the seven lamps of the golden Candlestick, corresponding with the light of the Holy Spirit, by means of which the Church is made the light of the world (Isaiah 60:1; Matthew 5:14; Revelation 1:20). (3) The Church of Christ is compared in Acts 15:16-17, to a booth or tent (skene), so en­larged that the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, may find shelter and protection under it. Compare Isaiah 54:1-4. (4) In 1 Corinthians 3:16, Paul says to the Corinthian brethren, “ Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” And in 2 Corinthians 6:16, he says, “ Ye are the Temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” And again the same Apostle says in his Epistle to the Ephesians (2: 19-22), “ Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone; in whom all the build­ing fitly framed together groweth into a holy Temple in the Lord: in whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit.” In like manner, writing to Timothy, he calls the Church the house of God (1 Timothy 3:15) ; and so he does also in Hebrews 3:6 Hebrews 10:21. The same thought is also expressed in 1 Peter 2:5. From all of which we are constrained to believe that the true Tabernacle and the Church of Christ cannot be separated: they are certainly identical in whole or in part. But to this view, it is proper to say, there is this apparent objec­tion. The Church of Christ did not exist as a distinct organization till the Day of Pentecost, A.D. 34, about ten days after Christ’ s ascension. That God had a people even from the beginning, and that Christ had followers from the beginning of his public ministry, is of course conceded. But not till the Pentecost that next fol­lowed after his resurrection, was he publicly proclaimed the anointed Sovereign of the universe (Acts 2:36) ; not till then was any one baptized by his authority into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) ; and not till then was the Spirit given to animate the body (John 7:37-39). And yet it is said in Hebrews 9:11-12, that Christ entered through a greater and more perfect Tabernacle (than that of Moses) into the Most Holy Place. Now I think it must be conceded that this greater and more perfect Tabernacle is identical with the true Tabernacle of our text; and if the true Tabernacle is identical with the Church, then how could it be said with propriety that Christ went up through the Church ten days before it had a distinct organic existence ? Perhaps a reference to Christ’ s mode of teaching by parables may assist us in solving this confessedly difficult problem. At one time he compares the kingdom of Heaven to a grain of mustard seed; at another, to leaven; at another, to a dragnet; at another, to ten virgins, etc.; his object being in all these cases to illustrate only some one element or characteristic of his Kingdom. Seldom, if ever, does he include in his comparisons all that belongs to it as a complete and perfect organization. May not Paul then, in like manner, speak by synecdoche of the greater and more perfect Tab­ernacle, having reference at the same time to some of the elements of the Church of Christ? The Church is the same thing as the Kingdom of Christ on earth, only viewed under different aspects. It, as well as the Kingdom, has its essential elements. Christ is its head; believers anointed with the Holy Spirit are its members: the promise given to Abraham concerning Christ (Galatians 3:17) may be regarded as its constitution; the rules and regulations given by the Apostles are its laws and ordinances; Apostles, Prophets, Evange­lists, Elders, and Deacons, are its officers; the sanctified portion of the Earth is its territory, and the blue vault of heaven, covered with cherubim, may perhaps be regarded as an emblem of its can­opy or inner curtain. Now as Christ so often speaks of his Church or Kingdom by synecdoche, putting a part for the whole; and as the inner curtain of the Tabernacle is often put for the Tabernacle itself (see, for instance, Exodus 40:19), may we not with propriety regard the sky, covered as it is with the wings of angels and the protecting shield of God’ s providence, as emblematical of the greater and more perfect Tabernacle referred to in Hebrews 9:11 ? And is not this view corroborated by what is said in Hebrews 4:14? See notes on Hebrews 9:11. If this view of the matter is correct, it may serve to explain that precept of the Law which required that no one should be in the Tabernacle while the High Priest went into the Holy of holies to make an atonement for the people. (Leviticus 16:17.) When Christ went up through the heavens (Hebrews 4:14) into the Most Holy Place, on the fortieth day after his resurrection, he left behind him many sincere and devoted followers; but it was not until after that he had made expiation for the sins of the world, and came out to bless the people by his Spirit on the following Pentecost, that the Church was fully organized and prepared for a habitation of God through the Spirit. Then, for the first time, believers were received into it on condition of their repenting and being baptized into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 8:3 ---For every high priest is ordained, etc.— The logical train of thought in this connection is well stated by Delitzsch as follows: “ Christ is a priest in the heavenly archetypal Sanctuary (verses 1, 2), for there is no priest without some sacrificial function (verse 3);; and if here on earth he would not be a priest at all (verse 4), where there are priests already who serve the typical and shadowy Sanctuary (verse 5). The priestly functions of Christ must therefore be discharged in a higher sphere, and so it is.” Or to express the same train of thought syllogistically, “ A priest’ s office is to offer sacrifice; Christ is a priest; and therefore he must have some­thing to offer. The sphere in which Christ’ s priestly office is dis­charged must be either an earthly or a heavenly one; but an earthly one it cannot be, inasmuch as on earth (in the material Tabernacle) there are other priests officiating according to the law, and therefore Christ’ s sphere of priestly operation must be a heav­enly one.” To this view of the matter it has been objected that Christ is thus represented as making frequent and continual offerings like the Levitical priests, whereas our author says distinctly that he has made but one offering, and that this has been made once for all, never again to be repeated. See Hebrews 7:27 Hebrews 9:12 Hebrews 9:26 Hebrews 9:28 Hebrews 10:12. But the allegation does not logically follow from the premises, for the Apostle speaks here indefinitely with regard to time, and the whole expression may be rendered thus: “ Wherefore it [was] necessary that this [Priest] should also have something which he might offer” (prosenegke). So the passage is translated by Beza, Bengel, Bleek, De Wette, Lunemann, Hofmann, Macknight, and others. And hence the reference may be simply to the one offering which Christ made of himself in the heavenly Sanctuary after his ascension. But as this one offering of Christ, by means of which he made an atonement for the sins of the world, is the ground of his continued ministry in our behalf, I am inclined to think with Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others, that the Apostle refers here particularly to the constant use and application of the one offering of Christ, as the only means of procuring our pardon, justification, and sanctification. Christ’ s one offering is, in fact, a continual of­fering; an offering the efficacy of which will endure forever. So that while he officiates as a minister in the heavenly Sanctuary, and in the true Tabernacle, he will always have to offer what is fully adequate to the justification and salvation of all who come unto God by him. Hebrews 8:4 ---For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest,—The meaning of this verse is quite obvious from what precedes. As Christ was not of the house of Aaron, he could not lawfully offici­ate as a priest on earth. (Numbers 18:1-7.) True, indeed, as our au­thor shows in 7: 11-19, the law had ere this been abolished. As a religious institution, it was abrogated when Christ was crucified. (Colossians 2:14.) But no other law creating a new order of earthly priesthood had been enacted in its place. And as, for wise and be­nevolent reasons, God allowed the law of Moses to continue for a time as a civil institution, it was, in fact, the only existing law on earth, of Divine appointment, according to which gifts and sacri­fices could be rightfully offered. This point of the argument was, of course, well understood and appreciated by the Hebrew breth­ren. Hebrews 8:5 ---Who serve unto the example, etc.— Or more literally and correctly: Who serve the delineation and shadow of heavenly things. The word rendered delineation (hupodeigma) means (1) a private sign or secret token, and (2) a delineation or copy of anything. Here, it denotes that the Jewish Tabernacle, with all that pertained to it, was but a faint symbolical representation of the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. The word shadow (skia) is added with the view of intensifying the thought; thus in­dicating that the given representation was wholly destitute of the substance which is inherent in the heavenly realities. Hebrews 8:5 ---as Moses was admonished of God, etc.— The Apostle now submits as proof of the above allegation, the fact recorded in Exodus 25:40, that when Moses was about to make the Tabernacle, God directed him to frame it according to the exact pattern (tupos) showed to him in the mount. In order that this symbolical struc­ture might exactly correspond in its shadowy outlines with the heavenly archetypes, God, it seems, caused Moses to see in vision a just representation of these on Mount Sinai, and then instructed him to make the Tabernacle according to this pattern. And hence, according to the testimony of Moses, the Jewish Tabernacle was not an original structure, but only a copy of the representation which God gave to him of the heavenly Sanctuary and of the true Tabernacle. From all of which it is evident that the sphere of Christ’ s ministry is greatly superior to that in which Aaron and his successors performed their services, and consequently that his priesthood is also greatly superior to theirs. It is no objection to the view above taken of the true Taberna­cle, that it is here ranked and classified with the “ heavenly things,” of which the Jewish Tabernacle was but a shadowy representation. For the Church of Christ is in no proper sense a worldly institu­tion. It is in all its essential elements identical with the kingdom of heaven, and hence those who become members of it are said to sit down together “ in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” See Ephesians 1:3 Ephesians 2:6; Hebrews 9:23. 1. How true it is that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (Hebrews 7:1-10.) Who, without the aid of the Holy Spirit, would have ever thought that the fourteenth chapter of Genesis has any reference to Christ? But it is even so. God who sees the end from the beginning, knows always by what means his ends and purposes can be best accomplished. To effect these, he often turns the hearts of kings as the rivers of water (Proverbs 21:1), and makes the history of individuals and of nations fill up the exact measure of his benevolent intentions. Thus it was, for instance, that he made Hagar a type of the Old Covenant, and Sarah a type of the New (Galatians 4:21-31) ; and thus it was that he made Melchisedec a type of Christ; so that in the ages to come he might make it manifest to all that he is himself the author of the whole plan of re¬demption, and that his son, Jesus Christ, is the Alpha and Omega of the whole Bible. 2. As Jesus had no predecessor, so also he has no successor in office (verses 16, 17). Like Melchisedec, he remains a priest upon his throne perpetually. Not that he has to offer daily, w’ eekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices, like the Levitical priests; for by one offering he has made full and complete expiation for the sins of the world. But as he ever lives to make intercession for us, so also he must of necessity be continually presenting the one offering of himself to God, as the ground of his intercessions, and as the only means of our justification. This priestly function can never be transferred to another. And consequently the word of the oath which was since the Law maketh him a priest forevermore. 3. The Old Testament is not “a fable devised by learned and crafty Hebrews,” but a revelation from God, given to us by holy men of old, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21.) What Jew would ever ot his own accord have predicted the rise of another priest after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the order of Aaron? What, but the Spirit of the Almighty, could have ever induced David to utter a prophecy involving the abroga¬tion of the whole Jewish economy? Truly, ‘‘ all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” 4. None who believe in Christ need ever be dismayed at the approach of death or anything else, for he is both able and willing “ to save to the uttermost all who come unto God through him, seeing he ever lives to make intercession for us” (Hebrews 7:5). All other helps will fail, sooner or later. Our friends may now comfort us in many ways; and physicians by their skill and timely remedies may greatly relieve our present sufferings. But death will soon separate us all, and put an end to all our kind offices here in behalf of one another. For no man can redeem his brother from death, nor save him from the corruption of the grave. But Jesus never forsakes those who trust in him. (Hebrews 13:5.) Having washed us from our sins in his own precious blood, he will not desert us in the hour of death, nor will he then allow any calamity to overcome us; so that we may say confidently with David, “ Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.” (Psalms 23:4.) And with Paul we may exclaim, “ O Death, where is thy sting? O Grave, where is thy victory?” (1 Corinthians 15:55.) But what else than the religion of Jesus can fill the soul with such con¬fidence and consolation ? What has infidelity to offer in the hour of death to her many votaries? What has she ever done, and what can she do, to enlighten the understanding and fill the heart with confidence in reference to the future? What skeptic was ever known to say, as does Paul, “ We know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens” ? Who but the Christian can say with confidence, “ To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” ? And again, “ It is better to depart and to be with Christ” ? And still again, “ There is a rest which remains for the people of God” ? This is the language of him, and of him only, who knows in whom he has believed, and who is fully persuaded that he is able to keep that which he has committed to him. (2 Timothy 1:12.) 5. The religion of the Lord Jesus is just such a religion as we all need (Hebrews 7:26-27). Notwithstanding all that infidels and scoffers have said against it, it so happens that the man who understands and obeys it most perfectly, is always, other things being equal, the most happy and the most useful member of society. And so, also, it is with whole communities and nations. Those that are most completely under the influence of the religion of Christ, are always the most happy and prosperous. The religions of the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Celts, and Goths, all failed because of their incapacity to make men happy. There was nothing in them to satisfy the longing desires of the human heart. And for the same reason, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Mahometanism, and all other systems of false religion, are now waxing old and “ are ready to vanish away.” But Christianity is constantly gaining more power and influence over mankind, as civilization advances. And it is doing so simply because it presents to us a perfect Savior; one who is “ holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens.” It reveals to us the only proper antidote for sin, the only atonement that is at all adequate to so meet and satisfy the claims of the Divine government, that God can be just in justifying those who believe in Jesus. It presents to us just such motives as best serve to make us hate sin, love holiness, do justice, and walk humbly, righteously, and godly in this present world. And, finally, it offers to us on the simple conditions of faith and obedience, just such a salvation as the heart of every man desires: a salvation from sin, death, hell, and the grave. And, in a word, it withholds from us nothing that is calculated to elevate, refine, and purify the heart; to make us like God; to fit us for doing his will here, and for enjoying his presence hereafter. Can such a religion be a falsehood? Judge the tree by its fruit. 6. How infinitely glorious and exalted is the great High Priest of our confession! (Hebrews 8:1-2.) Having by the grace of God tasted death for every man, and made an atonement for the sins of the world, he now sits as a priest upon his throne, and officiates as a minister of the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. No wonder, then, that all heaven is filled with his praises, while the angels and the redeemed behold his glory and think of his conde¬scending love in providing for the ransom of millions, who without his atoning sacrifice must have perished forever. “ But angels can never express, Nor saints who sit nearest his throne, How rich are his treasures of grace; No, this is a secret unknown.” SECTION SEVENHeb 8:6-13 In this short section, we have another partial digression from the main line of argument. Having stated in the closing paragraph of the last section that the sphere of Christ’ s ministry is the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle, our author is naturally led to consider in the next place the superior efficacy of his ministry. And this point he actually introduces in the sixth verse of this (the eighth) chapter as the next subject for discussion. Christ, he says, has obtained a ministry as much superior to that of the Levitical priests, as the Covenant of which he is the Mediator is superior to the Old Covenant of which Moses and the Levitical priests were the mediators. But having mentioned the subject of the two covenants, his thoughts are at once wholly engrossed with this as his main theme. The ministry of Christ falls for awhile into the back¬ground, and the active and comprehensive mind of our author is wholly occupied with the superior excellencies of the New Covenant. He argues from Jeremiah 31:31-34, that it excels the Old Covenant in each of the following particulars: I. The Old Covenant was faulty, but the New is faultless (Hebrews 8:7-8). That is, relatively so. In one sense, the Old Cove¬nant was just as perfect as the New. Each of them was perfectly adapted to the end for which it was designed. But the former never did and never could justify, sanctify, or save anyone. In these respects it was relatively faulty, and the New is faultless. II. The Old Covenant was written on stone, but the New is written on the understanding and the heart (Hebrews 8:10. Compare 2 Corinthians 3:3 2 Corinthians 3:7). And hence the latter is far more efficacious in forming the character and controlling the lives of its subjects than the former. It is of but little service that we have the truth writ¬ten on marble or parchment, unless it is also put into the under¬standing and engraven on the hearts of the people. III. The subjects of the Old Covenant were not all pious. Many of them were really aliens to God, while enjoying all the temporal and civil privileges of the Theocracy. But not so with the subjects of the New Covenant. They must all, of necessity, serve Jehovah as their God, for he says: “ I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people” (Hebrews 8:10). IV. Most of the subjects of the Old Covenant became such by a birth of flesh (Genesis 15:18 Genesis 17:7-8, etc.) ; but the subjects of the New Covenant must all be bprn of water and of the Spirit (John 3:5). They must all be begotten by the Holy Spirit through the word of truth, the good seed of the kingdom, before they can be admitted to the rights and privileges of the New Institution. (1 Corinthians 4:14-15; James 1:18, etc.) And hence they must all know the Lord, from the least of them even to the greatest of them (Hebrews 8:11). V. There was nothing in the Old Covenant that could really take away sin. (Hebrews 10:4.) And hence, notwithstanding the many daily, weekly, and monthly sacrifices that were offered to make purification for the sins of the people, these sins were all called into remembrance again on the Day of Atonement. (Leviticus 16.) But not so under the New Covenant. The blood of Christ procures for all its faithful and obedient subjects, free, full, and everlasting forgive¬ness. And hence, on the Day of Judgment, the faithful in Christ will all be treated as if they had never sinned (Hebrews 8:12). VI. The Old Covenant was abolished as a religious institution when Christ was crucified (Ephesians 2:14-17; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 7:11¬19) ; but the New Covenant will continue while time endures (Hebrews 8:13). OF THE NEW Heb_8:6-13 Heb 8:6 ---But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry,—That is, a ministry more excellent than that of the Levitical priests. The degree of this superior excellence is measured, as our author now proceeds to show, by the superior excellence of the new and better covenant of which Christ has become the Mediator. The word mediator (mesitcs) means one who intervenes or goes between two parties, as an interpreter, a reconciler, an internuncio, or an inter­cessor. “ In all ages, and in all parts of the world,” says Calmet, “ there has constantly prevailed such a sense of the infinite holiness of the supreme Divinity, with so deep a conviction of the imperfec­tions of human nature and the guilt of man, as to deter worshipers from coming directly into the presence of a being so awful; and recourse has therefore been had to mediators. Among the Sabi- ans, the celestial intelligences were constituted mediators; among other idolaters, their various idols; and this notion still prevails in Hindostan and elsewhere. Sacrifices were thought to be a kind of mediator; and, in short, there has been a universal feeling, a senti­ment never forgotten, of the necessity of an interpreter or mediator between God and man.” Under the Old Covenant, the office of mediator was filled pri­marily by Moses (Exodus 20:19-21 Exodus 24; Galatians 3:19-20) ; and after him it seems that the high priest discharged the duties of a media­tor, standing, as he ever did, between God and the people, espe­cially on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16). But under the New Covenant there is but “ one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5.) He stands as security on the part of God, that he will graciously fulfill all his promises to man (Hebrews 7:22) ; and on the part of man he appears before God, not only to plead our cause, but also to make purification for our sins, with his own blood, according to the Scriptures. Through him God can now be just in pardoning and justifying every obedient penitent believer; and through him, unworthy as we are, we can now come to God, as children to a father, and obtain mercy and find grace for seasonable help. (Hebrews 4:16.) The superior excellencies of the “ better covenant" and the “ bet­ter promises" will become more obvious as we proceed with the exegesis of the following verses. Hebrews 8:7 ---For if that first covenant had been faultless, etc.— The form of the argument which our author uses here is the same which he has employed in Hebrews 7:11. If the first covenant had been sufficient to accomplish God’ s purposes with respect to the salva­tion of man, then most assuredly he would never have set it aside and made way for another. “ For if," as Paul argues in his epistle to the Galatians (Galatians 3:21), “ there had been given a law that was able to give life, then, indeed, righteousness would have been by law” ; and the New Covenant in that event would never have been inaugurated. But when it was fully demonstrated by the deeds of law no flesh could be justified before God (Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16 Galatians 3:11) ; then it pleased God to give to his people a new and better covenant, which is established on better promises. Let it not be supposed, however, that God was in any way disap­pointed in his purposes with respect to the Old Covenant. He can never be disappointed, as man is often disappointed; for known unto him are all his works from eternity (apo aionos). Acts 15:18.) The fact is that the Law, or Old Covenant, was never given for the purpose of justifying any man. It was added simply “ on account of transgressions, till the seed should come, to whom the promise was made"; and it was intended to serve as a schoolmas­ter in bringing us to Christ. (Galatians 3:19 Galatians 3:24.) But the Holy Spirit often speaks of things relatively, according to our conceptions of them. See, for example, Matthew 19:17 and John 1:21. And just so it is in this case. The Jews all looked upon the Old Covenant as the power of God for the salvation of the seed of Abraham ac­cording to the flesh. And viewed in this light, it was of course faulty; for by it no man ever was or ever could be saved. And hence when God had accomplished his benevolent purpose in giving it to the people, he then took it out of the way, and gave to them a better covenant “ established on better promises.” Hebrews 8:8 ---For finding fault with them—Or as it may be rendered in more exact harmony with the context: For finding fault he saith to them. God found fault with the Covenant, as above explained, and he also found fault with the people, for they were constantly transgressing the laws and requirements of the Covenant; and it, as a consequence, was constantly condemning them. Such an ar¬rangement, therefore, however necessary as a preliminary measure, was never intended to accomplish fully God’ s benevolent designs and purposes with regard to the salvation of the world. And hence after the conquest of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, about 588 B.C., while the captives were detained at Ramah, God revived the hearts of his disconsolate children by giving to them the very en¬couraging series of prophecies found in Jeremiah 30-31, from which our author makes the beautiful extract given in the following verses. Hebrews 8:8 ---Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make, etc.—Or more literally: Behold, the days are coming, saith the Lord, when I will accomplish (sunteleso) upon the house of Is¬rael and upon the house of Judah a new covenant. Man makes a covenant with his fellow-man; but God perfects his arrangements according to the counsel of his own will, and then bestows them on (epi) his people. And hence the idea of the prophet seems to be this: that in the last days, under the reign of the Messiah, God would himself complete and bestow upon the house of Israel and upon the house of Judah the arrangement (diatheke) which, though hid for ages, was really intended from the beginning for the benefit of mankind. The name Israel means “ He will be a prince with God.” It was given (1) to Jacob himself, Genesis 32:28; (2) to all the descen¬dants of Jacob taken collectively, Exodus 4:22; (3) to the ten tribes that revolted from Rehoboam, 1 Kings 12:19-20; and (4) to all believers in Christ, Romans 9:6. The term “ house of Israel,” as used in our text, means evidently the ten tribes that revolted from the line of David, and made Jeroboam their king, 975 B.C. Most of them were carried away captive into Assyria by Shalmaneser, 721 B.C. But some of them remained in Canaan (2 Chronicles 30 , etc.) ; and others, it seems, returned thither at different periods. See Jeremiah 1:4-7; Ezra 2:70 Ezra 6:16¬18; 8: 35, etc. The name Judah means “ praise,” or he will be praised. It was given (1) to the fourth son of Jacob by Leah, Genesis 29:35; (2) to his descendants, called also the tribe of Judah, Numbers 1:7; (3) to all who followed Rehoboam, including the tribes of Judah and Benjamin and some also from the tribes of Simeon and Dan. (4) After the captivity the name Jew was applied indiscriminately to all who were known to be of any of the tribes of Israel, and even to Jewish proselytes. And (5) it is used by Paul to denote any believer in Christ. (Romans 2:29.) In our text the appellations “ house of Israel” and “ house of Judah” are manifestly used, as in the time of Jeremiah, to denote all the descendants of Israel. With these and for these God prom¬ised by that prophet that he would, in the latter days, make a new and better covenant than he had made with their fathers at Mount Sinai. But not with them as separate and distinct houses, nor even as tribes; but simply as individuals. All tribal and family distinctions are now lost in Israel; and all who now enter into cov¬enant with God become members of the one household of faith, in which there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither bond nor free, nei¬ther male nor female; but all are one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28.) But why is this called a new covenant? Is it not the same as that of which Paul speaks in Galatians 3:17; and which he says was given to Abraham four hundred and thirty years before the law was given from Mount Sinai ? In order to answer these questions properly it is necessary to go back to the time when God called Abraham out of Ur of Chaldea, and examine the promise which God then made to this illustrious patriarch, in connection with all its subsequent developments. The first account of this promise is given in Genesis 12:1-3, as follows: “ Now the Lord had said unto Abraham, Get thee out of thy coun¬try, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’ s house, unto a land that I will show thee; and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” The same promise is variously repeated and somewhat amplified in, etc. Now, it is true that in these several passages we have given what may be regarded as four distinct promises. These are (1) a promise that Abraham should have a numerous offspring; (2) that God would be a God to him and to his seed after him; (3) that he would give to him and to his seed an everlasting possession; and (4) that he would bless all the nations of the earth through him and his seed. These may of course be considered as so many separate and distinct promises; but it is more in harmony with the design of the Spirit and the general tenor of the Holy Scriptures to consider them as but elementary parts of the one general promise (Ephesians 2:12) ; having, however, a double reference; the one side of it looking to what was carnal and temporal, and the other to what was spiritual and eternal. The first element of this promise, for instance, was a pledge to Abraham that he should have a numerous family; first, according to the flesh; and secondly, according to the Spirit: the second that God would be a God to both of these families, though in a far higher sense to the latter than to the former: the third, that each of them should become heirs of an everlasting inheritance: and the fourth, that through each of them the world would be blessed. For awhile, the spiritual side of the promise was almost wholly concealed in the distance behind the carnal; which from time to time became more and more prominent by sundry new developments. The most important of these was the covenant of circumcision, given in Genesis 17:9-14. This was a sign of the more general and comprehensive covenant which God made with Abraham in reference to his natural posterity. It served to distinguish the He¬brew race from all others; and it was to all of them, save those only who were excepted by special enactment, a pledge of the promised inheritance; while it had at the same time, like other ele-ments of the carnal promise, a typical significance, looking to the spiritual circumcision of the family of the faithful. See Romans 2:28-29; Ephesians 1:13-14; Philippians 3:3; Colossians 2:9-12. At length, just four hundred and thirty years after the giving of this twofold promise to Abraham, the carnal side of it was fully developed into the Old or Sinaitic Covenant. In this were of course embraced many various and distinct elements, such as the laws and ordinances relating to the different kinds of sacrifices, the consecration of the Levites, the covenant of the priesthood, etc.; all serving, however, to form and perfect one great national Institution, answering all the ends and purposes of civil government; and serving at the same time to check the progress of idolatry, to illustrate the exceeding heinousness of sin and the necessity of holiness, and also to typify and adumbrate the glorious realities embraced in the spiritual side of the Abrahamic promise, which in due time was also to be developed into a far more gracious and comprehensive Institution. In the meantime the carnal was the stay and support of the spiritual, while the spiritual served also to preserve and sanctify the carnal. They were united, but not blended together: for “ the Law is not of faith,” says Paul (Galatians 3:12) ; and again he says in substance, Faith is not of the Law (Romans 9:6). So matters stood until Christ came, “ made of a woman made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the law.” (Galatians 4:4-5.) For about three and a half years he instructed the people, and, by his personal ministry, developed to a great extent the beauties, riches, and superlative excellencies of the spiritual ele¬ment of the Abrahamic promise. But still it was in an imperfect state, not yet having received its full and proper development. Nor could this be done really while the first Institution was stand¬ing. It was necessary that the Old Covenant should be abrogated before the New could be fully inaugurated. This was done at the death of Christ. Then the Law of Moses was taken out of the way, being nailed to the cross. (Colossians 2:14.) After that it was no longer binding on any one as a religious Institution; though it was through the forbearance of God allowed to remain as a civil Institution, for about thirty-six years longer, until the destruction of Je¬rusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70. In the meantime the spiritual element of the Abrahamic promise was fully developed in the Church of Christ, which was set up as a separate and distinct In¬stitution on the Day of Pentecost which next followed after his death, burial, and resurrection. Then, for the first time, he was publicly proclaimed to the world as the anointed Sovereign of the universe (Acts 2:36) ; and then also believing penitents were first required to be baptized by his authority into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Compare Matthew 28:19 with Acts 2:38. From that time forward, the Church of Christ is repeatedly spoken of as an existing reality, a distinct and independent body, enjoying the many blessings and privileges of the New Covenant. See Acts 2:47 Acts 5:11 Acts 8:1 Acts 8:3 Acts 9:31 Acts 11:15; Colossians 1:13, etc. It will now be an easy matter for the reader to reconcile Galatians 3:17 with Jeremiah 31:31. When Paul, writing to the Galatians, says, the covenant concerning Christ (eis Christon) was given to Abraham four hundred and thirty years before the giving of the Law upon Mount Sinai, he refers simply to the spiritual elements of the Abrahamic promise. But when with Jeremiah, he speaks of the constitution, laws, and ordinances of the Church of Christ, as a new covenant, he then manifestly refers to the full and perfect development of the spiritual side of the aforesaid promise under the personal reign and administration of the Lord Jesus. They were identical in the sense in which an oak is identical with the acorn from which it is produced; and in like manner they were also very different. But in no proper sense was either of them identical with the Old Covenant; the Old being to the New as the shadow is to the substance, or as the type is to the antitype. (Colossians 2:17; Hebrews 10:1.) All this may perhaps be made still more evident to some of my youthful readers by means of the following diagram : Hebrews 8:9 ---Not according to the covenant—That is, the Sinaitic Cove¬nant into which the carnal element of the Abrahamic promise was finally expanded. The word day is here used metaphorically for the period during which God led the people on their way from Egypt to Canaan. Certain pledges were of course given to them before they left Egypt, but the Covenant was made at Sinai. See references. Hebrews 8:9 ---because they continued not in my covenant,—God here gives the reason why he was about to accomplish upon the house of Is¬rael and the house of Judah a new covenant. It had now become manifest that by the Old Covenant no flesh could be justified be¬fore God: for the people were continually violating its require¬ments, and consequently God was under the necessity, so to speak, of rejecting them. Hebrews 8:9 ---and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.—Because they re¬jected me and my covenant, saith Jehovah, I also rejected them. The Hebrew may be literally rendered as follows; For they broke my covenant, and I was a lord to them. That is, I treated them as a lord treats his unfaithful servants : I rejected them. Hebrews 8:10 ---For this is the covenant, etc.—The Apostle now proceeds to state, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah, the several points of difference between the Old and the New Covenant: the first of which consists in the carnal externality of the former, and the spir¬itual internality of the latter. Hebrews 8:10 ---I will put my laws into their minds, etc.—The ten fundamental precepts of the Old Covenant were written on two tables of stone (Exodus 34:1 Exodus 34:28; Deuteronomy 10:1-5; 2 Corinthians 3:7), and the other laws and ordinances most likely on skins prepared for the purpose (Exodus 24:7; Hebrews 9:19 Hebrews 10:7). Many of the pious Hebrews no doubt, like David, treasured up these laws in their minds and in their hearts (Psalms 119:11) ; and, like Abraham, they were justified by faith through the covenant concerning Christ. But multitudes of those who lived under the Old Covenant never received the impress of God’ s law upon either their understanding or their hearts. And hence it was always to them but as a letter inscribed on stone, and not as an indwelling and life-giving power inscribed on their hearts. (2 Corinthians 3:6.) But not so under the New Cove¬nant. For unless a man is begotten by the Spirit, through the word of truth, the good seed of the kingdom, he cannot become a member of it, nor can he be a partaker of its benefits. Compare John 3:3 and John 3:5, with 1 Corinthians 4:15; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23. God first enlightens the understanding by means of his inspired word, and then he inscribes it on the heart. Through the heart, the truth affects the will, and through the will it controls and sanctifies the life, so that all the members of the New Covenant are really “ voluntary offerings,” according to the promise of God to his Son. (Psalms 110:3.) It is not therefore “ the letter,” but it is “ the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” that constrains us to do the will of God from the heart. Hebrews 8:10 ---and I will be to them a God, etc.—This is the second of the “ better promises” on which the New Covenant is established. Under the Old Covenant, there were of course many true believers who, like Abraham, took Jehovah to be their God, all of whom he received and acknowledged as his people. (Exodus 19:5; Leviticus 26:12.) But many, now knowing their right hands from their left, were of course incapable of so receiving him, and others were not willing to do so, preferring the worship of Baal, and other heathen idols, to the worship of the only living and true God. “ The fact is,” says Delitzsch, “ there is no period in the history of Israel before the captivity, in which more or less idolatry was not united with the worship of Jehovah, except it be in the time of David and the first years of Solomon, during which the influence of Samuel continued to be felt. And when, by the captivity, idol worship was completely eradicated from the people, as far at least as regards that part of it which returned, it is well known that a hypocritical letter worship got the mastery over them, which was very little better.” But under the New Economy, no such state of things is at all possible. No one can really become a member of the New Covenant, except by faith and obedience (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38, etc.), and no one can continue to be a member of it except on the same conditions (6: 4-6; 10: 26-31; 2 Peter 1:1-11). “ Know ye therefore,” says Paul, “ that they who are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham, and heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:7 Galatians 3:29.) To all such, God is now a God in even a higher sense than he was to the ancient patriarchs, for to none of them was the Holy Spirit given, as it is now given to all the subjects of the New Covenant, because that Jesus was not then glorified. (John 7:37-39.) But now we are not only brought nearer to God by the offering of Christ, but we are also filled with his Spirit, through which we are enabled to cry “ Abba, Father.” (Galatians 4:6.) Thus it is that Jehovah is now our God, and that we are his people “ in truth and in righteousness.” (Zechariah 8:8.) Hebrews 8:11 ---And they shall teach every man his neighbor, etc.— The word polites means a citizen, and with the possessive pronoun his (autou), as in our text, it means a fellow-citizen. And hence the whole verse may be properly rendered as follows: And they shall not teach every one his fellow-citizen, and every one his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all will know me from the least to the greatest of them. But of whom does the Lord speak when he says, They will all know me? Evidently, of the members of the New Covenant, and of these only. They must all know the Lord from the least of them even to the greatest of them. And hence we have given here a very striking point of contrast between the Old and the New Covenant. For if we except the few Gentile proselytes, who on condition of their being circumcised, were admitted to some of the rights and privileges of the Theocracy, all the subjects of the Old Covenant had to be taught to know the Lord. But not so under the New Covenant. No one, ignorant of Jehovah, can possibly become a member of it: “ for he that cometh to God must believe that he is,and that he is the rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” (Hebrews 11:40) The ground of this difference will become more obvious if we reflect for a moment on the relation which the Old Covenant sus­tained to the New, and also on the leading object for which the Old was instituted. Be it observed, then, that to communicate to mankind, in a clear and intelligible way, the whole plan of redemp­tion through Christ, was a very difficult and intricate problem; difficult in itself on account of its unique and supernatural charac­ter ; difficult on account of the many imperfections of the languages through which it had to be communicated; and difficult also on account of the preternatural blindness and depravity of the human heart. Now, in order to overcome these and other like obstacles, as far as possible, and to make the scheme of redemption plain and intelligible to all, it pleased God to explain and illustrate it by means of a series of material signs and symbols, which none of course but a Being of infinite knowledge was capable of inventing. For this purpose, he made Abraham the father of two families, the first embracing all his posterity according to the flesh, save such only as God himself saw fit to eliminate by special enactment, and the second embracing all who have the faith of Abraham. The first were made types of the second with respect to their birth, their circumcision, their inheritance, etc. The first became members of the Old Covenant, whether in its incipiency or in its fully devel­oped state, by virtue of their natural birth, just as all mankind are by their natural birth made subject to the conditions of the Adamic covenant, and as the descendants of Levi were by virtue of their birth made subject to the conditions of the Levitical covenant. This is evident from such considerations as the following: (1) from the terms of the covenant which God made with Abraham respecting himself and his posterity (Genesis 17:7-8) ; (2) from the fact that every male that was found to be uncircumcised after the eighth day was to be regarded and treated as a transgressor of the covenant (Genesis 17:14) ; (3) from the fact that all females of the stock of Abraham, through Jacob, were from their birth regarded as mem­bers of the Covenant (see, for instance, Numbers 36) ; (4) from the fact that this is everywhere conceded by Christ and his Apostles, as well as by the ancient prophets (see Matthew 3:9; John 8:33 John 8:37, etc.) ; and (5) from the existing analogies between the Old and the New Covenant. As the family of the faithful now become members of the New Covenant by being born of water and of the Spirit (John 3:3 and John 3:5), so also the children of Abraham, by natural de­scent, became members of the Old Covenant by being born of the flesh. Now this being so, one of the first lessons which the subjects of the Old Covenant had to learn was to know the Lord. But this necessity does not, and cannot, exist under the New Covenant, for its subjects are “ born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:13.) God begets us, not by natural generation, but by means of “ the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures.” (James 1:18.) And hence it is evident that all the subjects of the New Covenant must know the Lord. True, indeed, they are required to grow in knowledge, as well as in the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 3:18.) Leaving the rudiments of the doctrine of Christ, we must go on to perfection, but not by learning again to know the Lord. This is the Alpha of the Christian Religion, with­out which no one ever did or ever can become a subject of the New Covenant, and a partaker of its benefits. Hebrews 8:12 ---For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness,— This is given as the fourth of the “ better promises” on which the New Covenant is established. The law having a mere shadow of the good things pertaining to the New Covenant, could never with its bloody rites take away the sins of the people. (10: 4.) And hence, on the Day of Atonement all the sins of the year, for which many sacrifices had already been offered, were again called into remem­brance. But under the New Covenant the case is wholly different, for the blood of Christ cleanses us thoroughly from all our sins. (1 John 1:7.) It is to the moral government of the universe what the blood of bulls and of goats was to the symbolical government of the Jews. It meets fully and satisfactorily the claims of the Divine government against every penitent believer, and procures for him, on given conditions, free, full, and absolute forgiveness. And hence it is that those who are justified by faith through the blood of Christ, have no more consciousness of their past sins. God treats them as if they had never sinned, for he says: “ Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.” That is, he deals with the justified as if their sins were wholly forgotten, so that no one can ever successfully prefer a charge against the elect of God. See Isaiah 54:17; Romans 8:33. Hebrews 8:13 ---In that he saith, A new covenant, etc.—The terms old and new are relative. And hence the Apostle argues that the use of the epithet new implies that the first had become old. Nay more, he further insists that the Old Covenant was even then “ ready to van­ish away.” As a religious Institution, it was, as we have seen, abolished when Christ was crucified. He then took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. (Colossians 2:14.) And as a civil Institu­tion it continued for only about seven years after the writing of this Epistle. God then took it entirely out of the way, forever abolishing at the same time the whole Tabernacle service in order to stay more effectually the hand of persecution, and correct the extreme judaizing tendencies that were then threatening to corrupt the simplicity of the Gospel, especially throughout Palestine. 1. What a blessed thing it is to be a subject of the new and better covenant: to enjoy its rights and privileges here, and its eternal honors and rewards hereafter (verse 6). To have Jehovah for our God, to have his laws and ordinances inscribed as a living power on our hearts, and to have our sins and iniquities all blotted out through the blood of Christ, knowing at the same time that if “ our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens”— what more could we desire than this ? 2. No irresponsible persons, whether they be infants or idiots, can become members of the New Covenant (verse 11). For God himself says of its subjects that they will all know him, from the least even to the greatest of them. But such knowledge is above the capacity of infants and idiots. And hence they can never be lawfully received as members of the church of Christ. True, in¬deed, all who were of the seed of Abraham and of the stock of Is¬rael, became members of the Old Covenant by virtue of their birth. But these were but types of those who by a birth of water and of the Spirit put on Christ and receive the sign and seal of the New Covenant. (Romans 2:28-29; Philippians 3:3; Colossians 2:9-12; Ephesians 1:13-14.) The babes of the New Covenant are therefore the new con¬verts who believe in Christ and obey his commandments. (Matthew 18:6.) 3. Let it not be supposed, however, that those who die in their infancy are excluded from the benefits of Christ’ s death and media¬tion. By no means: for we say with truth, as did Paul (Romans 5:15-17), “ In him the tribes of Adam boast more blessings than their fathers lost.” Though infants are not proper subjects of the New Covenant, they are nevertheless all embraced in the more comprehensive arrangement of the Godhead, made for the benefit of all classes of mankind. Those, therefore, who die in their in¬fancy will be saved, unconditionally on their part, through the sac¬rifice and mediation of the Lord Jesus. “ For as by the one man’ s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the obedience of the one shall the many be made righteous” (Romans 5:19) ; that is, so far as it respects the Adamic covenant. And hence it follows that all mankind will in due time be saved, through Christ, from the effects of the first transgression. And then will be fulfilled in its fullest sense the saying of the Psalmist, “ Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength, because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.” (Psalms 8:2.) 4. The New Covenant was framed for the benefit of those, and only those, who have attained to the years of responsibility. In it and through it we have given all that is really necessary to the at¬tainment of life and godliness. He who believes, repents, and is baptized by the authority of Christ into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, has the fullest possible as¬surance that his past sins are all forgiven (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38) ; and if, giving all diligence, he continue in well doing, he has then also the assurance that in the end he will receive an abundant entrance into God’ s everlasting kingdom (2 Peter 1:5-11). But he who, on the other hand, willfully neglects these laws and ordi nances of the New Covenant, will just as certainly be banished with an everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power. (Mark 16:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9.) And hence it follows that everyone who has in his possession the Holy Scriptures, may even now read and understand his destiny. On this point there can be no mistake or failure so far as it respects God. “ He is not a man that he should lie, nor is he the Son of man that he should repent.” What a man sows, he will most as¬suredly reap: “ He that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.” (Galatians 6:8.) 5. But how is it with the millions who have no knowledge of God, nor of the gracious provisions of the New Covenant? Will they be saved, or will they be lost? If lost, it will not be on account of the Adamic transgression, for as we have seen, all will be finally saved from it through Christ. Nor will it be on the ground that they have rejected Christ, and the offer of salvation through him; for this they have not done. But it will be simply owing to their own personal transgressions, many of which they have all committed (Romans 1:18-32) ; and from which there is no salvation but through Christ (Acts 4:12). 6. If saved at all, then, it must be by means of the Gospel. But how can they be saved by that of which they have no knowledge? Does not Paul say that the Gospel is the power of God for salvation to every one that believeth, because in it is revealed God’ s plan of justification by faith in order to faith? (Romans 1:16-17.) And does not the commission given by Christ to his apostles, and through them to the church (Matthew 28:18-20), clearly indicate that there is no salvation for those who are dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1-3), except through the knowledge and faith of the Gospel? And did not the apostles act constantly under the influ¬ence of this conviction? When charged, as they doubtless often were, with being beside themselves in their great zeal to save the world from sin and death, the defense which Paul makes in his own behalf and also in behalf of his brethren is simply this; “ The love of Christ constrains us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they who live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him who died for them, and rose again.” (2 Corinthians 5:14-15.) On no other hypothesis can we explain the labors and teachings of the apostles than they looked upon the whole heathen world as lost, eter¬nally and irrecoverably lost, unless saved by the Gospel. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 8:2. The building used in the Mosaic system was regarded as a sanctuary (holy place) and a tabernacle as truly as is the one in the service under Christ. The difference is in the description given in the rest of this verse. True tabernacle means that of which the first one was a type. tched is defined by Thayer as follows: "To make fast, to fix; to fasten together, to build by fastening together." The Lord directed the building of the Old Testament tabernacle, but it was made of literal material and the work was actually done by human hands (See Exodus 36-40.) The last tabernacle employed the services of man also, but the materials were not literal and the formation of the system was the handiwork of God. Hebrews 8:3. Every high priest refers to those under the Old Testament line. Thayer defines ordained, "To appoint one to administer an office." Gifts and sacrifices were in the same general class, but the first refers especially to articles that were not intended to be used as victims on the altar. This man means Christ who was called upon to make a somewhat offering. That is, Christ offered many contributions to the New Testament service, and then made the "supreme sacrifice" of himself on the cross just before ascending from earth to his Father in Heaven. Hebrews 8:4. If he were on earth. This means as long as Christ was on earth he could not act as a priest. That is because the law was in force all the time He was on earth, and it already had its priests to offer according to that law. Hebrews 8:5. The institutions of the Mosaic system were examples and shadows (patterns or types) of the heavenly things (t h e institutions under Christ). Who means the priests mentioned in the preceding verse. In Exodus 25:40 is the instruction that God gave Moses to make all things according to the "pattern" shown to him in the mount. The idea is that when God mentioned this pattern for the tabernacle service, He had in mind that it was to be a type or pattern of the greater things to come, as well as to serve the purpose of that first dispensation. Hebrews 8:6. Several words of comparison in the second degree are used in this verse which should not be misapplied. God never made any mistakes and all that He ever did was good from the standpoint of being righteous. But the purposes to be accomplished by His plans were not always considered as final. He had a terminal to be reached in the preparation of mankind for the Hereafter, and until the final plan had been reached (that which was "perfect" 1 Corinthians 13:10), each step in the unfolding of the divine plan may be considered as looking forward to something 'more excellent and better. Hebrews 8:7. A part of the fault of which the Lord complained was concerning the shortcomings of the people. They did not do even as well as they could with the system which God had given them. However, God has always been inclined to give His creatures every opportunity for developing a desirable character. In view of this, He regarded the old law as not the best that could be accomplished in the future, and in that sense He would not consider the old covenant to be faultless. Hebrews 8:8. (recorded in 1 Kings 12). The tribes were destined to be reunited after the captivity, but the two parts are named to show that every Jew (as well as the Gentiles) was to be included in the new covenant. Hebrews 8:9. The day refers to the period in general when Sinai was the principal place of interest. (See Jeremiah 34:13-14.) The shortcomings of the Israelites was the reason on the human side for a change. (See verse 7.) Hebrews 8:10 : This verse states one of the main differences between the old and the, new covenant. When a male child was eight clays old he was cir-cumcized. and that made him a full member of the covenant, notwithstanding he had no mind to receive anything: the law was put in the flesh instead of the mind. The new covenant laws were to be put in the mind (or heart) instead of the flesh. Hebrews 8:11. Samuel was a full "brother" to Eli although he "did not yet know the Lord" (1 Samuel 3:7); his circumcision introduced him into the brotherhood (Genesis 17:9-14). That is why it was necessary for Eli to make his brother Samuel acquainted with the Lord. It was done in verse 9 of the same chapter where he told Samuel to say, "Speak, Lord: for thy servant heareth," which is the same as know the Lord in our present verse. Such an introduction in the brotherhood under Christ will not be necessary because all shall know me from the least to the greatest. That is because under the New Testament system a person cannot become a member until he is old enough and has mind enough to receive the law of Christ intelligently. This would completely rule out all such conditions as "cradle rolls" or infant church membership in the New Testament church. All must have mind enough to "know the Lord" through the law of the Gospel before they can come into the church. Hebrews 8:12. This verse contains a likeness and a contrast between the two covenants. God showed mercy under the old, and the passages that show It are too numerous to mention. (It should be stated what was overlooked at verse 10, that another likeness between them is that in each case the relation of God and people holds good.) The contrast in this verse is that the sins would be remembered no more. The word "against" Is often added in quoting this subject which is incorrect, for God never did remember a sin against a man after he had been forgiven. This point will be dealt with in detail by the comments on chapter 10:3. Hebrews 8:13. The main point in this verse is a conclusion based on the term new covenant: it proves that the other one was considered old. Since old things are expected to disappear. the conclusion is that the old covenant was to be replaced by the New Testament. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 9 SECTION EIGHT Heb 9: 1-28 and Hebrews 10:1-18 The Apostle having sufficiently considered the superiority of the New Covenant, proceeds now to demonstrate more fully and par­ticularly the superiority of Christ’ s ministry and sacrifice. I. He begins the discussion by referring to the structure and furniture of the Jewish Tabernacle. (Heb 9: 1-5.) The first covenant, he says, had ordinances of Divine service and a worldly Sanctuary. This consisted of two apartments, each of which was also called a Sanctuary, in the first of which, commonly called the Holy Place, were the Candlestick, the Table of Shewbread, and the Altar of Incense; and in the second, known as the Most Holy Place, was the Ark of the Covenant, wherein were the golden vase that had manna, Aaron’ s rod that budded, and the Tables of the Covenant; and over the Ark were the Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Mercy-seat. II. He notices, in the second place, the services which were performed in these two apartments, and also the typical and transi­tory nature of the several ordinances which appertained to the Old Economy (verses 6-10). 1. The priests went into the Holy Place every day, performing the required services. 2. But into the Most Holy Place, the High Priest went alone, once every year, to make an atonement for himself and for the er­rors of the people, by which arrangement was divinely indicated the comparative darkness of that dispensation. For 3. The Tabernacle was but a figure for the time being, reaching down to the period of renovation, according to which were per­formed many carnal rites and ceremonies which never could purify the conscience of any one. For (1.) Reason could perceive no moral or natural connection be­tween the means and the ends. (2.) God had not yet given to mankind any satisfactory expla­nation of these matters. And hence the necessity of the Inner Vail during that dispensation, to indicate that the way into heaven was not yet made manifest. II. But Christ having appeared as the High Priest of the New Economy, entered through a greater and more perfect tabernacle into the heavenly Sanctuary, not with the blood of bulls and of goats, but with his own blood, thereby procuring eternal redemp­tion for us, and purifying our consciences also from dead works (verses 11-14). Thus is indicated the superiority of Christ’ s min­istry in several ways. For 1. On his way into the heavenly Sanctuary, he passed through, not a material structure, such as the Holy Place of the Tabernacle and Temple, but through the true and spiritual Tabernacle of the new creation. 2. He went into heaven itself, and not into a mere symbol of it. 3. He went by means of his own blood, rendered infinitely effi­cacious by the eternal Spirit through which it was offered. 4. By means of this one offering he has procured for us eternal redemption, and purified our consciences from dead works, thereby qualifying us for the service of the living God. The Apostle next contemplates Christ as the Mediator of the New Covenant, procuring, by means of his death, full forgive­ness for all the faithful of the Old Covenant, and securing at the first of these points forms the scope of his argument in 10: 1-4. The Law, he says, having but a shadow, and not the exact image, of the good things to come, could never with its bloody sacrifices and carnal ordinances take away sins. This he proves from the fact that even those sins for which the daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly sacrifices had been offered, were again brought into remem­brance on the Day of Atonement. III. But the sacrifice of Christ, fulfilling as it does the perfect will of God, enables him to be just in justifying every true believer. And hence it procures for all such free, full, and everlasting for­giveness (verses 5-18). This section may be divided into the seven following para­graphs : I. 9: 1-5. The structure, arrangement, and furniture of the an­cient Tabernacle. II. 9: 6-10. Symbolical services of the Tabernacle, indicating the comparative darkness of the Jewish age, and the insufficiency of its carnal rites and ordinances. III. 9: 11-14. The higher, purer, and more perfect services of Christ. IV. 9: 15-24. The eternal inheritance secured for the called and faithful of all ages, through the death and mediation of the Lord Jesus. V. 9: 25-28. Further illustrations of the differences be­tween the Levitical services and those rendered by Christ as the high priest of our confession. VI. 10: 1-4. The utter moral inefficacy of the Levitical offer­ings. VII. 10: 5-18. The all-sufficiency of the one offering of Christ shown (1) in its fulfilling the will of God; and (2) in the full and complete forgiveness which it procures for every obedient believer. THE , AND OF THE JEWISH Heb_9:1-5 Hebrews 9:1 ---Then verily the first covenant— The Apostle returns here to the line of argument from which he was led off in the sixth verse of the eighth chapter by a comparison of the two covenants. In the fifth verse of the same chapter he speaks of the high priest under the first covenant serving the Tabernacle of Moses, which, he says, was but a shadowy representation of the heavenly things belonging to the second covenant. And now he simply concedes what is really implied in 8: 5, that the first covenant had its “ ordi­nances of Divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.” His object is not in any way to disparage the Old Covenant, but to honor it as far as truth will permit. And hence he readily grants that it, as well as the New Covenant, was of Divine origin; that it had the ordinances of Divine service appointed by God himself, and a worldly sanctuary framed in every respect according to the pattern which God showed to Moses in the Mount. The word covenant (diatheke) is not expressed in the original; but is manifestly implied, as may be seen from both what precedes and what follows. And it is, therefore, now generally conceded that the word covenant, and not tabernacle (skene), should be sup­plied in our English text. The word rendered ordinances (di- kaiomata) is a verbal noun, and means (1) a righteous action, an act by which righteousness is fulfilled (Romans 5:18) ; (2) a righ­teous judgment, indicating that a sinner is made righteous through the righteousness of Christ (Romans 5:16) ; (3) a righteous decree or appointment, an ordinance, law, rule, or regulation relating to the worship of God. In this last sense, the word is manifestly used in our text and also in the tenth verse of this chapter. The word sanctuary (hagion) means here, as in Exodus 25:8, a holy dwelling place, referring to the entire Tabernacle. It is called a worldly (kosmikon) sanctuary in contrast with the heavenly (epouranion) sanctuary of the New Covenant. (8:2; 9:23.) It was a material perishable structure made with hands, and pertained wholly to this perishable world. But not so with the heavenly sanctuary. It, in­cluding both apartments, is “ a building of God, a house not made with hands,” and it will endure forever. Hebrews 9:2 ---For there was a tabernacle made;— Our author now pro­ceeds to illustrate and amplify the general statement made in the first verse; viz.: that ‘‘ the first covenant had ordinances of Divine service and a worldly sanctuary.” This, he insists, is true; for there was a tabernacle prepared (katcskcusthe) ; that is, framed and furnished according to the pattern which was showed to Moses in the Mount. For particulars see Exodus 26:1-30. The word tabernacle (skene) as used here is but a synonym of sanctu­ary in the first verse. It includes both the Holy Place and the Most Holy, each of which is also called a tabernacle in what fol­lows. Hebrews 9:2 ---The first, wherein was the candlestick,— That is, the first or east room of the Tabernacle, called the Holy Place. It stood first in position, because the high priest had always to pass through it on his way into the Holy of Holies. On the south side of this apartment stood the candlestick made out of a talent of gold. (Exodus 25:31-40.) It consisted of an upright shaft (which the rabbis say was four cubits high) and six branches, all ornamented with “ bowls, knops and flowers.” On the top of the main stem and each branch there was a lamp in which pure olive oil was kept con­stantly burning. (Exodus 27:20-21; Leviticus 24:1-4.) This candlestick was a type of the Church of Christ not as a dwellingplace like the Tabernacle, but as God’ s appointed means for perpetuating and dispensing the light of the Gospel. (Zechariah 4:1-14; Revelation 1:20.) And hence every Christian congregation should be a light-supporter and a light-dispenser. (1 Timothy 3:15.) But observe, the candlestick served only to support and dispense the light. It was the oil, not the candlestick, that produced it; and throughout the Bible oil is used as the appropriate symbol of the Holy Spirit. See, for example, Isaiah 16:1; Acts 10:38; Hebrews 1:9; 1 John 2:20 1 John 2:27. The seven lamps seem to be symbolical of the perfect light of the Gospel. Hebrews 9:2 ---And the table and the shewbread,— On the north side of the Holy Place, opposite the candlestick, stood the table of shewbread, or bread of the face, so called because it always stood in the pres­ence or before the face of Jehovah. This table was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold. It was two cubits long, one cubit broad, and a cubit and a half high. Around its upper edge was a cornice of gold, and on its sides were fastened four rings through which were placed two staves of acacia wood covered with gold, for the purpose of bearing it conveniently from place to place. Its dishes and cups were all of gold. (Exodus 25:23-30.) TABLE OF On this table were placed every Sabbath day by the high priest twelve cakes of fine flour, six in a row, and on each row a cup of frankincense. (Leviticus 24:5-9.) Each cake was made of two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour, consisting of about seven quarts. These cakes were eaten by the priests, and were symbolical of the spiri­tual food of Christians, all of whom are made priests to God through Christ. (1 Peter 2:5 1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6 Revelation 5:10.) The frankin­cense seems to have been emblematical of praise and thanksgiving. (Revelation 5:8.) In the Holy Place immediately before the vail stood the altar of incense. It, too, was made of acacia wood overlaid with gold, and was two cubits high, and one cubit in length and breadth. Like the table, it had a cornice of gold around its upper edge. It had also four rings of gold through which were placed two staves of acacia wood overlaid with gold, by means of which it was carried by the Kohathites. It had also four horns, or projecting corners, on which the high priest made an atonement once every year. (Exodus 30:1-10.) ALTAR OF INCENSEOn this altar the priests every morning and evening burned sweet incense made out of equal parts of stacte, onycha, galbanum, and frankincense. (Exodus 30:34-38.) This incense when burned sent forth a delightful perfume, and seems to have been typical of the prayers of the saints. See Psalms 141:2; Luke 1:9-10; Revelation 5:8 Revelation 8:3-4. And hence we see the propriety of placing this altar of prayer directly before the Ark of the Covenant, which in con­nection with the Mercy Seat was a symbol of God’ s throne. (Jer. 3: 16. 17; Hebrews 4:16.) Every priest in offering incense on this altar drew near to the throne of grace. Hebrews 9:3 ---And after the second vail,— The first vail (kalumma) was suspended at the doorway on the east end of the Tabernacle, from golden hooks attached to five pillars overlaid with gold, each of which rested on a socket of brass. (Exodus 26:36-37.) But the sec­ond or partition vail (katapetasma) divided the whole Tabernacle into two apartments: that on the east was called the Holy Place; and that on the west, the Most Holy. This vail, like the inner curtain of the Tabernacle, was beautifully variegated with colors of blue, purple, and scarlet; and curiously embroidered all over with figures of cherubim. It was suspended directly under the golden clasps of the inner curtain, from hooks of gold attached to four pil­lars of acacia wood overlaid with gold and resting on four sockets of silver. (Exodus 26:31-34.) The Rabbis say that this vail was made of thread six double; and that after the erection of the Temple it was renewed regularly year by year. Hebrews 9:4 ---Which had the golden censer,— It is still a question with the critics, whether the word which is here rendered censer (thumi- aterion from thumiao to burn incense) is used by our author to de­note the Golden Censer on which, according to the Mishna, the High Priest burned incense once a year in the Holy of holies (Leviticus 16:12), or the Golden Altar on which he burned incense every morning and evening (Exodus 30:7-8). In favor of the former rendering, it is alleged by Luther, Michaelis, Bengel, Bohme, Reland, and many others, (1) that this is more in har­mony with Greek usage. The word commonly used in the Septua- gint for the altar of incense is thusiasterion. Indeed the word thu- miaterion occurs but twice in this entire work (2 Chronicles 26:19; Ezekiel 8:11), in both of which cases it evidently means a censer. It is, however, frequently used by later writers, as Joseph and Philo, for the Altar of Incense. (2) It is alleged that the con struction of our text favors the same hypothesis. For, from such passages as Exodus 30:6-8, it is perfectly obvious that the Altar of Incense stood before the Vail in the Holy Place, and that incense was burned on it daily; but the thumiaterion of our text is classi­fied with the Ark of the Covenant, and seems to be located behind the Vail in the Most Holy Place. In reply to this it is urged by Olshausen, Ebrard, Delitzsch, and others, that the Apostle does not say that the golden thumiaterion was in the Most Holy Place; but only that it belonged to it. He simply affirms that the Holiest of all had a golden thumiaterion and the Ark of the Covenant. But behind the second Vail, he says [was], the tabernacle which is called The Holiest of all, having (echousa) a golden thumiaterion, and the Ark of the Covenant overlaid on all sides with gold; which was the golden vase containing the manna, and the rod of Aaron which had budded, and the tables of the covenant. Now, as a house may be said to have many things which are really not in it, such as a sign, an awning, etc., it is alleged by some that our au­thor means nothing more in the above expression than simply this: that though the Golden Altar was located in the Holy Place before the Vail, it was, nevertheless, in its significance more properly con­nected with the Most Holy. And this view is thought to be sup­ported by 1 Kings 6:22, which may be literally rendered as fol­lows : And the whole house he overlaid with gold, until he had fin­ished all the house; also the whole altar which [pertains] to the Oracle, he overlaid with gold. The main reason alleged in support of the second rendering is found in what would otherwise seem to be an unaccountable omis­sion by the author, in speaking of the symbolical furniture of the Tabernacle. It is urged that the Apostle would certainly not have overlooked so important an article as the Altar of Incense, and name one that is not even referred to in the Law of Moses, unless it be in Leviticus 16:12. But here, the vessel used for carrying the coals of fire from the Brazen Altar, is not called in the Septuagint a golden thumiaterion, but simply a pureion, a fire-pan. In the Hebrew it is called a machtah which also means a fire-pan; but the golden censer spoken of in the Mishna is called a kaph; that is a curved vessel, as a dish or a pan. This objection to the common rendering is certainly not without force. The omission, if indeed it is such, is certainly a very re markable one, and one that is not easily accounted for. It should, however, be remembered (1) that it was not the purpose of our au­thor to enter into minute details in describing the furniture of the Tabernacle (9: 4) ; but only to give a general outline of its divi­sions, apparatus, etc. (2) In the discussions which follow these introductory remarks, he has reference chiefly to the solemn ser­vices of the Day of Atonement; and as on that day, the most sol­emn and important part of the incense offering was made in the Most Holy Place, and in the Golden Censer, the Apostle may have deemed it unnecessary to speak further in detail of the less impos­ing services of the same kind that were performed in the Holy Place and on the Golden Altar. (3) It is remarkable that Jose­phus makes the same omission both in his Jewish War and in his Antiquities. In speaking of the conquest of Judea and Jerusalem by the Romans, he says, “ Pompey and those that were about him went into the Temple itself, whither it was not lawful for any to enter but the High Priest, and saw what was deposited therein: viz., the Candlestick with its lamps, and the Table, and the pouring vessels, and the censers, all made entirely of gold; as also a great quantity of spices heaped together, with two thousand talents of sa­cred money” (J. War. b. 1, 7, 6). On the whole I agree with Alford, and I might say with the ma­jority of commentators both ancient and modern, that “ the balance inclines toward the censer interpretation; though I do not feel by any means that the difficulty is wholly removed; and I would hail with pleasure any new solution which might clear it still further.” Hebrews 9:4 ---And the ark of the covenant— This was a sort of chest, two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half broad, and a cubit and a half high. It was made of acacia wood, overlaid on all sides with pure gold. Around the upper edge, was a cornice of gold; and on each side there were two rings of gold, through which were in­serted two staves, for the purpose of bearing the Ark from place to place. (Exodus 25:10-16.) Hebrews 9:4 ---Wherein was the golden pot, etc.— In the Ark were placed a golden vase containing an omer (about seven pints) of manna (Exodus 16:32-34) ; Aaron’ s rod that budded and brought forth al­monds (Numbers 17:1-11); and the two tables of the covenant (Deuteronomy 10:1-5). It seems from 1 Kings 8:9, that both the vase of manna and Aaron’ s rod had been removed from the Ark and most likely lost, before the building of the Temple; but our author speaks here of the original order and disposition of matters in the time of Moses. The Ark itself was in some way lost during the Chaldean catastrophe. It was never restored after the Babylonian captivity; but in its stead, there was placed in the second Temple a stone slab of three fingers in thickness, called by the Rabbis Eben Sh’ theyah which means a stone of drinking. Hebrews 9:5 ---And over it, the cherubim of glory— On the Ark was placed a cover (hilasterion) of pure gold; two cubits and a half long, a cubit and a half wide, and of unknown thickness. The original word kapporeth means simply a cover. But as from it, God was wont to give forth his gracious responses (Numbers 7:89), it hence obtained the name Propitiatory or Mercy Seat. On the ends of it were formed out of the same piece of solid gold from which the Propitiatory was made, two cherubim with wings extended, and having each his face turned toward the other, and also toward the Mercy Seat, as if anxious to look into the profound mysteries of the Ark upon which rested the Shekinah. (1 Peter 1:12.) The word cherub means a keeper, a guardian. These figures, as well as the cherubim of the vail and the linen curtain, were most likely symbolical of the angels who are sent to minister to the heirs of salvation. (Hebrews 1:14.) But of these matters, as our author says, it is not now necessary to speak particularly. I trust that enough has already been said on the general structure and the furniture of the Tabernacle to pre­pare the reader for the more profound and interesting themes which are discussed in the following paragraphs. OF THE THE OF THE JEWISH AGE, AND THE OF ITS CARNAL RITES AND Heb_9:6-10 Hebrews 9:6 ---Now when these things were thus ordained,— The Apostle having described the Tabernacle with sufficient minuteness, pro­ceeds now to show what was done in it. These things, he says, being thus arranged, the Priests enter constantly [every day] into the first tabernacle [the Holy Place] accomplishing [there] the ser­vices [of their order]. These services consisted in dressing the lamps and offering the incense every morning and evening; and of the change of the presence-bread on every Sabbath. The present tense (eisiasin) may be used here as the historical present, indicat­ing merely what was customary; or it may denote that these ser­vices were still performed in the Temple when this Epistle was written in A.D. 63. Hebrews 9:7 ---But into the second went the high priest alone, once every year,— That is, into the second apartment, the Most Holy Place, of the Tabernacle. Into this, none but the High Priest was allowed to enter; and he only once a year, on the tenth day of the seventh month. But on that day he entered the Most Holy Place at least three times, perhaps four. This will be best explained by indicating briefly the varied services of that most solemn of all the days of the year, as given in the sixteenth chapter of Leviticus. After the usual morning services and the offering of the sacrifices prescribed in Numbers 29:7-11, the High Priest was required (1) tokill the bullock which he has provided for a sin-offering for himself and for his house (Leviticus 16:11) ; (2) to carry a pan of coals from the Brazen Altar and also a portion of sweet-incense into the Most Holy Place, and there to burn the incense before the Lord (verses 12, 13) ; (3) to enter the second time with the blood of the bul­lock, and to sprinkle it seven times on and before the Mercy Seat (verse 14) ; (4) to slay the goat of the sin-offering for the people (verse 15) ; (5) to go the third time within the Vail, with the blood of this goat, and to do with it as he had done with the blood of the bullock; (6) to make an atonement for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of the congregation, as he had done for the Most Holy, by smearing with the blood of the two victims the horns of the Golden Altar (Exodus 30:10), and also most likely by sprinkling the blood seven times with his finger on and before the Altar, as he had before sprinkled it on and before the Mercy seat (verse 16, compare Josephus Ant. iii. 10, 3) ; (7) to make an atonement for the altar of burnt-offerings, by smearing its horns with the mingled blood of the two victims, and by sprinkling of the mixture seven times on it, as he had on the Altar of Incense (verses 18, 19). The Rabbis say that for this purpose the blood of the two victims was mingled in a basin. (8) After this the High Priest was re­quired to send away the live goat to asasel, which means a state of complete separation (verses 20-22) ; (9) to bathe himself and put on his golden garments, which he had put off before entering the Most Holy Place (verses 23, 24) ; and (10) to offer the burnt-of­ferings for himself and the people, and the fat of the sin-offerings; and then to cause their flesh to be burned without the camp (verses 24, 25). After this, according to the Mishna (Yoma v. 1; viii. 4), he again put off his golden garments, and entering the Most Holy Place the fourth time, he brought out “ the bowl and the censer.” When, therefore, the Apostle says that the high priest went into the Most Holy Place, “ not without blood,” he does not mean that he was required to carry blood with him every time that he entered it; but only that he had to do this on the day on which he went in to make an atonement for himself and for the errors of the people. The word rendered errors (agnoemata) means ignorance, involun­tary error, etc. But it here includes all sins, save those only which were committed “ with a high hand,” and in open defiance and contempt of God’ s law. For such sins, no sacrifice was to be offered. (Numbers 15:30-31; Hebrews 10:28.) See notes on Hebrews 5:2. Hebrews 9:8 ---The Holy Spirit this signifying,— The Holy Spirit is here acknowledged to be the designer, as well as the interpreter of the Old Economy. It not only moved the ancient prophets to speak to the people the words and thoughts of God (see references), but it also breathed into the inanimate types of the Old Covenant a lan­guage which shows that they are all of God, and are designed to shadow forth and illustrate the sublime mysteries of redemption. And not only so,— not only were these types made shadows of good things to come, but they were moreover so framed as to indi­cate also in various ways the comparative darkness of the Jewish age. The fact, for instance, that none but the high priest was al­lowed to go behind the Vail, and that even he was allowed to do this but once a year, and then not without blood which he was re­quired to offer for his own sins and for the sins of the people,— all this served to demonstrate that the way into Heaven, the antitype of the Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle (verses 12, 24), was still a mystery, a matter that was not fully understood by anyone but God himself while the Tabernacle and Temple worship was continued. That God did, in anticipation of the shedding of Christ’ s blood, justify and save believers, under both the Patriar­chal and the Jewish age, is of course conceded. See Exodus 3:6; 2 Kings 2:1 2 Kings 2:11; Daniel 12:13; Luke 16:22 Luke 23:43; Romans 3:25-26; Hebrews 6:15 Hebrews 11:13-16, etc. But the ground on which they were so justified and made happy, was yet a mystery to men and angels; for none, it seems, but the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit yet understood that Christ must suffer and rise from the dead, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached to all nations through him, as the way, the truth, the resurrection, and the life. See references under.2 But when Christ’ s body was broken for our sins according to the Scriptures, then also was the Vail of the Temple “ rent in twain from the top to the bottom” (Matthew 27:51) ; and henceforth the way into Heaven, through the torn flesh of Jesus, was made manifest. Then also the Old Tabernacle, with all that pertained to it fell to the ground; and on its ruins was erected the true Tabernacle of which Christ has become the prime Minister. (Hebrews 8:2 Hebrews 9:11.) Hebrews 9:8 ---While as the first tabernacle was standing:— First in what respect? Does the Apostle mean first in time, or first in place? First in place or position say Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others. These able critics insist that the word “ first” is used here, as in verse sixth, to denote simply the Holy Place, standing as it did in front of the Most Holy. So long as it stood in that position, it served of course to obscure the way leading through the Vail into the Most Holy Place, which in the second verse is called the second tabernacle. All this is of course conceded as a matter of fact. But is this the meaning of the passage? I think not. It seems to me that the Apostle has reference here to the entire Jew­ish Tabernacle, which however, he uses symbolically for the whole system of Jewish worship, begun in the Tabernacle and continued in the Temple; and that the second Tabernacle, with which the first is contrasted, is the “ greater and more perfect Tabernacle” of the eleventh verse, together perhaps with the heavenly Sanctuary into which Christ has for us entered. Previous to Christ’ s entry, the way into the Holiest of all was not made manifest to anyone. Until the vail of Christ’ s flesh was rent (Hebrews 10:20), no man, and perhaps no angel (1 Peter 1:12), understood how God could be just in justifying any of Adam’ s race, and receiving them into glory. But when Christ died for our sins according to the Scrip­tures, then all was made manifest. (Romans 3:25-26.) Henceforth Jesus was everywhere proclaimed as the way into the Holiest of all. See references. Hebrews 9:9===Which was a figure for the time then present,— Or rather, Which [tabernacle] was a figure [reaching down] to the present time. The idea of the Apostle seems to be this: that the Jewish Tabernacle with all its rites was made a symbol (parabole) of the good things of the kingdom of heaven; and that as the Law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ (Galatians 3:24), even so the symbolic worship of the Tabernacle was designed to continue until the beginning of the new dispensation under the reign of Christ. But no longer; for since the coming of Christ, we are no longer under the schoolmaster. (Galatians 3:25.) Hebrews 9:9 ---In which were offered— (kathen) according to which [fig­ure] are offered both gifts and sacrifices. The present tense (prospherontai) seems to denote that the Levitical sacrifices were still offered by the Jews, according to the laws and ordinances of the ancient Tabernacle. Hebrews 9:9 ---That could not, etc.— These bloody sacrifices procured for those who offered them a good relative standing with respect to the honors, rights, and privileges of the Old Covenant; but nothing more. They had no power to perfect anyone with respect to his own moral consciousness. They were, in fact, but shadows of the sacrifice of Christ (10: 1), and could therefore procure for neither priest nor people anything more than a mere symbolical pardon of sins. Hebrews 9:10 ---Which stood only in meats, etc.— The construction of this sentence is somewhat obscure; and hence several different render­ings have been proposed. The main trouble is to determine the proper antecedent member of the relation expressed by the prepo­sition epi, the usual meaning of which is on, upon, or in addition to. What was on, upon, or in addition to meats, and drinks, and divers washings? “ Gifts and sacrifices,” say Delitzsch, Alford, etc.; “ The service,” say Luther and some of the more ancient com­mentators; “ Carnal ordinances” representing gifts and sacrifices, say Green and Liinemann; “ Perfect,” say Ebrard and some of the Christian fathers: that is, they say, the gifts and sacrifices offered could not perfect anyone with respect to his conscience, but only with respect to meats, and drinks, and divers washings. On the whole, I agree in the main with Alford and Delitzsch. The object of the Apostle seems to be to connect the offering of sacrifices with certain other matters relating to meats, and drinks, and divers washings,— all of which he characterizes as carnal ordinances, im­posed on the people till the coming of Christ. Hebrews 9:10 ---And divers washings:—(diaphorois baptisinois) washings which were performed by immersing in water whatever was to be cleansed. These had reference (1) to the washing of the whole body (louo) ; as, for instance, the body of every Priest at the time of his consecration (Exodus 29:4) ; of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16:4 Leviticus 16:24) ; of a Priest defiled with any unclean­ness (Leviticus 22:6) ; of the Priest who officiated at the services of the red heifer (Numbers 19:7) ; of the man who burned the red hei­fer (Numbers 19:8) ; of the person cleansed with the water of purifi­cation (Numbers 19:19) ; of the healed leper (Leviticus 14:8-9) ; of any one who had eaten the flesh of an animal dead of disease (Leviticus 17:15) ; of the conductor of the scape-goat (Leviticus 16:26) ; of the man who burned the sin-offering without the camp on the day of atone­ment (Leviticus 16:28) ; of a person unclean from a running issue (Leviticus 15:13) ; of a person rendered unclean by coming in contact with anything defiled by a running issue (Leviticus 15:8) ; of a per­son defiled by semen virile (Leviticus 15:16 Leviticus 15:18) ; of a person defiled by female uncleanness (Leviticus 15:22 Leviticus 15:27) : (2) to the washing of the hands and feet (nipto) ; as of the Priests (Exodus 30:19-20) ; of the Elders of the congregation (Deuteronomy 21:6): (3) to the washing of garments (pluno) ; as of the Levites at the time of their conse­cration (Numbers 8:7) ; of the Priest who officiated at the sacrifice of the red heifer (Numbers 19:7) ; of the man who burned the red heifer (Numbers 19:8): (4) to the washing of the inwards and legs of the burnt-offerings (pluno); see, for instance, Exodus 29:7; Leviticus 1:9 Leviticus 1:13 : (5) to the washing of wooden vessels (nipto) ; see Leviticus 15:12 : and (6) to such spoils of war as could not be made to pass through the fire (Numbers 31:21-23). These washings were all but carnal ordinances, and had in themselves no efficacy beyond the purifying of the flesh; but in that age of types and shadows, these were all necessary to indicate and illustrate the moral purity that is required of all who would enjoy the benefits of the New Covenant. Hebrews 9:10 ---Until the time of reformation.— That is, until the coming of Christ and the inauguration of the New Covenant. Then old things were to pass away, and all things become new. And hence the new era is called the period of the regeneration. (Matthew 19:28.) THE HIGHER, PURER AND MORE OF CHRIST AS THE HIGH OF THE NEW ECONOMYHeb_9:11-14 Hebrews 9:11 --- But Christ being come— (paragenomenos) having come forward as a historical person. (Matthew 3:1.) The Apostle makes the appearance of Christ (not his incarnation, but his historical manifestation) the grand turning point in the economy of redemp tion. Previous to his coming it was fit and right that all the Levit- ical ordinances should be carefully observed, and particularly that the high priest should go once every year into the most Holy Place to make a symbolical atonement for the people. But when Christ came forward as the high priest of the new institution, types and shadows were no longer necessary; and he, therefore, took them all out of the way, nailing them to his cross. (Col. 2; 14.) Hebrews 9:11 ---Through a greater and more perfect tabernacle,— There is here, as well as in the following verses, a manifest reference to the services of the first Tabernacle. As the high priest passed through the Holy Place of this symbolic edifice on his way into the Most Holy; so also Christ passed through a greater and more perfect Tabernacle than the Holy Place of the ancient Tabernacle on his way into heaven. But what is this greater and more perfect Tabernacle? The whole earth, says Macknight; the human nature of Christ, says Chrysostom; the holy life of Christ, says Ebrard; the glorified body of Christ, says Hofmann; the aerial and siderial heavens, says Bleek; the heaven of angels and of the just made perfect, says Delitzsch. The Apostle says here but little concerning it; he merely tells us that it is “ a greater and more perfect Tabernacle” than was that of Moses; and furthermore that it is “ not made with hands; that is, not of this creation” (tautes tes ktiseos). The Old Covenant had a wordly sanctuary (Hebrews 9:1) ; but the Sanctuary of the New Covenant is not of this world (John 18:36) ; it is heavenly. Its most Holy Place is heaven itself (Hebrews 9:23-24) ; and its Holy Place is the house which God has established on earth for his peo­ple, and in which he himself condescends to dwell with them through his Spirit (Eph. 2: 20-22). It therefore manifestly in­cludes the Church of Christ. Indeed the building was never com­plete until the Church was established as a distinct and indepen­dent body on Pentecost A.D. 34, ten days after Christ’ s ascension. We know, however, that God has been the dwelling-place of his people in all generations. (Psalms 90:1.) He has always had a place of refuge and shelter for those who trust in him. Under the shadow of his wings the faithful have always reposed with confi­dence. But as the covenant concerning Christ was, for a time, in but an incipient state (see notes on 8: 8), so also it was with the house of God which is from heaven. For a long time it was but little more than a curtain, designed for the protection and shelter of those who reposed under it. But when our Solomon (peace­able), the Prince of Peace, became king, he converted the tent into a magnificent temple. See notes on Hebrews 8:2. Hebrews 9:12 ---Neither by the blood of goats, etc.— The Apostle is still keeping up a comparison between the services of the high priest on the Day of Atonement and the services of Christ, when he, as our High Priest, entered for us “ into that within the vail.” The former gained admittance into the earthly sanctuary by means of (dia) the blood of a calf or young bullock (Sept, moschos) and that of a goat (Sept, chimaros) ; but Christ entered heaven itself as the high priest of the New Covenant by means of his own blood. It was, so to speak, the key by means of which the heavenly Sanc­tuary was opened, and Christ was allowed to enter, once for all in our behalf, into the immediate presence of the King eternal, im­mortal and invisible. Hebrews 9:12 ---Having obtained eternal redemption for us, or rather, obtain­ing eternal redemption for us. That is, he obtained it by means of the offering which he then and there made. The verb entered (ei- selthen) and the participle obtaining (heurantenos) are both aorists, and express contemporaneous acts; so that it was not merely by means of his death, but by the offering of his blood in connection with his death, that he paid the ransom price of our redemption. The high priest under the Law first slew the victim and then car­ried its blood into the most Holy Place, where he offered it for the sins of the people, thereby procuring for them a sort of typical and relative pardon. But Christ, by means of his own blood offered in heaven itself, has procured for his people absolute and eternal re­demption. The word redemption (lutrosis or apolutrosis) involves the idea (1) of a ransom price (lutron) paid for the release of a slave or captive; and (2) the deliverance procured by means of the price that is paid for this purpose. In this case the price paid was the precious blood of Christ, in consequence of which God can now be just in justifying every true believer. See Matthew 20:28; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 1:7; 1 Timothy 2:6; Titus 2:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19. But in our text it is the deliverance that is made prominent, and that is said to be eternal; for “ their sins and their iniquities,” says God, “ I will remember no more.” Hebrews 9:13 ---For if the blood of bulls, etc.—In this verse and the follow­ing our author proceeds to develop still further the amazing effi­cacy of the blood of Christ. For this purpose he again refers to the symbolical effects of the blood of bulls and goats by means of which purification was made for the sins of the people on the Day of Atonement. Hebrews 9:13 ---And the ashes of an heifer—These ashes, as we learn from Numbers 19, were prepared by burning without the camp of Israel a red or earth-colored heifer, together with cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet. Out of these ashes was prepared the water of purification, by means of which were cleansed all who were symbolically defiled by the touch of a dead body, or by being in the same tent with a dead body. This was a solemn ordinance of Divine appointment, and as such had an efficacy, as well as the sprinkling of the blood of bulls and of goats, in symbolically cleansing the people and securing to them the continued enjoyment of their rights and privi­leges as members of a typical and carnal institution. Hebrews 9:14 ---How much more, etc.—The form of the argument, used here by the Apostle is what is technically called a minori ad majus, from the less to the greater. He concedes that the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of an heifer did secure for the members of the Old Covenant a certain kind of purification; they sanctified to the purifying of the flesh. But now he says, “ How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge [purify] your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” The meaning evidently is that the blood of Christ is far more efficacious in cleansing the moral nature of man from all spiritual defilement than were the aforesaid carnal ordinances in cleansing the flesh. For the latter cleansing was only temporary and symbolical. There was no real­ity in it. It served only to demonstrate the extremely polluting na­ture of sin, and the great necessity of that real spiritual cleansing which can be effected only through the infinitely precious blood of Christ. (1 John 1:7.) This is a matter, however, which belongs more properly to faith than to philosophy. Nothing short of infi­nite knowledge would enable us to fully trace out and explain the influence of the blood of Christ on the government of God, and on the nature, character and destiny of mankind. Without then at­tempting to be wise above what is written on this profound theme, let us simply and joyfully accept the unequivocal declaration of the Holy Spirit, that the blood of Christ is sufficient to cleanse our consciences from all the works of the flesh leading to death (Hebrews 6:2), and so to fit us for the service of God who is himself infinitely holy. But what is meant by “the eternal Spirit” through which Christ offered himself without spot to God ? In reply to this query, we have given the following hypotheses: (1) that the expression denotes the Divine nature of Christ (Beza,Ernesti, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford) ; (2) that it means the Holy Spirit (Bleek, Tholuck, Moll) ; (3) that it signifies the endless and immortal life of Christ (Grotius, Limborch, Schleusner) ; (4) that it has reference to the glorified and exalted person of Christ (Doderlein, Storr) ; (5) that it represents the Divine influence by which Christ was moved to offer himself up as a sacrifice for the sins of the world (Kuinoel, Winzer, Stuart). That something may be said in favor of each of these hypotheses, is manifest from the names by which they are supported. But that the first is the true one seems most probable for the following reasons: (1) It is manifestly the design of the Apostle, in using this expression, to heighten and intensify the value of Christ’ s offering. And this he could do in no more effectual way than by telling us that the offer­ing was made and rendered perfect by means of his own Divine nature. It was the sacrifice of his perfect humanity, sustained and supported by his own Divinity, that gave to his offering its infinite value. That it was made in some respect through the will and agency of the Father himself, is proved by the fact that “ the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14) ; and that it was made also through the agency of the Holy Spirit, is equally manifest from the fact that it was through the Spirit that the Word became incarnate (Luke 1:35), and that Christ afterward performed his miracles (Matthew 12:28 Matthew 12:31-32). God bestowed on him the gift of the Spirit without measure (John 3:34), so that it may be truthfully said that under its influence he went to the cross, rose from the dead, ascended to the heavens, and there made an offering for the sins of the world. All this is of course conceded. But it is not to any extraneous influence, but to the personal dignity, glory, and Divinity of Christ himself that the infinite value of his offering is to be ascribed. (2) This seems to be further indicated by the form of the expression. It is not “ through the Holy Spirit,” as we have given in a few manuscripts (D, A, B, F, H, etc.) ; nor is it “ through the eternal Spirit,” as in our English Version, but it is according to our best authorities (B, D, K, L, etc.), simply, “ through eternal Spirit,” that Christ offered himself without spot to God. The eternal Spirit that is here spo­ken of, as Alford justly observes, “ is Spirit absolute; Divine Spirit; and thus it is self-conscious, laying down its own course, purely of itself, unbounded by conditions. The animals which were offered had no will, no spirit (pneuma) of their own which could concur with the act of sacrifice. Theirs was a transitory life, of no potency or value. They were offered through law (dia notnou) rather than through any consent or agency or countera­gency of their own. But Christ offered himself, with his own con­sent assisting and empowering the sacrifice. And what was that consent? The consent of what? Of the spirit of a man, such as yours or mine, given in and through our finite spirit, whose acts are bounded by its own allotted space and time, and its own re­sponsibilities? No: but the consenting act of his Divine personal­ity— his eternal Spirit (pneuma aionion), his Godhead, which from before time acquiesced in, and wrought with the purpose of the Father.” THE ETERNAL SECURED FOR THE CALLED AND OF ALL AGES, THROUGH THE DEATH AND OF THE LORD JESUSHeb_9:15-24 Hebrews 9:15 ---And for this cause—(kai dia tonto) on this account; viz., that the blood of Christ has an inherent power and efficacy, such as the legal sacrifices had not: a power to purify the conscience from dead works, and to fit all who are purified and sanctified by it for the service and enjoyment of the living God for this very reason. Hebrews 9:15 ---he is the mediator of the new testament,—This clause is ex­plained with sufficient fullness in our notes on Hebrews 8:6 Hebrews 8:8, to which the reader is referred. The word rendered testament (diatheke) means here a covenant, and the “ new testament” of this verse is the same as the New Covenant of Heb 8:8. Hebrews 9:15 ---that by means of death, etc.— Or more literally, so that [his] death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions grounded on the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance. The Apostle here plainly declares that the death of Christ was necessary in order to the redemption of the transgressions which were commit­ted under the Old Covenant during the Jewish age. But what was then true in this respect of the Jewish age, was also equally true of all previous ages. For as Hofmann says, our author here “ regards the history of God’ s relations to mankind as one great whole, of which the religious history of Israel forms a typical part, exhibit­ing in one crucial instance the incapacity of the whole human race to satisfy the requirements of the Divine will. From this point of view, atonement for transgressions under the law will mean the same thing as the atonement of the sins of men in general, re­garded as violations of the revealed will of God; and the death of Christ will be an atonement, not merely for sins in the abstract, but especially for sin in its most aggravated form, as conscious trans­gression of that revealed will. The special reference here made to transgressions under the covenant of Sinai has its ground not only in this, that that covenant had a real significance for mankind in general, but also that the point which the sacred writer has here mainly in view, is the transition from it and its failures to the sav­ing dispensation of the Gospel. That transition could not take place without a death which would annihilate the transgressions of the former covenant.” But the death of bulls and goats was wholly unavailing for the purpose. (Hebrews 10:4.) And hence the neces­sity that Christ should die for the people, before the “ called” of any age could have an absolute right to the free and full enjoyment of the eternal inheritance. But does it follow from this, as many suppose, that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and other faithful men of the Patriarchal and Jewish ages were still “ under the dominion of sin and death,” until Christ came, and by his death and alleged descent into Hades procured their deliverance? I think not, for the Scriptures everywhere teach that these holy men of old were justified by faith and obedi­ence as well as we (Romans 4:4; James 2:21-23, etc.), and this of course implies that they were received and treated by God as just persons, and that after their death they were immediately trans­lated, if not directly to heaven, at least to a place and state of high spiritual enjoyment (Exodus 3:6; Daniel 12:13; Luke 16:23-26, etc.). And this is manifestly Paul’ s idea in Romans 3:25-26, where he says in substance that God had, as it were, passed by the sins of those faithful men for a time, and that in the end of the ages he had set forth Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for a demon­stration of his administrative justice in doing so. That no sin was ever forgiven absolutely, without the blood of Christ, is of course conceded, and so also no debt was ever paid absolutely by a mere paper currency. But nevertheless we know that thousands of obli­gations have been practically cancelled by notes, bonds, and other like documents. And just so God seems to have administered the affairs of his government during the Patriarchal and Jewish ages. He, too, so to speak, issued in the meantime a sort of promissory notes, based on the infinite value of the blood of Christ, which he knew was to be shed in due time. By means of these notes he was enabled (if I may say it with reverence) to meet, for the time being, all the claims of justice, and still to treat as just and righ­teous all who like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, became loyal sub­jects of his government. But no one could read his “ title clear to mansions in the skies,” until by the blood of Christ his sins were all cancelled absolutely, and the notes and bonds that had been is­sued in behalf of the sinner were all redeemed by the one great atoning sacrifice. See notes on Hebrews 11:39-40. Hebrews 9:15 ---they who are called—That is, all in every age who by faith and obedience have become the children of God, “ and heirs according to the promise.” For all such, God has provided “ an inheritance which is incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away.” (1 Peter 1:4.) But before any could rightfully inherit it and claim it as their own, the covenant through which it has been provided had to be sealed and ratified with the blood of Jesus. The neces­sity of this the Apostle now proceeds to illustrate (1) by the anal­ogous case of a will of testament; and (2) by example of the Old Covenant. Hebrews 9:16 ---For where a testament is, etc.—That is, before a testament can have any legal force, the death of the testator must be known and publicly acknowledged as a fact. The reference which our au­thor makes to “ the eternal inheritance” at the close of the preced­ing verse, suggested to his mind the case of a testament, and this thought he now takes up, not for the purpose of proving, but sim­ply of illustrating the necessity of Christ’ s death. Hebrews 9:17 ---For a testament is of force after men are dead:— This is a well known law of all civilized nations. So long as the testator lives, it is his privilege to change his will as he pleases, and nothing but his death can therefore immutably fix and ratify its various stipulations. Previous to this indeed, his intended heirs may be al­lowed to enjoy to any extent the benefits of his estate. But not until the will is ratified by his death, can they claim a legal right to the inheritance as their own. And so it was with respect to the eternal inheritance. “ After Abraham had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.” (Hebrews 6:15.) That is, immediately after his death he was received into the enjoyment of the promised rest, as one of God’ s elect, and henceforth he was allowed to partake of the benefits of the inheritance so far as he was capable of enjoying them. (Hebrews 11:10 Hebrews 11:16.) And he also doubtless looked forward to the time when he and his children would be constituted the rightful owners of all things (Romans 4:13; 1 Corinthians 3:21-23), not excepting the redeemed and renovated earth. See notes onHeb_2:5-9. But it was not until the New Covenant was inaugurated by the death of Christ and ratified by his blood, that any one could claim, as we now claim, an absolute right to the eternal inheritance. I see no reason for the protracted controversy that critics have kept up with respect to the meaning of the word diatheke in the sixteenth and seventeenth verses. It is quite evident that the dia- themenos of these verses is the maker of the diatheke, and that his death must of necessity take place before the diatheke can have any legal force. This is not true in the case of a covenant, but only in the case of a will or testament. And hence, beyond all doubt, the word diatheke in these verses means a will or testament. But on the other hand, it is equally obvious that this word cannot in this sense be literally applied to any of God’ s arrangements with men, nor does our author so intend to apply it. He refers to the well- known law of a will as an analogous case, merely for the purpose of illustrating his point, and of so impressing more deeply on the mind of his readers the necessity of Christ’ s death, before God could consistently bestow on the heirs of the promise a right in fee-simple to the eternal inheritance. The word diathemenos means both a covenanter and a testator, and the word diatheke means in like manner both a covenant and a testament. And hence it was perfectly natural and legitimate that our author should, in this in­stance, pass from the first meaning of diatheke to the second, with­out however intending to apply the word to any of God’ s arrange­ments in a sense which would be altogether inapposite. Hebrews 9:18 ---Whereupon neither was the first testament dedicated without blood.— Or more literally, Wherefore neither was the first covenant inaugurated without blood. The sixteenth and sev­enteenth verses are but an illustration of the fundamental principle submitted in the fifteenth, viz., that the death of Christ was neces­sary in order to redemption from the sins committed under the Old Covenant, and also to the rightful inauguration of the New Cove­nant, so that all the redeemed might have a legal right to the eter­nal inheritance. This thought the Apostle now proceeds to illus­trate still further by referring to the way in which the Old Cove­nant was inaugurated. Since therefore it is thus and so in the case of a will, it is also analogically true of all the diathekai of God; they, too, must be inaugurated and ratified by means of death and the sprinkling of blood. And hence even the Old Covenant, which was but a type of the New, was not inaugurated without blood. Hebrews 9:19 ---For when Moses had spoken, etc.— There is reference here to the solemn transactions that are recorded in Exodus 24:1-8. When Moses had received from God the laws and ordinances re­corded in Exodus 20-23, he recited them to the people, and they all answered with one voice and said, “ All the words which the Lord hath said we will do.” After this; he wrote all the words and commandments of the Lord in a book; and when he had again re­cited them to the people, and had received their second response, he then proceeded, as our author says, to ratify the covenant, by taking “ the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop,” with which he “ sprinkled both the book and all the people.” The account of these transactions, as given by both Moses and Paul, is very brief, each of them writing under the in­fluence of plenary inspiration, like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, selected only such particulars as best served to accomplish his purpose. Moses makes no mention of the blood of goats, nor of the water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, which were used on the occasion, nor does he speak of the sprinkling of the book of the covenant. And Paul, on the other hand, says nothing about build­ing the altar and the twelve pillars, nor does he specify the particu­lar kinds of offerings which were offered by the young men at the bidding of Moses. Like the Gospel narratives, however, these ac­counts are both true so far as they go, for on no fair principle of interpretation can mere omissions be construed as inconsistencies or discrepancies. The hyssop and scarlet wool were used on other occasions for the sprinkling of blood and water. See Exodus 12:22; Leviticus 14:4-7; Numbers 19:18-19, etc. Usually the bunch of hyssop was fastened to a stick of cedar wood, by means of a scarlet band, and then wrapped round with scarlet wool for the purpose of ab­sorbing the blood and the water that were to be sprinkled. Hebrews 9:20 ---Saying, This is the blood of the testament— That is, This is^the blood by means of which the covenant is ratified, and you yourselves purified and consecrated to God, as his peculiar people. This shows that without the shedding and sprinkling of blood, the people could not be received into covenant relation with God: nay more, that without this blood, the covenant itself could have no va­lidity. Hebrews 9:20 ---Which God hath enjoined unto you.— The use of the word en­joined (eneteilato) shows very clearly that the Sinaitic Covenant was not a mere compact or agreement (suntheke), as made be­tween equals. On the contrary, it was a solemn arrangement (dia- theke) proposed by God himself to the people for their acceptance; and which when accepted unconditionally on their part, had to be ratified with blood. Hebrews 9:21 ---Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, etc.— This cannot have reference to the occasion spoken of in Exodus 24:1-8; for the Tabernacle was not then constructed. But the Apostle must refer here to the consecration of the Tabernacle ac­cording to the directions given in Exodus 40:9-11. True indeed there is no explicit mention made in these about the sprinkling of blood. God simply says to Moses, “ Thou shalt take the anointing oil, and anoint the Tabernacle and all that is therein, and thou shalt hallow it and all the vessels thereof; and it shall be holy. And thou shalt anoint the altar of burnt-offerings and all its vessels, and sanctify the altar; and it shall be an altar most holy. And thou shalt anoint the laver and its foot, and sanctify it.” In all this, there is nothing said about the sprinkling of blood on either the Tabernacle or its furniture. But neither is there anything said in the following verses (12-16) of the same chapter, about sprinkling blood on Aaron and his sons: and yet we know from Leviticus 8:30, that blood, as well as oil, was sprinkled on the Priests at the time of their con­secration. The mere silence of Moses is therefore no evidence that the Tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry were not purified with blood, as well as anointed with oil. We all believe on the tes­timony of Paul (Acts 20:35), that Christ said on one occasion, “ It is more blessed to give than to receive” ; though this saying is not recorded in any of the Gospel narratives. And just so we rea­son in the case under consideration. The statement of Paul is quite sufficient on this point, without further evidence; though it is worthy of notice that the testimony of Josephus is to the same ef­fect as that of Paul. Speaking of the consecration of the Priests he says, “ And when Moses had sprinkled Aaron’ s vestments, himself, and his sons, with the blood of the beasts that were slain, and had purified them with spring water and ointment, they became God’ s Priests. After this manner did he consecrate them and their gar­ments for seven days together. The same did he to the Tabernacle and the vessels thereto belonging,— both with oil first incensed, as I said, and with blood of bulls and rams slain day by day, one, according to its kind.” (Ant. iii. 8, 6.) From this statement of Jo, as well as from the narrative of Moses (Ex. 40: 9-16), it seems most likely that the consecration of the Tabernacle and that of the Priest took place at the same time. Hebrews 9:22 ---And almost all things are by the law purged with blood: — That is, the Law required that almost everything defiled in any way, should be purified by means of blood. In some cases, indeed, purification was made by means of water (Leviticus 16:26 Leviticus 16:28; Numbers 31:24) ; and in others, by fire and water (Numbers 31:22-23) ; but the exceptions to the general rule of purification by blood, were but few. Hebrews 9:22 ---And without the shedding of blood is no remission.— To this law, there was no exception. Every sin required an atonement; and no atonement could be made without blood. The only appar­ent exception given in the Law is in the case of one who was too poor to bring “ two turtle-doves or two young pigeons for a sin- offering.” (Leviticus 5:11-13.) In that event, he was required to bring to the Priest the tenth part of a ephah (about seven pints) of fine flour, without oil or frankincense, a handful of which, the Priest was to burn as a memorial upon the altar. But that even in this case, the sin of the poor man was not forgiven without the shed­ding of blood, seems evident from what follows in the next verse of the same chapter, where it is said, “ And the priest shall make an atonement for him for the sin which he hath sinned, and it shall be forgiven him.” This atonement, it seems, could not be made with­out blood; for God says (Leviticus 17:11), “ I have given it [the blood] to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.” This law was regarded by the Jews as universal in its application: for in the Talmud it is said, “ There is no atonement except in blood” (Yoma 51). It is most likely therefore that in this case, the Priest was required to make an atonement for the sin of the poor man, at the public expense. The memorial was made with flour; but the atonement with blood. Hebrews 9:23 ---It was therefore necessary, etc.— Without these sacrifices required by the Law, the Tabernacle and all its furniture would have been unclean; and the Priests themselves would have been unclean; so that no acceptable service could have been rendered to God in either the court or the Tabernacle. Nay more, without these sacrifices, the book of the covenant would have been unclean, and the covenant itself would never have been ratified. The very existence of the Theocracy depended, therefore, on the shedding and sprinkling of blood, without which the whole nation of Israel would have been cast off as an unclean thing. Hebrews 9:23 ---But the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these;— This profoundly significant phrase naturally sug­gests to our minds the following queries: (1) What are the “ better sacrifices” with which the heavenly things are cleansed? (2) What are the heavenly things that are cleansed by means of these sacrifices? And (3) what is meant by the sacrificial cleansing of these heavenly things? (1) By the better sacrifices is evidently meant the sacrifice of Christ himself. The plural is put for the singular by synecdoche, because of the plurality of the Levitical sacrifices which are spoken of in the same verse. See a similar case in Luke 16:9. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 9:2. This verse names what was in the first part of the tabernacle, the part called "worldly sanctuary" in the preceding verse. This room is called the sanctuary because the word means "holy," a type of the church which is said to be holy (Ephesians 5:27). The placing of the articles named is recorded in Exodus 40:4. Hebrews 9:3. After the second vail. The entrance to the tabernacle was enclosed with a vail (Exodus 26:36). That makes the next one the second as it is called here, and it is described in Exodus 26:31-33. The room of the tabernacle enclosed by this vail is called Holiest of all. It is so called because it contained the ark and was a type of Heaven, into which our High Priest (Christ) has gone (chapter 6:19, 20). This service of Christ will be considered further when we come to verse 24 of this chapter. Hebrews 9:4. Golden censer. According to Leviticus 16:12 the high priest burned incense in the most holy place on the day of atonement. A censer is a vessel to be carried in the hand and used in the manner of fumigating. This instrument was necessary because the golden altar of incense was in the first room or holy place of the tabernacle. As proof of this we read in Exodus 40:24 that the candlestick was placed in the "tent" of the congregation. Then in verse 26 it says the golden altar also was in the "tent" or the same place where the candlestick was. Hence, the golden altar of incense was in the holy place or first room of the tabernacle, making it necessary to have this censer in the most holy place. Ark of the covenant is so called because it contained the tables of the covenant (Deuteronomy 10:1-2). For the history of the pot of manna and Aaron's rod, see Exodus 16:32-34 and Numbers 17:1-11. Hebrews 9:5. The mercy seat was made of solid gold and served as a covering for the ark as well as a resting place for the cherubims. (See Exodus 25:17-21.) Cannot speak particularly means he was not ready to enter into detail about the separate services of these parts. Hebrews 9:6. Ordained signifies to be prepared or made ready, and refers to the articles in the two rooms of the tabernacle. The priests went always is said in the sense of going daily or frequently, in contrast with "once a year" as in the next verse. First tabernacle refers to the first room or the tabernacle, and the common priests might enter this place any time it was necessary, and they were the ones who did most of the service of that room. Hebrews 9:7. The second means the most holy place which was "within the vail" (chapter 6:19, 20), and no one but the high priest was permitted to enter this room while it was in service. Once every year means on the one day only, for he made more than one entrance into the most holy place on that day. (See Leviticus 16.) Not without blood. The passage just cited explains where and how he got the blood. Offered for himself. That was necessary because those priests were all erring creatures (contrary to our High Priest). The people signifies that the service performed in the most holy place by the high priest was for the sake of the nation as a whole. If any individual was personally indebted to the Lord because of his sin, he was required to attend to that as his own personal duty. (See Leviticus 4:27-35.) Hebrews 9:8. The Holy Ghost (or Spirit) inspired the writers of the Bible, and in the present case it signified something by the "setting" of things in the tabernacle. The thing signified was the idea that the way into the holiest--the way by which man could reach the holiest place, or Heaven--was still unrevealed. The vail is what kept the most holy place out of sight, for the high priest only was ever permitted to enter that room, and that on one day of the year only. As long as that tabernacle was standing the vail also was standing between. But the death of Christ and his resurrection, after which He entered Heaven, was equivalent to removing the vail to the extent at least of giving others a glimpse (by the eye of faith) into Heaven. That is why the vail was rent from top to bottom at the death of Christ (Matthew 27:51). This vail is connected with the flesh of Christ in chapter 10:19, 20. Hebrews 9:9. Which was a figure means these things were types of the institutions of Christ. Gifts and sacrifices is explained at chapter 8:3. Not make him . . . perfect. A popular notion is that sins were not forgiven under the Mosaic law. This subject will be dealt with fully when we come to chapter 10:4. Hebrews 9:10. Meats and drinks has reference to the regulations under the law of Moses concerning what they were to eat and drink. Washings is explained at chapter 6:2 on the word "baptisms." Carnal ordinances refers to the outward ceremonies such as animal sacrifices and burning of incense, not that they were "carnal" in the sense of being sinful. Imposed is not used in the sense of forcing something unjustly upon them in the sense that we usually understand the word. Its meaning is that the ordinances were put in force over the people of that dispensation. Time of reformation means the institution of Christ. It is so called because Christ remodeled (reformed) the scheme of human redemption, by bringing into the world the last or final religious plan, of which those in force under the Mosiac system were types or figures, which were to be used until the Lord was ready to set up the completed form. Hebrews 9:11. Not made -with hands bas the same meaning as "pitched" in chapter S:2. Good things to come signifies that the greatest values to be obtained from the New Testament institution will be enjoyed in the future. This building refers to the tabernacle all parts of which were on the earth. while that part called the holiest of all typified Heaven which is not on the earth. That is why the institution of Christ is called a greater and more perfect tabernacle. Hebrews 9:12. This verse states another of the contrasts between the two dispensations. The first used the blood of dumb animals, while the second used that of the High Priest himself. Eternal redemption contains the special idea of spiritual benefits, and not those that pertain to bodily or fleshly ones. Since this redemption is eternal and hence is endless, it. was necessary for Christ to provide it only once. Hebrews 9:13. The cleansing of fleshly or bodily impurities (which might be either physical or "ceremonial" or both), is fully described in Numbers 19 which should be carefully read. With that ceremony as a background it will be easier to appreciate the argument of our verse and the next. one. Hebrews 9:14. The Hebrews admitted that the blood of animals could cleanse the bodies of men from outward impurity. That should enable them to believe in the greater sterilizing power of the blood of Christ. The animals used under the old law were required to be without spot. Likewise the sacrifice of Christ was perfect since He had no blemish either in body or mind or spirit. This sacrifice was made possible through the Spirit, which was necessary because the literal blood of Christ was poured out on the ground and never reclaimed. But the spiritual worth of it was taken into the Most Holy place (Heaven) by Him (verse 12). From dead works means to draw the Christians from the works of the law. (See comments at chapter 6:1.) To serve the living God in this age can be done only by accepting the perfect sacrifice made through the Son. Hebrews 9:15. The argument of this verse will receive further attention when we come to chapter 10:4. For the present it is well to state that whenever a man was forgiven under the Mosiac exercises, the sins were charged up against the blood of Christ (not "rolled forward"). Hence when Jesus came into the world in the form of flesh, it was necessary for Him to make all of those instances good by His own blood. Thus Christ was not required merely to give "a pint of blood" but He was made to give it all, and thus assure the whole world of the possibility for eternal inheritance. Hebrews 9:16-17. This paragraph may-he regarded as a companion passage of chapter 8:4, in that the New Testament which is the covenant or will of Christ was not in force until after His death. This is a rule that is generally recognized concerning testaments (or wills) that men make, in that such wills are not in force during the lifetime of the men who make them. Hebrews 9:18. Death is the central idea in this part of Paul's argument, hence he states that the first testament was dedicated. (consecrated) with blood. Since the shedding of blood requires the death of the creature furnishing it, the circumstance makes the type and antitype complete. The animals died in order to dedicate (or put into force) the Old Testament or covenant, and Christ died and gave his blond to dedicate and render forceful His New Testament. (See Matthew 26:28). Therefore the animals slain In sacrifice under the law constituted the testator of that system. Hebrews 9:19. In keeping with the truth just referred to, Moses used blood to put into force the words of the law after he had spoken them. Regardless of the excellence of the words of that law, it required the blood of the testator (the animals) to render them valid. Likewise the words of Christ spoken in his personal ministry and to be spoken by the apostle afterwards, required the blood of Him who was to be the testator of the new law or new covenant. Hebrews 9:20. This language is similar to that spoken by Jesus when he was instituting the ceremony that was to symbolize the dedicating virtue of the New Testament. (See Matthew 26:28 and 1 Corinthians 11:25.) Hebrews 9:21. The passages in Exodus and Leviticus that record this use of the blood of animals are too numerous even to cite at this place. Hebrews 9:22. Paul confirms the remark made in the preceding paragraph, by the general statement that almost all things are by the law purged with blood. He was therefore considering only the blood of animals when he said without the shedding of blood there is no remission. He had no reference to the blood of Christ in this statement. His blood is not even referred to until the latter part of the next verse, and then indirectly only. The statement is frequently quoted by brethren when presiding at the Lord's table and applied to the blood of Christ. Such a use of the passage is not only a perversion of it, but it destroys the interesting argument the apostle is making. Hebrews 9:23. It was therefore necessary, etc. Paul is still speaking about the patterns or types in the Old Testament, that even they had to be purified or dedicated by these, meaning the blood of animal sacrifies. The blood of Christ has not been considered as yet. Then the apostle introduces by inference only the necessity of the blood of Christ. If the patterns or types of heavenly things required such blood (without the shedding of which there was no remission for the Hebrews), then the heavenly things themselves--the things pertaining to the New Testament called for better sacrifices. This is Paul's introduction for the blood and sacrifice of Christ, which has not been the subject for several verses. Hebrews 9:24. Christ never did any official or priestly services in the temple at Jerusalem while on earth, for the priests of the law were still in that service (chapter 8:4). Hence He entered that place of which the one made with hands was a figure or type. He is there to be in the presence of God for us or on our behalf as our High Priest. This is another item in Paul's reasoning with the Hebrew Christians. He is showing them that in clinging to the service of the Levitical priesthood, the Judaizers are repudiating the One who has actually entered into the presence of God. Hebrews 9:25. Another contrast is in the frequency with which the two priests performed their services in the most holy place. The high priests of the Levitical order had to repeat theirs often (every year). Blood of others means that the high priest of that law used the blood of a victim and not his own blood. Hebrews 9:26. If the sacrificial service of Christ was exactly like that of the Levitical priests, then He would have been required not to wait so long before beginning it. He would have needed to begin it at the same time the world (inhabitants of the earth) began to exist. Since one time only was necessary because the sacrifices of the old system were taking care of the sins for the time (to be explained at chapter 10:4), He could wait until the end of the world to perform His. World in this place is from AIONION which means age or dispensation. Jesus died in the last weeks of the Jewish Dispensation; fifty days after His death the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles, thus cancelling the Old and ushering in the New Testament Dispensation. Unlike the high priests of the Levitical system, Christ performed his by the sacrifice of himself. Hebrews 9:27. The preceding verse maintains that Christ needed to make his sacrifice only once. However, that is on the ground that man will go through death and the judgment but once. Hence this verse proceeds on that principle to affirm that it is appointed unto man to die once, and the judgment will come afterwards. Hebrews 9:28. Having but one sacrifice offer, Christ waited until the typical dispensation was at its end before He did it. Bear the sins of many. The sacrifice of Christ was for the sins of the whole world (John 1:29). That means that by His one great sacrifice Christ made provision for the remission of sins for all men who will avail themselves of it under whatever dispensation they live. The rest of the verse is a beautiful likeness drawn from the procedure of the high priest of the Mosaic system. While he was in the tabernacle (or temple) performing the services for the people, they were on the outside waiting for him. After the services were completed he would come out and bless the waiting throng. (See Leviticus 9:15-24; Numbers 16:15-17; Luke 1:9-10.) Likewise faithful servants of God who are looking (with pleasure 2 Timothy 4:8) for Christ, will see Him come to earth the second time. Without sin means He will not come to make another sacrifice for sin. (One offering was all that was necessary.) When He comes it will be unto salvation; that is to complete the salvation of those who will be faithfully looking for Him. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 10THE UTTER MORAL OF THE Hebrews 10:1-4 Hebrews 10:1 ---For the law having a shadow, etc.— In this and the next fol­lowing paragraph, we have, as Alford justly observes, the leading thoughts of the whole section brought “ together in one grand finale, just as in the finale of a piece of music, all the hitherto scat­tered elements are united in one effective whole.” But it is not a mere summary of the thoughts and arguments of the section, that is here presented. New thoughts are introduced, and others are set forth in a fuller and more attractive light. In the last para­graph, for instance, it is fairly implied though not categorically ex­pressed, that the blood of Christ and that alone “ cleanses from all sin.” This thought the Apostle now proceeds to amplify and illus­trate still further, by showing in the first place the utter insuffi­ciency of the Levitical sacrifices. That they had no power to take away sin, he argues from the nature of the sacrifices themselves and the character of the services that were rendered under the Old Covenant. For the Law, he says, having a mere shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never, with the same sacrifices which they offer year by year con­tinually, perfect those who draw near [to God, by means of them]. The word shadow (skia) is used here metaphorically to denote that the Law, as a religious institution, was but a faint out­line, a mere symbolical adumbration of the good things of the Kingdom of Christ. And the word image (eikoi) means the true bodily shape which belongs to the things themselves; the essential form of the good things, in contrast with the shadowy representa­tion of them as given in the Law. In the Gospel, we have both the image (eikon) and the essence (hupostasis) : but in the Law we have nothing more than a mere unsubstantial shadow of them. And hence the Law had no power to take away sin; nor could it make any one perfect, except in a mere civil and symbolical sense. Hebrews 10:2 ---For then would they not have ceased to be offered?— If these bloody sacrifices had been really efficacious in taking away the sins of the people, there would of course have been no need of repeating them with reference to the same sins; because, as our au­thor says, the worshipers having been thoroughly cleansed once for all, would have no more consciousness of sins so forgiven. A debt that has been once fairly and fully cancelled, is not to be paid a second time. If a disease has been once thoroughly eradicated from the system, there is no further need of medicine. And just so, if a sin is once effectually blotted out, it is remembered no more. Hebrews 10:3 ---But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.— For special sins, the Law required special of­ferings. “ If any soul sin through ignorance,” said God to Moses, “ then he shall bring a she-goat of the first year for a sin-offering. And the Priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the Lord, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.” (Numbers 15:27-28.) See also Leviticus 4:3 Leviticus 4:14 Leviticus 4:23 Leviticus 4:28. Besides these special of­ferings, others were offered daily (Exodus 29:38-46) ; weekly (Numbers 28:9-10) ; monthly (Numbers 28:11-15) ; and yearly at each of the three great festivals (Leviticus 23). But nevertheless on the tenth day of the seventh month, all the sins of the past year were again called into remembrance; and an atonement was made, first for the sins of the Priests (Leviticus 16:11-14), and then for the sins of the people (Leviticus 16:15). Nor did even these sacrifices offered on the Day of Atonement, suffice to cover the sins of the worshipers, as any one may see from the following ordinance relating to the scape goat. “ And when he [Aaron] hath made an end of reconciling the Holy Place and the Tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat; and Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness. And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhab­ited ; and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.” (Lev. 16: 20­22.) Thus it appears that what all the sacrifices of the year could not accomplish, was symbolically effected by the goat, on whose in­nocent head were laid the sins of the nation for the whole of the preceding year, to be borne away by it into a land of separation: ‘‘ the Holy Spirit this signifying,” that in due time Christ would, in like manner, bear away on his own person all our sins into a state of everlasting oblivion. Hebrews 10:4 ---For it is not possible, etc.— Why not? Who can fully and satisfactorily answer this question? The fact is clearly and cate­gorically stated by the Spirit that “ searches all things, yea even the deep things of God.” And some of the reasons are plain and obvi­ous enough. It may be alleged, for instance, that every sinner is under condemnation; and that something is necessary in order to his redemption. And, furthermore, it may be shown that the sin­ner has really nothing to offer as a ransom for his soul: “ for,” says God, “ every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thou­sand hills.” (Psalms 50:10.) All this, and much more, may be truthfully urged in support of the Apostle’ s declaration. But until we can estimate aright the exceeding sinfulness of sin and the just claims of the Divine Government on the sinner, I am inclined to think that all our speculations on this matter must fall short of a true and full solution of the question. It becomes us, therefore, to receive humbly and implicitly, as a matter of faith, what reaches far beyond the narrow limits of our speculative philosophy. That these sacrifices were of Divine appointment, is, of course, conceded by all who believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God; and that they served to secure for the Israelites symbolical forgiveness, and, as a consequence of this, continued membership in the sym­bolical Church of the Old Covenant, is also equally obvious. But beyond this, they only served to direct the minds and hearts of the people to “ the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.” THE ALL- OF THE ONE OF CHRIST SHOWN (1) IN ITS THE WILL OF GOD, AND (2) IN ITS FOR ALL THE , FREE, FULL, AND Hebrews 10:5-18 Hebrews 10:5 ---Wherefore when he cometh into the world,— That is, since it is now manifest that the Levitical sacrifices had no power to take away sin, and since, therefore, a better sacrifice was needed for this purpose, Christ on coming into the world as God’ s chosen minister to redeem it, says : Hebrews 10:5 ---Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, etc.— This citation is from the fortieth Psalm, and has reference primarily to David as a type of Christ; and secondarily to Christ himself as the anti­type. See notes on 1:5. In the first part of this Psalm, David praises God for deliverance from his persecutors, as well as for many other tokens of Divine grace. And then with an earnest de­sire to serve God and to do his will, he says, Sacrifice and offering thou hast not desired; ears hast thou digged out for me: burnt- offering and sin-offering thou hast not asked. Then said I, Lo, I come [I bring myself as a sacrifice] (in the volume of the book it is written of me) ; to do thy will, O my God I have delighted, and thy Law is in the midst of my bowels. In this remarkable utter­ance of David, we have clearly set forth the utter insufficiency of the legal sacrifices to accomplish the will of God; and also Christ’ s purpose to do this by the sacrifice of himself. The general meaning of the passage then is plain enough. But how is the Greek rendering of our text, “ a body hast thou pre­pared me,” to be reconciled with the Hebrew, “ ears hast thou digged out for me?” It will not do to say with some that our au­thor follows the Septuagint Version, without regard to the exact meaning of the passage. He never does this. When the Septua­gint expresses correctly the meaning of the original, he then com­monly quotes from it; otherwise, he either so modifies the render­ing as to make it correct, or he gives us a new translation of the Hebrew. Even in the few lines which are here cited, there are several slight departures from the Septuagint; but in the clause which we have now under consideration, he follows the Septuagint exactly; no doubt because it expresses exactly the mind of the Spirit. But how is this? To the careless and superficial reader, there may at first seem to be no connection between digging out, or thor­oughly opening the ears of any one, and providing a body for him. But the thoughtful reader will at once see that, in the case of Christ, the two expressions are nearly equivalent, and that the lat­ter differs from the former chiefly in this: that it is rather more specific and expressive. To dig out the ears of a person means simply to make him a willing and obedient servant. (Ex. 21:6.) But in order to so qualify Christ as to make him a fit servant for the redemption of mankind, a body was absolutely necessary. Without this, there could have been no adequate sacrifice for sin, and without an adequate sacrifice, there could have been no suit­able atonement, and without an atonement, the claims of Divine Justice could not have been satisfied, and without this, the will of God could never have been accomplished in the redemption of mankind. The Greek, therefore, though not an exact translation of the Hebrew, is nevertheless in perfect harmony with it, plainly indicating that both come from the same fountain of Divine inspi­ration. The only question of doubt, then, is simply this: Whence did the translators of the Septuagint obtain the specific idea which they have here so happily expressed? Or in other words, How came they to put such a construction on the original Hebrew? To me it seems most probable that they simply followed the current interpretation of the passage, as it had been explained by the an­cient prophets. See 1 Corinthians 14:1-4, and 1 Peter 1:10-12. Hebrews 10:6 ---In burnt offerings, etc.—This is but an echo of the sentiment expressed in the preceding verse, making with it a sort of Hebrew parallelism, in which “ burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin” are made to correspond with sacrifices and offerings in general. Together, the two verses express with great emphasis the utter insufficiency of the Levitical sacrifices to accomplish the will of God in the redemption of mankind. For the law of the burnt offerings, see Leviticus 1:1-17, and for that of the sin offerings, see Leviticus 4:1-5 The former was so called because it was wholly consumed on the altar, but the latter received its name from its having always special reference to sin and to the sin-offering of Christ. The former was instituted immediately after the fall of man, and in con­nection with the meat offering it constituted an important part of the Patriarchal worship. But the sin offering was instituted after the giving of the Law. It is first mentioned in Exodus 24:14. Hebrews 10:7 ---Then said I, Lo, I come— The Septuagint rendering of this verse corresponds exactly with the Hebrew, and is as follows: Then said I, Lo, I come [to do thy will] : (in the volume of the book it is written of me) ; to do thy will, O my God, I have de­lighted. Our author, by omitting the latter part of the third clause, has changed in some measure the form of the whole verse, without affecting its meaning. He simply makes the phrase, “ to do thy will" in the third clause, depends directly on “ I come” in the first. The second clause is thrown in parenthetically. It is manifestly David that speaks in the Psalm from which the Apostle makes this citation. But, as Delitzsch says, “ he speaks in typically ordered words which issue, as it were, from the very soul of the Antitype, the Anointed of the future, who will not only be the King of Israel, but also the Captain of their salvation, as well as of that of the whole world.— David speaks; but Christ, whose Spirit already dwells and works in David, and who will hereafter receive from David his human nature, now already speaks in him.” See notes on 1: 5. Hebrews 10:7 ---in the volume of the book it is written of me,— That is, in the roll or volume of the Law. “ Anciently,” says A. Clarke, “ books were written on skins and rolled up. Among the Romans they were called volumina from volvo, I roll: and the Pentateuch in the Jewish synagogues is still written in the same way. There were two wooden rollers; on one they rolled on, and from the other they rolled off, as they proceeded in the reading.” In the volume of the Pentateuch, which every king of Israel was required to transcribe and carry with him as a vade mecum (Deuteronomy 17:14-20), there is constant reference to Christ. Indeed, we may truly say of it, as John has said of the Apocalypse, “ The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of the prophecy.’ ' (Revelation 19:10.) This testimony is given not only directly in such passages as Genesis 3:15 Genesis 22:17 Genesis 49:10; Deuteronomy 18:18; but also indirectly in all the types and shadows of the Old Covenant. Hebrews 10:8 ---Above when he said,— Our author now proceeds to explain and apply the foregoing prophecy, and for this purpose he quotes it again substantially in such a form as best serves to give point and energy to his argument. But in doing so, he wholly overlooks the type, and applies the words of the Psalm directly to Christ as their true and proper author. It is no longer David, but Christ himself who appears in front of the great drama of redemption, and who comes forward to do the will of God, by giving his own life for the salvation of the world. “ Above,” (that is in the former part of the quotation,) “ when he [Christ] saith, Sacrifices, and offerings, and whole burnt offerings, and offerings for sin, thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; such as are offered according to the law.” Hebrews 10:9 ---Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will— The reader will observe that in the preceding verse the Apostle has thrown to­gether all the various kinds of Levitical offerings, no doubt for the purpose of making the contrast between them and the one offering of Christ, as strong and as pointed as possible. Numerous and various as they were, they nevertheless all failed to fulfill the will of God; but this, Christ has fully accomplished by the one offering of himself. Hebrews 10:9 ---he taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.— The thing taken out of the way is not merely the Levitical sacri­fices, but the whole arrangement under which they were offered, and the thing established is the more gracious and perfect arrangement according to which the offering of Christ was made once for all. This is indicated (1) by the use of the abstract neuters, “ the first” (to proton) and “ the second” (to deuteron) ; and (2) by what follows in the next verse. Hebrews 10:10 ---By the which will we are sanctified through the offering, etc.— From this clause taken in connection with what precedes, it is quite manifest that the thing taken out of the way, embracing the Old Covenant with all its rites and ceremonies, was not the will of God, but that the thing established and ratified by the sacrifice of Christ, is the will of God. “ He taketh away the first,” which was not the will of God; “ that he may establish the second,” which is the will of God. The term “ will” as used here, denotes God’ s re­deeming purpose, conceived before the foundation of the world but gradually developed in the Holy Scriptures, and finally ratified by the atoning blood of the Lord Jesus. In the accomplishing of this will, embracing as it does the whole Gospel plan of salvation, “ we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” Hebrews 10:11 ---And every priest standeth daily ministering, etc.—The keynote of what follows is found in the last word of the tenth verse, (ephapax) “ once for all.” The Levitical sacrifices were not only numerous and various, but they were also often repeated: “ Every priest standeth, day by day, ministering and offering often­times the same sacrifices which can never take away sins.” “ The same wearisome circle of ineffectual efforts,” says Tholuck, “ which has been shown to characterize the performances of the high priest on the Day of Atonement, is now exhibited as characteristic of the priestly institute in general.” Several manuscripts and some of the ancient versions have high priests (archiereus) instead of priest (hiereus), but the balance of authority is in favor of the reading found in our English Version. Hebrews 10:12 ---But this man, after he had, etc.— The main point of contrast here is, not between the one sacrifice and the many, but between the often repeated offerings of the many sacrifices of the Law, and the one offering of the sacrifice of Christ. For while every Leviti- cal priest standeth daily ministering, as one who has never finished his work; Christ, on the other hand, having offered one sacrifice for sins, sat down perpetually on the right hand of God, as one who has accomplished his work; that is, the particular work to which our author here refers: the work of making an atonement for the sins of the world. This will never have to be repeated. The contrast that is here made by the Apostle is well presented by Menken as follows: “ The priest of the Old Testament stands timid and uneasy in the Holy Place, anxiously performing his awful ser­vice there, and hastening to depart when the service is done, as from a place where he has no free access, and can never feel at home, whereas Christ sits down in everlasting rest and blessedness at the right hand of the Majesty in the Holy of Holies, his work accomplished, and he himself awaiting its reward.” Hebrews 10:13 ---From henceforth expecting, etc.— The Apostle refers again to Psalms 110:1, where David by the Spirit says, Jehovah said to my Lord, Sit on my right hand till I make thy enemies thy foot­stool. Christ is represented in our text as calmly and patiently waiting for the fulfillment of this promise. Not that he has ceased to work for the redemption of mankind, for he must reign, and that, too, with infinite power and energy, until the last enemy, death, shall be destroyed. (1 Corinthians 15:25-26; Revelation 19:11-21, etc.) But his sacrificial work is done. The one offering which he made of himself is all-sufficient, as our author shows further in the fol­lowing verse. Hebrews 10:14 ---For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.— This is assigned as the reason why Christ has not to stand and daily repeat his offering, like the Levitical priests. The one offering which he has made of himself is enough. By it he has forever perfected them that are sanctified. But who are they? Evidently the same as the sanctified in 2: 11; those who by faith and obedience have put on Christ (Galatians 3:27), and who have risen with him from the baptismal grave to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12 Colossians 3:1). All such have come to perfection in Christ, finding as they do in him all that pertains to life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3), so that they have only to persevere in well doing to the end of life, by abiding in Christ as the branch abides in the vine, and then with spirits as pure as the angels before the throne of God, they will join the redeemed millions “ who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” Hebrews 10:15 ---Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us:—Our author now proceeds to prove and illustrate his position still fur­ther by referring to the inspired Hebrew writings. For this pur­pose he again quotes from the prophecy of Jeremiah (31: 33, 34), showing clearly that even under the Old Economy, it was God’ s purpose that through the blood of the New Covenant the sanctified in Christ Jesus should enjoy absolute and eternal forgiveness. But in making use of this passage, he quotes only so much of it as has a direct bearing on his argument, and by so abbreviating it, he has left the construction of it somewhat doubtful. The main point to be determined is simply this: Where does the protasis of the sen­tence end, and the apodosis begin? Hebrews 10:16-17---Most commentators, since Beza, make the division in the middle of the sixteenth verse as fol­lows : “ For after having said, This is the covenant which I will make with them after those days, the Lord [then] says, Patting my laws into their hearts, I will also write them on their under­standing; and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more But some of our ablest expositors make the apodosis begin with the seventeenth verse, and render the whole passage as follows: “ For after having said, This is the covenant which I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, putting my laws into their hearts, I will also write them on their understanding, [he then adds] and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.” On the whole, I think with Beza, Delitzsch, and others, that the first construction is the most natural, and also most consistent with our author’ s free manner of quoting from the original text. It mat­ters but little, however, which of these renderings is adopted. In ei­ther case, the main object of the writer is evidently to prove from the Old Testament Scriptures, that the subjects of the New Cove­nant enjoy, through the one offering of Christ, free, full, and abso­lute forgiveness. Hebrews 10:18 ---Now where remission of these is, there is no more offer­ing for sin.—That is, where there is absolute forgiveness of sins, there is no further need of a sin-offering. Another atonement would be wholly superfluous. This, as we have seen in comment­ing on 8: 12, is one of the leading points of contrast between the Old and the New Covenant. Under the former, the offerings were numerous, and were perpetually repeated; while they served to procure for the Israelites nothing more than a mere civil and ec­clesiastical forgiveness. But under the latter, the one offering of Christ procures for all the sanctified absolute and everlasting for­giveness. 1. This is one of the most profoundly interesting sections in the whole Bible. Leading us back, as it does, to the original gracious purpose of God, conceived, of course, before the foundation of the world, but gradually revealed and illustrated from the fall of man until it was fully developed in the kingdom of Christ, it embraces within itself an outline of the whole remedial system. We see in it both the shadow and the substance in their true and proper rela¬tions to each other; and all looking to the one grand consumma¬tion, when the last enemy, Death, having been vanquished, the kingdom will be delivered up to God the Father. To understand this one section, therefore, in all its legitimate bearings, is, in fact, to understand the whole economy of Divine grace. 2. Judaism, though in itself but a shadow, differs nevertheless in many respects from all false systems of religion; but chiefly in this, that it has in Christianity a real corresponding substance. The religious systems of the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and other heathen nations, were nothing but shadows; mere counterfeits without any corresponding realities. The Romans, for instance, had their high priest or Pontifex Maximus, as well as the Jews. But while the Jewish high priest was a type of Christ, the Roman Pontifex Maximus was a type of nothing: a mere shadow of a shadow, without any corresponding substance. And this is true also of all the heathen temples, sacrifices, etc.; so that there is really no proper parallelism between Judaism and any other system of religion outside of the Bible. The one was given by God him¬self ; but the other is wholly of human origin. 3. Christians should ever rejoice that the way into the holiest of all is now made manifest. (Hebrews 9:8 Hebrews 10:19-20.) Christ has made it so very plain, that all may now understand it and walk in it. Indeed he is himself the way, the truth, the resurrection and the life. The man who is in him, and who walks in him, cannot fail to enter, even as he himself did, into the holy of holies. Well, therefore, might Christ now say to us, as he once said to his disciples while on earth, “ Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see: for I tell you that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.,, Let us all then strive to walk worthy of our high and holy calling; “ with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” 4. The great end of all religion is to purify the conscience from all that is impure and unholy; and so to qualify us for the service of God here, and for the enjoyment of his presence hereafter. (Hebrews 9:14.) Without this, all outward purifications are of no avail. The body will soon go to corruption, do as we may. “ Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,” is the irrevocable decree of God with respect to all flesh. But if by Divine grace the spirit is made like that of Christ, then also the body will in due time be made like the body of Christ. (1 John 3:2.) And if we are like Christ, we will be with him (John 14:3), and be made heirs of the universe through him (1 Corinthians 3:21-23). 5. There has ever been but one ground of pardon, justification, sanctification, and redemption. The conditions of enjoying the great boon of eternal life have varied somewhat in different ages and under different circumstances. Some things were required of the Jews, which are not now required of Christians; and some things are required of Christians, which were wholly unknown to the Jews. But neither Jews nor Christians ever did or ever can do anything by way of making an atonement for sin. This can be done only through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, which was just as necessary “ for the redemption of the sins that were com¬mitted under the first covenant,” as it is for the redemption of those that are now committed under the second covenant. (9: 15; Romans 3:25-26.) This is the fountain which God by the mouth of Zechariah (13: 1) promised that he would open “ to the house of David for sin and for uncleanness” ; and this is the fountain to which every penitent sinner is now invited to come and be cleansed. 6. How infinitely glorious will be the second advent of our blessed Lord. (Hebrews 9:28.) His first coming was in weakness, poverty, and suffering, because he was then “ made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law; that we might receive the adoption of sons.” (Galatians 4:4-5.) He had then to be “ made sin for us, though he knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Corinthians 5:21.) But now his sacrificial work is done. His sufferings and sorrows are all over. He has borne away all our sins in his own person; and by the one offering of himself he has brought in everlasting righteousness. And hence when he comes again, it will be to redeem his saints, “ and to convict all the impious concerning all their works of im¬piety which they impiously did, and concerning all the hard things which impious sinners spoke against him.” (Jude 1:14-15.) Then “ all that are in their graves will hear his voice and come forth; they that have done good, to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of damnation.” (John 5:28-29.) The judgment will sit, and the books will be opened. And then every man will be rewarded according to his works. (Revelation 20:11-15.) Sinner, are you prepared to meet him at his coming? If not, why not at once repent of your sins? Why not accept of the mercy which he now offers to you through the Gospel? “ Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” (2 Corinthians 6:2.) 7. God is not an arbitrary, but a just and righteous Sovereign. (Hebrews 10:1-4.) Otherwise he might have accepted the blood of bulls and of goats as an atonement for sin; nay more, he might have even allowed all sin to pass with impunity. But this was impossi¬ble. God’ s own nature would not allow this. Justice, absolute and eternal justice, had to be satisfied before any sinner could be par¬doned absolutely; for justice and judgment are the habitation of God’ s throne. (Psalms 89:14.) But nothing it seems save the blood of Christ was sufficient to pay the ransom. And hence even this was not withheld by our ever gracious and merciful Father. For, as told, he “ so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16.) But before this can be made available to the sinner, it must be humbly and thankfully ac¬cepted by him. He must reverently bow to the authority of Jesus, and receive him as the anointed Sovereign of the universe. (Philippians 2:9-11.) To those who do so willingly, Christ has become the author of eternal salvation (Hebrews 5:9) ; but to those who reject Christ, the Gospel is but a savor of death unto death (2 Corinthians 2:16). Better for all such that they had never been born; for by an eternal moral necessity they must be banished “ with an everlasting de¬struction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe.” (2 Thessalonians 1:9-10.) 8. How infinitely consoling is the assurance given to us in this section, that the one offering of Christ has so far satisfied the will of God, by meeting the claims of Divine justice against the sinner, that he can now be just in justifying every one who believes and obeys him. (Hebrews 10:5-10; Romans 3:25-26.) This is indeed to us as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, reaching even within the Vail. For, as our author says in his letter to the Romans ( Romans 5:10), “ If when we were enemies to God by wicked works, we were reconciled to him by the death of his Son; much more being now reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.” On this rock we may now rest our hopes in confidence, feeling assured that “ all things work together for good to them that love God” (Romans 8:28) ; and that “ neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39). May God help us then to renounce all self-righteousness and self¬reliance, and to trust only in him “ who of God has become unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.” SECTION NINEHeb_10:19-39 In the first six chapters of our Epistle, exhortation follows exposition and argument in quick and rapid succession. But from 7: 1 to 10: 18, we have one continued discussion of the priesthood of Christ, of the covenant of which he is the Mediator, and of the one great atoning sacrifice of himself which he once made for the sins of the world. At this point ends the doctrinal part of the Epistle; most of what follows being taken up with matters of exhortation, consolation, and encouragement. In the first section of the hortatory part upon which we now enter, our author makes a practical application of some of the leading points involved in the preceding discussion, earnestly exhorting his readers to greater zeal and diligence in their Christian profession, warning them still further against the dangers and fearful consequences of apostasy, and encouraging them in various ways and by sundry motives to persevere with fidelity to the end of their Christian course. (Hebrews 10:19-39.) I. He begins by exhorting his Hebrew brethren (1) to draw near to God with true hearts and in the full assurance of faith, hav¬ing their hearts sprinkled from an evil consciousness, and their bodies washed with pure water; (2) to hold fast the confidence of their well grounded hope; (3) to have a mutual watch-care over one another, so as to excite each other to love and good works, and (4)not to neglect the meetings appointed for social worship. (Hebrews 10:19-25.) This exhortation he enforces. 1. On the ground that the way of access into the Holiest of all had then been made manifest through the rent vail of the flesh of Jesus (Hebrews 10:19-20). 2. That they had a great high priest over the house of God, through whom they had at all times free access to the throne of heavenly grace (Hebrews 10:21). 3. That God is faithful, and that he will certainly fulfill all his promises (Hebrews 10:23). 4. That the day of trial was then near at hand (Hebrews 10:25). II. He again warns his readers against the dangers and fearful consequences of apostasy. Of these, he urges them to beware. 1. Because for the apostate even the sacrifice of Christ is no longer available, and consequently he can expect nothing but the awful horrors of the coming judgment (Hebrews 10:26-27). 2. Because his condemnation will be even more intolerable than was that of the presumptuous sinner under the Law, on the ground that wherever much is given, there also much is always required (Hebrews 10:28-29). 3. Because God will certainly execute his righteous vengeance on all the finally impenitent (Hebrews 10:30-31). III. He urges and encourages them on the ground of consistency, to endure with meekness and resignation whatever trials and afflictions might come upon them (Hebrews 10:32-34). They had, it seems, formerly endured much, and they had borne it all joyfully in view of the riches and honors that awaited them. And now the Apostle would have them persevere in the same course in which they had begun. IV. He exhorts and encourages them to maintain their confidence, and to persevere in their begun course, (1) on the ground that their final recompense would be very great; and (2) on the ground that the coming of Christ was very near at hand, when the faithful would all be rewarded for their fidelity (Hebrews 10:35-39). This the Apostle illustrates and enforces by referring to the over¬throw of the Chaldean monarchy, and the deliverance of the faith¬ful Israelites from its oppressive bondage. The main points of this section may therefore be briefly summed up as follows: I. Hebrews 10:19-25. An exhortation to greater diligence, purity, constancy, and fidelity in the worship and service of God. II. Hebrews 10:26-31. A solemn warning against the dangers and fearful consequences of apostasy. III. Hebrews 10:32-34. Exhortation and encouragement to the Hebrew Christians, drawn from their previous steadfastness and endurance. IV. Hebrews 10:35-39. Further exhortation and encouragement to maintain their confidence, and to persevere through faith to the end, which to them was then very near at hand. AN TO GREATER , PURITY. , AND IN THE WORSHIP AND SERVICE OF GODHeb_10:19-25 Hebrews 10:19 ---Having therefore, etc.—In the preceding section the Apos­tle has shown (1) that the way into the Holiest of all, though dark and mysterious to the ancients, has now been made manifest to us through the shed blood of Christ; (2) that Christ has himself en­tered it by means of his own blood with which he has made an atonement for the sins of the world; (3) that he ever lives there as a priest on his throne to intercede for us and to bless us; and (4) that by virtue of his atoning blood, we, too, are allowed to follow him and to be with him as joint heirs of the eternal inheritance. All this, then, serves to inspire us, not exactly with “ boldness,” but rather with a joyful confidence (parresia) as regards our entrance into the Holiest of all, through the blood of Jesus. On this point there is really no longer any reason for doubting. We now “ know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” (2 Corinthians 5:1.) We are therefore no longer in bondage through the fear of death, having confidence that “ it is better to depart and be with Christ.” The phrase, “ by the blood of Christ,” denotes the means by and through which this joyful access to heaven has been procured for us as illustrated in the preceding sec­tion. Hebrews 10:20 ---By a new and living way,— The meaning of this expression will be best understood when viewed in its proper relations to other parts of the sentence, the whole of which may be literally rendered as follows: Having therefore, brethren, confidence with respect to the entrance of the Holy of holies by means of the blood of Jesus, which [entrance or entranceway] he consecrated for us [as] a way fresh and living [leading] through the vail, that is through his flesh, etc. From this, it will be seen that our English Version gives the sense of the passage pretty accurately, without, however, giving the exact grammatical relation of the words as they stand in the original. The new and living way is the same as the entrance way. It is called new, fresh, or recent way, because it had but recently been initiated and consecrated by Christ, and it is called a living way, because like Christ himself it is ever fresh and living. “ The way into the Sanctuary of the Old Testament,” says Hofmann, “ was simply a lifeless pavement, trodden by the high priest and by him alone. But the way that has been opened and consecrated for us by Jesus Christ, is one that really leads and car­ries all who enter it into the heavenly rest:— a living way, because one with the living person and abiding work of the Lord Jesus.” It is also a way that leads through the vail; that is, through the rent flesh of Christ. As the vail was the only medium of access to God under the Old Economy, so also is the rent flesh of Christ the only medium of access to him under the New Economy. And hence when the heart of Christ was ruptured on the cross (see notes on Hebrews 5:7), the vail of the temple was then also “ rent in twain from the top to the bottom.” (Matthew 27:51.) Then, and not till then, was the way of entrance into the Holies of all made manifest to men and angels. Hebrews 10:21 ---And having an high priest over the house of God;— Liter­ally, And having a great priest (hierea megan) over the house of God. True, indeed, in the Septuagint, as well as in the writings of Philo, these words (hierens megas) are often used in the sense of archicrus (archiereus). But as they are not in any other instance so used by our author, it is most likely that he uses the word great in this instance, as in Hebrews 4:14, to denote Christ’ s personal dignity and royal highness. Like Melchisedec, he sits as a priest upon his throne, while he presides over the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15.) The house of God may, however, in this instance, de­note the church in heaven as well as the church on earth, for Christ is a minister of both the heavenly Sanctuary and the true Tabernacle. (Hebrews 8:2.) Hebrews 10:22 ---Let us draw near—Draw near to what? Evidently to God and to the throne of his grace, as we are exhorted to do in Hebrews 4:16. The priests of the Old Covenant drew near to God symbolically, whenever they approached the golden altar to 'burn incense, for be­tween this altar and the Ark of the Covenant, on which God’ s presence was manifested, there was but little space. The vail, however, still intervened between the worshiped and the worship­ers, and the whole scene was, in fact, one of mystery and terror to the priests, as well as to the people. But not so under the New Economy. “ For as many as are [now] led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” For as Paul assures us (Romans 8:15), we have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but we have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. And thus having a joyful confidence as respects the en­trance into the Holiest of all, and having a great sympathetic high priest over the house of God, we may all now draw near to God as his redeemed children, and find grace for seasonable help. But this near approach into the presence of our heavenly Father should always be made with becoming reverence and with due preparation of both head and heart. “ I will be sanctified,” says God, “ in them that come nigh me.” (Leviticus 10:3.) And accord­ingly the children of Israel were required to wash their clothes and to purify themselves for three days, before they were allowed to approach God at Mount Sinai. (Exodus 19:10.) “ God is spirit,” says Christ, “ and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24.) This is just as necessary now as it ever was. And hence while the Apostle would have all his Hebrew brethren approach God in prayer and praise, he would have them do so (1) with a true heart; (2) in the full assurance of faith; (3) having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience; and (4) having their bodies washed with pure water. Let us consider each of these in order. Hebrews 10:22 ---with a true heart— That is, with a heart that is free from all guile, deceit, and hypocrisy. A heart made true by the knowledge of itself and of the grace of God, through the enlightening and sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit. “ When this knowledge takes root,” says Ebrard, “ it will dispel the delusive fancy that God needs no atonement; that God is only a dead idol, who knows not the anger of holy love. It will dispel, too, the confidence in false self-made atonements, including all merit of works, and it will de­stroy all self-deception about an atonement through any other sac­rifices than the sacrifice of Christ.” A true heart, then, is a heart which, while renouncing all self-righteousness and every other “ refuge of lies,” receives Christ and trusts in him as the way, the truth, the resurrection, and the life. Hebrews 10:22 ---In full assurance of faith,— That is, with a faith that dispels all doubt with regard to God and his promises; a faith which enables us to “ take God at his word,” and to do just what he commands, feeling perfectly sure that all things work together for good to them that love and serve him. That such a degree of faith is desir­able no one can doubt; and that it is also attainable through the grace of God is perhaps equally certain. And if so, then surely it should be most earnestly sought for by all; for to approach God in a doubtful state of mind is very dishonoring to him as well as inju­rious to ourselves. Hebrews 10:22 ---Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience,— The word rendered conscience (suneidesis) may mean here, as in Hebrews 9:9 Hebrews 9:14, either conscience or consciousness; either the moral faculty of the soul, or the state of mind resulting from the exercise of this faculty. Every act that we perform contrary to the known will of God defiles our conscience and also our consciousness; we have them both an evil conscience and an evil self-consciousness. And this, so long as it continues, must seriously interrupt our union, communion and fellowship with God. The child that is suffering from an evil consciousness on account of its having transgressed the known will of its father cannot, so long as the feeling lasts, approach him with perfect confidence. But when it repents of the evil, confesses the wrong, and feels fully assured that the fault is forgiven, then what a change comes over it. It can then properly appreciate a father’ s love, and draw near to him with filial and joy­ful confidence. And just so it is with every child of God. So long as we feel conscious of guilt, so long we feel also that there is a strong barrier between us and our God. For if our heart con­demns us, we know that God also condemns us. (1 John 3:20.) But “ if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9.) And this he does in all cases by applying to our hearts the blood of sprinkling; for it is this, and only this, that can cleanse from sin. (1 John 1:7.) And when our hearts are thus purified, we have then “ confidence toward God” (1 John 3:21) ; and we can then approach him as his redeemed children and have sweet communion and fellowship with him. “ Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” Hebrews 10:22 ---And our bodies washed with pure water.— There is here a manifest reference to the bath of regeneration. (Titus 3:5.) It will not do to say with Calvin, Limborch, Owen, Bengel and oth­ers that this is a mere symbolical expression, having reference simply to the inward cleansing of the soul by the blood of Christ and the renewing influence of the Holy Spirit. The strong and pointed antithesis which the Apostle here makes between the sprin­kling of the heart and the washing of the body forbids any such interpretation of the passage. This is conceded by Delitzsch, Al­ford, Moll and others. Indeed nearly all eminent expositors are now agreed that there is here a manifest reference to the ordinance of Christian baptism. Alford says, “ There can be no reasonable doubt that this clause refers directly to Christian baptism. The bath of water (loutron ton hudatos) of Ephesians 5:26, and the bath of regeneration (loutron palingenesias) of Titus 3:5, are analogous expressions; and the express mention of body (soma) here as dis­tinguished from hearts (kardias) before, stamps this interpretation with certainty. To the same effect are the remarks of Prof. Stuart. In commenting on our text he says, “ It seems to me that there is a plain allusion to the use of water in the initiatory rite of Christian baptism. This is altogether consonant with the method of our author who is everywhere comparing Christian institutions with Jewish ones. So in the case before us he says, The Jews were sprinkled with blood in order that they might be purified so as to have access to God; Christians are internally sprinkled, that is, purified by the blood of Jesus. The Jews were washed with water in order to be ceremonially purified so as to come before God; Christians have been washed by the purifying water of bap­tism. So Ananias exhorts Saul to be baptized and wash away his sins. (Acts 22:16.) In this latter case and in that before us the phrase is borrowed from the legal rite of washing for purification.” To these very judicious remarks I need only add that the obvious design of our author in using this expression is to indicate that the whole man, both soul and body, should be sanctified and conse­crated to the service of God. See Romans 12:1. Hebrews 10:23 ---Let us hold fast, etc.— This would be better rendered as fol­lows: Let us hold fast the confession of the hope (homologian tcs elpidos) without wavering. See notes on 3: 1. I agree with Bloomfield that this is “ a pregnant expression,” and that its full meaning might be expressed thus: “ Let us hold fast the faith which we have confessed and cling to the hope which it ministers.” The idea is, that we are still but pilgrims here as all our fathers were. We have not yet reached the goal of our destiny. Eternal life is still with us an object of hope. And hence the necessity of clinging to this hope as the anchor of our souls. Hebrews 10:23 ---For he is faithful that promised;— This clause is added by the Apostle for the purpose of encouraging his Hebrew brethren and all who might read this Epistle to hold fast the confession of their hope without wavering even to the end of life. To persuade them to do this was, indeed, his leading object in writing the Epistle; and hence his frequent reference to the fidelity of God, as well as to the glory and dignity of Christ. See notes on Hebrews 6:18. Hebrews 10:24 ---And let us consider one another— That is, Let us not be selfish, caring merely for ourselves; but let us have constantly in mind each other’ s wants and circumstances as members of the one family of God; and that, too, for the purpose of exciting and en­couraging one another to love and good works. The same senti­ment is earnestly inculcated by Christ in his sermon on the Mount, where he says to his disciples, “ Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16.) “ How beautifully,” says Delitzsch, “ is the exhortation here disposed of in conformity with the Pauline triad of Christian graces. (1 Corinthians 13:13; Colossians 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:3 1 Thessalonians 5:8.) First, we have the injunction to approach in the full assur­ance of faith; then that to hold fast the confession of our hope; and now, third, to godly rivalry in the manifestations of Christian char­ity” Hebrews 10:25 ---Not forsaking the. assembling of ourselves, etc.— The Apostle refers here, not to apostasy from the Church, as some al­lege, but simply to the neglect of public and social worship. The time when this letter was written was manifestly a time of persecu­tion in Jerusalem and perhaps, throughout Palestine. (12: 4.) Many of the Hebrew brethren were no doubt greatly discouraged; and some of them had fallen into the habit of neglecting the regular meetings of the Church. This was clearly wrong for several rea­sons. (1) Because by so doing, they neglected and set at naught an ordinance of God. Nothing is more obvious in the history of the primitive Church than that the members of the several congre­gations were wont to meet together on every Lord’ s Day, and no doubt also frequently during the week for public and social wor­ship. (Acts 2:42 Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, etc.) And as these meetings were held with the sanction of the Apostles, and for a time under their immediate supervision, they had, as a matter of course, all the force and obligation of a Divine ordinance. (2) Be-cause by neglecting his ordinance of God, the disciples deprived themselves of many social and religious privileges. The Church of Christ is a social institution designed for the edification and im­provement of all its members. And besides, Christ says that wher­ever even two or three are met together in his name he will be with them. (Matthew 18:20.) But when Christ meets with his people it is of course to bless them, and to strengthen them for the many trials and conflicts of life. No one can, therefore, properly estimate his loss in willingly absenting himself from the meetings of his breth­ren. (3) The delinquent Hebrews were doing wrong, also, be­cause of the bad example which they were setting before others. Christ intends that every one of his disciples shall be a living wit­ness for the truth. No wonder, then, that the Apostle so earnestly exhorted the Hebrews, not to neglect the duty and privilege of meeting with their brethren for public and social worship. Hebrews 10:25 ---And so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.—To what day does our author here refer? To the day of judgment, say Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others; when Christ will come in person to raise the dead and reward every man according to his works. But this interpretation is manifestly erroneous. To me at least it seems perfectly obvious that the Apostle refers here to a day which both he and his brethren were looking for as a day that was then very near at hand: a day that was about to come on that generation, and try the faith of many. And hence I am con­strained to think with Macknight, Scott, Stuart, and others, that the reference is most likely to the day of Jerusalem’ s overthrow. Christ had himself foretold the near approach of that event (Matthew 24:34) ; he had also spoken of the signs of its coming and of the great calamities that would accompany it (Matthew 24:4-41). No doubt, therefore, the Christians in Palestine were all looking for­ward with much anxiety to the time when this prophecy would be fulfilled. They would naturally speak of it as “ the day” ; the day of trial; the day when seeing Jerusalem encompassed with armies, they would themselves have to flee to the mountains. (Luke 21:20-22.) If this is not the meaning of the Apostle, I would then under­stand him as referring simply to the day when Christ comes in his providence to call on each individual to give an account of his stewardship. In this general sense the passage may be regarded, like the parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25:1-13), as an admoni­tion and warning to all Christians in all ages and in all nations. But to refer it exclusively to the day when Christ will come in per­son to judge the world is clearly inadmissible. See notes on Hebrews 10:37. A SOLEMN WARNING AGAINST THE DANGERS AND FEARFUL OF Heb_10:26-31 Heb 10:26 ---For if we sin willfully, etc.— To sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth is the same as to aposta­tize from Christ, for which there is no forgiveness. See notes on Hebrews 6:4-6. The use of the present participle (hamartanonton) shows that the sin is not one of error or inadvertence; not a sin of mo­mentary excitement; but rather that it is a sin of habit; a sin that is willingly and deliberately persisted in; a sin that is committed with a high hand and in open violation and contempt of God’ s law. For the law in reference to these two classes of sins, see Numbers 15:22ff. The word rendered knowledge (epignosis) means more than a mere objective knowledge (gnosis) of the truth. It rather de­notes a full experimental knowledge, such as we gain by the active application of our minds to the study of the truth. And hence it is of “ those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heav­enly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted of the good word of God and the powers of the world to come,” that our author speaks. If such persons apostatize from Christ— Hebrews 10:26 ---There remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,— Or rather, there remaineth no longer (ouk eti) a sacrifice for sins. The idea of the Apostle is not simply that those who presumptuously reject the sacrifice of Christ can obtain salvation through no other; but fur­ther, he means to say that in the case of such high-handed trans­gressors, even the sacrifice of Christ is no longer available. The man who was once a Christian, a true child of God, and who as such was made a partaker of the Holy Spirit, and yet falls away as an apostate from Christ, can obtain no more forgiveness in any way. “ His desperate condition,” as Delitzsch justly remarks, “ is both the natural consequence of his willful error, and also a con­dign punishment inflicted by the Divine hand. He not only shuts out himself from grace, but the door of repentance is shut behind him; and he has before him only the prospect of a damnation from which there is no escape.” Hebrews 10:27 ---But a certain fearful looking for of judgment— This is the fearful condition of every apostate from Christ. Cut off from all hope of being saved, nothing remains for him but a certain fearful anticipation of coming judgment and a fervor of fire which will fi­nally consume all the enemies of God. There seems to be an allu­sion here to the fire which came out from God and consumed the two hundred and fifty Levites who participated in the rebellion of Korah (Numbers 16:35); and perhaps also to the destruction of Nadab, Abihu, and other like rebels against the Divine govern­ment. See references. So, God himself is represented as a con­suming fire (Hebrews 12:29), before whom all the wicked will finally per­ish (2 Thessalonians 1:8). This thought our author now proceeds to il­lustrate still further by a reference to the law of Moses. Hebrews 10:28 ---He that despised Moses' law, etc.— The Apostle does not speak here of all manner of sins and transgressions committed under the Old Covenant, but only of such as were committed “ with a high hand,” and in open rebellion against God and in contempt of his government: such, for example, as the sin of idolatry; the law concerning which was inexorably laid down as follows: “ If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant, and hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; and it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: then thou shalt bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die. At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses shall he that is worthy of death <be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.” (Deuteronomy 17:2-7.) This is the best possible commentary on our text. It proves be­yond all doubt that for the apostate under the Old Covenant there was no forgiveness. And now he proceeds to show by an argu­ment, a minori ad majus, that the case of the apostate under the superior light and privileges of the New Covenant, is even more intolerable. Hebrews 10:29 ---Of how much sorer punishment, etc.— The lesson is taught by our Lord himself, that wherever much is given, there also is much always required. “ That servant,” he says, “ who knew his lord’ s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required; and to whom men have committed much, of him will they ask the more.” (Luke 12:47-48.) And just so our author reasons in the case before us. If the apostate under the Old Cove­nant was punished with so great severity, much more shall the apostate, who under the superior light of the New Covenant has trampled under foot the Son of God, and accounted the blood of the covenant by means of which he was sanctified an unholy thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace, suffer the extreme penalties of the divine law. The threefold specification of his guilt is given here for the purpose of more clearly defining the desperately wicked and abandoned course of the apostate. Let us notice each of these in order: Hebrews 10:29 ---Who hath trodden under foot the Son of God,— The in­effably glorious and perfect Being who in infinite condescension be­came flesh and died to redeem him; who sent his good Spirit to enlighten, comfort, and sanctify him; and who, in a word, did all that Heaven could do to save him from his sins, and to make him an heir of honor, glory, and immortality;— this is the Being whom the apostate, as far as he can, now tramples under foot, and treats as an object of extreme hatred and contempt! What else can such a one expect but the extreme terrors and torments of the coming judgment. Hebrews 10:29 ---And hath counted, etc.— The word rendered unholy (koinon) means (a) what is common; and (b) what is unholy or im­pure. Its secondary meaning is to be preferred here as being more in harmony with the context. The apostate treats this blood, by means of which he was himself once sanctified, as an unholy and impure thing. The use of the word sanctified (hegiasthe) shows very clearly that the subject of the discourse was once a Christian, a true child of God, and prospectively an heir of glory. But now he is a child of the devil and an enemy of all righteousness. Hebrews 10:29 ---Hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?— That is, to the Holy Spirit. It is here called the Spirit of grace, because through it God imparts all grace, comfort, and salvation to our helpless and sinful race. By it, Christ himself worked all his mira­cles (Matthew 12:28) ; and by it, he convinces the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (John 16:8) ; and by it, he com­forts his saints and helps their infirmities (John 7:39; Romans 8:26). To insult this Spirit, then, as does the apostate, is manifestly the height of all wickedness, maliciousness, and impiety. And hence, as Christ says (Matthew 12:32), for those who do so there is no forgiveness. Nothing remains for them but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a jealousy of fire which will devour all the adversaries of God. Hebrews 10:30 ---For we know him that hath said,—The meaning is, we know the character of God: we know him to be a God of truth; a God of justice; and a God of infinite power and holiness. We know, therefore, that he will certainly execute all his threatenings on his enemies, while he at the same time fulfills all his promises to his children. Hebrews 10:30 ---Vengeance belongeth unto me, etc.— This is a quotation from Deuteronomy 32:35. It is cited in Romans 12:19, to show that vengeance does not belong to us but to God. Here, it is cited to prove that God will certainly, in due time, render a just recompense to all his enemies. Hebrews 10:30 ---And again, the Lord shall judge his people.— This is a cita­tion from Deuteronomy 32:36. The same expression is found also in Psalms 135:14; but it is most likely that our author quotes from the law as given by Moses. The passage is variously explained by exposi­tors. Some take it to mean that the Lord will vindicate and avenge his people, by executing just judgment on his and their enemies (Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, Stuart) ; but others think that the object of our author is rather to show that God is so very just and righ­teous, that he will not allow the sins of even his own children to pass with impunity, much less the daring impiety of apostates (Bleek, Lunemann, De Wette). “ For if the righteous scarcely be saved, where will the ungodly and the sinner appear ?” (1 Peter 4:18.) Perhaps both ideas may be included in the Apostle’ s argu­ment. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 10:2. Had those sacrifices been complete (of themselves or by their own virtue) they would have ceased to be offered. When a devoted Hebrew nation had made one full program of atonement for sin, it would have been permanent and would not have to be repeated. Such a conclusion is logical, and it should have convinced the Judaizers that something was to come in the place of those institutions. Hebrews 10:3. Remembrance again made. But it does NOT SAY that the sins were remembered against them as it is so frequently expressed. Every year when the national atonement day arrived, the nation had a public and formal reminder of sin by the entrance of their high priest into the most holy place with the blood of atonement. Contrary to that, our High Priest entered once and forever into the presence of God with the blood of the New Covenant, and it has never had to be repeated. Hebrews 10:4. It is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. Any explanation of a passage that contradicts another plain one is bound to be wrong, for the Bible does not contradict itself. To say that sins were not forgiven under the Old Testament is a contradiction of the following. Leviticus 4 describes the sin offerings under the Mosaic system that were required of various Hebrews who had sinned. Verses 20, 26, 31 and 35 state these persons are to offer these sacrifices for sin, and in each case after doing it the passage plainly declares, "And it shall be forgiven him." Perhaps someone replies that it does not say they were to be forgiven then. Well, we will consider another place in the Old Testament, namely, 1 Kings 8. After the temple was completed, Solomon offered a prayer on behalf of the people in which he asked God to forgive them upon their prayer to Him. Verse 30 makes it definite as to when the forgiveness was to take place, for it says, "When they shall pray toward this place; hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and when thou hearest, forgive." This is very definite; when they prayed was the time God was to hear and when He heard was the time the forgiveness was to be granted. But was this prayer of Solomon granted? Chapter 9 and verse 3 of that book says, "And the Lord said unto him, I have heard thy prayer and thy supplication that thou hast made before me." That settles the point that sins were actually forgiven under the Old Testament times. This is another place where we should remember the main subject of this book. The Judaizers were insisting on the permanence of the old law and its ordinances of religious service. They thought that the benefits to be obtained from those performances were by reason of the virtue of those things and hence that they were good enough to be continued. Were Paul to write an epistle to many disciples and others today, he would use the same argument about baptism and the other items of service to Christ. He would say that it is impossible for baptism and the other formalities of the Gospel to take away sin. Indeed, the denominational world actually does see that and that only with reference to the ordinances. They will say "there is no salvation in water," and that is true in the same sense that the blood of animals could not take away sins. No, the saving virtue is in the blood of Christ and it is the purchasing power for salvation on behalf of mankind in whatever age he lives. But He will not apply that blood to any man unless he has enough faith in the Lord to do whatever he is told to do. That may be the command to offer animal sacrifices or be baptized, depending on what age he is under. Hence in any of the dispensations that God has placed among men, all who will do whatever they are told to do, will be forgiven on the strength of the blood of Christ. The virtue is in the blood is why it never had to be repeated. Hebrews 10:5. The two pronouns he and the one me refer to Christ, and the two pronouns thou stand for God. When Christ was ready to come into the world He knew it was to fulfill the promise made to Abraham (Galatians 3:16-19), also that He was to make of himself a sacrifice to replace the animal sacrifices of the old law. Yes, Christ existed before he was born of the virgin (John 8:58), and hence when God made the promise to Abraham, He made it also to Christ. (See the passages in Galatians referred to above.) The coming of Christ into the world by way of the virgin birth was therefore voluntary on His part, in the spirit of obedience to his Father. He also knew that a spiritual body could not die, and hence that a fleshly body would be needed. That is why it was said that God had prepared a body for Him, to be produced within the fleshly body of the virgin and consisting of one that could be made to die. Hebrews 10:6. This verse represents Christ as explaining why the plan was needed referred to in the preceding verse, namely, that God no longer was pleased with burnt offerings offered under the law. Hebrews 10:7. Then said I (Christ), in the volume of the book it is written of me. Christ knew that the Old Testa-men predicted His coming into the world as a sacrifice for sins. The great respect Christ had for the Father, also for the majesty of the ancient writings, Induced Him to cooperate in the great plan. That is why He said, I come to do thy will, 0 God. Hebrews 10:8. This verse is mostly an exnlanation or repetition of the pre-ceding ones, to the effect that the displeasure of God was concerning the sacrifices of the law. Of course it should be understood that such a condition of mind came after those sacrifices had served the divine purposes. Hebrews 10:9. The forepart of this verse is a repetition of verse 7. The antecedent of first is will, referring to the old will or covenant consisting of the ordinances of the Mosaic law. God took away the first one that He might establish the second. He never had two systems of religion in force at the same time for the same people. This verse is a complete refutation of the Sabbatarian heresy even if there did not exist a single other passage on the subject. Hebrews 10:10. By the which will means that by the second will or system of salvation, we are sanctified (or consecrated) through the body of Christ, (not that of animals). Hebrews 10:11. This is explained by the comments at verse 4. Hebrews 10:12. This man refers to Christ, and for ever means His sacrifice would be permanent and would not have to be repeated as did those of the old law. Hebrews 10:13. From henceforth expecting signifies that He expects to remain on the right hand of God till his enemies are made his footstool. (1 Corinthians 15:25-26.) Hebrews 10:14. This is equivalent to chapter 9:26; and verse 12 in this chapter. Hebrews 10:15. Holy Ghost (or Spirit) also is a witness to us. The prophets of the Old Testament and the apostles of the New were all inspired by this Spirit. Hebrews 10:16-17. This makes specific reference to one of the Old Testament predictions, and it is to be found in Jeremiah 31:31-33, which is explained at chapter 8:8-13. Hebrews 10:18. See the comments at verse 3. Hebrews 10:19. Boldness does not mean a spirit of forwardness but rather one of strong confidence. Enter into the holiest. Not literally but by faith through the merits of the blood of Jesus Christ. Hebrews 10:20. This new and living way through the vail is explained by the comments at chapter 9:8. It is living in that it need not be repeated. Hebrews 10:21. This verse shows one of the likenesses between the two systems in that each had the services of a high priest. The distinction is the truth that Christ is over the house of God which is said in the sense of the church and Heaven. Hebrews 10:22. Draw near. The nearest the people of the first priesthood could get to the most holy place was by way of or near the vail. Likewise Christians may get very near the throne of God (by the full assurance of faith). The heart and conscience are the inner and invisible part of man, hence we know that sprinkled is used figuratively and means to be cleansed spiritually. The figure is drawn from the fact that the blood was actually sprinkled on men to consecrate them for the priesthood under the old law (Exodus 29:21). Our bodies are literal and hence they are literally washed in the water of baptism. Pure water has no reference to the subject of sanitary conditions. The word means "unmixed" and is a contrast from the water of purification used under the law. That water was mixed with the ashes of an animal (Numbers 19). Hebrews 10:23. Hold fast means to be faithful to the end. He is faithful denotes that the Lord is always true and makes His promises good. Hebrews 10:24. To provoke means to induce or stimulate others to do that which is good. We should do this by exhortation and that will require the following verse. Hebrews 10:25. Forsaking is from ECKATA-LEIPO, which Thayer defines, "To abandon, desert, to leave in straits, leave helpless; leave in the lurch." The word does not refer to those who are "irregular in attendance" or who "just come occasionally." (There are other scriptures which take care of such delinquents.) But it means those who remain away from the assemblies so long that they can no longer be considered as a part of the group. Assembling of ourselves together. This does not apply to any one of the public gatherings of Christians any more than it does to another. The assembling to have the Lord's Supper is included in the passage, but it does not apply to that any more than to any other scriptural gathering of the church. Malachi 3:16 is clearly a prediction of conditions to exist in the dispensation of Christ, and it says "Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another." They cannot do this unless they are together, and coming together once a week cannot truly be said to be "often." The day firSt refers to the day when the city of Jerusalem was to be destroyed. which was then near at hand. At that time a general disturbance was expected when many opnortunities for assembling would be hindered and in some places would be completely im possible. Since that event is now past, the day means the judgment day when all opportunities for Christian assembling will be forever ended on earth. We can see the day approaching by faith, for each day brings us "One day nearer our Father's house than ever we've been before" (Romans 13:11). Hebrews 10:26. Sin wilfully means to sin deliberately or purposely, in contrast with that committed incidentally or through weakness. No more sacrifice does NOT SAY there is no more chance of forgiveness. Jesus taught that all manner of sins would be forgiven except that against the Holy Spirit. This passage is in the same class or principle as Hebrews 6:4-6, in that it mentions that the persons had received the knowledge of the truth. The point is that Christ made one sacrifice for sin and will make no other. If this one is repudiated there is no other to which we can look as the Hebrews could In the Mosaic system. Those sacrifices were repeated over and over again and after every transgression the guilty ones could look forward to another sacrifice. If we reject the one in Christ there will be no one and nothing else to which we may look (Galatians 5:4). But that does not say we cannot change our mind and return to the sacrifice that is still available for all who will receive it on the Lord's terms. Hebrews 10:27. If we do not return to Christ then we must look for that which is fearful, namely, the judgment of God at which He will exhibit fiery indignation. Devour is from a word that literally means to eat. However, we do not eat that which we dislike, hence the thought is that God will dispose of these adversaries by abandon-ing them to the regions of endless destruction. Hebrews 10:28. To despise means to dis-respect and refuse to obey. The punishment for disobeying the law of Moses in extreme cases was death without mercy (Numbers 35:30; Deuteronomy 17:5-6). Hebrews 10:29. The law of Christ is so much more final and far-reaching that the violation of it deserves a much sorer (worse) punishment than an unmerciful death of the body. But since such a punishment as that is the most severe of any that can be imposed on a human being in this world, the sorer punishment will have to wait until the next world to be inflicted. That is why the unjust are to be "reserved unto the day of judgment to be punished" (2 Peter 2:9). All of the wrongs mentioned in the rest of this verse may be charged against the Judaizers, because they have trodden under foot the Son of God. They did so by rejecting Him and going back to the sacrifices that were offered under the law. Blood of the covenant refers to the blood of Christ because it was shed to make good all the promises God made to the descendants of Abraham. To reject it and go back to the sacrifices for salvation is equivalent to counting it an unholy thing in that it implies that it is no better than the blood of animals. Spirit of grace is a phrase signifying the New Testament since it is the final system under the favor of God. and it was given through the means of the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 10:30. Paul cites a statement of God recorded in Deuterony 32:34-36, in regard to the determination of God to judge (execute punishment) the people who reject His terms of mercy. Hebrews 10:31. All men and all things are ever in the hands of God in a general sense, and hence cannot fall into His hands. The verse therefore has a special meaning which is related to the mediation of Christ. There is no being in the universe who is between God and man but Christ, by whom man may escape the judgment mentioned in the preceding verse. Hence if a man repudiates Christ (as the Judaizers were doing), he deprives himself of any intercessor, and must take his chances with an avenging God who has declared vengeance against all who are not pardoned by the blood of Christ. Hebrews 10:32. Illuminated means to be enlightened by the Gosnel. Soon after these people became Christians they were persecuted by the unbelivers of both Jews and Gentiles. Paul terms this experience with afflictions as a fight, and of course it would be a "fight of faith" (1 Timothy 6:12). Hebrews 10:33. Made a gazingstock denotes an exhibition of something for people to gaze at with contempt. By reproaches and afflictions the enemy drew attention to the Christians with the result that they were made light of. Some did not personally have this experience, but they associated with and showed friendship for those who did, and thus brought unon themselves the same kind of reproaches. Hebrews 10:34. Paul was a prisoner in chains for the sake of the Gospel, but these disciples manifested sympathy for him and thus invited the darts of the enemies. As a punishment for their manifestation of faith, they were forced to submit to the spoiling (plundering) of their possessions. They did not even fret about such losses because they believed there were better riches awaiting them in Heaven. Hebrews 10:35. Confidence means strong assurance which prompts one to face danger or affliction on behalf of the truth. The reward will be great in the end. Hebrews 10:36. Patience is the same as perseverance, and it is manifested by those who continue to have confidence. We need not expect to receive the fulfillment of God's promises unless we first do the will of the Lord. Hebrews 10:37. Little while Is comparative, for the endless term of the reward will make even centuries of waiting seem but a short time. Hebrews 10:38. Live by faith agrees with the idea of persevering on the strength of our faith. Draw back means to hesitate or shrink from going forward against afflictions. Hebrews 10:39. But we are not, etc. In placing himself with them the apostle regards them in a favorable light. It is true that many of the Hebrews had remained true. However, many others had gone backward, and others were in danger of doing so on account of the Judaizers among them. That made it necessary for the apostle to warn them repeatedly against the disastrous results of faltering. Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 11 SECTION TEN Hebrews 11:1-40In this section, we have another characteristic Pauline digres¬sion. Our author having touched, in the close of the tenth chapter, on the conservative nature and sustaining power of faith, his mind is at once seized with the importance and magnitude of the subject, and he accordingly devotes the whole of this section to its consid¬eration and development. I. He begins by giving us, not a logical definition of faith, but rather a plain statement with regard to its nature and province as an affection of the human mind, implying at the same time its great power and influence as a means and principle of enjoyment. It sustains and supports the soul of the believer, by enabling him to enjoy even now to some extent, as present realities, those things which are the objects of our hopes, and which lie far away beyond the narrow sphere of our corporeal senses. This is shown 1. From the fact that in consequence of their faith many of the ancients obtained a reputation which is as wide as the world, and as enduring as time (Hebrews 11:2). 2. From the fact that through it we are enabled to rely with the utmost confidence on matters which lie far beyond the narrow lim¬its, not only of our senses, but even of our philosophy; such, for instance, as the fact that “ In the beginning God created the heav¬ens and the earth” (Hebrews 11:3). II. Having thus stated, and in a general way verified his main thesis, the Apostle next proceeds to illustrate it at great length by citing some of the most remarkable examples that are found in Old Testament history. In doing so, he refers 1. To the case of Abel (Hebrews 11:4) ; 2. To the case of Enoch (Hebrews 11:5-6) ; 3. To the case of Noah (Hebrews 11:7) ; 4. To the case of Abraham, with regard to the promised inheritance (Hebrews 11:8-10) ; 5. To the case of Abraham and Sarah with regard to the conception and birth of Isaac (Hebrews 11:11-12); 6. To the case of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Jacob, with regard to the promises concerning Christ and the eternal inheritance through him (Hebrews 11:13-16) ; 7. To the example of Abraham in offering up his son Isaac (Hebrews 11:17-19) ; 8. To the example of Isaac, in blessing Jacob and Esau (Hebrews 11:20); 9. To the case of‘ Jacob, in adopting and blessing Ephraim and Manasseh, as his own sons (Hebrews 11:21); 10. To the example of Joseph (Hebrews 11:22) ; 11. To the conduct of Amram and Jochebed, the parents of Moses (Hebrews 11:23) ; 12. To the example of Moses, (1) in preferring the reproach of Christ to the treasures of Egypt; (2) in leaving Egypt with the conviction that God would yet deliver the Israelites through him (Acts 7:25); and (3) in keeping the Passover (Hebrews 11:24-28) ; 13. To the example of the Israelites, (1) in crossing the Red Sea; and (2) in compassing the walls of Jericho seven days (Hebrews 11:29-30) ; 14. To the example of Rahab, the harlot (Hebrews 11:31). III. From these special cases, our author next proceeds to give a summary of others too numerous to be mentioned in detail, all of which, however, serve to illustrate the great power of faith in sustaining the soul under the severest trials and afflictions. These heroic men and women, though in the world, were really not of it. Their affections were not set on the earth, but on heaven. And hence, while here, they regarded themselves but as strangers and pilgrims in a foreign land (Hebrews 11:32-38). IV. Finally, the Apostle reminds his readers that none of these illustrious ones lived to see Jesus, or to enjoy the superior bless¬ings of his mediatorial reign (Hebrews 11:39-40). These matters were but partially revealed to the faithful ones of the Patriarchal and Jewish ages. And as Christians are now blessed with superior privileges, so also they are placed under greater responsibilities to remain steadfast even to the end of life. The principal points of this section may therefore be summed up as follows: I. Hebrews 11:1-3. The nature, province, and sustaining power of faith. II. Hebrews 11:4-31. Sundry examples selected from the history of the ancients, illustrative of the nature, power, and influence of faith. III. Hebrews 11:32-38. Other general illustrations drawn from the exploits, deliverances, and heroic endurance of faithful men and women under the Old Covenant. IV. Hebrews 11:39-40. Superior light and privileges of believers under the New Covenant. THE NATURE, , AND POWER OF FAITHHeb_11:1-3 Heb 11:1 ---Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,—It is I think obvious from the context that the object of our author in this verse is, not to define faith, not to tell what it is in and of itself, but simply to describe it in its relations to the human soul, as a means of endurance and principle of enjoyment. Having shown from Habakkuk, its marvelous conservative power, it was natural that he should next explain wherein its great strength lieth; and how it is that it wields so great an influence over the character, lives, and fortunes of those who possess it. This he does with great clear­ness, beauty, and energy in the course of this section. He begins by telling us that faith is the hupostasis of things hoped for. This is all plain enough except the word hupostasis. What does it mean? In Hebrews 1:3, it evidently means essence or substance, in con­trast with the outward manifestations of the Deity; and in Hebrews 3:14, it just as clearly means confidence in God and in the word of his grace. In this latter sense, confidence in reference to the things hoped for, it is here taken by Luther, Melancthon, Grotius, Bohme, Tholuck, Bleek, DeWette, Bloomfield, McLean, Lunemann, Ebrard, Stuart, Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and most other modern interpreters. “ There can be no reasonable doubt,” says Alford, “ that this is the true meaning here.” But others, as Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Bengel, and the translators of our English Version, see in this word something more than “ a well grounded confidence.” They allege that, in the use of this term, the Apostle means to say that faith is in effect to the soul of the believer the very substance or essence of things hoped for: so that, by means of it, he is able to enjoy as present realities, what without faith would be to him in effect but as mere nonentities. It was faith, say they, that gave to the heavenly country such a substantive existence in the minds of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as enabled them to enjoy it, in a measure, even while they were strangers and pilgrims on the Earth. That this is all implied in the use of the word hupos- tasis, is I think very clear from the several illustrations which fol­low in this chapter. But it is not so clear to my mind that the Apostle intends to express by this word anything more than a firm and well grounded confidence in reference to the objects of our hope. This confidence is of course followed by many joyful and encouraging effects, some of which are well illustrated by the re­marks of Chrysostom and Augustine. For other instances of the use of this word, see 2 Corinthians 9:4 2 Corinthians 11:17. Hebrews 11:1 ---the evidence of things not seen.—This, in connection with the preceding clause, forms a sort of constructive Hebrew parallelism. The expression, “ things not seen” comprehends more than “ the things hoped for.” The latter has reference only to future good; but the former embraces all the invisible realities of the universe, past, present, and future, about which the Holy Spirit has borne witness. The word here rendered evidence (elenkos) is also used in different senses. It may denote (1) the proof or demonstration, by means of which any proposition is shown to be true or false; and (2) the conviction or full persuasion wrought in the mind by means of this demonstration. Commentators are much divided as to the proper meaning of the word in this connec­tion. Some, as Bengel, Bohme, Stier, Ebrard, Hofmann, Stuart, Delitzsch, and Alford, take it objectively, in the sense of proof or demonstration; and others, as Kuinoel, Menken, Bleek, De Wette, Liinemann, etc., take it subjectively, in the sense of conviction or firm persuasion. For my own part, I think as in the former case, that both ideas are implied in the Apostle’ s use of the term; but that it is the subjective element to which he has most direct reference, and which he intends to express by the word elegchos. There can, of course, be no conviction without a sufficient proof; but it is not I think to the proof, but to its effect on the soul, that the Apostle here particularly refers. This is most in harmony with his main object throughout the entire chapter, which is manifestly to describe faith in its relations to the soul, both as a power of en­durance, and a means and principle of enjoyment. He, therefore, begins the discussion with the simple affirmation, that faith is to the soul of the believer confidence with respect to things hoped for, and conviction with respect to things not seen: that is, with respect to such invisible realities as are revealed to us in the word of God. For where there is no testimony there can be no faith. (Romans 10:17.) But when God speaks, his word is to the believer an end of all controversy. It is to the Christian what a demonstration is to the mathematician: it gives confidence with respect to whatever is promised; and it begets conviction with respect to the truth of whatever is affirmed. Do the Scriptures teach, for example, that “ the hour is coming in which all that are in their graves shall hear his [Christ’ s] voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good to the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil to the resurrection of damnation ?”— the Christian receives this testi­mony, believes it, and acts in reference to it with all confidence. Why so? Simply because God says so. No reasoning, no philoso­phy, and no demonstration of any kind, can ever go beyond this. And hence it is, that to the believer all the promises of God are yea and amen in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 1:20) ; and like Moses he endures as seeing him who is invisible (Hebrews 11:27). The word elenkos occurs only here and in 2 Timothy 3:16. In the latter case, it means conviction of sin, or of any erroneous notions or hy­potheses. Hebrews 11:2 ---For by it the elders obtained a good report.— Our author now proceeds with the proof and illustration of his main thesis, as submitted in the first verse. That faith is confidence with respect to the objects of our hope, and conviction with respect to those in­visible realities which are revealed to us in the word of God, he argues (1) from the fact that by it (en taute) the elders obtained a good name and a most enviable reputation from God as well as from his people; and (2) from the fact that by means of it we are convinced that the universe was framed by the word of God. These elders (hoi presbuteroi) were not only persons in official authority, but the term is used here to indicate all the heroic men of the Old Testament from Abel down to the Maccabees, as we learn from what follows. They were not generally distinguished for their wealth, their talents, their learning, or their worldly at­tainments of any kind; but they were men of faith. They believed God's word; and they were, therefore, constrained to look upward for life, health, and happiness. They set their affections on things that are above, and not on things that are on the Earth, knowing that they were but strangers and pilgrims in the world. This un­wavering confidence in God and in the word of his grace, gave them even while here a realization of good things to come, and en­abled them to endure with meekness and fortitude the severest trials and afflictions. Hebrews 11:3 ---Through faith we understand, etc.—This is given by our author as an example of the “ things not seen.” The creation of the universe is a matter which we did not and which we cannot perceive by means of our corporeal senses: nor is it discernible by even the eye of reason through the medium of the light of nature. This, all must concede. But to the eye of faith it is just as plain that “ In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” as that Columbus discovered America, or that George Washington was once President of the United States. The critics are not agreed as to the textual meaning of the word that is here rendered worlds (aiones). Literally, it means ages; and it is so rendered by Alford and most of the Greek Fathers. But it seems to me, judging from the terms of the context, that the Apostle intends to express here about the same general thought that Moses expresses in Genesis 1:1; and I, therefore, agree with Delitzsch and others that aiones is used here by metonymy to denote at least the whole material universe. See note 1: 3. This will become more obvious from the consideration of the following clause. Hebrews 11:3 ---so that things are seen, etc.:— or rather, according to our best authorities, So that that which is seen [the visible universe] has not come into being from visible materials, as the heathen philoso­phers all believed and taught. Thales maintained that God made all things out of water or chaos. Plato concedes the eternity of three distinct principles, viz., God, matter, and ideas: meaning by the ideas a sort of incorporeal archetypes according to which God framed and fashioned all things. Aristotle held to the eternity of matter; and says, it was the common opinion of naturalists that “ Nothing can be made out of nothing.” This is as far as philoso­phy goes or can go. But our faith assures us that God alone is eternal; and that in the beginning he created the Heavens and the Earth. (Genesis 1:1.) It assures us moreover that through the eternal Word, who was with God and who was God, all things came into being (egeueto) ; and that without him not even one thing came into being which is in being (John 1:1-3). And just so in our text. The Apostle makes no attempt at explanation; but like Moses he simply affirms, by the authority of the Holy Spirit, that God did not make the universe, as an architect makes a house, or as an artist makes a steam engine out of pre-existing materials; but that in the beginning he' created it by the word of his power. “ He spake,” and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.” SUNDRY FROM THE HISTORY OF THE , OF THE NATURE, POWER, AND OF FAITHHeb_11:4-31 Heb 11:4 ---By faith Abel offered, etc.— Cain and Abel both brought of­ferings, but of different kinds. Cain brought of the fruits of the ground, but Abel brought of the firstlings and fatness of his sheep or goats. (Genesis 4:3-5.) Wherein, then, did the superior excel­lence of Abel’ s offering consist ? Not in its greater intrinsic value, for Cain’ s offering may have been quite as costly as that of Abel. Of this, we cannot judge positively from anything given in the in­spired record. Nor can we determine in what the offering of Cain consisted, further than this: that it was purely a vegetable offering. True, indeed, it is called a mine hah, a meat offering, and in Leviti­cus 2: 1-16, the minchah is described as consisting of fine flour, or unleavened cakes, or parched corn, to which were added a portion of salt, oil, and frankincense. But in Genesis 4:3-5, the word min­chah seems to be used, not in its legal and specific sense, but in its more general signification, to denote an offering of any kind, for in the fourth verse the offering of Abel is also called a minchah, though it consisted of lambs or goats; neither of which were in­cluded in the legal meat offering. If, then, the superiority of Abel’ s offering did not consist in its greater intrinsic value, in what did it consist? Evidently, as our author says, in its being offered in faith, and in obedience to the command of God: for “ To obey,” says Samuel, “ is better than sac­rifice ; and to hearken, than the fat of rams.” (1 Samuel 15:22.) And Solomon says, “ The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, but the prayer of the upright is his delight.” (Proverbs 15:18.) That is, the most costly offering of the wicked man is hateful in the sight of God, while a mere prayer that costs nothing, if it be offered in faith and in obedience to God’ s will, is his delight. Cain, like King Saul, was a proud, haughty, and self-reliant rationalist. Instead of honoring God by bringing as he was required, a bleed­ing victim from his flock, he presumptuously substituted for it, what was more in accordance with his own blinded and perverted reason. But Abel was a man of faith; a man who trembled at the word of the Lord, and whose only question was, therefore, “ Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” In this, he and Cain had both been sufficiently instructed, for the Apostle says that Abel offered in faith. But this he could not do without a Divine warrant. In all such cases, faith must of necessity rest on the word of God. (Romans 10:17.) Sacrifice is therefore, beyond all doubt, of Divine origin, and the superior excellence of Abel’ s offering consisted simply in this: that in making it, he acted strictly in compliance with the re­vealed will of God. It does not follow, as Magee, Bloomfield, and others suppose, that Abel understood the typical import of his sacrifice, and that through it he showed his faith in the sacrifice of Christ, which was afterward to be offered for the sins of the world. That he may have had some faint conception of God’ s far-reaching designs in in­stituting sacrifice, is quite probable. Of this we cannot speak with certainty. All that is plainly and fairly implied in our text, is sim­ply this: that Abel did what he did in consequence of his firm and unwavering faith in God. He knew God’ s will, and like Noah, Abraham, and others named in this chapter, he resolved to do it. Hebrews 11:4 ---by which he obtained witness, etc.— The meaning is, not that he obtained this “ witness” by his sacrifice, but rather by his faith in offering the sacrifice. Faith is the leading thought in the whole sentence, and to “ faith” as the leading word, the pronouns which and it have both reference. But how and from whom did he ob­tain this witness? The answer to this question is given in the fol­lowing clause. Hebrews 11:4 ---God testifying of his gifts:— (epi tois dorois) with respect to his gifts. This God did, no doubt, in the usual way, by causing fire to come down and consume the victims which Abel offered. See references. So say the Jews as well as most Christian exposi­tors. Abel’ s offering, like that of Elijah (1 Kings 18:38) was ac­cepted by its being consumed on the altar, but Cain’ s offering, like the offerings of the false prophets, remained unconsumed, and of course unaccepted. This at once greatly excited and provoked the envy of Cain, and so he was moved to kill Abel, “ because,” says John, “ his own works were evil, and his brother’ s righteous.” (1 John 3:12.) Hebrews 11:4 ---and by it he being dead yet speaketh.— The Textus Receptus, with the manuscripts, D, E, J, K, and the old Italic version, has the passive form of the verb (laleitai) “ is spoken of.” But some of the best manuscripts, most of the ancient versions, and several of the Greek Fathers, have the active voice (lalei), as in our English Version. This reading is also best supported by the internal evi­dence, and it is therefore now justly preferred by most expositors. The idea is not that Abel “ is now spoken of” as a faithful man, and so commended for his piety, but rather that he, though dead, still speaks to us by his faith and example. What, then, does he say? Most commentators, as Calvin, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford, etc., maintain that there is here direct reference to Genesis 4:10, and that in harmony with the record there given, Abel’ s blood still calls to God for vengeance. But it is not by his blood, but by his faith that he still speaks. And I therefore agree with Chrysostom, Stuart, and a few others, that what the Apostle means is simply this: that Abel by his faith and example still speaks to us, warning, admonishing, and encouraging us to obey God’ s will by doing just what he has commanded us to do, and giving us assurance, at the same time, that all things will cer­tainly work together for the good of those who do this. His is the first example on record of just such an exercise of faith as God commends and approves, and hence it is, perhaps, that the Holy Spirit has given to it so great prominence. Hebrews 11:5 ---By faith Enoch was translated—There is but little said in the Bible respecting this eminently pious man. In Genesis 5:24, Moses says: “ And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, be­cause God took him.’’ And from Jude (5: 14), we learn that he was a prophet, and that he warned his contemporaries that the Lord would finally come with “ his holy myriads to execute judg­ment on all, and to convict all the impious concerning all the hard sayings which impious sinners spoke against him.’’ Having thus, like Noah, been for a time a preacher of righteousness, the Lord rewarded him for his fidelity by translating him no doubt to Heaven, as he afterward translated Elijah. (1 Kings 2:1 1 Kings 2:11.) So the Psalmist expresses his confidence that, after death, the Lord would receive him to glory. (Psalms 73:24.) Hebrews 11:6 ---that he should not see death;—That is, that he should not experience death like other men. So the word see is often used in the Holy Scriptures. See, for example, Psalms 89:48; Luke 2:26 ; John 8:51. Enoch did not experience death as men ordinar­ily do, but was miraculously delivered from it, perhaps in the same way that the living saints will be at the second coming of Christ. “ Behold I show you a mystery,” says Paul; “ we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we [the living saints] shall be changed.” (1 Cor. 15: 51, 52.) All attempts at explanation in such cases, however, are wholly unwarranted by the word of God. See Deut. 29:29. Hebrews 11:6 ---and was not found, because God had translated him:— The meaning is, that he was not found on earth, because God had translated him from earth to heaven, as he afterward translated Elijah. After Elijah’ s removal, the sons of the prophets sent out fifty men, who sought for him three days diligently, but they did not find him, because God had taken him. (2 Kings 2: 17.) And so, also, it seems to have been in the case of Enoch. His friends no doubt made diligent search for him, but it was all in vain. “ He was not found,” because God had removed him from earth to higher and better climes. Hebrews 11:6 ---for before his translation, etc.— The idea is that he pleased God before his translation, as is proved by the testimony. But this he could not have done without faith, as our author now proceeds to show. Hebrews 11:6 ---But without faith it is impossible to please him:— Why so? The fact is clearly stated in our text, and it is even further emphasized in what follows: “ He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” The same fundamental truth is also abundantly set forth in other passages. In Romans 8:8, for example, Paul says, “ They that are in the flesh can not please God.” And again in Romans 14:23, he says, “ Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” There can be no doubt, therefore, that faith in God is essential to all acceptable worship and service of any kind. But why is it so? Is it owing simply to an arbitrary arrange­ment on the part of God ? or does it arise from a moral necessity ? That the latter, and not the former, is true, will I think appear manifest from a little reflection. Be it observed, then, (1) that there was a time when God was and nothing else beside him. By his own power he gave birth and being to all things. See Genesis 1:1; John 1:3; Colossians 1:16, etc. (2) He created all things according to the counsel of his own will, and in harmony with his own na­ture. See Ephesians 1:11; Romans 11:34, etc. (3) Hence it follows that whatever is in harmony with God’ s will is right, and that whatever is not in harmony with it is wrong— necessarily, immuta­bly, and eternally wrong. (4) Every man, therefore, who acts from any other ruling motive than the known will of God, is so far a rebel against God and his government. What he does may of course serve to promote in many respects the interests of society. He may, for instance, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, instruct the ignorant, and if need be he may even die for his friends or his country. But unless, in all this, he acts from a supreme regard to the will of God, his conduct is wanting in one of the essential ele­ments of virtue, and cannot, therefore, be otherwise than displeas­ing to God. (5) But no man can act in harmony with the will of God unless he has faith in God and in the revelation which he has made to us of himself, for his own glory and for the good of his creatures. This is self-evident. And hence it follows, as our au­thor says, that he who would come to God and serve him accepta­bly, “ must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” Enoch did this. He walked with God. And the Apostle therefore justly argues that he had faith in God, and that his marvelous deliverance from death was both an attestation and a reward of his faith. Hebrews 11:7 ---By faith Noah, being warned of God, etc.— From the brief record that is here given of Noah’ s faith, we learn (1) that he was divinely admonished (chrematistheis) with regard to the coming deluge. One hundred and twenty years before it occurred, God warned him of its coming, and directed him to go to work and pre­pare an ark for the saving of himself and his house. (Genesis 6:3-18.) (2) That he believed God and did just as he was commanded. Moved by a reverential fear (eulabetheis) through his belief in God’ s testimony, he prepared an ark for the saving of his house. This, under the circumstances, was a very remarkable instance of strong and unwavering faith in God. For (a) the time appointed was still far off in the future, (b) There were as yet no natural indications that such an event as the destruction of the world by a deluge would ever occur, (c) The experience of mankind was against it. For sixteen hundred years, the natural order of events had been uninterrupted, and no doubt many of the so-called philos­ophers of that age would be forward in proving to the people that such a catastrophe was physically impossible, (d) The profane and wicked scoffers of the age would also, as a matter of course, do all that they could by their wit, ridicule, and sarcasm, to destroy Noah’ s faith in the promise of God, and to dissuade him from his great undertaking. But nothing could move him from his purpose. Throughout the long period of one hundred and twenty years, he continued strong in faith giving glory to God. (3) By his faith and obedience he condemned the world, as Christ says the men of Nineveh and the queen of the south will, on the day of judgment condemn the unbelieving and disobedient men and women of his own generation. (Matthew 12:41-42.) Every man, in fact, who gives heed to God’ s warnings and admonitions, condemns by his faith and practice all who neglect to do so. Thus, Noah con­demned his own disobedient contemporaries, and thus also he will, on the day of final reckoning, condemn millions of our own more highly favored generation. (4) By his faith, he also became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. Several eminent expositors, as Cramer, Michaelis, Bisping, and Hofmann, make the phrase “ by which (dia hes) depend on the word ark (kibotos) ; that is, they say Noah condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness of faith by building the ark. But it is better with Bengel, Menken, Bohme, Bleek, De Wette, McLean, Ebrard, Lii- nemann, Delitzsch, Alford, and others, to make “ faith” the antece­dent of the relative “ which.” Faith is the leading thought of the whole sentence, and the word faith is therefore properly made the governing word in construction. It should be observed, however, that the building of the Ark is included in the word faith, for it is not of faith in the abstract, but of faith in all its practical bearings that the Apostle is speaking. This is obvious from all the exam­ples of faith that are given in this section. Indeed, the faith which God commends and requires is, in no case, a mere cold, lifeless, abstraction; it is a living, active, fruit-bearing principle, which is constantly manifesting and developing itself in the life as well as in the heart of the individual. Such was the faith of Abel; such was the faith of Enoch; and such also was the faith of Noah, through which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righ­teousness which is according to the law of faith. (Romans 3:21-31.) Hebrews 11:8 ---By faith Abraham, when he was called— In this verse we have given (1) the fact that Abraham received a call from God; (2) that by this call he was required to leave his home and kindred in Ur of Chaldea, and go out into a strange land; (3) that this land, though promised to his posterity, was wholly unknown to him at the time; and (4) that he nevertheless obeyed God, and went out of his own country, not knowing whither he went. The original call is not recorded in the Scriptures; but in Genesis 12:1-3 it is repeated in substance as follows: “ Now the Lord had said to Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’ s house, unto a land that I will show thee: and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” This call must have been a very severe test of Abraham’ s faith. To leave a comfortable home and friends and follow the call of another, at any time and under any circumstances, shows a very strong degree of trust and con­fidence in the one who calls us. But this Abraham did, and did promptly. Taking with him his father Terah, and Lot his nephew, he immediately left Ur of Chaldea and came to Haran, where he remained five years. But when his father was dead he left Haran and passed over into Canaan, where he sojourned for one hundred years. These numbers may be easily verified as follows. We learn from Galatians 3:17 and Exodus 12:40-41, that from the call of Abra­ham to the Exodus or giving of the Law was four hundred and thirty years; and from Genesis 15:14 we also learn that from the birth of Isaac to the Exodus was four hundred years. Consequently thirty years intervened between the call of Abraham and the birth of Isaac. But when Isaac was born Abraham was a hundred years old (Genesis 21:5) ; and hence he was seventy years old when he was first called and received the promise. But he was seventy-five years old when he came to Canaan (Genesis 12:4); and he was a hundred and seventy-five years old when he died. (Genesis 25:7.) And hence he sojourned five years in Haran and a hundred years in Canaan. Hebrews 11:9 ---By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, etc.— It ap­pears from this that Abraham never regarded Canaan as his home. He knew, of course, that when the Amorites should have filled up the cup of their iniquity in the fourth generation, the land would be given to his posterity for an everlasting possession (Genesis 15:16). But until that time neither he nor his seed had any rights and privileges in Canaan beyond what might have been enjoyed by other strangers under like circumstances. “ God,” says Stephen, “ gave him no inheritance in it; no, not so much as to set his foot on; yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.” (Acts 7:5.) And hence Abraham had to purchase the cave of Machpelah as a burying-place from Ephron the Hittite (Genesis 23:3-20) ; and hence, also, neither he, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, ever built a perma­nent residence in the country. They were satisfied to live in mov­able tents and fragile booths, feeling assured that, according to “ the promise,” they were all heirs of a better inheritance than any that was then to be found on this sin-stained earth. Hebrews 11:10 ---For he looked for a city, etc.— This is given by the Apostle as the reason why Abraham was satisfied to live as a stranger and sojourner in Canaan. He did so because he was looking for the city (ten polin) which hath the foundations (tous themelious), whose Architect and Builder is God. From this and other like passages we are constrained to think that God had given to the pa­triarchs information with regard to the heavenly country far be­yond what is now recorded in Genesis or any other part of the Old Testament. What we find there at present was written for our in­struction, as well as for the benefit of the ancients (Romans 15:4). But much may have been said to them which would in no way ben­efit us; and which was, therefore, excluded from the Canon by Moses, Ezra and other inspired writers. The origin of sacrifice, for instance, is nowhere expressly mentioned in the Old Testa­ment ; nor is there anything said in it respecting the origin of the Patriarchal priesthood. Information, clear, full, and explicit, on all such matters, was of course needed by the ancients; but for us the more general instructions of the Bible are quite sufficient. And so, also, we think it was with respect to the heavenly country. The Patriarchs seem to have received revelations concerning it which have never been transmitted to us; for it is obvious that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, lived in constant expectation of enter­ing it at the close of their earthly pilgrimage. They were satisfied to live here as strangers and pilgrims, knowing that they had in heaven a city having permanent foundations whose Architect and Framer is God. This city is manifestly the heavenly Jerusalem (Galatians 4:28; Hebrews 12:22 Hebrews 13:14), which for the present is lo­cated in heaven, but which will hereafter descend to the earth after that it shall have been renovated by fire (Revelation 21). Then will be fulfilled in its full and proper sense the promise made to Abraham that he and his seed should be the heirs of the world. (Romans 4:13.) “ The meaning of the whole verse,” says Prof. Stuart, “ most evidently is that Abraham looked for a permanent abode in the heavenly country; that is, his hopes and expectations were placed upon the world to come.” It was faith in this which was the dem­onstration of things not seen, and which moved him to obey the commands of God, and to do and suffer whatever he required. The fact then that the saints under the Old Testament were moved in their conduct by considerations which had respect to the invisi­ble world, or an immortal state of existence, is plainly implied here by the reasoning of the Apostle. God is here called the architect (technites) of the heavenly city, because he is the author of the plan; and he is also called the builder (demiourgos), because it is he himself who executes the plan. He is the master-builder as well as the projector of the heavenly Jerusalem. Hebrews 11:11 ---Through faith also Sarah herself received strength to conceive seed,— Or more exactly, By faith even Sarah herself re­ceived strength to conceive seed. The emphatic manner in which this is expressed seems to indicate that there was something very extraordinary 'in the case of Sarah. But what was it ? On this point the commentators differ. Some think that our author has reference merely to what he more fully and distinctly states in what follows, viz.: that Sarah, though now past the time of bear­ing, through faith received strength for the conception of seed (Schlichting, Schultz, Stuart, etc.). But the majority maintain that there is in these words an allusion also to the fact that, at the outset, Sarah herself was unbelieving. (Genesis 18:9-15.) Thus Macknight: “ By faith in God’ s promise, even Sarah herself, though at first she thought the matter impossible, received strength for the conception of seed, and brought forth a son when past the age of child-bearing; because she at length attained to the strong­est persuasion of the faithfulness and power of Him who had promised her a son.” So also Bleek, DeWette, Winer, Liinemann, and others. In this instance, the minority are probably right. It seems most likely that the Apostle makes no reference here what­ever to the former incredulity of Sarah; but only to her past bar­renness and advanced age. For at that time she was about ninety years old (Genesis 17:17) ; far beyond the natural period of child­bearing. But nevertheless, through her strong faith in God, she obtained the promise. Hebrews 11:12 ---Therefore sprang there even of one, etc.—The word therefore shows that what follows is to be taken as a result and conse­quence of the faith of Abraham and Sarah. They had both waited long and patiently for the fulfillment of the promise: and now when Abraham is about a hundred years old, and Sarah ninety, their faith brought to them the promised reward. “ Though it tarry, wait for it; for it will surely come; it will not be behind the appointed time." (Habakkuk 2:4.) They did wait; and finally, as a re­ward for their faith in God and in the word of his promise, “ there sprang from one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of Heaven in multitude; and as the sands of the sea shore innumera­ble.” For Abraham, says Paul, “ against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about a hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’ s womb: he staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; being fully persuaded that what he had promised he was able also to perform.” (Romans 4:18-21.) And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness; and not only so, but in consequence of this, Isaac was born, and his descendants were multiplied as the dust of the earth. See refer­ences. The bearing of this illustration of the main argument of the Apostle is very obvious. Nothing could better serve to strengthen the hands and encourage the hearts of the desponding and perse­cuted Hebrews, than this reference to the faith of their illustrious ancestor. God himself makes a like reference to it, by the Prophet Isaiah, for the purpose of encouraging the Israelites under the Ba­bylonish captivity. “ Hearken unto me,” he says, “ yfc that pursue righteousness, ye that seek Jehovah: look unto the rock whence ye were hewn; and to the hollow of the cave whence ye were digged: look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah who bore you; for I called him, being a single person, and I blessed him, and I multi­plied him.” (Isaiah 51:1-2.) Hebrews 11:13 ---These all died in faith,— (kata pistin) according to faith: that is, in the exercise of faith and in the enjoyment of its many blessings. They died as they had lived, in jaith. But of whom does the Apostle here speak? Who are the “ all” who died in faith? Some, as Oecumenius, Theophylact, and Primasius, think that our author refers here to the aforesaid faithful antediluvian Patriarchs, as well as to the postdiluvian. But in this they are manifestly in error. The context makes it quite obvious, that only Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Jacob, are included in this remark. They are the persons who received the promises (Galatians 3:16), and who might have returned to their father-land had they been inclined to do so. But they all preferred remaining as strangers and pilgrims in Canaan, because their hearts were set on the heavenly country into which they hoped to enter soon. Hebrews 11:13 ---Not having received the promises,— What promises? Manifestly not the verbal promises; for these they did receive (Galatians 3:16): but the word promises (epangliai) is used here to de­note the things promised. These they did not receive during their earthly pilgrimage; they only saw them afar off, and “ greeted them as the wanderer greets his longed-for home, even when he comes in sight of it at a distance; drawing to himself, as it were, magnet­ically and embracing, with inward love, that which is yet afar off” \ General remarks. The point has been frequently emphasized that the outstanding subject of this book is the disturbances of the Judaizers. There would seem to be a shift now to the subject of unbelief. And yet it is not so much of a change at the base. All failure to do that which is right may be charged up against unbelief. In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul enumerates a number of misdeeds that contributed to the overthrow of the Israelites in the wilderness. But in Hebrews 3:19 where he has the same history in mind, the apostle says they could not enter in because of unbelief. By the same token, the mistake of rejecting Christ for the sake of going back to the old law may truly be attributed to unbelief. Much has been said against the denominational teaching of "faith alone," and justly so. At the same time we should be careful not to under- estimate the importance of belief or faith. It is true that we cannot be saved by faith alone, neither can we be saved without it. We cannot be saved by "faith only," but we can be lost by unbelief only. That is because it requires all the items of the plan of salvation to please God, while the omission of one fundamental item is enough to displease Him. This is especially true of such a principle as faith which is the motive power of all our actions as the present chapter will show. Hebrews 11:1. Substance is from a word that means basis or foundation on which something rests. Faith constitutes such a basis for our hope since it is produced by testimony. Even things not seen but desired may be expected and thus hoped for when we have the evidence of their truthfulness. Hebrews 11:2. Elders is from and Thayer defines it at this place as "forefathers." Good report is used in the sense that they obtained a good reputation by their faith that was "put into practice." Hebrews 11:3. Through faith does not mean that the following things of this verse were accomplished by faith. for God does not have to act on faith. He knows what he can do. It is through faith that we understand about it. Worlds is defined by the lexicon at this place, "The worlds, the universe," and framed is defined, "To fit out, equip, put in order, arrange, adjust." Are seen and do appear are both in the present tense, and made is from a Greek word that means "caused to be." The sentence means that the universe which we see was not made out of anything else that appears to us. But that does not say that God "made something out of nothing." Such a notion is not taught in any scripture that I have read. Just because we cannot see what God made the universe of does not prove that He made it out of nothing. Word is from RHEMA. which Thayer defines at this place, "The word by which some thing is commanded, directed, enjoined." This agrees with Psalms 33:9, which says, "He spake and it was done; he commanded and it stood fast." Also the phrase "and God said" occurs nine times in the first chapter of Genesis. Hebrews 11:4. By faith Abel. Romans 10:17 says faith comes by hearing the word of God. Hence Abel had been told by the Lord what to do or he could not have done it by faith. When he offered an animal by faith, therefore, it was because God had told him to do so. That made it a more excellent (superior) sacrifice than the one Cain offered, for God had not told him to offer the fruit of the ground. Obtained witness means that testimony was borne him that he was a righteous man. Dead yet speaketh. Although Abel is dead physically, yet the record of his righteous performance is preserved down to the present time, and it speaks or testifies to the good deed that was done through his faith in the word of God. Hebrews 11:5. Translated . . not see death. The last phrase explains the first word, and was not found any more on earth because he was taken to Heaven. Had this testimony. It is recorded in Genesis 5:24 that Enoch walked with God, which means he walked or conducted himself according to the "word of God" which produces faith. Hebrews 11:6. The apostle interrupts his line of special instances to state the general principle of faith. Regardless of whatever apparent good there might be in one's actions, it will not be pleasing to God unless he has authorized it. Believe that He is means to believe in the existence of God. Furthermore, unless a man believes that God will reward a diligent seeker, lie will not make any effort to come to Him. Hebrews 11:7. The flood of which Noah was warned was over a century in the future (Genesis G:3). yet he prepared an ark according to the Lord's instructions. That was because he believed what God told him and acted accordingly. To the saving of his house from the flood that destroyed the rest of mankind. Condemned the world. Thayer defines the first word at this place as follows: "By one's good example to render another's wickedness more evident and censurable." Heir of righteousness. The last word is what is done and not inherited, hence the phrase means to inherit the reward that comes to one whose faith leads him to seek a righteous life. Hebrews 11:8. The main point that showed Abraham's faith was his obedience even when he did not know where he was going. But God promised that it was to be towards a place which he should some day inherit. Hebrews 11:9. Strange means "belonging to another"; Abraham considered himself a sojourner which means a temporary dweller. That is why he lived in tabernacles (or tents) because he regarded himself as well as his immediate descendants as heirs only. He believed the land would sometime be actually possessed by the nations coming from him. Hebrews 11:10. Abraham did not expect to possess personally the land of Canaan, hence he did not provide himself any permanent building for a home. He believed that his descendants would finally get possession of it. As for himself, he chose to be faithful to God while sojourning in the land, then finally enter the city with foundations, which means the permanence of the Eternal City or Heaven. Hebrews 11:11. Being delivered of a child was not the miracle in this case, but it was the ability to conceive one to begin with. Sarah was ninety years old and thus was past the usual age of child-bearing. She also had been barren all her life so that she was not at any time able to conceive by the natural process of reproduction. Hence she would have felt no urge to cooperate with her husband in carrying out their part of God's plan. But on account of her faith in the promise of God she acted and was rewarded with the strength (ability) to conceive. Hebrews 11:12. As good as dead. The second word is not in the original as a separate term. The phrase is used figuratively because all appearances were that way. We know Abraham's reproductive powers were not gone, for at least thirty-seven years later he married the second time and begat six sons (Genesis 23:1 Genesis 25 Genesis 1, 2). There is no evidence that a miracle was performed to enable him to beget these sons. Besides, they were not needed to fulfill the promise made in the beginning. Stars and sand are used to indicate the vast number of his descendants. Hebrews 11:13. These means Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, who never lived to see the fulfilment of the promises. Died in faith means that their faith remained with them as long as they lived. Seen them afar off (by the eves of faith). Being strangers and pilgrims (temporary dwellers), they did not expect to possess the land personally, but they never doubted that their descendants would according to the promises. Hebrews 11:14. The faith described in the preceding verse implies a belief in some other country than was then visible. Hebrews 11:15. The country from whence they came out (Mesopotamia) was visible and would require no faith to realize it. Moreover, it was still obtainable and had they been mindful of it or cared for it, they could have returned to that place, although in so doing they would have lost their favor with God. Hebrews 11:16. This verse expresses the same hope mentioned of Abraham in verse 10. God is pleased to own people who are trusting Him, and as a reward he will admit them into the heavenly city in the "sweet by and by." Such a home will be a better country than the one from which they came, or even than the one in which they were "sojourners." Hebrews 11:17. When he was tried means when his faith was put to a test. Offered up Isaac. Abraham did not literally sacrifice his son, but he went as far as the Lord permitted him to go. Not knowing that God would change the order, Abraham was put to as strong a test of his faith as if he had slain his son. His only begotten son is mentioned to emphasize the severity of the test. Hebrews 11:18. Regardless of how many other sons he might have had, that would not have lessened the severity of the test for the promise was restricted to Isaac.. Hebrews 11:19. Abraham never doubted God's ability and faithfulness in fulfilling the promise, even though his only son should die. The reason for that faith is explained in this verse in that he expected God to bring his son back to life. Received him in a figure; this may be regarded in two senses. The performance came so near to actual death for Isaac that the change in God's order was virtually the same to Abraham's mind as if the son had died. It was in the nature of a case where it is said that one "is snatched from the jaws of death." Another phase is the truth that it all was a figure or type of the restoration of the Son of God from death after having been slain and made an offering at the cross. Hebrews 11:20. This blessing is recorded in Genesis 27, and it pertains to favorable experiences that were to come to his sons in the future. Being a patriarch, Isaac could speak as by a revelation from God, but he would not have done so had it not been for his faith in the declarations of God. Hebrews 11:21. Jacob was another patriarch and could speak by the Lord's instruct ion. The favorable predictions he made for Joseph's sons are re- corded in Genesis 48. Hebrews 11:22. When Joseph was taken into Egypt it was said that "the Lord was with him" (Genesis 39:2), and He continued to be with him all the time. Hence he was able to make the prediction (by faith) that is mentioned here and at Genesis 50:24-25. Hebrews 11:23. It should be understood that it was the parents of Moses who had the faith. They were true servants of God and believed that He would protect their child if they did what they could to help him live. Not afraid means they were not frightened by what the king of Egypt had ordered to be done to the infants. Hebrews 11:24. Come to years corresponds with "full forty years old" in Acts 7:23. At that time he repudiated his relation to the daughter of Pharaoh in order to join himself with the Hebrews. The circumstance of becoming related to Pharaoh's daughter referred to here is recorded in Exodus 2:5-10. Hebrews 11:25. Pleasures of sin refers to the life he was connected with while a part of the royal family of Egypt. A season would be the comparatively short time in this world, for sinful pleasures will all cease at the judgment and endless punishment will follow. On the other hand the faithful people of God, though afflicted by the enemy in this life. will enjoy endless pleasure in the world to come. Hebrews 11:26. Reproach of Christ. Moses did not yet know the full system of salvation of which Christ is the central figure, but Paul considers any suffering endured in service to God as also being for the sake of Christ. Treasures in Egypt were the luxuries experienced by the royal group of Egyptians. (See comments at verse 25.) Hebrews 11:27. Forsook Egypt. This was forty years later than the preceding verse, referring to the time he led the Israelites out of the land. Not fearing the wrath means notwithstanding the wrath of the king. Seeing (by the eye of faith) him. who is invisible to mortal eyes. Hebrews 11:28. This event is recorded in Exodus 12, where the sprinkling of blood was to save them from death. Since such a means could not naturally prevent death, the observance of It was necessarily done through faith as an act of obedience. Hebrews 11:29. There was no natural cause for the Red Sea to open up and stand as walls, hence the Israelites marched down between them because they believed God would hold them up until His people were passed over. Egyptians assaying (trying) to go through the same passage were drowned because God was not with them. Hebrews 11:30. There was no physical force in the marching and shouting of the Israelites to bring down the walls of Jericho. The power of God brought them down, but it would not have been done had they not believed in God who told them (through Joshua) to march around. The power was in God as in other cases, but He would not have used it had the people lacked the faith to obey. Hebrews 11:31. Joshua 6:25 says that Rahab was preserved "because she hid the messengers whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho." But she hid them because she believed the reports of the favorable things the Lord had done for His people. Acting on that faith she cooperated with the messengers in escaping the wrath of the king of Jericho. As a reward for her faith she was permitted to dwell with the Israelites, and was honored by being permitted to be in the line of ancestors of Christ. (See Joshua 6:25; Matthew 1:5.) Hebrews 11:32. What shall I more say! Why go into details further in illustrating the fruits of faith by the lives of ancient worthies? Time would fail me. This is an accommodative expression, meaning that the time that would be used in going on into the same details concerning the following cases individually, would be more than is suitable to an epistle of the length of this one. Paul therefore groups a number of outstanding characters and also groups a list of things they did among them. The remainder of the chanter will be devoted to a descrip-tion of heroic deeds performed through the incentive of faith. If the reader wishes to get the details of the particular persons named he may see Gideon at Judges 6:11 : Barak at Judges 4:6; Samson at Judges 13:24; .Tephthah at Judges 11:1 :David at 1 Samuel 16:1; Samuel at 1 Samuel 1:20. Hebrews 11:33. Subdued kingdoms. An Instance of it is in 2 Samuel 8 whore David overcame the Philistines; God gave him the victory because of his faithfulness. Wrought righteousness means to do righteous work through the motive of faith. Obtained promises means they obtained the fulfillment of them because they had the faith to comply with the conditions on which the promises were made. Stopped the mouths of lions. This was done directly by Samson in Judges 14:5-6, and by Daniel indirectly in Daniel 6. In each case God gave the victory because of the faith of the men. Hebrews 11:34. Quenched the violence of fire occurred when the three companions of Daniel were cast into the fiery furnace (Daniel 3). Escaped the edge of the sword. Instances of this are too numerous to mention all, but a notable one is in 1 Samuel 20. Out of weakness were made strong. An outstanding instance was that of Samson in Judges 16:2 S-30. where his strength was given back to him because of his returning faith and dependence upon God. Waxed valiant means the servants of God were strong and brave in their contests with the enemies of God. The unassisted strength of man is a failure when faced with the might of worldly hosts, but God rewards his faithful servants with victory when the attack is made. Aliens refers to those of another nation. Gideon routed the Midi-anites in connection with his war cry, "The sword of the Lord and Gideon" (Judges 7:20-23). Hebrews 11:35. The phrase raised to life again and the word resurrection are from the Greek word , and the phrase is a good definition of the word. Two cases of such a favor shown to women are in 1 Kings 17:17-24 and 2 Kings 4:18-37. Were tortured. This was done to force the servants of God to renounce their faith. They were promised relief from the torture if they would turn against the Lord, but they would not accept deliverance on such terms. Their motive for such resistance was that they might obtain a better resurrection. All mankind will be resurrected. but only those who are faithful till death will come forth to a happy life (Daniel 12:2; John 5:29.) Hebrews 11:36. Not all the persecuted ones were mit to death. but they were mistreated in various ways. Jeremiah was placed in prison (Jeremiah 37:15-21, and afterward was nut into the dungeon (Jeremiah 33:1-6). Hebrews 11:37. They were stoned. Two Instances of this are recorded in 1 Kings 21:1-14 and 2 Chronicles 24:21-22. Sawn asunder. This is a correct translation according to Thayer, and he says that an ancient tradition claims that the prophet Isaiah was put to death in that way. This was one manner in which the ancient worthies were tempted or put to a test of their faith. Others were put to death by having their head severed from their body, or by being thrust through the bowels. The reason for their wandering in sheepskins and goatskins is explained by the next phrase, namely, being destitute. Of course the condition of destitution was brought about by the cruelty of their enemies, who afflicted and tormented them in whatever way they could devise. Hebrews 11:38. Of whom the world was not worthy. The world of mankind that mistreated those faithful servants of God was not fit to have their presence. They wandered in these places to escape their enemies. (See Judges 6:2 and 1 Samuel 13:6.) Hebrews 11:39. Good report signifies they were well spoken of on account of their faith. The passage says they received not the promise which refers to the promise of the seed of Abraham who was to bless the nations of the world. It means they did not live to see the fulfillment of the promise, but their confidence in the promises of God was so strong that they maintained their faith until death. Hebrews 11:40. The better thing is the New Covenant established on "better promises" (chapter 8:6), that was to be brought into the world through Christ. God's purpose was to provide this institution for vs (Christians). Because of such a plan He did not bring the fulfillment of the promise in the lifetime of those worthies. Not be made perfect or complete, denotes that the scheme that was started in their days could not be completed until the time of us (Christians). Robert Milligan Comfmentary On Hebrews 12SECTION ELEVENHeb_12:1-29Having described the nature of faith, and illustrated by a great variety of examples its power and efficacy as a principle of human conduct, and also as a means of spiritual enjoyment, the Apostle now returns to his main line of thought, and proceeds to encourage still further his Hebrew brethren to persevere steadfastly in their begun Christian course. This he does, I. By representing them as contestants in a race-course, sur-rounded by all the faithful ones referred to in the preceding chap-ter; who, as a cloud of witnesses for the truth, are represented as being also anxious spectators of the great contest for the crown of life (Hebrews 12:1). The imagery is drawn from the foot-races then cele-brated in Palestine, Greece, Italy, and other provinces of the Roman empire. In allusion to these, the Apostle exhorts his brethren 1. To make all due preparation for the race, by laying aside every weight that might in any way serve to impede their progress; and especially the besetting sin of unbelief, so paralyzing in its effects. 2. To run their race with patience, as in the presence of the aforesaid cloud of illustrious witnesses and sympathizing spectators. II. He exhorts and encourages them to look off to Jesus in all their conflicts, and to follow him as their great Exemplar (Hebrews 12:2-3), remembering 1. That as the Author and Finisher of the faith, he had endured the cross: 2. That he had despised the shame; bearing calmly and meekly the most unjust and violent opposition of his enemies: 3. And that as a reward for all this, he has received a seat on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens. III. He encourages them to bear their trials and afflictions with patience (Hebrews 12:4-11) ; 1. In consideration of their lightness. These Hebrew brethren had not, like Jesus and many other martyrs, resisted unto blood (Hebrews 12:4). 2. He further urges them to bear their afflictions with patient resignation, in view of God’ s gracious designs in allowing them to come upon them (Hebrews 12:6-11). They were all the chastisements of the Lord, intended to make them purer and better. In illustrating and amplifying this thought, the Apostle reminds his brethren, (1.) That the simple fact of God’ s correcting them, was evi¬dence of his love and care for them; that he was in fact dealing with them as his own beloved children (Hebrews 12:6-8). (2.) That they had borne patiently and even thankfully the corrections of their earthly parents; though they were, like them-selves, carnal, and consequently ever liable to err in their discipline (Hebrews 12:9). (3.) That God never errs: but that being infinitely exalted above all the weaknesses and infirmities of the flesh, he always corrects his children in wisdom and in love; in order that they may be made partakers of his holiness. (4.) That although all chastening is for the present grievous, it nevertheless, when wisely administered, always results in good to those who are properly exercised by it. IV. In view of these facts, the Apostle further exhorts them,1. To take fresh courage; and by removing every obstacle out of the way, to strengthen the weak, encourage the faint-hearted, and save if possible those who were even then ready to perish by the way (Hebrews 12:12-13). 2. To follow peace with all men and holiness; without which none can have communion and fellowship with God (Hebrews 12:14). 3. To watch diligently that no root of bitterness should spring up among them, such as might cause many to fall from the grace of God; reminding them at the same time, by the case of Esau, that for the apostate there is no salvation (Hebrews 12:15-17). V. He next encourages them by reminding them of their superior privileges and birthrights, as the favored subjects of the New Covenant, and members of the family of God (Hebrews 12:18-24). 1. The aspects of the Old Economy were full of terror and alarm (Hebrews 12:18-21) : 2. But the New Economy is full of comfort and encouragement (Hebrews 12:22-24). VI. But as it is a law of the Divine government, that wherever much is given, there also much is required, it follows that these su¬perior privileges of the New Economy serve to increase very greatly the obligations of all who are permitted to enjoy them. And hence the Apostle again insists that the Hebrews should give the more earnest heed to the things which they have heard (Hebrews 12:25-27) ; 1. Because God himself was then speaking to them through his own Son from heaven; and not as he had formerly spoken to their fathers through Moses and angels from Mount Sinai (Hebrews 12:25) ; 2. Because they were then living, not under a preparatory dis-pensation, like the Jewish, but under the last dispensation of God’ s grace to fallen man; during which, God would so shake the world as to remove out of the way all antichristian powers, and make the Kingdom of Christ universal and perpetual (Hebrews 12:26-27). VII. Finally, he encourages them to persevere in serving God with reverence and godly fear,1. Because they had by the grace of God become citizens of a Kingdom which is immovable (Hebrews 12:28). 2. Because God himself is also unchangeable, and will prove to be a consuming fire to his enemies under the New Economy as well as under the Old (Hebrews 12:29). The first and second points of this analysis, though containing motives somewhat different, belong nevertheless to one and the same paragraph; and the same is also true of the fifth, sixth, and seventh points of division. And hence the whole section may be properly subdivided into paragraphs as follows: I. Hebrews 12:1-3.—Exhortation and encouragement to the Hebrew brethren to persevere in their begun Christian course; (1) from the example and contemplated presence of the many faithful ones who had gone before them; and (2) from the example of Christ. II. Hebrews 12:4-11.—Exhortation to endure their afflictions patiently; (1) in view of their comparative lightness; and (2) from the con-sideration that they were all the chastisements of God, designed for their own spiritual improvement. III. Hebrews 12:12-17.—Exhortation to rouse themselves to more reso-lute and courageous perseverance in the Christian course; and fol-lowing after peace and holiness, not to allow any cause of bitter-ness to spring up among themselves; lest some of them should, like the profligate Esau, discover too late the folly of renouncing their blood-bought privileges and birthrights. IV. Hebrews 12:18-29.—Further warnings against apostasy, and exhor-tations to greater zeal and steadfastness in the Divine life; (1) from the superior honors and privileges of the New Covenant; (2) from the sovereign authority and righteous administration of Him who calls us; and (3) from the stability of the Kingdom which God has inaugurated for the salvation of those who love and serve him. AND TO THE HEBREW TO IN THEIR BEGUN COURSE; (1) FROM THE EXAMPLE AND OF THE MANY ONES WHO HAD GONE BEFORE THEM; AND (2) FROM THE EXAMPLE OF CHRIST Hebrews 12:1-3 Hebrews 12:1 ---Wherefore, seeing we also, etc.—In the last section, the Apostle brought forward for the encouragement of his brethren, the example of many noble and faithful ones who, under the severest trials, had run with patient endurance the race that was set be­fore them. And now returning to the line of exhortation com­menced at 10: 19, but broken off at the close of the same chapter (10: 39), he calls on his brethren in Christ to imitate the example of those noble witnesses of the faith. Having, he says; such a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, laying aside every superfluous weight, and the sin which so easily besets us, let us also run with patient endurance the race which is set before us. In this verse there is evident allusion to the games of the ancient Greeks; or rather perhaps to those which Herod the Great had in­troduced into Palestine in imitation of the Grecian games. See Jo­sephus Ant. 15: 8; 15 : 9, 6; 19: 7, 5; Bell. 1, 21, 8. These games consisted in such exercises as leaping, boxing, wrestling, throwing the quoit, foot-races, horse-races, chariot races, etc. The exercises were performed in the arena of a vast amphitheatre, around which, immense crowds of spectators, often amounting to from twenty- five to one hundred thousand, were arranged on seats, rising high one above another. Corresponding with these assembled multitudes of anxious spectators, is the “ cloud of witnesses’’ by whom the He­brew Christians are said to be surrounded while running their race for the crown of life. These crowned victors are here repre­sented as a cloud on account of their immense numbers (Ezekiel 38:9 Ezekiel 38:16) as well perhaps as on account of their elevated position. But why are they called witnesses (martures) ? Several an­swers have been given to this question. (1) Some, as Liinemann, supposes that they are so called simply from the fact, that in the preceding chapter they all appear as “ witnesses of faith.” They have by their example borne honorable testimony with respect to the nature, power, value, and sure rewards of faith. (2) Some, as Bleek and Tholuck, take the word witnesses in the sense of specta­tors (theatai). They think that these ancient worthies are called witnesses simply because they are represented here as spectators of the Christian conflict. But (3) the majority of commentators combine these two meanings. They maintain that these faithful ones are called witnesses (a) on account of the testimony which they have ever borne as to the power and efficacy of faith and of God’ s fidelity; and (b) on account of their being spectators of our conduct in the arduous but honorable race which lies before us. “ Averse as we are in general,” says Delitzsch, “ to depart from the simple sense of the text of Scripture, for the sake of making out a multitude of meanings, so that ‘ the wood at last can hardly be seen for the trees,’ we feel that in the present case the double meaning unmistakably obtrudes itself. Those who were witnesses of faith in the previous chapter, are turned by the word surrounding (peri- keimenon) into witnesses of us in this: or rather the two applica­tions of the word martures (witnesses) are in the writer’ s thought and expression, inextricably combined.” I agree with Delitzsch, Alford, Moll, and others, that the Apostle does represent these glo­rified saints, not only as witnesses of the faith, but also as specta­tors of our conduct. But I think that in representing them as spectators, gathered over and around us, he wishes to indicate that these same champions of the faith will be witnesses for or against us, according to the manner in which we deport ourselves in the great conflict of life. See Matthew 12:41-42. The original word (martus) never means merely a spectator (theates) ; it may, how­ever, as in the case of the Apostle, denote one who sees and hears with the view of bearing witness. But in what sense are these witnesses of the faith and of our de­meanor, spectators also of the Christian conflict? Is it in a literal or in a metaphorical sense? On this question the commentators are again divided. Alford says, “ The words must be taken as dis­tinctively implying community between the church triumphant and the church below; that they who have entered into the heavenly rest are conscious of what passes among ourselves. Any interpre­tation short of this leaves the exhortation tame and without point. If they are merely quasi-witnesses, merely witnesses in a metaphor, the motive, so far as this clause supplies one, is gone.” The fact, as here alleged by Alford, that the spirits of the just made perfect are real witnesses of our conduct, is most likely correct. This is certainly the most natural inference from our text, and it seems to be supported by several parallel passages. See 1 Corinthians 13:12; Hebrews 13:23; Revelation 6:1 Revelation 6:3 Revelation 6:5 Revelation 6:7, etc. Still, I cannot agree with this able, and in the main, judicious critic, that the metaphorical interpretation supported by Macknight and others, is wholly point­less. It seems to me that even if the aforesaid ancient worthies were wholly ignorant of our course and manner of life, the Apostle might nevertheless by a bold rhetorical figure justly represent them as quasi-witnesses of our conduct, in order to stimulate us to imitate their noble example. See 1 Kings 22:19-23; and Job 1:6­. I have not sufficient evidence, however, that any such figure is used in this case, and I therefore incline with Alford to the literal interpretation. Hebrews 12:1 ---let us lay aside every weight,—In this clause the Apostle makes allusion particularly to those who run foot-races in the am­phitheatre. These contestants laid aside everything that might in any way serve to impede their progress. The original word (on- kos) means a weight, a burden, a swelling, an encumbrance, and it is evidently used here to denote whatever has a tendency to in­terrupt or retard our progress in the way of holiness; such as “ the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye, and the pride of life.” All such hindrances the Apostle exhorts his brethren to lay aside, so that like the contestants in the Grecian games, they might be able to run with patient endurance the race that was set before them. Hebrews 12:1 ---and the sin which doth so easily beset us,—That is, as the context plainly indicates, the sin of unbelief. This is the sin against which the Apostle warns his readers most particularly throughout the whole Epistle; and it is, moreover, the sin from which all other sins in a measure proceed, and by means of which they are ever more or less cherished and supported. When the Comforter is come, says Christ, he will convict the world “ of sin, because they believe not on me.” (John 16:9.) To put off the sin of unbelief is therefore in fact equivalent to putting off the old man with all his deceitful lusts, and putting on “ the new man who, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness.” (Ephesians 4:22 Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:9.) The qualifying epithet euperistatos does not occur elsewhere, either in the New Testament or in the Greek classics; but it is evident from the context as well as from the etymology of the word, that it means, as in our English ver­sion, easily besetting or surrounding. The temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil, all serve to draw away our minds and hearts from God, and to make us trust more in the crea­ture than in the Creator. And hence the constant tendency of unbelief to encircle us, and so to paralyze our spiritual energies as to make us faint by the way. That this is alarmingly true is abun­dantly evident from the history of God’ s ancient people and the church of Christ, as well as from our own daily experience and ob­servation. The Apostle still draws his imagery from the race course, and seems to refer here to the custom of the contestants in laying aside even their inner garments, so that they might the more readily run with endurance the race that was set before them. So also the writer of our Epistle exhorts us to lay aside, in like man­ner, every superfluous weight, and especially the sin of unbelief, which, like a close-fitting garment, is ever liable to environ our whole persons, and so to paralyze our spiritual energies. Hebrews 12:1 ---let us run with patience the race that is set before us,— The word rendered patience (hupomone) means here, endurance or perseverance. The object of the Apostle is not so much to exhort his brethren to bear the troubles and toils of life with patience, as it is to encourage them to persevere through all trials and difficulties even to the end. Since it is true he means to say in substance that so many illustrious patriarchs, prophets, kings, and martyrs, have preceded us in the way of holiness; and by perseverance in well­doing to the end of life have at length obtained the promised re­ward ; therefore let us also, after their example, laying aside every superfluous weight, and especially the sin of unbelief run with pa­tient endurance the Christian race, until, like our illustrious ances­tors, we too reach the goal of victory and receive the crown of life. Hebrews 12:2 ---Looking unto Jesus, etc.— The Apostle, in this verse, pre­sents to his Hebrew brethren a second motive and ground of en­couragement to persevere even to the end in their begun course. He exhorts them to run their race, not only as if in the presence of their illustrious ancestors, but while doing so he would have them also look off to Jesus the Leader and Perfecter of the faith; so that they might all be encouraged by his greatness and stimulated by his example. The word rendered author (archegos) means prop­erly one who leads, or acts as principal in any given enterprise. It occurs in the New Testament only in Acts 3:15 Acts 5:31; Hebrews 2:10, and in our text. In the first and also in the second instance, it is rendered prince; in the third, captain; and in our text, author. The word rendered finisher (teleiotes) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament; but as its etymology indicates, it means a com­pleter, perfecter, finisher; one who brings any scheme or enterprise to its full and perfect consummation. “ Our” should be omitted and the inserted before the word faith, which is used here, as in many other parts of Scripture, to denote the Christian religion in its great­est fullness. See Acts 6:7 Acts 13:8; Galatians 1:23 Galatians 3:23; and Jude 1:3. The object of the Apostle in introducing this clause is therefore manifestly twofold: (1) to encourage us by keeping constantly be­fore our minds the fact that Jesus is himself the Leader and Per­fecter of the faith, regarded as God’ s plan of justification, sanctifi­cation, and redemption; and (2) to fill us with his mind and tem­per, by keeping constantly before us his example as the very best possible illustration of the nature, power and efficacy of faith. For such was his trust in God and in the word of his grace, that he willingly endured the greatest sufferings and reproaches “ for the joy that was set before him” ; the joy of presently sitting down with the Father on his throne, and saving a world by means of his own death and mediation. Hebrews 12:2 ---endured the cross, despising the shame,—It is difficult for anyone living in this age and country, to properly paraphrase this ex­pression. We know indeed that the pains and sufferings of cruci­fixion must have been very great; but of the shame that was at­tached to it when Christ died for our sins, we can have no ade­quate conception. For as Mr. Barnes well remarks, “ When we now think of the cross, it is not of the multitude of slaves, and thieves, and robbers, and rebels who have died on it, but of the one great victim, whose death has ennobled even this instrument of tor­ture, and encircled it with a halo of glory. We have been accus­tomed to read of it as an imperial standard in war in the days of Constantine, and as the banner under which armies have marched to conquest. It is intermingled with the sweetest poetry; it is a sa­cred thing in the most magnificent cathedrals; it adorns the altar, and is even an object of adoration; it is in the most elegant engrav­ings; it is worn by beauty and piety as an ornament near the heart; it is associated with all that is pure in love, great in self-sac­rifice, and holy in religion.” Before we can therefore feel and ap­preciate the full force of the Apostle’ s remark, we must remove from the cross “ the halo of glory” which has so long encircled it, and we must place ourselves in such an attitude that we can see, and hear, and feel, as did the contemporaries of our blessed Lord: we must look upon it as an instrument of torture designed for the pun­ishment and disgrace of only the lowest and vilest criminals. “ There is,” says the same pious author, “ a degree of dishonor which is at­tached to the guillotine, but the ignominy of a death on the cross was greater than that: there is a disgrace attached to the block, but the ignominy of the cross was greater than that; there is a much deeper infamy attached to the gallows, but the ignominy of the cross was greater than that.” And yet such was Christ’ s zeal for the glory of God, and such was his regard for the recompense of the reward that was before him, that he willingly submitted to all the sufferings and reproaches through which he had to pass on his way to the throne of the Majesty in the heavens. See notes on Hebrews 1:3 and Hebrews 8:1. Hebrews 12:3 ---For consider him that endured such contradiction, etc.—“ There is,” says Bishop Sanderson, “ scarce any other provocation to the performance of duty so prevailing with men as the example of such as have performed the same before them with glory and success.” Recognizing this well-attested fact, the Apostle would have his brethren, not only look off to Jesus as the Leader and Perfecter of the faith, but he would have them also carefully con­sider him as having meekly, patiently, perseveringly, and triumph­antly borne “ such contradiction of sinners against himself.” The word rendered contradiction (antilogia) means literally opposition by means of words and arguments, and it is so interpreted by some in this instance. But most expositors, as Chrysostom, CEcumenius, Theophylact, Delitzsch, and Alford, justly maintain that under this expression the Apostle includes all the opposition and persecution which Christ endured here from sinners, even to his agony on the cross. For the contrary word often results in the contrary action; and hence it is that antilogia in its second intention means opposi­tion of any kind. In John 19:12, for instance, the cognate verb antilegeo) means not merely to contradict Caesar, but also to rebel against him. It is therefore to the suffering, bleeding, and dying Savior that Paul here especially calls the attention of his brethren. Hebrews 12:3 ---lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.— The Apostle has still in view the foot-races of the amphitheatre, and from them he continues to draw his metaphors. As the knees of the contestants in the ancient arena were apt to grow weary, so also it is with those who run in the Christian race. They, too, are apt to grow weary and faint in their minds. But as in the Greek stadium, a forward look to one who had won the prize, and who was then ready to crown other victors at the end of their race, was apt to inspire the athlete with fresh courage and energy, so also it is in our Christian race. When the soul is bowed down under the manifold trials and afflic­tions of this life nothing so much revives it as looking off to Jesus, and carefully considering him who endured such contradiction of sinner against himself. This, it seems, was one of Paul’ s chief means of gaining strength and support in all his trials and afflic­tions. He looked off constantly to Jesus, and became so inspired with his pious and heroic example, that he was even anxious to fill up in his own personal experience that which was “ behind of the afflictions of Christ.” (Colossians 1:24.) TO ENDURE THEIR , (1) IN VIEW OF THEIR ; AND (2) IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ALL THE OF GOD, FOR THEIR OWN Hebrews 12:4-11 Hebrews 12:4 ---Ye have not yet resisted unto blood,— There seems to be a change of metaphor here, as in 1 Corinthians 9:24-27, from the agonistic race to the more severe contest of boxing. “ In these games, the boxers were accustomed to arm themselves for the fight with the caestus. This at first consisted of strong leathern thongs wound around the hands and extending only to the wrist, to give greater solidity to the fist. Afterward, these were made to extend to the elbow, and then to the shoulder, and finally they sowed pieces of lead or iron in them, that they might strike a heavier and more de­structive blow. The consequence was that those who were en­gaged in the fight were often covered with blood and that resist­ance unto blood showed a determination, courage, and purpose not to yield” (A. Barnes). The contest of the Hebrews had not as yet assumed this severe form. They had not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin. Their Christian profession had not yet cost them their lives. Stephen, James, and many others had re­sisted unto blood; but it is only of the living members of the Jeru­salem Church that our author here speaks. The persons addressed in this Epistle had not yet been called on to suffer what Christ and many others had endured for the sake of the truth. And hence as their afflictions were yet comparatively light, they were the more inexcusable for their timidity and cowardice. Hebrews 12:4 ---striving against sin.— Sin is here personified; and is supposed by many to be equivalent to sinners, the abstract being used merely for the concrete. But this is to sacrifice much both of the meaning and energy of the expression. It is not only of sin in others, but also of sin in ourselves that our author speaks. He himself found it necessary to strive against the depravity of his own nature, as well as against the enemies of the truth, in battling for the crown of life. (1 Corinthians 9:27.) And so also does everyone else, who like him would strive successfully in the arena of life. Hebrews 12:5 ---And ye have forgotten the exhortation, etc.— Commenta­tors are much divided on the question, whether this clause should be read affirmatively or interrogatively. See note on 3: 16. The for­mer view is taken by all the ancient expositors, and also by many of the moderns; as, for instance, Bengel, Kuinoel, Tholuck, Ebrard, and Alford; and the latter is maintained by Calvin, Beza, Braun, Bohme, Lachmann, Delitzsch, Stuart, Bleek, Lunemann, Mac- knight, and others; chiefly on the ground that the declarative mode has an air of too great severity and harshness. But this expression is no more harsh and severe than some others that occur in the Epistle; see, for instance, Hebrews 5:11-12. It is not to be supposed, how­ever, that in either of these cases, the charge is preferred against all the members of the Church. See note on Hebrews 5:12. Many of them may have remained faithful, and may have been striving earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. But that some of them had become very negligent in the study of God’ s word, and the discharge of their other Christian duties, is quite evident from what follows, as well as from other parts of the Epis­tle. “ You have quite forgotten,” says the Apostle, “ the exhorta­tion which discourses with you as with children.” And in conse­quences of this neglect, he further intimates that the hands of some of them were hanging down; that their knees had become feeble; and that they were, in fact, in great danger of apostatizing from the faith. Hebrews 12:5 ---My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord,— The Apostle quotes here from Proverbs 3:11-12, the Hebrew of which may be literally rendered as follows: My son, despise not the cor­rection of Jehovah, and do not murmur at his reproof: for whom Jehovah loves he reproves, as a father a son in whom he delights. Our author quotes freely, but accurately, from the original. His object is to still further encourage his brethren, by showing from the Old Testament Scriptures, that the light afflictions which they were then enduring, were really evidences, not of God’ s anger, but of his love. They served to indicate that God had still a tender regard for them, and that he was dealing with them as with chil­dren. The word rendered chastening (paideia) means such correction and discipline as are necessary in the education of chil­dren, and such as the Lord himself uses for the spiritual improve­ment of his people. This chastening of the Lord, the Apostle ex­horts his brethren not to despise or treat as a light matter; and on the other hand, not to be too much discouraged or dejected by it. Hebrews 12:6 ---For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth,— In this verse we have given the reason why we should not, on the one hand, treat lightly the chastening of the Lord; nor on the other be too greatly dejected by it. The simple fact that this chastening is from God, makes it a very grave and momentous matter; and at the same time it gives us the assurance that the chastening is not the punishment of revenge but the discipline of love. “ For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he re- ceiveth.” Not that he does this arbitrarily or unnecessarily: for God does not willingly grieve nor afflict any of the children of men. (Lamentations 3:33; Hosea 11:8.) But such is the common depravity and waywardness of our nature, that we all need this discipline; and God, therefore, as our ever-kind and gracious Educator metes out to us day by day such trials and afflictions as will best serve to humble and purify our hearts, and so to work out for us “ a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” (2 Corinthians 4:17.) No child of God need, therefore, expect to enter heaven without, on his way thither, passing through the furnace of afflictions. “ We must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:22.) Hebrews 12:7 ---If ye endure chastening:— That is, if it is a fact that you are suffering chastisement, this of itself is evidence that God is dealing with you as his children: for what son is there whom his earthly father does not chastise? How then can you expect, as the chil­dren of God, to escape his correction? Such is manifestly the meaning of the reading given in the Textus Receptus and our Eng­lish Version: a reading which is supported by Reiche, Bleek, Li nemann, Stuart, Bloomfield, and Tischendorf in his latest editions; on the ground that it is best supported by internal evidence, and especially that it is required by the antithesis that is given in the seventh and eighth verses. The force of this will appear from the following paraphrase of these two verses as given by Kuinoel, and followed by Bloomfield and others: “ If you have to conflict with trials and tribulations, you may thence infer that you are beloved of God, and that he takes care of you: but if you are exercised with no afflictions, you have reason to fear that God neglects you, as men neglect illegitimate children, of whose education and morals they take no care, leaving them wholly without chastisement.” This makes good sense, and harmonizes well with the context and design of the writer. But it must be confessed that the external evidence preponderates vastly in favor of substituting eis into, for) for ei if). See critical note. But to make sense of this read­ing has somewhat perplexed the critics. T. S. Green renders the phrase as in the amended text: “ At chastening, he enduring eis paideian hupomenete); as with sons God is dealing with you; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? The Vul­gate renders it thus: “ With a view to chastening, endure pa­tiently.” And Alford, following Chrysostom, Delitzsch, and oth­ers, translates it as follows: “ It is for chastisement that ye are en­during : as with sons God is dealing with you: for what son is there whom a father chasteneth-not ?” The paraphrase of Ghrys- ostom is to the point, and seems to indicate clearly the scope of the passage. “ It is for chastisement ye are enduring: not for punish­ment, not for torment, not for any evil purpose.” This rendering of the amended text differs but little in sense from the reading of the Textus Receptus, and is most likely correct. Hebrews 12:8 ---But if ye be without chastisement, etc.—If ye be without that discipline of which all the children of God have ever been partakers, it would follow that ye are really not his children: but that ye are bastards (nothoi), an illegitimate offspring, whose edu­cation is commonly neglected, much to their own injury and dis­grace. Instead, therefore, of murmuring and complaining at the chastening of the Lord, you should rather feel encouraged by it, knowing that it is evidence of your sonship, and of God’ s love for you as his adopted children. Hebrews 12:9 ---Furthermore, we have had fathers of our flesh, etc.—Or thus: Then again, the fathers of our flesh we once had as chastis­ers, and we reverenced them; shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of Spirits, and live? See Deuteronomy 21:18-21, touching the penalty of the law for disobedience to parents. The only matter that requires explanation in this verse, is the use of the words jlesh and spirit. In what sense are our earthly fathers said to be the fathers of our flesh? and in what sense is God said to be the Father of spirits? In reply to this query, we have given the following hypotheses: (1) It is said that we receive our bodies from our parents by natural generation; but that our spirits are the direct gift of God, formed by his own immediate creative energy (Primasius, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, Wetstein, De- litzsch). This hypothesis requires us to use both these words, flesh and spirit, in too limited a sense. The Apostle does not say that God is the Father of “ our” spirits merely, but “ of spirits” in general. And there is nothing in either the text or the context which limits the word “ flesh” simply to our bodies. This term is commonly used in a much wider sense in the Holy Scriptures. See references. (2) That God is the author and originator of our spir­itual life, as our parents are of our natural life. “ Flesh,” says Ebrard, “ denotes here as always the natural life produced by crea­ture powers, in opposition to the life which is produced by the sav­ing gracious act of God in regeneration. By natural generation we become carnal or fleshly men; but it is God who, by his Holy Spirit, causes our souls (psuchai) to be developed into sanctified spirits (pneumata). Such is also the interpretation of Cramer, Grotius, Bleek, De Wette, Lunemann, and others. But here again both the words are used in a sense which is not warranted by their usual acceptation in the Scriptures. (3) Others again, as Morns, Kuinoel, and Bohme, think that the word father, as used in this connection, means simply “ an upholder” or “ cherisher.” God is called the Father of spirits, say they, “ because he takes care of our spirits and provides for our spiritual wants, as our earthly parents provide for our physical wants.” This is, of course, true, as far as it goes; but like the other hypotheses it falls far short of being an adequate explanation of the passage. The words flesh and spirits must be understood and interpreted in harmony with the context and the special object of the writer, which is manifestly to give another reason why the Hebrew breth­ren should bear with patient endurance whatever trials and afflic­tions God might send on them: a reason which he draws from a comparison of God and his chastisements with our earthly parents and their chastisements. God, he argues, is infinitely perfect; and his chastisements are all like himself in this respect, that they are wise, and just, and good. But our earthly parents are like ourselves, frail, weak, and sinful; often erring in their attempts to educate us as well as in everything else. We, however, bore their imperfect chastisements with patience and reverence; much more then should we now bear with grateful resignation the wise and gracious chas­tisements of him who never errs, but who always corrects us for our own good, with the view of making us partakers of his holi­ness. This is manifestly the purpose of the author in the use of this passage; and hence it seems that he uses the words flesh and spirits, in this connection, after the manner of the Hebrews, chiefly as qualifying epithets. That in the use of the word “ father” he in­tends to convey the idea of origin and also of guardianship is, I think, quite obvious. But like produces like. “ Adam begat a son in his own likeness” (Genesis 5:3); and Christ says to the Jews, “ If ye were the children of Abraham ye would do the works of Abra­ham” (John 8:39), clearly recognizing the relation of resemblance between the parent and the child, between the producer and the thing produced. Now as this principle was well understood by the Hebrews, it was perfectly natural that the Apostle should use these words, flesh and spirit, according to the well known Hebrew idiom, as genitives of quality, to express with energy and brevity the at­tributes of our earthly parents on the one hand, and of God on the other. For throughout the Bible, the word flesh is often used sym­bolically to denote what is depraved, weak, or sinful; and so also the word spirit is often used in contrast with it, to denote what is pure, holy, and perfect. “ That which is born of the flesh,” says Christ, “ is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:6.) See also Romans 8:4-9; Galatians 5:16-25 Galatians 6:8, etc. The word flesh, then, in this connection is designed to indicate mainly that our earthly fathers are like ourselves, carnal, frail, sinful mor­tals ; and like ourselves they are therefore ever liable to err in their discipline. But the word spirits, as here applied to God, denotes that he has none of the weaknesses and infirmities of the flesh (see note on Hebrews 1:7) ; but that being himself, not only spirit (John 4:24), but also the Father of spirits, he cannot like our earthly fathers err in his chastisements. They are all the gifts and offspring of his love, designed to make us wiser and better, so that we may l>ecome partakers of his holiness. If I am right in this explanation, it follows that our text fur­nishes no grounds whatever for the doctrine of creationism, which many attempt to draw from it. It is not the purpose of our author to make known to us in this connection the origin of either the body or the spirit of man. God is as really the Creator of the one as he is of the other. At first they were both formed miraculously; but for aught that appears in our text, they may now be equally the product of natural generation, under the all-pervading, per­meating, and gracious providence of Him in “ whom we live, and move, and have our being.” (Acts 17:28.) Hebrews 12:10 ---For they verily for a few days, etc.— What does the author mean by the phrase, “ for a few days” (pros oligas hemeras) ? Does he mean the time during which our fathers, according to the flesh, exercised their authority over us; that is, during our minor­ity ? Or does he mean that their discipline had reference chiefly to the few days of our present earthly life; while the chastisements of God have supreme reference to our eternal welfare? The former, say Luther, Grotius, Bleek, Macknight, Stuart, Delitzsch, and Al­ford ; the latter, say Calvin, Calmet, Bengel, Tholuck, and Ebrard. The construction is elliptical; and it is therefore difficult to deter­mine with absolute certainty what are the exact points of the an­tithesis which our author intends to express. But to my mind the former view seems much more natural, and also more in harmony with the scope of the passage than the latter. Our earthly parents corrected us (1) for a little while, and then left us to our own err­ing judgment. But not so with God; he never leaves us; never forsakes us; but always watches over us, and when necessary cor­rects us. (2) Our fathers often erred during even the few days that we were subject to them; they corrected us according to what then seemed good in their own eyes. But God never errs: he al­ways corrects us for our own good, with the view of making us partakers of his holiness. We have then given in this paragraph three leading reasons why we should, with patient resignation, humbly submit to the Divine chastisements: (1) they all proceed from the love and benevolence of God: “ Whom the Lord loves he chastens, and scourges every son whom he receives.” (2) They come from one who is himself infi­nitely perfect, and who is in no respect subject to the weaknesses and imperfections of our carnal nature. (3) They are all intended for our highest good, and serve to make us partakers of the Divine nature, by helping us to escape the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Peter 1:4.) This thought our author now pro­ceeds to develop more fully in the following verse. Hebrews 12:11 ---Now no chastening for the present, etc.—“ This,” says Ebrard, “ is a precious verse, of which the only proper commentary is our own personal experience.” Now all chastisement for the present seemeth to be a matter not of joy but of grief. This much the Apostle here concedes as a simple and acknowledged fact. All chastisement, both human and Divine, gives us present pain. This is its object; and without pain there can indeed be no chastisement. And hence it is for the time being, a matter not of joy but of grief. So we all feel and think. Hebrews 12:11 ---nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness—Though it is at first bitter to the taste, it nev­ertheless afterward becomes a tree of life which yields constantly “ the peaceable fruit of righteousness.” That is, it produces righ­teousness as its fruit; and this fruit gives peace and consolation to the once grieved and troubled soul. “ It is,” says Tholuck, “ fruit of righteousness to be enjoyed in peace after the conflict is over.” unto them which are exercised thereby.— Not to all; but only to those who are well exercised by it. The training of the ancient palaestra was of no service to such athletes as, deeming it a life of toil and drudgery, refused to submit to the rules and regulations of the contest. But to the victors in the games, the crown of olive pine, laurel, or parsley, was a boon of very great value. And just so it is in the school of Christ. To those who are of a perverse and rebellious spirit, the discipline of the Master is but “ a savor of death unto death.” Instead of softening and sanctifying the hearts of such persons, it only serves to make them more obstinate and rebellious. But to those who see in it the kind and gracious hand of God, it never fails to bring peace, joy, and consolation. So the purest and best of men have always testified. David says, “ Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now I keep thy word.” And again he says in the same connection, “ It is good for me that I have been afflicted, that I might learn thy statutes.” (Psalms 119:67 Psalms 119:71.) To the same effect is also the testimony of Paul in several of his other Epistles. Writing to the Romans he says, “ We glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.” (Romans 5:3-5.) And in his second Epistle to the Corinthians he says, “ Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” (2 Corinthians 4:17.) This is all in har­mony with our own blessed experience in the Divine life. We never feel that we have suffered too much or too severely from the hand of God. THE HEBREW ARE TO ROUSE TO MORE AND IN THEIR COURSEHeb_12:12-17 Hebrews 12:12 ---Wherefore lift up the hands, etc.—That is, since it is true that afflictions are the chastisements of the Lord, designed for your own greatest good, you should from this take courage and bring to their right position the relaxed hands and the paralyzed knees of the inner man. These words are cited from Isaiah 35:3, and may denote weariness arising from any cause whatever. Most expositors agree that there is an allusion here to the ancient palaestra. But as Isaiah in the prophecy quoted has reference (1) to the Jews on their return from Babylon to Jerusalem, and (2) to Christians on their way to the heavenly Jerusalem, it is more prob­able that Paul, in quoting and applying the words of the Prophet, draws his imagery simply from the case of weary travelers. His meaning is, however, in either case the same. He calls on the strong to strengthen and encourage the weak; and on the weak to take fresh courage and run their race with patient perseverance, in view of the fact that God is with them, caring for them, and sanctifying even their greatest afflictions to their good. Hebrews 12:13 ---And make straight paths for your feet,— The writer has still before him the image of a company of persons marching on­ward to the heavenly Jerusalem. Some of them are lame, weak, and much disheartened by reason of the many obstacles in the way. And in order if possible to save such, the Apostle admonishes his stronger and more courageous brethren to make the paths of all straight and smooth, so that even the lame might be encouraged by the direct­ness and evenness of the way, to persevere in it to the end. The same sentiment is forcibly presented in the fourteenth chapter of Romans; and it is also frequently and variously illustrated in the last great division of the prophecies of Isaiah (chapters 40-66). In this section the prophet has reference, as in the thirty-fifth chapter, (1) to the return of the Jews from Babylon to Jerusalem, under Zerubbabel; and (2) to the more sublime march of the re­deemed, under Christ, from the captivity of sin and Satan to the free enjoyments of the heavenly Jerusalem. 0 In this march, both Paul and Isaiah insist that there should be no meanderings in the ways of sin; and that no obstacles should be left as stumbling- blocks in the way of the weak; but that the course of all should be straightforward in the King’ s highway of holiness. The voices of many harbingers should still be heard proclaiming before the King’ s army, “ Prepare ye the way of the Lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” (Isaiah 40:3.) See also. Such proclamations are strengthen­ing and encouraging to all; and might serve to help even the weak and dejected to persevere in their onward march to the everlasting Zion. Hebrews 12:14 ---Follow peace with all men,— There is no noun expressed in the orignal corresponding with the word “ men” ; and it may there­fore be a question whether we should supply the word “ men,” as in our English Version, or the word “ brethren ” as is done by Michaelis, Storr, Tholuck, Bleek, Ebrard, Delitzsch, Alford, and others. “ Individual believers,” says Delitzsch, “ are exhorted to cherish peaceful relations with all the members of the community, even with the lame, sick, and weak. The improvement of such is to be aimed at, not by carnal contention, harsh acts of judgment, and un­charitable avoidance of their society; nor yet by merely setting them a good example in the purity and decision of our own con­duct, while coldly waiting for the first advance on their side to­wards mutual explanation or agreement; but by pursuing peace on our own part; that is, by earnest active endeavors after a good un­derstanding, and pursuing or hunting after peace as a noble prey or object of search.” This is all good and excellent as far as it goes. But I see no sufficient reason for limiting this course of action simply to “ the brethren.” The peace and prosperity of the Church may depend largely on the demeanor of its members toward those that are without, as well as toward one another. And I therefore think with Cecumenius, Theophylact, Bohme, Liinemann, Mac- knight, Clarke, and others, that the reference is to “ all men,” whether believers or unbelievers. The Apostle well knew that the Hebrew brethren, by living harmlessly and giving no unnecessary offense to either Jews or Gentiles, might greatly promote the peace and prosperity of the Church: and hence he exhorts them, as he does the Roman brethren, to live peaceably with all men as far as possible: that is, as far as the law of Christ will permit. He would have us imitate Christ in this respect, as well as in everything else. Hebrews 12:14 ---and holiness,— The original word (hagiastnos) is a verbal noun, and denotes the putting on of the Divine holiness (hagiotes), or the becoming partakers of it, as indicated in the tenth verse. Our depraved nature is prone to resist the injurious; and in times of war and persecution, men are apt to follow after strife and con­tention. But the advice of the Apostle is quite different. Pursue peace, he says, and earnestly follow after a pure and holy life. Hebrews 12:14 ---without which no man shall see the Lord:— That is, without which holiness or sanctity of life, no one shall be admitted into God’ s presence so as to enjoy his favor and fellowship. (Matthew 5:6) “ For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteous­ness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” and what sympathy and concord can there be between an infinitely holy God and an impure human spirit? Like loves its like in Heaven, Earth, and Hell. And hence the earnest exhortation of God to all who would enjoy his fellowship: “ Become ye holy, for I am holy.” (1 Peter 1:16.) Hebrews 12:15 ---Looking diligently— (epispopountes) observing carefully. This is an exhortation, not merely to the overseers (episkopoi) of the Hebrew Church, but also to all its other members. The Apos­tle calls on every one of them to carefully examine his own heart and life, while he at the same time exercises a prudent and judi­cious oversight over his brethren. Hebrews 12:15 ---lest any man fail of the grace of God;—“ The image,” says Chrysostom, “ is taken from a company of travelers, one of whom lags behind, and so never reaches the end of the long and laborious journey.” Those who do so, fail of course to secure the promised reward: for they only who endure to the end shall be saved. Stuart very happily expresses the idea of the Apostle, in its proper connection, as follows: “ See well to it, that no one fail of obtaining that Divine favor which is the result of holiness.” Hebrews 12:15 ---lest any root of bitterness, etc.— We have here given another example of Hebrew parallelism. In the preceding clause, the Apostle admonishes his brethren to take heed and watch carefully, lest any one by lagging behind on the King’ s highway of holiness, should fail to reach the portals of the celestial city; and so fall short of the grace of God. But in this second member of the par­allelism, he goes a step further, and cautions his brethren to see well to it, that no one, like Achan (Joshua 7:25-26), by his evil example trouble and defile the whole Church. Our author seems to have reference here to Deuteronomy 29:16-21, where Moses admon­ishes his brethren to beware of the sin of idolatry; “ Lest,” he says, “ there should be among you man, or woman, or tribe, whose heart turneth away from the Lord our God, to go and serve the gods of those nations; lest there should be among you a root that beareth gall and wormwood; and it come to pass, when he heareth the words of this curse, that he bless himself in the heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst.” Paul’ s root of bitterness, then, is one which, as Moses says, “ beareth gall and wormwood.” The metaphor is used here to denote anyone who is himself bitterly opposed to the faith of the Gospel, and who labors to turn others from its simplicity and purity. Such a man not unfrequently trou­bles and defiles a whole congregation by his evil example and false principles. In 1Ma 1:10, Antiochus Epiphanes is called a sin­ful root (risa hamartolos) because from him iniquity sprung up all over the land, as a luxuriant crop of vegetables. Hebrews 12:16 ---Lest there be any fornicator, etc.—This is but an amplifi­cation of the admonitory lesson given in the preceding verse. See to it, says the Apostle, that no one by falling behind from any cause whatever, come short of the grace of God; and particularly, that no one apostatize from the faith, and so corrupt others by his bad example and false principles; and furthermore, that no one be so given up to the lusts of the flesh and to the neglect of spiritual things, that like the licentious and profane Esau, he will barter away his birthright as a child of God for a mere mess of pottage. The word fornicator (pornos) is to be taken in its literal sense, as denoting one who is given up to sensual lusts and pleasures; and the word profane (bebelos) means one who is regardless of God and of his religion. Both words are descriptive of one and the same person, viewed from different standpoints: for the abandoned fornicator is always a profane person; and the man who throws off all the restraints of religion, is sure to indulge in all manner of car­nal excesses. Esau was no doubt both a fornicator and a profane person. This view is most in harmony with the plain and obvious meaning of the text, as well as with the traditions of the Jews. Hebrews 12:16 ---who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.— The account of this is given in Genesis 25:27-34, to which the reader is referred for a plain statement of the facts. Such was the abandoned and profligate state of Esau’ s mind, that for one meal he sold his rights of primogeniture (ta prototokia heautou). These may be best un­derstood by a comparison of the fortunes of Jacob and Esau with their descendants. They evidently involve the rights and privi­leges of the Abrahamic covenants with respect to both the posses­sion of Canaan and the birth of the Messiah. Hebrews 12:17 ---For ye know how that afterward, etc.— Esau, as we have seen, sold his rights of primogeniture to his brother Jacob for a mess of pottage; and afterward, when he wished to obtain the blessing, which was really a part of what he had sold, he was re­jected by both his father and his God (Genesis 27:31-41): for the blessing of Isaac was in this case the blessing of God. Hebrews 12:17 ---for he found no place of repentance,— What is the meaning of this? Does the Apostle mean repentance on the part of Esau, or on the part of his father Isaac? The former, say Luther, Calvin, Grotius, Bengel, DeWette, Hofmann, Delitzsch, Alford, and all the ancient Greek expositors: the latter, say Beza, Tholuck, Ebrard, Liinemann, Stuart, Macknight, and most of the other modern ex­positors. In either case the main lesson taught is about the same. For whatever construction be put on the several words of this sen­tence, it must be obvious that the object of the Apostle is to re­mind his readers, that the mistake of Esau, once committed, was committed forever: that no possible change of his mind could in any way effect a change in the mind and purposes of God. We might, therefore, without doing violence to the scope of the argument, refer the word repentance (tnetanoia) to either Esau himself or to Isaac as God’ s representative. But with the ancient exposi­tors, I prefer the reference to Isaac, (1) because this is required by the literal meaning of the word repentance, which properly de­notes a change of mind produced by sorrow for sin; and (2) be­cause the phrase “ place of repentance,” means properly a place where the repentance of the sinner is made available. Whenever a sinner believes and repents, he is brought within the sphere of God’ s forgiving mercy. God can now, for Christ’ s sake, pardon and justify him, because he has come within the sphere of true and gen­uine repentance. But to this place of repentance on the part of the sinner, and of mercy on the part of God, the apostate has no access (see notes on Hebrews 6:4-6) ; and neither had Esau, so far as respects his forfeited birthrights. That he may have afterward repented of his sins, and so obtained forgiveness, is I think possible; but not so with regard to his despised birthrights. These had by one foolish and irreligious act, been irrecoverably lost. This, the Hebrews well understood; and hence the Apostle holds up this case as an example of warning to them, while he cautions them to beware lest they too by their negligence and folly should forfeit their birth­rights as the children of God, and so place themselves beyond the divinely prescribed limits of repentance. Hebrews 12:17 ---though he sought it carefully with tears.— Sought what? Many able expositors, as Chrysostom, Grotius, Luther, Ebrard, and Alford, refer the pronoun it (auten) to repentance as its ante­cedent: but it is better with Calvin, Bengel, Bleek, Hofmann, Macknight, Delitzsch, and others, to make blessing (eu log tan) the antecedent. Esau had his heart set on receiving the blessing; and it was this that he sought so earnestly with tears. The whole sen­tence may therefore be construed and arranged according to our English idiom, as follows: For ye know that even when afterward he wished to inherit the blessing, though he sought it earnestly with tears, he was rejected; for he found no place of repentance. Or the order of the original may be preserved as in the English Version, by simply enclosing the words, “ for he found no place of repentance” in a parenthesis.FURTHER AGAINST , AND EX­ TO GREATER ZEAL AND IN THE DIVINE LIFE,Hebrews 12:18-29 Hebrews 12:18 ---For ye are not come, etc.—“ For” connects this verse with what precedes. Ye should, says the writer, look to it diligently that no one fall short of the grace of God; that no root of bitter­ness spring up to trouble you, and so to defile the many, and that there be among you no such licentious and profane person as Esau: for your privileges and responsibilities under the New Cov­enant are greatly superior to those of your fathers under the Old Covenant. For ye have not come near to the mountain that is tan­gible [material, and so capable of being touched], and that burned with fire; and to blackness, and darkness, and tempest, etc. The word mountain (orei) is not expressed in our best manuscripts, but it is manifestly understood. Some expositors take the words mountain, fire, blackness, dark­ness, and tempest, as indicating so many separate and distinct ob­jects of approach. Thus, “ Ye have not come near to a tangible mountain, and to a kindled fire, and to blackness, and to darkness, and to a tempest,” etc. The construction is ambiguous, but the rendering of our English Version is more in harmony with the parallel passage given in Deuteronomy 4:11, to which our author here evi­dently refers. See also Deuteronomy 5:23 Deuteronomy 9:15. In all these parallel passages, “ flaming fire” is taken as an attribute of the mountain, and not as a separate object. Hebrews 12:19 ---And the sound of a trumpet,— The several clauses of this verse are best illustrated by the following brief extracts from the original narrative as given in Exodus: “ And it came to pass on the third day [that is, say the Jews, on the sixth day of the month Sivan, just fifty days after the Exodus] in the morning, that there were thunderings and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. And Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire; and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trum­pet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.” (Exodus 19:16-19.) After giving some further instructions to the people through Moses, God him­self spoke to them from the top of Sinai, saying, “ I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me,” etc. Thus, in an audible voice, he delivered to them all the words of the Decalogue; and in the meantime, “ all the people saw the thunder­ings and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking. And when the people saw it, they removed and stood afar off. And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear; but let not the Lord speak with us, lest we die.” (Exodus 20:18-19.) Thus they “ entreated that the word should not be spoken to them anymore.” Hebrews 12:20 ---For they could not endure that which was commanded, —Our author now assigns parenthetically the reason why the an­cient Hebrews felt so much terror and alarm, as they stood at the foot of Sinai, in the immediate presence of God, and heard from his own lips, in awful solemnity, the words of the Decalogue. “ They could not bear that which was commanded, If even a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned.” The original decree as given in Exodus 19:12-13, is as follows: “ And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to your­selves, that ye go not into the mount, or touch the border of it; whosoever toucheth the mount shall surely be put to death: there shall not a hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned or shot through; whether it be a beast or a man, it shall not live.” The Apostle quotes freely from the Hebrews, giving in this, as in many other instances, the substance but not the exact words of the origi­nal. The phrase “ thrust through with a dart” is manifestly an in­terpolation from the Septuagint, introduced into our text by some post-apostolic writer. See critical note. Hebrews 12:21 ---And so terrible was the sight, etc.— No such saying of Moses, as that given in our text, is found in the Pentateuch. And hence the question has been often asked and considered, “ Whence did our author obtain these words?” Some think that he obtained them from Jewish tradition, while others suppose that this is a mere inference of Paul, drawn from the appalling circumstances of the case. But how very absurd and unsatisfactory are all such hy­potheses! The only proper answer to such questions is to be found in the promise which Christ gave to the Apostles touching all such matters: “ Howbeit,” says he, “ when the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth.” (John 16:13.) See also John 14:26, and 1 Corinthians 2:10-13. The Holy Spirit, then, was Paul’ s infallible guide in writing every word and sentence of this Epistle. From it, and not from Jewish tradition or logical infer­ence, he learned whatever facts and principles were necessary for our edification, as well as for the edification and encouragement of his own persecuted and disheartened Hebrew brethren. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ Hebrews 12:2. A runner would forget the things behind him and be looking toward the goal and what it would mean to reach it. Likewise the Christian should have his eyes on Jesus who has set the goal at the end of a faithful life. Author means one who sets an example for others to follow, and finisher is one who carries out that example by a faithful life unto the end. The pronoun our is not in the original and is not necessary to the thought in the mind of the apostle. The sentence denotes the faith of the Gospel as it is demonstrated by the life of Christ. The joy that was set before Jesus was that of being the Saviour of the world, even though it required Him to die on the cross. Despising means to belittle or count as nothing the shame of such a death. It was bad enough to die at all, the just for the unjust, but it was more humiliating to die by crucifixion because only the worst of criminals were usually executed by that means. That is why Paul makes the remark that Jesus obeyed his Father unto death, "even the death on the cross" (Philippians 2:8). Christ was rewarded for his humble service by being seated at the right hand of God, and those who fashion their lives after the pattern set by Jesus will be permitted to live with him and God. Hebrews 12:3. Christians were persecuted for the sake of Jesus and often thought their sufferings were unnecessary. On this account they sought to avoid it by deserting Him and going back to Moses as their lawgiver. But Jesus also suffered for righteousness' sake, including mistreatment from sinners who were usually contradicting His teaching. Christians should consider this example and take courage for the conflict. Faint in your minds means to be discouraged on account of trials. Hebrews 12:4. They had not suffered as much as Jesus did, for he was compelled to defend His faith to the extent of shedding his blood. Hebrews 12:5. The exhortation referred to is in Proverbs 3:11-12. This exhortation by Solomon is based on a truth that is in force under all ages of the world, hence Paul cites it and applies it to the servants of God in the Christian Dispensation. Despise not denotes that they should not belittle or disrespect the correction. Chastening refers to the discipline that a righteous parent will exercise upon his son for disobedience. To faint means to become despondent over the rebukes of our Heavenly Father. Hebrews 12:6. The Lord chastises his children because of His love for them, even to the extent of scourging (suffering them to be afflicted) for their training. Hebrews 12:7. Paul is making his comparison to an earthly parent who is the proper kind, not one who fails in his duty of controlling his children. God chastens his children for their good as do fleshly fathers their sons. Christians are exhorted to submit humbly to the chastisement from God, on the principle that His love for them prompts the correction. Hebrews 12:8. Bastards and not sons. Even so-called "illegitimate" boys are sons of men and women, and are brought forth by the same law of reproduction that is the source of all human beings. Hence the term as used In contrast with sons is employed in a technical or legal sense. The idea is that if a man refrained from using discipline on a boy it would be on the ground that he was not his son; that he belonged to another outside his own family. Likewise, if a professed Christian objects to being chastised by the Lord, it implies that he does not claim to be a son of the Lord. Hebrews 12:9. All good persons remember with appreciation the punishment they received from their fathers in the days of their minority, for they realize that it was for their good. How much more should we accept with humility the correction from the Father of spirits (our spiritual Father) and live a life of uprightness. Hebrews 12:10. For a few days. During the days when we were minors which was a comparatively short time in the light of the endless future. Their own pleasure. Not that the fathers obtained any enjoyment from the punishing of their children, but the word means that it was according to their best judgment. God is infinite in judgment and totally unselfish in His motive for chastising his children, and does it solely for their own advantage. Hebrews 12:11. Punishment is always unpleasant to the body and cannot bring any enjoyment for the time being. The good done is to be realized in the form of a better line of conduct by having been corrected from a life of waywardness. Of course this is on condition that the children are exercised thereby, which means they take the correction properly and amend their ways. Hebrews 12:12. Hands hanging down and feeble knees indicate a spirit of despair or aversion to the chastisement for the punishment of wrong. Such persons should take a different attitude in the matter and look upon the situation as one where they really have been favored. Hebrews 12:13. Make straight paths. Christians are not permitted to devise their own plan of religious life; that has been done by the Lord. The meaning is that they should be careful to walk In the path that has been prepared for them. They should do this not only for their own sake, but for others who may be influenced by their example. Otherwise if they do that which is not right, those who have less knowledge or ability might be confused and caused to lose the way. Instead of such a result, their lives should be such that the lame or weaker ones may be healed or led aright. Hebrews 12:14. Follow peace should be on the basis of Jas 3:17 which requires the peace to be in harmony with the pure wisdom from above. Paul recognizes the necessity of this proviso in Romans 12:18 whore he says "if it be possible." Holiness is the same as righteousness and without it no man shall sec the Lord which means to enjoy Him. Hebrews 12:15. Look diligently denotes the idea of being careful how one conducts himself, otherwise he may get out of the right path and fall from the grace or favor of God. Root of bitterness means a feeling of hatred against others, which could be only a source of trouble among disciples that would spread defilement among them. Hebrews 12:16. This verse specifies some of the things referred to in general terms in the preceding one. Fornicators should not be permitted to remain among the disciples because of their evil influence (1 Corinthians 5:6-7). A profane person is one who makes a temporal use of a sacred thing. That is what Esau did when he sold his birthright (a sacred possession) for a mess of food (a temporal article). In general practice it means any disciple who would try to obtain some earthly advantage out of his profession of faith in Christ. Hebrews 12:17. Found no place for repentance. Repentance means more than sorrow or regret for a mistake, but also requires that it be corrected. Esau knew afterward that he had acted foolishly in selling his birthright, but he had no opportunity for getting it back, for Jacob would not give it up. Hebrews 12:18. From here through several verses the apostle returns to the leading subject of the epistle, namely, the contrasts between the system under Moses and that under Christ. The mount that might be touched was Sinai because it was a literal one (Exodus 19:12), and it was from this mount that the old law was given. The rest of the verse is descriptive of the conditions when the Israelites approached the area. Hebrews 12:19. This continues the conditions at Sinai which are recorded in Exodus 20:19 and other passages in connection therewith. Hebrews 12:20. Could not endure that which was commanded sounds as if God required something that the people could not do, which we know was not the case. The meaning is that the conditions were so awe-inspiring that it overwhelmed them with terror. The things mentioned in the latter half of the verse are recorded in Exodus 19:12-13. Hebrews 12:21. This remark of Moses is not recorded in Exodus, but Paul was inspired and was able to report this part of the circumstance for our information. Hebrews 12:22. The preceding verses describe the mount to which Christians do not come (as the Israelites did); the apostle now will describe the mount to which they have come. He does so by a series of points of identity which apply to the one divine institution under Christ, which was set up in Jerusalem which is termed Mount Zion. Christians do not actually go to the city of Jerusalem, but they come to the institution that was set up in that city. In coming to this divine institution we are brought into near relation with other spiritual places and things, to be named in this and the next two verses. City of the living God is that one in which He lives and which is the one "which hath foundations" (chapter 11:10). Heavenly Jerusalem is a contrast between Heaven above and the literal one below. The angels live in Heaven but are used in service for the people of God (chapter 1:14). By coming into the church it brings us into the benefit of these holy services. Hebrews 12:23. General assembly is from , which means the same as a mass meeting, and refers to the universal membership of the church of Christ. The same institution is composed of the firstborn which is plural in the original Greek and also is in the possessive case. The members of the church are called firstborn in a figurative sense. In old times the firstborn child was heir to the possessions of his father. Since all faithful members of the church are heirs of the spiritual possessions of Christ, they are here called the firstborn (ones). The phrase church of the firstborn is not a scriptural title or name of the church as it is erroneously used often by our brethren. Written in heaven. The names of the faithful children of God are enrolled in heaven (Luke 10:20; Revelation 21:27). Membership in the church of Christ brings us into fellowship with God who is the Judge of all. It also makes us have relationship with the spirits of just men made perfect, meaning those who have reached the complete state under the providence of God, such as those described in Matthew 27:53; Romans 8:29; 1 Corinthians 15:20; Ephesians 4:8; Jude 1:14. Hebrews 12:24. Jesus became the mediator of the new covenant by giving that law into the world to take the place of the law of Moses. Blood of sprin- kling is so worded because under the system of Moses the blood of animals was literally sprinkled on the objects to be affected. The blood of Christ is sprinkled figuratively when men obey the Gospel which brings them into the benefits of that blood. (See 1 John 1:7.) Speaketh better things than that of Abel. The blood of Abel cried for vengeance (Genesis 4:10 Genesis 4:15), while the blood of Christ calls for mercy (chapter 2:17). The word better means "more useful or serviceable." The blood of Christ opened up a way of salvation for all mankind, which was not true of the blood of Abel. Hebrews 12:25. Him that speaketh means Christ whose blood speaks better things than that of Abel. Judaizers would have the Christians refuse Jesus by going back to Moses for their law. Moses spake on earth (at Sinai) and even his law dared not be refused (chapter 2:1, 2; 10:29). Jesus spake from heaven when he sent the Holy Spirit down to the apostles in order to give them the new law. Paul asks how can we escape rejection from the Lord if we refuse His law. Hebrews 12:26. Whose voice means that of God, speaking in conjunction with that of Christ who was always associated with God in all that was done (Genesis 1:26; John 1:3). Then shook the earth occurred at Sinai as described in verses 18-20. That shaking brought in a new system of religious practice, but it was one that was not destined to be permanent. Instead, God purposed to bring about one more shaking that was to be more extensive and would involve both heaven and earth; the event is predicted in Haggai 2:5-9. The prediction refers to the time when the Lord was to bring in the New Covenant and thereby dis-annul all other systems that had been in use. Hebrews 12:27. Paul explains that since there was to be but one more shaking, it signified that what would be left in force after the shaking would be so firm that it wool be useless to try the shaking again. Such was the case, for when the great shaking took place at Jerusalem on Pentecost, the Jewish and Patriarchal Dispensations were gone and only the kingdom of Christ was able to remain as our verse says. Hebrews 12:28. We (Christians) receiving a kingdom takes place when people renounce the worldly life and come into the kingdom of Christ. Cannot be moved is explained in the preceding verse, and in Daniel 2:44. With such an institution in which we may live, there is much reason for our serving God acceptably, and the apostle prays that divine grace may be had in the service. Reverence and godly fear are virtually the same, meaning profound regard for God and resolve to treat him with full devotion. Hebrews 12:29. God is merciful to all those who will accept His mercy, but he is a revenging God upon those who do not respect His law (chapter 10:28, 29; verse 25). Robert Milligan Commentary On Hebrews 13 SECTION TWELVEHeb_13:1-25The Apostle has now accomplished his main object in writing this unique epistle. In trains of profound thought and lofty sub¬limity, he has presented to us Jesus in all his varied relations and transcendent excellencies: with the hand of a master he has also traced the leading features of the economy of redemption; shown the infinite superiority of Christianity over Judaism; and most strikingly and impressively illustrated the obligations of all Christians to follow Jesus, if need be, “ through floods and flames” on their way to the everlasting Zion. And now in conclusion, he simply exhorts his brethren to be faithful in the discharge of vari¬ous personal and social duties: and particularly 1. To love one another as brethren in Christ (Hebrews 13:1). 2. To be hospitable (Hebrews 13:2). 3. To sympathize with those in bonds (Hebrews 13:3). 4. To be faithful in their marriage relations (Hebrews 13:4). 5. To be satisfied with their condition and circumstances (Hebrews 13:5-6). 6. To follow the example and imitate the faith of their departed leaders (Hebrews 13:7). 7. To be firm and stable in the faith of Christ, who was offered up without the gate of Jerusalem, in order to lead our minds away from that which is symbolical and earthly to that which is real and heavenly (Hebrews 13:8-15). 8. To be benevolent (Hebrews 13:16). 9. To obey their overseers who had the care of their souls (Hebrews 13:17). 10. To pray for himself and especially that he might soon be restored to them (Hebrews 13:18-19). After delivering these several exhortations, our author brings the Epistle to a close as follows: 1. He offers up a brief but earnest prayer for their perfection (Hebrews 13:20-21). 2. He beseeches them to receive with favor what he had written for their encouragement and edification (Hebrews 13:22). 3. He announces to them the fact that Timothy had been set at liberty; and that it was his purpose to see them in connection with Timothy very soon (Hebrews 13:23). 4. He sends his own salutation and also that of his Italian brethren to the elders and saints in Jerusalem (Hebrews 13:24). 5. Benediction (Hebrews 13:25). From this general analysis of the section, we see that it may be naturally and properly divided into the following paragraphs: I. Hebrews 13:1-7. Exhortation to steadfast perseverance and fidelity in the discharge of sundry personal and social duties. II. Hebrews 13:8-16. Exhortation to stability in Christian doctrine and practice; and to avoid being carried away from the faith of Christ by unprofitable discussions and controversies about such matters as clean and unclean meats. III. Hebrews 13:17-19. Our duties to the overseers, and other public servants of the Church. IV. Hebrews 13:20-21. An earnest benedictory prayer in behalf of the Hebrews. V. Hebrews 13:22-25. Closing remarks. TO AND IN THE OF SUNDRY AND SOCIAL DUTIESHeb_13:1-7 Hebrews 13:1 ---Let brotherly love continue.— In the Greek classics, the word Philadelphia means the natural love which brothers and sis­ters have for one another; but in the New Testament it means the love which all Christians should cherish for each other as mem­bers of the one family of God in Christ. See Romans 12:10; 1 Thessalonians 4:9; 1 Peter 1:22; 2 Peter 1:7. This cardinal Christian virtue is one of the first fruits of that “ faith which worketh by love:” and accordingly from the beginning it served to distinguish Christians from all others as the peculiar people of God. For we are told that immediately after the setting up of the Kingdom, “ all that believed were together and had all things common.” See Acts 2:44-47. After this, when tribulations and persecutions began to abound, “ because of the word,” the love of many waxed cold. But it is evident from this Epistle (Hebrews 6:10 Hebrews 10:32), as well as from Acts of Apostles (Acts 12:5 Acts 12:12 Acts 15:22 Acts 15:25), that the Christians of Palestine continued to cherish for one another, a feeling of frater­nal affection. And hence our author simply says to them, “ Let brotherly love continue.” Hebrews 13:2 ---Be not forgetful to entertain strangers:— The duty of kind­ness to strangers was enjoined by the Law of Moses. “ The stran­ger (proselutos) that dwelleth with you,” said God to the He­brews, “ shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.’ ' (Leviticus 19:34.) Our author therefore assumes here, that his breth­ren understood their duty in this respect; and he simply admon­ishes them not to neglect it. The word (philoxenia) occurs only here and in Romans 12:13; in both of which places it is supposed by Delitzsch, Alford, and others, to denote a mere exercise of broth­erly love. But I see no sufficient reason for so limiting it. It seems rather to denote all exercise of that love which we owe to all men. (2 Peter 1:7.) For this virtue, as well as for brotherly love, the primitive Christians were very remarkable. Even Julian the apos­tate, in his forty-ninth Epistle, assigns “ kindness to strangers” as one of the means by which their religion was so rapidly propa­gated. Hebrews 13:2 ---For thereby some have entertained angels unawares.— There is reference here no doubt to Abraham and Lot (Genesis 18:2-10 Genesis 19:1-3) ; and perhaps also to some other cases not recorded in the Holy Scriptures. The idea of the Apostle is this; that the free and liberal exercise of this social virtue may be of very great service to ourselves as well as to others. Our guests may often be messen­gers sent to us from God, for our own special benefit, as were the angels who saved Lot and his family from the ruin of Sodom. At all events, they give us an opportunity of showing to the world our love for Christ, and our respect for his laws and ordinances. I know it may be said, that the establishment of so many hotels and the various other improvements of modern civilization, have some­what lessened our obligations to receive and entertain strangers. This is no doubt true to some extent. But it should not be forgot­ten that our mission is to do good to all men as we have opportu­nity (Galatians 6:10) : and it is written for our encouragement that “ Whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones [who believe in Jesus] a cup of cold water only, in the name of a disci­ple, shall in nowise lose his reward.” (Matthew 10:42.) Hebrews 13:3 ---Remember them that are in bonds,— The reference here is no doubt chiefly to those who were in bonds on account of their reli­gion ; but the injunction may, and probably does, include prisoners of all classes. All such need our sympathy and our aid as far as it can be given. And as Christ himself came to preach glad tidings to the meek, to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound (Isaiah 60:1), so also we, as his disciples and co-workers, are re­quired to sympathize with the prisoners, as if we ourselves were bound with them; remembering that so long as we are in the body we too are subject to like calamities. The reader will observe that in these brief sententious admoni­tions, we have all the force, ardor, and characteristic haste of the great Apostle of the Gentiles. Most of what precedes is written with the care, dignity, and stateliness, which belong properly to a regular treatise on the sublime themes of redemption. But in this chapter we have some of Paul’ s most characteristic lifelike sketches. Hebrews 13:4 ---Marriage is honorable in all,— Or rather, Let marriage be honorable in all; and let the bed be undefiled: for fornicators and adulterers God will judge. This verse, like the one preceding and also the one following, is hortatory, and should be rendered imper­atively. It is so construed by Ebrard, Stuart, T. S. Green, Alford, Moll, and most other modern expositors. Polygamy and concubin­age had long been more or less tolerated among the Jews; and all manner of uncleanness had been practiced among the Gentiles, often with the approval of their legislators and their most distin­guished philosophers. And hence the necessity of this injunction: Let your marriage be held honorable in all respects, and let your marriage bed be undefiled: for (gar) fornicators and adulterers God will judge. Or as rendered by T. S. Green: “ Let marriage be highly prized in all, and its bed be undefiled; but (de) whoremon­gers and adulterers will God judge.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10.) It is still a question with expositors, whether the phrase “ in all” (en pasi) means in all persons or in all things. The former view is supported by Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Stuart, and most other Protestant commentators; and the latter, by CEcumenius, Bleek, Delitzsch, Alford, and most of the Roman Catholic com­mentators. This is preferable (1) because it is the more general, and, in fact comprehends the former: for if marriage is honorable in all respects, then most assuredly it is also honorable among all classes of men. (2) The latter is most in harmony with Greek usage. Greek writers generally use the preposition en in reference to things (1 Timothy 3:11; 2 Timothy 4:5; Titus 2:9-10; Hebrews 13:18) and para in reference to persons (Matthew 19:26; Acts 26:8; Romans 2:13; 2 Thessalonians 1:6; James 1:27). Hebrews 13:5 ---Let your conversation be without covetousness;— The word rendered conversation (tropos) means properly a turning; and hence it is often used metaphorically to denote either a turn of mind or a habit of life. Here it seems to include both. Let the disposition of your minds and your habits of life be without cov­etousness. That is, let the whole tenor of your conduct clearly indi­cate that your hearts are not set on acquiring the riches of this world. For “ they that will be rich,” says the same Apostle, “ fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in perdition. For the love of money is the [a] root of all evil; which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” (1 Timothy 6:9-10.) Hebrews 13:5 ---and be content with such things as ye have:— This does not forbid all lawful endeavors to improve our own condition and that of others. Such an injunction would be wholly inconsistent with what is plainly taught in many other passages of Scriptures. See, for example, Romans 12:11; Ephesians 4:28; 2 Thessalonians 3:11. But the meaning of the Apostle is simply this, that such should be our trust and confidence in God, that we would be satisfied with our condi­tion, be it what it may; knowing that if we are only faithful God will cause all things to work together for our good. Be diligent in business; do all that you can lawfully and consistently to improve your own condition and to promote the happiness of others; and then with calmness and resignation leave all the consequences to God. Hebrews 13:5 ---for he hath said I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.—This is given as the reason why Christians should all be satisfied with their lot in life, and why they should be content with such things as they have. God has said to every one of his children, “ I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.” Words almost identical with these are found in Deuteronomy 31:6; and they are afterward re­peated with some modification in Joshua 1:5; 1 Chronicles 28:20, etc. The original promise given by God to the Israelites through Moses is full of comfort and consolation; and it seems therefore to have become a sort of proverbial expression among the later Hebrews: for in Philo (Conf. Ling. Section 32) we have the identical words of our author as given in the Textus Receptus (me se ano oude ou me se eukataleipo) : “ an oracle,” says Philo, “ of the all-merciful God, full of gentleness, which shadows forth good hopes to those who love instruction.” It is probable, therefore, that our author quotes here a Bible sentiment, proverbial among the Hebrew's, with­out perhaps having direct reference to any one passage of Scrip­ture. Be this as it may, the sentiment abounds in both the Old and the New Testament: in the sayings of Christ and his Apostles as well as in the writings of the ancient prophets. “ Take no thought for your life,” says Christ, “ what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air; for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they ?” And again he says, “ Why take ye thought for raiment ? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they toil not, neither do they spin; and yet I say unto you that even Solo­mon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field which to-day is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?” (Matthew 6:25-30.) What an infinite contrast we have given here between the conso­lations of God’ s word and such as are offered to us by even the wisest of the heathen philosophers. In order to reconcile us to our present condition, some of them tell us “ that our discontent only hurts ourselves, without being able to make any alteration in our circumstances; others, that whatever evil befalls us is derived to us by a fatal necessity, to which the gods themselves are subject; while others very gravely tell the man who is miserable that it is necessary he should be so, to keep up the harmony of the universe, and that the schemes of providence would be troubled and per­verted were he otherwise. These and the like considerations rather silence than satisfy a man. They may show him that his discontent is unreasonable, but they are by no means sufficient to relieve it. They rather give despair than consolation. In a word, a man might reply to one of these comforters, as Augustus did to his friend who advised him not to grieve for the death of a person whom he loved, because his grief could not bring him back again. “ It is for that very reason,” said the emperor, “ that I grieve” (Spectator, No. 574). How utterly empty, then, are all such phil­osophical speculations compared with the precious promise of our text: “ I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.” The original form of expression is made as emphatic as possible. Hebrews 13:6 ---So that we may boldly say,— Or rather, So that we say with confidence, The Lord is my helper; and I will not fear what man shall do unto me. This is a quotation from Psalms 118:6. It forms a part of the great Hallel or collection of hymns which the Hebrews were wont to sing at the close of the feast of Tabernacles. And hence the manifest propriety of using the indicative form of expression; We say [i.e., we are wont to say] with confidence, The Lord is my helper, etc. The Hebrew may be literally ren­dered according to the Masoretic pointing, as follows: Jehovah is for me; I will not be afraid; what will man do to me ? Some crit­ics, as Griesbach and Alford, following the Hebrew, place a mark of interrogation at the close of the verse. Thus, “ The Lord is my helper; and I will not be afraid. What shall man do unto me?” But others allege with reason that the use of the conjunction and (chai omitted in some manuscripts), before the second clause, shows an intentional departure from the Hebrew construction; and they therefore prefer the declarative form of our English Version as being more suitable to the proverbial sentiment of our text. In both cases, however, the meaning is substantially the same. For “ if God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” So that we may confidently say with David, “ Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with me: thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.” Hebrews 13:7 ---Remember them which have the rule over you,— Or more literally, Remember your leaders (hegoumenon) who spoke (ela- lesan) to you the word of God; carefully considering the issue (ekbasin) of their manner of life; imitate their faith. The refer­ence is to such men as Stephen, James the brother of John, and other faithful preachers of the Gospel who had formerly pro­claimed to the Hebrews the good word of God, and whose whole course of life, resulting as it did in a happy and triumphant death, was worthy of their admiration and imitation. “ After the author had thus held up the past as a mirror to the present, and had called to remembrance the gaps which death had made in the church of the Hebrews, what could be more appro­priate,” says Delitzsch, “ than to raise his thoughts to the immuta­ble Lord, exalted high above all change ?” This he does in the fol­lowing paragraph. TO IN AND ; AND TO AVOID BEING CARRIED AWAY FROM THE FAITH OF THE GOSPELHeb_13:8-16 Hebrews 13:8 ---Jesus Christ the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.—This expression is not in apposition with the phrase, “ the end of their conversation," as our translators seem to have thought, but a proposition on a wholly distinct and separate subject. The object of the Apostle is to lead and encourage his brethren not to be car­ried away from “ the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints," by various and strange doctrines; but to be firm and reso­lute in their Christian profession. And as the basis of his exhorta­tion and argument, he reminds them that Jesus Christ, the Leader and Perfecter of the faith, is himself the same yesterday, today, and forever, without even the shadow of change. (James 1: 17.) And as is the Leader, so also he insists should be his followers. Hebrews 13:9 ---Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.—The corrected reading of the critical note is more in harmony with the context, and is doubtless correct: “ Be not carried away by var­ious and strange doctrines." The admonition is general, and may refer to any doctrines, whether of Jewish or Gentile origin, that are inconsistent with the Doctrine of Christ, though the sequel shows that the former are particularly intended. The metaphor seems to be taken from a ship that is carried out of its course by means of violent winds. Hebrews 13:9 ---For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace;— That is, by means of the gracious truths and influences of the Gospel. This is good for us; and it is also good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; for being thus “ rooted and grounded in love, we are no longer liable to be tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (Ephesians 4:14) ; but having a hope strong and steadfast “ reaching even into that within the vail,” we can with it, as an anchor of the soul, calmly smile on all the ills and misfortunes of life, knowing that we have in heaven for ourselves a better and enduring posses­sion. This confirmation of the heart, then, by the grace of God, gives us stability of character, fixedness of purpose, consolation in our misfortunes, and makes us like Christ, kind, gentle, and benev­olent to all. Hebrews 13:9 ---not with meats,—What meats? Those offered in sacrifice, and of which the worshipers were allowed to partake, say Bleek, Lune- mann, Macknight, Scott, Clarke, and some others: those which were distinguished as clean and unclean merely as articles of food, say Calvin, Tholuck, Delitzsch, Alford, and most other commenta­tors. But why make any such distinction as the above? For my own part I see no propriety in doing so. That certain portions of certain sacrifices were allowed to be eaten by certain persons, is plain from such passages as Leviticus 6:26-30 Leviticus 7:11-15, etc. These rules were still rigidly observed and enforced by the Jewish Rab­bis; and there was therefore danger that the judaizing party among the Hebrew Christians would succeed in blending these “ divers and strange doctrines” with the plain and simple rules of the Christian religion. And it is equally obvious that, on the other hand, the same judaizing party were then busily engaged in sowing the seeds of discord among the churches, with regard to clean and unclean meats. (Romans 14.) It was therefore necessary that the Apostle should, as far as possible, correct all such mistakes about meats and drinks, and other carnal ordinances which had been im­posed on the people till the time of reformation; but which never did and never could make anyone perfect, so far as respects his moral consciousness. And consequently those who walked in them were not profited by them. See notes on Hebrews 9:9-10. Against all such doctrines, therefore, in reference to meats and drinks, Paul here earnestly cautions the Hebrew brethren. For as he says to the Romans, “ The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.” (Romans 14:17.) Hebrews 13:10 ---We have an altar, etc.— Two queries naturally arise with regard to this verse. First, what is meant by the word altar? and second, what connection has this verse with what precedes and with what follows ? In reply to the first, it is alleged (1) that the word altar in this connection represents no definite object whatever; but that the Apostle uses it merely for the sake of the imagery, so as to give consistency to th*e figurative expressions which he here employs (Michaelis, Tholuck) ; (2) that it means Christ himself (Suicer, Wolf); (3) that it means the Lord’ s Table (Bohme, Ebrard); (4) that it denotes the heavenly place on which Christ now offers the virtue of his own blood to the Father for us (Bretschneider) ; (5) that it means the cross on which Christ was crucified (Delitzsch, Alford) ; and (6) that it signifies the Divine nature of Christ on which his human nature is supposed to have been offered, and by means of which it was sanctified and made available. To me it seems evident that the altar is here used by metonymy for Christ himself, who was sacrificed for us; so that to partake of this altar is simply to partake of the sacrifice of Christ. So Paul reasons in reference to the sacrifices of the Old Economy. “ Behold Israel,” he says, “ after the flesh: are not they who eat of the sacrifices partak­ers of the altar?” (1 Corinthians 10:18.) And again he says, “ Do ye not know that they who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?” (1 Corinthians 9:13.) To eat of the altar is therefore manifestly to eat of the sacrifice which is offered on the altar. And that the sac­rifice in this case was the sacrifice of Christ, is evident from the context, as well as from many parellel passages. See, for example, John 6:53-55. Of this sacrifice, they have no right to eat who serve the Tabernacle. For they who would partake of it must do so in faith (John 6:47 John 20:31; Acts 16:31) ; but those Jews who served the Tabernacle, did not of course believe in Jesus as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world; and con­sequently they had no right to partake of his sacrifice. This, then, will enable us to understand readily the proper import of the second query, touching the connection of this verse with what precedes and follows. The Jews boasted of their exclu­sive right to partake of their own consecrated sacrifices. This doubtless made a strong and deep impression on the minds of some of the weaker brethren; and they were in this way in danger of being misled by the false teachings of the judaizing party. But as an offset to all their vain speculations about meats and drinks, and carnal ordinances, Paul here reminds his brethren, that we Christians have also our exclusive rights and privileges; that we too have a sacrifice of which to partake as well as the Jews; a sac­rifice of infinite value, and which is quite sufficient to satisfy the desires of all who lawfully partake of it. From this, however, the unbelieving Jews were all debarred according to their own ritual, as our author now proceeds to show. Hebrews 13:11 ---For the bodies of those beasts, etc.— The point made by the Apostle is simply this; the Jews were not allowed to eat the flesh of any sin-offering whose blood was carried into the Sanctu­ary by the High Priest. The flesh of all such victims had to be car­ried without the camp, and there consumed by fire. “ No sin-offer­ing,” says Moses, “ whereof any of the blood is brought into the Tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the Holy Place, shall be eaten; it shall be burnt in the fire.” (Leviticus 6:30.) According to this law, then, as the Apostle now goes on to show, the Jews, as Jews, were all prohibited from partaking of the sacri­fice of Christ. Hebrews 13:12 ---Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people, etc.— To suffer without the gate was the same as to suffer without the camp; for Jerusalem was then the metropolis and camp of Is­rael. And as the blood of Jesus was taken by himself into the heavenly Sanctuary to make an atonement for the people, so also, according to the law of the sin-offering, it was necessary that he should bear our sins on his own body without the camp. All therefore who would partake of the benefits of his sacrifice, must do so without the gate. They must forsake the camp of Israel, leaving Judaism behind them, and take upon them the reproach of Jesus, if they would be made partakers of the benefits of his death. Hebrews 13:13 ---Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp,— Since it is true, that Jesus himself voluntarily suffered for our sake, without the gate of Jerusalem, all the pain, shame, and reproach of the cross; and since it is furthermore true that his sacrifice is really the only one that can meet and satisfy the wants and desires of our souls, let us therefore courageously follow him without the pale of Jerusalem, which is but as it were a temporary camp that will soon be broken up; and let us manfully bear the reproach of Christ whatever it may be. This he now proceeds to show will result in much gain and but little loss to us. Hebrews 13:14 ---For here we have no continuing city,—It is vain to seek refuge in Jerusalem which, according to prophecy, will soon be­come a heap of ruins (Matthew 24) ; and in no other city on Earth, can we find a secure and permanent habitation. But if we leave Je­rusalem with all its errors and corruptions, and follow Christ with­out the gate, we will thereby secure for ourselves a place in the heavenly Jerusalem, the city which hath the foundations, whose Architect and Builder is God. See notes on 11: 10, 16. “ If then ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye.” (1 Peter 4:14.) Hebrews 13:15 ---By him therefore let us offer, etc.—Instead of falling back to Judaism, and offering sacrifices required by the Law, let us rather through (dia) Jesus, as the great High Priest of our confes­sion, offer to God continually the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiv­ing. For as Peter says to the strangers scattered throughout Pon- tus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, we are all “ living stones, built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer upspiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 2:5.) The sacrifice of praise in our text has reference partic­ularly to the voluntary peace and thank offerings of the Law. (Leviticus 7:11-25.) To these allusion is also frequently made in the Psalms of David. In Psalms 50:14, for example, Jehovah says to Israel, “ Offer unto God thanksgiving, and pay thy vows unto the Most High.” And in the twenty-third verse of the same beautiful ode, he says, “ Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me; and to him that or- dereth his conversation aright, I will show the salvation of God.” Hebrews 13:16 ---But to do good, etc.— It is not enough to praise God with our lips; we should also honor him with our substance, by doing good to all men as he gives us opportunity. We should, as far as in us lies, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, instruct the ignorant, and assist in converting the world to Christ. There seems to be a proneness in our selfish nature to neglect these practical duties, and hence the exhortation not to forget them. Imitate Christ who went about doing good. (Acts 10:38.) Hebrews 13:16 ---for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.—Such sacrifices are pleasing to God (1) because they are in harmony with his own nature and administration. He opens his hand liberally, and sup­plies the wants of every living thing. (Psalms 145:16.) (2) Be­cause they indicate in us a state of mind and heart, that is well pleasing in his sight; provided they proceed from proper motives. And hence on the day of judgment, our characters will be tested by this law of benevolence. (Matthew 25:34-35.) And (3) because they are of benefit to others. A very great change would soon be wrought in society, if all Christians would but act faithfully as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.OUR DUTIES TO THE AND OTHER PUBLIC OF THE CHURCHHeb_13:17-19 Hebrews 13:17 ---Obey them that have the rule over you,—(tois hegoumenois hutnon) your leaders. These were the Elders or Overseers of the Church, to whom were committed (1) the duty of instructing the members; and (2) the duty of watching over and governing them. So we learn from many passages in the New Testament. In the twentieth chapter of Acts, for instance, Paul says to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus, “ Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit hath made you Overseers, to feed the Church of God (tou kuriou, the Lord) which he hath pur­chased with his own blood. For I know that after my departure shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember that by the space of three years, I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” (Acts 20:28-31.) So also in his first Epistle to Timothy, the same Apostle says, “ Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in word and doctrine.” (1 Timothy 5:17.) Compare also 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9; James 5:14-15; 1 Peter 5:1-4. Hebrews 13:17 ---and submit yourselves:— That is, submit to them so far as they teach and rule according to the Oracles of God. The obliga­tions of the Church and of her officers, are mutually binding. If it is the duty of the Elders to teach, it is also manifestly the duty of the other members of the Church to receive their lawful instruc­tions ; and if it is the duty of the former to rule, it is equally the duty of the latter to submit to all their acts of discipline which are not in violation of the law of Christ. Hebrews 13:17 ---for they watch for your souls,—This is a charge of fearful re­sponsibility. “ They watch for your souls as they that must give account!” “ When I say to the wicked,” says God in his instructions to Ezekiel, “ thou shalt surely die, and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thy hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Again when a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness and commit iniq­uity, and I lay a stumbling-block before him [by allowing him to be severely tried, as was Abraham, Genesis 22:1-19], he shall die; because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sins, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, he shall surely live; also thou hast delivered thy soul.” (Ezekiel 3:18-21.) Not un­like this is the solemn charge which Christ has given to every shepherd of his flock. (Acts 20:28.) And hence the solemn admo­nition which is here given to all the members: Obey your leaders, and submit yourselves to their instruction and government; for they watch for your souls, as they that must give an account of their stewardship. It is no trifling matter, then, to watch over the flock of Christ, which he has purchased with his own blood. How few Pastors are doing this as they should; and how few of the members of the flock have yet learned what it is to submit practi­cally to their instruction and government. Hebrews 13:17 ---that they may do it with joy, and not with grief:— Those who under God “ turn many to righteousness,” and who succeed in leading them to the end in the way of holiness, will of course ren­der their final account with joy; but those who, though faithful themselves, have the misfortune to see many of their flock perish by the way, will do this with grief. And hence John says, “ I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth” (3 John 1:4) ; and hence alsb Paul earnestly exhorts his Thessalonian brethren to be faithful even to the end. “ For what,” he says, “ is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? For ye are our glory and our joy.” (1 Thessalonians 2:19-20.) Hebrews 13:17 ---for that is unprofitable for you.— That is, that your Pastors and Teachers should have to render their final account concerning you with grief. This would be even a greater misfortune to you than to them. As, therefore, your griefs in that event would be mutual, see to it that on the contrary your joys may be mutual. Hebrews 13:18 ---Pray for us:— It is not enough that you obey your rulers, and submit to those who are directly over you in the Lord; you should also remember us the Apostles and Evangelists who have gone out from you to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Hebrews 13:18 ---for we trust we have a good conscience,— Our admonitions to you, and our opposition to Judaism, proceed from no selfish or sin­ister motives: but simply from a desire to discharge conscien­tiously the duties which God has imposed on us with regard to both Jews and Gentiles; wishing in all things to act honestly in the sight of God. Hence we claim an interest in your prayers. Hebrews 13:19 ---But I beseech you, etc.— From this, in connection with the preceding verse, it is evident (1) that the writer of this Epistle was known to the persons addressed; (2) that he had been for­merly with them, not necessarily as one of their Pastors, but in some respects as a co-worker; (3) that he was anxious to see them again, but was then prevented from doing so by some hindrances unknown to us; and (4) that he felt well assured that through the prayers of the Hebrew brethren in his behalf, these hindrances would be removed, and that he would be restored to them the sooner. This, then, is a beautiful commentary on the efficacy of prayer; and it should encourage us to pray always for the success and welfare of all those who are laboring to convert the world to Christ, and to educate the converts for Heaven. For “ this is the confidence that we have in him, that if we ask anything accord­ing to his will he heareth us.” (1 John 5:14.) “ Ask [then] and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” (Matthew 7:7.)AN EARNEST AND PRAYER IN BEHALF OF THE HEBREW Hebrews 13:20-21 Hebrews 13:20 ---Now the God of peace,— God is here called “ the God of peace,” because all peace comes from him through Jesus Christ, who is himself “ The Prince of peace.” (Isaiah 9:6.) The propriety of so designating “ the Father of mercies” will be manifest when it is remembered that at the time of writing this Epistle, the Churches of Judea were threatened with many dangers, both from within and from without. Hebrews 13:20 ---that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus,— The res­urrection of Christ is often ascribed to God the Father in the Holy Scriptures. See references. By raising him from the dead, God acknowledged him as his only-begotten Son (Romans 1:4), and thus publicly demonstrated to the world that he was the promised Messiah of whom all the ancient Prophets had spoken (Acts 3:24). “ This is the only passage,” says Delitzsch, “ in which*the au­thor mentions the resurrection. [He means, of course, the res­urrection of Christ: see Hebrews 11:35. Everywhere else he lifts his eyes from the depths of our Lord’ s humiliation, passing over all that is intermediate, to the highest point of his exaltation. The connection here suggests to him once at least to make mention of that which lay between Golgotha and the throne of God, between the altar of the cross and the heavenly Sanctuary, the resurrection of him who died as a sin-offering for us.” Hebrews 13:20 ---that great Shepherd of the sheep,— The Apostle had before spoken of the under shepherds of the flock (Hebrews 13:17) and had en­joined obedience to them in all their lawful endeavors to edify the Church. Most appropriately, therefore, does he here call Christ himself the “ great Shepherd of the sheep.” To him both the under shepherds and the flock are alike responsible, purchased as they have been by his own blood. “ I am the good Shepherd,” says Christ; “ the good Shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.” (John 10:11.) Every word in this benedictory prayer is well chosen, and serves to impress on our hearts more and more deeply the sen­timents that have been inculcated. Hebrews 13:20 ---through the blood of the everlasting covenant,—(en hat- mati) in the blood, or by virtue of the blood of the everlasting cov­enant. The New Covenant is here called “ the everlasting Cove­nant" in contrast with the Old Covenant which was then abrogated (see notes on Hebrews 8:13) ; and the blood of this Covenant is the blood of Christ by means of which the Covenant was itself ratified. (Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 9:23.) But what is the meaning and bear­ing of this clause ? Does it stand connected with what precedes, or with what follows? Did God bring Christ from the dead and con­stitute him the great Shepherd of the sheep, by virtue of this blood? Or is it simply the wish and prayer of the Apostle that God would perfect the Hebrews by virtue of this blood ? The lat­ter view is taken by A. Clarke and a few others; but Delitzsch, Alford, and most other commentators justly support the former. Many of them, indeed, very unwarrantably limit the meaning of this phrase; some to the word great, implying that Christ’ s great­ness as a Shepherd was owing to the shedding of his blood (Ebrard) ; and some to the words “the great shepherd of the sheep,” meaning that he was made a Shepherd of the sheep by vir­tue of the shedding of his blood (Liinemann, Moll). But all such restrictions are unnatural and arbitrary. The meaning of the pas­sage fairly construed is manifestly and simply this; that by virtue of the blood of Christ, God raised him from the dead, and consti­tuted him the great Shepherd of the sheep. The resurrection of Christ was the first in that series of triumphs which will result in the overthrow of Satan and the destruction of his works; all of which will be effected “ by virtue of the blood of the everlasting covenant." For what but the efficacy of this blood could remove even from our blessed Savior that load of assumed guilt and re­sponsibility, which ruptured his great heart, and crushed him down even into the dark chambers of death ? See note on Hebrews 5:7. Manifestly it was the flowing of that blood from the heart of our Redeemer, which enabled God, as the righteous Sovereign of the universe, to raise Christ from the dead, and through him to offer salvation to all penitent believers. In this view of the matter only, can we comprehend the meaning of Jesus when he says, “ I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened till it be ac­complished.” (Luke 12:50.) Hebrews 13:21 ---Make you perfect in every good work—The word ren­dered make perfect (katartizo) means properly to make quite ready, to put in order, to make complete. Here, it means so to adjust, strengthen, and rectify the powers of the soul, as to thor­oughly fit and prepare it for God’ s service. The Apostle saw among the Hebrew brethren lamentable evidence of mental, moral, social, and religious derangement. And he, therefore, earnestly prays that the God of all peace and order, who brought Jesus back from the dead, and so eminently qualified him for his work, would also through him fit and prepare them for doing his whole will, working in them by his Spirit, and by his truth “ both to will and to do of his own good pleasure.” (Philippians 2:13.) Hebrews 13:21 ---to whom be glory forever and ever.— This relative clause is by many expositors, as Calvin, Bleek, and Tholuck, referred to Jesus Christ; but others, as Bengel, Delitzsch, and Alford, more properly refer it to God the Father. Doctrinally, it may refer ei­ther to God (Romans 16:27), or to Christ (2 Peter 3:18); but grammatically, it refers properly to God, whose agency fills the whole sentence, and whose glory is, therefore, uppermost in the mind of the Apostle. CLOSING REMARKS Hebrews 13:22-25 Hebrews 13:22 ---And I beseech you, brethren, suffer, etc.— The word ren­dered suffer (anechesthe) means to bear patiently with, to receive with feelings of kindness and forbearance; and “ the word of ex­hortation” is evidently the whole Epistle. By some, this is re­stricted to the thirteenth chapter (Beza) ; by others, to the last great division of the Epistle, embracing all from 10: 18 to the close (Grotius); and by others, to the many exhortations which are in­terspersed throughout the Epistle (Kuinoel). But most commen­tators, as Delitzsch, Alford, and Moll, more properly apply it to the entire Epistle; the whole of which being eminently hortatory is by the author delicately called a word of exhortation. In this, as in many other instances, we see the very delicate, gentle, and mas­terly touches of Paul’ s pen; who being himself the Apostle of the Gentiles, and somewhat estranged from his Hebrew brethren, deals with these as gently as the nature of the case will permit. Hebrews 13:22 ---for I have written a letter unto you in few words.— That is, in few words considering the importance and magnitude of the subjects discussed. He might have said much more on these mo­mentous themes; but owing, perhaps, to the known prejudices of his brethren, he preferred making his communication as brief as possible: and this he assigns as a reason why they should receive and consider it kindly. Hebrews 13:23 ---Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty;— The Greek word for know (ginoskete) may be rendered either in­dicatively or imperatively: “ You know that our brother Timothy has been set free; in company with whom, should he come speed­ily, I will see you” (T. S. Green) ; or “ Know that our brother Timotheus is dismissed; with whom, if he come soon, I will see you” (Alford). Most commentators, however, justly as I think, pre­fer the latter. The word rendered “ set at liberty” (apolelumenon) may signify either that Timothy was dismissed from prison, or that he had been sent away on some special errand. The latter view is supported by Euthalius, Mill, and Lardner on the following grounds: (1) “ Because it appears from Phil. 2: 19-24, that Paul about this time purposed to send Timothy into Macedonia, with an order to return and bring him an account of the affairs of the brethren in that country; (2) because in none of Paul’ s Epistles written during his confinement in Rome, does he give the least in­timation of Timothy’ s having been imprisoned, although he was with Paul the greater part of the time, as appears from Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; and Philemon L.” In sentences so very brief and dis­connected, as are these closing remarks, it is sometimes impossible to avoid ambiguity: but it is a significant fact that the great major­ity of commentators from Chrysostom to Alford have preferred the former rendering of this passage. The historical circumstances of Timothy’ s imprisonment and release are, however, wholly un­known to us. “ This twenty-third verse,” as Delitzsch observes, “ exactly har­monizes with the idea that Paul was the author of the Epistle: for no one stood in closer relation to Timothy than Paul; and this re­lation became more and more intimate towards the close of the Apostle’ s life.” Hebrews 13:24 ---Salute all them that have the rule over you.— That is, your Pastors and Teachers. See note on verse 17. As if he had said, Present to them my kindest regards and best wishes. Christianity enjoins on us all the proper courtesies and amenities of life. It is, indeed, itself the very soul and marrow of all genu­ine politeness; and no one, therefore, who has been thoroughly converted to God, can any longer be a man of rough and boorish behavior. Hebrews 13:24 ---and all the saints.— That is, all within the limits of your ac­quaintance who are consecrated to Christ. See Acts 9:13-14 Acts 26:10; Romans 1:7-8, etc. Hebrews 13:24 ---They of Italy salute you.— From this expression, some have hastily inferred that when our author wrote this Epistle he could not have been in Italy; but that he must have been in some other place surrounded by Italians who had, perhaps been banished from Rome, like Aquila and Priscilla. (Acts 18:2.) But this inference is wholly unwarranted. “ They of Italy” hoi apo tes Italias) were simply Italians, just as “ Jews of Thessalonica” \ Hebrews 13:1. The main argument of this epistle is completed and the present chapter is given to various subjects pertaining to the church and individual duties. Brotherly love signifies the love extended to others by reason of the common relationship in the family of God. Hebrews 13:2. Entertain strangers is from a Greek word that is defined in the lexicon as hospitality, especially toward those outside one's immediate personal acquaintances. Entertained angels unawares was done by Abraham in Genesis 18. However, Jesus taught the principle of discretion in the bestowal of favors (Matthew 7:6), hence a Christian is not required to keep "open house" for all stragglers regardless of circumstances. Hebrews 13:3. The bonds were the chains fastened upon disciples because of their devotion to Christ. Those who are fortunate enough not to be in chains as yet, should consider themselves as partakers of the same persecutions. Also in the body refers to the body of Christ ( the church); being in the same body with the persecuted ones should create a feeling of brotherly sympathy. Hebrews 13:4. Marriage is honorable because it is the Lord's arrangement for the perpetuation of the race, hence the marriage bed should be regarded as undefiled. As an inducement for man to cooperate with God in this plan, He has made the intimate relation a pleasurable one. All good things may be abused, hence there are people who use this relationship for the one purpose only. Such people should remember the case of Onan in Genesis 38:8-10 and beware. The fact of having contracted legal marriage does not justify Christians in counteracting God's original purpose for the insti- tution. Whoremongers refers especially to men who are immoral and adulterers to either sex. Hebrews 13:5. Conversation means one's conduct or manner of life, and the sentence means that their lives should not be influenced by an overmuch desire for the wealth of this world. To be content does not deny one the right to "look out for a rainy day," or to acquire more of the good things of life than he needs for his own personal use; such a theory would contradict Ephesians 4:28. The thought is that while we are making lawful efforts to produce the desirable things of life, we should not be fretting because we are not as successful as others or as much so as we had expected to be ourselves. We may always have the assurance that we will be cared for in some way. Hebrews 13:6. We may boldly or confidently say that the Lord is our helper. Men may persecute us even to the extent of depriving us of the comforts of life, yet we should not fear about the outcome if we are faithful to Him. Hebrews 13:7. Remember means to be mindful of these rulers which means the elders. They have spoken the word of God in their work as shepherds over the flock (Acts 20:28). Whose faith follow. That is we should imitate the example of faithfulness in the discharge of their duties. Verse 17 is more direct in its requirements of the treatment of the rulers in association with the flock, hence the present verse has especial reference to the ones who have gone on out of life, but whose examples of faith were still worthy of imitation. The disciples are told to consider the object and outcome of those noble lives of faith. Hebrews 13:8. This verse continues the thought begun in the preceding one, telling us what was the end or object or motive of the faithful lives of the rulers, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ. Since He is the same yesterday, and today, and forever, to have Him as the motive of one's life would insure a life of faithfulness till death. Hebrews 13:9. The divers (different) and strange (from the outside) doctrines (or teachings) refers especially to the disturbances of the Judaizers. To be carried about indicates something that can be moved with the wind and hence having very little weight. Paul wishes them to be established or firmly set with the grace or favor of Christ, instead of relying on the regulations of the old law regarding meats. A few more verses are devoted to some contrasts and likenesses between the two dispensations. Hebrews 13:10. The Mosaic system had a literal altar service on which animals were burned in sacrifice. Some parts of the beasts were reserved for food to be eaten by the priests who performed the service. We Christians also have an altar that is not a literal or temporal one; it is the sacrificial service of Christ. Those who accept the teaching of the Judaizers in going back to the old tabernacle, forfeit their right to the benefits of Christ's sacrifice; they have fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4). Hebrews 13:11. The bodies of those beasts, etc. (See Exodus 29:14.) The blood of those beasts was used in the most holy place while the bodies were taken to the outside of the camp and burned as a sacrifice for sin. Hebrews 13:12. There is a beautiful parallel drawn here between the bodies referred to and that of Christ. He was taken outside the city of Jerusalem to be put to shame by death on the cross as the worst of criminals. Hebrews 13:13. But this humiliating treatment of Jesus was imposed upon him by his enemies, although it was a part of God's great plan of salvation to be accomplished through His only begotten Son. True followers of Him therefore will not be ashamed to "stand by" Him in his humiliation and will take joy in sharing in the reproach. Verse Hebrews 13:14. The material things of this world are all finally to pass away. Even the cherished city of Jerusalem in which was located the temple and center of the Mosaic worship, was then about to be destroyed by the Romans. Then why not give attention to the service under Christ which will prepare one for the city which is to come and which will never pass away. Hebrews 13:15. Instead of the material incense that was used with the sacrifices of the Mosaic system, let us offer the kind that is spiritual. Instead of the fruit of the field or sheepfold, let it be the fruit of our lips in the form of praise to God for all the wonderful blessings which we have received. Hebrews 13:16. Not that all physical or temporal services are to be dropped from our activities. We may still do good to others by communicating or sharing with them the good things necessary to their personal wellbeing. God is still pleased with that kind of sacrifices. Hebrews 13:17. Obey is from PEITHO and Thayer defines it at this place as follows: "To listen to, obey, yield to, comply with." The definition agrees with the connection in which it is used here. The persons are said to have the rule which could not be accomplished unless they were obeyed. This thought is repeated by the word submit which is from HUPEIKO, which Thayer defines in the same passage as follows: "To give way, yield, to yield to authority and admonition, to submit." No institution can succeed without government, and that calls for governors or rulers. But such officers cannot govern unless they are obeyed, hence the members of the church are commanded to be obedient to the rulers which means the elders. They watch for your souls. Since the souls of men cannot be seen it follows that the elders must watch the actions of their bodies. The members sometimes resent their elders and seem to think they have a strong complaint when they say "we are being watched." But the elders are not doing their duty unless they watch the actions of the members. The elders will have to give account for the conduct of the flock, and if the members do not live in obedience to their rulers the account will not be a joyous one. lf the facts require an unfavorable report to the Chief Shepherd, such an account will be unprofitable for the sheep for it will cause their souls to be rejected at the day of judgment. Hebrews 13:18. Pray for us. Inspired apostles felt the need of fellowship and the benefit of the prayers of their brethren. Paul professes to have a good conscience which was doubtless suggested by the accusations that had been made against him, making him a prisoner in Rome. The original for honestly is really a stronger word than it, for a man could be honest while doing wrong. It truly means to live "so that there shall be no room for blame"--Thayer. In order for a man to have a good conscience in the sight of God, it is necessary that his life be right as measured by the will of God. Hebrews 13:19. Evidently the Hebrew brethren to whom this epistle was written were principally those living in Judea. Paul was in Rome and detained as a prisoner on account of his testimony for Christ. He besought the brethren to pray for his deliverance so that he might again come among them and labor in the work of the Lord. Hebrews 13:20. God of peace is said of Him because he is the source of all genuine peace that is in harmony with divine wisdom (James 3:17). He brought his Son from the dead in order to give the assurance of genuine peace to all true servants of righteousness. Great shepherd of the sheep is Christ who is called the "chief Shepherd" in 1 Peter 5:4. This emphasized title is given to Christ because elders are referred to as shepherds in that tney are told to "feed the church of God" which is termed the flock (Acts 20:28). The things Paul wishes God to do for them in the next verse are to be accomplished through the blood of the everlasting covenant. It is called everlasting because it was not to be replaced by any other as was the Mosaic covenant Hebrews 13:21. Make you perfect means to equip them completely for every good work in doing His will. It is to be done through Jesus Christ which will make it well-pleasing in his (God's) sight. Hebrews 13:22. Exhortation means to insist on doing one's known duty, and Paul has clearly made known to them their duty to serve under Christ and not Moses. Few words is a comparative term. The epistle to the Hebrews though consisting of several chapters, yet it embraces arguments covering the books of Exodus and Leviticus and parts of others in the Old Testament. That makes the book of Hebrews comparatively "few words." Hebrews 13:23. This is the only place I have found that mentions the imprisonment of Timothy. Paul's confidence in the prospect of his own release (verse 19) was so strong that he planned on joining Timothy soon in going to meet with these brethren. Hebrews 13:24. Salute means to give a friendly greeting which implies a wish for the wellbeing of the one saluted. This was to include the rulers (elders) as well as other saints (Christians). Others in Italy (of which Rome was the capital) joined Paul in his salutation for the brethren in Judea. Hebrews 13:25. Grace means the unmerited favor of the Lord and it was the sincere wish of Paul that his brethren everywhere should so live as to receive that favor. Amen is from a Greek word that is spelled the same as English. In the King James Version it is rendered "amen" 50 times and "verily" 100 times.